soundwave05
Member
LOL, if the PS2 came out 18 months later, like the XBox and GCN did, it would blow both of those chipsets out of the water.
Docwiz said:I am sure the PS3 is very powerful, but it's been designed by Sony
and I feel that they have not done a better job than an ATI or an Nvidia could do.
I feel that their architecture is based on brute force method of adding in more
and more processors instead of thinking smarter.
I believe that overall, this will be harder for programmers to deal with.
This will be a lot harder to develop for than even PS2.
I do not think that Microsoft's architecture will be any less powerful overall and thus
I do not think you will see graphics on the PS3, that can't be done on the xbox 2.
I also feel that Sony will have a more complicated architecture that will be hard to get the maxium power out of, just like the PS2 is now (but even more so). Just because you have 100 cell processors inside and outside of the console (ie in TV's or DVD players) doesn't mean you can tap all of that power and doesn't mean that the Xbox 2 can't match that power. We saw how the PS2 got beat with an 80x86 celeron processor inside, pretty sad that that much power can be beat by ordinary PC parts.
Microsoft has XNA and will allow developers to save money and this is going to be very attractive to developers as they will need to save more and more money. This time American developers know that Microsoft is now taken very seriously and they will have an easier time aligning with Microsoft.
soundwave05 said:I don't think the industry needs to be balanced out.
soundwave05 said:I like the idea of having a market leader -- as long as its Sony.
Microsoft and Nintendo get too crazy whenever they get that much power.
I'm not even a Sony whore at all, but even I understand if Nintendo or Microsoft had the market leader position, I'm not so sure the game industry would be in the best hands (remember the days of $80 NES games? Or how about Microsoft's various monopoly styled practises in the computer OS field?).
Sony has kept hardware and software pricing reasonable, in fact software prices have gone done even though they could have raised prices to pad profits (who was gonna stop them? The N64 or Sega Dreamcast?).
Interesting question here is see WHO is actually designing that GPU in the first place. Is it really Sony, or someone else?I agree that Sony won't make a GPU that will shame Ati but it will be equal tech wise to the R500 (assuming sony isn't stupid)
No, it would be awesome.pcostabel said:I think that competition is always good. A market with only one console would be very boring.
Yeah -- on average, console generations are about five years apart (i.e., SNES-N64, N64-GC, etc.). No matter how you slice it, Microsoft is ending this one earlier than is customary.soundwave05 said:Actually it was over five years between PSX and PS2 (Sept. 1995 - October 2000).
If you're going be Japanese launches then its December 1994-March 2000, again over five years.
DopeyFish said:truncating? Xbox entered late this gen. They are just balancing out the lifecycles so it matches with the other 2. 4 years between Xbox -> Xbox 2. It was only about 4.5 years between PSX and PS2.
DopeyFish said:truncating? Xbox entered late this gen. They are just balancing out the lifecycles so it matches with the other 2. 4 years between Xbox -> Xbox 2. It was only about 4.5 years between PSX and PS2.
Fatghost28 said:PS1 launched Dec 1994 in Japan
PS2 launched March 2000 in Japan.
I don't follow your math. It was 6.5 years.
In the US, it went from Sept 9 1995 to Oct 26 2000, which was still slightly over 5 years.
xexex said:...8-12 threads instead of the 3-6 config reported...
Yes, but MS is going to do a better job at getting titles out.soundwave05 said:They're trying to get a headstart on Sony, we'll see if that strategy helps or if it backfires.
If the PS3 has a considerably better chipset (or even just slightly better), I think it could very well back fire. A big reason why the XBox has carved out a rep for being the "hardcore" player's console of choice is because of the tech advantage it had over the PS2.
I could see a lot of people jumping off the bandwagon pretty quick if PS3 is the better hardware. Halo is big, but it's only one franchise at the end of the day. Super Mario 64 did not beat Sony, despite selling 12 million copies.
Subitai said:Yes, but MS is going to do a better job at getting titles out.
If MS can hold 40% marketshare by 2010 after Sony's onslaught, and still be profitable, MS will be successful.
Subitai said:Yes, but MS is going to do a better job at getting titles out.
.
Let's see what our friend, NPD Sales Chart, has to say about that. Oh look, profit!TheGreenGiant said:like how they squeezed a half finished HALo2 out and allowed a butchered Fable out onto the gaming public.
TheGreenGiant said:like how they squeezed a half finished HALo2 out and allowed a butchered Fable out onto the gaming public.
BuddyChrist83 said:Let's see what our friend, NPD Sales Chart, has to say about that. Oh look, profit!
It was finished in concept form, but saying that the ending was complete when they cut it is like saying the game itself was finished at that time. If I remember right, they ended up cutting it all out after E3 2K3 or so.Deku Tree said:Halo 2 was finished but they cut the end for some reason. The evidence is on the LE disk.
They're in an awkward position for sure, one they're so not familiar with being predominantly a software company not typically confined to such rigid revision cycles. I think Xbox2 is largely a "do over" from their perspective and all signs keep pointing to a late 2005 release, so we should begin to see soon enough how well they've adapted.So basically. MS will be damned if they launch early and damned if they launch later.
BuddyChrist83 said:It was finished in concept form, but saying that the ending was complete when they cut it is like saying the game itself was finished at that time. If I remember right, they ended up cutting it all out after E3 2K3 or so.
xexex said:I'd like a 60fps version of Halo 2 on Xenon with all the poly detail bumped up, 720p / 1080i, all the weapons, vehicles and levels cut from the Xbox Halo2. yes please!
If rumors hold true, the window will be less then 5 months between the launch dates. Give that some developers have had development kits for Xenon for almost a year now, it gives them a HUGE advantage, not to mention a fimilar toolset and great documentation.For the record, I don't think the PS3 will be hitting the US a few months after the Xbox2, as many people seem to be assuming.
What features would people really need that PS3 has that Xbox 2 wouldn't? What are these features that make it a better game system?Because PS3 will be backwards compatible and MS having fewer features will hurt it at retail.
MS really doesn't sell many tools geared for Xbox outside of Visual Studio. Most tools are provided in the XDK.Of course they'd say that if they want to sell tools!
If your talking about Xenon, you are totally wrong. If anything, Xenon is a extremely well thought out system in the same way that Gamecube was. Very clean and well thought out. Unlike Xbox, which was pretty much slapping off the shelf PC parts.I feel that their architecture is based on brute force method of adding in more and more processors instead of thinking smarter.
I've heard the direct opposite from developers. That most have made the transition without much pain.I believe that overall, this will be harder for programmers to deal with.
This will be a lot harder to develop for than even PS2.
What he saidelement said:lots of stuff
If your talking about Xenon, you are totally wrong. If anything, Xenon is a extremely well thought out system in the same way that Gamecube was. Very clean and well thought out. Unlike Xbox, which was pretty much slapping off the shelf PC parts.
f_elz said:I predict Xenon will be the next gen leader...
soundwave05 said:Sony has kept hardware and software pricing reasonable, in fact software prices have gone done even though they could have raised prices to pad profits (who was gonna stop them? The N64 or Sega Dreamcast?).