PDA

View Full Version : Its all a matter of timing... PS3



cliffbo
06-03-2006, 06:44 PM
i've been thinking about this for a while now and i wondered what others thought about it:

the Xbox was released as we know to compete with the PS2, but didn't do very well. in a determined effort to beat PS3 in this round MS has released the 360 a year ahead of PS3. but a president has been set with MS which is a 4 year lifecycle for their consoles without it appears a determination to support their prior console.

if the 360 outlives the Xbox by two years that means that the PS3, which is intended to be a ten year lifecycle, would conceivably have to compete with an Xbox720 for five years (five years into the PS3s lifecycle)

with mistakes made by MS concerning starage medium and an add on that would play movies and would be unlikely to support games, its likely that a new machine from MS is probable with a HD-DVD or perhaps a Blu-ray (unlikely)

so my question is: will Sony's PS3 be able to compete with a third generation Xbox? because this to me is a given. Sony have carefully positioned the PS3 as futureproof, but how can they futureproof it against technology that has the advantage of a five year developement cycle? if they can then theres more to the PS3 than we are aware of and considering Sony's excellent track record i wouldn't doubt this.

this is the whole reason for the futureproofing statements as far as i'm concerned. it has to be because they know that 360 will not be around as long as the PS3. it will take a couple of years before we start to really see the difference between blu-ray and DVD9 games. but if Sony are really clever they could give MS no room for maneuvre by necessitating a full utilization of blu-ray and making their Online service free (which we already know is about to happen)

this could be the end game for MS unless they can win this next gen war or at least draw. Vista has hit the headlines of late and perhaps this is a sign that MS are gravitating back to its roots.

LiquidEagle
06-03-2006, 06:51 PM
Are you sure that the PS3's 10 year life cycle isn't going to be similar to the PS2's hopeful 10 year life cycle? Sony wants to keep the PS2 around for a full 10 years, so with that they could be supporting it all the way to 2010, even though the PS3 will be out since 2006. For PS3's 10 years of 2006 - 2016 I don't know if Sony's planning on keeping it at the front of their console lineup or if they plan on introducing PS4 to take the spotlight at like 2012 or so... I wouldn't blame them for not having a solid plan though, since it's anybody's guess as to what the console market is gonna be like even 4 years from now...

cliffbo
06-03-2006, 06:55 PM
Are you sure that the PS3's 10 year life cycle isn't going to be similar to the PS2's hopeful 10 year life cycle? Sony wants to keep the PS2 around for a full 10 years, so with that they could be supporting it all the way to 2010, even though the PS3 will be out since 2006. For PS3's 10 years of 2006 - 2016 I don't know if Sony's planning on keeping it at the front of their console lineup or if they plan on introducing PS4 to take the spotlight at like 2012 or so... I wouldn't blame them for not having a solid plan though, since it's anybody's guess as to what the console market is gonna be like even 4 years from now...

with each console Sony has increased the lifecycle. so lets say the PS3 will have an 8 year lifecycle before PS4 is released. thats still leaves 3 years to compete against a 720. Sony have bigger plans than we know...

Infernal
06-03-2006, 07:00 PM
with each console Sony has increased the lifecycle. so lets say the PS3 will have an 8 year lifecycle before PS4 is released. thats still leaves 3 years to compete against a 720. Sony have bigger plans than we know...
Well PS1 was out for about 6 years until PS2, and PS2 was out for slightly less than that before PS3. So actually they have decreased the lifecycle. The "10 year" thing is exactly what they did for PS1, they stopped production slightly after its 10 year anniversary. I assume they will do the same for the PS2 and PS3. Its a Sony tradition I guess similiar to how they always have a console redesign after about 4 years.

Viano
06-03-2006, 07:06 PM
I some how have feeling that the PS4-concept is gonna change fundamentally, something like, upgradable.

there might be a graphic jump from ps3→x3, but certainly not gonna be a ps2→ps3 jump. 5 years later ps3 will have great library, low console price, I don't think people would even rush to get a new console because of the graphical update. instead, in my believe most people would wait for the true next next gen, the PS4.

I might be wrong on the graphical prediction but however, and no bashing but when did ms ever or brave enough to come up with something completely new? x3 prolly just gonna be the updated version of x2.. personally not expecting much from it...

ded5850
06-03-2006, 07:08 PM
I dunno. I imagine the 360 remaining relativly cpmparable to the PS3. Wii too. I'm not too concerned about the PS3's future. Or any of the consoles for that matter.

But I don't wanna venture off topic. Just throwing in some opinions, because I know we don't get enough of those around here already ;)

edoshin
06-03-2006, 07:12 PM
There are a great deal of unknowns .. most prominent being how well the consumers will react to the 600 price. At that price point, its difficult to conceive that PS3 can achieve the same kind of numbers that PS2 achieved in the same time frame. If MS cuts short the console cycle again, PS3 will have to just hang tight and probably compete against a 3rd generation xbox with their PS3 for quite some time. That may not necesasarily be bad for consumers. If the MS cycle and Sony cycle were staggered, we would not necessarily have to "choose" a console that are pretty much the same .. after all, most people are multi-console owners anyways. You would be an MS console, and a few years later buy a Sony console, and so on.

The huge risk that MS took by not biting the bullet on price is possilby allowing Sony to achieve that digital conversion. That would be more difficult to overcome than introducing more powerful hardware.

Nameless
06-03-2006, 07:39 PM
The one advantage of using bleeding edge technology is the hardware will not be outdated in the near future... The PS3 is fairly future proof, the only area of potential weakness is the GPU, but Sony has addressed this weakness with the architecture and how the RSX collaboratively works with the cell to tackle graphics rendering. The PS3 & 360 are showing the importance of developers instead of hardware...

I believe the next-gen we are experiencing now will be all about the developers to really see the power of the consoles. This will also apply to the upcoming generation of hardware launches. The average consumer is starting to have difficulty seeing the subtle differences in visuals and the importance of interesting game play will be the key to grow the gaming industry.

If MS decides to just release an evolution in hardware for the next console it could be a fatal mistake... The PS3 should be able to hold it's on against new hardware, but if MS launches another piece of hardware with more RAM and a more powerful GPU it will allow developers to create great results with minimum effort. The PS3 would be able to keep pace, but would require more effort and work from the development community...

I would really like to know what Ken is cooking up for the PS4, because I would imagine he is anticipating a major shift in the industry and not just a simple hardware upgrade.

Viano
06-03-2006, 07:46 PM
Sony's route from PS1 to PS5 imo is

PS1 basic elements & concepts → PS2 graphics & network → PS3 network & linux software penetration → PS4 hardware & software concepts changes depend on the software(linux) penetration rate from PS3 → PS5 major home entertainment device competes with PC

The main reason for me to think console will one day compete with pc directly is because the functionalities of console is simply growing every gen(PS) but PC is not changing much as console. Not sure if it's just me or something but if you think about it, what does the ultimate-home-entertainment-device-with-opened-source equal to?

Competing directly with pc means to competes with ms, thus imo in order for ms to avoid the situation is to achieve the vitual-hardware aka the home entertainment Sony is now trying to achieve, because you can only do so much on the software and can't avoid the invasion from hardware.

conclusion, imo, there's no worries about x3 coming out early at all, that just means PS4 will be far superior than x3, and the most important thing is..

ms usually just upgrade what they have for now instead of going to the next step. and that is when the vision needs to come in.


KK are you laughing right now?

Viano
06-03-2006, 07:54 PM
for the post above off mine, I believe, will be totally destroyed by the virtual reality technologies in future. Only if PS can survive untill its fifth gen it will have chance competing with pc, having
large share of market is not needed imo.

last question, what's the ultimate pc? and what's the ultimate console... they should be the same like KK has stated many times.

sorry a lil off topiced but hope someone knows what I am talking aout loL.

Sephiroth_VII
06-03-2006, 09:02 PM
last question, what's the ultimate pc? and what's the ultimate console... they should be the same like KK has stated many times.

Sorry a little off topiced but I hope someone knows what I am talking about loL.
Well, you're probably correct that the theoretical "ultimate console", which can't exist, since the hardware will continue to be upgraded fpr all eternity, is the same as the "ultimate PC".

But if, theoretically, TV resolution becomes high enough to be used instead of a pc monitor, so that using your TV for your PC becomes standard, won't PC edge out the consoles, since the basis of a console is that it's a closed enviroment, which can't be upgrded? Or will PC and console simply merge?

We're starting to see developement in this direction, as Windows Media Center will ship with the high-end versions of Vista, at least it's in the beta version of Vista ultimate that I'm currently running.
The basis of Media Center, for those who don't know, is hooking up your PC to the TV, which is easy, since most current GPU's ship with a TV-out.

Also, we're seeing an explosion in pure Media Center PC's, with Dell and other PC-making-companies building computers designed to fit in your living room, right on top of your DVD-player. Is it possible that the theory is becoming reality?

Z
06-03-2006, 09:36 PM
we need to keep in mind that a certain consoles life cycle doesn't mean much for the new model. some think the next PS won't come out till after 10 years of PS3's launch. that isn't the case at all. we can expect PS4 around 2010. PS3 will still be going if theire are sales. if PSOne was still getting support, SOny wouldn't have stopped it, uless the profits made from it are no longer that good that they are not worth spending resources on it.

I don't think there would be a technical reason to update PS3 or X2 before at least 6 years on the market. the only one that I see that might jump the gun is Ninty. for business and technical reasons, I can see them bringing something new (compatible with Rev games) in 4 years or so.

but all this depends on how they all perform really. if one system proves to be a flop and is sinking fast, you can bet that the maker will try to cut their losses and start a new if they couldn't revive it.

as for the future updates, I don't see the logic behind calling MS's next console 720. it's called '360' for the concept of it 'surrounding you in entertainment'. so adding or subtracting to that particular number seems illogical. I would say they'll go with a totally different name (that may involve the word 'box' in it). by that time, I think they'll support the disk platform that seems to have the better future.

SOny on the other hand have their job cut out for them if only due to Cell and BD- if the latter is still living by that time.
one of Cell's great features is that it is scalable and very flexible. SOny could very well just simply upgrade PS3's main core hardware, while introducing some of the new tweaks to the GPU and what not. maybe something like what Ninty is doing with Rev.


in any case, it is far too early to talk about the next wave when we still haven't seen two of the three main players this coming generation.
I am more interested in the next wave of handhelds than consoles.

Domination
06-03-2006, 10:35 PM
Sony's route from PS1 to PS5 imo is

PS1 basic elements & concepts → PS2 graphics & network → PS3 network & linux software penetration → PS4 hardware & software concepts changes depend on the software(linux) penetration rate from PS3 → PS5 major home entertainment device competes with PC

The main reason for me to think console will one day compete with pc directly is because the functionalities of console is simply growing every gen(PS) but PC is not changing much as console. Not sure if it's just me or something but if you think about it, what does the ultimate-home-entertainment-device-with-opened-source equal to?

Competing directly with pc means to competes with ms, thus imo in order for ms to avoid the situation is to achieve the vitual-hardware aka the home entertainment Sony is now trying to achieve, because you can only do so much on the software and can't avoid the invasion from hardware.

conclusion, imo, there's no worries about x3 coming out early at all, that just means PS4 will be far superior than x3, and the most important thing is..

ms usually just upgrade what they have for now instead of going to the next step. and that is when the vision needs to come in.


KK are you laughing right now?

I totally agree with you. I, too, thought about this as well. I believe Sony is trying to force Microsoft into a bottleneck.

jaxmkii
06-03-2006, 10:49 PM
well for one if MS has to make a third Xbox in less than 3 years and they choose to drop support for 360 like they did to xbox1 than you would be nutz do get involved with them.

as far as 10 years life cycle for PS3 its not that much of a strech.

remember they overlap systems

PS1 has a run of what 12 years? 6 of thouse 12 where durring PS2s life.

PS2 will be aroud for the first half of PS3s run

halfway though PS3 in will enter PS4 (everysix years acording to KK)

MS strategy for the new Xbox will depend on how well the "headstart" tactic works for 360. if it fails we may see MS take there time, if they even try again after having two no profit consoles. if it works expect to see rushed systems everytime anyone thinks about making a new system

Domination
06-04-2006, 12:03 AM
well for one if MS has to make a third Xbox in less than 3 years and they choose to drop support for 360 like they did to xbox1 than you would be nutz do get involved with them.

as far as 10 years life cycle for PS3 its not that much of a strech.

remember they overlap systems

PS1 has a run of what 12 years? 6 of thouse 12 where durring PS2s life.

PS2 will be aroud for the first half of PS3s run

halfway though PS3 in will enter PS4 (everysix years acording to KK)

MS strategy for the new Xbox will depend on how well the "headstart" tactic works for 360. if it fails we may see MS take there time, if they even try again after having two no profit consoles. if it works expect to see rushed systems everytime anyone thinks about making a new system

Nah...I really doubt Microsoft to release anything in three years. I was thinking more line of launching before Sony. Maybe Sony is playing the field to that particular advantage.

LaLiLuLeLo
06-04-2006, 02:54 AM
one thing I really like about playstation brand is they've extended the life cycle of every passing generation. And they continue supporting their consoles even after focus has shifted.

masteratt
06-04-2006, 02:59 AM
I honestly think we'll know about the next Xbox by late 2007.

Even if not the "true next Xbox" I think they will release a slightly updated X360 with HD-DVD games.

Sony as always will take their time. :thumbl:

BahnNZ
06-04-2006, 03:11 AM
I think people get crazy about the timing, it comes down to two things. Powerhouse franchises and *cough* price point.

It's if people still have faith in Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy, Tekken, yadda yadda. And they did have the GTA series, but it's drifted.

It's all down to that. Nintendo have the Maro and the Zelda thing, people buy their consoles for that because they're sure they'll get great games, ?Xbox has Halo, there's Halo heads who play that game 24/7.

I think the Sony timing is a little off, but their hand has been forced.

gljvd
06-04-2006, 03:21 AM
this could be the end game for MS unless they can win this next gen war or at least draw. Vista has hit the headlines of late and perhaps this is a sign that MS are gravitating back to its roots.


Its the other way around. It could be end game for sony .


Ms has the cheaper console.

Ms designed the console to quickly drop in costs . There are no hardware components that will not drop in price , unlike the ps3 with hits hardrives.

Ms also has a year advantage.

They are also the cheaper console with the same graphical capabiltys .

Sony will continue to play catch up and whats worse. Sony may have 2 years left in thier little ps3 when the xbox 3 comes out and the ps3 may still at that point (4 years after its launch) be around 200$ .


Ms made great moves and the only thing that can possibly affect them is the lack of a next gen optical format. However they can simply go multi disc like sony did for many psone games. Any multiplatform games will target dvd 9 and the few that need more space will ship on 2 discs that would be much cheaper than 1 bluray disc.

Infernal
06-04-2006, 03:35 AM
Its the other way around. It could be end game for sony .


Ms has the cheaper console.

Ms designed the console to quickly drop in costs . There are no hardware components that will not drop in price , unlike the ps3 with hits hardrives.

Ms also has a year advantage.

They are also the cheaper console with the same graphical capabiltys .

Sony will continue to play catch up and whats worse. Sony may have 2 years left in thier little ps3 when the xbox 3 comes out and the ps3 may still at that point (4 years after its launch) be around 200$ .


Ms made great moves and the only thing that can possibly affect them is the lack of a next gen optical format. However they can simply go multi disc like sony did for many psone games. Any multiplatform games will target dvd 9 and the few that need more space will ship on 2 discs that would be much cheaper than 1 bluray disc.
Well since your making it look bad for Sony ill make it look bad for MS, just to be fair :beer: .

Sony has the more powerful console.

Sony designed the console to drop in costs quickly and massively as well as to be futureproof so consumers dont get stuck with old hardware after just a few years unlike the 360 with its DVD and no standard Hard drives.

Sony has never launched first and has always dominated the console that has launched before them in a generation.

They have better phyics, sound, and graphical capabilities as well as a higher maximum resolution.

Sony is launching a year later so when the Xbox 3 comes out people wont be ready for yet another MS console and will refuse to pay for it. They will want to keep their big PS3, and maybe buy a little PS3 at that time. Also at that point it will be around the same price the PS2 is now, just like every previous generation.

Sony made great moves. The only thing that can possibly effect them is if they lose any exclusives, but the odds are that wont happen. If it does they can just go the way of Xbox 1 and make a game like Halo that everyone that owns a PS3 will thrive on and use it in every console debate argument.

P.S. JVD please dont respond to this saying im a fanboy, this post was more of a joke than anything as I assume your post was as well.

makeitlookreal
06-04-2006, 03:56 AM
I hope that the PS4 will utilize a Holographic Data Storage system and have a processor composed of quantum qubits. Actually, the Holographic Data Storage is going to get started this year and there are actually people working on the first quantum processors as we speak (and it is rumored that the government already has a few models be used to encode and decode quantum encryption).

Nameless
06-04-2006, 04:31 AM
I hope that the PS4 will utilize a Holographic Data Storage system and have a processor composed of quantum qubits. Actually, the Holographic Data Storage is going to get started this year and there are actually people working on the first quantum processors as we speak (and it is rumored that the government already has a few models be used to encode and decode quantum encryption).
MILR, I don't think we will see HDS in a console until PS5 unless we see a major shift in game development. I think Blu-ray should be sufficient for capacity for some time.

If for some reason Blu-ray & HD-DVD are huge failures, perhaps we could see the technology dumped for HDS, but that is highly unlikely...

Considering all the cutting edge tech in the PS3 I'm curious to see what's in store for the PS4, but I'm more than happy with the PS3 & 360 for the next 5+ years...Peace

Smokey
06-04-2006, 10:14 AM
MILR i think you need a time machine & go 100yrs into the future. then you will get what you want :)

Viano
06-04-2006, 10:27 AM
Its the other way around. It could be end game for sony .


Ms has the cheaper console.

Ms designed the console to quickly drop in costs . There are no hardware components that will not drop in price , unlike the ps3 with hits hardrives.

Ms also has a year advantage.

They are also the cheaper console with the same graphical capabiltys .

Sony will continue to play catch up and whats worse. Sony may have 2 years left in thier little ps3 when the xbox 3 comes out and the ps3 may still at that point (4 years after its launch) be around 200$ .


Ms made great moves and the only thing that can possibly affect them is the lack of a next gen optical format. However they can simply go multi disc like sony did for many psone games. Any multiplatform games will target dvd 9 and the few that need more space will ship on 2 discs that would be much cheaper than 1 bluray disc.


I agree with you!!

The End.

Nameless
06-04-2006, 10:42 AM
I agree with you!!

The End.
Viano, I guess you could not take it anymore... LOL!::crazy2:

BahnNZ
06-04-2006, 11:04 AM
Actually they don't need to do the whole holographic dvd shibang, just supporting those TDK 200GB Blu Ray disks would be enough next time round, and everybody wouldn't have to go crazy retooling pressing plants, adopting strange new laser tech, etc etc.

Blu Ray, built to last baby!

Chrome
06-04-2006, 11:07 AM
Most of the people that I work with including my bosses think that Sony have pulled a master stroke with the PS3.
What Sony have being genious about is that they won't have to pump so much money into R&D come PS4, they'll just use an updated Cell which will be as powerfull as anything any other Chip maker has to offer and the Developers will be used to coding for the Cell chip by then, kind of like with the Nintendo Wii being very like the GameCube.

The PS3 offers websurfing, mouse and keyboard as standard, something that Microsoft won't allow on their consoles because it means you wouldn't be using a PC or the Windows based OS. The xbox and Xbox360 could have easily been used as a web browser. The websurfing aspect is very important for the Console's that will allow it, which includes the nintendo Wii.
For Nintendo and Sony it's a masterstroke, not so for Microsoft.

Where I work we have had meetings discussing this very fact.

Viano
06-04-2006, 11:08 AM
lol, just chilling loL

but however, this actually relates to the sony-share thread because even if the market share of PS comes down to 20%, it will be able to explode again by competing directly to pc/media center market.

Sony is actually ninja not a samurai because nin means patience and ninja means the one who is being patient, loL.

Viano
06-04-2006, 11:26 AM
Most of the people that I work with including my bosses think that Sony have pulled a master stroke with the PS3.
What Sony have being genious about is that they won't have to pump so much money into R&D come PS4, they'll just use an updated Cell which will be as powerfull as anything any other Chip maker has to offer and the Developers will be used to coding for the Cell chip by then, kind of like with the Nintendo Wii being very like the GameCube.

The PS3 offers websurfing, mouse and keyboard as standard, something that Microsoft won't allow on their consoles because it means you wouldn't be using a PC or the Windows based OS. The xbox and Xbox360 could have easily been used as a web browser. The websurfing aspect is very important for the Console's that will allow it, which includes the nintendo Wii.
For Nintendo and Sony it's a masterstroke, not so for Microsoft.

Where I work we have had meetings discussing this very fact.

true, now we can see the picture clearer.

I think ms is making a big big mistake not letting xbox be the fully function device like Sony's route. Softwares are limited by their own platform whether its pc, mobile phone or console, because it can not change the fundamental concepts of any hardware/platform itself but only to reach the its limits.
And there's nearly no limit for hardware in terms of concepts except the technologies of its time.

overclocked
06-04-2006, 11:26 AM
I would like to add something about the overlapping of generations, like PS2/PS3. I think this will only get more stronger in the future, ie PS3/PS4.

One thing i think they could add as a accesoaire to PS3 would be UMD plug in player for PSP. Which brings up PSP2 that will likely debut in 3+ years also and emphasis on the ground foundation with PS3 and builds it even stronger with PS4, this is something i think get overlooked easy if we are to watch the whole picture.

Viano
06-04-2006, 11:28 AM
um great view!

BahnNZ
06-04-2006, 11:29 AM
If you mean what I think, you could do that in software. USB cable from PSP to PS3, the data comes down the PSP from the UMB, decoded and played on PS3.

I'd buy that for a dollar

overclocked
06-04-2006, 11:50 AM
If you mean what I think, you could do that in software. USB cable from PSP to PS3, the data comes down the PSP from the UMB, decoded and played on PS3.

I'd buy that for a dollar

Well i mean as a way to boost and increase the value of UMD, just plug in our UMD movie in a tiny little player, would be a great IMO.
Then with PSP2 and say "UMD2" you get 720P/1080P possibilites with PS3/4. I mean when they release for example the Da vinci Code on regular DVD or Blu-Ray Sony has already made statements about adding a UMD disc with the movie/movies for a little extra if i remember correct and on DVDs also.

Im talking about Consumer centric beneafits here, i think everyone would like such a accesoiare for PS3. I mean they must have some thoughts about using 4 USB2 ports afterall.

cliffbo
06-04-2006, 02:52 PM
lol sometimes its a bit like playing Chinese whispers...:)

the transition periods between consoles always overlap, although MS are trying very hard to derail this. it would be wise for Sony to have something that coexists in this stratigy and actually overlaps on a seperate timescale so i can see why some of you view the PSP as part of the plan. PSP2 cell based. piggybacking on the success of PS3... genious! got a PSP need a PS3... got a PS3 need a PSP... brilliant.

what i'm trying to get everyone to consider is that because Sony have gone on record saying that they want a ten year lifecycle and the Xbox3/720/3602 (it was only meant to be an expression of MS next console guys), will more than likely release a new machine half way through the PS3s lifecycle, then Cell + RSX + Blu-ray must have enough grunt to compete. Sony must be confident that third gen PS3 games will be able to equal first gen 720 titles. so it seems a given that PS3 is way more powerful than we think.

with the inclusion of Blu-ray Sony have effectively layed down an ace, especially, like i said above, if Sony can convince devs to fully realise its advantages.

360 means full circle?! thats the reason MS gave but the real and obvious reason is because perception wise it would have been suicide to put Xbox2 up against PS3. so they managed to get a 3 in there.

BahnNZ
06-04-2006, 04:13 PM
The xbox life cycle is interesting. I wonder if it's true or not, people high up in companies say a lot of things, then recant. Such as "We'll have all xbox games running on 360 eventually" - Peter Moore. "We could make a Blu Ray 360 one day" - Peter Moore.

Actually maybe it's just that guy. :)

The short lifespan of the Xbox 1 has a lot to do with Microsoft's relationship with both Intel and nVidia. They wanted rid of these two as fast as possible, for financial reasons. If the new IBM/ATI one is a bed of roses maybe 360 won't dissappear after 4 years (Which is only 3 years next November, eeek!)

I wonder...

With the price point as it is I can see PS3 going for longer than the PS1/PS2 cycle. I think people were happy with SD TV for 35 odd years, who's to say they won't be happy with 1080p HD TV for even longer.

imported_The_One
06-04-2006, 04:29 PM
What Sony have being genious about is that they won't have to pump so much money into R&D come PS4, they'll just use an updated Cell which will be as powerfull as anything any other Chip maker has to offer and the Developers will be used to coding for the Cell chip by then, kind of like with the Nintendo Wii being very like the GameCube. I like that idea :).

That's probably what everyone is speculating, though. Since in a few years, when PS4 is about to hit the spotlight, no doubt the CELL would have been utilizes more properly, and many tweaks and trips would have been discovered to push it that-little-bit-further. Not to mention, since the CELL is scalable, we could potentially see a 14 SPE version of the CELL inside the PS4 :lol:. Man, that gives me the creeps just thinking about it... balancing 14 SPE, ain't gonna be easy, that much I know.

masteratt
06-04-2006, 04:37 PM
I dunno about that, I don't see it as Sony's style.
I think Sony once again will take a "risk" and develop a brand new chip. That's what Sony believes is "next-gen"= Not just upgrading something that's already there but to create something brand new.

imported_The_One
06-04-2006, 04:40 PM
I dunno about that, I don't see it as Sony's style.
I think Sony once again will take a "risk" and develop a brand new chip. That's what Sony believes is "next-gen"= Not just upgrading something that's already there but to create something brand new. Well, with the CELL being still relatively new (as compared to the 20-odd year old x86 architecture) in 5 years, I don't think IBM and Toshiba are going to be keen on jumping on another development bandwagon. Besides, even Sony themselves have stated that it will be used in all sorts of home application and utilities in the future.

I see a GPU facelift, but the CELL? Nah, that homeboy here to stay ;).

gljvd
06-04-2006, 07:14 PM
Well since your making it look bad for Sony ill make it look bad for MS, just to be fair


Which is what the thread was all about before I jumped in .


Face it , the only thing diffrent from the ps2 vs xbox arguement is that the ps3 is even more expensive and offers a new disc drive. Other than that its already falling in line with last gen. This time the positions are reverse.

Ms already has around 4-5m consoles shiped with a large portion of those sold. They feel they can have 10m shipped with a large portion sold by the time the ps3 launches.

This is the exact same postition that the ps2 enjoyed.

The ps2 also lagged behind in the graphics department (which we still don't know if the xbox 360 will ) yet devs still targeted it in a greater amount than the xbox .

In this market sales talk and bs pr and fanboy convos don't. Devs wont ignore the ever increasing sales base of the xbox 360 just because a more expnsive conso has entered the market

For those who think ms will have to replace the console in 3 years are dreaming. This console will do fine for 5 years and will continue to grow ms's market share .

Gamers and people on budgets aren't going to care about bluray . They are going to look at what system gives them the over all best experiance for thier pricing segement and buy it .

At 100$ cheaper for the best / worse system comparison , the xbox 360 leads that comparison and will for some time . Esp since ms will have the first software that will be cheap in price new and used . They also will have the larger library of games for at least another year or so while sony catches up.


It is all about timing and The nes took the market share and held it by being first. The better hardware in the master system didn't do anything for it.

The geneisis took about half the market from having 2% because it was first and cheaper .

The playstation came in the middle (the saturn launched first) but it wasn't plagued with bad press and sales on the sega cd and 32x and it was cheaper than the saturn. The n64 came out 18 months or so later and it was to late to take the market back.

The dreamcast launched first but sega had a poor repuation with the casual gamers and were broke and thus it died. The playstation then came out 18 months before the xbox and gamecube , both of which had better and more powerfull systems all around . Yet the ps2 still lead those systems because of its price and installed base lyead

Domination
06-04-2006, 07:44 PM
Which is what the thread was all about before I jumped in .


Face it , the only thing diffrent from the ps2 vs xbox arguement is that the ps3 is even more expensive and offers a new disc drive. Other than that its already falling in line with last gen. This time the positions are reverse.

Ms already has around 4-5m consoles shiped with a large portion of those sold. They feel they can have 10m shipped with a large portion sold by the time the ps3 launches.

This is the exact same postition that the ps2 enjoyed.

The ps2 also lagged behind in the graphics department (which we still don't know if the xbox 360 will ) yet devs still targeted it in a greater amount than the xbox .

In this market sales talk and bs pr and fanboy convos don't. Devs wont ignore the ever increasing sales base of the xbox 360 just because a more expnsive conso has entered the market

For those who think ms will have to replace the console in 3 years are dreaming. This console will do fine for 5 years and will continue to grow ms's market share .

Gamers and people on budgets aren't going to care about bluray . They are going to look at what system gives them the over all best experiance for thier pricing segement and buy it .

At 100$ cheaper for the best / worse system comparison , the xbox 360 leads that comparison and will for some time . Esp since ms will have the first software that will be cheap in price new and used . They also will have the larger library of games for at least another year or so while sony catches up.


It is all about timing and The nes took the market share and held it by being first. The better hardware in the master system didn't do anything for it.

The geneisis took about half the market from having 2% because it was first and cheaper .

The playstation came in the middle (the saturn launched first) but it wasn't plagued with bad press and sales on the sega cd and 32x and it was cheaper than the saturn. The n64 came out 18 months or so later and it was to late to take the market back.

The dreamcast launched first but sega had a poor repuation with the casual gamers and were broke and thus it died. The playstation then came out 18 months before the xbox and gamecube , both of which had better and more powerfull systems all around . Yet the ps2 still lead those systems because of its price and installed base lyead

The PS2 was very limited last-gen on the hardware front across the board just about, which affected developer support in a number of cases. It's online was not as great as it could have been, and presure was not as great as it is now. Compared to the PS2, more has been achieved this time with the PS3. The only real difference now is them launching later rather than sooner and with a higher price tag as far as a direct comparison to what's being offered at this exact moment.

I think what you listed earlier is very decieving.

Infernal
06-04-2006, 10:37 PM
Face it , the only thing diffrent from the ps2 vs xbox arguement is that the ps3 is even more expensive and offers a new disc drive. Other than that its already falling in line with last gen. This time the positions are reverse.

No, I will not face your twisted opinions JVD.

Ms already has around 4-5m consoles shiped with a large portion of those sold. They feel they can have 10m shipped with a large portion sold by the time the ps3 launches.
First off the PS2 had about 20 million consoles sold when the Xbox launched compared to MS's projected 10 million sold when the PS3 launches. Also the dreamcast had sold almost 10 million by the time the PS2 launched, that didnt stop devs from supporting the PS2 and jumping ship to the dreamcast.

The ps2 also lagged behind in the graphics department (which we still don't know if the xbox 360 will ) yet devs still targeted it in a greater amount than the xbox .
The Xbox is weaker in all of the fundamental tasks. Graphics (arguably I guess), physics, sound, resolution, and another thread says the AI for PS3 is amazing. Also devs targeted the PS2 because it was a proven system, it was Xbox's first time in the market and devs had no idea how people would react.

In this market sales talk and bs pr and fanboy convos don't. Devs wont ignore the ever increasing sales base of the xbox 360 just because a more expnsive conso has entered the market
Devs have already ignored the increasing sales of the 360 by continuing their support on the PS3. Not one important exclusive to the PS2 that I can think of has switched to even multiplatform for the PS3. The only thing that has switched from just a timed exclusive to a same time launch is GTA.

Gamers and people on budgets aren't going to care about bluray . They are going to look at what system gives them the over all best experiance for thier pricing segement and buy it .
Gamers will care about blu-ray, they cared about DVD when PS2 launched, I cant see why they wouldnt care about blu-ray now.


At 100$ cheaper for the best / worse system comparison , the xbox 360 leads that comparison and will for some time . Esp since ms will have the first software that will be cheap in price new and used . They also will have the larger library of games for at least another year or so while sony catches up.
Thats true however that best/worse system comparison is equal. They both offer the same features, in fact the lower end PS3 offers more than the upper end 360 when you consider the free online. Used and lower priced software never sells a system, and for someone working at Gamestop you should know that very well. Its the AAA titles and the 50/60 dollar games that everyone just has to have that sells a system. While MS will have the larger library for some time, Sony will still have their continuing library from last generation that gamers will know is coming soon enough.

Playstation has never launched first in a generation as you have pointed out. Whats different between Dreamcast and 360? They both had losing generations before the current one and both launched with an outdated disk media. Now I dont think 360 will be dreamcasted, but I think your dreaming if you think it will dominate or even beat the PS3 this generation.

I dont see whats reversed here. The only reversed situation is the price and power. However your acting like those are the only two things that made the PS2 win last generation. This generation the PS3 picks up the slack in online, continues to be the push for advanced disk media, continues its support for great games, and continues to offer additional features in a single box. Alot of people were impressed that the PS2 could play DVD's, CD's, PS2 games, and PS1 games, and the PS3 can do 10x that.

Infernal
06-04-2006, 10:42 PM
Anyway guys wheres Wounding? Normally he would be all over a thread like this.

gljvd
06-05-2006, 12:01 AM
MILR, I don't think we will see HDS in a console until PS5 unless we see a major shift in game development. I think Blu-ray should be sufficient for capacity for some time.

If for some reason Blu-ray & HD-DVD are huge failures, perhaps we could see the technology dumped for HDS, but that is highly unlikely...

Considering all the cutting edge tech in the PS3 I'm curious to see what's in store for the PS4, but I'm more than happy with the PS3 & 360 for the next 5+ years...Peace


Its not capacity but speed.

Bluray is much to slow . HVD though is much faster even at 1x . Its about 5x faster I believe ( will look up exact numbers when i have a few mins) So 100 gig size disc with at least 5x the speed of a 1x bluray ( I'm sure hvd will come in at faster speeds than 1x but each stepping will get faster and faster) Bluray has a limit of 10k rpms just like cd and dvds. At the same rpm the hvd method is faster so it will be very important as we actually use more and more of the disc space other wise you will get more and more load times. The reason is that the disc doesn't spin in the hvd .

It will go at up to 1gbps 40 times faster than dvd. 2x bluray is 108mbps .


While the media itself limited the recording speed in the past, the only limiting factor for Blu-ray is the capacity of the hardware. If we assume a maximum disc rotation speed of 10,000 RPM, then 12x at the outer diameter should be possible (about 400Mbps). This is why the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) already has plans to raise the speed to 8x (288Mbps) or more in the future.


Bluray would top out at a max of 400mbps at the start of disc. HVD though is standard 1gbps through out the disc

Viano
06-05-2006, 12:14 AM
HO HO HO~ santa claus is coming to the thrreaddddddd.♪

the only fact I can state here is, gljvd is a fanboy, and you can do nothing about it!!

HO HO HO~ santa claus is coming to the thrreaddddddd.♪

*one kid opened the bag and said..."Mom!! I dont want this green t$#%#!!"*

*his heart is to be hurt forever..and ever..*

gljvd
06-05-2006, 12:29 AM
First off the PS2 had about 20 million consoles sold when the Xbox launched compared to MS's projected 10 million sold when the PS3 launches. Also the dreamcast had sold almost 10 million by the time the PS2 launched, that didnt stop devs from supporting the PS2 and jumping ship to the dreamcast



Link to an article about it .

The ps2 shiped between 10m units its first year.

Prove other wise


The Xbox is weaker in all of the fundamental tasks. Graphics (arguably I guess), physics, sound, resolution, and another thread says the AI for PS3 is amazing. Also devs targeted the PS2 because it was a proven system, it was Xbox's first time in the market and devs had no idea how people would react.



a) says who ?
b) was not the ps2 weaker in ever regard ? or are you going to pull bs out of your ass


Devs have already ignored the increasing sales of the 360 by continuing their support on the PS3. Not one important exclusive to the PS2 that I can think of has switched to even multiplatform for the PS3. The only thing that has switched from just a timed exclusive to a same time launch is GTA.


One of the biggest selling games of the ps2 era is now no longer a timed excuslive and ms is getting tons of third party support and third party exclusives .


Gamers will care about blu-ray, they cared about DVD when PS2 launched, I cant see why they wouldnt care about blu-ray now.


Dvd came out in 1997 and had a large library in 2000 when the ps2 launched. Dvd provided a huge visual leap on every tv sold in every country. Bluray will only provide a visual leap on hd-tvs and unlike dvd it has a competing format in hd-dvd .


Thats true however that best/worse system comparison is equal. They both offer the same features, in fact the lower end PS3 offers more than the upper end 360 when you consider the free online. Used and lower priced software never sells a system, and for someone working at Gamestop you should know that very well. Its the AAA titles and the 50/60 dollar games that everyone just has to have that sells a system. While MS will have the larger library for some time, Sony will still have their continuing library from last generation that gamers will know is coming soon enough.



The 100$ diffrences is today , when the ps3 hasn't launched yet . Will it be the same in nov ? I don't think so you seem to though.

As for software amounts and prices , you'd be naive to think they don't sell. Go work in a game store and see how many people factor in the library sizes and prices . They are very important . Xbox will have been out a year in nov and will have a years worth of games. They will also have many of the titles coming out on the ps3 along with its own exclusives.


Playstation has never launched first in a generation as you have pointed out. Whats different between Dreamcast and 360? They both had losing generations before the current one and both launched with an outdated disk media. Now I dont think 360 will be dreamcasted, but I think your dreaming if you think it will dominate or even beat the PS3 this generation.

Whats diffrent ? Wow sony troll big time here. Let me count the ways for you

1) Sega was bankrupt
2) Ea the biggest 3rd party publisher with the biggest sports titles that sell millions a year didn't support them
3) Piracy was rampet , anyone with a cd burner could download the games and play them on the dreamcast. Thus 3rd partys left in droves
4) sega had no big named games , no halo 3 , no froza 2 , no gears of war
5) MS doesn't have 3 failed hardware attempts behind them (more so if you count handheld) Sega failed with the 32x , sega cd and saturn (game gear , nomad and the cd-x)

Can't get much more diffrent than that .


I dont see whats reversed here. The only reversed situation is the price and power. However your acting like those are the only two things that made the PS2 win last generation. This generation the PS3 picks up the slack in online, continues to be the push for advanced disk media, continues its support for great games, and continues to offer additional features in a single box. Alot of people were impressed that the PS2 could play DVD's, CD's, PS2 games, and PS1 games, and the PS3 can do 10x that.


Lots of thigns are reversed.

Ms has the hardware sales (And no sony didn't sell 20m units before the xbox launched) tehy will have shiped and closed to sold 10m units before sony launches.
Ms has the software on the market both in exclusives this year and in cheap older games. and they have the pricing advantage .


I came into this thread as it was a pissing contest against ms and I'm just sheding light on the circle jerk that was this thread. Its not all roses for sony , far from it

Just as few people want the core unit from ms , few people will want the 500$ ps3 . Esp since the core unit can easily get a hardrive and be a full xbox 360. The 500$ ps3 can't suddenly get hdmi .

pari
06-05-2006, 12:33 AM
Its not capacity but speed.

Bluray is much to slow . HVD though is much faster even at 1x . Its about 5x faster I believe ( will look up exact numbers when i have a few mins) So 100 gig size disc with at least 5x the speed of a 1x bluray ( I'm sure hvd will come in at faster speeds than 1x but each stepping will get faster and faster) Bluray has a limit of 10k rpms just like cd and dvds. At the same rpm the hvd method is faster so it will be very important as we actually use more and more of the disc space other wise you will get more and more load times. The reason is that the disc doesn't spin in the hvd .


If disc does not spin, then how do you have rpm for comparison? rpm -> revoultions per minute so where does rpm come into play?

Second if the disc is not spinning, then to access different location of the memory (cube) the light source has to move. All disk based memory (including hard disk) have their head move in one axis. Open up the CD-player you would see a slot in which the head is placed. Head moves up and down the slot. So is the access is done in the HVD?

Infernal
06-05-2006, 12:53 AM
Link to an article about it .

The ps2 shiped between 10m units its first year.

Prove other wise


In contrast, the PS2 shipments hit 10.6 million units at the end of March 2001, after 13 months on sale, and totaled 19.6 million after 19 months
As you said the Xbox launched about 18 months after... So... Link (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,97523,00.asp)

a) says who ?
... I hope your not serious. Havok and Ageia have clearly stated many times that the PS3 is highly capable in physics in comparison to the 360. As for sound, well considering PS3 has seen games supporting 7.1 sound compared to 5.1 on 360 as well as Cell's amazing sound capabilities were proven in many demonstrations. Resolution isnt even arguable and graphics like I said are arguable, opinion I guess you could say.

b) was not the ps2 weaker in ever regard ? or are you going to pull bs out of your ass
Link something that says it was weaker in anything besides graphics, instead of pulling bs out of your ass.

One of the biggest selling games of the ps2 era is now no longer a timed excuslive and ms is getting tons of third party support and third party exclusives .
The PS3 has gained just as much support, link me something that says otherwise.

Dvd came out in 1997 and had a large library in 2000 when the ps2 launched. Dvd provided a huge visual leap on every tv sold in every country. Bluray will only provide a visual leap on hd-tvs and unlike dvd it has a competing format in hd-dvd .
While everyone may not have an HD-TV at the moment, in 2-3 years most people will. You need to not just think about at launch when its already guaranteed to sell out, but into the future as well.

The 100$ diffrences is today , when the ps3 hasn't launched yet . Will it be the same in nov ? I don't think so you seem to though.
We will see if they drop the price come November, but I still dont see why they would. I predict they will sell out at Christmas if they dont drop the price, so why bother?

As for software amounts and prices , you'd be naive to think they don't sell. Go work in a game store and see how many people factor in the library sizes and prices . They are very important . Xbox will have been out a year in nov and will have a years worth of games. They will also have many of the titles coming out on the ps3 along with its own exclusives.
Yes they sell, but were talking about console sales here. The cheap, boring games dont sell consoles.

Whats diffrent ? Wow sony troll big time here. Let me count the ways for you

1) Sega was bankrupt
2) Ea the biggest 3rd party publisher with the biggest sports titles that sell millions a year didn't support them
3) Piracy was rampet , anyone with a cd burner could download the games and play them on the dreamcast. Thus 3rd partys left in droves
4) sega had no big named games , no halo 3 , no froza 2 , no gears of war
5) MS doesn't have 3 failed hardware attempts behind them (more so if you count handheld) Sega failed with the 32x , sega cd and saturn (game gear , nomad and the cd-x)

Can't get much more diffrent than that .
A few of those are valid, however a few arent. First off while MS is no where near bankrupt, investors wont dare to allow them to make another Xbox is the 360 loses money. Sega had big named titles for their time, Soul Calibur and UT off the top of my head.

I came into this thread as it was a pissing contest against ms and I'm just sheding light on the circle jerk that was this thread. Its not all roses for sony , far from it
No ones saying its all roses for Sony, but you seem to only point out disadantages and always try to make Sony seem like the bad guy. I have said it before, why are you posting in the PS3 forum if you hate everything PS3. While you can discuss PS3, if all your going to do is say Sony lies and say 360 is better, why even post here?

The 500$ ps3 can't suddenly get hdmi . Yah its damn easy for the 360 to suddenly get HDMI isnt it...


Wow sony troll big time here.
I never say anything bad about other consoles unless someone only points out the bad for Sony, unlike yourself. If someone says something good about Sony, I just dont jump out and say "but Sony sucks at life".

{Delta}
06-05-2006, 12:53 AM
I imagine we are going to have a 360-style PS3 launch come x-mas, as in terrible availabilty. I just do not see how they are going to get around it.


I am still quite worried what games are going available at launch as I don't share Krazy Ken's vision of "buy it because its a playstation". The features are going to be quite good, but if I have seen anything of my PS1 and PS2, I am curious about the infamious sony Playstation Revision 1 hardware. Blueray is nice...horrah movies...but it really is not a huge selling point for me.

Internet Access? Nice feature, all console are going for it, but even though it has a nice linux OS, I am still not sure what functionality it can match up with my windows/Linux PC box.

gljvd
06-05-2006, 01:18 AM
As you said the Xbox launched about 18 months after... So... Link


Alright , i will bite. However the xbox 360 will have shipped 10m units in less than 12 months. Faster than the ps2 sales. So in 18 months they can easily surpase 19.6m units .

18 months would put it at june for 20m . Ps3 will only be aroudn 6m there. Still a sizable lead. 10m in 11months is much faster than 19.6m in 18 months.

Btw this is shipped. Not sold . Sony doesn't used sold numbers in press releases


I hope your not serious. Havok and Ageia have clearly stated many times that the PS3 is highly capable in physics in comparison to the 360. As for sound, well considering PS3 has seen games supporting 7.1 sound compared to 5.1 on 360 as well as Cell's amazing sound capabilities were proven in many demonstrations. Resolution isnt even arguable and graphics like I said are arguable, opinion I guess you could say.

The 360 can support any sound system it wants. Any of them can do 10.1 sound if they want to. Its not very hard at all. As for physics , both havok and aegia have physics engines on the systems.
There are also a number of devs who have said the cabilitys of both are in line with each other .



Link something that says it was weaker in anything besides graphics, instead of pulling bs out of your ass.



Graphcis , sound , transfer rates . Those are not enough ?


The PS3 has gained just as much support, link me something that says otherwise.

When did i say they didn't ? However ms already has games on the market and a larger library equals more sales .

Link me to something that says ms has less support than sony


While everyone may not have an HD-TV at the moment, in 2-3 years most people will. You need to not just think about at launch when its already guaranteed to sell out, but into the future as well.


Post something proving that in 2-3 years 51% of people in america , europe and japan will have at least 1 hd-tv set . Go for it . Because 51% would be a little bet more than half and I guess we can agree that being close to most


We will see if they drop the price come November, but I still dont see why they would. I predict they will sell out at Christmas if they dont drop the price, so why bother?

Ms has already stated they plan on yearly price drops. If it doesn't happen before the holdiay it will happen aftre the holiday. So in march they can easily drop by 50$ . putting the core at 250$ and the premium at 350$ 150$ cheaper than the ps3.


Yes they sell, but were talking about console sales here. The cheap, boring games dont sell consoles.



ERRR wrong

boring games yes , but not every cheap game is boring. Is god of war boring ? Of course not but its cheap.

Cheap games are yesterdays expensive games. Most of ms's launch games will have droped greatly in price (perhaps even a million seller sku) Some games have already started droping and come sept / october some games like call of duty 2 will have a sequal on the market and thus wont support a 50$ or 60$ sku . However someone getting a console around the holidays can look at ms's games under 30$ and pick up some nice gems for cheap. Reducing the over all cost of the console .

You fail to understand that buying a console isn't just the price of the console and thats it .

You have to factor in

Controllers and games.


A few of those are valid, however a few arent. First off while MS is no where near bankrupt, investors wont dare to allow them to make another Xbox is the 360 loses money. Sega had big named titles for their time, Soul Calibur and UT off the top of my head.


Bullshit . Post proof where investors wont let them make another xbox that looses money ? Its not stated anywhere.

Anyway , the reasons why the xbox 1 failed have all been corrected. Actually whats funny and you shy away from is the hardrive.

2 of the biggest money loosers from the xbox was a) buying the cpu and gpu through intel and nvidia which kept the profits from die shrinks instead of passing them on to sega . b) the hardrive which remained around 20$ through out the life of the console , never droping in price

Sure 20$ isn't a big deal at 600$ but when you get closer to the 100$ price point it becomes a bigger expense. at 100$ its almost a quarter of a the price
at 200 its 10% of the cost .

Those are the reason why the xbox lost so much money . That and the price war.

Ms designed a console where they own the chips (only a small fee is charged per chip like sony with the rsx) They are free to move micron processes and reduce the chip price as yields get better.

They also left out the hardrive so that 20$ fixed price is now removed.


No ones saying its all roses for Sony, but you seem to only point out disadantages and always try to make Sony seem like the bad guy. I have said it before, why are you posting in the PS3 forum if you hate everything PS3. While you can discuss PS3, if all your going to do is say Sony lies and say 360 is better, why even post here?


I read the posts where everyone pointed out all the postives for sony. So why not post the negatives


Yah its damn easy for the 360 to suddenly get HDMI isnt it...


Why does the 360 need it ? It doesn't have hd-dvd or bluray . Its also not an option that you loose from the core to the premium.

Face it the 360 core be updated to the 360 premium for 100$ (in the future less . The ps3 500$ can never be upgraded to the premium ps3

Infernal
06-05-2006, 01:38 AM
Eh forget it, you didnt post any proof to your points as I knew you would even though I asked, so I see no reason to continue this. It is just going to keep going back and forth so why bother, we seem to be destined to never agree on anything.

masteratt
06-05-2006, 01:43 AM
gljvd made a name on the PS3 forum as the guy who kills the fire of PS3 (or tries)
The reason why he doesn't suceed is he tries to use Xbox 360 to extinguish PS3's flame and that's just not going to happen.

gljvd
06-05-2006, 01:49 AM
gljvd made a name on the PS3 forum as the guy who kills the fire of PS3 (or tries)
The reason why he doesn't suceed is he tries to use Xbox 360 to extinguish PS3's flame and that's just not going to happen.


Sure because this board is full people that have thier heads in the sand .

Every postive thing xbox 360 has going for it is either not talked about or shrugged away.

However if sony used gdr 701 instead of gdr 700 than fan boys would be running around posting about how much better the ps3 is and how its going to rule

You can already see Infernal run around with the same mentality .


Infernal all my facts are general knowledge. If you want to dispute the factual nature of them , its up to you to prove that they are indeed false .

masteratt
06-05-2006, 01:54 AM
Every postive thing xbox 360 has going for it is either not talked about or shrugged away.

You can't seem to grasp that this is a PS3 DISCUSSION THREAD! Why the hell would we menton the X360? I don't think anyone is looking for a X360 vs PS3 discussion but you turn most threads into one by saying "yeah well, x360 can do Blah blah blah"

Enjoy your X360, why do you need to prove it to us on a PS3 forum?

Domination
06-05-2006, 02:09 AM
I think you may have been misinformed on a number of cases there, JVD.


Link to an article about it .

The ps2 shiped between 10m units its first year.

Prove other wise

Correct me if I am wrong, but the original Xbox launched November 8, 2001 in North America, it's very first territory. By that very sametime, the PS2 shipped over 2001/10/10 20.04 million units (Japan: 6.86 million/ USA: 8.55 million/ Europe: 4.63 million) (http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/data/bizdataps2_e.html) globally. Since then, Sony has lapped that number four times to this very date. So I believe you are wrong in this case.


a) says who ?
b) was not the ps2 weaker in ever regard ? or are you going to pull bs out of your ass

Well, there are a number of sources to go by here. Not only does everyone seem to say the samething, but results are showing such differecne, too. But hey, we aren't here to have a grudge contest. So believe whatever it is you'd like. Me, personally, I think I've see enough to draw my own conclusion as to what the results will turn up as.


One of the biggest selling games of the ps2 era is now no longer a timed exclusive and ms is getting tons of third party support and third party exclusives .

That's true. But you make it sound as if the PS3 is being left out. GTA was a great, successful game. I'll admit that. But once it went multi platform, the advantage was mostly if not completely negated after that. From there it had to rely on other titles.


Dvd came out in 1997 and had a large library in 2000 when the ps2 launched. Dvd provided a huge visual leap on every tv sold in every country. Bluray will only provide a visual leap on hd-tvs and unlike dvd it has a competing format in hd-dvd .

I agree, which is why Sony is having to do more with the console this time than before. But I think you make it seem more gloomy than it really is. I don't know who the winner will be in the end, but I'm hoping it's Blu Ray for quality reasons alone. You are comparing an add-on to a format that ships standard. As much as it may seem bad for Blu Ray in your case, I think an add-on with very little support shipping at $100 or more to play the exact same movies that the console will play anyway has equally got its work cut out for it if not more.


The 100$ diffrences is today , when the ps3 hasn't launched yet . Will it be the same in nov ? I don't think so you seem to though.

Time will tell how effective that is if it even comes to that.


As for software amounts and prices , you'd be naive to think they don't sell. Go work in a game store and see how many people factor in the library sizes and prices . They are very important . Xbox will have been out a year in nov and will have a years worth of games. They will also have many of the titles coming out on the ps3 along with its own exclusives.

I agree, but not always have software been the desiding factor everytime when making such a launch. We will see how it plays out, though.



Lots of thigns are reversed.

Ms has the hardware sales (And no sony didn't sell 20m units before the xbox launched) tehy will have shiped and closed to sold 10m units before sony launches.
Ms has the software on the market both in exclusives this year and in cheap older games. and they have the pricing advantage .

If you mean reversed both ways, I agree. If not, then that's completely false. I see just as much of an advantage on Sony's end as I see on Microsoft's. Price for the average consumer is the only thing I see wrong here, and it is not certain as to how Sony plans on handling this in the distant future.


I came into this thread as it was a pissing contest against ms and I'm just sheding light on the circle jerk that was this thread. Its not all roses for sony , far from it

Of course it isn't and neither is it for Microsoft. But by a number of responses, I'd assume you thought otherwise. :pirate:


Just as few people want the core unit from ms , few people will want the 500$ ps3 . Esp since the core unit can easily get a hardrive and be a full xbox 360. The 500$ ps3 can't suddenly get hdmi .

The PS3 core unit is not the same as the 360. There's a difference there. One could easily get the core unit and be just as satisfied than if they were to get a premium. If you thought 1080p wasn't that important to begin with, although the two support it, then what's the big deal for those experiencing a moderate difference? Either it matters or it doesn't.

venomv
06-05-2006, 02:14 AM
10m in 11months is much faster than 19.6m in 18 months.

Someone needs to learn basic math before they spit crap like that out. 19.6 in 18 months is 1.0888million a month, while 10mil in 11 months is .90909 million a month.


Btw this is shipped. Not sold . Sony doesn't used sold numbers in press releases

Neither does MS, what your point?



Bullshit . Post proof where investors wont let them make another xbox that looses money ? Its not stated anywhere.

Dude, it's called common sense. They may support more, but eventually they will get tired of constantly losing money and pull they plug if they don't make any money(not saying that is won't, as you are correct that MS fixed most/all of the faults of the XBox in that regard).


boring games yes , but not every cheap game is boring. Is god of war boring ? Of course not but its cheap.


Cheap can have more then one meaning.

Infernal
06-05-2006, 02:16 AM
Every postive thing xbox 360 has going for it is either not talked about or shrugged away.
Because this is a PS3 forum, we dont talk about the 360 here unless an article discusses both, or an anti-sony fanboy like yourself brings it up.


Infernal all my facts are general knowledge. If you want to dispute the factual nature of them , its up to you to prove that they are indeed false.
As are mine, however you always respond as if they arent, asking me to dig up links that can easily be found in old threads on this forum, just use the search function.


You can already see Infernal run around with the same mentality.
If you really think that JVD thats your opinion that no one else agrees with. Maybe you should read your own posts once and a while.

edoshin
06-05-2006, 02:56 AM
As forum discussion board goes, this is a fairly balanced board, where both the positive and the negative are discussed. If people go overboard in praising PS3 .. well, this is a PS3 board after all, so we get excited about PS3 and PS3 games. PS3 negativity is not necesarily a bad thing .. its just that it usually comes from the usual parties, and as such, is just "noise".

pari
06-05-2006, 03:15 AM
Sure because this board is full people that have thier heads in the sand .

Every postive thing xbox 360 has going for it is either not talked about or shrugged away.

However if sony used gdr 701 instead of gdr 700 than fan boys would be running around posting about how much better the ps3 is and how its going to rule

You can already see Infernal run around with the same mentality .


Infernal all my facts are general knowledge. If you want to dispute the factual nature of them , its up to you to prove that they are indeed false .

Oh thanks for being the devil's advocate or being the conscious keeper to lead this PS3 forum in the right direction.

BTW, please do not say all your facts are general knowledge and we need to disprove you. How about you disproving what is said about PS3 instead first? We have debated in few threads, one thing I have noticed is you ask others to prove their point, but you never provide any facts or links to prove your point? Why should it be one way.

Couple of other things, MS has promised to do price cut and that is not exclusive to MS alone. In Xbox MS was buying chips from Intel and Nvidia who had no incentive to do a shrink the die as it not worth the expense for them. In 360 MS, bought the design for CPU & GPU, so that they can shrink the die to save cost. FYI, Sony is semiconductor company that does processor design and they can shrink the die also. So Sony can also cut cost of PS3 it is not something exclusive for 360 alone.

MS does not have processor/GPU design team, they contracted it out to IBM and ATI, whereas Sony did a collaboration with IBM and possibly Nvidia. For PS2 Sony did its own GPU. So whatever technology access MS has with IBM, Sony would also have it. Only difference for MS its a contract with IBM, whereas its a joint development for Sony and Sony has its own fab, so if Sony develop new techniques to fab, they can modify CELL to be fabbed in their own fab, whereas MS depends on IBM fab or the foundries. The foundries are good but they are not the bleeding edge technology, so MS has a handicap in that front to depend upon IBM fab for bleeding edge technology. IBM fab are not cheap, which gives Sony an advantage.

Blu-ray drive is not going to stay expensive, did CD-drive or DVD-drive stay expensive all along? No, so Blu-ray would get cheaper. So PS3 also can get cheaper really quickly too..

We can go on back and forth countless time, point is both have plus and minus and we are not interested in how great 360 is. And we do not have our head in the sand, unlike you say.

And last, this is PS3 forum to talk about PS3, not to talk about how great is 360, for that I believe there is a separate forum.

edoshin
06-05-2006, 03:32 AM
Bringing 360 into discussions in a PS3 board is usually a bad formula. It inevitably disintegrates into another stupid PS3 vs 360 thread that destroys a perfectly good discussion. Naturally there are rabid Sony supporters that denigrate the other consoles, but u cannot expect the entire population to behave cordially. What's annoying are the regular posters who have absolutely never have anything good to add to a PS3 discussion, but seem to love to hang out in this forum. I say just go away.

Is there anyone equivalent in the 360 forum? .. who never has anything but negativity to inject into a 360 discussion, but pretends to be unbiased and knowledgable.

yoshaw
06-05-2006, 03:35 AM
Tsk tsk tsk, what a hopeless guy! Never understands the obvious even after getting pwned twice in arguments. JVD, your argument tactics have hit a new low in this thread. And as usual falling back to the real you that just wants 360 praised (in the same vain as a PS3) on a PS3 forum. LOL


I see thread closure coming soon.

venomv
06-05-2006, 04:10 AM
Only difference for MS its a contract with IBM, whereas its a joint development for Sony and Sony has its own fab, so if Sony develop new techniques to fab, they can modify CELL to be fabbed in their own fab, whereas MS depends on IBM fab or the foundries.

MS owns the designs and can take them anywhere to be made, even though I think that is simply a bargoning chip and will never accually happen.

tien69
06-05-2006, 11:59 AM
Chrome Said:

Most of the people that I work with including my bosses think that Sony have pulled a master stroke with the PS3.
What Sony have being genious about is that they won't have to pump so much money into R&D come PS4, they'll just use an updated Cell which will be as powerfull as anything any other Chip maker has to offer and the Developers will be used to coding for the Cell chip by then, kind of like with the Nintendo Wii being very like the GameCube



Yup, they will be using less R&D funds to make Cell scalable, and make sure the programming plays nicely with each other. Lower die size, less heat, etc. So all efforts would mostly be put into the GPU this time.

pari
06-05-2006, 12:43 PM
MS owns the designs and can take them anywhere to be made, even though I think that is simply a bargoning chip and will never accually happen.

MS owns the design and can get it fab where ever it wants. Normally the chips are designed for particular fab process technology. Chip can be fabbed without any modification to the mask set from fab to another fab but chances are low. IBM fab process would have lot of steps in the maks which might not be available in other fabs. So if the mask set was cut for IBM fab, then MS might or not be able to use the foundries.
The process have become more complex and the transistor making steps are not simple anymore, lot more steps are required. TSMC, USMC and Charter might not have all the tweaks for the transistors.
So how much bargaining MS has would depend on how the mask set was cut. Currently 65nm technology is available @Intel, IBM/AMD and rest are still developing. I do not think IBM gave away 65nm process technology to any of the foundries.
Only advantage MS has this time is, they have shrink done to reduce the cost which was not available for them in earlier. Since Sony owns the fab, they can accelerate the cost reduction much faster than what IBM would offer to MS. IBM needs to make profit when they fab it for MS, whereas Sony when it fabs, it needs to break even and spread the cost across its semiconductor product line.

cliffbo
06-05-2006, 01:49 PM
thank you for derailing yet another thread VD (can't someone find a cure for this virus? XB) your contributions are getting very tiresome. there is a 360 section on these forums if you would like to wax lyrically about MS and i for one would like to see you do that... there! don't expect many responses though, most of the excitement seems to gravitate to this PS3 section. back on topic guys :)

thanks for your thoughtful contributions by the way. wheres wounding?


i've been thinking about this for a while now and i wondered what others thought about it:

the Xbox was released as we know to compete with the PS2, but didn't do very well. in a determined effort to beat PS3 in this round MS has released the 360 a year ahead of PS3. but a president has been set with MS which is a 4 year lifecycle for their consoles without it appears a determination to support their prior console.

if the 360 outlives the Xbox by two years that means that the PS3, which is intended to be a ten year lifecycle, would conceivably have to compete with an Xbox720 for five years (five years into the PS3s lifecycle)

with mistakes made by MS concerning starage medium and an add on that would play movies and would be unlikely to support games, its likely that a new machine from MS is probable with a HD-DVD or perhaps a Blu-ray (unlikely)

so my question is: will Sony's PS3 be able to compete with a third generation Xbox? because this to me is a given. Sony have carefully positioned the PS3 as futureproof, but how can they futureproof it against technology that has the advantage of a five year developement cycle? if they can then theres more to the PS3 than we are aware of and considering Sony's excellent track record i wouldn't doubt this.

this is the whole reason for the futureproofing statements as far as i'm concerned. it has to be because they know that 360 will not be around as long as the PS3. it will take a couple of years before we start to really see the difference between blu-ray and DVD9 games. but if Sony are really clever they could give MS no room for maneuvre by necessitating a full utilization of blu-ray and making their Online service free (which we already know is about to happen)

this could be the end game for MS unless they can win this next gen war or at least draw. Vista has hit the headlines of late and perhaps this is a sign that MS are gravitating back to its roots.

Viper
06-05-2006, 06:07 PM
To be fair to JVD, this whle thread was console vs console from post one and while there is nothing wrong with that so long as facts are presented (instead of soley assumed or requested) then a great discussion can be had.

One thing that is certain is that none of us know what else is certain. None of us know the results of each upcoming year and with so many possibilities and variables involved, none of us should be so certain of many of our own predictions. We can be hopeful and sometimes given teh circumstance quite probably correct but it's best to remove yourself from brand loytaly, personal hopes and expectations and then analyze all data before assuming. When we make assumptions and we do lots of that, lets try to back them up with a fact or analogy to help portray the thought.

Also, no personal attacks on members or their gaming preferences please unless you want it done to you and NO console/manufacturer is without their faults.

Carry on.

cliffbo
06-05-2006, 06:20 PM
this puts me in mind of the old labour party. for years they tollerated the far left because diplomacy was necessary in a socialist party. eventually though they realised that if they didn't make a split with the far left progress could not be made... banning is the only option.

cliffbo
06-06-2006, 03:54 PM
it seems to me that Sony believe that they could be competing with an Xbox3 in around five years.


A: This console is going to do much more. We have made sure this is a console for the long haul. If you look at the lack of Blu-ray on Microsoft, what do you do if the game requires 40 to 50 gigabytes? Put it on three disks? Let's look under the hood and see total value we are delivering to consumers. At five to 10 years, you see the lasting power of the PS‚2. If you go out there now, there is a lot of PS‚2 software out there. From a consumer's view, who got the better value? If you look at which console is giving the publishers more time to amortize their development costs, the answer is pretty obvious.

cliffbo
06-06-2006, 04:37 PM
this could be a warning to MS that if they decide to bring out a new machine in 4 years then Sony could bring out PS4 a year after.

LinpinWangyFoot
06-07-2006, 07:54 PM
this could be a warning to MS that if they decide to bring out a new machine in 4 years then Sony could bring out PS4 a year after.

i think that Sony are going to have a tougher time this gen but i also think that they will eventually prevail. if they reduce the price of the PSP significantly then those who buy one will also buy a PS3. MS are trying to change the time line of consoles to suit themselves. Sony will go out of their way to bring it back to theirs, including perhaps a shorter life span of PS3 if xbox 3 comes out in five years time.

LinpinWangyFoot
06-09-2006, 12:20 AM
amazing! the most relevent thead ignored in favour of hearsay! listen up! this is the real deal here... this is where its won or lost.