Sony considering multi-core processor for PS4

somehow i feel like a made a good choice not to purchase one of this current gen's new consoles..how many years has the PS3 been on the market for again?

The PS3 has been available more than 3 years now...and we are probably looking at at least 2 more years before we get the PS4...I think that 5 years is rather good for a gaming system; but then again I am used to having a PC that costs twice as much and is outdated after a year, obsolite after 2-3 years.

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

The PS3 has been available more than 3 years now...and we are probably looking at at least 2 more years before we get the PS4...I think that 5 years is rather good for a gaming system; but then again I am used to having a PC that costs twice as much and is outdated after a year, obsolite after 2-3 years.

---

Don't spread FUD, PC gaming isnt that expensive, unless you want to play the games in max resolution like 1920 by 1200, with everything turned to max.

BTW my old gaming rig is 7 years old & still going strong, far from obsolete, all you do to play the latest titles is adjust the graphics to a lower resolution.

it may be lower than that of the best specs that the games are designed for but it is still far superior to both the PS3 & 360.

The PS3 vga is based on the 7600 Nvidia. 550 mhz GPU, 256 MB of GDDR3 ram clocked at 700mhz, which is like lol.... thats a £20 graphics card, no i couldn't possibly afford that upgrade!


BTW back on topic didn't IBM state a couple of months ago that the Cell processor line is at an evolutionary dead end & killed it?

Don't you just love how wild speculation constantly gets reported as news? They probably also considered only selling it built into its own 60" HDTV for $3000, but you don't see BS like that 'reported.' It'll probably be a year or so before they even make close to a final decision on any architecture, anyway. The Cell is already multi-core and it would be kinda dumb to assume any new CPU wouldn't be, so it doesn't say anything people couldn't assume anyway. Even the wording from said source sounds kinda made up.

Not only is the cell a multi-core, but it has a lot of vector processing capability; it is effectivly a GPU and a CPU in one; the extra chip for video is just for extra power.

I have trouble believing that your 7-year-old gaming system still runs new titles, especialy since the reason I bought my 3870 is because slinter cell refused to even try to start on my x1650...it isn't even a matter of the games playing slowly and ugly...the games just won't play...I might as well put a PS3 game into a PS2. I don't think you play modern PC games on that old rig...but I will stop short of calling you a liar; maybe your idea of "new games" is flash-based titles that will run on any netbook.

I was actualy being nice to the PC...$600 is a great deal for a PC capable of running the same titles at the same quality...most $600 PCs cannot run GTA4 as well as a PS3. Also, PS3 has no hardware upgrades; you don't need to keep buying a new video card to play the latest games at max resolution; they are writen to run well on the hardware available...and the hardware available does not change every 6 months.

While I am an old-timer PC gamer (I still have Wolfenstein 3D on diskets), recent times have pushed me to the PS3 more than ever. It seems like every PC game is writen to require Live, Steam, or some other crap. They also all seem to be writen with the goal of allowing cheating, especialy in online play. Since I moved to playing PS3 almost exclusivly, there are only two things I miss: The Keyboard and the Mouse. Other than that, it is a wholy more enjoyable experience, with a lot less money waisted on constant upgrades...and without all the DRM-related problems that PC games have become slaves to (I know there is still DRM...but it works correctly on the PS3).

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

While I am an old-timer PC gamer (I still have Wolfenstein 3D on diskets), recent times have pushed me to the PS3 more than ever. It seems like every PC game is writen to require Live, Steam, or some other crap.

---

Wow! I still have shareware diskettes of WOLFENSTEIN 3D, DOOM (I), HERETIC (I) and others. I too am leary of things like STEAM...requiring installing an online client app to play your damn stuff is kinda shady. Then again, the Valve guys are egomaniacal buttwipes, so hardly surprising. People like that really deserve getting knocked down a few to several notches. They've pretty much ADMITTED they're too inept to understand PS3 (or ANYTHING non-DirectX, so OpenGL probably confuses their tiny minds too).

Quote:

---

BTW my old gaming rig is 7 years old & still going strong, far from obsolete, all you do to play the latest titles is adjust the graphics to a lower resolution.

---

I looked at call of duty: modern warfare2 and need for speed shift for pc and according to the system requirements you need a dual core processor with min 1.5ghz.I doubt you will get them to run on a 7 year old pc.Im gonna buy a PS3 even if it is 3 years old only cause i want to play decent games.ive red somewhere the PS4 should be ready by 2012 but i highly doubt it im guessing around 2015.

If everyone gets used to the cell, which they seem to be, wouldn't it be better to keep that framework than switching off to something different?

But meh, I don't really care about the tech in the box. Partly because it's over my head and partly because the games kinda tell me all I need to know about the tech.

I have to agree with av_verbal when it comes to playing newer games. There will be some games that won't make it on a 7 year old system but there are still plenty of new games that will. That said, I like my games at max thus I tend to play "older" games on my 5 year old system. I'm just getting around to playing Far Cry and I have to say that it's not "cutting edge" but it's still pretty good, fun, and most importantly less than $5. I still can't comprehend how people pay $40-$60 for a video game. I just let the fanfare of the new games die and pick them up when their not "cool" anymore. If I'm paying more than $25 for a game (and at $25 it better be a GREAT game) then I'm paying too much.

I speculate that the PS4 will be announced in 2 years, released in 3. But also that the PS3 will still be around for a few years after that. It will have a large catalog of games behind it, and it functions well as a multimedia box. Just like the PS2 franchise is still being milked, I believe Sony will do the same for the PS3, hence the reported "10 year" lifespan. 5-6 years is the typical wait time for a new system and it should be that way. If they can release a next gen system for those who have the money to spend, then more power to them, as long as they can keep the PS3 titles and features fresh for those who would rather wait. Heck there are still tons of people who have no plans on buying into HD in the next 2 years.

A PS3-PS4 transistion will be much different than the PS2-PS3 transition was. Many aspects of the PS3 can be built upon. Customers have been introduced to an online community and a multimedia online store. This is a foundation that can be built upon, rather than abandoned for a new one. They just have to make sure that the PSN account transition is seamless and that they don't make the mistake of not providing backwards compatibilty with PS3 games (I should be able to log into thet PSN with my PS4 and have access to all PS3 and PS4 titles, but if I decide to log in with my PS3, I obviously will only have access to PS3 titles). In regards to hardware, there probably won't be a need for a new laser design, as I don't see blu ray being succeeded in the near future. Unless they can incorporate faster read times. And it's also possible that the shift may be from hard disc to online only anyway.

Gaming is dead(not a polished enthusiast driven hobby its now a wanky brand/trend focused mainstream crap fest.... )

Anyway whatever the POS3 dose hardware wise it needs to have more ramm,less bottle necks and for gods sake better software kits to make ti easier to develop for...


Oh and if the POS4 comes out before 014 the game industry is dead to me....

that's just stupid, but its Sony. developers have just gotten the hang of the whole learning curve. now there telling us that it was fun but you learned all that for nothing piss on sony i hope they die a slow painful death.

the DOD is really going to love this, maybe that's why they bought all those PS3 just for the cell processor alone.

Originally posted by Clownzill:

---

I have to agree with av_verbal when it comes to playing newer games. There will be some games that won't make it on a 7 year old system but there are still plenty of new games that will. That said, I like my games at max thus I tend to play "older" games on my 5 year old system. I'm just getting around to playing Far Cry and I have to say that it's not "cutting edge" but it's still pretty good, fun, and most importantly less than $5. I still can't comprehend how people pay $40-$60 for a video game. I just let the fanfare of the new games die and pick them up when their not "cool" anymore. If I'm paying more than $25 for a game (and at $25 it better be a GREAT game) then I'm paying too much.

---

Yeah, I'm doing something different this time with video games. The Gamecube, PS2, Xbox, and Dreamcast generation all have good enough graphics for me. Playing the newest games isn't really a big deal to me anymore. So used games for those system mostly all come in at under $10, and the systems themselves all are under $100. I'll just enjoy them and then pick up the wii, 360, and PS3 whenever the next nintendo, microsoft and sony consoles come out.

Originally posted by DXR88:

---

that's just stupid, but its Sony. developers have just gotten the hang of the whole learning curve. now there telling us that it was fun but you learned all that for nothing piss on sony i hope they die a slow painful death.

the DOD is really going to love this, maybe that's why they bought all those PS3 just for the cell processor alone.

---

The Slim PS3 already no longer allows doing what the DoD is doing with them anyway, so it doesn't matter what Sony does from here on as far as they're concerned.

@atomicxl
Well said!!!

What really happens is developers (due to time constraints) really TRY to push their titles to all 3 consoles (or 2 sometimes in the case of CoDMW2), but the PS3 is just a whole new programming paradigm. It is like learning Lisp after learning C. Totally different schools of thought.

Moving to another CPU will be cheaper and it will be easier for programmers to make sure that their titles will utilise all the power in the consoles. Now who has the most cores may have just a little bit more power than the rest of the consoles, but not a lot. And regardless, you hardly ever program multi-core/multi-CPU/threaded applications by manually specifying how many cores are present. That is up to runtime (or compile-time depending on the architecture).

Most of the time right now, developers are using internal (or publicly available) tools to write code in one language and then that will translate to PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii (where of course one of the biggest hurdles is making sure OpenGL/OpenGL-like and DirectX (360) operations are as close as possible alike). I sometimes see PS3 graphics as worse then 360, and really Wii ALWAYS needs the dumbing down of graphics operations and texture sizes if the game is supposed to run similarly on it as compared to other consoles. Same for PS2.

You can see the power of the PS3 in certain games though. It is definitely there, and it seems to be only when the game is a PS3 exclusive.

For me, PS3 is expensive altogether. And I already have my 360. It seems most of the big titles come out for every console nowadays, so it is no loss like owning an Xbox back in the day or owning a Nintendo 64 back when PSX was dominant (but saturated with lots of crap too).

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.

But what are they upgrading from.. oh yes.. a 20 year old 8088 cluster built into a mainframe.. good use of taxpayer dollars there buying tech from the sneaky enemy. The big question to my mind is why they decided to buy these damn things.. are they looking at possibilities for taliban supercomputers built at home, or do they just like playing final fantasy (I prefer the second pink option.. we know the army is stuffed full of geeks and dubious gamers.. don't ask, don't tell)

Anyhow *yawns* .. like it is important? .. console gaming is pretty much dead in the water in the next couple of years.. better pc's and big tv's with vga etc inputs.. say goodbye to these dinosaurs with their dead end cpu tech and miniscule amounts of ram.

meh....pc gaming makes me sleepy. I spent $1,200 on a new rig this year for HD video encoding and a variety of other purposes. I can play practically any game at the highest settings. I can't name one that I've played in the last year more than 10 minutes. Even multi-plats, I've enjoyed more on consoles. And devs have wised up, releasing the PC version of multi-plat games months after the console version. Who knows how outdated my PC will be in 5 years. But I can tell you that I'm not looking upgrade any components. I did my research and it was a nightmare trying to find the perfect components with drivers that worked with Windows. And I still had problems with 8 months with video drivers until updates finally worked.

Console gaming will not die. It's a different feel. It's a separate machine with specs you don't need to upgrade. I wouldn't want to be in a situation where I couldn't play a game because my PC was running an important overnight task, and I wouldn't build a PC just for gaming. I know people who would, and they are in their own class. Also, I don't want my kids asking me to get off the PC so that they can play their game. As long as you have families with kids, console gaming will live.

Exclusives keep consoles alive. The handful of Sony exclusives have impressed me and have held my attention for months at a time. Heck, if a console can release a killer exclusive every 3-4 months, I would no longer be wanting in the game department. So far most value-adding dlc for exclusives have been free, available via updates.

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.

---

I agree with the first part and as well with the more ram would be beneficial but only in part ~ because while yes more ram is "good", having quality is overall better than just having more...i.e. XDR over standard off the shelf stuff.

Remember, the PS3 has 4 times the internal bandwidth, twice the memory bandwidth and much faster ram than it's closest competitive counterpart. Combine that with how fast the Cell crunches data and you really aren't hampered by 512mb ram in the PS3 (if utilized properly), Killzone 2, Uncharted 1 & 2, MAG and quite a few others prove this. Here is a short article about the PS3's ram.

On topic though, I am a bit worried about the next gen of PS product because of 2 things. Ken Kutaragi is not at Sony anymore (the father of Playstation) and the design/architecture of all the PS consoles have always been his "brainchild" and since he is not there currently it concerns/bothers me...which leads me into the second thing ~ Without Kutaragi to envision a very powerful system that has scalable constantly improving possibilities, will the next PS be nothing more than "just" powerful from the start thus causing a bit of stagnation & laziness because there won't really be a pushing of the boundaries/learning curve if it uses some sort of easy to code for tech?

That has always been the PS's strongest card. To always give more than what the others do & give...so if they "settle" for tech that is off the shelf then how are they going to do the same & offer the same as every PS has in the past?

Quote:

---

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.

---

I agree with the first part and as well with the more ram would be beneficial but only in part ~ because while yes more ram is "good", having quality is overall better than just having more...i.e. XDR over standard off the shelf stuff.

Remember, the PS3 has 4 times the internal bandwidth, twice the memory bandwidth and much faster ram than it's closest competitive counterpart. Combine that with how fast the Cell crunches data and you really aren't hampered by 512mb ram in the PS3 (if utilized properly), Killzone 2, Uncharted 1 & 2, MAG and quite a few others prove this. Here is a short article about the PS3's ram.

On topic though, I am a bit worried about the next gen of PS product because of 2 things. Ken Kutaragi is not at Sony anymore (the father of Playstation) and the design/architecture of all the PS consoles have always been his "brainchild" and since he is not there currently it concerns/bothers me...which leads me into the second thing ~ Without Kutaragi to envision a very powerful system that has scalable constantly improving possibilities, will the next PS be nothing more than "just" powerful from the start thus causing a bit of stagnation & laziness because there won't really be a pushing of the boundaries/learning curve if it uses some sort of easy to code for tech?

That has always been the PS's strongest card. To always give more than what the others do & give...so if they "settle" for tech that is off the shelf then how are they going to do the same & offer the same as every PS has in the past?

---

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.....

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.

Originally posted by kyo28:

---

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.

---

Exactly. Additionally there is also a new AA technique that has been tried in the game Saboteur which even in it's infancy is EXTREMELY promising...quote from article ~

Quote:

---

The PS3 rendition of Pandemic's The Saboteur is different though. It's special. It's trying something new that's never been seen before on console, or indeed PC, and its results are terrific. In a best-case scenario you get edge-smoothing that is beyond the effect of 16x multi-sampling anti-aliasing, effectively delivering an effect better than the capabilities of high-end GPUs without crippling performance.

---

Source

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...

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.

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.....

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.

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.

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....

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?

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.

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.

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?

Quote:

---

OMG spot the fanboys!

---

Where?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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..

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.

Max resolution is 1080P as in 1920x1080 progressive.

the maximum limit for PC is only defined by the monitor and that limit is 3280×2048 WQSXGA

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.

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....

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.

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.

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.

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....

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.

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*

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.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

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.

---

I'm drawing a blank on the game but I should have been more clear in my explanation in that I was implying the games as a whole (physics, size, story, sound & etc PLUS graphics...not just graphics)

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

and uhg your going to make me reply to all of these :P

---

Yes I am ;)

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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....

---

But that does not fall in line with the timeline you said earlier as I quoted/explained earlier (and below in the next quote)?.?.? But I understand what you mean to an extent now as it would be their only choice though I believe it would ultimately do more harm for them and their customers than good if they did.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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.

---

I agree. Which is the model that Sony has followed...at least in the beginning with the 20, 60 & early 80 gb models though I am sure they would have the data to show BWC (while wanted by most if not all) probably doesn't get used as much as people think. Thus the removal of that feature to aid in cost reduction later on was probably wise...even if only to make up some market share since they actually still support and sell a physical PS2 model. Plus there are still rumblings of Sony being able to offer this via software emulation in a FW. But we shall see.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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.........

---

I think if you re-read what I said, yoiu will understand my meaning is that there are no more bottle necks because they have the tools to work around it. I.E. ~ If they can easily work within the hardware at this current time, then it cannot be a "bottle neck" to them anymore as it was in the beginning. Got me? Or am I just doing/emulating a "Zippyism" ;P

Anyways I'll be back later as I have to re-install XP and all the ancillary crap because my 7 dual boot is losing HDD's & partitions plus my XP had already took a header into the abyss sometime during the confusion...God do I hate Microsoft ;)...I really hope Google's OS is acceptable. If not, to hell with them too!

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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.

---

The PS3 is doing well enough but frankly if they didnt screw up so much they would have done alot more by now. I can't say the same 360 as most of issues are triaiarty and more annoying than the slow down choices made for the PS3 but ya I am begin fickle and nitpicky.

I really do wish to see the best done with both the 360 seems to be dieing a slow death while the PS3 can't get over itself. If the WII had save states and cheats for the GC and VC stuff I'd probably like it the most despite the under developed control setup.......

Originally posted by Oner:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

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.

---

I'm drawing a blank on the game but I should have been more clear in my explanation in that I was implying the games as a whole (physics, size, story, sound & etc PLUS graphics...not just graphics)

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

and uhg your going to make me reply to all of these :P

---

Yes I am ;)

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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....

---

But that does not fall in line with the timeline you said earlier as I quoted/explained earlier (and below in the next quote)?.?.? But I understand what you mean to an extent now as it would be their only choice though I believe it would ultimately do more harm for them and their customers than good if they did.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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.

---

I agree. Which is the model that Sony has followed...at least in the beginning with the 20, 60 & early 80 gb models though I am sure they would have the data to show BWC (while wanted by most if not all) probably doesn't get used as much as people think. Thus the removal of that feature to aid in cost reduction later on was probably wise...even if only to make up some market share since they actually still support and sell a physical PS2 model. Plus there are still rumblings of Sony being able to offer this via software emulation in a FW. But we shall see.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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.........

---

I think if you re-read what I said, yoiu will understand my meaning is that there are no more bottle necks because they have the tools to work around it. I.E. ~ If they can easily work within the hardware at this current time, then it cannot be a "bottle neck" to them anymore as it was in the beginning. Got me? Or am I just doing/emulating a "Zippyism" ;P

Anyways I'll be back later as I have to re-install XP and all the ancillary crap because my 7 dual boot is losing HDD's & partitions plus my XP had already took a header into the abyss sometime during the confusion...God do I hate Microsoft ;)...I really hope Google's OS is acceptable. If not, to hell with them too!

---

I know I know either way the 360 can manage well enough but the way things go I'd like it out now(as in acouple years) with full BWC, support for 360 live for 5 years and full MP free with more features on the subscription plan. Also if they do it and launch it at a 350$ price point and leave it at 350$ for 5 years they will at least break break even. It can be done but they are going to build a more closed and controlled hardware/software environment and if they go lulzy with the hardware it might be their Saturn song.... I don;t know if MS could handle 3 or so years of slow sales like Sony did I don't think they are that patient and if they did they would widly rape it apart like Sony and the PS3.


I do not think the BWC was the best choice to take for sony since they invented proper BWC in the first place its left me quite pissed at them, well that and the hardware dickary and thinking a 800$ hard to code for console would sale well.... at least MS's was half the price for more fail...er....wahtever :P

IMO the PS3 lacks foresight and continuance and this annoys me the 360 just has bad hardware that's probably making it age faster than it should be, I mean with such hardware issues how can they fully push it to it max without luqiud cooling?.

Its crazy, both are messed up and opportunistic but even with that said I think Sony more or less has a better future path planed out, if the enxt box has open hardware and full BWC in any form out of the box they finally got over themselves and made the better system unless of coarse it has hardware that's worse than the PS3/360 0-o

Oh BTW whos fault is it for bringing in a console to a industry that can not adept to it well? I say its the console makers fault for biting off mroe than they can chew. And I still think that the ramm limtis the PS3 to much if it had twice the ramm I could see it lasting 8+ years as the main console before another comes out but the way it is I would be surprised if we do not see a new PS console out in 4-5 years.

I'd like to see more thought put into a full featured product that will last in 10 year cycles.

Originally posted by Oner:

---

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.

---

is this a serious post by a moderator on a supposed unbiased tech web site is it? omg!

Wii Dominates Amazon's 2009 Sales List 12/31/2009

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177479



Blu-ray players could top the Christmas list, but the format has a long way to go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...-christmas-list

Sales of Sony's premium product have disappointed so far, accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

Two years ago, Sony was brimming with confidence: in April 2007 it produced an internal presentation of sales projections which reckoned that by the end of 2009, 27m players would be in use, and 85m discs sold.

Blu-ray player sales have grown rapidly this year , but they still make up less than 12% of DVD player sales in western Europe, according to data released recently by the analysis company GfK Group.

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

snip

is this a serious post by a moderator on a supposed unbiased tech web site is it? omg!

Wii Dominates Amazon's 2009 Sales List 12/31/2009

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177479



Blu-ray players could top the Christmas list, but the format has a long way to go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...-christmas-list

Sales of Sony's premium product have disappointed so far, accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

Two years ago, Sony was brimming with confidence: in April 2007 it produced an internal presentation of sales projections which reckoned that by the end of 2009, 27m players would be in use, and 85m discs sold.

Blu-ray player sales have grown rapidly this year , but they still make up less than 12% of DVD player sales in western Europe, according to data released recently by the analysis company GfK Group.

---

Meh everyone has a bias those that are good with word and letter are either cable at explaining it away or hiding it, I'd rather them explain it than hide it.

BR is growing and more so than LD and VCD and anything that came after VHS and before DVD. BR needs another year or 2 to get decent low cost (sub 70$) players out as the main player line up that with supporting DVD in their BR releases in 5 to 10 years DVD will be where VHS is.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

snip

is this a serious post by a moderator on a supposed unbiased tech web site is it? omg!

Wii Dominates Amazon's 2009 Sales List 12/31/2009

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177479



Blu-ray players could top the Christmas list, but the format has a long way to go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...-christmas-list

Sales of Sony's premium product have disappointed so far, accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

Two years ago, Sony was brimming with confidence: in April 2007 it produced an internal presentation of sales projections which reckoned that by the end of 2009, 27m players would be in use, and 85m discs sold.

Blu-ray player sales have grown rapidly this year , but they still make up less than 12% of DVD player sales in western Europe, according to data released recently by the analysis company GfK Group.

---

Meh everyone has a bias those that are good with word and letter are either cable at explaining it away or hiding it, I'd rather them explain it than hide it.

BR is growing and more so than LD and VCD and anything that came after VHS and before DVD. BR needs another year or 2 to get decent low cost (sub 70$) players out as the main player line up that with supporting DVD in their BR releases in 5 to 10 years DVD will be where VHS is.

---

as my post stated Blu-Ray grown rapidly this year but has a long way to go.

imo mr/mrs zippy a site that is supposedly a news site, should enforce objective rules.

Subjective news sites are fan/rhetoric/agenda/propaganda/advertising/etc sites, are they not?

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

snip

is this a serious post by a moderator on a supposed unbiased tech web site is it? omg!

Wii Dominates Amazon's 2009 Sales List 12/31/2009

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177479



Blu-ray players could top the Christmas list, but the format has a long way to go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...-christmas-list

Sales of Sony's premium product have disappointed so far, accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

Two years ago, Sony was brimming with confidence: in April 2007 it produced an internal presentation of sales projections which reckoned that by the end of 2009, 27m players would be in use, and 85m discs sold.

Blu-ray player sales have grown rapidly this year , but they still make up less than 12% of DVD player sales in western Europe, according to data released recently by the analysis company GfK Group.

---

Meh everyone has a bias those that are good with word and letter are either cable at explaining it away or hiding it, I'd rather them explain it than hide it.

BR is growing and more so than LD and VCD and anything that came after VHS and before DVD. BR needs another year or 2 to get decent low cost (sub 70$) players out as the main player line up that with supporting DVD in their BR releases in 5 to 10 years DVD will be where VHS is.

---

@ Zippy & av_verbal ~ It is widely known I prefer the PS3 over my 360 (especially since it has broken on me 5 times) and over my Wii because there are no quality titles on it or I have played them all (whatever there are).

@ av_verbal Either way I have a RIGHT to voice my opinion about ANY product I buy/own, especially one as faulty as the 360. If people consider that me being "biased" or whatever, it still doesn't matter as being unbiased was never a pre-requisite when I came aboard. Considering I have done more than enough to actually HELP EVERYONE with their console issues from PS, Wii & Xbox modding through to helping fix DRE's on PS2's & RROD's on Xbox 360's. Just because you don't see it nor want to believe it does not mean it never happened. The only gripe I have with your point about BD av_verbal is you state

Quote:

---

accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

---

I don't claim the US and/or NPD to be the be all end all when making a point so to single out the EU as the definitive descriptor for how BD stands is a bit limited in my opinion. No matter how you slice it BD is following the same foot steps as DVD way back when and if it continues the same way it will do just fine. Again let me reiterate though ~ 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") or maybe at least not for quite a long while, ultimately.


Edit:

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

imo mr/mrs zippy a site that is supposedly a news site, should enforce objective rules.

Subjective news sites are fan/rhetoric/agenda/propaganda/advertising/etc sites, are they not?

---

aD is more than JUST a "News Site" and last I checked, under the News discussion link it states ~

Quote:

---

Read what our users have said about news articles published on our news section and feel free to participate too.

---

So please discuss...

Originally posted by Oner:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

snip

is this a serious post by a moderator on a supposed unbiased tech web site is it? omg!

Wii Dominates Amazon's 2009 Sales List 12/31/2009

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177479



Blu-ray players could top the Christmas list, but the format has a long way to go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...-christmas-list

Sales of Sony's premium product have disappointed so far, accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

Two years ago, Sony was brimming with confidence: in April 2007 it produced an internal presentation of sales projections which reckoned that by the end of 2009, 27m players would be in use, and 85m discs sold.

Blu-ray player sales have grown rapidly this year , but they still make up less than 12% of DVD player sales in western Europe, according to data released recently by the analysis company GfK Group.

---

Meh everyone has a bias those that are good with word and letter are either cable at explaining it away or hiding it, I'd rather them explain it than hide it.

BR is growing and more so than LD and VCD and anything that came after VHS and before DVD. BR needs another year or 2 to get decent low cost (sub 70$) players out as the main player line up that with supporting DVD in their BR releases in 5 to 10 years DVD will be where VHS is.

---

@ Zippy & av_verbal ~ It is widely known I prefer the PS3 over my 360 (especially since it has broken on me 5 times) and over my Wii because there are no quality titles on it or I have played them all (whatever there are).

@ av_verbal Either way I have a RIGHT to voice my opinion about ANY product I buy/own, especially one as faulty as the 360. If people consider that me being "biased" or whatever, it still doesn't matter as being unbiased was never a pre-requisite when I came aboard. Considering I have done more than enough to actually HELP EVERYONE with their console issues from PS, Wii & Xbox modding through to helping fix DRE's on PS2's & RROD's on Xbox 360's. Just because you don't see it nor want to believe it does not mean it never happened. The only gripe I have with your point about BD av_verbal is you state

Quote:

---

accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

---

I don't claim the US and/or NPD to be the be all end all when making a point so to single out the EU as the definitive descriptor for how BD stands is a bit limited in my opinion. No matter how you slice it BD is following the same foot steps as DVD way back when and if it continues the same way it will do just fine. Again let me reiterate though ~ 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") or maybe at least not for quite a long while, ultimately.


Edit:

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

imo mr/mrs zippy a site that is supposedly a news site, should enforce objective rules.

Subjective news sites are fan/rhetoric/agenda/propaganda/advertising/etc sites, are they not?

---

aD is more than JUST a "News Site" and last I checked, under the News discussion link it states ~

Quote:

---

Read what our users have said about news articles published on our news section and feel free to participate too.

---

So please discuss...

---

I love it when you take sides gives me a chance to toss some spit balls, its only a shame my trollish hate for everything dose not work on everything :P

This might sound funny but I think the 360 has done well greater than the PS3, simply because the PS3 has better world wide backing despite its slow start when the optimizations get to middle ware devs in acouple years more and more games will shine on the PS3 as they should(well should have years ago but whos counting :P). The 360has done all it could really and its done damn well considering all tis faults and return to mostly twitch gaming.... uhg MS should treat the 360 as a extension to the PC(windows OS) already >>

Quote:

---

Blu-ray players could top the Christmas list, but the format has a long way to go

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...-christmas-list

Sales of Sony's premium product have disappointed so far, accounting for just 12% of DVD player sales in Europe

Two years ago, Sony was brimming with confidence: in April 2007 it produced an internal presentation of sales projections which reckoned that by the end of 2009, 27m players would be in use, and 85m discs sold.

Blu-ray player sales have grown rapidly this year , but they still make up less than 12% of DVD player sales in western Europe, according to data released recently by the analysis company GfK Group.

---

What a giant speculative article that is, imo, biased. In April 2007, the world was not in the biggest recession since the Great Depression. Quantitative easing has helped move the world's stock markets and kept banks from failing, but how many consumers saw a raise this year from their jobs? Hell, how many people lost their jobs in Western Europe and the States? Exactly.

Additionally, Blu-ray is selling better than DVD did in its first years. Granted, Blu-ray over upscaled DVD is not as great a jump in quality as was DVD over VHS but anyone who does not see the quality difference is kidding themselves or has frankly never tried Blu-ray. I have only seen a few upscaled DVDs that come even close to Blu-ray (usually Wes Anderson movies).

I will take the opposite stance of Oner here and say that in 2012 (or before), Blu-ray will have the controlling stake in market share (50%+) over DVD, despite the Great Recession and other factors.

Originally posted by DVDBack23:

---

Blu-ray will have the controlling stake in market share (50%+) over DVD, despite the Great Recession and other factors.

---

I agree DVDBack23.

A little off topic but since someone opened the door on percentages and Blu-ray:

District 9 generated 41% first-week sales on Blu-ray.

Some additional Blu-ray milestones:

>Blu-ray just set another revenue record of $86 M following a $80 M week.

>That during the last 5 weeks Blu-ray has met or exceeded the best week of 2008 , The Dark Knight, by substantial margins.

(WE 12/14/08 = $47 M, last 6 weeks $41 M, $47 M, $69 M, $47M, $80 M, $86 M)


>That in the last 5 weeks, Blu-ray did more revenues than it did during the entire 2005 2006 2007 high definition optical disc format war with HD DVD.

(Blu-ray revenue through 2006 and 2007 was $307 M, the last five weeks are $329 M for Blu-ray)


>That in the last three months of this year, Blu-ray will have done more than it did in all of 2008?

(4QTD $543 M, EOY2008 $531 M)


>Blu-ray has done at least double what it did in 2008 revenue wise and is now a billion dollar industry.

(YTD2009 is $1194.42 M, EOY2008 $531.80 M)

Discussion on the data here:

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/high-def...rs-etc-263.html

Thank You Toshi. For the life of me I could not find the data that I have read through over the last 3 months or so online. It's appreciated.

@ DVDBack ~ I agree and that is exactly my point I have been trying to portray here. When you really start to look at the rise & trend BD is taking/following it sure does look damned good respectively, I just still have this feeling it's going to be hard for the bulk of the masses to really let go of DVD because of price and the penetration it has...although in this case that "feeling" is not something based off of all the info and rationale BD sales are showing to me/us, but in all honesty, it really wouldn't bother being proven wrong in this situation ;P

before all you sales reps go crazy this is what i posted.

Quote:

---

Blu-Ray grown rapidly this year but has a long way to go.

---

news is objective if not its marketing, propaganda, rhetoric, etc.

so afterdawn is dead then, just another fan site for slating the 360 while promoting the PS3.

Anyway back on topic after the moderator oner is happy for this thread to descend into a 360 slagging match, i wander if anyone will be banned as he has done on many other threads or is it only people that criticise sony who get banned?

my original post on the 1st page stated:

Quote:

---

BTW back on topic didn't IBM state a couple of months ago that the Cell processor line is at an evolutionary dead end & killed it?

---

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

before all you sales reps go crazy this is what i posted.

Quote:

---

Blu-Ray grown rapidly this year but has a long way to go.

---

news is objective if not its marketing, propaganda, rhetoric, etc.

so afterdawn is dead then, just another fan site for slating the 360 while promoting the PS3.

Anyway back on topic after the moderator oner is happy for this thread to descend into a 360 slagging match, i wander if anyone will be banned as he has done on many other threads or is it only people that criticise sony who get banned?

my original post on the 1st page stated:

Quote:

---

BTW back on topic didn't IBM state a couple of months ago that the Cell processor line is at an evolutionary dead end & killed it?

---

---

Criticism=complaining, if not done with respect,tact and humor you will get banned because no one wants to hear your broken whiny record.

It also helps to kiss ass as much as you can while you do a bit of back stabing....oh wait that didnt come out right =0-o=

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

Anyway back on topic after the moderator oner is happy for this thread to descend into a 360 slagging match, i wander if anyone will be banned as he has done on many other threads or is it only people that criticise sony who get banned?

---

And right on Que there is always someone who has to take it to a personal level instead of just having a simple discussion. THAT is where people get lost in translation...You can get banned for personal insults and slights that are uncalled for. Not for proving me or anyone wrong (which you haven't done I might add). And THAT is what you are all pissy about ~ being proven wrong or corrected in your information and not being able to do the same to me/others.

P.S. ~ it's not like I didn't warn people or didn't see this one coming (as usual)

Quote:

---

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.

---

P.P.S. ~ and if you REALLY want to be accurate you were the first person that brought the 360 into this conversation in the 3rd post down

Originally posted by av_verbal:

---

before all you sales reps go crazy this is what i posted.

Quote:

---

Blu-Ray grown rapidly this year but has a long way to go.

---

news is objective if not its marketing, propaganda, rhetoric, etc.

so afterdawn is dead then, just another fan site for slating the 360 while promoting the PS3.

Anyway back on topic after the moderator oner is happy for this thread to descend into a 360 slagging match, i wander if anyone will be banned as he has done on many other threads or is it only people that criticise sony who get banned?

---

So basically your argument is that this article isn't about the 360??? GOOD argument! ;-)

By the way, if you actually look at most console-related articles on this site, you'd see they're actually more skewed in favor of the 360. Just because a moderator is backing up the PS3 (in a solely PS-related article!) doesn't mean THE SITE is inherently biased in that direction. And calling people fanboys when you yourself are one is quite hypocritical.

folowing sonys trend the title should read:sony considering Quantum processor for ps4.

Why do news outlets always misinterpret the 10 year life cycle?

It does not mean 10 full years before the next system. It means that Sony will support the console for at least 10 years.

Originally posted by NeoandGeo:

---

Why do news outlets always misinterpret the 10 year life cycle?

It does not mean 10 full years before the next system. It means that Sony will support the console for at least 10 years.

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

I don't think it was misinterpreted. It is interesting that in the 3rd year it's being considered. It's expected that Sony will continue to support the PS3. Dropping it would be foolish. Sony's history of support for the PS2 shows this. Both the 360 and PS3 have much larger and more intricate online systems/communities established than their predecessors did. It would be equally as intersting to see what MS does. They took a lot of heat for abandoning the XBOX 1 completely.