PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Ginko on March 16, 2005, 06:40:00 AM
-
>>>Link<<< (http://ps2.ign.com/articles/596/596036p1.html)
It\'s a five page debate between the editors on if the industry is ready to move forward. It\'s all speculation but it\'s a fun read none the less.
Here are some quotes:
I think the question with most any console launch is, "Is there a leap in technology significant enough to warrant a new system?" From what we\'ve seen thus far and from what we\'re hearing, the answer is absolutely yes. Most everyone has seen some of the supposed next-gen scans out there and looking at Epic\'s UnrealEngine3, which should be greatly indicative of the graphical prowess of these machines, then yes, it\'s time.
It\'s all about image quality and finite details this time around. I for one am quickly growing tired of flat textures, aliased visuals and the like. Look at the tech demos that rolled out when ATI and NVIDIA launched DX9 cards oh-so-long ago for the PC. HDR lighting? Soft, realtime shadows? Normal-mapped everything with super hi-res textures? That\'s what I want.
---Chris Roper, Editor, IGN Gear
There\'s no need for Sony to rush PlayStation 3 to market. PlayStation 2 is continuing to sell. PlayStation 2 software is continuing to sell. Games like Grand Theft Auto San Andreas remain unstoppable. The company can afford to take its time.
Microsoft will of course launch the successor to Xbox later this year. Sony in turn will likely launch a campaign to subdue sales. It\'ll push its PSP handheld against Microsoft\'s new console. And it might just offer a hint of things to come: some well-placed teaser ads for PS3 that promise bigger, better things than Microsoft may have planned for Xenon.
Nintendo is a non-factor. The company doesn\'t so much compete as it exists.
---Matt Casamassina, Editor-in-Chief, IGN Cube
I normally disagree with Jeremy because I\'m a hateful bastard, but this time I actually have a valid point to make.
Already, *most* PlayStation 2 games feel antiquated when compared to their more advanced competitors and since the PC is already showing us what next-gen physics and graphics are capable of, the problem is only going to worsen with each passing day. We need to see something new and we need to see it fast to keep hope alive.
While I don\'t believe it\'s entirely necessary for the PS3 to release at this exact moment in time, it should definitely be unveiled soon to counter the rising tide of Xbox momentum, assuming Sony would like to remain on top. And when I say unveiled I don\'t mean for Sony to dance around the subject cupping their genitals and throwing out a lot of clever buzzwords that get the ill-informed in a hype-crazed uproar. I want to see specs. I want to see a final design. I want to see someone actually playing a killer app with a real controller. And, I want to see a release date that might have been engraved next to the Ten Commandments before Moses broke the holy heck out of \'em.
If Sony gives me more, "Cell is the greatest thing ever" nonsense and then follows it up with a paper launch at E3 and a promise of Mahjong 2006 on day one, I\'m going freaking nuclear.
---Ivan Sulic, Editor, IGNPS2
The hype for PlayStation 3 is already there. Talk to any developer and you\'ll get a range of comments, from "the system eclipses Xenon" to "it\'s three and a half times more powerful." Publishers are on board in a big way. Everyone is making Xenon and PS3 games. And Sony\'s brand name has never been better.
There\'s no point in releasing it now. Not when PlayStation 2 is doing just fine.
An added six months to a year ensures that PlayStation 3 will not only be significantly more powerful than Xenon -- which it clearly is -- but also able to play high-definition Blu-ray movies out of the box, all with a cheaper price tag than would have been possible this year.
---Matt Casamassina
Roper and I are in the same bed on this one. Let\'s face it, the PS2 is dated. GameCube and Xbox games look better and load faster than comparable games on the PS2, so I say it\'s time for a whole new generation of consoles to rub up against each other and spawn some new babies.
---Tal Blevins, Editorial Director, IGN.com
I don\'t like the argument that Sony should not come out with PS3 any time soon because PlayStation and its games are continuing to sell. In fact, I think that reasoning is absolutely ridiculous (again with the hateful bastard who tends to make an occasional point).
---Ivan Sulic
I\'m with Ivan. Once people see what the Xbox 2 is capable of, they\'re going to move away from the PS2 simply because it looks like so much poop. Hell, most of the time I don\'t like playing it. Look at Grand Theft Auto San Andreas. That game looked like ass. I don\'t care what you say about the visual style, the PS2 just didn\'t have the power to make it a good looking game. When players see the difference between the PS2 and Xbox "somethinerother" they\'re going to start frowning at their old favorite and want something new.
---Dan Adams, Editor-in-Chief, IGNPC
I\'ll post my thoughts later, I want to see what some of you have to say...
-
The only thought that comes to my mind is that they\'re a bunch of idiots.
A couple of valid points, granted. But on the whole, just a bunch of slack jawed faggots.
p.s. Ginko, you never come on MSN anymore.. :(
-
you..care?
*he does love me, he really does
:p
I just thought it was a fun read, but fuck it, just rain on my goddamn thread...
-
yea its interesting
i just find it funny - everyone always says its about the gameplay
but all those editors talk about it how graphics will be shown on xbox2 and make everyone come to play it instead of ps2
which is not true - they may flock to xbox for merely fact that one its new - and its the next console - but as wel know graphics are nothing without the gameplay - least for more then just casual gamers
i could give rats ass about graphics - i could enjoy my older systems as much as the new ones given the right game :0
-
Its funny that despite that the PS2 is selling as well if not better than the more powerful XBOX and GC they judge it just by the graphics.The games overall are top notch.
Also they want the PS3 to be released sooner just to get the "oh godly graphics" sooner because they are bored of PS2\'s graphics.Yeah lets rush it shall we?Lets not delay the PS3. Sony shouldnt release it when they believe its the right time to ensure success.Right?We dont care how well it will do and what it will offer.We just care about the good graphics in the short term.Right?
Lets kill it like the DC.
-
I guess i have quite a bit to say but ill have to elaborate later.
Im not quite sure that its time for a new gen or system. If anybody launches before 2006 id consider that just plain silly. Microsoft is talking about launching before the end of 2005 but we havent even seen real/complete specs or even a decent amount of gameplay shots. There are too many loose ends.
Either MS is keeping their people tight lipped or they are just making a big mistake. They make promising statements but im just not seeing the reality.
To reiterate: Launching before 2006 is DUMB.
-
but can we all agree that graphics at this point is really not an issue? i mean we\'re not talkin atari 2600 graphics here anymore...these consoles can put out graphics that surpass the arcades..(yes even the ps2 is doin this) don\'t get me wrong i think graphics are a big part of it, but if you put a ps2 game and xbox together side by side the difference is not dramatic at all....so for those that say it is are full of s**t.....
-
eh. being a pc gamer I think the consoles have dragged on long enough. When Doom III, Far Cry, and HL2 look as good as they are, compared to GTA:SA (which outsold all those other games) I really think it\'s time to move on.
I like console gaming but with the standards that are out now, the 4-year old tech is actually hurting gameplay. Slowdown is always a major factor in any game and the only way to combat it is to let the graphics & original vision suffer.
Xmas 2005 would be great but I can wait a little bit longer.
-
We are making a mistake when we judge consoles by what we see on PC
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
We are making a mistake when we judge consoles by what we see on PC
i agree and i\'m not a pc buff at all,...but imo and i could be wrong here, but most games i see on the pc, even tho the graphics are nice, they seem to be lacking in the animation dept...you can\'t compare the pc industry to the console industry,...the pc industry is always evolving, while the consoles do evolve (engine wise) they are still working with the same hardware technology....
-
Okay, let\'s look at what the PC is doing right now, Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 as examples. Those can\'t be done as they are meant to be on the current consoles. Recently we have seen the amazing graphic capabilities of the Unreal Engine 3...you guys don\'t want some of that?
If it was only about the gameplay then we\'d still be playing our our 32-bit systems. That\'s not the case, people got excited over the prospect of better visuals and cheerfully moved into the next gen. It\'s a natural progression.
Its funny that despite that the PS2 is selling as well if not better than the more powerful XBOX and GC they judge it just by the graphics.The games overall are top notch.
Let me guess, you just read the quotes I supplied instead of reading the whole article?
All of those people, even the people claiming the PS2 is starting to show its age, say that the system has great games. The gameplay is less of an issue, the graphic ambitions of the developers are outgrowing the systems. GTA:SA is a perfect example, fun to play but the graphics leave something to be desired. How many of you would object to a better looking GTA? None? Thought so.
Also they want the PS3 to be released sooner just to get the "oh godly graphics" sooner because they are bored of PS2\'s graphics.Yeah lets rush it shall we?Lets not delay the PS3. Sony shouldnt release it when they believe its the right time to ensure success.Right?We dont care how well it will do and what it will offer.We just care about the good graphics in the short term.Right?
Now I know you didn\'t read the article. They specifically say that the PS3 is not needed at this very point and time, however they do say that 2006 sounds about right.
With the power of the new systems they\'ll be able to handle the ambitions of developers like Rockstar and Polyphony. You probably won\'t hear them bitch about upgrading. More horsepower equates to more headroom for the developers...and you object?
Lets kill it like the DC
lol, Sega had so many other problems that led to the demise of the DC. Launching with the PS2 in the horizon was but one of many pieces.
but all those editors talk about it how graphics will be shown on xbox2 and make everyone come to play it instead of ps2
which is not true - they may flock to xbox for merely fact that one its new - and its the next console - but as wel know graphics are nothing without the gameplay - least for more then just casual gamers
People will upgrade for better graphics, how else do you explain the rockstar launch of the PS2? You think that had to do with gameplay? Tell me what PS2 launch game possesed the gameplay that justified a mob of people upgrading, in your opinion...
Now, I don\'t think everyone will jump on the MS wagon just because it\'s out first. People know Nintendo and Sony are coming and I have no doubt a majority will wait to see what they have to offer.
I think it\'s time.
-
Originally posted by clips
i agree and i\'m not a pc buff at all,...but imo and i could be wrong here, but most games i see on the pc, even tho the graphics are nice, they seem to be lacking in the animation dept...you can\'t compare the pc industry to the console industry,...the pc industry is always evolving, while the consoles do evolve (engine wise) they are still working with the same hardware technology....
Wait, so the PC games are lacking in areas like animation but the consoles are not?
The console industry works on a different timetable. It is evolving as well but due to the willingness of the market we only see upgrades every five or so years.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Let me guess, you just read the quotes I supplied instead of reading the whole article?
All of those people, even the people claiming the PS2 is starting to show its age, say that the system has great games. The gameplay is less of an issue, the graphic ambitions of the developers are outgrowing the systems. GTA:SA is a perfect example, fun to play but the graphics leave something to be desired. How many of you would object to a better looking GTA? None? Thought so.
Tell me where did I say I dont care about better graphics and hardware
Now I know you didn\'t read the article. They specifically say that the PS3 is not needed at this very point and time, however they do say that 2006 sounds about right.
With the power of the new systems they\'ll be able to handle the ambitions of developers like Rockstar and Polyphony. You probably won\'t hear them bitch about upgrading. More horsepower equates to more headroom for the developers...and you object?
Tell me where did I say dont care about better graphics and hardware
lol, Sega had so many other problems that led to the demise of the DC. Launching with the PS2 in the horizon was but one of many pieces.
I am trying to understand what are you disagreeing with.Perhaps you should tell Sony to release it now too.
Actually tell me who(the people you disagreed with) said he doesnt want better graphics.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Wait, so the PC games are lacking in areas like animation but the consoles are not?
The console industry works on a different timetable. It is evolving as well but due to the willingness of the market we only see upgrades every five or so years.
Console Market different than PC market.Stop comparing them
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
We are making a mistake when we judge consoles by what we see on PC
Better graphics in above HD resolutions are out there, don\'t be scurrd, or even worse, complacent. :)
No one wants the PS3 NOW, we are saying the PS2 is definitely in need of a replacement. Then with the Xenon on the way the PS2 will look ancient.
-
Originally posted by THX
Better graphics in above HD resolutions are out there, don\'t be scurrd, or even worse, complacent. :)
No one wants the PS3 NOW, we are saying the PS2 is definitely in need of a replacement. Then with the Xenon on the way the PS2 will look ancient.
We are saying the same thing.
When I say we shouldnt judge consoles by what we see on PC I mean that the console market works differently.PC surpassed PS2 not recently.It\'s beeing surpassing it fo more than 2 years.Yet this didnt mean that because we saw better graphics in PCs, PS2 should have been replaced already.It still offered.
PS2 should be replaced when market strategies, hardware, support, tools etc ensure strong competitiveness, lastability and success(Generally a stronger future) for the next generation console because its a different kind of market.
I want to be a satisfied PS3 consumer as much as possible.
We cant just compare PCs and consoles and decide that the next console should be released now.Because then the newer more powerful console wont offer in the long term as much as it should have.
It doesnt work like PCs.
So basically we are saying the same thing
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
Tell me where did I say I dont care about better graphics and hardware
Your post objects to their idea of releasing the PS3 due to the aging technical capabilities of the PS2. I didn\'t say you don\'t care, however you are objecting to the idea that the PS2 is getting old and the graphics antiquated.
"Its funny that despite that the PS2 is selling as well if not better than the more powerful XBOX and GC they judge it just by the graphics.The games overall are top notch."
If your post was simply to object to the idea of PS2 being inferior to the Xbox and GC then you missed the point of the article. Plus you should also note that the successor of a console usually comes around in the current console\'s peak years. Sony would like to ride that momentum into the next gen rather than revive a slumping market.
I am trying to understand what are you disagreeing with.Perhaps you should tell Sony to release it now too.
I know your english isn\'t the greatest but what part of "They specifically say that the PS3 is not needed at this very point and time, however they do say that 2006 sounds about right." didn\'t you understand?
Actually tell me who(the people you disagreed with) said he doesnt want better graphics.
Just you...
"Also they want the PS3 to be released sooner just to get the "oh godly graphics" sooner because they are bored of PS2\'s graphics.Yeah lets rush it shall we?Lets not delay the PS3. Sony shouldnt release it when they believe its the right time to ensure success.Right?We dont care how well it will do and what it will offer.We just care about the good graphics in the short term.Right?"
They didn\'t say they were bored with the graphics, though they are starting to hit a ceiling. It\'s that there are bigger games coming that simply aren\'t achievable on the current consoles...time to move on. The tech has come to a point where it outright surpasses anything that can be done at this point and time. Time to move on.
I don\'t get what you\'re objecting to by releasing in 2006. I, for one, would love to play Half-Life 2 with all the fancy features while sitting on my couch. Sooner rather than later...if that\'s all right with you.
Console Market different than PC market.Stop comparing them
By all means, please point out the glaring differences.
I\'m going to get to the bottom line that as technology progresses so will the ability of developers. I\'d ready to see what they have in mind.
-
The console market mimmicks the PC market more and more each generation. Voice chat, upgradeability, online play. Now people are taking out their harddrives and putting new ones in with mods to change the game. I\'m all for it, just pointing out the industries aren\'t all that different.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
We are saying the same thing.
When I say we shouldnt judge consoles by what we see on PC I mean that the console market works differently.PC surpassed PS2 not recently.It\'s beeing surpassing it fo more than 2 years.Yet this didnt mean that because we saw better graphics in PCs, PS2 should have been replaced already.It still offered.
PS2 should be replaced when market strategies, hardware, support, tools etc ensure strong competitiveness, lastability and success(Generally a stronger future) for the next generation console because its a different kind of market.
I want to be a satisfied PS3 consumer as much as possible.
We cant just compare PCs and consoles and decide that the next console should be released now.Because then the newer more powerful console wont offer in the long term as much as it should have.
It doesnt work like PCs.
So basically we are saying the same thing
When in the past 5 years did the PC become vastly superior to the console market? It wasn\'t until just recently (2004) we started to see obvious differences with the likes of Far Cry, Doom 3, and Half-Life 2.
Specifically referring to HL2 the physics are better than anything available on consoles at the moment. The PC market has been taking steps to reach this point. The technology has finally progressed to a stage where it\'s ready to leap into next gen. That\'s why we\'re getting new consoles.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Wait, so the PC games are lacking in areas like animation but the consoles are not?
The console industry works on a different timetable. It is evolving as well but due to the willingness of the market we only see upgrades every five or so years.
you guys make everything so complicated..let\'s keep this simple...upgrades are happening almost 6 months in the pc field hardware wise...this does not happen in the console field..only engines get upgrades..not the the hardware...so naturally pc games are gonna look better than consoles games currently being produced....see nice and simple....
and i agree with you as far as to why we see a new console generation every 5 years...it\'s true that at that time the technology in the consoles are basically peaked....and developers become more ambitious with what they want to put in a game...things that cannot be done on current consoles....
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Your post objects to their idea of releasing the PS3 due to the aging technical capabilities of the PS2. I didn\'t say you don\'t care, however you are objecting to the idea that the PS2 is getting old and the graphics antiquated.
I object to the idea that PS2 should be released soon.The objection that PS2 is getting old is your own assumption
"Its funny that despite that the PS2 is selling as well if not better than the more powerful XBOX and GC they judge it just by the graphics.The games overall are top notch."
If your post was simply to object to the idea of PS2 being inferior to the Xbox and GC then you missed the point of the article. Plus you should also note that the successor of a console usually comes around in the current console\'s peak years. Sony would like to ride that momentum in the next gen rather than revive a slumping market.
This was directed to this...ONLY----->"Roper and I are in the same bed on this one. Let\'s face it, the PS2 is dated. GameCube and Xbox games look better and load faster than comparable games on the PS2, so I say it\'s time for a whole new generation of consoles to rub up against each other and spawn some new babies.
---Tal Blevins, Editorial Director, IGN.com"
Beause this statement is no reason why PS2 should be replaced.
I know your english isn\'t the greatest but what part of "They specifically say that the PS3 is not needed at this very point and time, however they do say that 2006 sounds about right." didn\'t you understand?
I was directing my post to the people who disagreed with the people who believed that PS3 should be released later.Not all of them had the same opinion,Some disagreed with others
Just you...
"Also they want the PS3 to be released sooner just to get the "oh godly graphics" sooner because they are bored of PS2\'s graphics.Yeah lets rush it shall we?Lets not delay the PS3. Sony shouldnt release it when they believe its the right time to ensure success.Right?We dont care how well it will do and what it will offer.We just care about the good graphics in the short term.Right?"
They didn\'t say they were bored with the graphics, though they are starting to hit a ceiling. It\'s that there are bigger games coming that simply aren\'t achievable on the current consoles...time to move on.
Yeah it is hitting the ceiling.But what are they bubbling about when PS3 is going to be released anyways?SOme of them want PS3 soon.I am disagreeing with the idea that PS3 should be released soon just becuase PS2 is obsolete compaed to PCs while forgeting other factors.
I don\'t get what you\'re objecting to by releasing in 2006. I, for one, would love to play Half-Life 2 with all the fancy features while sitting on my couch. Sooner rather than later...if that\'s all right with you.
Oh God.Once again I am telling you....I WANT BETTER GRAPHICS AS WELL
I am objecting against early release.Not against being released in 2006
By all means, please point out the glaring differences.
There is no battle of hardware or brands in PC market.Developers make games for PCs.They dont make games for IBM PCs, Compaq PCs etc.Gaming is an option.So a consumer doesnt have problem to upgrade often their PC.It wasnt bought only for games anyways.People choose ATI cards or Nvidia cards and most games are supported by both.There is no direct competition.
Consoles though are different.Consoles are gaming devices ONLY and the consumer doesnt want to upgrade them to play some games.There are few consoles from few(3) companies that compete each other, each offering diferent kind of hardware, and has different kind of support/developers.
Its a battle of hardware/brand competition not just games.Not all 3 devices offer the same support or the same games.Also the kind of games they offer often differ from that of PCs
If the console and PC market were the same then consumers would have being making direct comparisons between PCs and consoles.Consumers judge console gaming differently from PC gaming.Otherwise PCs would have replaced consoles after a couble of years of consoles\' life thanks to PCs technical superiority.
There was and there will never be a direct competition between a PC and a console.
They are different markets.And the fact that an obsolete PS2 is selling more than obsolete PC hardware and still has support is enough proof.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
I object to the idea that PS2 should be released soon.The objection that PS2 is getting old is your own assumption
If 2006 is too soon then when would you have it? When the next GTA has so much clipping that it causes you to have a seisure? NOBODY in that article suggested the PS3 needs to come out right now, they did however point out that the PS2 is showing its age.
This was directed to this...ONLY----->"Roper and I are in the same bed on this one. Let\'s face it, the PS2 is dated. GameCube and Xbox games look better and load faster than comparable games on the PS2, so I say it\'s time for a whole new generation of consoles to rub up against each other and spawn some new babies.
---Tal Blevins, Editorial Director, IGN.com"
Beause this statement is no reason why PS2 should be replaced.
It\'s true though. And he\'s not just suggesting that PS2 only be replaced, he did say a "whole new generation of consoles". Obviously refering to the current generation needing to be upgraded.
I was directing my post to the people who disagreed with the people who believed that PS3 should be released later.Not all of them had the same opinion,Some disagreed with others
okay
Yeah it is hitting the ceiling.But what are they bubbling about when PS3 is going to be released anyways?SOme of them want PS3 soon.I am disagreeing with the idea that PS3 should be released soon just becuase PS2 is obsolete compaed to PCs while forgeting other factors.
If you bothered to read the entire article you\'ll see the same people making comments. None of them suggested the PS3 should come out at this very moment and none of them said the PS2 is obselete.
What they did suggest is that the PS2 is starting to show it\'s age with the progression of technology and the ambition of developers.
Oh God.Once again I am telling you....I WANT BETTER GRAPHICS AS WELL
I am objecting against early release.Not against being released in 2006
If you had read the article then you wouldn\'t have felt the need to comment on it at all.
There is no battle of hardware or brands in PC market.Developers make games for PCs.They dont make games for IBM PCs, Compaq PCs etc.Gaming is an option.So a consumer doesnt have problem to upgrade often their PC.It wasnt bought only for games anyways.People choose ATI cards or Nvidia cards and most games are supported by both.There is no direct competition.
You missed my point. The PC and Console market are similar due to the progression in technology, and remember I did point out they are on different cycles.
The PC game market has different consumers than the console market but they are all buying into the same thing, entertainment. The technological capabilities of digital entertainment are constantly upgrading on the PC but they only take a leap in progression every few years. That\'s why I mentioned the likes of Half-Life 2. The current consoles are starting to plateau(sp?) and the PC has demostrated that we not only have the technology to move into next gen but the developers are ready as well.
The rest of what you said is irrelevant to the thread.
They are different markets.And the fact that an obsolete PS2 is selling more than obsolete PC hardware and still has support is enough proof.
Again, nobody said that the PS2 is, at this moment, obsolete. You can read the article top to bottom and you won\'t see it. However, and you admited it yourself, the PS2 is starting to hit a ceiling.
So what should Sony do? Rest on its laurels and ride the PS2 until it can\'t go any further -OR- end the generation on a high note and ride the momentum into the next?
I know which one I\'d choose...
-
You are making unneeded arguements out of my post that do not exist if you have noticed :p
-
I see PC hardware (namely GPUs) as proving grounds for future consoles. All the major players in PC graphics chips are also gonna be in our all consoles next gen as well.
How could you say that the consoles aren\'t mimicking PCs more and more with each passing generation? The technology is perfected and improved upon in the PC arena, then the next gen PC GPU is packaged up and put in your brand new PS3 & Xenon.
One of the big reasons I sold my ps2 on ebay was just how underwhelmed I became with the graphics. I\'m also a big FPS fan and couldn\'t go any longer without my KB & mouse. I\'m totally spoiled now (graphics wise), being able to run most of my games @ 1600x1200 is amazing. The next big step in console gaming has to be the resolution.. but you can only do so much with old analog TVs. Those of us that have HDTV are gonna see consoles finally break out of the past and match the PC where it has truley been lacking... resolution.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
You are making unneeded arguements out of my post that do not exist if you have noticed :p
I just like making a scene, as of lately you\'ve become an easy target :D
Anyway, bottom line is that developers are outgrowing the potential of the current consoles. blah, blah, blah...
JBean said the rest quite nicely.
-
The fact that consoles are lending hardware characterstics has nothing to do with the kind of market though.
-
I like the pc market better.. mods for certain games and such
plus the games are cheaper (for the most part)
:)
consoles get their best games from japan... PC games come mostly from the US and Europe
there\'s your difference
-
Bored to quote myself :p
-
The markets are different, I don\'t contend that, but they share the same technology. They\'re both moving forward, just in a different manner. The PC constantly upgrading while the consoles only do it every five or so years = progression.
Just to clear this up before we go any further, it\'s just recently that the PC market and the console market have become so similar. Before that it was the arcade industry and consoles. The same logic applies though, both moving forward, blah, blah.
Think of it as a cycle.
A console is released with the latest tech available, it has to be a considerable leap from the last generation and be a viable solution for the next five years due to the nature of the console market.
Meanwhile there is constantly new tech, releasing more powerful iterations every several months. (Be it on the PC, Arcade, etc.) The R&D creates more powerful tech and also generates revenue for more R&D. Eventually the tech reaches a point where it is considerably more powerful and is ready to leap. This jump from one generation in capability to the next usually falls somewhere between every 3-4 years. The PC, Arcade, what have you, begins to surpass the current console by a significant margin.
We get a new console when the tech is ready and just as the developers have exploited the potential of the current generation. It\'s like clock work.
We are nearing the end of this generation and everything seems to be in place. The PC games are beginning to create a gap in visuals and gameplay. The developers have expressed their interest in more powerful hardware and it also happens that both ATi and Nvidia are developing their next generation of technology. Not to mention developers with resources like Unreal Engine 3 that just aren\'t going to happen on the current generation of consoles.
I don\'t know, maybe all that stuff happening is just a coincidence.:p
-
ginks i basically said the same thing..only in less words...you lilly livered sap sucka!...:mad:...:p
-
Originally posted by clips
ginks i basically said the same thing..only in less words...you lilly livered sap sucka!...:mad:...:p
clippers!
your explanation was far too simple and didn\'t provide me with any ammo.
This thread probably wouldn\'t be this long had it not been for my instigation.:D
and what\'s with the name calling:(
-
Originally posted by JBean
consoles get their best games from japan... PC games come mostly from the US and Europe
I think it would be killer if someone like Konami started making some made-for-PC FPS games. Talk about an FPS with an ultra slick heads-up display and stylish characters to boot. It\'s very hard to get the Japanese to change course though. They tend to stick to what they know.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
clippers!
your explanation was far too simple and didn\'t provide me with any ammo.
This thread probably wouldn\'t be this long had it not been for my instigation.:D
and what\'s with the name calling:(
heh heh agreed. oh and i was just bustin on ya with the name calling..i take it back..:)...:beer:
-
Next gen CONSOLE release before 2006 is silly imo.
I will not buy a next gen console to play games which feature graphics as good or twice as good as HL2 & Doom3.
No : I want next gen console games to look at least 4 times as good.
Both HL2 & Doom 3 have their root code based on old pc tech evolved by the latest DX9.0c tech. Yes, Carmack did make Doom3 with the likes of Geforce3 in mind ; and yes, HL2\'s lighting is a big trick workaround becuz alot of the lighting/shadowing is prerendered baked to texture radiosity, not real time.
Stuff like the Unreal3 engine is slightly hinting at what next gen consoles should offer, not any less.
And they\'re FPS\'s ! Do I see games like Super Monkey Ball, Ico, Katamary Damaci etc. on the current PC platform ?
March 31st : Splinter Cell 3 Chaos Theory is due and it looks friggin\' great at shader model 3.0 with HDR lighting enabled. I really enjoyed the demo and it has several being-in-awe moments.
Yet, I recently finished MGS3 on PS2 and it had alot of those being-in-awe moments too.
So... there I have a 3,2Ghz Gf6800GT equipped PC, a PS2 and a Xbox...
I don\'t see ANY reason to play overgrown next gen console tech demo\'s - becuz, let\'s face it, that is what alot of early next gen console games will be - within 2005, at the cost of a fully new next gen console unit.
I always said and will say again : If MS releases Xbox2 soon it\'ll be a DC but just with better marketing.
Both Sony and Nintendo will do better if they let both their tech and development kits and development libraries mature a bit more up to halfway 2006.
-
^^exactly
-
Goddammit! I just typed up a huge post to reply and I lost it!
Next gen CONSOLE release before 2006 is silly imo.
I will not buy a next gen console to play games which feature graphics as good or twice as good as HL2 & Doom3.
No : I want next gen console games to look at least 4 times as good.
Both HL2 & Doom 3 have their root code based on old pc tech evolved by the latest DX9.0c tech. Yes, Carmack did make Doom3 with the likes of Geforce3 in mind ; and yes, HL2\'s lighting is a big trick workaround becuz alot of the lighting/shadowing is prerendered baked to texture radiosity, not real time.
Stuff like the Unreal3 engine is slightly hinting at what next gen consoles should offer, not any less.
And they\'re FPS\'s ! Do I see games like Super Monkey Ball, Ico, Katamary Damaci etc. on the current PC platform ?
March 31st : Splinter Cell 3 Chaos Theory is due and it looks friggin\' great at shader model 3.0 with HDR lighting enabled. I really enjoyed the demo and it has several being-in-awe moments.
Yet, I recently finished MGS3 on PS2 and it had alot of those being-in-awe moments too.
So... there I have a 3,2Ghz Gf6800GT equipped PC, a PS2 and a Xbox...
I don\'t see ANY reason to play overgrown next gen console tech demo\'s - becuz, let\'s face it, that is what alot of early next gen console games will be - within 2005, at the cost of a fully new next gen console unit.
Then you\'ll be interested to know that Half-Life 2 and the Unreal Engine 3 run on Xenon without the console breaking a sweat. Developers still don\'t have final hardware, so there you go.
People who have witnessed what the machines can do say that it is next gen.
I can only assume that PS3 and Revolution can do the same.
Yet, I recently finished MGS3 on PS2 and it had alot of those being-in-awe moments too.
So... there I have a 3,2Ghz Gf6800GT equipped PC, a PS2 and a Xbox...
Thank you, knowing that you understand that with make this all the easier for you to digest.
We\'re still in the last generation. Even though Xbox and GC released a full 18 months after PS2 they are still comparable. It\'s the same generation of technology. The PC cards out right now are still of last generation.
You still think Xenon, PS3, and Revolution will be so different? They\'ll all be in the same pool, just at different ends.
I always said and will say again : If MS releases Xbox2 soon it\'ll be a DC but just with better marketing.
Sega and MS are in such different situations that they simply can\'t be compared.
- MS has money, Sega did not
- MS has major third party support, Sega did not
- MS has a continually growing user base. Sega burned their customers with failed add-ons and an abandoned console.
- The Dreamcast released on Nov. 27th, 1998. The PS2 released March 4th, 2000. A full 15 month difference.
The DC, even with the older tech, still held its\' own visually. It\'s the other factors that were of far more concern and led to the console\'s untimely demise.
MS doesn\'t have any of those problems. Sony or Nintendo will not push their console launches past 2006.
Both Sony and Nintendo will do better if they let both their tech and development kits and development libraries mature a bit more up to halfway 2006.
The differences in hardware are not going to make or break the consoles, it will be the software. No console has ever launched with a fully matured library or development kits. Those grow with time and that\'s why we start seeing better games in the second year of the console and on.
-
We\'re still in the last generation. Even though Xbox and GC released a full 18 months after PS2 they are still comparable. It\'s the same generation of technology. The PC cards out right now are still of last generation.
I\'m not so sure about that. The newest cards out (6800Ultra & X800xtpe) are more than double the performance of 9800xt & FX5950 (or whatever the hell it was called).
Although maybe I see your point, the next round of cards are gonna probably have 24 pipes (instead of 16). Nvidia went with an entirely new chip for the nv4x gpus while ATI just ramped up their old ones from the 9800 days.
So you think the jump in technology to the next line of PC cards is gonna be bigger than what we just saw? Not saying you are wrong, but you seem to know your shit better than I.
-
Originally posted by JBean
I\'m not so sure about that. The newest cards out (6800Ultra & X800xtpe) are more than double the performance of 9800xt & FX5950 (or whatever the hell it was called).
Although maybe I see your point, the next round of cards are gonna probably have 24 pipes (instead of 16). Nvidia went with an entirely new chip for the nv4x gpus while ATI just ramped up their old ones from the 9800 days.
So you think the jump in technology to the next line of PC cards is gonna be bigger than what we just saw? Not saying you are wrong, but you seem to know your shit better than I.
I hardly know my shit, I\'m simply relaying info I\'ve picked up.
I haven\'t been keeping up with Nvidia except to know they built a new chip.
ATi on the other hand...
Quote:
2005-H1 ATI R520 ATI graphics chip said to be nicknamed Fudo (after philosofer or theInq\'s newsman). Earlier rumoured to be the PC-version of the XBox2-specific R500, but more recent sources indicate that it is closer to the R420, while the R500 is part of a new generation. Hyper Memory included.
Quote:
2005-H1 ATI R500 High end ATI graphics chip for XBox2 built in a 90 nm process. Part of a new generation, comparable to R600 for the PC.
Early on reported to "have 10 times higher geometry and 4 times higher pixel performance compared to the RADEON X800 XT".
May support WGF and Pixel and Vertex shaders 3.0 with 128 bit precision.
Quote:
2006 ATI R600 PC-equivalent to the R500 for XBox2. Likely to support WGF.
>>>Link<<< (http://endian.net/roadmap.asp?MapNo=5)
>>>The Beyond 3d thread I found it in<<< (http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20487)
The next generation ATi card is coming, starting in the Xenon. We\'re going to see far more than double the performance of current offerings.
I\'ll try to find something on Nvidia...
EDIT: found this:
And basically what it is, it’s on next generation of GPU. As you know we don’t talk about next generation products but it’s our next generation of GPU. And we’ve been working with them to produce a customized version that is customized specifically to connect that to the cell processor, so that they could work together. And the timing and everything is up to them to disclose, although we will have some products a little bit later this year, so this is not that far in the future on the development side.
>>>Link<<< (http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/ces2005.html)
So you think the jump in technology to the next line of PC cards is gonna be bigger than what we just saw? Not saying you are wrong, but you seem to know your shit better than I.
I think what we\'re seeing right now are early indications of what the next generation will be.
-
We were able to verify the info and we know that G70 is actually the real codename for Nvidia next generation high end product. We don\'t have a clue why Nvidia dropped its NV number nomenclature but this might actually mean that Nvidia is turning the page and that it will present something out of this world. The G70 won\'t be based on any existing NV40 marchitecture and it won\'t be anything like NV47.5, we mean not just an upgrade to existing marchitecture.
so yes, it looks like nvidia is making an entirely new chip as is ATi. Guess they had to for the 6800, 6600 series cards as the fx5200-fx5900\'s sucked so hard and there is no way an updated nv4x chip could keep up with the next gen Ati stuff it sounds like.
-
Originally posted by JBean
so yes, it looks like nvidia is making an entirely new chip as is ATi. Guess they had to for the 6800, 6600 series cards as the fx5200-fx5900\'s sucked so hard.
Good find.
I editted some more info into my post above.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Goddammit! I just typed up a huge post to reply and I lost it!
Then you\'ll be interested to know that Half-Life 2 and the Unreal Engine 3 run on Xenon without the console breaking a sweat. Developers still don\'t have final hardware, so there you go.
People who have witnessed what the machines can do say that it is next gen.
I can only assume that PS3 and Revolution can do the same.
Thank you, knowing that you understand that with make this all the easier for you to digest.
We\'re still in the last generation. Even though Xbox and GC released a full 18 months after PS2 they are still comparable. It\'s the same generation of technology. The PC cards out right now are still of last generation.
You still think Xenon, PS3, and Revolution will be so different? They\'ll all be in the same pool, just at different ends.
Sega and MS are in such different situations that they simply can\'t be compared.
- MS has money, Sega did not
- MS has major third party support, Sega did not
- MS has a continually growing user base. Sega burned their customers with failed add-ons and an abandoned console.
- The Dreamcast released on Nov. 27th, 1998. The PS2 released March 4th, 2000. A full 15 month difference.
The DC, even with the older tech, still held its\' own visually. It\'s the other factors that were of far more concern and led to the console\'s untimely demise.
MS doesn\'t have any of those problems. Sony or Nintendo will not push their console launches past 2006.
The differences in hardware are not going to make or break the consoles, it will be the software. No console has ever launched with a fully matured library or development kits. Those grow with time and that\'s why we start seeing better games in the second year of the console and on. [/B]
:stick: You are creating non existing arguements again
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
:stick: You are creating non existing arguements again
Tell me where I\'m creating non-issues concerning the thread...
Or, to make it easier for you, tell me where I didn\'t directly reply to one of Knotter\'s concerns.
-
I am bored to start quoting and debating with someone else\'s post as if it was mine :p
Wait for his reply.
-
Then bring up one of yours, I\'m not going anywhere...
-
Ah, c\'mon .. it\'s Nvidia who\'s treading sm3.0 steps right here right now with NV40.
If they\'d, Ati & Nvidia put speed refresh GPU\'s of current gpu cores into next gen consoles that would be a major shame.
That sm3.0 is, as we speak, beginning to become standard in the developer world.
It would be very unwise for console makers to force console gamesdevelopers into that high end development pipeline within 2005 ; by which i mean : having those games ready in 05
The hardware is NOT the problem. The transition for developers IS, if you have them rush it into 05.
Even though there\'ll be fancy @ss XNA and PS3 dev libraries development cycles will at least double in complexity thus effecting their bussiness model as well.
To conclude : we should NOT use HL2 and Doom3 as measurement marks for what next gen could or should be.
They\'re OLD tech. No use naming them in any discussion about the potential for next gen consoles.
The Unreal3 engine however IS a indicative of some of the graphics features ( note how I do not say \'performance\' ). That engine how it is still has fairly limited Geometry. I doubt most pc devs even comprehend right now how much money, time and assets making such a next gen engine game will take.
MS may go ahead for all I care. But they should look surprised if PS3 will do realtime radiosity on which an early bird Xbox2 will choke.
Releasing those consoles early will do neither the console companies nor the gamers nor the games developers a favor. (While the PC guys are laughing their @ss off to see any early release console age like hell compared to the next Ati or Nvidia refresh, faster than if that console had been released later).
-
Originally posted by Knotter8
Ah, c\'mon .. it\'s Nvidia who\'s treading sm3.0 steps right here right now with NV40.
When would you have the next gen come out? When sm4.0 is ready, why not wait until sm5.0? Shit, why not sm6.0?
Why wait when sm3.0, a considerable step foward, is here right now?
If they\'d, Ati & Nvidia put speed refresh GPU\'s of current gpu cores into next gen consoles that would be a major shame.
That sm3.0 is, as we speak, beginning to become standard in the developer world.
It would be very unwise for console makers to force console gamesdevelopers into that high end development pipeline within 2005 ; by which i mean : having those games ready in 05
So you think everyone should wait until sm3.0 is harnessed before anyone attempts to move foward? Or is that you simply think a few months into 2006 will give them a better understanding?
How do you think the transition from generation to generation has been? There are always new standards introduced that the developers come to terms with.
The hardware is NOT the problem. The transition for developers IS, if you have them rush it into 05.
Even though there\'ll be fancy @ss XNA and PS3 dev libraries development cycles will at least double in complexity thus effecting their bussiness model as well.
The developers who are still around have gone through these transitions before, or did you miss 8-bit, 16-bit, 32/64-bit generations? They did happen and developers had to harness that technology as well and eventually they outgrow it.
If they can\'t adapt then they\'ll disappear, something that has also happened to developers. It\'s the nature of the business.
To conclude : we should NOT use HL2 and Doom3 as measurement marks for what next gen could or should be.
They\'re OLD tech. No using them in any discussion about the potential for next gen consoles.
The Unreal3 engine however IS a indicative of some of the graphics features ( note how I do not say \'performance\' ). That engine how it is still has fairly limited Geometry.
Fair enough concerning HL2 and Doom 3 and you\'re right on the money about Unreal3 engine. The next gen ATi and Nvidia gpus are rumored in the hundreds of millions of polygons, some even suggesting close to a billion.
Considering that we are sitting somewhere around 5-15 million for this console generation I\'d say that\'s quite a leap, in fact I\'d say it\'s next gen worthy.
MS may go ahead for all I care. But they should look surprised if PS3 will do realtime radiosity on which an early bird Xbox2 will choke.
I think you\'re putting far too much emphasis on such a small gap in release times. I also don\'t think you\'re giving MS, ATi, or IBM (all partners for the Xbox 2) enough credit.
Releasing those consoles early will do neither the console companies nor the gamers nor the games developers a favor. (While the PC guys are laughing their @ss off to see any early release console age like hell compared to the next Ati or Nvidia refresh, faster than if that console had been released later).
Delaying them would do developers better? You sound like an overprotective mother or something. Also, and this has to do with what I\'ve been trying to say this whole thread, it\'s nearing that time when the industry needs to move foward. This one has been tapped. The potential for the next is looming on the horizon and seeing as how so many developers are announcing next gen products I\'d say they\'re ready.
ATi and Nvidia will be releasing PC parts derived from their next generation gpus developed for the PS3 and Xbox 2. You think ATi and Nvidia are going to magically come up with their next-next generation of technology shortly after the PS3 and Xbox 2 release? No, they won\'t. That will take years of R&D before they are ready to make the next jump.
IBM developing multi-core cpu\'s for both the Xbox 2 and PS3 ensure that the consoles are moving in the same direction as the pc industry.
There will be a yo-yo effect just as there has been since the 32-bit generation. Console comes out that is superior to available PC tech -> PC tech moves forward and eventually surpasses Console. Repeat.
-
You are wasting your time.He said that releasing next gen consoles before 2006 isnt the best idea
Whats wrong with that?Actually 2006 is the best timeframe and offers opportunities for improvement.
Or is the wait too long?Cant you wait till 2006?
-
^ Yeah, overall on the whole I do agree with you.
But I think this transition might be quite a rough one then for console developers, or they face being assimilated by the EA\'s in this world becuz they can\'t fund next gen development nor have the manpower for it.
This implies a major shift in the landscape of developers towards big publishers and devs who are longtime PC devs already.
6 months extra to learn new libraries might just do the trick for those console devs who are on the virge to getting left behind .....
As a gamer, consumer of games, I don\'t feel the need for a new console within 05 yet ; of course, that\'s my personal feelings about it. Q2 of 06 would be a good next gen console timing imho.
-
Originally posted by Knotter8
^ Yeah, overall on the whole I do agree with you.
But I think this transition might be quite a rough one then for console developers, or they face being assimilated by the EA\'s in this world becuz they can\'t fund next gen development nor have the manpower for it.
This implies a major shift in the landscape of developers towards big publishers and devs who are longtime PC devs already.
6 months extra to learn new libraries might just do the trick for those console devs who are on the virge to getting left behind .....
As a gamer, consumer of games, I don\'t feel the need for a new console within 05 yet ; of course, that\'s my personal feelings about it. Q2 of 06 would be a good next gen console timing imho.
Uni, I thought you weren\'t going to answer for knotter.
The transition is inevitable and there\'s no point in delaying it. Games will continue to get more expensive, development houses will grow, mergers will take place...that\'s just how it is.
I remember reading about five guys in a garage making a smash hit video game. Now it takes a team of dozens of people to cater to our growing demand in digital entertainment.
I still don\'t think the 6 months will matter. The PS2, Xbox, and GC game line-ups are drying up. Developers are on the move right now, I haven\'t read one complaint or sob story of having more power to make their games.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
You are wasting your time.He said that releasing next gen consoles before 2006 isnt the best idea
Whats wrong with that?Actually 2006 is the best timeframe and offers opportunities for improvement.
Or is the wait too long?Cant you wait till 2006?
I don\'t see the point in waiting from an industry perspective. I\'m not saying it needs to release tomorrow but I fail to see the problem with late this year or early next year.
Why is 2006 the best timeframe? What makes it the better choice than 2005 or 2007? If it\'s only a preference of yours then there\'s no point in debating.
-
I say pick a technology and run with it, you can\'t wait forever. Newer tech is coming out all the time... consoles are getting a bit long in the tooth (ps2 especially)
-
Originally posted by Ginko
I don\'t see the point in waiting from an industry perspective. I\'m not saying it needs to release tomorrow but I fail to see the problem with late this year or early next year.
Why is 2006 the best timeframe? What makes it the better choice than 2005 or 2007? If it\'s only a preference of yours then there\'s no point in debating.
why?WHY?Ask Sony.Why Sony is considering 2005 so early?And what kind of cost is the consumer suffering thanks to the delay?
And you didnt answer my question.You seem to fail to see whats the problem if the console is released in 2005 yet you seem to see the problem if its released in 2006.Whats the problem if its released in 2006 really?Why do you think its so late while its not?
Do you know better than Sony?
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
why?WHY?Ask Sony.Why Sony is considering 2005 so early?And what kind of cost is the consumer suffering thanks to the delay?
They simply aren\'t ready for a 2005 launch. They wouldn\'t be sitting on the PS3 if it were ready. SDK\'s just recently went out and cell isn\'t finalized.
I don\'t know what you\'re getting at with that last question. Perhaps you can elaborate on that thought?
And you didnt answer my question.You seem to fail to see whats the problem if the console is released in 2005 yet you seem to see the problem if its released in 2006.Whats the problem if its released in 2006 really?Why do you think its so late while its not?
Do you know better than Sony?
I don\'t have a problem with it releasing it 2006, that\'s perfectly fine just like a 2005 launch is okay by me. I\'ve already said it several times that a 2005-2006 launch window is great for the next generation.
It seems as though some people object to the thought of a 2005 launch and I haven\'t heard a valid reason for that yet.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
They simply aren\'t ready for a 2005 launch. They wouldn\'t be sitting on the PS3 if it were ready. SDK\'s just recently went out and cell isn\'t finalized.
I don\'t know what you\'re getting at with that last question. Perhaps you can elaborate on that thought?
Exactly.Do you want Sony to change their plans?Just to release a more powerful console than PS2 soon?
As for the last question what I am trying to say is that the consumer isnt losing more thanks to the delay than what he will gain when the console is released in 2006
I don\'t have a problem with it releasing it 2006, that\'s perfectly fine just like a 2005 launch is okay by me. I\'ve already said it several times that a 2005-2006 launch window is great for the next generation.
It seems as though some people object to the thought of a 2005 launch and I haven\'t heard a valid reason for that yet. [/B]
You said one above
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
Exactly.Do you want Sony to change their plans?Just to release a more powerful console than PS2 soon?
Oh my god, has that been your hang up this whole time? You think I want them to rush it? That is NOT what I\'ve been saying. I think that 2005-2006 is a good time for the transition to the next generation...it\'s what I\'ve been saying this entire thread!
As for the last question what I am trying to say is that the consumer isnt losing more thanks to the delay than what he will gain when the console is released in 2006
What delay? What loss? I never proposed any of that just to get the machine here.
Sony has had the PS3 specs in mind for quite some time, they\'re not just flying by the seat of their pants waiting for something better. They\'re waiting for the PS3 they had in mind to come together, when it does it will launch.
You said one above
What, that it\'s not ready? That\'s a very good reason, but it\'s not a valid case against MS which some of you seem to be harping on. The components are nearly ready, all signs for Xenon point to go come this November.
Sony\'s situation is different, they have much more involved. They\'re incorporating new technologies (Blu-Ray and Cell) that just aren\'t ready to roll out yet. But I can guarentee if they were you\'d be seeing a PS3 this christmas.
-
I ve told you that you were bringing non existing arguements before.
I am glad that you now understand my point.
About MS though.We all know that MS wants to release XBOX2 soon before the competition to gain consumers.
But the reason why some people arent seeing XBOX2 as a good idea to be released in 2005 are the same why we dont believe is a good idea to rush the PS3.
We feel that MS is rushing it.Thats what we are saying.Giving the chance for Sony to see the competition\'s offers and improve on aspects XBOX2 wont be able to if its released sooner.
MS representatives might say that everything is well planned but we arent expecting them to say otherwise anyways.
Sega was saying the same thing.They were saying that they are ready for everything.Support was huge they said, developers\' opinions were extremely positive, and it was easy to program on it.Indeed everything seemed rosy and bright.They even said that the PS2 will be hard to program to get all the performance it promises.They were right.
But they failed.
There are some unexpected still unknown factors that are hard to forsee
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
I ve told you that you were bringing non existing arguements before.
I am glad that you now understand my point.
You never outright said that I want them to rush it, had you said that then this probably would have ended long ago.
About MS though.We all know that MS wants to release XBOX2 soon before the competition to gain consumers.
But the reason why some people arent seeing XBOX2 as a good idea to be released in 2005 are the same why we dont believe is a good idea to rush the PS3.
Here\'s my problem with that though, 2005, more specifically November of 2005, is only 5 months before the rumored launch of PS3 in Spring \'06. It seems like people are hung up on the year number rather than the actual timeframe.
We feel that MS is rushing it.Thats what we are saying.Giving the chance for Sony to see the competition\'s offers and improve on aspects XBOX2 wont be able to if its released sooner.
Sony will not be able to just see what MS has and vice versa then go back to the drawing board. They\'re in too deep now.
These consoles have been in development since their successors were released. SDK\'s from Sony have been shipped, they\'re not going to greatly differ from that no matter what MS or Nintendo come up with.
The only time I\'ve seen that done is with Sega Saturn. Changed it from a 2D machine to a 3D machine and created a monster to develope for in the process.
MS would be worse off if they were to throw away any of what they have simply due to what Sony is showing. Components like ram are still in question though.
MS representatives might say that everything is well planned but we arent expecting them to say otherwise anyways.
I have a quote somewhere in here(console debating) that is dated a mere 7 months after the Xbox released saying that Xbox 2 was already in development. You call that a ill-conceived plan?
XNA has been in development side by side in order to benefit the Xbox 2. You think that was put together over night?
Sega was saying the same thing.They were saying that they are ready for everything.Support was huge they said, developers\' opinions were extremely positive, and it was easy to program on it.Indeed everything seemed rosy and bright.They even said that the PS2 will be hard to program to get all the performance it promises.They were right.
But they failed.
There are some unexpected still unknown factors that are hard to forsee
Lol, you got the easy to program right but you a little misinformed when it comes to support. The Saturn met an early demise due to ill-conceived hardware (2d to 3d change), the system was difficult to program for compared to the simple PS, and eventually it was abandoned for a new business model, the Dreamcast. The DC was missing alot of 3rd party support because of all the mishaps Sega had previous. Cautious developers just weren\'t convinced to fully support it. EA didn\'t support it because Sega went with PowerVR over their preferred Voodoo, that was a big loss and a really stupid decision by Sega, imo.
Anyway, MS does not equal Sega. You, or anyone else, aren\'t going to be able to justify such a silly comparison.
EDIT: Just went through the thread again and noticed that you and I were talking about two different things, I kept misinterpreting as being related to the subject of the article (when to move to next gen).
I\'ve been debating about "when to say when" concerning the move to next gen, and you\'ve been objecting to the rushing of PS3 due to a comment made by one of the editors.
Read the article if you\'re going to debate it! BAH!
-
wow
Like i said. I think 2006 looks good. Psx came out in 93 correct? Ps2 came out 2000? Thats seven years almost. Of course the psx was moving along at a stronger pace it seemed but 1 less year in life seems adequate. The only problem i see in waiting personally is ps2\'s remaining 2005 & 2006 library. Im not thinking too deep into this but im not so sure that there is anything A++ being released in this time.
At some points i feel that perhaps it is time but we just havent allowed the time for everything to unravel. We were hearing all kinds of news, predictions and mock shots and designs in 98-99 before the ps2 released. So far we havent heard much of anything. Perhaps Sony isnt ready, but if they hold a decent list of releases this year then i can definately wait.
By e3 im sure we\'ll come to some conclusions
-
Originally posted by Lord Nicon
Like i said. I think 2006 looks good. Psx came out in 93 correct?
Playstation launched in Japan on December 3rd, 1994.
>>>Link<<< (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation)
At some points i feel that perhaps it is time but we just havent allowed the time for everything to unravel. We were hearing all kinds of news, predictions and mock shots and designs in 98-99 before the ps2 released. So far we havent heard much of anything. Perhaps Sony isnt ready, but if they hold a decent list of releases this year then i can definately wait.
By e3 im sure we\'ll come to some conclusions
Much of anything?
We know about the cell and proposed performance, we know about Nvidia helping out and have heard early estimates as to what their GPU is capable of. We know SDK\'s have been shipped and there\'s already a buzz about it from not so tight lipped developers.
We know even more about Xbox 2. Nintendo, as always, is the most secretive.
The news is coming, apparently you\'re not paying attention.
-
Take into consideration that my opinions arent absolute
Originally posted by Ginko
Here\'s my problem with that though, 2005, more specifically November of 2005, is only 5 months before the rumored launch of PS3 in Spring \'06. It seems like people are hung up on the year number rather than the actual timeframe.
Console\'s full specs, real games and generally information appear months before the consoles release.So its actually more than just 5 months that Sony will know much about everything about the competitor.
Sony will not be able to just see what MS has and vice versa then go back to the drawing board. They\'re in too deep now.
These consoles have been in development since their successors were released. SDK\'s from Sony have been shipped, they\'re not going to greatly differ from that no matter what MS or Nintendo come up with.
The only time I\'ve seen that done is with Sega Saturn. Changed it from a 2D machine to a 3D machine and created a monster to develope for in the process.
MS would be worse off if they were to throw away any of what they have simply due to what Sony is showing. Components like ram are still in question though.
Its not just simply the graphics that Sony can observe and counter.And still Sony might make a few small alterations.I am not saying that Sony will make huge changes.But if MS comes up with something that will make Sony consider their offer then some changes will make their way.
I didnt mention huge changes.This is an assumption
Also dont forget.Sony will know even months before XBOX2\'s launch
I have a quote somewhere in here(console debating) that is dated a mere 7 months after the Xbox released saying that Xbox 2 was already in development. You call that a ill-conceived plan?
XNA has been in development side by side in order to benefit the Xbox 2. You think that was put together over night?
But there is no competition.Until you know what the competitor is offering no matter what and how much you are working on something there is still the risk of uncertainty.
Lol, you got the easy to program right but you a little misinformed when it comes to support. The Saturn met an early demise due to ill-conceived hardware (2d to 3d change), the system was difficult to program for compared to the simple PS, and eventually it was abandoned for a new business model, the Dreamcast. The DC was missing alot of 3rd party support because of all the mishaps Sega had previous. Cautious developers just weren\'t convinced to fully support it. EA didn\'t support it because Sega went with PowerVR over their preferred Voodoo, that was a big loss and a really stupid decision by Sega, imo.
Anyway, MS does not equal Sega. You, or anyone else, aren\'t going to be able to justify such a silly comparison.
I am not saying that MS is bound to fail thanks to the same factors that made the DC fail.My point is that there are unknown factors.I said unknown.Unexpected.I didnt name the factors that made DC fail and neither did I say that MS will fail for the same reasons.It might not do as well thought due to other still unknown factors.
They are facing a ghost competitor and there is no nexct gen market yet.There is actually nothing.All these sound good and they can say that they quarantee success but how well it will do in the market when its released next to the competition its a whole different story
Since so far I havent seen anything but only read text from MS representatives its normal to have this uncertainty.
Also dont forget that some gaming industry analists predicted MS decision to release the console in 2005 as a wrong move and that this might not give the expected well headstart MS is expecting.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
Take into consideration that my opinions arent absolute
Console\'s full specs, real games and generally information appear months before the consoles release.So its actually more than just 5 months that Sony will know much about everything about the competitor.
That time is relative. You think Sony is just sitting around waiting to see what MS is doing? They\'re still developing whatever it is they have going on. What do you think they would do if they were to learn the fulls specs of their competitor? Say a memo dropped into their office tomorrow morning.
Abandon their current plans, their investment in time and resources toward the proposed PS3 model they\'ve had on the burner for several years? They can\'t stray from that too far or they\'ll end up in a mess.
SDK\'s have already been sent out, the hardware might undergo some minor changes but anything radical is out of the question.
Its not just simply the graphics that Sony can observe and counter.And still Sony might make a few small alterations.I am not saying that Sony will make huge changes.But if MS comes up with something that will make Sony consider their offer then some changes will make their way.
I didnt mention huge changes.You assume too much from my post
Also dont forget.Sony will know even months before XBOX2\'s launch
If it\'s not a huge change then what does it matter?
But there is no competition.Until you know what the competitor is offering no matter what and how much you are working on something there is still the risk of uncertainty.
I am not saying that MS is bound to fail thanks to the same factors that made the DC fail.My point is that there are unknown factors.I said unknown.Unexpected.I didnt name the factors that made DC fail and neither did I say that MS will fail for the same reasons.It might not do as well thought due to other still unknown factors.
Then how could one possibly call it another DC if circumstances are entirely different? We know what factors led to Sega exiting the console business and MS doesn\'t share ANYTHING in common.
They are facing a ghost competitor and there is no market.There is actually nothing.All these sound good and they can say that they quarantee success but how well it will do in the market when its released its a whole different story
Since so far I havent seen anything but only read text from MS representatives its normal to have this uncertainty.
Everyone\'s starting from zero next gen and everything can change. You think Nintnedo let Sony come in and take over? Their decisions ultimately knocked them down the ladder a few notches and now they sit in 3rd place.
Nintendo\'s proposing their Revolution, Microsoft is proposing the "HD Era", and Sony is banking on their Cell and Blu-Ray. Their strategies will be different but I believe their hardware will be very close in terms of performance.
Who knows where gaming is going to go? I don\'t think we\'ll figure it out today.
Also dont forget that some gaming industry analists predicted MS decision to release the console in 2005 as a wrong move and that this might not give the expected well headstart MS is expecting.
Could these be the same analyst that predicted MS would drop out of the console race within 2 years of Xbox launching?
-
Originally posted by Ginko
Playstation launched in Japan on December 3rd, 1994.
>>>Link<<< (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation)
Much of anything?
We know about the cell and proposed performance, we know about Nvidia helping out and have heard early estimates as to what their GPU is capable of. We know SDK\'s have been shipped and there\'s already a buzz about it from not so tight lipped developers.
We know even more about Xbox 2. Nintendo, as always, is the most secretive.
The news is coming, apparently you\'re not paying attention.
So we know about the cell and "proposed performance." Also about who\'s working on the project and that the sdk\'s have been shipped.
Simply Riveting
Ive been paying enough attention to know the same degree of information i knew last gen and this is definately not the degree of numbers, speculation and hype that we saw in 99/00. If thats any indicator of what this gen is going to be like then id rather them wait to see what they can stir up or improve on. Yes there is the question "what can they improve?" and im pretty damn sure theres something. We know that some companies have jumped on the wagon to dev for these consoles but we havent heard too much. On top of that we have barely seen any shots.
Dont tell me all the devs and sony are keeping tight lipped this gen. Sony is the king of hype. If there was enough material being developed for xbox2 and ps3 we would have already seen much more.
Perhaps the entry of MS stirred things up a lot but compared to last gen this is a drought. I dont think MS caused all of that alone. On top of everything, i hear no casual gamers talking about either console which is somewhat weird since casual gamers tend to spread all sorts of rumors - poly count, gflops etc. Ive heard none of that.
Maybe it is time for this gen to end but nobody seems ready. Perhaps theres something you see that i dont but im just not seeing it.
-
Originally posted by Lord Nicon
So we know about the cell and "proposed performance." Also about who\'s working on the project and that the sdk\'s have been shipped.
Simply Riveting
I suppose that depends who you ask.
Ive been paying enough attention to know the same degree of information i knew last gen and this is definately not the degree of numbers, speculation and hype that we saw in 99/00. If thats any indicator of what this gen is going to be like then id rather them wait to see what they can stir up or improve on. Yes there is the question "what can they improve?" and im pretty damn sure theres something. We know that some companies have jumped on the wagon to dev for these consoles but we havent heard too much. On top of that we have barely seen any shots.
In 99/00 Sony was spewing Emotion Engine left and right, and it was because of the Dreamcast.
You\'re looking for indicators that next gen is coming? Did you miss the one about Unreal Engine 3? How about the one about standardization of tools in the form of XNA and Collada? What about Mistwalker saying that the performance of the Xenon is way beyond what\'s capable with the current consoles? Sega said that the Xenon is a developers dream. Nintendo is commenting that their next console will be a revolution. How about the "HD era"?
You want some screenshots? Look up Gears of War, Wardevil, and Condemened. How about those pics EA posted not too long ago?
Would you like me to make a thread about what J Allard said concerning Project Gotham 3?
Are you just forgetting all this stuff or you simply haven\'t come across it?
Dont tell me all the devs and sony are keeping tight lipped this gen. Sony is the king of hype. If there was enough material being developed for xbox2 and ps3 we would have already seen much more.
Developers can\'t show their hand until the consoles are officially announced. Looks like that will be E3.
We\'re already hearing support for next gen consoles from EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Tecmo, and others.
You don\'t think Sony has started with their hype? Have you missed all the Cell info? It\'s like hearing about the Emotion Engine all over again.
Perhaps the entry of MS stirred things up a lot but compared to last gen this is a drought. I dont think MS caused all of that alone. On top of everything, i hear no casual gamers talking about either console which is somewhat weird since casual gamers tend to spread all sorts of rumors - poly count, gflops etc. Ive heard none of that.
It\'s all about timing. If Sony showed it\'s full hand right now and didn\'t launch for a year then that\'d make for a pretty dull wait. They have to play the hype game with MS, who, in my opinion, has become just as good at it.
I personally think MS has a great strategy of keeping an almost tight lip. Right now they are still riding on great sales of their Xbox, this past holiday was their biggest and it still has momentum. It would be stupid to kill that.
I\'m under the impression that when E3 rolls around you\'ll hear nothing but Xbox 2 through November. IGN\'s said it, Gamespot\'s said, there\'s alot we don\'t know about but we will soon.
You\'re simply not visiting the right forums. Go to Beyond3d, Gamersage, or Teamxbox. You\'ll get far more speculation than you\'ll care to hear.
Maybe it is time for this gen to end but nobody seems ready. Perhaps theres something you see that i dont but im just not seeing it. [/B]
You\'re just not seeing it. If you\'re using this forum as a source of information then I\'ll tell you that you\'re missing quite a bit of info. I certainly don\'t post everything here and I hardly see anyone else posting the latest.
This place is hardly a gauge for excitement concerning next gen.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
That time is relative. You think Sony is just sitting around waiting to see what MS is doing? They\'re still developing whatever it is they have going on. What do you think they would do if they were to learn the fulls specs of their competitor? Say a memo dropped into their office tomorrow morning.
Abandon their current plans, their investment in time and resources toward the proposed PS3 model they\'ve had on the burner for several years? They can\'t stray from that too far or they\'ll end up in a mess
SDK\'s have already been sent out, the hardware might undergo some minor changes but anything radical is out of the question.
Stop puting words I didnt say in my mouth and read my whole post before quoting, choping and replying.I didnt say that at all and I elaborated what I ment
Sony isnt delaying PS3 because they are sitting and waiting to see what MS will do.But Sony wont be sitting with their hands tight either.
If it\'s not a huge change then what does it matter?
I ment not changes that will change drastically the hardware scheme/architecture.They will take the right countering measurments
Then how could one possibly call it another DC if circumstances are entirely different? We know what factors led to Sega exiting the console business and MS doesn\'t share ANYTHING in common.
If it fails thanks to being released sooner yes it will be another DC.Regardless what factors playied the role of failure for XBOX2
Everyone\'s starting from zero next gen and everything can change. You think Nintnedo let Sony come in and take over? Their decisions ultimately knocked them down the ladder a few notches and now they sit in 3rd place.
Nintendo\'s proposing their Revolution, Microsoft is proposing the "HD Era", and Sony is banking on their Cell and Blu-Ray. Their strategies will be different but I believe their hardware will be very close in terms of performance.
Nintendo never tried to compete directly XBOX and PS2.Sony and MS are different from Nintendo.Your example doesnt work.XBOX offered DVD, online, HDD support, and targeted the same consumers Sony was targeting, while Nintendo mostly targeted the younger audience, and Nintendo fans
Who knows where gaming is going to go? I don\'t think we\'ll figure it out today.
I estimate.Just as you do.
Could these be the same analyst that predicted MS would drop out of the console race within 2 years of Xbox launching?
Ahm....if thats what you want to believe.
-
Originally posted by Ginko
You\'re just not seeing it. If you\'re using this forum as a source of information then I\'ll tell you that you\'re missing quite a bit of info. I certainly don\'t post everything here and I hardly see anyone else posting the latest.
This place is hardly a gauge for excitement concerning next gen.
Trust me im not. Ive seen the unreal engine. Ive seen half the shots. The cell hype isnt what "fear the power of emotion" was, nor are they putting up numbers similar to those of last gen\'s. Nintendo is said they are going to start/create a revolution with the new "revolution" - that tells me a lot. Standarization of tools, Mistwalker said this, Sega said this. Why? How? From the looks of things sega\'s first attempts at next gen have been poor thus far. I havent seen anything otherwise.
Im not asking sony to show all of their cards. But if a lot of you are in agreement that this gen should start at the end of 2005, i dont know why we havent seen more. Perhaps our definition of "more" varies, but half the things you listed are far from something to jump about. True, there are some very exciting points but the rest isnt there.
Perhaps theres quite a bit to be excited about when it comes to ms and all of that and i dont mean to be a Sony whore, which i wouldnt say, but for some odd reason, ms hasnt grown on me, nor have they given me much of a reason to look too far into what they are doing. Maybe its my mood but im waiting on sony and from the looks of things you\'ve set your eyes on what ms is doing. Theres nothing wrong with that, but on my "side" of the playing field, if you want to call it that, there isnt much.
Im not very motivated to go into detail but its just how i feel.
-
Originally posted by Unicron!
Stop puting words I didnt say in my mouth and read my whole post before quoting, choping and replying.I didnt say that at all and I elaborated what I ment
Sony isnt delaying PS3 because they are sitting and waiting to see what MS will do.But Sony wont be sitting with their hands tight either.
You didn\'t do it very well. Both companies are moving forward with their layed plans and there is no way they can effectively adopt a new plan to full-on counter what the other has to offer. The little shit they can change but that\'s the stuff that makes little to no difference anyway.
If either has made an error in judgement as to where games are going then the other will rise above. That is unless they have strikingly similar plans, which I believe they do, then we\'ll just see who can market it better.
I ment not changes that will change drastically the hardware scheme/architecture.They will take the right countering measurments
I know what you meant and I don\'t think it\'s as simple to just as you\'re making it out to be. Then again I don\'t think the consoles will greatly differ from each other in any area.
If it fails thanks to being released sooner yes it will be another DC.Regardless what factors playied the role of failure for XBOX2
To say it is a "DC" is comparing it to the defining factors of that particular console\'s life, or in this case the end of. If the Xbox 2 were to fail then I\'d say that the DC and Xbox 2 have that in common, however there would be significant differences as to how their demise unfolded.
Nintendo never tried to compete directly XBOX and PS2.Sony and MS are different from Nintendo.Your example doesnt work.XBOX offered DVD, online, HDD support, and targeted the same consumers Sony was targeting, while Nintendo mostly targeted the younger audience, and Nintendo fans
Oh, so Nintendo didn\'t mind giving up that market share? I see:rolleyes:
Nintendo didn\'t read the market right with the N64 and that\'s why Playstation took over. The N64 came out later, it supported an unfavorable medium to developers, and Nintendo was too picky with the whole "quality over quantity" policy.
Nintendo has never intentionally targeted a different audience, the consumer changed and Nintendo ignored that dynamic.
What do you think they keep referring to when they say "we\'ll come back" or something like that? What was the effort to secure Resident Evil for the Gamecube? Was that for the kiddies?
I estimate.Just as you do.
Fair enough.
Ahm....if thats what you want to believe.
Well, I\'m convinced that you have severe misconceptions about what\'s about to do down for next generation but I don\'t doubt you think the same of me. I think all we can do is agree to disagree, then wait and see what happens.
-
Originally posted by Lord Nicon
Trust me im not. Ive seen the unreal engine. Ive seen half the shots. The cell hype isnt what "fear the power of emotion" was, nor are they putting up numbers similar to those of last gen\'s. Nintendo is said they are going to start/create a revolution with the new "revolution" - that tells me a lot. Standarization of tools, Mistwalker said this, Sega said this. Why? How? From the looks of things sega\'s first attempts at next gen have been poor thus far. I havent seen anything otherwise.
Im not asking sony to show all of their cards. But if a lot of you are in agreement that this gen should start at the end of 2005, i dont know why we havent seen more. Perhaps our definition of "more" varies, but half the things you listed are far from something to jump about. True, there are some very exciting points but the rest isnt there.
Perhaps theres quite a bit to be excited about when it comes to ms and all of that and i dont mean to be a Sony whore, which i wouldnt say, but for some odd reason, ms hasnt grown on me, nor have they given me much of a reason to look too far into what they are doing. Maybe its my mood but im waiting on sony and from the looks of things you\'ve set your eyes on what ms is doing. Theres nothing wrong with that, but on my "side" of the playing field, if you want to call it that, there isnt much.
Im not very motivated to go into detail but its just how i feel.
Guess it does depend who you talk to...
-
The actual official specs for the PS3 will more than likely be cut down to make it more affordable to produce and for consumers. I remember the ps2 specs were somewhat cut down from the original proposals. Doesn\'t 4Ghz or so sound like wishful thinking? Considering the fact that PC\'s are still only touching 3Ghz.
-
We ve got a year until its produced
-
It\'s time for new consoles, in my opinion. I\'m still enjoying this generation however it has been getting stagnant for the past year or so. Too many sequels of games, though great as they are, look and play all too similar. "Been there, done that" is becoming common.
Knotter,
The PS3 will not do true raycasting. We might see that with the PS4 and Xbox 3. In the mean time we\'ll see the type of raycasting that\'s been around since the PS One days.
-
Originally posted by Phill
The actual official specs for the PS3 will more than likely be cut down to make it more affordable to produce and for consumers. I remember the ps2 specs were somewhat cut down from the original proposals. Doesn\'t 4Ghz or so sound like wishful thinking? Considering the fact that PC\'s are still only touching 3Ghz.
So were the Xbox specs. I wouldn\'t speculate about it at this point though, no way to tell. Let\'s just wait for the official unveiling in May, shall we?
You can\'t compare a PC CPU with the Cell. They\'re completely different architectures. The Cell is designed to run at high speeds doing specialized operations and is an in-order CPU. PC CPUs are massively out-of-order CPUs designed for general purpose applications. They\'re way more complex than the Cell in terms of logic etc. But of course they might cut the speed of it if the yields aren\'t good enough but no one but STI knows about that for sure at this point in time. So why speculate?
-
Hi everybody!:)
I think PS3 will be released in 2006, just my opinion, and I think it will be extremely powerful! I forecast more powerful than the successor of XBox! That\'s only my opinion, and I see PS3 later then the next XBox....
ps HI Ginko!!!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by Phill
The actual official specs for the PS3 will more than likely be cut down to make it more affordable to produce and for consumers. I remember the ps2 specs were somewhat cut down from the original proposals. Doesn\'t 4Ghz or so sound like wishful thinking? Considering the fact that PC\'s are still only touching 3Ghz.
The first time I heard about official words/possible specs about PS2, I heard about a CPU running at 250 MHz capable of 55 M poly/sec with no effects, and we know the final specs were a little higher...66 M poly/sec......let\'s wait and see......
-
BizioEE!!!
*drops dead*
-
Hi Samwise !!!!
I\'ve been so busy lately with my job, a nightmare, for the last two years!!! How are you?
-
Wow, there\'s a blast from the past.
-
Originally posted by BizioEE
Hi Samwise !!!!
I\'ve been so busy lately with my job, a nightmare, for the last two years!!! How are you?
I\'m good thanks. :)
Nice to see another oldie again! :D