Ken Kutaragi - PS3 Hardware Upgrade Possible

For serious...

Next year what will be my media hub...etc??? Well considering my media hub right now is my vista media server (i have had the ctp build for several weeks as an msdn programmer go and get it now if you want to do the public beta), and using xbox360 as my player on whatever TV in the house i want to use it on for music or video.

So i assume this time next year it will still be vista and i will still be using my $399.99 x360 to play all of it on. Why wait for sony's promises when you can have it now for cheaper and with more functionality between different non sony equipment.

I don't think that is the case. Nobody is going to ditch their PS2 because the PS3 plays MP3s or movies. Some people who were looking to buy a PS3 may decide to get a 360 instead, in which case they will probably hang on to their PS2 so they can continue to play the games they do now. In either case Sony's overall share doesn't budge an inch. At least not until people do get rid of their PS2s.

Another day, another Sony bit of dumb thinking. While the media hub biz looks attractive most folk don't care for it. This thinking isn't gonna capture the people who bought the PS0ne and PS2.

Focus Sony muppets, no bloody movies and crap, just the damn games.

it's a computer now!!??
WTF!!

Nevermind focus Joji. I think if Sony was a person they'd be showing the first signs of demetia.
They really don't seem to know what direction they are going anymore. Is this just an excuse to cover up the high pricetag and not a genuine lack of direction?

I like consoles because I don't have to stick in a new video card every third week. Sony is trying to go in a new direction, thats fine, but... Their whole Playstation thing as a games console seemed to work in the past. Not exactly sure why they want to start changing that. They had most of the market with the PS2 and PS1, why not use the same formula and continue with the success. So like what...

$600 - PS3
$140 - 2 games
$??? - Upgrades.

Really, thats over a grande. Their missing the market of your mainstream teenager who buys NFL every year.

If Sony manages to pull off an ass kicking this time around, I'll eat a Dualshock.

If i wanted a media center i'd buy a windows xp compatible media center.Adding an already established DVD component and succeeding is one thing, and trying to establish your own format by attaching it on your console in hope that it will sell as many as your previous generation is tottaly different. UMD anyone? lol

Having upgrades in mind, the mainstream PC market where media centers draw their components is a lot more comfortable for my pocket and poses as a more realistic, safe and open choice than a specialized sony component that works for sony alone and would certainly be as overpriced as ps3 itself.

If they really want to "save" themselves they better come out with a low cost PS3 with simple DVD on it. If they want to have a chance to dominate in the same way PS2 did.

As for comparing with dell lol what can i say ...are they saying they'll try to take dell's or even worse PC market as well now? lol

Sony's thinking is definitely funny.At least i give them credit for amusing us with pure next gen humor :D

You want opinions, I'll bite.

This is something I advocated for years, for the PC Xbox. But this is not so useful for the PS3, or the Xbox 360, as they are more custom. With PC technology, it is developed and subsidised by the PC industry, it surpassed the console tech fairly quickly last cycle. With the console industry you are outlaying a lot of cost and time to develop custom solutions likely to only stay ahead of leading edge PC technology for 1 to 2 years. The problem with the PC is their are so many configurations to support, or produce trouble and inefficiencies. Using this technique in a console, does not pose as great a problem as it first seems. In a xbox like console you could upgrade the hardware once a year after the first 2 years, get higher performance while reducing power and size factors and pull ahead of the custom competitions illogical and totally stultifying seven year cycle. The reason it's not such a problem, is instead of supporting hundreds of configurations, the configuration is locked down to one a year after the first two year run, with a totally new model at five years, so only four locked down targets have to be accommodated. You could also have a universal API virtual engine, so that if the developer so wishes they only need to do one (most non cutting edge games do not require more), or two, either the most popular or recent hardware configuration, plus a universal one for the rest.

For the Playstation 3, they have been talking of going to media centre and the rest since before the PS2, and talking of PC aspirations since then, it is no surprise. So, it is good for improving the functionality and interfaces each year, this year the fabled much cheaper Media centre, then computer, and keep upgrading with the latest bits over it's ten year cycle. But as well, they could change the GPU and add a faster and larger cell array. even some of the PC add ons meant to compete with the cell. So yes, it is a good idea.

MS was reportedly designing a Xbox PC, this has disappeared, and the Power PC based 360 does not help, unless they aim to go to 360 based, Power, PC's. Their is suggestions of more Microsoft branded hardware products (I forget what the latest was this week). This should worry the PC industry like absolutely mad, what do they do if MS produces it's own PC's, with an xbox PC able to take any consumer market it is placed in by storm? Where do vendors go to, if there is no market under 500 pounds for their hardware, or an updated MS OS, Linux?

I'm not a developer and I don't have a PC powerful enough for XP, so WTF are you on about?

Why would anyone ever want to upgrade from 2k to Vis(as)ta?

Thanks for your insight.

The reason why consoles work is because they are based on a fixed internal system with a fixed instruction set. This does not lock out all of the i/o (inputs and outputs), from controllers, to media inputs(dvd, HD-dvd, usb etc), but the system itself is contained and controlled.

Why would would a game company want to allocate resources to releasing 4 different iterations of a single game for a single system (with multiple hardware configs). This would require 4 times the beta testing, 4 times the amount of post patching, 4 times the amount of support, and still not a single version would totally optimize the exact hardware.

Your statement is retarded and is one of the problems with PC gaming. I am a PC gamer, but no i cannot expect every game to run flawlessly on my system without doing some optimizations.

Listen and learn, and I'm sure there are a few users left that didn't upgrade from 2K to XP as well. Like it or not, even XP will probably become dated (when we get 2GB machines). I've even got Geoworks around here that could also be useful for 2K users if they don't want to upgrade.

I deal with retarded people all the time when I post, they are usual self opinionated barely able to string facts together, let alone recognise them.

A bit of advanced thought, and fact stringing, reveals, that the hardware differences are only a small part of the equation in software development, that is why they invented "computer languages" and those other funny things you may not be entirely aware of, called firmware, and a C.o.m.p.u.t.e.r O.p.e.r.a.t.i.n.g S.y.s.t.e.m. that smooth out programming for hardware differences. Apart from this they have libraries and A>P>Is to perform similar functions where greater hardware differences are there. Lets string some further facts, 80 to 90% of coding usually can be made hardware independent, with optimised libraries and APIs covering the rest. As you are working with common language, firmware, operating systems and APIs, very little time has to be spent on the ten percent+ of code that requires full speed or optimisation. Coding is only a small part of production, the rest being other things like Design, sound, graphic and overheads. Now days more than 10% of games might be cutting edge in performance, and a few tittles when the PS3 initially gets released, mostly though, 80-90% of games wouldn't be, so the performance difference makes even less of a difference in those cases. Given that they will broadly retain the same instruction set, large portions of optimised machine code can remain virtually untouched, so optimisations further come down to the code actually handling different hardware. For the majority of those hardware differences, an API can do the job very pre-optimised in itself. So you are left with only a limited amount of cases, and machine code that needs to be uniquely optimised. I have described a streamlined design and production process. Of course, if you design/program this programming system like a moron, you will stuff all this up. If you program this system like a moron, you won't get the full benefit from it, but this is what happens already with single configurations.

So, most of the time it just won't matter that there are 4 configurations, the effort, time and money to incorporate them is relatively small (especially compared to hundreds/thousands of PC configurations) with them pre-optimised for the handful of configurations. It is called proper software management, which is beyond even most programmers, but why there are people out there to manage this.

I sure hope you now, know what you are talking about in the future.

I *read* and din't learn a thing, because you completely neglected to answer my question. Maybe you're too self-absorbed to read what I wrote, so I'll try again;

why would anyone want/need to upgrade from XP (or even 2k) to Vista?

why would I need a 2GB machine, other than to support an overweight OS?

All your condescending diatribe about APIs, OSs, firmware etc etc doesn't explain how even with this magic stuff , PC games still suffer from cripling bugs with differenet harrdware.

Console games have bug - it's unavoidable. When you bring in 4 different configurations you increase the chances of bugs by at least 4 times.

and then you've got to look at the difficulty/cost/feasibility of coding for different levels of capability. It's the reason ps2 hardrive wasn't well supported - developers couldn't be bothered with the extra coding for a fragment of the market. Same will happen if there were 4 configs - the most popular would be the best supported by software. A killer app might boost a higher config, but the config owned by casual gamers would be the most most widespread.

At least the 2 PS3 configs don't offer any huge difference for developers, unlike the 360 configs.

This generation's console was will be won or lost on AAA developer support, although the numerous boastful comments coming from executive management are probably succeeding in drumming up interest in both platforms.

Thanks to Sega and Nintendo's failures (32X/Saturn/Dreamcast and N64), it should be clear to Sony that a system will live or die based on your developers' AAA-exclusive title. The audio and visual capabilities of the next generation of systems is not in doubt, since these systems can all claim life-like visuals at the highest resolution currently available in television technology (Unless OLED technology takes off, I don't forsee any real graphics wars in the distant future). Despite Nintendo's superb motion-sensing idea, I would be concerned since Sony is smart enough to have gone to great lengths to lock up more AAA exclusives than both Nintendo and Microsoft.

The Japanese aversion to the American system is, while at times a bit baffling, the main reason Microsoft has little chance of winning this generational war despite its early and (quite) successful launch. This leaves Nintendo and Sony to do battle, with Sony's terrible recent publicity track record going up against Nintendo's unwillingness to shell out risky amounts of money to lock up AAA third party support. In my opinion, Nintendo is looking to maximize profit without necessarily "winning" the generational wars while Sony and Microsoft feel the best way to maximize profit is to take care of maximizing market share first, suffocate the competition second and profit handsomely during the later years of the generation (a strategy Sony employed to unparalleled success with the PS2). Thanks to an excellent E3, Nintendo's almost ensured a profitable showing with the Wii and Sony is probably setting their sites on snuffing out Microsoft because they showed weakness not being able to penetrate the Japanese market.

Despite the $600 pricetag, Sony is positioning itself to continue its winning steak if they convince the 25-49 demograph to think along the lines of "I can justify the $600 because we can use the system to watch movies and burn exact copies of DVD's we rent thanks to some software that I found online with my amazing knowledge of the internet." The lame press releases are not accomplishing this for me, but the publicity doesn't really stick in my mind except when it is released during E3 and the pre-launch month. If enough upper middle class families and college graduates buy the PS3 during the initial launch, the resulting steady stream of Japanese, European and North American AAA titles (coupled with the price drop once the early-adopter phase is complete) will not present Nintendo with an opportunity to counterattack.

Should the PS3 launch fail due to the pricepoint or (more likely) being unable to weave itself into North American culture because it comes off as arrogantly Japanese, Nintendo could counterattack by focusing it's 3rd party campaign towards becoming the "Sports Console" to combat North American child obesity and eventually grabbing the overall lead in 3rd party AAA titles as parents lap up the reasonably priced console for their (perceived) out-of-shape children. Nintendo will have to grab exclusive third party support the hard way - by showing developers that their installed base is higher than Sony's - if they want to win the market share battle and this generation's war. I don't think Sony is as blundering as we make them out to be - ensuring strong third party support within the first year of launch is probably even more important than a strong advertising campaign thanks to the Playstation's strong culture image, although they really have to shut their traps until they have come up with a less elitist message.

'

Thanks way...you are still an idiot.

I am a software engineer. i did game programming fior about 2 years till i realized how little profit there is in independant game programming without securing a publisher...which then means I lose all creative freedom in my design.

If you knew the first thing about software design you would know as an industry wide fact that technical support for software is the most costly aspect of software design. Not programming, not art design, not game design, not anything else. Support by itself is the most costly aspect. This includes the beta testing and the bug fixing, and the bug patching, and the compatability testing and everything else that goes with shipping out a final product and then making sure said product continues to work on later hardware.

In a console you have a fixed system that relies on fixed components. This is why testing and support for consoles is so much cheaper then on computers. You think that because my computer has a directx 9c video card and is running xp, that BF2 should run flawlessly on my machine because it was written in dx9c. Wrong because I was using a soundblaster live32 audio card i was getting driver conflicts between the out of date sound card hardware not working properly with the latest direct sound release which is a part of the directx api. So I had to upgrade my sound card in order to enjoy BF2.

This is not the case with fixed consoles. When Ken is talking about upgrading the ps3, he is not talking about changing the fixed internals, he is talking about changing the I/O capability, such as video or sound outputs, Blu-ray upgrades etc.

You dont have a clue what you are talking about and there is no point to try to argue. You can reply all you want but i wont entertain your ignorance any more with any further responses.

Not that I plan on responding...but what exactly is a 2 gig machine??? Does that mean a 2 gig harddrive, 2 gigs of ram??? 2 gighz processor??? What an idiot.



There really was no compelling reason for gamers to upgrade from 2k to xp because MS released dx9 across both platforms. The reason to upgrade to vista is because only vista will support DX10 which all the new games will be using.

This whole thread is full of subsurface fanboyism, feeblemindedness and bad form...

Completely ignoring almost everything in this thread previous...

As long as Sony is talking about upgrading I/O components only, its really a non-issue...they're just peripherals, big freaking deal. More significant than removable face plates, but only just. The example mentioned, a Blu Ray recorder, affects a gaming purist only if he wants one.

If, however, they plan on upgrading capabilities more integral, and create a have/have not situation well, that would definitly tend to validate the "I bought a console specifically so I wouldn't have to put up with this s**te, you poxy bastards!" view.

As to comparing the difficulty of programming and suchlike, the difference between a few different console configurations, all produced and controlled under a central authority and the vast multituide of electronic mishmashes that call themselves PCs would be of a quantum nature. So, we have another non-issue. Unless it was some really stupid buggers doing the configurating, oh wait, this IS Sony...

The media hub bit is gonna be one of those things that just creeps up on your average consumer, sooner or later (perhaps much later) its going to feel like everone has one but them, and people who, if they thought about it at all, thought they'd never need one, will be buying whatever everyone else has, or (more likely) getting media hub functionality (wether they want it or not) included with their next PC.

p.s. I knew precisely what he meant by 2gig machine, you should have stopped just before the whole childish bit at the end...

p.p.s. don't bother replying to this...

jpohn,

Good take.

Sorry, we seem to have got our wires crossed with the other rude reply I got.



Means, who gives a stuff about anybody else or the facts, as it doesn't concern your machine. Plus, you emphasised it with a not so polite WTF. I have regularly given plenty of time in the past to repeatedly simplifying and explaining things to people that have to high an opinion of themselves, and low opinion of others and the truth, to read to understand, but would rather look just to dismiss. My explanation gave the reason, for the same reason XP is popular and if you want the best support, you will be forced to upgrade to Vista eventually as well. Unfortunately MS can do this to us, and still not offer a bug free product, and that is where the future lies. If you stick with 2K you will be stuck in a similar situation to Geoworks users eventually, with a lack of support and new games. It doesn't matter how good it is today things move on. So, it is a question with an obvious answer. Plus, eventually 2GB is going to be so cheap, as to make it an none objection, which is what MS is depending on. People objected that Windows 95 needed 32MB to run properly, and that Geoworks could do it less than 1MB (and better in most cases) but now who cares. Geoworks does not even support all the latest hardware. They also objected to XP, and the same fate as Geoworks is scheduled for 2K.

The rest of the stuff is more of an answer to the other rudely ignorant post. Don't just look at the replies, think about what is said.

I said this programming related stuff has to be done right, nobody is saying here that the PC was done right, but it is totally possible and reasonable to do a multi hardware platform programming system cheaply without a large amount of bugs, and in fact there are many game development systems that already do this. The problem is just how the PC is setup, wrongly, and there are hundreds to thousands of configurations messing this up. If it was done right new configurations would be handled almost automatically and be much less problem. Everything you know is a disillusionment of the PC industry, it is sub standard programming that is not regularly tolerated in the regular embedded and consumer electronics industry, which is why washing machine and fridges usually work better.

This child's games up.



Yes, I picked you for a salivating moron :). Experience is a poor substitute for ability, experience teaches you mistakes, ability helps you find solutions, and wisdom helps you determine which is which. You make the mistake, thinking you know it all before you have worked it out, and before you are able to work it out.

What did you develop for, on what machine were you developing, 2D platformers/race games on a PC, Pocket PC? Re-edit, read to the end, yep PC. I doubt that you worked on a single configuration platform, or the bigger games that require heaps of graphics sound and artwork, as well as motion capture. So which types of games are you talking about and which machine that needs this support, PC?

Maybe the ratio of code to graphics has changed in the last ten years, maybe the cross platform development systems took a step back.

Your examples are weak and empty and reflect something seriously wrong. You try to legitimise your arguments by including "beta testing and the bug fixing, and the bug patching, and the compatibility testing" but you should know, if you were taught properly, that they are all part of the programming process. I have been programming since the early 80's, I have been doing intricate complex OS design since the late 80's/early 90's with the aim to solve the issues we have been discussing. I have spent this time complementing and designing better and better ways of doing these things, and have learnt a lot more since the early 90's. I work at very deep design levels into these concepts. I have a bent interest in 100% game performance, efficiency and minimal programming. The original Taos OS, a contemporary of mine, claimed 80%+ speed of machine code in the early 90's for cross platform, and somewhat similar to very good C code. Please note, this is overall game performance, and certain critical sections of code could get even greater performance difference from machine code, and also not representative of a full OS system performance.

99% of software developers do not know how to design a system to properly reduce these issues, ideally OS companies and development tool makers, need to hire the other 1% to design systems to stream line the development work of the other 99%. Unfortunately the PC industry has a bad record at this, and lots of customisations and loose standardisations, which is why it is particularly stuffed, as you have discovered.

I know that most people might not have an idea, but it never ceases to amaze me that when you layout a blindly obvious improvements, they miss it. "oh, little boy, it doesn't work like that" instead of asking themselves what is being said, and making it work. What other people do is irrelevant to the limits of what can be done, unless they are already doing it, let alone a restricted example of what people do. If you don't want to think about it, I am not interested in replying.

Funny, you called me an idiot (well a few time) and yet you are the only one here that doesn't understand I mean 2GB, like what is being said in recent testing of vista with games (1 GB will also work apparently). I do not need to fill the gaps that much.

If you want to know the problem, you are not nice and have a big ego about it, rather then considering, thinking and listening. Unfortunately, while I have lots of time for nice people that I can talk with, that will consider themselves and what they think as well as what I do. But I have learned being nice to ignorant people that believe what they know defines the world is like p... in the wind, they respect themselves but not the truth. So, in future, I suggest being nice, courteous ("blah blah" and "retard" things are a dead give aways) and thinking about what is being said and where it can go, because it can go anywhere way past our experience.

Sorry I have been so tough on you, but certain things get under my skin, and I have had to courteously put up with a lot of rude people, who just usually turn out to be wrong and using reinterpretations of the facts.

The rest of your comments basically prove what I was saying. If properly organised 4 configurations only requires a fraction extra work compared to one configuration and less then the PC, or even 4 configurations through the windows OS in the older days. The latest MS windows game development system is supposed to be cross windows platform, but I don't know if it lives upto the hype yet. Look at Taos Intent/Elate2 Vos, my main competitors, for how seamless cross platform used to be done in the old days, when we all started (Oak/Java as well).

Save me Preciosue, save me, from these people!



I think Sony does, from previosue statements, oterhwise in ten years the PS3 could be like 64+ times less than the cutting edge.



Thanks, I think {:-)



I just saw a news release on something like a 40inch display panel with Media PC built in, poor Apple, lost the introduction of that one. Yes, I want one, maybe based on a PS3 though.