J Allard has broken down the directions that the big three hardware manufacturers seem to be taking for the next generation. Speaking to Eurogamer, he has responded to claims from Sony’s camp that the Xbox 360 is insufficiently future-proof, he challenged the assertion that the PS3 will dwarf the MS console in terms of graphical power. Pointing out that "...there's no special silicon that you can go and buy", he said that component costs and availability would make it impossible for any one system to be capable of performance that their competitors couldn’t very nearly match. He also suggested that Sony’s decision to use Blu-Ray discs might be a stumbling block in the run up to launch, opining that the use of this very new technology might lead to complications, as the drives would not be widely available and therefore expensive. Blu-Ray discs are able to hold up to 7 times as much data as a standard DVD.
Commenting that he had enjoyed the Sony tech demos of Motorsport and Killzone greatly, he said that he did not doubt that the new hardware would be capable of such feats, but that he dismissed that such quality would be seen in launch titles, "...in terms of theoretical performance, maybe five years out, maybe it's possible".
Microsoft’s entry to the console hardware game with the Xbox was accompanied by much bombast. It seemed to many that the software giant’s agenda was nothing less than to dominate the games industry in the same way that it dominates the arena of PC operating systems. But Allard’s stance is much more one of providing support and service for the many existing Xbox fans. Echoing the beliefs of many gamers, he said that he felt there was not much further for graphics to go, especially in terms of drawing in support from customers. "It's not the thing that's going to sell to the next 100 million people". As far as Microsoft’s edge went, he pointed to its online service, by far the best currently available to console owners.
Microsoft’s more modest, less bullish stance was further underlined by his explanation on why MS had not sought to make Quake 4 and Call of Duty 2 Xbox exclusives. "A ton of our gamers are dual gamers meaning that they have PC and console because they prefer some aspects of PC, especially in FPS's", he said. Well, quite.
J went on to say that, as a gamer, he was very excited by the fierce competition between the companies, and their various stances: "I think it's great that all three companies are all taking really different approaches and are bringing gaming to the next level in different ways. That's good. That's good for competition, that's good for the consumer, that's good for the industry", he said.
J Allard helming the development of the Xbox 360 is a Good Thing. Microsoft will remember that no console can be all things to all people. MS has carved out a niche for itself which it will wisely spend its time maintaining and slowly expanding. Nintendo, too, has many loyal fans, particularly in Japan. The Kyoto giant has also made it clear that a demographic they wish to explore is non-gamers. The Big N will wish to have something to offer the people in a household who still don’t use consoles despite having shared their home with one for years. Sony, with its impressive spec sheet and tech demos, was for many, the victor of this year’s E3. But as Allard says, "People don’t buy tech demos". Perhaps the PS3’s hand isn’t as strong as some think.
Commenting that he had enjoyed the Sony tech demos of Motorsport and Killzone greatly, he said that he did not doubt that the new hardware would be capable of such feats, but that he dismissed that such quality would be seen in launch titles, "...in terms of theoretical performance, maybe five years out, maybe it's possible".
Microsoft’s entry to the console hardware game with the Xbox was accompanied by much bombast. It seemed to many that the software giant’s agenda was nothing less than to dominate the games industry in the same way that it dominates the arena of PC operating systems. But Allard’s stance is much more one of providing support and service for the many existing Xbox fans. Echoing the beliefs of many gamers, he said that he felt there was not much further for graphics to go, especially in terms of drawing in support from customers. "It's not the thing that's going to sell to the next 100 million people". As far as Microsoft’s edge went, he pointed to its online service, by far the best currently available to console owners.
Microsoft’s more modest, less bullish stance was further underlined by his explanation on why MS had not sought to make Quake 4 and Call of Duty 2 Xbox exclusives. "A ton of our gamers are dual gamers meaning that they have PC and console because they prefer some aspects of PC, especially in FPS's", he said. Well, quite.
J went on to say that, as a gamer, he was very excited by the fierce competition between the companies, and their various stances: "I think it's great that all three companies are all taking really different approaches and are bringing gaming to the next level in different ways. That's good. That's good for competition, that's good for the consumer, that's good for the industry", he said.
J Allard helming the development of the Xbox 360 is a Good Thing. Microsoft will remember that no console can be all things to all people. MS has carved out a niche for itself which it will wisely spend its time maintaining and slowly expanding. Nintendo, too, has many loyal fans, particularly in Japan. The Kyoto giant has also made it clear that a demographic they wish to explore is non-gamers. The Big N will wish to have something to offer the people in a household who still don’t use consoles despite having shared their home with one for years. Sony, with its impressive spec sheet and tech demos, was for many, the victor of this year’s E3. But as Allard says, "People don’t buy tech demos". Perhaps the PS3’s hand isn’t as strong as some think.
Read More Like This
Comments
Showing the 20 most recent comments. Read all 27.
schnide 23 May 2005 23:05
8/27
Hi J! I like what you've done with your name there, taking away the rest of the letters like that. Unless you were of course christened with one initial, in which case I of course apologise.
So I see you've changed your hairstyle to try and hide your baldness, pumped a s**tload of money into your clothes and an MTV commercial, but let's take a look at what our most recent focus groups said about you!
Here's the message you should really let convey itself to you:
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
You get it? Yeah! Go team!
So I see you've changed your hairstyle to try and hide your baldness, pumped a s**tload of money into your clothes and an MTV commercial, but let's take a look at what our most recent focus groups said about you!
Here's the message you should really let convey itself to you:
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
YOU WILL NEVER BE COOL!
You get it? Yeah! Go team!
Radiant 24 May 2005 06:32
9/27
What IS his name anyway?
I spoke to some HR people who also did HR for MS who insisted on repeatedly calling him J. which bugged the hell out of me.
The big draw for the consumer to xbox is the online and multimedia hub aspect of it.
Halo did so much for the current gen of xbox as it pretty much introduced accessable (the Halo world/rules being introduced via the great single player) online play to people who had never played online before.
Halo is ctf/tdm for people who have never played online ctf/tdm before on a PC.
Now if MS bring some mighty mmorpgs to the console fraternity and bring it in a bigger, more organised way and with less barriers to entry then say a PSO (buy a PS BB adapter actually have an ethernet bb connection etc) they will essentially bring more advanced online play to people who have never tried a Planetside or WoW or Eve online.
Remember online console play is at least a generation behind PC online play.
Nintendos hardware is also bringing online play but if rumours are correct about their controllers being (part) touch screen they will be in a position to skip the generation of online console gaming they missed and come on strong with a close to PC advanced online experience (Sims, RTS, MMOPRGS using a similar mouse and keyboard/touchscreen multi menu setup).
Where Xbox trumps Nintendo is in the Multimedia/connectivity section.
If Nintendo can come out with great multimedia connectivity (and their yelling about wireless connectivity suggests that) out of the box (without relying on 3rd party play yan esque bolt ons) and at Nintendo usually great cheap price then I for one am completely sold on the Revolution.
This next gen contest isn't as clear cut as Microsoft would have you believe.
Allard though, is essentially correct.
If Sony persist in pushing developers to go for super high quality as their main USP then only a few developers would be able to afford the high dev cost to acheive that.
By correctly setting the consumers expectation MS and Nintendo are in a better position not to disappoint.
Anyway at the end of the day Sony has superb brand perception (the consumers perception of their brand) in built.
MS will have to continue to spunk countless dollars up the wall to increase it's brand perception in an effort to play catch up (and also explain why it's USPs benefit the consumer, something it has completely failed to do at this point including that MTV abortion).
In the face of this Nintendo doesnt have to sell as much for it's console to be a 'success' at the end of the financial year but at the same time will have to increase it's flagging consumer perception (as it's being seen by joe commonman as an also ran).
For me it's about cost and games and if Nintendo make their entire backcatalogue (nes snes N64) available for FREE like they have been hinting then I'm sold completely (think about the damn games on the N64 alone) if they also have multimedia connectivity (esp to a pc as a storage device) then I won't need to buy an xbox.
I spoke to some HR people who also did HR for MS who insisted on repeatedly calling him J. which bugged the hell out of me.
The big draw for the consumer to xbox is the online and multimedia hub aspect of it.
Halo did so much for the current gen of xbox as it pretty much introduced accessable (the Halo world/rules being introduced via the great single player) online play to people who had never played online before.
Halo is ctf/tdm for people who have never played online ctf/tdm before on a PC.
Now if MS bring some mighty mmorpgs to the console fraternity and bring it in a bigger, more organised way and with less barriers to entry then say a PSO (buy a PS BB adapter actually have an ethernet bb connection etc) they will essentially bring more advanced online play to people who have never tried a Planetside or WoW or Eve online.
Remember online console play is at least a generation behind PC online play.
Nintendos hardware is also bringing online play but if rumours are correct about their controllers being (part) touch screen they will be in a position to skip the generation of online console gaming they missed and come on strong with a close to PC advanced online experience (Sims, RTS, MMOPRGS using a similar mouse and keyboard/touchscreen multi menu setup).
Where Xbox trumps Nintendo is in the Multimedia/connectivity section.
If Nintendo can come out with great multimedia connectivity (and their yelling about wireless connectivity suggests that) out of the box (without relying on 3rd party play yan esque bolt ons) and at Nintendo usually great cheap price then I for one am completely sold on the Revolution.
This next gen contest isn't as clear cut as Microsoft would have you believe.
Allard though, is essentially correct.
If Sony persist in pushing developers to go for super high quality as their main USP then only a few developers would be able to afford the high dev cost to acheive that.
By correctly setting the consumers expectation MS and Nintendo are in a better position not to disappoint.
Anyway at the end of the day Sony has superb brand perception (the consumers perception of their brand) in built.
MS will have to continue to spunk countless dollars up the wall to increase it's brand perception in an effort to play catch up (and also explain why it's USPs benefit the consumer, something it has completely failed to do at this point including that MTV abortion).
In the face of this Nintendo doesnt have to sell as much for it's console to be a 'success' at the end of the financial year but at the same time will have to increase it's flagging consumer perception (as it's being seen by joe commonman as an also ran).
For me it's about cost and games and if Nintendo make their entire backcatalogue (nes snes N64) available for FREE like they have been hinting then I'm sold completely (think about the damn games on the N64 alone) if they also have multimedia connectivity (esp to a pc as a storage device) then I won't need to buy an xbox.
more comments below our sponsor's message
LUPOS 24 May 2005 10:39
10/27
ozfunghi wrote:
Funny guy...
but that wasn't the point, whether or not it was to be expected that PS3 was more powerfull... the point was the U-turn MS just did regarding their stance on graphics. Maybe they should name the console 180 instead of 360.
But I'm sure you missed that with your sharp insights.
Funny funny funny.
but that wasn't the point, whether or not it was to be expected that PS3 was more powerfull... the point was the U-turn MS just did regarding their stance on graphics. Maybe they should name the console 180 instead of 360.
But I'm sure you missed that with your sharp insights.
Funny funny funny.
my point is that ms took a bath on xbox1 hardware cause the only way the coudl compete with the pre-established names of ps and nintendo was to out gun them... now that is not neccesarily the case and they want to actually try and turn a profit this time... they have said that from the beggining... its not news... and if your just now realize that microsofts long term goals include... making money... well... then the power of your insight far exceeds my own.
____________________
OptimusP 24 May 2005 13:10
11/27
Well, J (whats next, he's going to wear a gold necklace with that letter on it or something?) is bringing out a paradox.
At one point he's saying "owh grpahics won't cut it next gen" on the other hand Microsoft licensends the Unreal 3 engine...
Well J, could you tell why you did that?
"It's for the....eeumh....well....eeeumh..."
"It's for the new graphical technologies isn't it!!"
"Yes...it is....*crying*"
"And your name isn't J is it...Bill!"
"boehooeeehooeee, yes it is Bill...*crying* look how bald i am...."
"and ugly"
"AND UGLY, boehoeeoeeee"
Well you get the point. The difference in graphics this gen will be made by who possesses the best Art Style. More realisme is not goin gto cut it, more stylish graphics a lot more.
At one point he's saying "owh grpahics won't cut it next gen" on the other hand Microsoft licensends the Unreal 3 engine...
Well J, could you tell why you did that?
"It's for the....eeumh....well....eeeumh..."
"It's for the new graphical technologies isn't it!!"
"Yes...it is....*crying*"
"And your name isn't J is it...Bill!"
"boehooeeehooeee, yes it is Bill...*crying* look how bald i am...."
"and ugly"
"AND UGLY, boehoeeoeeee"
Well you get the point. The difference in graphics this gen will be made by who possesses the best Art Style. More realisme is not goin gto cut it, more stylish graphics a lot more.
ozfunghi 24 May 2005 14:43
12/27
Lupos, your're gonna love this one:
Just received my June 2005 issue of EDGE:
page 9:
Robbie Bach has a simple, extraordinary claim to make for xbox 360: "It will be," he says unequivocally, "the most powerfull games machine this generation!"
Talk about a U-turn, since the article is from before PS3's specs were known... but you were saying? Something?
(i recon he doesn't mean "this" generation as in "gamecube/PS2/xbox" generation, just because they get a 6 month head start and indeed is talking about 360/PS3/rev - generation)
*tum tum tidum*
Just received my June 2005 issue of EDGE:
page 9:
Robbie Bach has a simple, extraordinary claim to make for xbox 360: "It will be," he says unequivocally, "the most powerfull games machine this generation!"
Talk about a U-turn, since the article is from before PS3's specs were known... but you were saying? Something?
(i recon he doesn't mean "this" generation as in "gamecube/PS2/xbox" generation, just because they get a 6 month head start and indeed is talking about 360/PS3/rev - generation)
*tum tum tidum*
fluffstardx 24 May 2005 19:03
13/27
That's still Robbie Bach. The guy's Microsoft's bulldog. He goes out and tears the s**t outta people, like that Nintendo of America guy. What he says usually amounts to dick.
No, this war isn't even started. Sony have made the Xbox 2, and they have no idea why the first was so good. They put 7 pads on it, which is silly as that cannot work in split screen. Too cheap to add another, Sony?
Plus, let's face it, the damn thing will be £350 or be making a loss. Sony as a company can no longer afford a Playstation to fail. It is swiftly BECOMING Sony. So, they've gone for all out power... and made a programming monster. Having 8 separate parts of a chip to code for is a NIGHTMARE. The old PS2, with a mere 2, caused horrendous problems for some companies, and it shows. 4 times that? Nuh-uh. Not doing. 3 processors chained together? Hmm, easier... All the teraflops in the world mean nothing if nobody can use them. The PS3 has power, but can anyone use it?
And the Killzone 2 video was a joke. Yeah, nice graphics, shame about how similar all the faces were. In fact, I swear the opening starts with 10-20 people ALL WITH THE SAME FACE. Not good. I'll stick with the raft of 360 games I have already seen proper footage of, knowing they were made on underpowered kit. The end result will look better, and that's very satisfying...
No, this war isn't even started. Sony have made the Xbox 2, and they have no idea why the first was so good. They put 7 pads on it, which is silly as that cannot work in split screen. Too cheap to add another, Sony?
Plus, let's face it, the damn thing will be £350 or be making a loss. Sony as a company can no longer afford a Playstation to fail. It is swiftly BECOMING Sony. So, they've gone for all out power... and made a programming monster. Having 8 separate parts of a chip to code for is a NIGHTMARE. The old PS2, with a mere 2, caused horrendous problems for some companies, and it shows. 4 times that? Nuh-uh. Not doing. 3 processors chained together? Hmm, easier... All the teraflops in the world mean nothing if nobody can use them. The PS3 has power, but can anyone use it?
And the Killzone 2 video was a joke. Yeah, nice graphics, shame about how similar all the faces were. In fact, I swear the opening starts with 10-20 people ALL WITH THE SAME FACE. Not good. I'll stick with the raft of 360 games I have already seen proper footage of, knowing they were made on underpowered kit. The end result will look better, and that's very satisfying...
Newtynho 24 May 2005 19:45
14/27
fluffstardx wrote:
and made a programming monster. Having 8 separate parts of a chip to code for is a NIGHTMARE.
That's not what the Epic guy says.
OptimusP 24 May 2005 20:10
15/27
Actually, the Cell chip is a single-core processor, it just has 8 vector units to support it and the Cell is so abstract that all those units work like 1.
So as far developers are concerned, the Cell-chip has a single-core setup.
The problem with the Cell is it abstractness. Developers don't know where their code is running on, is it the central cpu or one of those vector units, this makes bug-testing and fixing a lot more difficult.
The 3-core setup of the Xbox360 is in that regard harder to work for...if the developers want to use both 3 cores and if you ask the people who are going to make the games you'll be lucky if the good games use 2 cores. The third core is labelled "useless" allready.
Thats offcourse saying it as simple as possible, not going into tomuch detail.
So as far developers are concerned, the Cell-chip has a single-core setup.
The problem with the Cell is it abstractness. Developers don't know where their code is running on, is it the central cpu or one of those vector units, this makes bug-testing and fixing a lot more difficult.
The 3-core setup of the Xbox360 is in that regard harder to work for...if the developers want to use both 3 cores and if you ask the people who are going to make the games you'll be lucky if the good games use 2 cores. The third core is labelled "useless" allready.
Thats offcourse saying it as simple as possible, not going into tomuch detail.
LUPOS 24 May 2005 22:57
16/27
ozfunghi wrote:
Lupos, your're gonna love this one:
Just received my June 2005 issue of EDGE:
page 9:
Robbie Bach has a simple, extraordinary claim to make for xbox 360: "It will be," he says unequivocally, "the most powerfull games machine this generation!"
Talk about a U-turn
Just received my June 2005 issue of EDGE:
page 9:
Robbie Bach has a simple, extraordinary claim to make for xbox 360: "It will be," he says unequivocally, "the most powerfull games machine this generation!"
Talk about a U-turn
well seeing as the boys runig the xbox show kept saying "the xbox 360 will be the strongest platform" it could be construed that they where implyign the the total package of the game playign abaility, the live, and the media connectivity aspects will result in the strongest overal... or to help explain it for my fellow nerds...
ps3= fighter class: all power no finnese
rev= wizard class: no power at all
and xbox360= cleric worshiping a war god... ie... wizard with a war hammer!
as for you one little quote... go you for having a subsciption that i dont and havign a magazzine i dont... your very lucky finding the one time anyone missrepresnted the 360... congrats robbie just ruined my entire argument... oh wait... i almost forgot... my point was... im not suprised in the slightest that the ps3 is stronger... its going to be newer... just liek how the xbox is stronger than the ps2... its a freaking year newer.
i realize this is a place to tlak about things... but it just doesnt even seem like an issue... if ms is top notch when they come out and sony are top notch when they come out...6 months later (or more like a year if i was betting)... whos is strongest?
gee, i wonder?!
_________
LUPOS 24 May 2005 23:47
17/27
damn you being right
heres hoping its true!
i know a bit about programming and real time graphics... but i have no idea if those nonsensical calculations mean dick... although i will say that the 360's incredible amount of bandwidth is rather intruiging
_______
heres hoping its true!
i know a bit about programming and real time graphics... but i have no idea if those nonsensical calculations mean dick... although i will say that the 360's incredible amount of bandwidth is rather intruiging
_______
Newtynho 25 May 2005 00:24
18/27
LUPOS wrote:
IGN wrote:
We decided to put this Microsoft-provided information up undigested. Thus, enclosed is a Microsoft-made comparitive analysis. We have not altered, added, or tinkered with the data. We have not interpreted the specs. We have cut and pasted this information from the email into our site and formatted it. Make of it what you will, but be clear we know that Microsoft has clearly slanted this info, and we're not endorsing it, just printing their version. There is a difference.
This shows two things :
1) Microsoft is really concerned, because they actually know that the PS3 will be more powerful than the Xbox 360;
2) IGN is a joke as far as professional journalism goes!
BustyKrusty 25 May 2005 03:16
19/27
yeah i so laughed while reading this but what's even more striking is that they had some staffer opinion article titled something like :Killzone 2 real or not? and not one said it was real
If only they'd tried PS2 version they'd know if this one's real or not.
If only they'd tried PS2 version they'd know if this one's real or not.
config 25 May 2005 08:32
20/27
Newtynho wrote:
LUPOS wrote:
Bah! I hoped we'd avoided anyone mentioning that ridiculous comparitive "analysis" on SPOnG's hallowed pages.
Didn't that article come from Major Nelson, Xbox Live's Programme Director? So it's got an inherent bias, right?
Right! The whole thing is so full of marketing holes anyone should be able to see right through.
"The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell."
Okay, so this is a comparison of the 3x PPCs in the 360 to the 1x PPC core in the CELL. How "general" can you get? Erm, what about the 8x SPEs that give the CELL its grunt?
"The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU."
Has the PS3's RSX spec been completely unveiled? I thought we'd had a bunch of figures, but no final spec. Going on some of the tech demos, if the RSX was short on flexibility, the CELL could easily help out.
"Now that the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 specifications have been announced, it is possible to do a real world performance comparison of the two systems."
Once the'yre both on the production line, in final silicon, THEN we can do a real-world comparison.
What I say is, let's wait until we actually have some hardware to play with and compare before we acknowledge the blatherings of these corporate drones.
PS. Is "nelson" some sort of euphemism?
tyrion 25 May 2005 08:32
21/27
fluffstardx wrote:
They put 7 pads on it, which is silly as that cannot work in split screen. Too cheap to add another, Sony?
They put one Bluetooth piconet in it, that allows eight devices, one of which has to be the receiver. That leaves seven for the controllers.
If they had put two receivers in there, you would have had up to 14 controllers, then wehere would you be with split screen?
And speaking of split screen, the PS3 shown at E3 had two HDMI outputs on the back. These can drive HD televisions, each one at 1080p.
That means if you divide them up four each (seven for the players, one for stats?) you get 960x540 pixels for each player (1080p has 1920x1080 pixels).
Given that the top resolution for a PAL display is 720x576 interlaced and NTSC is 720x480 interlaced. You'll be getting about a full television of resolution PER PLAYER!!
Without interlacing!
Plus one for a map or scores or stats of some sort.
Then imagine putting that beast on a network!!
Of course, this is in a hypothetical "money no object" world, but the seven controller thing isn't going to be a bad thing, believe me.
LUPOS 25 May 2005 21:51
22/27
tyrion wrote:
Of course, this is in a hypothetical "money no object" world, but the seven controller thing isn't going to be a bad thing, believe me.
while im sure its not a bad thing at all, i seriously doubt it will get any real use... more than likely most things will only support 4 players, the idea that the thing could run what amounts to roughly 7 displays at higher res than todays progressive scan games is a bit far fetched, not that its impossible, but the graphics woudl definely have to take a hit filling 2 1080p screens. Also, on the weird number front, why two out puts? historically most games that actually took advantge of multiple monitors where racing and flying games, which always use an odd amount... leaving one for the all important center view whiel the rest are just perifery (sp?).
While im sure some titles may support some kind of dual screen 7 player death match (8 if you plug a dual shock into a usb port perhaps) i certainly doubt it woudl be anywhere close to the norm.
what is most likely the case is just that that is the max number of controlers a bluetooth is capable of so they list the true spec, even if they have no intention of using it (except perhaps for other peripherals, camera, dance pad, POWER GLOVE?!). The dual display thing however is perplexing to me.
_____________
fluffstardx 26 May 2005 10:14
23/27
One screen's for playing on while the other is for Sony to convince yourself it's a good game, perhaps? ;P
tyrion 26 May 2005 12:07
24/27
LUPOS wrote:
what is most likely the case is just that that is the max number of controlers a bluetooth is capable of so they list the true spec, even if they have no intention of using it (except perhaps for other peripherals, camera, dance pad, POWER GLOVE?!).
I'd have thought those devices would be more suited to the USB connection, except perhaps the power glover which could be safely stored in the cylindrical filing cabinet.
LUPOS wrote:
The dual display thing however is perplexing to me.
Has to be on there for a reason, it's gonna up the cost of the console. Maybe the GPU is just that good? It may be that NVIDIA have done a double up thing like their recent PCI cards?
fluffstardx 26 May 2005 13:01
25/27
It's probably a "well, it's costing us nothing extra" addition. After all, the only Sony franchise that could possibly need seperate screens is, well, Time Crisis...
PEN15 27 May 2005 16:05
26/27
J Allard said its all about the games long before Sony put out there specs.
Also X-Box has more original titles coming out then Sony... so at least there actions seem to point to it being indeed all about the games. Meanwhile Sony has like 2-3 original games out of the 10-15 talked about.
Sony: Its all about selling ther blue-ray and cell chip... f**k games bitches!
Also X-Box has more original titles coming out then Sony... so at least there actions seem to point to it being indeed all about the games. Meanwhile Sony has like 2-3 original games out of the 10-15 talked about.
Sony: Its all about selling ther blue-ray and cell chip... f**k games bitches!
LUPOS 27 May 2005 18:58
27/27
tyrion wrote:
I'd have thought those devices would be more suited to the USB connection, except perhaps the power glover which could be safely stored in the cylindrical filing cabinet.
i dont personally think controllers are very well suited for wirelessness... do the 360 pads even rumble? i dont remeber the one at the shows rumbling (and they where wired) but then i wasnt paying as much attention to the controller as i should have been.
tyrion wrote:
Has to be on there for a reason, it's gonna up the cost of the console. Maybe the GPU is just that good? It may be that NVIDIA have done a double up thing like their recent PCI cards?
not necesarily... there are three expantion type ports on a game cube if i remebr correctley... *goes to check*... yup three... one for the network adapter, one for the gba player... and one for f**k whatever. the genisis and snes both had similar set ups... and the gen was the only one to ever use it. (for cd purposes).
The sLI theory is interesting but i would think they would just have them hooked up together inside like the pc versions... plus having a y connection cable by default woudl look rather stupid... i should hope they coudl unify the output inside the box. (i dont even know is the SLI pc cards use one or both out puts)
plus the way sli iworks is not by having each card to an even half a screen... but rather shifting the load around... since in an outdoor environment the card rendeing the static sky woul dbe seriously underutilized. Im sure it coudl be programmed to output to two monitors, but that is not how it is meant to be used. Plus, whiel its not impossible, i seriously doubt sony is going to put 2 of those chips in each system. they are already going to be taking a bath on the cost to manufactur... and the graphics chip is the most expensive part (especially considering hwo cheap cells are supposed to be to make compared to triple core powerpc chips)
my magic eight ball says to ask again later... worst five dollars i ever stole.
_______________