Mama said don't buy no ugly console: PS3 is UUUgly

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Okay, seriously, are these guys trying to trump one another in terms of who can design the ugliest console? If so, I can't wait to see how ugly the Revolution will be. But this PS3, I mean damn, did where did I put my Dirt Devil? I swear if I buy one of these things, I might just pop a stick on top of it and clean the living room floor. It looks like a $500 bread box. And the controller...the controller...my gosh someone is going to owe Batman some serious royalties. You could put somebody's eye out with that thing. I know the games are supposed to be interactive, but damn you can jump into the next Tekken game and use the controller as a weapon. I guess Sony was serious about trying to woo female gamers, they got all the angles covered with this controller.

Seriously though, this whole thing is very sad looking from a company that designs really nice looking equipment. On the bright side, Sony delivered on the guts of the system, at least on paper. They should hold off on screen shots because their games look horrible at the moment. But i'm not gonna be an idiot and say this is what the final games will look like, but in the interim they aren't doing themselves any favors. Especially with that shot of Fight Night, that isn't even XBOX quality.

System memory, well, I guess Sony just loves giving developers fits when it comes to memory bottlenecks. No on die memory, and 256meg of main memory, coupled with 256meg for the graphics. Its not bad, but from what I hear, developers pleaded with MS to throw in 512 of unified memory and the 10mb of on-chip, no bus whatsoever memory.

The processor is hard to rate, in terms of comparison to the XBOX 360's 3 cores, plus nobody really knows how the cell functions anyway. Apparently though it is a beast able to push 1080p, that will come in handy in about 5 years when people actually have sets capable of 1080p, but still its pretty awesome that Sony thought ahead, unlike last generation.

Up to 7 Bluetooth batarangs..ahem, I mean controllers. Again, this is not typical Sony. I guess they are willing to forgo the extra cash they normally got from multitaps and the like. They also saw fit to throw in WI-FI, ethernet ports, and detachable hdd. Of course there are a bunch of features to make it into some kind of all-in-one media center, just like MS it'll be compatiable with a bunch of crap like mp3 players and all that crap. Honestly, I think they overate this stuff. The one feature I can see being popular for both Sony and MS is videochat, girls will eat this up. Plus, you can videochat with people around the Globe. Hell, companies could use these features for videoconferencing.

The GAMES. Here is where I get worried. At least 360 is giving you some new projects. What do I see on PS3, another TEKKEN, another METAL GEAR, another GT5 oh this time they MIGHT think about including car damage. Tell you what Polyfony, you had better include car damage and online play, no more excuses. Killzone is back again, guess they will give it another shot. The killzone images were a mixed back, some of the stuff in the forefront looked good, including the vehicle, but some of the soldiers in the background looked PS2-ish. All the power in the world won't help horrible artist.

PS3 needs some new games, period. I mean they are going to get their teeth kicked in if they launch with MetalGear, GT5 and Killzone against Halo3 and lord knows what else MS will be cooking up. Sony also, thus far hasn't mentioned anything about an online service.

At this point, I see why MS wasn't concerned to release first. PS3 will be more powerful and have a few more features, but its obvious the XBOX 360 won't be far behind and will likely be wayyy more developer friendly. Both systems will be capable of anything developers want to make. Power will not be a bottleneck this generation. Its all gonna come down to the games, as it should. MS has made some in-roads to attract Japanese talent and Japanese games. Sony now has to do the same thing when it comes to western developers and pc developers. If they don't capitalize on the tremendous PC talent out there, they will be in trouble here in the states.

So far, I see no negatives for either system. I thought they'd both be great products, they both had to be great products, and I think they will obviously be 1 and 2. A lot of analyst are predicting MS will leap to #1 at least here in the US. I don't know why. The only way I see that is price. And these analyst may very well know the pricing structures. Sony put a lot frills into this unit its going to cost them or us.

[Pandarbock]

Okay, seriously, are these guys trying to trump one another in terms of who can design the ugliest console? If so, I can't wait to see how ugly the Revolution will be. But this PS3, I mean damn, did where did I put my Dirt Devil? I swear if I buy one of these things, I might just pop a stick on top of it and clean the living room floor. It looks like a $500 bread box. And the controller...the controller...my gosh someone is going to owe Batman some serious royalties. You could put somebody's eye out with that thing. I know the games are supposed to be interactive, but damn you can jump into the next Tekken game and use the controller as a weapon. I guess Sony was serious about trying to woo female gamers, they got all the angles covered with this controller.

Seriously though, this whole thing is very sad looking from a company that designs really nice looking equipment. On the bright side, Sony delivered on the guts of the system, at least on paper. They should hold off on screen shots because their games look horrible at the moment. But i'm not gonna be an idiot and say this is what the final games will look like, but in the interim they aren't doing themselves any favors. Especially with that shot of Fight Night, that isn't even XBOX quality.

System memory, well, I guess Sony just loves giving developers fits when it comes to memory bottlenecks. No on die memory, and 256meg of main memory, coupled with 256meg for the graphics. Its not bad, but from what I hear, developers pleaded with MS to throw in 512 of unified memory and the 10mb of on-chip, no bus whatsoever memory.

The processor is hard to rate, in terms of comparison to the XBOX 360's 3 cores, plus nobody really knows how the cell functions anyway. Apparently though it is a beast able to push 1080p, that will come in handy in about 5 years when people actually have sets capable of 1080p, but still its pretty awesome that Sony thought ahead, unlike last generation.

Up to 7 Bluetooth batarangs..ahem, I mean controllers. Again, this is not typical Sony. I guess they are willing to forgo the extra cash they normally got from multitaps and the like. They also saw fit to throw in WI-FI, ethernet ports, and detachable hdd. Of course there are a bunch of features to make it into some kind of all-in-one media center, just like MS it'll be compatiable with a bunch of crap like mp3 players and all that crap. Honestly, I think they overate this stuff. The one feature I can see being popular for both Sony and MS is videochat, girls will eat this up. Plus, you can videochat with people around the Globe. Hell, companies could use these features for videoconferencing.

The GAMES. Here is where I get worried. At least 360 is giving you some new projects. What do I see on PS3, another TEKKEN, another METAL GEAR, another GT5 oh this time they MIGHT think about including car damage. Tell you what Polyfony, you had better include car damage and online play, no more excuses. Killzone is back again, guess they will give it another shot. The killzone images were a mixed back, some of the stuff in the forefront looked good, including the vehicle, but some of the soldiers in the background looked PS2-ish. All the power in the world won't help horrible artist.

PS3 needs some new games, period. I mean they are going to get their teeth kicked in if they launch with MetalGear, GT5 and Killzone against Halo3 and lord knows what else MS will be cooking up. Sony also, thus far hasn't mentioned anything about an online service.

At this point, I see why MS wasn't concerned to release first. PS3 will be more powerful and have a few more features, but its obvious the XBOX 360 won't be far behind and will likely be wayyy more developer friendly. Both systems will be capable of anything developers want to make. Power will not be a bottleneck this generation. Its all gonna come down to the games, as it should. MS has made some in-roads to attract Japanese talent and Japanese games. Sony now has to do the same thing when it comes to western developers and pc developers. If they don't capitalize on the tremendous PC talent out there, they will be in trouble here in the states.

So far, I see no negatives for either system. I thought they'd both be great products, they both had to be great products, and I think they will obviously be 1 and 2. A lot of analyst are predicting MS will leap to #1 at least here in the US. I don't know why. The only way I see that is price. And these analyst may very well know the pricing structures. Sony put a lot frills into this unit its going to cost them or us.

Took epic 2 months to get unreal 3 engine running on the finalized hardware with quite a bit more impressive results (and in real time to top it off) than the little bitty pre-render clip of gear of wars all the xblokes are no doubt going ape **** over. Oh an I really don't see how 35GB per second bandtwidth between the RSX and its 256MB of memory is going to bottle neck much of anything.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Took epic 2 months to get unreal 3 engine running on the finalized hardware with quite a bit more impressive results (and in real time to top it off) than the little bitty pre-render clip of gear of wars all the xblokes are no doubt going ape **** over. Oh an I really don't see how 35GB per second bandtwidth between the RSX and its 256MB of memory is going to bottle neck much of anything.


I agree, I don't see it being a bottleneck as much as a way of giving developers fits. I think it'll make things interesting for developers, but in the end probably won't make one bit of difference. My point is, i'm sure they would have liked to have used the memory as they saw fit, as opposed to being restricted. But I suppose you would see it as being a good thing.

As far as the Epic clip, did you say running on FINALIZED hardware specs, 2 months to complete, hmmm, that probably means its a more recent clip than the MS one, which was no doubt from a long time ago on alpha kit hardware. But i'll save the screen shot wars for you guys, I think its a waste of time worrying about screen shots and small videoclips. With 720p, 1080I, and now 1080p, 512mb of memory(unified or not), cell processors and 3 custom IBM processors, both of these machines will be more than capable. But only one is UGLY, lol. OMG that is a bad design.

[theWacoKid]

Classic, a guy who buys an xbox thinking another console is ugly.

[Pandarbock]

I agree, I don't see it being a bottleneck as much as a way of giving developers fits. I think it'll make things interesting for developers, but in the end probably won't make one bit of difference. My point is, i'm sure they would have liked to have used the memory as they saw fit, as opposed to being restricted. But I suppose you would see it as being a good thing.

As far as the Epic clip, did you say running on FINALIZED hardware specs, 2 months to complete, hmmm, that probably means its a more recent clip than the MS one, which was no doubt from a long time ago on alpha kit hardware. But i'll save the screen shot wars for you guys, I think its a waste of time worrying about screen shots and small videoclips. With 720p, 1080I, and now 1080p, 512mb of memory(unified or not), cell processors and 3 custom IBM processors, both of these machines will be more than capable. But only one is UGLY, lol. OMG that is a bad design.

ok hehehe well finalized is a bit pushing it, but it is on the hardware that was there as he actually controls the demo with the controller they had there.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Classic, a guy who buys an xbox thinking another console is ugly.

I can tell you don't like the PS3's design. Because if it was a hot looking console, your big-assed mouth would be blasting the news all over the internet. But seeing that this is the most docile you've been since you got released from the ward, says it all. You know the system looks dumb, console and controller. And you know you have a healthy dose of crow to eat over talking about the XBOX 360 design, which now looks marvelous when compared to this Rolo-dex like machine. I mean it looks like an architect's small scale model of a basketball arena.

Anyway, yeah your right, the XBOX wasn't great looking, neither was the Gamecube, and now neither is the PS3. I think Sony intentionally made the console ugly, just to prove it doesn't matter how a console looks you degenerate, it only matters how it plays. And hopefully this one will play great. As opposed to the PS2 which looked great but played like crap.

Now just shaddup cause you know my words to be true.

[theWacoKid]

I can tell you don't like the PS3's design. Because if it was a hot looking console, your big-assed mouth would be blasting the news all over the internet. But seeing that this is the most docile you've been since you got released from the ward, says it all. You know the system looks dumb, console and controller. And you know you have a healthy dose of crow to eat over talking about the XBOX 360 design, which now looks marvelous when compared to this Rolo-dex like machine. I mean it looks like an architect's small scale model of a basketball arena.

Anyway, yeah your right, the XBOX wasn't great looking, neither was the Gamecube, and now neither is the PS3. I think Sony intentionally made the console ugly, just to prove it doesn't matter how a console looks you degenerate, it only matters how it plays. And hopefully this one will play great. As opposed to the PS2 which looked great but played like crap.

Now just shaddup cause you know my words to be true.

There's only one head case on these boards, and that's you, pal. TMG, you are and have always been for me, a joke. You're as redundant as that soon to be extinct console you worship.

Hey, how's that b/c coming for 360?

[Jupiter_x]

PS3 will be more powerful and have a few more features, but its obvious the XBOX 360 won't be far behind and will likely be wayyy more developer friendly

Actually? That is not entirely true!

The Developers are saying PS3 is Very Easy to program for and they are very impressed with its capabilities:

"To show off the PlayStation 3's graphical brawn, Sony showed several game demos, including an Unreal 3 engine show-off of what appeared to be Unreal Tournament 2007. In what must come as a relief to developers, Epic Games' Tim Sweeney was on hand to vouch for the PS3, saying it was "easy to program for" and that Epic had received its first PS3 hardware two months ago. He proved the tech demo was real time by showing it again and by manipulating the camera and zooming in."

"However, Sweeney's words were only the beginning. Later, Sony trotted out a whole host of publishers that are backing the PlayStation 3. And in the process, it confirmed several games for the console. Hideo Kojima introduced Konami's Metal Gear Solid 4, Capcom showed off Devil May Cry 4, Namco unveiled Tekken 6, Polyphony Digital trotted out a fifth Gran Turismo, SCEE showed off the next Killzone, and Rockstar Games mentioned that a Grand Theft Auto would be released for the console."

Souce (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/16/news_6124681.html)


Some Developers are infact jumping ship from M$ and getting on board with Sony now! Sorry but these are the facts!

Quoted by: Zillaman
I've also been informed that a lot of developers are shifting titles previously meant for the 360 over to the PS3, due to its power and the copmplications of developing for the 360's multiple processors.

Source (http://forums.videogamereview.com/showthread.php?t=4774)

One game that was slated for Xbox 360 has in fact been made for PS3:

Source (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614766p1.html)

[theWacoKid]

The xbots right now along with MS are sh&*ing their pants. They thought they had a year head start, they don't. They have about 6 months or so. So, they're all talking about the ps3 is ugly, the controller is ugly, etc., because that's about all they can pick on.

There was so much at the conference sony didn't get into with any depth and it blows away MS and their rinky dinky gamertag home page crapola so bad, it ain't even funny. For me, xbox 360 is turning into a joke. You want next gen, you want real high tech, you want the ps3, not the 360 which MS will be dumping in 3 years instead of 4.

The ps3 was decoding 12 streams of high definition video. They had a screen with over 100 thumbnails, which could represent a game in progress, a dvd playing, a video conference, etc. What is MS offering me, oh, a pic for my gamertag icon along with a rep rating, perfect for losers who think like a 12 year old kid. MS is insulting me with their offering and their total lack of vision.

I didn't expect 1080p as standard for ps3 and that nvidia chip runs games in that res at 60fps. Blu ray movie playback. All sorts of connectivity options, hdmi output, bluetooth wireless, they kicked butt. And graphically the ps3 will kick the xbox 360's butt as well, because they've working on the quality of the visuals, not how many polygons they can toss around.

MS pulled PDZ from their lineup for their conference apparently. It was a no show, their big killer app. And they're going to conquer the world with what this xmas, frickin' Kameo? How can xbots be so deluded? Game over, man. Halo 3 to combat the ps3, Bill, you're on drugs, dude, stick to windoze, something you know about, because you don't know jack about the videogame world.

[Jupiter_x]

PS3 will have:
1080i Dual Screen Support!
Faster GPU (550 Mhz Nvidia)
X7 On Blue Tooth 2.0
2.0 Tflops as opposed to (1.0 Xbox360):D

Sony is not treading lightly here, They will not let MS get ahead...No Way.
Oh yeah I remember that fella from Team Ninja saying he will only produce his games (Ninja Gaiden) on the most Powerful system...I guess NG should be on PS3...yet I think 360 is getting it?!?

Now! Don't get me wrong, I've said before that it's not only about the raw power but the games! I admit that 360 indeed does have some sweet a$$ titles coming....Halo 3....drool! But I gotta have my RPGs, and if God of War looks that good on PS2 imagine what the sequel would look like on PS3? :eek:


On Final Note:
I feel sorry for Nintendo, GameSpot nor IGN even have a listing for Revolution (Coming soon) Section like they do for PS3 and 360! Hmmmmm! :(

[Brendon]

I'm going to go against all my Sony hating insticts and admit that I think the PS3 is rather fetching (Spiderman font or not), certainly more astetically pleasing than the train wreck that is the PS2.

What I've seen from all the demos so far though, for 360 and PS3, is massively underwhelming, higher poly counts all round, and sod all else. Then again, there isn't much further to really go without plumbing the depths of sychophancy. All the things that would be really neat could never be done in real time, even in high end CGI they have to cheat a lot since things will often just refuse to do what they're supposed to.

Ragdolls are the new lens flare. And Kinematic blending is the new ragdoll.

[ilnadmy]

Actually, I like the way the PS3 looks. The controller looks weird I agree, but then again so did the GameCube's controller, and look how comfortable that was. We'll just have to wait and see. The console itself, however, kicks the 360's ass all the way to Redmond and back. It is SLEEK.

And by the way, do you really think that releasing with games such as MGS4, DMC4, GT5, and Killzone 2 is going to hurt the console? Hahaha wow, you really are deluded aren't you. What does the 360 have? Kameo? KAMEO?? Hahahah yeahhhhh, 360 is going to be way cool dude.

And Bill Gates really is a nutjob. With the news about the Halo 3 releasing simultaneously with the PS3, I now know what happened with Halo 2. Gates told Bungie to give the game a helluva cliffhanger ending so that people want to buy Halo 3....and then releasing Halo 3 with the PS3. Basically screwing over the consumer in order to screw over Sony. Well, the way I see it, the PS3 is going to attract all the consumers while Halo 3 is left in the dirt. After all, it's either buy the PS3 and several games or buy Halo 3.....hmmm, tough decision indeed.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

[
Quoted by: Zillaman
I've also been informed that a lot of developers are shifting titles previously meant for the 360 over to the PS3, due to its power and the copmplications of developing for the 360's multiple processors.


LMAO, you can't be serious, quoting a VGR fanboy as if it really means something. XBOX 360 has 160 titles in development. And if anything, developers are jumping over to XBOX, and nobody appears to be significantly waiting on PS3.

Now, don't get me wrong, unlike you guys, i'm not hoping for the PS3 to be a failure, like you are hoping 360 will be, but it simply is not going to blow away the 360.

The system has a core processor with basically 8 32bit cell processors, so i'm guessing you will get 8 threads from the cell. The XBOX 360 has 3 cores each capable of 2 threads, so you get 6 threads. Each cpu on the cell apparently has a vector processing unit, ditto with XBOX 360. However the PS3 has 512mb of L2 cache, guess what, XBOX 360 has 10MB of on-die cache.

Memory XBOX 360 has 512mb of unified memory, PS3 has 256mb of main mem and 256 Vmem, its obvious the 360 is more flexible here. But it's a difference that probably won't be a big deal.

The GPUs XBOX 360 runs at 500mhz, PS3 runs at 550mhz. PS3 has about 25gb/s performance, XBOX 360 about 22.5gb/s.

HDD. both detachable and upgradeable, so far, only 360 includes a hdd. Obviously Sony is mulling this over or else they would have said its included.

Is the PS3 more powerful of course it is, is it going to make a difference in terms of what you see, it definitely doesn't look like it. In terms of which one is easier to program for, time will tell.

But one thing is for sure games will sell the system. And though its early, the PS3 games seem all too familiar. Tekken, MetalGear, GT6, DevilMayCry, the only game that seems interesting is KILLING DAY or something, and that's only cause its from Ubisoft, and apparently exclusive to PS3. This is what the PS3 needs a presumably exclusive western shooter from a developer that knows how to do shooters, not something like Killzone2.


Backward Compatiability is definitely a bonus for PS3 here. But big deal, you can't play horrible PS2 games. On XBOX 360 you'll likely be able to play XBOX games that are much more valuable in terms of being closer to next gen. Games like Forza, Half-life2, Doom3, Halo2, Jade Empire, Rainbow6 Lockdown, etc. Aside from God of War, I don't really know what is worth playing in terms of backward compatiability. Plus, in 2006 b/c won't matter one bit for MS, as they will have one full years worth of XBOX 360 titles.

The reason why MS is doing b/c this way is simple, it is going to cost them money to emulate each title, obviously they aren't going to invest in emulating every game, something like Blood Wake. It only makes sense to do the most popular games.

But one thing no one has mentioned is the Revolution. Apparently it will use 12cm proprietary disk. Which means to DVD or HD-DVD movie playback. And people killed MS over not jumping to a new expensive movie technology. Hell at least you can get high def movies from you PC with 360(if for some reason you simply have to watch movies on your game player). Supporting this standard (blu-ray) and HD movies is going to be an expensive proposition for Sony, the ? is how much of those costs will be bourne by the consumer.

You guys need to quit being fangirls and start looking at this objectively. I know you all want MS to fall, but its not gonna happen. If anything, judging by many other websites fans, Sony just made MS' position stronger, not weaker. Everybody expected this fantastic looking machine, and instead Sony dropped what now looks like a car amplifier and a boomerang vibrator. They will definitely need to redesign the controller, you can't hold that thing for more than 30 minutes.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Actually, I like the way the PS3 looks. The controller looks weird I agree, but then again so did the GameCube's controller, and look how comfortable that was. We'll just have to wait and see. The console itself, however, kicks the 360's ass all the way to Redmond and back. It is SLEEK.

And by the way, do you really think that releasing with games such as MGS4, DMC4, GT5, and Killzone 2 is going to hurt the console? Hahaha wow, you really are deluded aren't you. What does the 360 have? Kameo? KAMEO?? Hahahah yeahhhhh, 360 is going to be way cool dude.

And Bill Gates really is a nutjob. With the news about the Halo 3 releasing simultaneously with the PS3, I now know what happened with Halo 2. Gates told Bungie to give the game a helluva cliffhanger ending so that people want to buy Halo 3....and then releasing Halo 3 with the PS3. Basically screwing over the consumer in order to screw over Sony. Well, the way I see it, the PS3 is going to attract all the consumers while Halo 3 is left in the dirt. After all, it's either buy the PS3 and several games or buy Halo 3.....hmmm, tough decision indeed.

Come on, be real. This console does not look good. The best description you can give it, is that it looks plain, and that is being generous. It looks like something from their XPLOD line of car audio amplifiers. But hey, i'm not the one big on a console's looks. That's all the guys who started talking about the XBOX 360. Now, they definitely don't have anything to talk about. And that controller, we might have to get that thing registered as a lethal weapon. Either that, or they might have to sell that thing in ADULT 18+ porn stores. You know that is seriously going back to the drawing board.

Now about Halo3. Are you serious, can you possibly imagine what Halo3 is going to look like on XBOX 360. Over 6 million people bought Halo2 and made it immediately the most popular game on XBOX LIVE. All the games shown thus far on 360 are first generation launch window games. Can you imagine what the most talented team in the business, that being bungie, is going to have prepared for the launch of PS3. It is going to be a very strong blow coming from Bungie and the answer can only come from one company, Rockstar. Sony better pray that Rockstar will be there for them at launch with an exclusive GTA game. If Rockstar goes multiplatform, Sony will be real trouble.

After unveiling the PS3 Sony on did one thing, guarantee this generation will be a whole lot closer. Some good sensible news from Sony though, they will have a subscription based network, similar to LIVE according to the Gamespot website. But it seems like with Sony its one thing or the other. Now we have to wonder if the hdd will be a peripheral or not. I told you guys you were all jumping the gun.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

PS3 will have:
1080i Dual Screen Support!
Faster GPU (550 Mhz Nvidia)
X7 On Blue Tooth 2.0
2.0 Tflops as opposed to (1.0 Xbox360):D

Sony is not treading lightly here, They will not let MS get ahead...No Way.
Oh yeah I remember that fella from Team Ninja saying he will only produce his games (Ninja Gaiden) on the most Powerful system...I guess NG should be on PS3...yet I think 360 is getting it?!?

Now! Don't get me wrong, I've said before that it's not only about the raw power but the games! I admit that 360 indeed does have some sweet a$$ titles coming....Halo 3....drool! But I gotta have my RPGs, and if God of War looks that good on PS2 imagine what the sequel would look like on PS3? :eek:


On Final Note:
I feel sorry for Nintendo, GameSpot nor IGN even have a listing for Revolution (Coming soon) Section like they do for PS3 and 360! Hmmmmm! :(

I agree with you that Team Ninja should support both systems. I just don't think they will. Just like I think Rockstar should support both systems. But I just don't think either one will support both systems. Of course, Rockstar has supported XBOX in the past with MaxPayne and Midnight Club, but we all know they need to do one thing, release GTA simultaneously, and not give Sony a 6 month exclusivity. But, if Sony is offering you millions for exclusivity then Rockstar would be stupid to ignore it, ditto with Team Ninja, its not been said that MS has explicitly paid for exclusivity, I think it was all just a matter of Team Ninja not wanting to fight with the PS2 hardware, after all they did release DeadorAlive on PS2, and the DC version was better. So I think TeamNinja was just done with PS2 hardware. But now, I just have a feeling MS will continue to publish their games and they will not appear on PS3. The reason being is they have competition on PS3. There are other fighters DOA would have to contend with, and other action games NG would have to contend with. I think Team Ninja likes to stand-out and there might be something personal. Of course, if I was MS, i'd buy 'em out.

Far as the console specs, Sony has been known to dramatically overstate their hardware. Now will it be more powerful than 360 yes, but 2 terraflops, ummm no. Not realizable power anyway. But i'm certainly not against power. Last generation I bought the most powerful system, and would have bought either a GC or PS2 if their systems had of been worthy, to me. This time around the PS3 is definitely the strongest system and the most versatile system, and now it looks like they will have a subscription based network, so i'll have a PS3. I definitely think initially the XBOX 360 will have more western oriented games, but hopefully with games from Ubisoft like Killing Day, and support from Unreal and Epic and others PC developers will migrate more and more to PS3. Because they need the help, I think they are hopelessly lost and stuck in their cycle of games, MetalGear, Tekken, FF, GT, DMC etc etc etc etc.

[Mochan]

The system has a core processor with basically 8 32bit cell processors, so i'm guessing you will get 8 threads from the cell. The XBOX 360 has 3 cores each capable of 2 threads, so you get 6 threads. Each cpu on the cell apparently has a vector processing unit, ditto with XBOX 360. However the PS3 has 512mb of L2 cache, guess what, XBOX 360 has 10MB of on-die cache.


Now hold on.

6 threads =/= 6 cores

It's 3 cores with 2 threads each, vs 8 cores with 1 thread? each (actually we don't really know how the SPEs and core on the Cell work). Saying the PS3 only has 25% more power (6 to 8) than the XBox3 is like saying Athlon 64 2800 is as strong as an Opteron because it has Dual Channel memory.

Further, the 10MB isn't L2 cache, it's RAM for the GPU. i.e. it is dedicated video memory. The XBox 360 only has 10MB dedicated memory and shares the rest of the system's 512MB, compared to the PS3 which has 256MB Dedicated video memory. Although PS3 only has 256MB system RAM. What is unclear though is that 512MB render memory for the reality synth unit that Last Word mentioned. I can't find that on the stats page.

Anyway, a more accurate comparison would be:

XBox 360 CPU = 1MB L2 Cache

vs.

PS3 CPU = 512KB L2 Cache +
7 x 256KB SPE Cache

For a total of 2.3MB on-die memory as opposed to XBox 360's 1MB.


By the way, Shared RAM is typically not as efficient as dedicated RAM. Saying the XBox 360 is more flexible here is misleading, it may be more flexible but it probably won't be as good as dedicated RAM. Still, I have to say 256MB System RAM is cutting it a little too close for the PS3.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Now hold on.

6 threads =/= 6 cores

It's 3 cores with 2 threads each, vs 8 cores with 1 thread? each (actually we don't really know how the SPEs and core on the Cell work). Saying the PS3 only has 25% more power (6 to 8) than the XBox3 is like saying Athlon 64 2800 is as strong as an Opteron because it has Dual Channel memory.

Further, the 10MB isn't L2 cache, it's RAM for the GPU. i.e. it is dedicated video memory. The XBox 360 only has 10MB dedicated memory and shares the rest of the system's 512MB, compared to the PS3 which has 256MB Dedicated video memory. Although PS3 only has 256MB system RAM. What is unclear though is that 512MB render memory for the reality synth unit that Last Word mentioned. I can't find that on the stats page.

Anyway, a more accurate comparison would be:

XBox 360 CPU = 1MB L2 Cache

vs.

PS3 CPU = 512KB L2 Cache +
7 x 256KB SPE Cache

For a total of 2.3MB on-die memory as opposed to XBox 360's 1MB.


By the way, Shared RAM is typically not as efficient as dedicated RAM. Saying the XBox 360 is more flexible here is misleading, it may be more flexible but it probably won't be as good as dedicated RAM. Still, I have to say 256MB System RAM is cutting it a little too close for the PS3.

That's completely inaccurate. The PS3 has less on die memory than the XBOX 360 by a boat load, whether its called cache or not. The 10meg on die memory is being used as a videobuffer. Essentially what you have is both systems with 512mb or ram, Sony is squarlely dividing theirs, MS is not simply because developers pleaded with MS to make it unified. But on die ram MS has as you said 10mb compared to Sony's 2.3. Does it all matter, nope, because no one is contesting the PS3 isn't more powerful.

[Mochan]

That's completely inaccurate. The PS3 has less on die memory than the XBOX 360 by a boat load, whether its called cache or not. The 10meg on die memory is being used as a videobuffer

You completely missed the point. You were comparing the PS3's 512KB L2 Cache on the CPU, to the XBox 360's 10MB embedded DRAM on the GPU, as if trying to show that the 360 were 20 times superior to the PS3 in this particular area. It's not.

L2 Cache is not video buffer memory, it's instruction core buffer memory. It's where instructions to the CPU are kept before they go to the CPU proper itself. The 360 has 1MB worth of this, the PS3 has about 2.3MB worth.

What you were trying to do was to say that the XBox's 10MB on-die memory -- which is used for doing quick GPU tasks -- is greater than the 512MB on-die L2 cache of the PS3. Which is just bonkers because the two don't perform the same tasks. It's like saying ten pounds of striated body muscle is greater than 1 pound of brain matter. Compare apples to apples, and not to oranges.

Where:
(CPU on-die cache = apples)
(GPU dRAM = orange)
(( In case you didn't get what I mean ))

[slade]

LMAO, you can't be serious, quoting a VGR fanboy as if it really means something. XBOX 360 has 160 titles in development. And if anything, developers are jumping over to XBOX, and nobody appears to be significantly waiting on PS3.

Before you dismiss it out of hand, look at this:

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614766p1.html

[ThaMaskedGamer]

You completely missed the point. You were comparing the PS3's 512KB L2 Cache on the CPU, to the XBox 360's 10MB embedded DRAM on the GPU, as if trying to show that the 360 were 20 times superior to the PS3 in this particular area. It's not.

L2 Cache is not video buffer memory, it's instruction core buffer memory. It's where instructions to the CPU are kept before they go to the CPU proper itself. The 360 has 1MB worth of this, the PS3 has about 2.3MB worth.

What you were trying to do was to say that the XBox's 10MB on-die memory -- which is used for doing quick GPU tasks -- is greater than the 512MB on-die L2 cache of the PS3. Which is just bonkers because the two don't perform the same tasks. It's like saying ten pounds of striated body muscle is greater than 1 pound of brain matter. Compare apples to apples, and not to oranges.

Where:
(CPU on-die cache = apples)
(GPU dRAM = orange)
(( In case you didn't get what I mean ))


Oh I get what you mean, but I have to re-read the tech article about the embedded ram(on 360) because I recall reading it was more than just for GPU related tasks. I could be wrong, I glanced over this stuff very quickly when it was first released.

[Mochan]

I too read that the L2 Cache of the 360 could be accessed by the GPU... this is very unconventional, but probably allows the 360 to work faster than it could. Probably a good thing.

But regardless, my point is that we shouldn't be comparing the 10MB on-die of the GPU die to the On-Die memory found on the CPU die.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Before you dismiss it out of hand, look at this:

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614766p1.html


First let's get one thing clear, i'm not coming out in the ANTI-PS3 camp. I'm anti-PS2, not Anti-PS3. I'm as interested in the PS3 as anyone else, I hope it loves up to the hype. But what I am saying is you guys who are in the ANTI-360 camp can feel like the 360 won't be able to compete all you want, it will compete with the PS3, despite the FACT PS3 is indeed more powerful.

I think the idea that Square is half supporting 360, Capcom is making a game, and a lot of big shot japanese developers who fathered some classic titles are doing XBOX games, is a bigger coup than Kung Fu Chaos jumping ship.

On the PS3, I think its great and a big coup that Ubisoft is doing what appears to be an exclusive shooter for PS3, Killing Day or something.

I'm just trying to get you guys to realize this is not going to be a walk in the park for PS3. It will be a fight.

The roles of a competitor against an established GIANT were somewhat reversed last generation. In any other market, electronics, automobiles, etc., the newcomer usually challenges the market leader based on cost. For what ever reason, Sony dropped the ball on the PS2, and had to adopt the cost leader strategy, while MS adopted the quality product role. Now, it appears, the world is back on its proper axis, and Sony has the top of the line product, but MS will no doubt be the cost leader, but they will also not be significantly behind in terms of what their games look like. I think its a mistake to think there will be some kind of PS2 versus XBOX difference in visual quality. That might be the case 3 years from now when we have PIXAR quality games, but no time soon.

Just to clarify, TMG = Pro 360, Pro PS3, Pro XBOX. Neutral - Revolution(though under no circumstance will I be buying one) Anti -PS2, Anti-GC.

[Mochan]

it will compete with the PS3, despite the FACT PS3 is indeed more powerful.

No doubt about that. The PS2 competed, and won, over the XBox despite the fact that the XBox was more powerful.

As for the graphical quality, you may have a point, I think the bigger issue is that not too many people will have 1080p-capable tubes. And you probably do have a point in that the human eye may no longer be really capable of appreciating the fine differences at such high resolutions, so 360 and PS3 games may just look similar.

However, that's just from a resolution standpoint. The graphical effects that the PS3 can ultimately achieve will likely be better than the 360's, this will be the kind of graphical difference between the two consoles. You're probably right in saying though that we will not notice the difference until a few years down the line when devs figure out the best ways to do graphics on the next gen.

I sure hope we reach a graphical plateau soon as Renz predicted, that would mean the ridiculous hardware scramble on the PC can finally stop.

[slade]

I think the idea that Square is half supporting 360, Capcom is making a game, and a lot of big shot japanese developers who fathered some classic titles are doing XBOX games, is a bigger coup than Kung Fu Chaos jumping ship.

How is this a coup when Square is porting a two year old game? As for other major Japanese developers, they made games for the X-box too. This is in no way a coup at any level.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

How is this a coup when Square is porting a two year old game? As for other major Japanese developers, they made games for the X-box too. This is in no way a coup at any level.


The industry is seeing Square supporting XBOX 360 as a coup. You and I, both don't see it that way, so I agree with you. But the media's perception is glowing. Ditto for the big name Japanese developers who left Capcom and Square and are now making some games for 360. You know these guys better than I, you know what kind of classics they were responsible for, I forget and its not important to me. The media seem to think its important for 360 and for Japan, I don't think so, and I guess you don't either. So for once we are in agreement. But given the totality of that, I think it is definitely more of a coup than the Kung Fu Chaos guys jumping to PS3.

Again, I think the fact that Ubisoft, who had such a close relationship with MS, is making an exclusive shooter for PS3, is a much bigger story for PS3. In fact its real important, its saying that Ubisoft believes in the hardware and in Sony getting behind a top-knotch shooter, and is willing to ignore any additional revenue a 360 version would bring in.

[shogun]

I think the idea that Square is half supporting 360, Capcom is making a game, and a lot of big shot japanese developers who fathered some classic titles are doing XBOX games, is a bigger coup than Kung Fu Chaos jumping ship.
.

Capcom gave XBox some half-assed support with Dino Crisis, Steel Batallion and fighting game/Onimusha ports. Whee. Nothing new.

Sega and Tecmo did XBox and both have showings for 360 (although Sega's is quite a bit leaner than their bold support of XBox) not suprising, and not a coup. Xbox was never completely avoided by the japanese.

[Jupiter_x]

[
Now, don't get me wrong, unlike you guys, i'm not hoping for the PS3 to be a failure, like you are hoping 360 will be, but it simply is not going to blow away the 360.



Ok ok, I know it sounds like I want 360 to fail...I don't! :)
I am very excited over the possibilities of Ps3 and 360, also I cannot deny that 360 too is very enticing...Uhhhhh:mad: alright....(Glockstar would just love to hear this), ever since Nintendos showing, I have pondered complimenting my PS3 with 360 instead of Rev! Maybe I just need too cool off a little :mad: but c'mon, Who F*cking cares about Mario Kart Online, and yet another Gameboy...Nintendo needs a hard kick in the pants...you know...the 'ol Pokemons!

:mad: (Yelling: "NINTENDO WILL YOU EVER LEARN") :mad:

Today was a real eye opener for me, Nintendo (as much as I love them and everything they do) in my opinion will be left behind this gen! They arent even finished with REV yet, they are notorius for always being late in everything they do. By the time Rev is released most of the population will have purchased PS3 or 360!

For the first time in a long time I am going to wait it out for those killer apps on the Revolution, and then see if it is worth my money! Now, don't get me wrong, unlike you guys, i'm not hoping for the PS3 to be a failure, like you are hoping 360 will be, but it simply is not going to blow away the 360.

[Gadfly2317]

First let's get one thing clear, i'm not coming out in the ANTI-PS3 camp. I'm anti-PS2, not Anti-PS3. I'm as interested in the PS3 as anyone else, I hope it loves up to the hype. But what I am saying is you guys who are in the ANTI-360 camp can feel like the 360 won't be able to compete all you want, it will compete with the PS3, despite the FACT PS3 is indeed more powerful.

I think the idea that Square is half supporting 360, Capcom is making a game, and a lot of big shot japanese developers who fathered some classic titles are doing XBOX games, is a bigger coup than Kung Fu Chaos jumping ship.

On the PS3, I think its great and a big coup that Ubisoft is doing what appears to be an exclusive shooter for PS3, Killing Day or something.

I'm just trying to get you guys to realize this is not going to be a walk in the park for PS3. It will be a fight.

The roles of a competitor against an established GIANT were somewhat reversed last generation. In any other market, electronics, automobiles, etc., the newcomer usually challenges the market leader based on cost. For what ever reason, Sony dropped the ball on the PS2, and had to adopt the cost leader strategy, while MS adopted the quality product role. Now, it appears, the world is back on its proper axis, and Sony has the top of the line product, but MS will no doubt be the cost leader, but they will also not be significantly behind in terms of what their games look like. I think its a mistake to think there will be some kind of PS2 versus XBOX difference in visual quality. That might be the case 3 years from now when we have PIXAR quality games, but no time soon.

Just to clarify, TMG = Pro 360, Pro PS3, Pro XBOX. Neutral - Revolution(though under no circumstance will I be buying one) Anti -PS2, Anti-GC.

Interesting post.

I don't how to categorize myself at this point. I guess I seem anti-Xbox360, but the main thing is, I really gluttonized on the systems this time around, and I realized how the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence and all that, but its all just grass. The point is I have learned the expensive way I can NEVER keep up with all the games I'd like to play, and because of that, it seems irrational to have both a Ps3 and Xbox360 unless you play a LOT of games, but the main thing is, the Ps3 will feature the majority of games that are on the Xbox, PLUS a LOT more, plus its more powerful, PLUS its backwards compatible so I can continue to play less expensive Ps2 games as filler between Ps3 games I want.

As far as Revolution, I'm not "pro" at this point, but the one plus for it is that it will likely be the cheapest to start, fall in price the fastest, and at some point make an inexpensive supplement to the Ps3 for anyone who likes those Nintendo first party games.

I guess that makes me an unenthusiastic but pro-Ps3, still watching Rev, and see Xbox360 as completely pointless. . . if you can live without Halo3, you can live without Xbox360. Which, in fact, if you can't live without Halo3, just rent the damned 360 for the week it takes you to beat the game.

[Mochan]

Right now, it seems I'm going to be doing this gen what I did last gen. Go with PC + PS3 combo.

Same logic more or less applies, although XBox360 seems to be trying to differentiate its library from the PC's a bit more by getting more Jap devs onto the scene. PS3 will probably still have better support in this regard, so I'll probably still end up with the PS3.

Revo... at first I thought you could download GameCube games. Since you can't, and only go as far as the N64, then I see little point in it since emulators cover everything from the FamiCom to the N64. But still, I'll wait for May 19 to see if we have any big surprises from Nintendo.

I'm still hoping Sony will eventually allow us to hook up keyboards and mice to the PS3. Or better yet, Speed pads and mice (ideal control setup!) for games I don't want to play on a gamepad.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

Right now, it seems I'm going to be doing this gen what I did last gen. Go with PC + PS3 combo.

Same logic more or less applies, although XBox360 seems to be trying to differentiate its library from the PC's a bit more by getting more Jap devs onto the scene. PS3 will probably still have better support in this regard, so I'll probably still end up with the PS3.

Revo... at first I thought you could download GameCube games. Since you can't, and only go as far as the N64, then I see little point in it since emulators cover everything from the FamiCom to the N64. But still, I'll wait for May 19 to see if we have any big surprises from Nintendo.

I'm still hoping Sony will eventually allow us to hook up keyboards and mice to the PS3. Or better yet, Speed pads and mice (ideal control setup!) for games I don't want to play on a gamepad.

What you see as a negative is a positive to most. The fact is that most people don't game on the PC and the Xbox is vialbe platform to play some of the PC's best games.

[Renzatic Gear]

I'd say that the same amount of people play games on the PC as they do on Xbox. If they didn't then the big videocard companies wouldn't be pulling in as much business as they were on their high end cards.

[Mochan]

I'd say that the XBox 360 stands a much better chance of wooing all the PC gamers if it allowed you to use a mouse. And there are a lot of PC gamers, you know.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Interesting post.

I don't how to categorize myself at this point. I guess I seem anti-Xbox360, but the main thing is, I really gluttonized on the systems this time around, and I realized how the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence and all that, but its all just grass. The point is I have learned the expensive way I can NEVER keep up with all the games I'd like to play, and because of that, it seems irrational to have both a Ps3 and Xbox360 unless you play a LOT of games, but the main thing is, the Ps3 will feature the majority of games that are on the Xbox, PLUS a LOT more, plus its more powerful, PLUS its backwards compatible so I can continue to play less expensive Ps2 games as filler between Ps3 games I want.

As far as Revolution, I'm not "pro" at this point, but the one plus for it is that it will likely be the cheapest to start, fall in price the fastest, and at some point make an inexpensive supplement to the Ps3 for anyone who likes those Nintendo first party games.

I guess that makes me an unenthusiastic but pro-Ps3, still watching Rev, and see Xbox360 as completely pointless. . . if you can live without Halo3, you can live without Xbox360. Which, in fact, if you can't live without Halo3, just rent the damned 360 for the week it takes you to beat the game.


They continue to make the same lame weak arguments that never really applied last generation, to the next generation. There is much much more on XBOX to play than Halo, Halo was just two games, if XBOX only had 2 good exclusives games, it would have never survivied. I don't know what Gadfly's point is, I don't know what he is trying to accomplish especially by pushing these same weak arguments onto the XBOX 360. The fact is the system is launching without a Halo game and will have plenty of exclusives, hell all of its games will be exclusives for 6 months to a year.

He must just be upset that Nintendo has come out and said their console will only be 3 times more powerful than Gamecube. I tried to tell all of you guys the Revolution would not be as powerful as XBOX 360. WACKO tried to sell you guys a bunch of crap, that since the CPU and graphics card were made by the same companies as XBOX 360, that they would have the same level of performance. What WACKO didn't understand, and its too bad you guys believed him, is those CPUs and the GPU for XBOX 360 are custom designs made by Microsoft Engineers. Ditto for Nintendo's processors. So, now you guys put all your hope into Nintendo launching later and knocking off XBOX 360, with the hope it would be squeezed out in power by both Rev and PS3. Well, that was never going to happen. But you guys fell for his crap hook line and sinker.

I just don't understand why you guys are hating on the systems. Well, I understand loyalty to a company. That is just stupid. These are three brand new consumer products, lets judge them on their own merits, and hopefully adopt and "cheer" if you must for the one that plays games the best, the one that gives developers the best canvas to create the best games. My point last generation was that was XBOX. This generation, early on, it looks like PS3. And obviously, since MS conceded this, PS3 will be more versatile, supporting 1080P, supporting 3 more controllers(i know that's overkill, but I killed Sony for not going overboard with PS2, so I have to praise them for going overboard), ditto for supporting two monitors, that's also going overboard, but thank you Sony. It would be nice if you could use those two outputs to play cooperatively without split screen. Sony is also obviously supporting Blu-ray, while I don't think it matters for gaming, still it is an example of Sony giving you more for less. They are doing a network now, cool, and hopefully including a hardrive. So Sony deserves the spotlot early on, they so far have the best console, and its logical to assume, especially given how fast they've put these tech demos and games together, that their platform will allow developers to make the best games. Does that mean its over for 360, no, because its damn powerful too and MS has great franchises and will be cheaper, plus they have LIVE.

I don't hate Revolution or Nintendo. But taking this approach is a tactical mistake. They would have been better off, just bailing and supporting the 360. The reason I say the 360 is because they could have extracted much better terms from Microsoft in terms of licensing or royalties, they probably could have become a partner in the 360, instead of just a developer, but what they are doing now is just strategically a big mistake, of course they don't see it that way and it is a shame. They could have made any game they wanted to make from a power point of view on 360, they could have designed unique separate controllers using USB technology if they wanted funky controllers.

[theWacoKid]

He must just be upset that Nintendo has come out and said their console will only be 3 times more powerful than Gamecube. I tried to tell all of you guys the Revolution would not be as powerful as XBOX 360. WACKO tried to sell you guys a bunch of crap, that since the CPU and graphics card were made by the same companies as XBOX 360, that they would have the same level of performance. What WACKO didn't understand, and its too bad you guys believed him, is those CPUs and the GPU for XBOX 360 are custom designs made by Microsoft Engineers. Ditto for Nintendo's processors. So, now you guys put all your hope into Nintendo launching later and knocking off XBOX 360, with the hope it would be squeezed out in power by both Rev and PS3. Well, that was never going to happen. But you guys fell for his crap hook line and sinker.
.

Hey, chicken little, it ain't over till the fat lady sings. At this point, we're only hearing rumors of supposed perfomance of revolution as supposedly reported from nintendo. So, it still remains a big question mark, and please don't insult me with your MS engineer contribution bullcrap argument. These are in no way shape or form brand new chip designs. Your ignorance is astounding. Why dont you watch the promotional xbox videos, where your boy Jim Allard, lays it out how they went out and got the best IBM and ATI had to offer and tweaked it, and that's about the extent of the MS engineer contribution, tweaking.

Another thing to keep in mind, is that nintendo doesn't intend to do high def as far as I can see, so the performance they're talking about could be comparable to the xbox 360 at standard def resolutions. When I read from IGN, that PDZ is only running at 20-25 fps but that Rare is hoping for a steady 30fps for launch, I go, WTF, they're hoping for 30fps on a next gen game. Sad, just bloody sad. Is that supposed to be the yardstick for next gen performance, 30fps? Say it ain't so, TMG, because a 30fps next gen FPS sounds mondo pathetic to me. I want performance from a next gen console, I want blazing fast. If I see so much as a hint of slowdown or an erratic framerate, you can take those high def visuals and stick them where the moon don't shine, because they won't mean a damn.

Why Nintendo is seemingly content to ignore hi-def? Well, they ignored online for an entire generation, and they might figure, that the penetration of high def displays won't be sufficient to matter to them.

Next point, those terralop numbers basically refer to floating point operations and those are dominated by the respective gpus. The RSX for instance pulls 1.8 terraflops from that 2 Terraflops of system performance. Right now, we know virtually nothing about the performance of the gpu codenamed hollywood or what it can do or what performance yardsticks are being laid out. Its just another part of the revolution mystery nintendo doesnt' want to reveal for whatever bizarre reasoning.

I'm disappointed in the early indications of the revy, but it ain't over by a long shot. But, nintendo bailing and supporting the xbox 360 would be pure stupidity. Watch how Kameo bombs on the 360 like similarly themed games on the xbox. The xbot audience doesn't give a rat's ass about nintendo style games and nintendo fans would abandon nintendo if they moved to another platform. Nintendo will go under before going third party. That much is abundantly clear to me.

[Gadfly2317]

They continue to make the same lame weak arguments that never really applied last generation, to the next generation. There is much much more on XBOX to play than Halo, Halo was just two games, if XBOX only had 2 good exclusives games, it would have never survivied. I don't know what Gadfly's point is, I don't know what he is trying to accomplish especially by pushing these same weak arguments onto the XBOX 360. The fact is the system is launching without a Halo game and will have plenty of exclusives, hell all of its games will be exclusives for 6 months to a year.

He must just be upset that Nintendo has come out and said their console will only be 3 times more powerful than Gamecube. I tried to tell all of you guys the Revolution would not be as powerful as XBOX 360. WACKO tried to sell you guys a bunch of crap, that since the CPU and graphics card were made by the same companies as XBOX 360, that they would have the same level of performance. What WACKO didn't understand, and its too bad you guys believed him, is those CPUs and the GPU for XBOX 360 are custom designs made by Microsoft Engineers. Ditto for Nintendo's processors. So, now you guys put all your hope into Nintendo launching later and knocking off XBOX 360, with the hope it would be squeezed out in power by both Rev and PS3. Well, that was never going to happen. But you guys fell for his crap hook line and sinker.

I just don't understand why you guys are hating on the systems. Well, I understand loyalty to a company. That is just stupid. These are three brand new consumer products, lets judge them on their own merits, and hopefully adopt and "cheer" if you must for the one that plays games the best, the one that gives developers the best canvas to create the best games. My point last generation was that was XBOX. This generation, early on, it looks like PS3. And obviously, since MS conceded this, PS3 will be more versatile, supporting 1080P, supporting 3 more controllers(i know that's overkill, but I killed Sony for not going overboard with PS2, so I have to praise them for going overboard), ditto for supporting two monitors, that's also going overboard, but thank you Sony. It would be nice if you could use those two outputs to play cooperatively without split screen. Sony is also obviously supporting Blu-ray, while I don't think it matters for gaming, still it is an example of Sony giving you more for less. They are doing a network now, cool, and hopefully including a hardrive. So Sony deserves the spotlot early on, they so far have the best console, and its logical to assume, especially given how fast they've put these tech demos and games together, that their platform will allow developers to make the best games. Does that mean its over for 360, no, because its damn powerful too and MS has great franchises and will be cheaper, plus they have LIVE.
.

I don't hate the Xbox360, I just feel its irrelevant, more so than Xbox was even with its smallish game library--at least xbox was the most powerful system of its generation, and so got the PC ports, and third party games looked better. What are all these "great franchises" you are referring to that won't be on Ps3? I'm sure there's a few games, but I just don't see anything that would make me want to buy a whole console for when there are numerous superior games of the same genre on a much more powerful system. My only point really, is that I found 2 and 3 consoles to be too much to support, in terms of time and even the time it took to try and see what the hell was coming out in when and for what system. Cutting back to one System, Ps3 does it all, and plays all the Ps1 and Ps2 games I already have. What is an Xbox gamer to do, have an Xbox, Xbox360, AND a Ps3 under their TV? GAG!

Ps3 does everything the Xbox360 does and so much more I don't know why I'd bother spending several hundred dollars for a second inferior system with a smaller "me too" game library when I could spend that several hundred dollars on games for one really great system that also will play Hi-def movies.

It's not a hate thing, its just a practical observation from a gamer who wants to focus his gaming and not have 3 consoles under the TV anymore. It certainly isn't born out of anything to do with the Revolution or its "power" in relation to the 360. I could give a crap, seriously. I ignored the N64 if you'll recall, I'm not loyal. And so far, I have yet to see anything that makes me want a Revolution. I do like Nintendo games a lot, but so far they haven't announced any new ones. If you read my post it was pretty much saying I might pick up a Rev after its dreamcast like "price flop" to play the 2 new games they might put on it. And after it hits its dreamcast price, I'll have an inexpensive replacement for my GC since Rev plays GC games too (and its so freaking tiny.) Isn't that convenient how both the Rev and the Ps3 replace an existing console under the TV, but the Xbox360 just adds one more unless you throw out your Xbox and its libary, never to play those games again?

The GC was a great system early on, and it looks like its going to go out with a bang, but the poor revolution, with no Factor 5, no Silicon Knights, no Capcom, maybe even no Sega, and they can't even announce a new Shig title yet? What is there going to be on it, just Nintendo games and some EA games? I mean, GC looks like it is running circles around want they've announced so far for Rev. Something may come out to change my mind and maybe they are waiting until next year closer to launch to unveil some cool stuff so they could focus on the handheld war, but I'm just saying what I think about this in terms of games.

[Jupiter_x]

Ok, I was a little hard with Nintendo yesterday, I'm cool now though, gotta keep the faith man!

[slade]

Again, I think the fact that Ubisoft, who had such a close relationship with MS, is making an exclusive shooter for PS3, is a much bigger story for PS3. In fact its real important, its saying that Ubisoft believes in the hardware and in Sony getting behind a top-knotch shooter, and is willing to ignore any additional revenue a 360 version would bring in.

I think Bioware developing for PS3 is a bigger coup for Sony then Ubisoft.

http://games-news.sympatico.msn.ca/Video_Games/BreakingNews/ContentPosting.aspx?contentid=8293a826fffe4652a390 d0e8cebc3571&show=True&number=6&showbyline=True&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc

In terms of its Canadian connection, BioWare was at the press conference. It seems as though the Edmonton based developer will be starting a PlayStation 3 game in the coming weeks. So far BioWare has only made games for the PC and Xbox and has never made a game for any Sony gaming platform, but that is going to change. Details on what the game will focus on are not being discussed for the moment.

The industry is seeing Square supporting XBOX 360 as a coup.

Not quite. Read the following interview with J. Allard.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59297
Eurogamer: Will you have an exclusive game from Square Enix?

J Allard: You're going to have to talk to Square on that one. My lips are sealed [squirms in chair]. We can only say what we said on Monday night; that's all we can say right now.

Eurogamer: But you chose to show off a game that was released three years ago on the PC and we were expecting much more maybe...

J Allard: Well, there was the other trailer he showed as well... He showed a second game as well.

Eurogamer: That was just a tech demo though

J Allard: It is.

Eurogamer: It's not a game is it?

J Allard: I'm not the one that's going to break the news for Square Enix; you're going to have to talk to those guys.

Eurogamer: Will it be exclusive though?

J Allard: You're going to have to talk to those guys! I'm just the platform guy [throws hands in the air.]

Obviously, exclusives > three year old ports.

Now, Mistwalker and Game Arts are big feathers in MS's cap but they don't have the big name impact of established series. The other big studios in Japan do and they have not jumped into MS's camp. All the scuttlebutting around has been in Sony's favor and they have kept all of the big games that put them on top last gen.