Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony?
Options
Comments
-
-
CyberGhost wrote:heh, sony and ms, basically did the same thing, doesn't cell consist of mutiple cores?
My best effort at explaining cell chip: Cell chips dont have multiplae cores, but a cell chip is a collective of independant chips each charged with different sorts of threads. Therefore - too much of one type of thread will just cause on of the chips (out of 9 i think) to be flat out while the rest will be idle. The key to maximising cell chip technology is in the development of the code to run on it. The better spread the tasks are the more benefit will be achieved through the use of cell.
People who think they know better most likely do so feel free to correct me...politely.
0 -
Ciaran500 wrote:There have been more games for the Xbox360 shown, and actual gameplay vids for alot of them. Everything shown for the PS3 has been FMV or specialy set up demos.
Saying that they are real time doesn't mean games will looks like that. In these vids there are no physics calculations, no ai, nothing more than pure rendering.
If GTA is that detailed I'll eat my hat. The amount of time to create a full city of that detail would cost millions.
From what I undertand about the cell (not a huge amount TBH) the processor can be coded so the whole processor does one particular job toghter, in this case lost of complicated maths. The 360 cpu is a much more general processor that can't be coded to a particular task so would give lower result in benchs like the ones shown.
What game footage?
They were all just special scenes set up and rendered on the PS3. i.e. tech demos.
A number of the demos were doing real time physics, such as the ducks, the leaves and the gas station blowing up as was stated. And there was a lot going on in those demos. Plus things like the Unreal Engine, do you think people from epic are going to flat out lie about their engine running on a PS3 in order to make Sony look good? The physics may have been precalculated, but the processor could have handled those calculations at the same time as the GPU was rendering.
And my point about the Getaway wasn't the graphics(by business of London I meant Busy-ness), it was the amount of cars and people on screen at once. And every demo was like that. That doesn't take up extra development time, a game like San Andreas already has dozens of models done, getting the machine to display lots of them at once if its powerful enough isn't going to hurt developers. Like I said, I'm more interested in the amount of action going on on screen than what it looks like, the games pretty much universally impressed from that point of view.
And there's no reason to dismiss every single demo as fake without reason, considering many of them are by third party developers. There's nothing in it for Ubisoft to spend ages rendering lots of scenes to make a PS3 look good when they're nothing like the game that they're developing for it. People from numerous developers backed up everything Sony said, the games press who saw it first hand have given a unanimous thumbs up, the numbers all add up, there's no point automatically dismissing everything without any evidence.
In the case of the X360, I'm not just dismissing everything they've shown, I'm just saying not much of it was very interesting to me. Gears of War is the only thing I can think of that I liked. I'm sure there'll be other games but as of right now the PS3 is looking better to me.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Ciaran500 wrote:So what impressed you about it? and like wise for anyone who decided Xbox360 (trying to get propper debate going)
The specs, the demos, the bull**** that they talked, it just pulled me in, its been a long time since i've been excited about a console, but i cannot wait for these to come onto the market, the graphical demos looked brilliant, when the nvidia guy said that it was twice as powerful as two 6800 Ultras...i pooed myself a tiny bit0 -
btw, I see someone hacking those machines soon to install linux or maybe even windows, 20 gig HD, powerful vid, cpu, mutiple usb ports.... for around 300, sounds like a good deal.
I think the price will be closer to 500e tbh.If GTA is that detailed I'll eat my hat. The amount of time to create a full city of that detail would cost millions.
Games already cost millions. HL2 cost about $50 million to make.There just tech demos. Nearly every console release has impressive demos they show to get hype going. Remember the room with thousands of pinpong balls mounted on mouse traps that appeared before Xbox release. Doesn't show anything towards what they can do in a gaming enviroment TBH.
You see that's where your wrong. They aren't tech demos, they are game demos. Games that are actually in production and previewed. It's nothing like the old x-box tech demo or any other tech demo for that matter unless stated by the developer as an idea of what they can do on the console.
You have to remember that these consoles, at least in sony's and microsofts case are 2-3 times more powerful that a top end pc. Think of a top pc game like HL2, Far cry, BF2. Very impressive graphics. These consoles can achieve 2-3 times that though. I have no doubt that the pics are geuine and an actual representation of what the final games will look like. Be prepared to eat your hat.
If the likes of this fail to impress you, nothing will.
Anyway back on topic. So far the ps3 has impressed me the most. Amazing specs and previews of games. It's quite good looking when it's on it's side too. Second would have to be the 360. Very impressive also and it should be able to give the ps3 a run for it's money. The best looking of the 3 consoles so far. Last would definitely be the rev. 2-3 times the power of a cube, the worst looking of the 3 and no game previews as of yet. Teres still a lot of details to be released though so that could change.
I seriously can't beleive the amount of votes Nintendo has so far based on the info that's been released so far. Serious amounts of fanboyism in this forum.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 50589
Gamecube just for Zelda
Seriously for me it's the xbox 360 because they actually showed games for it and it looks like its well on schedule to launch with plenty of titles. Then would be the PS3 since the hardware seems amazing but we still haven't seen anything from it in terms of games. As for the revolution I'm still not sure what nintendo are doing with it, they really gave away nothing. The old downloadable games is interesting but I suspect nintendo will charge a fortune for them. We also haven't seen any decent footage of its capabilities.
I have one really niggling probelm with the new generation of consoles. Every game that was shown could easily be done on the current hardware but with less glitter paint. No game has any new ideas or pushes the boundaries at all. The fact that I'm more excited about the current generation games that were shown is testiment to this.
0 -
-
Join Date:Posts: 50589
BloodBath wrote:I really don't see how anyone could choose Nintendo. Your choosing Nintendo based on what games? What have they released so far in terms of pictures or specs that made you choose Nintendo?
The revolution will have ocarina of time
0 -
i said revolution too even though atm there isnt too much revolutionary about it but i just love my zelda! metroid aint too shabby either . ill probably end up with all of them at some stage but ps3 is at the bottom of my list. although i am lookin forwarfd to a nice pretty blur free devil may cry. 0
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 50589
BloodBath wrote:Remake? One of my fave games of all time. I wish square would get up off their arses and remake ff7 as well and stop teasing us with clips.
Bah, I wish. I only said that to be sarcastic when you were talking about the lack of games shown for the revolution (which I agree is a little distressing).
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 50589
I wonder if they will translate some of the obscure RPG's from the old systems. Like the Fire Emblem games. All the Fire Emblem games (Thats a demand not a hint if anyone from Nintendo is reading).
0 -
-
-
Retr0gamer wrote:I'm only a temporary Sega fan boy at the moment since i got my Saturn. I'm sure nintendos whole back catalogue can turn me to the light once again
maybe nintendo should start asking Sega to commit its backlog aswell, it will win ALL the retro fans over if they do (It will win me over if it garuntee's i can play Nights and Panzer dragoon saga on a gamecube style controller)
right then...looking at all three consoles...i think. They are all *as it currently stands* rubbish.
PS3: Yes it is so very beutiful and pretty and oooh and ahh. I absolutley love the graphics. And will not deny its beauty (graphics, the fridge itself is a chunk of crap). but i watched the movies for killing day and killzone and in fairness, they look boring. Killzone 2 is the MOHAA beach landing all over again. and Killing Day looks pretty but there seems to be little creativity behind it. Bloodbath i know your screaming that this is the peak before we somehow get the holodecks on our starships working. BUT its not. I'm am going to be the most evil person now.
I dont care if games get more expensive.
I dont care if we only have 12 games released a year...I dont care.
I want Developers to actually craft their ****ing games Not mass produce them with little touches and make overs to diversify them. I want Auteur like presence where the game is treated with developers, costume designers, scriptwriters...huge numbers. I wont movie like crew numbers working on a game to ensure that when someone plays it, that there are no lazy turret levels, that it is its own masterpiece. I want them to teach a Game Director course in university so that the person in charge knows about a balance between presentation and gameplay, between control and entertain. I love Half Life? Why? Because if you look at every damn level in that game you will see that it is designed to perfection, its not the AI or the models, its that someone actually said, no this is not another hallway section, lets make it that one must do something new here. (half life 2 sadly seemes to have missed a large chunk of that, though some of it can be seen every now and then)
Thats why i am not impressed with PS3, because it looks like developers are spending their money getting more graphic people in and are ignoring the level design. Apart from Graphics, the PS3 seems to hit all the right buttons, but it seems to lack the promise of support behind it as the X-360 has.
X-360: Not as impressive graphically, but the appeal is defitnally the hardware itself. X-box regardless of its games, is one of the best put together kits ever. And X-360 looks to continue with having X-box live and the hardware (Hard drive etc) being better implemented and offering more. Live is the best thing going for the X-360 and all they need to do is ensure its delivered. Now the question of games is the only shadow hanging over the 360.
Revolution: The poker player. While both microsoft and Sony have shown their hands Nintendo are keeping one half hidden. We have been shown Revolution and have seen how it clicks into what we already know. Good Nintendo products. But we know nothing of the new stuff. So this E3 has been appeal to Fans of Nintendo's work so far. And it clearly appeals to them. The second half is yet to be seen and i refuse to comment (As an Ex member of the Sega fanboyism) until i see this second half.
Overall none of the machines impress fully. Sony have the graphics and the support of games, but it looks more of the same. Microsoft have the Hardware and accessories perfected, but i havnt seen any games take advantage of it. And Nintendo are playing their strengths.
So i Vote for the Jaguar.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
I meant millions more.BloodBath wrote:Games already cost millions. HL2 cost about $50 million to make.BloodBath wrote:You see that's where your wrong. They aren't tech demos, they are game demos. Games that are actually in production and previewed. It's nothing like the old x-box tech demo or any other tech demo for that matter unless stated by the developer as an idea of what they can do on the console.
The quote you took from me there was actually about "the demos were doing real time physics, such as the ducks, the leaves and the gas station blowing up" which are tech demos.BloodBath wrote:Be prepared to eat your hat.
I don't own one
I never said I wasn't impressed by these shots. Just that I doubt games will look like that by the time they reach our console.BloodBath wrote:If the likes of this fail to impress you, nothing will.
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/135/926994_20050516_screen003.jpg0
Advertisement