|
Sony considering multi-core processor for PS4
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 29 December, 2009
Kotaku, citing Impress, is reporting today that Sony is considering not using the Cell architecture for the PlayStation 4, and instead moving to a multi-core CPU, one that will be easier to develop for than the Cell.
Sony has repeatedly said the PS3 will have a ten year life span but it's interesting to see that the company already has the PS4 on its mind.
The source says the first ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. December 2009 @ 11:53 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Quote:
Quote:
If properly utilize means lower textures and other graphics dickary youer better off with twice the ramm so even smaller backed games will be able to play well on it.....
That's just it. When properly programmed, there is no need for lower textures or other corner-cutting tricks. Those things are the results of games being developed for another architecture (PC or 360) and instead of being reprogrammed for PS3, they cut corners and make a poor-man's port of it.
A lot of games developed with the PS3 as lead architecture look very good and have high res textures. For example, Burnout Paradise was developed as one of the few multiplatform titles with the PS3 as lead console and as a result looks sharper on it than on the 360 for example.
*sigh* the problem is you make a unique console the the more trouble the standardize industry will have issues with it, that's great that some games an look great on it if they take their time and code on it correctly....my point is you don't allow for the distraction and issues you build a system that can be deved and easily molded for right from the start. By doing it the way they did they have did more damage and slot millions because of the lack of foresight...
Honestly Zippy I think your descripiton is exactly the 360's problem. It's powerful and easy to program for but look at it now...nothing that is technologically superior to even Uncharted 1 and the 360 has been out for about 4 years now.
It's all in how you look at it I say. Make something that is powerful but will challenge devs which will make them think creatively and that will separate/distinguish the talented from the average.
Well I get a feeling I know which side you have your butter on the toast...
Both have issues with hardware one being inept for obvious reasons(360) and the other being well almost the same level of inquietude over its design but instead of high fail rates you have pricing and software support issues.
At the very least MS got the software support part of it right.
Don't get me wrong the PS3 has potential but frankly it has taken to much time to get to where it is now, the PS3 could have been done alot better the 360 still just needs better heat dispensation design. LOL
Frankly the 360/WII is good enough the PS3 is over priced and not really needed but even so should last until 020. Its a shame they will produce a new system before 016.... and yes the 360 should have been replaced a year or 2 ago simply because its time.
But again I hate to see a new system out before its time, the PS3 is good enough and should last a long time a full 10 years would be nice, the 360 is showing its age, its tiem to repalce it all they really need is a new CPU, more ramm and a new GPU chipset open up the USB and HDD pipes to save yo stuff anywhere you want and offer full BWC with the 360 and Xbox(sale a 100$ verification card like what sat dishes use) it can be done but I bet we will see a dumbed down half assed POS like the 360.....
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
30. December 2009 @ 12:19 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Quote:
Quote:
If properly utilize means lower textures and other graphics dickary youer better off with twice the ramm so even smaller backed games will be able to play well on it.....
That's just it. When properly programmed, there is no need for lower textures or other corner-cutting tricks. Those things are the results of games being developed for another architecture (PC or 360) and instead of being reprogrammed for PS3, they cut corners and make a poor-man's port of it.
A lot of games developed with the PS3 as lead architecture look very good and have high res textures. For example, Burnout Paradise was developed as one of the few multiplatform titles with the PS3 as lead console and as a result looks sharper on it than on the 360 for example.
*sigh* the problem is you make a unique console the the more trouble the standardize industry will have issues with it, that's great that some games an look great on it if they take their time and code on it correctly....my point is you don't allow for the distraction and issues you build a system that can be deved and easily molded for right from the start. By doing it the way they did they have did more damage and slot millions because of the lack of foresight...
I don't get it Zippy. If you cater to standardization, you open the doors even wider for shovelware, which I know is your biggest gripe. With a unique design, you at least try to force innovation on the game devs part. You are always going to have a handful of devs that rise to the challenge, as we've seen with the exclusives that have been released so far. You say it's taken too long to get to this point in the PS3's life cycle, but I say who cares if we are already here and really it's only been 2-3 years. You act like there has been nothing offered along the way. It's another thing if you feel the growth has been too slow.
How do you figure the pricing is all wrong? Comparing to its counterpart, at $299, the PS3 is priced just right for what you get. Yes, out of the gate, the PS3 was not wallet friendly, but that is then and this is now. The 360 is and has always been overpriced when you consider how they rape you with accessories. And what's so great about "getting the software support right" if the hardware is rancid? IMO, it's better to get the hardware right and work on tweaking the software support over its lifetime. And even if Sony screws up the PSN premium service, online play will always be free, which is at least an option.
The way I see it, in this race, you have the PS3 that took its time out of the gate, had a rough start, but showed progress and has a promising future, which we are experiencing now. Then you have the 360 that charged out of the gate with one leg and both hands behind its back, running itself into the ground to hopefully get to the finish line and win by a tongue.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
30. December 2009 @ 13:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Well I get a feeling I know which side you have your butter on the toast...
Sorry if I prefer the better side of technology instead of the same old off the shelf shit. I've always said it ~ I don't settle for mediocrity in any other aspect of my life, so why should I in a product that I buy?
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Both have issues with hardware one being inept for obvious reasons(360) and the other being well almost the same level of inquietude over its design but instead of high fail rates you have pricing and software support issues.
At the very least MS got the software support part of it right.
Don't get me wrong the PS3 has potential but frankly it has taken to much time to get to where it is now, the PS3 could have been done alot better the 360 still just needs better heat dispensation design. LOL
Frankly the 360/WII is good enough the PS3 is over priced and not really needed but even so should last until 020. Its a shame they will produce a new system before 016.... and yes the 360 should have been replaced a year or 2 ago simply because its time.
But again I hate to see a new system out before its time, the PS3 is good enough and should last a long time a full 10 years would be nice, the 360 is showing its age, its tiem to repalce it all they really need is a new CPU, more ramm and a new GPU chipset open up the USB and HDD pipes to save yo stuff anywhere you want and offer full BWC with the 360 and Xbox(sale a 100$ verification card like what sat dishes use) it can be done but I bet we will see a dumbed down half assed POS like the 360.....
As for the rest of the quote I have to say Emugamer summed it all up pretty well. I find your points a bit contradictory as well in what you mean and what you want though? Example ~ You hate that the 360 is so technologically crappy but you hate the PS3 for being technologically superior then you like the PS3 for offering a 10 year plan (which in a way supports my point about it's technology offering more and better flexibility/scalability) and then you want the 360 to have already been retired after 2-3 years thus screwing it's customers over! o_O ~ Sometimes you baffle me Zippy...you really do LoL!
The only thing I want to add is that Sony has gotten it right the past 2 gens (and still doing so currently with the PS2) and the honest fact is the PS3 has proven it is following the same exact line it's predecessors have before it, right down to the way it's programming has improved year over year. Actually if anything it is better since this gen Sony has MUCH more support and tools it has given & allowed devs to share.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2009 @ 13:35
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. December 2009 @ 13:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by emugamer:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Quote:
Quote:
If properly utilize means lower textures and other graphics dickary youer better off with twice the ramm so even smaller backed games will be able to play well on it.....
That's just it. When properly programmed, there is no need for lower textures or other corner-cutting tricks. Those things are the results of games being developed for another architecture (PC or 360) and instead of being reprogrammed for PS3, they cut corners and make a poor-man's port of it.
A lot of games developed with the PS3 as lead architecture look very good and have high res textures. For example, Burnout Paradise was developed as one of the few multiplatform titles with the PS3 as lead console and as a result looks sharper on it than on the 360 for example.
*sigh* the problem is you make a unique console the the more trouble the standardize industry will have issues with it, that's great that some games an look great on it if they take their time and code on it correctly....my point is you don't allow for the distraction and issues you build a system that can be deved and easily molded for right from the start. By doing it the way they did they have did more damage and slot millions because of the lack of foresight...
I don't get it Zippy. If you cater to standardization, you open the doors even wider for shovelware, which I know is your biggest gripe. With a unique design, you at least try to force innovation on the game devs part. You are always going to have a handful of devs that rise to the challenge, as we've seen with the exclusives that have been released so far. You say it's taken too long to get to this point in the PS3's life cycle, but I say who cares if we are already here and really it's only been 2-3 years. You act like there has been nothing offered along the way. It's another thing if you feel the growth has been too slow.
How do you figure the pricing is all wrong? Comparing to its counterpart, at $299, the PS3 is priced just right for what you get. Yes, out of the gate, the PS3 was not wallet friendly, but that is then and this is now. The 360 is and has always been overpriced when you consider how they rape you with accessories. And what's so great about "getting the software support right" if the hardware is rancid? IMO, it's better to get the hardware right and work on tweaking the software support over its lifetime. And even if Sony screws up the PSN premium service, online play will always be free, which is at least an option.
The way I see it, in this race, you have the PS3 that took its time out of the gate, had a rough start, but showed progress and has a promising future, which we are experiencing now. Then you have the 360 that charged out of the gate with one leg and both hands behind its back, running itself into the ground to hopefully get to the finish line and win by a tongue.
Hardware/software development standardization not drool ware there is a huge difference in that....
What can cell/ps3 do better than than a 360 built around twice the speed/ramm on the CPU/GPU I just don't see it its a bad setup funky hardware that requires to much work to get going right.
The pricing on the PS3 when it came out was very all wrong and hurt it greatly...... it seems to me you are wearing rose tinted glasses and over look all the bad.....
Originally posted by Oner:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Well I get a feeling I know which side you have your butter on the toast...
Sorry if I prefer the better side of technology instead of same ol shit off the shelf. I don't settle for mediocrity in any other aspect of my life, so why should I in a product that I buy?
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Both have issues with hardware one being inept for obvious reasons(360) and the other being well almost the same level of inquietude over its design but instead of high fail rates you have pricing and software support issues.
At the very least MS got the software support part of it right.
Don't get me wrong the PS3 has potential but frankly it has taken to much time to get to where it is now, the PS3 could have been done alot better the 360 still just needs better heat dispensation design. LOL
Frankly the 360/WII is good enough the PS3 is over priced and not really needed but even so should last until 020. Its a shame they will produce a new system before 016.... and yes the 360 should have been replaced a year or 2 ago simply because its time.
But again I hate to see a new system out before its time, the PS3 is good enough and should last a long time a full 10 years would be nice, the 360 is showing its age, its tiem to repalce it all they really need is a new CPU, more ramm and a new GPU chipset open up the USB and HDD pipes to save yo stuff anywhere you want and offer full BWC with the 360 and Xbox(sale a 100$ verification card like what sat dishes use) it can be done but I bet we will see a dumbed down half assed POS like the 360.....
As for the rest of the quote I have to say Emugamer summed it all up pretty well. I find your points a bit contradictory as well in what you mean and what you want though? Example ~ You hate that the 360 is so technologically crappy but you hate the PS3 for being technologically superior then you like the PS3 for offering a 10 year plan (which in a way supports my point about it's technology offering more and better flexibility/scalability) and then you want the 360 to have already been retired after 2-3 years thus screwing it's customers over! o_O ~ Sometimes you baffle me Zippy...you really do LoL!
The only thing I want to add is that Sony has gotten it right the past 2 gens (and still doing so currently with the PS2) and the honest fact is the PS3 has proven it is following the same exact line it's predecessors have before it, right down to the way it's programming has improved year over year. Actually if anything it is better since this gen Sony has MUCH more support and tools it has given & allowed devs to share.
The 360 has been out for more than 5 years and still closed and locked hardware wise its time to move on to something better built hardware that's more open, if it was not so closed they could easily get away with installing games to the HDD and live off it for the next 2 or 3 years but as it is now its time and I would only support a new system if it was 100% BWC.
Also the PS3 has a higher ceiling so the sooner they get a solid next gen system out the better other wise they will lose market share to the PS3.
All my complaints about the PS3 are price at launch,design that leads to odd bottle necks in more than speed/performance, lack of proper BWC.
If sony didn't make such horrible hardware to dev for they would not have to double up on their software kits....... the cell is bloated in more ways than one as well I just do not see what it can do that a cheaper more standard multi core CPU/GPY solution can do....
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
30. December 2009 @ 14:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
What can cell/ps3 do better than than a 360 built around twice the speed/ramm on the CPU/GPU I just don't see it
One honest look at only Killzone 2, GT5P & Uncharted 2 will answer that question easily.
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
The 360 has been out for more than 5 years
The 360 launched on November 22, 2005 in the US & Canada ~ Source It has been out for 4 years. So going by what you said in this post
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
yes the 360 should have been replaced a year or 2 ago simply because its time.
You are saying you would have preferred it be retired after only being on the market for less than what it's predecessor was (original Xbox was about 4 years or so) in 2007/2008. That would sure as hell piss me off as a gamer to buy something that is obsolete that quickly and not supported thereafter!
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
All my complaints about the PS3 are price at launch,design that leads to odd bottle necks in more than speed/performance, lack of proper BWC.
But that's the thing Zippy there are no more bottle necks. The only true bottle neck was the time it would take devs to wrap their heads around programming for the PS3 and since the tools and support/sharing between devs is so much better this gen (for/from Sony) it ultimately becomes a wash anyway.
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
If sony didn't make such horrible hardware to dev for they would not have to double up on their software kits....... the cell is bloated in more ways than one as well I just do not see what it can do that a cheaper more standard multi core CPU/GPY solution can do....
Let me play devils advocate here and agree with you that the Cell may be bloated and they could have used a cheaper more standard solution...wouldn't that put them in the same situation as the 360 right now then? Plus the proof is in front of everyone's eyes to see that first & second party exclusive games show the Cell has proven it's capabilities far and above what the 360 has done after being on the market for 4 years! If the 360 was able to do what the PS3 can do then I honestly & truly ask you why hasn't it been done?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2009 @ 14:18
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
30. December 2009 @ 14:42 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
The pricing on the PS3 when it came out was very all wrong and hurt it greatly...... it seems to me you are wearing rose tinted glasses and over look all the bad......
I didn't overlook the bad at all. I was among those who scoffed at the initial $599 price tag of the 60GB system. I didn't buy into the PS3 until it was $200 cheaper. I also acknowledge that shoving blu ray down peoples throats was a bad move in the formats prematurity. They made mistakes initially, but th point is where the system is at now. I understand your point about BWC. Unfortunately, that will not change and I think it would be a big mistake for any new gen system to leave that feature out.
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
30. December 2009 @ 15:00 |
Link to this message
|
whats funny is the Xbox360 uses the Cell processors PPC implementation.
i think what zippy is trying to say is that if developers weren't lazy.
The 360 could match the graphic prowess of the PS3. Hell we all know the PC can.
|
|
av_verbal
Suspended permanently
|
30. December 2009 @ 15:43 |
Link to this message
|
OMG spot the fanboys!
Originally posted by DXR88:
Hell we all know the PC can.
totally, the PC outstrips both the PS3 & 360 n makes them look like last gen, which compared to how far PC's have moved on is exactly what both consoles are. The 7000 series nvidia VGA card that the ps3 uses is now £20 retail so what does that tell you, old technology still being sold as current gen.
does anyone really think that games are created on a console?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2009 @ 15:50
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
30. December 2009 @ 16:43 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
OMG spot the fanboys!
Where?
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
30. December 2009 @ 18:01 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
whats funny is the Xbox360 uses the Cell processors PPC implementation.
This is indeed true but sharing similar structure does not mean it can do the same thing. It's almost like saying a Celeron is on par with a Pentium ~ a bit of a weak analogy but I think the point comes across well.
Originally posted by DXR88:
i think what zippy is trying to say is that if developers weren't lazy.
The 360 could match the graphic prowess of the PS3.
You see that's the thing...going by Zippy's original view that if the 360 is so much easier to program for then I don't understand how could it be a factor of laziness for them to make something of equal quality? You see where I am coming from?
Originally posted by av_verbal:
OMG spot the fanboys!
Even if in jest please don't "joke" around like that as it only leads to problems...K?
Originally posted by av_verbal:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Hell we all know the PC can.
totally, the PC outstrips both the PS3 & 360 n makes them look like last gen, which compared to how far PC's have moved on is exactly what both consoles are. The 7000 series nvidia VGA card that the ps3 uses is now £20 retail so what does that tell you, old technology still being sold as current gen.
does anyone really think that games are created on a console?
See I have to disagree (to an extent) as I have yet to see anything on PC that matches GT5 Prologue (let alone the upcoming GT5) in graphics and even partially physics (not crashing mind you, the actual feel of driving).
You single out the Video Card but what about the Cell or the XDR ram or even the built in standard Bluray, Blutooth, WiFi and etc. for that matter? Shouldn't those get credit in itself because they are key factors that ARE current?
And no. I don't think anyone really thinks games are ONLY created on/for a console.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2009 @ 18:13
|
|
xnonsuchx
Senior Member
|
30. December 2009 @ 20:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
The PS3 exclusives realy do show off the power of the Cell...but since most games are released on the 360 also, they just dumb down the quality right from the start so that it will run on either system.
Both systems need more ram, but I think the PS3 would benifit a lot more from extra memory...or even some kind of readyboost-like addon.
BTW...the DoD now has over 2500 systems in their PS3 super-computer...clearly they think it will be a current-gen system for at least a couple of years.
Since their use of the PS3 has no bearing on the gaming aspect (they only used them as cheaper alternatives to IBM's Cell blades), the fact they have them doesn't mean anything.
One reason consoles limit RAM (besides cost and heat aspects) is partially for performance...LOTS of RAM allows lazy developers to make a lot of inefficient bloatware, so limiting the RAM forces more optimized coding which usually increases performance as well. For games that are available on consoles AND Windows PCs, why does the PC software require 1-2GB RAM when it runs fine within 256MB on a console? Before higher-end CPUs, RAM, HDs, GPUs got fairly cheap, it used to be that PC programs would be written in C or somesuch w/ highly optimized subroutines in assembly...and sometimes in all lower level code. Since then, most programmers have relied more on the faster/bigger hardware to compensate for lazy coding. Most complaints from programmers about console hardware is out of their own laziness...they just like the 360 a little more because they already know DirectX and can count a bit more on the GPU to do stuff rather than have to think about what it's doing.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2009 @ 20:08
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
31. December 2009 @ 06:19 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xnonsuchx:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
The PS3 exclusives realy do show off the power of the Cell...but since most games are released on the 360 also, they just dumb down the quality right from the start so that it will run on either system.
Both systems need more ram, but I think the PS3 would benifit a lot more from extra memory...or even some kind of readyboost-like addon.
BTW...the DoD now has over 2500 systems in their PS3 super-computer...clearly they think it will be a current-gen system for at least a couple of years.
Since their use of the PS3 has no bearing on the gaming aspect (they only used them as cheaper alternatives to IBM's Cell blades), the fact they have them doesn't mean anything.
One reason consoles limit RAM (besides cost and heat aspects) is partially for performance...LOTS of RAM allows lazy developers to make a lot of inefficient bloatware, so limiting the RAM forces more optimized coding which usually increases performance as well. For games that are available on consoles AND Windows PCs, why does the PC software require 1-2GB RAM when it runs fine within 256MB on a console? Before higher-end CPUs, RAM, HDs, GPUs got fairly cheap, it used to be that PC programs would be written in C or somesuch w/ highly optimized subroutines in assembly...and sometimes in all lower level code. Since then, most programmers have relied more on the faster/bigger hardware to compensate for lazy coding. Most complaints from programmers about console hardware is out of their own laziness...they just like the 360 a little more because they already know DirectX and can count a bit more on the GPU to do stuff rather than have to think about what it's doing.
I don't argue that PC games (and most PC software) is written to waist ram like crazy, and that keeping the memory size small helps to prevent this on a console...but when I pause a PS3 game to go to check a message, I should not have to wait 45 seconds for a text message to load from an XMB that does not even use my theme's icons. The text messaging is so basic that it could easily be run from about 500K or less of memory...if it is overloading the memory, then that means that the memory is already overloaded. Maybe they are able to work arround the delays so that I don't notice them as much...but I imagine that is why trees don't appear untill 2-3 seconds after I crash into them in GTA4.
BTW...GT5P used to have good handling...but they broke it.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
31. December 2009 @ 08:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by xnonsuchx:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
The PS3 exclusives realy do show off the power of the Cell...but since most games are released on the 360 also, they just dumb down the quality right from the start so that it will run on either system.
Both systems need more ram, but I think the PS3 would benifit a lot more from extra memory...or even some kind of readyboost-like addon.
BTW...the DoD now has over 2500 systems in their PS3 super-computer...clearly they think it will be a current-gen system for at least a couple of years.
Since their use of the PS3 has no bearing on the gaming aspect (they only used them as cheaper alternatives to IBM's Cell blades), the fact they have them doesn't mean anything.
One reason consoles limit RAM (besides cost and heat aspects) is partially for performance...LOTS of RAM allows lazy developers to make a lot of inefficient bloatware, so limiting the RAM forces more optimized coding which usually increases performance as well. For games that are available on consoles AND Windows PCs, why does the PC software require 1-2GB RAM when it runs fine within 256MB on a console? Before higher-end CPUs, RAM, HDs, GPUs got fairly cheap, it used to be that PC programs would be written in C or somesuch w/ highly optimized subroutines in assembly...and sometimes in all lower level code. Since then, most programmers have relied more on the faster/bigger hardware to compensate for lazy coding. Most complaints from programmers about console hardware is out of their own laziness...they just like the 360 a little more because they already know DirectX and can count a bit more on the GPU to do stuff rather than have to think about what it's doing.
I don't argue that PC games (and most PC software) is written to waist ram like crazy, and that keeping the memory size small helps to prevent this on a console...but when I pause a PS3 game to go to check a message, I should not have to wait 45 seconds for a text message to load from an XMB that does not even use my theme's icons. The text messaging is so basic that it could easily be run from about 500K or less of memory...if it is overloading the memory, then that means that the memory is already overloaded. Maybe they are able to work arround the delays so that I don't notice them as much...but I imagine that is why trees don't appear untill 2-3 seconds after I crash into them in GTA4.
BTW...GT5P used to have good handling...but they broke it.
Excellent points & info xnonsuchx.
@ KillerBug ~ Ahh the infamous "game of the year" GTA4...there is no way that game should have gotten so many accolades as it did. The pop in was actually worse on the 360 but that just says to me it's not that the 360's hardware is "worse" or anything it just proves the source of the problem was the programming of the game because it was horrible on BOTH systems!
KillerBug have you tried the new GT Academy Time Trial contest demo on the PSN? I haven't had a chance to use my G25 and Sim Chassis with it yet but I have given it a go with a controller and thought it actually felt better, quite a bit improved over GT5P even using a DS3.
|
|
scum101
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
31. December 2009 @ 09:48 |
Link to this message
|
I'm in agreement..console gaming has become a cash cow for certain large corporations. No inventiveness or any sigh of using the so called cutting edge hardware. Take the 360 .. state of the art cpu and bugger all ram.. like they were serious about moving things on? I'm not even going to mention the ps3 and it's lackluster game lineup.. the clever money bought a wii and modded it..
|
|
av_verbal
Suspended permanently
|
31. December 2009 @ 11:44 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
See I have to disagree (to an extent) as I have yet to see anything on PC that matches GT5 Prologue (let alone the upcoming GT5) in graphics and even partially physics (not crashing mind you, the actual feel of driving).
You single out the Video Card but what about the Cell or the XDR ram or even the built in standard Bluray, Blutooth, WiFi and etc. for that matter? Shouldn't those get credit in itself because they are key factors that ARE current?
And no. I don't think anyone really thinks games are ONLY created on/for a console.
lmao, max resolution PS3 1080 PC 1900.
obviously you have never completed even a basic it course, as one of the first things you learn is that:
A COMPUTER IS ONLY AS GOOD AS ITS WEAKEST LINK!
so the £20 nvidia 7000 series VGA that the PS3 boasts, is the limit of the power, or the tiny 128mb of ram, or the board that connects it all. you could put the most powerful processor in it but it would be liken to:
putting a Ferrari engine in a morris minor!
it looks cool but handles like trash.
this is the last comment i will be posting in this pathetic thread that appears to have descended into the pro sony point always wins.
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
31. December 2009 @ 13:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
31. December 2009 @ 14:45 |
Link to this message
|
I don't think they should be looking at PS4 at all they need to focus on PS3. In 5 years there will be new things out so they should not even be thinking about PS4. I'm still trying to pay off my PS3.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. December 2009 @ 14:52 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
One honest look at only Killzone 2, GT5P & Uncharted 2 will answer that question easily.
I don't really see it.... the 360 is damn close they could do better but meh
What was the racing game that had shadow maps and extra day/night modes for them sicne the PS3 had more space thats the only PS3 game I have saw so far that very clearly did more.
and uhg your going to make me reply to all of these :P
Quote:
The 360 launched on November 22, 2005 in the US & Canada ~ Source It has been out for 4 years. So going by what you said in this post
4/5 years whatever with the PS3 out and other issues now is a good time as any to upgrade the X line to a new console but not get rid of support for the old....
Quote:
You are saying you would have preferred it be retired after only being on the market for less than what it's predecessor was (original Xbox was about 4 years or so) in 2007/2008. That would sure as hell piss me off as a gamer to buy something that is obsolete that quickly and not supported thereafter!
Lovely thing about full BWC you can move on without abandoning anything, you are able to do both at once and not lose much in the process the new system is there for those willing to make the jump, if MS would put full BWC on it make live free for multi player but offer a more feature rich subscription setup I mean its win win its just a shame they will never do it.
Quote:
But that's the thing Zippy there are no more bottle necks. The only true bottle neck was the time it would take devs to wrap their heads around programming for the PS3 and since the tools and support/sharing between devs is so much better this gen (for/from Sony) it ultimately becomes a wash anyway.
........ no more bottle necks?.......good god man listen to yourself.........
Quote:
Let me play devils advocate here and agree with you that the Cell may be bloated and they could have used a cheaper more standard solution...wouldn't that put them in the same situation as the 360 right now then? Plus the proof is in front of everyone's eyes to see that first & second party exclusive games show the Cell has proven it's capabilities far and above what the 360 has done after being on the market for 4 years! If the 360 was able to do what the PS3 can do then I honestly & truly ask you why hasn't it been done?
No sicne the basic specs of the PC3 with a more normal architecture would be higher than the 360 and thus able to do mroe and last longer....
The only thing the cell has proven it can do less with more power effecticy than more normal architectures the cost of the cell has not yet made the trouble of codeing for it worth while....
===============================================
Originally posted by DXR88:
whats funny is the Xbox360 uses the Cell processors PPC implementation.
i think what zippy is trying to say is that if developers weren't lazy.
The 360 could match the graphic prowess of the PS3. Hell we all know the PC can.
No the PC can not do better than the PS3 they don;t dare code it bettter :P
What I am getting at the PS3 could not have been built so ackwardly and be at the current now point in software development from the beginning....
==================================================================
Originally posted by emugamer:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
The pricing on the PS3 when it came out was very all wrong and hurt it greatly...... it seems to me you are wearing rose tinted glasses and over look all the bad......
I didn't overlook the bad at all. I was among those who scoffed at the initial $599 price tag of the 60GB system. I didn't buy into the PS3 until it was $200 cheaper. I also acknowledge that shoving blu ray down peoples throats was a bad move in the formats prematurity. They made mistakes initially, but th point is where the system is at now. I understand your point about BWC. Unfortunately, that will not change and I think it would be a big mistake for any new gen system to leave that feature out.
WEll my point is the PS3 would be much further along and have more/better games if they didn't screw up to start with..... no wonder things suck suck so much in media and and consumer electronics everyone forgets and moves on....
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
31. December 2009 @ 15:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by av_verbal:
Originally posted by Oner:
See I have to disagree (to an extent) as I have yet to see anything on PC that matches GT5 Prologue (let alone the upcoming GT5) in graphics and even partially physics (not crashing mind you, the actual feel of driving).
You single out the Video Card but what about the Cell or the XDR ram or even the built in standard Bluray, Blutooth, WiFi and etc. for that matter? Shouldn't those get credit in itself because they are key factors that ARE current?
And no. I don't think anyone really thinks games are ONLY created on/for a console.
lmao, max resolution PS3 1080 PC 1900.
obviously you have never completed even a basic it course, as one of the first things you learn is that:
A COMPUTER IS ONLY AS GOOD AS ITS WEAKEST LINK!
so the £20 nvidia 7000 series VGA that the PS3 boasts, is the limit of the power, or the tiny 128mb of ram, or the board that connects it all. you could put the most powerful processor in it but it would be liken to:
putting a Ferrari engine in a morris minor!
it looks cool but handles like trash.
this is the last comment i will be posting in this pathetic thread that appears to have descended into the pro sony point always wins.
#1 Your assumptions about me are wrong while at the same time showing a lot about yourself.
#2 If you were so versed in "technology" then you would know that the PS3's Cell actually helps with the processing of the graphics so to imply the VGA is it's only source of "power" is a bit misinformed as it is simply not that cut and dry.
#3 Again if you were so versed in "technology" you would know the PS3 Video card actually has 256megs of ram on it (not 128 as you believe/claim) and the console as a whole can utilize the full 512meg available if necessary (but you knew that right?)
#4 What has really decended here is that you actually really never answered any part of my comment and made false claims.
I am not trying to argue with you (although you seem to be towards me), I am simply offering correct verifiable information that you haven't properly addressed or even attempted to answer.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. December 2009 @ 15:51
|
|
xnonsuchx
Senior Member
|
31. December 2009 @ 17:54 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
#1 Your assumptions about me are wrong while at the same time showing a lot about yourself.
#2 If you were so versed in "technology" then you would know that the PS3's Cell actually helps with the processing of the graphics so to imply the VGA is it's only source of "power" is a bit misinformed as it is simply not that cut and dry.
#3 Again if you were so versed in "technology" you would know the PS3 Video card actually has 256megs of ram on it (not 128 as you believe/claim) and the console as a whole can utilize the full 512meg available if necessary (but you knew that right?)
#4 What has really decended here is that you actually really never answered any part of my comment and made false claims.
I am not trying to argue with you (although you seem to be towards me), I am simply offering correct verifiable information that you haven't properly addressed or even attempted to answer.
I don't think anyone is going to convince the argumentative haters like av and dxr that they are wrong about their misinformation.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
31. December 2009 @ 22:19 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by xnonsuchx:
Originally posted by Oner:
#1 Your assumptions about me are wrong while at the same time showing a lot about yourself.
#2 If you were so versed in "technology" then you would know that the PS3's Cell actually helps with the processing of the graphics so to imply the VGA is it's only source of "power" is a bit misinformed as it is simply not that cut and dry.
#3 Again if you were so versed in "technology" you would know the PS3 Video card actually has 256megs of ram on it (not 128 as you believe/claim) and the console as a whole can utilize the full 512meg available if necessary (but you knew that right?)
#4 What has really decended here is that you actually really never answered any part of my comment and made false claims.
I am not trying to argue with you (although you seem to be towards me), I am simply offering correct verifiable information that you haven't properly addressed or even attempted to answer.
I don't think anyone is going to convince the argumentative haters like av and dxr that they are wrong about their misinformation.
I actually don't think DXR is misinformed at all, just because someone may have a different opinion doesn't always mean they are "haters" or wrong per se. As for others; well....but this is not something we should make a deal out of so I will ask everyone (including myself) to take it down a notch and just have a simple discussion (although I really don't think this is out of hand or anything), and if you can't then I kindly ask please refrain from posting to avoid spoiling it for others.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
1. January 2010 @ 00:51 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by xnonsuchx:
Originally posted by Oner:
#1 Your assumptions about me are wrong while at the same time showing a lot about yourself.
#2 If you were so versed in "technology" then you would know that the PS3's Cell actually helps with the processing of the graphics so to imply the VGA is it's only source of "power" is a bit misinformed as it is simply not that cut and dry.
#3 Again if you were so versed in "technology" you would know the PS3 Video card actually has 256megs of ram on it (not 128 as you believe/claim) and the console as a whole can utilize the full 512meg available if necessary (but you knew that right?)
#4 What has really decended here is that you actually really never answered any part of my comment and made false claims.
I am not trying to argue with you (although you seem to be towards me), I am simply offering correct verifiable information that you haven't properly addressed or even attempted to answer.
I don't think anyone is going to convince the argumentative haters like av and dxr that they are wrong about their misinformation.
I actually don't think DXR is misinformed at all, just because someone may have a different opinion doesn't always mean they are "haters" or wrong per se. As for others; well....but this is not something we should make a deal out of so I will ask everyone (including myself) to take it down a notch and just have a simple discussion (although I really don't think this is out of hand or anything), and if you can't then I kindly ask please refrain from posting to avoid spoiling it for others.
What I am getting at Sony wasted alot of time and effort doing the PS3 like they did, I think if they went with twice the ramm it would have saved the industry alot of grief trying to optimize code for it. Not to mention how much better, stronger and longer lasting it would be be with more ramm. But ya I am nit picking its a much better console than it was at launch...but IMO it has a long way to go to merit 300$.
Now as for the 360 its barely worth 200$ mainly due to hardware issues and I fear in less than 2 years it will be replaced so theres little in getting a new one might as well save and use that money for the next system....
|
|
scum101
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. January 2010 @ 01:47 |
Link to this message
|
poor oner.. sometimes regardless of our personal issues I really feel for you, having to defeend the indefensible crap product against the onslaught. Of course a console system wil become outdated in it's lifetime.. that's why they are pointless. blu disks died a death.. consumers aren't interested and the ps3 was abandoned nt fony pretty much as soon as it hit the shelves. fact.. there was a news item on this site a year or so ago saying that so there we are. whatever.. keep it sweet and it's on.. as long as dela don't show up eh?
What does get to me is how these console threads go on for page after page when there is really nothing to say... wouldn't it be easier to just post some facts and hit close, or not even bother with comments and discussion on a news item which is a rumour or a statement of fact?? I'm very surprised how long this bot built account has lasted.. made senior again.. like i give a crap.. anyhow.. I have actually enjoyed reading some of the posts in this thread.. most informative.. thanks all.. happy 2010.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
1. January 2010 @ 02:40 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by scum101:
poor oner.. sometimes regardless of our personal issues I really feel for you, having to defeend the indefensible crap product against the onslaught. Of course a console system wil become outdated in it's lifetime.. that's why they are pointless. blu disks died a death.. consumers aren't interested and the ps3 was abandoned nt fony pretty much as soon as it hit the shelves. fact.. there was a news item on this site a year or so ago saying that so there we are. whatever.. keep it sweet and it's on.. as long as dela don't show up eh?
What does get to me is how these console threads go on for page after page when there is really nothing to say... wouldn't it be easier to just post some facts and hit close, or not even bother with comments and discussion on a news item which is a rumour or a statement of fact?? I'm very surprised how long this bot built account has lasted.. made senior again.. like i give a crap.. anyhow.. I have actually enjoyed reading some of the posts in this thread.. most informative.. thanks all.. happy 2010.
Well he makes great points and in how hardware/industry progresses all that matters by the end of the day is if the hardware can sale despite itself. One can either live and let live with their media/hardware mentality or whine and bitch about it. I prefer to never forget and never forgive...and sharpen my teeth and comb my hair.....*rolls eyes*
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
1. January 2010 @ 08:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by scum101:
Of course a console system wil become outdated in it's lifetime.. that's why they are pointless. blu disks died a death.. consumers aren't interested and the ps3 was abandoned nt fony pretty much as soon as it hit the shelves. fact..
I personally wouldn't say enjoying a dedicated gaming machine for 7-10 years a waste. The same could also be said about PC's and owning a PC is by far the greater loss of expense (in terms of outdating hardware) but is a PC pointless? Just because you think consoles are pointless doesn't mean they are, that is YOUR personal opinion about them.
I have a few valid questions to ask you about the PS3 scum ~ If you think it's a fact that consumers aren't intersted in the PS3 then how would you explain a few of these questions I ask ~
1) If consumers weren't interested in the PS3 then why is it the 3rd fastest selling console in History?
2) What about how the PS3 has outsold the 360 in the same time frame when compared to eachother? (first year vs first year and so on)
3) How would you explain that the PS3 outsold or equally matched the 360 (YOY WW) all while being around $200 more expensive for the most part of this gen?
4) Could you explain how there are currently estimated about 30 Million PS3's sold vs the 360's 35-36 Million even tough it had a year head start in the US and nearly a year and a half in Europe? Doesn't RROD or E74 repurchases & LIVE bannings affect the bottom line to be closer than most believe?
5) You claim as fact the PS3 was "abandoned nt fony pretty much as soon as it hit the shelves. fact" so how would you explain how Sony have not closed down any major inhouse devs (currently around 20 ~ the most in the business btw) while MS has shut down quite a few and are down to what ~ 3?
6) While on the topic of games, support & abandonement have you actually followed what has happened to MS's lineup since late 2008? Because your view point sure sounds like it fits them a hell of a lot better than it does Sony's.
7) Estimations are showing the PS3 has outsold the 360 by about 2 million for 2009. How is that showing "no interest" by consumers?
8) If "blu disks died a death" why/how have they proven time and time again to sale equally to DVD's when they were first released if not even better? Now I have to make clear that I do not think BD will replace DVD's. Never have. But I do see them doing fine along side them just like forms of similar media have (CD along side DVD being "discs")...Plus have you ever heard a game developer say "we need less space"? BD's are great for gaming and are a necessity to help grow the field not stiffle, limit and stagnate the industry.
And if that was not enough, on top of all that above, this happened in the face of one of the worst glabal economy meltdowns in history. When you have a broader, more open & and factually supported view, the WHOLE picture looks a lot clearer than what most "claim".
Lastly I have to add/ask this about your opening statement ~
Originally posted by scum101:
poor oner.. sometimes regardless of our personal issues I really feel for you, having to defeend the indefensible crap product against the onslaught.
Why does it concern you what I do? Your condescension is surely not needed nor necessary here. I am here at Afterdawn for a REASON. I was asked to be a Moderator and help build up the console section of aD because of my experience and knowledge in this area. And 21 sections including nearly 1.3+/- MILLION posts in those said areas alone reflect this.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. January 2010 @ 08:54
|
