Support NeoGAF

[BeOnEdge]

A year and a half is a long time in tech time. For PCs thats like almost 3 generations of video cards. Anyway we know this time around if anything it's speculated that Sony will have the better specs between the PS3 and Xenon, so that probably wont be an issue.

i was waiting for someone to say that. it may be long in a PC but in a console, tech is seeming to hold up better. Hell even in PCs. Look at doom 3. it'll run on a tnt2 or something lowly like that. no one is willing to take advantage of PC coding until a game really needs to sell. PC devs up until recently seemed to rely on people upgrading their grafix cards when the old cards werent even squeezed to full potential like a console can be squeezed. XB and its Geforce 3 is proving that.

 

[Brofist]

well once finalized yeah a console is meant to last a 4-5 year cycle, which is longer than PC tech..but in 1 1/2 years a lot can happen in that finalization process. Either the developers can go for the similar specs, and cut cost big time, or go for higher specs. Either way that 1 1/2 yrs is a big advantage.

 

[ravingloon]

And video card cycles have really slowed recently. ATI has been tweaking the same core for how many years now?

 

[DrGAKMAN]

GC definitely seemed the more likely to come second at first

Yeah, from the gamer perspective GAMECUBE seemed like it would be Sony's competition...but to the mainstream press, gaming press, casual or non-gamers and to the business world MS was the "true" competition to Sony.

Going into the unveiling of the two systems (GAMECUBE & X-BOX) there was some scrutiny against both Nintendo & MS. People looked down on Nintendo 'cos N64 was a "failure" and 'cos of the whole kiddie PokeMon stigma. People were against MS in gaming 'cos they either didn't like MS's past business practices and/or hated PC gaming...but there were JUST AS MANY people who jumped onto the X-BOX wagon 'cos they knew MS's money/power/influence would keep it a good system and/or they liked PC gaming. It was a chance for PC heads to finally "rise up" and say that PC gaming was better than console gaming. There was also alot of people who liked the fact that MS was a secure company (unlike Sega) and after getting burned on DC they chose X-BOX knowing that MS would have the money to back it up.

Then...GAMECUBE was unveiled and while there were still alot of Nintendo loyalists who didn't mind the design or lack of DVD, there were others (hardcore N64 fans even) who just were disgusted. Soon after that, the X-BOX was unveiled and alot of those people who were disappointed by GAMECUBE's unveiling went on to become X-BOX fanboys.

Scrutiny coming into their respective launches aside, I think the general mainstream concensus amoung casuals, the press, the publishers & the retailers was that X-BOX was going to be Sony's competition. Purists and Nintendo fans may have done alot of X-BOX naysaying (myself included) and doubted that MS would do as well as it did, but any realistic person saw that since GAMECUBE was unveiled the mainstream never took it seriously 'cos it didn't look like a serious machine. Nintendo had people's attention at SpaceWorld 2000, but there were alot of casuals and mainstream people who were dissappointed by GAMECUBE before it even launched. In a time when Nintendo needed to look serious, they looked silly...and there was MS right there to wisk away alot of the people who were dissappointed by the GAMECUBE's unveiling.

Again, this is why e3 2005 will be so interesting, 'cos I would assume that alot of people are almost expecting the "Revolution" to have a dissappointing unveiling...I think Nintendo will surprize them with a SERIOUS approach to next generation this time.

 

[BeOnEdge]

from the GAMER perspective? HA! from the nintendo fanboy perspective and i bought my GC before i bought my xbox! I wasnt even going to buy and xbox because i thought MS would fail miserably. i didnt want another saturn...another dreamcast. the ps2 and GC were solid choices. I figured i'd get good sega goodness on GC starting with monkeyball and i figured nintendo would do good by their franchises. By the gamer perspective i would ave bought all 3 right off the bat but the only one i bought at launch was GC. i felt too beaten and abused by sega. i was emotionally scared. Funny i still ended up getting burned by the GC.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Sorry to skew this off topic with that last post, but I had to respond to what he said about Nintendo being seen as 2ND place before they started. I may have agreed back then with my Nintendo fanboy goggles on, but I'm looking at this from a general casual/non-gamer POV....and again, most people didn't take GAMECUBE seriously and those same people DID take X-BOX seriously though.

 

[BeOnEdge]

i think it was the complete opposite.

 

[MrSingh]

blah blah blah

MS sucks

blah blah blah

Xenon sux.

mimimimimimiimi.

that sums up the discussion!

 

[Lord Error]

i was waiting for someone to say that. it may be long in a PC but in a console, tech is seeming to hold up better.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only reason it seems to holds up better is because game developers have one target platform to optimize their code for. It has next to nothing to do with some 'magic' behind technical capacity of the said platform.

PS2 architecture was actually more of an aberation from that because it was so untraditional (with unconventially large fillrate) which allowed developers to make stuff which at least distinguished it's graphics from the traditional PC graphics of the time, whether someone liked how they looked or not.

 

[Kon Tiki]

Too soon? If you are a graphics whore, yes. There is very little that will change. So unless they have something else to advance besides graphics, 2005 is too soon.

MS has had (or stolen) some nice idea in the past, I am sure they will come up with more ideas then say Sony will *cough*using DS2 for PS3*cough*.

 

[Mama Smurf]

You must have been going to some wacky alternate universe message boards during the Xbox/GC build up DrGAKMAN, because there is no way that this was true:

"but to the mainstream press, gaming press, casual or non-gamers and to the business world MS was the "true" competition to Sony."

It just wasn't, you're remembering wrong. Those ideas came in much later. And they didn;t think the GC was going to be the threat to the PS2 either; they thought neither would be. And they were right on that (up until recently). However, Nintendo were definitely tipped for 2nd place.

 

[BeOnEdge]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only reason it seems to holds up better is because game developers have one target platform to optimize their code for. It has next to nothing to do with some 'magic' behind technical capacity of the said platform.

PS2 architecture was actually more of an aberation from that because it was so untraditional (with unconventially large fillrate) which allowed developers to make stuff which at least distinguished it's graphics from the traditional PC graphics of the time, whether someone liked how they looked or not.

errr....thats the point i was trying to make!

 

[Insertia]

Actually, from the press both Xbox and Gamecube were expected to best PS2.

Remember all of the "No console dominates two gens in a row" talk?
Articles and magazine covers stating Xbox was the 'PS2 killer'.
PS2 being so difficult to develop for that developers would skip it for the much easier Xbox and GC?
Gamers would ignore PS2 because two vastly powerful consoles were on the horizon?
Gamecube is $100 less then PS2, Xbox has a 'revolutionary' HDD; Why buy PS2?

PS2's wasn't expected to have an easy victory.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

wow. a BOE thread on something really really far off in the distance; but I guess it deserves our attention because its not

a) portable
b) SONY or Nintendo.

C-

I'm sorry you were burnt by the gamecube. awwww....

 

[TheGreenGiant]

Actually, from the press both Xbox and Gamecube were expected to best PS2.

Remember all of the "No console dominates two gens in a row" talk?
Articles and magazine covers stating Xbox was the 'PS2 killer'.
PS2 being so difficult to develop for that developers would skip it for the much easier Xbox and GC?
Gamers would ignore PS2 because two vastly powerful consoles were on the horizon?
Gamecube is $100 less then PS2, Xbox has a 'revolutionary' HDD; Why buy PS2?

PS2's wasn't expected to have an easy victory.

installed base says you are wrong

number of titles says you are wrong

* sorry; says the articles but then why wouldn't they. They need to SENSATIONALISE THEIR ARTICLES TO SELL

 

[DrGAKMAN]

We're getting off topic here. It is your opinion that GAMECUBE was suppossed to be in 2ND place or whatever, but I'm not voicing my personal opinion. Before it came out yes I thought and wanted it to come out ahead of the X-BOX, but it didn't. Why? Because the casual's and the mainstream's voice is louder than the Nintendo fan in me. And this didn't just happen later on or recently...this was decided (mainly by the press) before either system launched. The buzz was X-BOX and the "old dog" or some even said "next Sega" was GAMECUBE. Yeah some industry people voiced that X-BOX wasn't going to get too far, but just as many either said the same about GAMECUBE ('cos Nintendo was smaller than Sony & MS) or they failed to even mention them at all. And no, I don't mean recently, I mean back when the systems were unveiled...GAMECUBE was deemed the third place kids system before it ever launched. While there may have not been alot of people saying X-BOX would do better back then, they certainly took it alot more seriously than GAMECUBE.

When you say "people" thought Nintendo would do better than MS you're talking about purists and Nintendo fans on some websites somewhere. I'm not talking message boards. I'm not talking geeks in video game stores...I'm talking the mainstream and the press...they leaned in X-BOX's favor even when most "gamers" felt otherwise. We have to admit that the mainstream casuals are shaping the industry now...not gamers.

 

[seismologist]

If people have the perception that PS3 is "newer" Sony could be even more dangerous than they are now.

 

[DSN2K]

I know some people who think PS2 have better graphics then the xbox.

"blocky PC like" was the term they used for xbox :lol

 

[Lord Error]

errr....thats the point i was trying to make!

If you think that's the point you were initially trying to make, you officially have no clue what you are talking about anymore :\

Consoles seem to hold up better compared to PC due to programmers on PC never targeting the high end PC hardware. Between consoles though, advances in technology transfer to advances in visuals more smoothly, as programmers only have one platform to target. Hell, aren't you the first one screaming how much better Xbox graphics looks, due to the time difference of it's launch?

 

[jarrod]

how far apart were xb and ps2 tech wise? a year and a half?

Closer to two years actually, Xbox came together very last second. It's nearly a year apart from GameCube too actually (probably 9 to 11 months) in terms of technology timelines.

 

[Insertia]

If people have the perception that PS3 is "newer" Sony could be even more dangerous than they are now.

Agreed. If PS3 has the technological edge Xbox loses the majority of its appeal.

Giving the market leader an advantage that large is suicide on M$'s part.

 

[BeOnEdge]

Closer to two years actually, Xbox came together very last second. It's nearly a year apart from GameCube too actually (probably 9 to 11 months) in terms of technology timelines.

yet the gc and xb are quite close imo. that also brings up a good point and hint at X2s price. nintendo was able to launch at 199 easily. ofcourse theres no dvd drive, hard drive or built in ethernet, the cost of those 3 components have dropped over the years. ms may not be doing bad by partially following nintendos model.

 

[Fatghost]

No BC in Xenon and letting PS3 get assumed technological edge (even if the actual difference is pretty small) will pretty much guarantee MS will lose next round.

 

[BeOnEdge]

just like ms was guaranteed to fail this gen. it all comes down to games. if the ps3 becomes a bitch to program for and x2 has an edge software wise, that helps. Xbox LIVE helps. HD-DVD may help. you can no longer just come out and say "ms is going to fail" and be serious.

 

[Pedigree Chum]

No BC plus early launch = DOOMED for MS.

Sony will have BC, and LOTS of people will wait for the PS3 just based off of name recognition and exclusive titles that they know will be coming out on PS3 (GTA, GT, MGS, etc). If Xenon doesn't have Halo3 on or near launch they are fooked (and considering that H2 is coming out this year, how can Bungie get H3 out within a year? Hell within 2 years without it being a rehash?)...they can't ride off their name like Sony did cause they DON'T have the brand power Sony has. Plus, with no BC, Xenon will be judged based off it's early software and as I said, without Halo3 their line-up will be pretty shitty/a retread of stuff on PS2/XBox. It's going to be like Dreamcast+ for third-parties...devs won't commit to the Xenon, instead giving it token exclusives and enhaced ports like the DC recieved. They'll wait it out till the PS3 comes around to take the full leap, the Xenon will be a stepping stone, a place to test the waters of the next gen before diving in. And that will have a snowball effect on sales of the console. As a result, Xenon's one year headstart crumbles into nothing.

IMO,the best thing MS can do is launch at the same time as Sony in 2006 NA with a superior line-up (w/ Halo3 if they can). As of right now, they don't have the brand power to launch first and build momentum/userbase quickly like Sony did with the PS2. Factor in no BC and the feact that they won't have BR (which seems more and more likely to be the next standard) and MS has a huge uphill battle ahead of them, even without the competition of PS3. I'm assuming that MS think that doing what Sony did last gen will work for them (launch first, doesn't matter if the line-up isn't that hot) and winning over the hearts and minds of gamers...newsflash MS: YOU ARE NOT SONY, yet. And considering how they're planning to handle things, they never will be, the potential is there, but they're overstepping thier bounds way too early IMO. They need to come out with a bang in 2006, head to head with Sony (constantly showing why Xenon is the best next-gen system cause of *insert features/games here*). Rather than enter the market with a whimper in 2005 and slug along until the real competition arrives.

 

[Fatghost]

No BC plus early launch = DOOMED for MS.

Sony will have BC, and LOTS of people will wait for the PS3 just based off of name recognition and exclusive titles that they know will be coming out on PS3 (GTA, GT, MGS, etc). If Xenon doesn't have Halo3 on or near launch they are fooked (and considering that H2 is coming out this year, how can Bungie get H3 out within a year? Hell within 2 years without it being a rehash?)...they can't ride off their name like Sony did cause they DON'T have the brand power Sony has. Plus, with no BC, Xenon will be judged based off it's early software and as I said, without Halo3 they are fooked.

Yup.

Don't forget how important BC is to parents nowadays too. Parents see a real value in being able to use the games they've already bought for little Timmy for the new system. Being able to trade in the old system and reduce clutter is another bonus.

 

[Pedigree Chum]

Yup.

Don't forget how important BC is to parents nowadays too. Parents see a real value in being able to use the games they've already bought for little Timmy for the new system. Being able to trade in the old system and reduce clutter is another bonus.

I value it too, I'm buying more PS2 games lately cause I know I can play it on PS3. I don't speak for everybody, but I will enjoy playing this gen games next gen. There's plenty of games this gen that are timeless classics on PS2...I want to be able to revist them in the future without having a bazillion systems lying around. Think about it, if there's no BC in Xenon, will people really want to keep XBox (which will look like a monster in comparison to even the Xenon, which is said to be quite a bit smaller) to play last gen games and an Xenon to play next gen ones? It makes more sense for the PS3 not tbe BC considering the PSTwo and the decent size of the original PS2...yet it's MS not wanting BC and Sony wanting it in PS3? Am i the only person who sees something wrong here?

MS is making all the wrong moves for next gen. Good luck to them, they're going to need it.

 

[BeOnEdge]

parents could care less about BC. wtf are you guys talking about? parents arent even majority buyers anymore for god sake. BC isnt a deal breaker unless u want to spread useless propaganda on a messege board. Do you not play you nes, snes and N64 games because your GC doesnt play them? NO. MS will be sure that BC will be a distant thought if its not in x2. like i said, launch with PDzero, killer instinct, PGR3, and Madden, all with LIVE play and nothing else matters.

 

[Insertia]

parents could care less about BC. wtf are you guys talking about? BC isnt a deal breaker unless u want to spread useless propaganda on a messege board. Do you not play you nes, snes and N64 games because your GC doesnt play them? NO. MS will be sure that BC will be a distant thought if its not in x2. like i said, launch with PDzero, killer instinct, PGR3, and Madden, all with LIVE play and nothing else matters.

Ironic how you denounce BC while saying Xbox Live will help Xbox2 :lol

 

[Pedigree Chum]

parents could care less about BC. wtf are you guys talking about? BC isnt a deal breaker unless u want to spread useless propaganda on a messege board. Do you not play you nes, snes and N64 games because your GC doesnt play them? NO. MS will be sure that BC will be a distant thought if its not in x2. like i said, launch with PDzero, killer instinct, PGR3, and Madden, all with LIVE play and nothing else matters.

BC will matter when the system launches.

Senario1 w/ BC: Timmy has an XBox and Halo 2 (his favorite game evar). Timmy sees Xenon and is intrigued, but there's no Halo 3 yet and the software titles while good, aren't enough to get him off the fence. w/ BC he MIGHT take the leap with his favorite game in tow, and give the Xenon a chance, hell if he doesn't like the early launch stuff he can still play H2 on his shiny new Xenon on Xenon Live.


Senario2 w/o BC: Timmy has an XBox and Halo 2 (his favorite game evar). Timmy sees Xenon and is intrigued, but there's no Halo 3 yet and the software titles while good, aren't enough to get him off the fence. w/o BC he won't take the leap as the software isn't tempting enough on it's own to make the jump yet.

Repeate this senario a hundred-thousand times within the first year of the of the Xenon. That's what you get w/o BC in the first year. I agree that after the first year it doesn't matter as much, but BC enables MS/Sony to be a little more complacent the first year with software releases. W/o it, it shows how glaringly lacking the software is first year in comparison to seasoned consoles like PS2/XBox. Given the fact that future gens will have less and less of a graphical leap, this kills the whole "upgrade for mind-blowing grapx" shit. Software is going to fuel sales, and with BC that makes console manufactures lives a hell of a lot easier at and soon after launch. SOny has changed the dynamics of VG with BC, evolve or die. Simple as that.

 

[Mejilan]

BoE deserves a new tag...

'Intentionally Clueless???'

That'd fit.

 

[BeOnEdge]

hello? how would it not? explain. you have 1,000,000 users as of today. god knows how many MS will have after halo 2. The fact that at X2 launch, i'll be able to pop into x2s dash, plug in all my XBL info and kick someones ass on DAY ONE is a major plus. Why the hell would you wanna play an old game on launch day or whenever it may be you purchase the system? You honestly think someone will go...."ahhhhh...i got this hot peice of new hardware! let me go ahead and fire up SNEAKERS!!!! NO NO NO!!!! ah~ah~ah! perfect dark? HA!!! tao feng baby!!!" you gotta be shittin me.

 

[Pedigree Chum]

hello? how would it not? explain. you have 1,000,000 users as of today. god knows how many MS will have after halo 2. The fact that at X2 launch, i'll be able to pop into x2s dash, plug in all my XBL info and kick someones ass on DAY ONE is a major plus. Why the hell would you wanna play an old game on launch day or whenever it may be you purchase the system? You honestly think someone will go...."ahhhhh...i got this hot peice of new hardware! let me go ahead and fire up SNEAKERS!!!! NO NO NO!!!! ah~ah~ah! perfect dark? HA!!! tao feng baby!!!" you gotta be shittin me.

It matter in the first year, not the second a person buys a Xenon (like the second they get it home and launch the newfangled Xenon launch title, I'm talking a like a week later when he's bored and wants the play H2 again). No matter how powerful Xenon is, without a title to make it sing the hardware means nothing (imagine XBox without Halo at launch...yea, 3DO flashbacks). If MS don't have Halo3 within the first year, they won't have something to sell the XBox. Add in the fact that many will wait for PS3, no BC in Xenon, and not a big enough brand recognition to carry the system in the first year adn you've got a flaccid launch int he making.

 

[btrboyev]

BOE still thinks the N64 was a failure, yet if you were to stack it up against xbox sales wise for the same amount of time, you'd really see how the xbox and gc both failed miserably this gen. Just because xbox has a slight lead over GC and yes it is slight.. doesn't make it a huge success. Both machines are doing fine, but neither are selling like they should be considering both consoles beat ps2 graphically and combined have probably the top five games of this gen.

A 2005 launch is not a good move....they should take their time until proper software is ready then launch it along side of sony and nintendo....even if the system is ready, I'd wait and build a strong software launch.

 

[BeOnEdge]

eh? wtf does halo have to do with anything? screw halo. i didnt by halo at launch, i STILL dont own halo and i'm sure i'm not the only one. ur first year claim is garbage too. XNA will be in place to help the hardware sing. hell look at xbox and what it had at launch. the graphics have changed but not by much. wreckless is still a good looking game. When i got my PS2 i didnt use BC for months. Overall in the 3-4 years i've had my ps2 i've used BC 10 times maybe. I'm not everybody but its not as big of a deal as you are making it. 3d0 flashbacks? :lol $700!!!! i give up.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

just like ms was guaranteed to fail this gen. it all comes down to games. if the ps3 becomes a bitch to program for and x2 has an edge software wise, that helps. Xbox LIVE helps. HD-DVD may help. you can no longer just come out and say "ms is going to fail" and be serious.

Again, only fanatical unrealistic people actually said that X-BOX would fail...let alone believed it.

parents could care less about BC. wtf are you guys talking about? BC isnt a deal breaker unless u want to spread useless propaganda on a messege board. Do you not play you nes, snes and N64 games because your GC doesnt play them? NO. MS will be sure that BC will be a distant thought if its not in x2. like i said, launch with PDzero, killer instinct, PGR3, and Madden, all with LIVE play and nothing else matters.

I disagree. The only people who seem to think it don't matter are X-BOX owners...and of course YOU wouldn't need BC 'cos you already have an X-BOX. BUT...what about people who DON'T have one? No matter what you say missing this feature will be seen as a negative when the competition has it. Think outside the X-BOT box.

yet the gc and xb are quite close imo. that also brings up a good point and hint at X2s price. nintendo was able to launch at 199 easily. ofcourse theres no dvd drive, hard drive or built in ethernet, the cost of those 3 components have dropped over the years. ms may not be doing bad by partially following nintendos model.

I agree, if PS3 is coming out in Japan only a couple of months after Xenon comes out then it's not gonna make that much difference to most people's eyes. There will still be fanboys who quote specs and say up and down that PS3 is technically superior to anything/everything out there, but the differences to the naked eye will be margainal to the mainstream. And I also agree that Xenon taking the GAMECUBE-like approach will set MS up to profitability without sacrificing much power to the competition. They do, ultimatly, lose the power "edge", but I think that only matters to X-BOX fanatics and naysayers in the end...couple that loss of power edge with a loss of features and it could be bad...but nothing is going to straight out kill Xenon like that.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

If Xenon releases in both Europe and North America next holiday season, all it takes is the right kind of initial software, a steady stream of next-gen-like titles, and a huge (basically all-year-round) media storm of marketing to entrench itself for a fight against PS3 the following year.

Taking into consideration the age of the PS2 and, apart from a few big titles, its apparent inability to look quite as nice as XBOX going forward from this year (IMO), I think many of the PS2 faithful will be itching to 'upgrade' to a new set of experiences...and Xenon will be there scoop them up. I personally believe this because of the similarity in demographics targetted by both the MS and Sony -- Xenon will have no problem going sideways into PS2's base and, of course, the reverse is also true of PS3...but not until after Xenon's had a chance to build up in preparation for Sony's new entry. If the games are there, and if the marketing is there, the tech difference will simply not matter.

Nintendo's system is the real wildcard here.

 

[BeOnEdge]

thanks for a decent reply gakman! hey for all we know with that announcement that was made a couple weeks back, X2 could just have BC. I'd say MS plan is a 2 month vacation for bungie and Halo 3 ready by the time ps3 launches in the US fall 2006.

 

[Fafalada]

If Xenon releases in both Europe and North America next holiday season, all it takes is the right kind of initial software, a steady stream of next-gen-like titles, and a huge (basically all-year-round) media storm of marketing to entrench itself for a fight against PS3 the following year.

Actuallly that'll be interesting to see - first XBox took quite a bit longer to get to Europe, and it's also almost as much a failure in Pal region as it is in Asia. Will MS try to grab early share there this time?

Anyway I still think EA will be the deciding factor in US, in the first year especially, everything else secondary. If they make Xenon their base platform then any possible PS3 hw advantage will be marginalized no matter how big.

 

[SolidSnakex]

If people have the perception that PS3 is "newer" Sony could be even more dangerous than they are now.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Sony is setting up their own Xbox Live style network. That basically eliminates the 2 biggest "advantages" MS has tried to hold over Sony this gen (graphics and online). Is an early launch really worth giving Sony that kind of backing to go into next gen?

 

[BeOnEdge]

Actuallly that'll be interesting to see - first XBox took quite a bit longer to get to Europe, and it's also almost as much a failure in Pal region as it is in Asia. Will MS try to grab early share there this time?

????? burnout 3 and that konami soccer game say otherwise. it doesnt matter if sony is setting up an XBL type network. they are starting from scratch where as MS already has a group of users.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Actuallly that'll be interesting to see - first XBox took quite a bit longer to get to Europe, and it's also almost as much a failure in Pal region as it is in Asia. Will MS try to grab early share there this time?

MS knows their strength is in western developers so I'd be surprised to not see it happen.

Anyway I still think EA will be the deciding factor in US, in the first year especially, everything else secondary. If they make Xenon their base platform then any possible PS3 hw advantage will be marginalized no matter how big.

I'd say that it's a good thing that EA appears to be positive about Xenon's chances and that they (more than likely) have more than quite a few goodies in the oven for its launch.

MGS Japan is slaving hardcore right now for Xenon lineup, I'd imagine.

 

[BeOnEdge]

how many times have i mentioned madden already? and the damn loons keep bringing up BC.

 

[Fafalada]

????? burnout 3 and that konami soccer game say otherwise.

Say otherwise about what??? Sorry I don't quite get what you were replying to with that...

MGS Japan is slaving hardcore right now for Xenon lineup, I'd imagine.

Well the 'good' thing is they can pretty much only go up from where they are so far. As long as they learned that it's them that need to adapt to non US markets, not the other way around.

MS knows their strength is in western developers so I'd be surprised to not see it happen.

If MS has such an abundance of production they can afford to launch in two territories that early, that only lends credibility to people arguing Xenon hw is not designed to be cutting edge...

 

[Lazy8s]

Marconelly:

if you are able to see the difference, in the, say mip mapping between PS2 and GC game

The difference there is not of some particular variety; the difference in mipmapping between a PS2 and a GC game is actually the whole benefit of mipmapping. Since the selection of mip levels by the PS2's GS isn't advanced enough to account for a texture with 100% reliability, the areas where it falls short will just result in shimmering unlike DC/GC/Xbox/etc.

 

[nitewulf]

Actuallly that'll be interesting to see - first XBox took quite a bit longer to get to Europe, and it's also almost as much a failure in Pal region as it is in Asia. Will MS try to grab early share there this time?

against PS2 or overall? i thought xbox was doing pretty well against the gamecube in Europe. everything failed against the PS2.

Anyway I still think EA will be the deciding factor in US, in the first year especially, everything else secondary. If they make Xenon their base platform then any possible PS3 hw advantage will be marginalized no matter how big.

but there is no reason at all for EA to make Xenon their base platform.

as for what i think, i think Xenon and PS3 techs are nearly finalized, Sony started designing cell a long time ago. and they needed that time, because it involved other partners in order to design. xenon started later but the tech was developed quicker as MS's plans are less ambitious. but both platforms seem to be similar tech wise. i dont think they'll be far apart specifically because i believe both hardware designs are near complete. PS3 will be faster, but i think Sony also needed the additional time for developing semiconductor fabrication process and overall design of cell itself. whereas MS even though started late, comissioned IBM and ATI to do the chips which are based on existing platforms rather than all new designs, like Cell. so what im trying to say is, even if PS3 launches late, i dont think it'll be that much better tech wise, i just think the extra time was already spent on developing Cell, and now they'll just use the post-Xenon launch time to crunch out perhaps faster clockspeeds, perhaps increase the memory (depending on what Xenon uses) and start manufacturing parts. even large scale fabrication of BlueRay might introduce delays and difficulties for them.
as for MS, for one thing, they are probably better off with not using BlueRay as they dont have to pay Sony a premium licensing fee. they are releasing too early if they release it in mid 2005, as they dont need to with games like Halo 2, KoTOR 2, and Jade Empire. no BC will hurt them. they should be toe to toe with Sony, launch 6 months ahead, with close enough clockspeeds and memory that they can spout in the ads.
eh, lots of speculation on my part, lets see how it all pans out.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Well the 'good' thing is they can pretty much only go up from where they are so far. As long as they learned that it's them that need to adapt to non US markets, not the other way around.

I hope so. I'm guessing that the shuffle over there was to tune up their development efforts and tune into the Japanese market with 'appropriate' software.

If MS has such an abundance of production they can afford to launch in two territories that early, that only lends credibility to people arguing Xenon hw is not designed to be cutting edge...

Maybe...or that they're rushing a shitload of titles. Rare's got to turn in some universally-appealing stuff sometime...and it seems like Xenon is where their focus is at.

 

[nitewulf]

Maybe...or that they're rushing a shitload of titles. Rare's got to turn in some universally-appealing stuff sometime...and it seems like Xenon is where their focus is at.

he was talking about hardware. say you have finalized your designs and ordered productions of the console. depending on the factories it'll take a while to build enough units for lanching in Europe and America. you are assuming they can have lets say one and a half million units for launch (1,000,000 for US, 500,000 for Europe), so that means production will have started 8/10 months prior to launch date, which means the final hardware designs have been done even earlier, leading to weaker overall design.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Ah...gotcha. Still, if they're ready to launch in NA in time for next holiday season, I can't imagine that they would have all that much trouble getting a fair amount of systems into a similar timeframe for the European market. Europe probably only initially needs a third of the amount that the NA market will get initially. From there, because MS can shop around the production of the hardware somewhat freely, they can find more sources for production based on demand.

As for the relative strength of the design, I would be inclined to think that it's less of a standard evolution (bigger, faster) and more of an interestingly powerful solution to provide high performance.

 

[Lazy8s]

It's not technology which ultimately limits a chip's maximum potential for performance; it's the balancing of the design for programmer usability as mentioned previously. Typical PC processors could've easily been designed to have higher theoretical performance by using their silicon budget for lots of parallel computing units and pipelines, but it was thought better to use those transistors for features and constructs which make programming more intuitive and therefore make the performance more effective.

Sony's design philosophy has been focused on maximum potential more than that of typical PC processors, so their chips aren't balancing in progammer usability as much. As mentioned earlier, this should give them a paper tiger with a loud roar before resulting in a backlash over the smaller real-world difference.