Wow....I am stunned
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="GIJames248"][QUOTE="NextGenNow"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"][QUOTE="emitsu97"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"]I agree with you, Sony may be eating a lot of the cost but hey, it was their stupid decisions that led to the extremely high cost of producing PS3's. Right now the current price isn't justified considering x360 offers a lot more for a lot less money. Sony shoudl have just focused on making the best gaming system period, but no, they had to take too many risks trying to make the PS3 some ultimate fusion of media functionality.xuimod
Let's see how that argument holds up in 4 years. They're already stumbling on storage capacity and it's only been a year for them.
I haven't heard any serious outcries from developers regarding disk space. And there's a very easy solution, just put the games on more than one DVD. No big deal. I would rather have the odd game on multiple dvd's than pay a premium for a videogame system that's desperately trying to be a blu-ray player and a PC. Imagine Halo 2 on the Dreamcast, then imagine all the creative cutbacks that would have to be made...that's what happens when you don't upgrade formats each generation. You haven't heard any yet because the competition hasn't heated up yet. Imagine Halo 3 being a lot smaller than Killzone 2....well stop imagining because it will be. 9 gig vs 50...wonder which game will have bigger areas, more enemies, better A.I., more weapons, more explosions, and bigger mulitplayer? Wonder no more...
I have yet to see a game that was seriously hampered by media restrictions. I have a gamecube and that console has some of the best gameplay and graphics of the last-gen and it was "hampered" by 1.4 gigabyte discs. Ever heard of Ocarina of Time, that game was made on a 32MB cartridge. I am a supporter of Blue-ray but to condemn the 360 as a failure or a crippled console because it uses DVD 9 is blind fanboyism. Look at Oblivion, 200 hours long, good gameplay, great graphics, five gigabytes. Blu-ray is a nice feature and I am willing to pay the price but I can see were MS is coming from on the 360 front.
Wrong.....Square didn't bring Final Fantany 7 to the Nintendo 64 because of limitations in cartridge media. Square instead choose to bring out FF7 on the PS1 because CD-ROM's offered a lot more space that the developers needed. And that is one HUGE example b/c FF7 was one of the key games that helped the PS dominate over the N64. Ouch thats a big blow
[QUOTE="smeags11"]I dont know about nyone else but i live in Canada, i dont own a ps3 but i really want one. So the **** at sony decide to instead of lower the price which was at $656.99+tax=around $750. THEY ACTUALLY MAKE IT MORE PRICY AT 699.99+tax= PRETTY MUCH 800 FRIKIN DOLLARS. do they not want to sell the system at all?I would say move to the U.S. but you may want to hold out on that until after the 08' elections. If hilary doesnt win, then you can move here, if she wins, I'm moving to Australia. I suggest you do the same
blitzinger123
I disagree.
THe USA will be a much better place if Hillary...heck any Democrat......wins in '08.
[QUOTE="Goku004"][QUOTE="NextGenNow"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"][QUOTE="emitsu97"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"]I agree with you, Sony may be eating a lot of the cost but hey, it was their stupid decisions that led to the extremely high cost of producing PS3's. Right now the current price isn't justified considering x360 offers a lot more for a lot less money. Sony shoudl have just focused on making the best gaming system period, but no, they had to take too many risks trying to make the PS3 some ultimate fusion of media functionality.neovalkyr
Let's see how that argument holds up in 4 years. They're already stumbling on storage capacity and it's only been a year for them.
I haven't heard any serious outcries from developers regarding disk space. And there's a very easy solution, just put the games on more than one DVD. No big deal. I would rather have the odd game on multiple dvd's than pay a premium for a videogame system that's desperately trying to be a blu-ray player and a PC. Imagine Halo 2 on the Dreamcast, then imagine all the creative cutbacks that would have to be made...that's what happens when you don't upgrade formats each generation. You haven't heard any yet because the competition hasn't heated up yet. Imagine Halo 3 being a lot smaller than Killzone 2....well stop imagining because it will be. 9 gig vs 50...wonder which game will have bigger areas, more enemies, better A.I., more weapons, more explosions, and bigger mulitplayer? Wonder no more... lol..Owned.
I think the last two people quoted better learn how computers work...the amount of content availble at anyone time is determined by the RAM. In otherwords, how many textures,character meshes, and maps can you fit into one multiplayer game? 512 mb worth... The only thing lacking with the xbox because of DVD will be the quality of FMV.
Agreed.
Blu-ray has nothing to do with enemy AI, number of enemies, weapons etc.
People really need to do some research before talking about game development.
Wrong.....Square didn't bring Final Fantany 7 to the Nintendo 64 because of limitations in cartridge media. Square instead choose to bring out FF7 on the PS1 because CD-ROM's offered a lot more space that the developers needed. And that is one HUGE example b/c FF7 was one of the key games that helped the PS dominate over the N64.xuimod
You still don't understand.
RAM wasn't the reason why Square went with the PS1 over the N64. It was the fact that Square needed all the storage space for their CGI movies.
[QUOTE="neovalkyr"][QUOTE="Goku004"][QUOTE="NextGenNow"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"][QUOTE="emitsu97"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"]I agree with you, Sony may be eating a lot of the cost but hey, it was their stupid decisions that led to the extremely high cost of producing PS3's. Right now the current price isn't justified considering x360 offers a lot more for a lot less money. Sony shoudl have just focused on making the best gaming system period, but no, they had to take too many risks trying to make the PS3 some ultimate fusion of media functionality.LosDaddie
Let's see how that argument holds up in 4 years. They're already stumbling on storage capacity and it's only been a year for them.
I haven't heard any serious outcries from developers regarding disk space. And there's a very easy solution, just put the games on more than one DVD. No big deal. I would rather have the odd game on multiple dvd's than pay a premium for a videogame system that's desperately trying to be a blu-ray player and a PC. Imagine Halo 2 on the Dreamcast, then imagine all the creative cutbacks that would have to be made...that's what happens when you don't upgrade formats each generation. You haven't heard any yet because the competition hasn't heated up yet. Imagine Halo 3 being a lot smaller than Killzone 2....well stop imagining because it will be. 9 gig vs 50...wonder which game will have bigger areas, more enemies, better A.I., more weapons, more explosions, and bigger mulitplayer? Wonder no more... lol..Owned.
I think the last two people quoted better learn how computers work...the amount of content availble at anyone time is determined by the RAM. In otherwords, how many textures,character meshes, and maps can you fit into one multiplayer game? 512 mb worth... The only thing lacking with the xbox because of DVD will be the quality of FMV.
Agreed.
Blu-ray has nothing to do with enemy AI, number of enemies, weapons etc.
People really need to do some research before talking about game development.
i think both of you need to learn how they work. AI and Physics are computed by the SPE's on the Cell in the PS3, then routed to the GPU. the GPU then has acess to 512 mb of ram, 256 of its own DDR, and 256 of the main boards XDR(quite a bit faster than DDR ram that is on the 360, which means it has more bandwidth and less access time, AKA faster) on top of that, each SPE has their own 256mb of ram, thats 6 SPE's, each at 256, then the PPE itself has 512 cache, and that is dual core. so, try again there Mr. Wizardi think both of you need to learn how they work. AI and Physics are computed by the SPE's on the Cell in the PS3, then routed to the GPU. the GPU then has acess to 512 mb of ram, 256 of its own DDR, and 256 of the main boards XDR(quite a bit faster than DDR ram that is on the 360, which means it has more bandwidth and less access time, AKA faster) on top of that, each SPE has their own 256mb of ram, thats 6 SPE's, each at 256, then the PPE itself has 512 cache, and that is dual core. so, try again there Mr. WizardGzus666
I know how they work.
That's why I said blu-ray has nothing to do with AI, weapons, and physics or "larger maps". What you posted basically reinforced that.
Thanks! ;)
EDIT: It seems you're still not informed on quite a few subject on this matter. I recommend you check out both Beyond3d.com and arsetechnia.com's articles on both console's architecture.
[QUOTE="Gzus666"] i think both of you need to learn how they work. AI and Physics are computed by the SPE's on the Cell in the PS3, then routed to the GPU. the GPU then has acess to 512 mb of ram, 256 of its own DDR, and 256 of the main boards XDR(quite a bit faster than DDR ram that is on the 360, which means it has more bandwidth and less access time, AKA faster) on top of that, each SPE has their own 256mb of ram, thats 6 SPE's, each at 256, then the PPE itself has 512 cache, and that is dual core. so, try again there Mr. WizardLosDaddie
I know how they work.
That's why I said blu-ray has nothing to do with AI, weapons, and physics or "larger maps". What you posted basically reinforced that.
Thanks! ;)
EDIT: It seems you're still not informed on quite a few subject on this matter. I recommend you check out both Beyond3d.com and arsetechnia.com's articles on both console's architecture.
agreed, but neither does the ram, and thats what the guy said above that post."the amount of content availble at anyone time is determined by the RAM. In otherwords, how many textures,character meshes, and maps can you fit into one multiplayer game? 512 mb worth"
That's the part I was agreeing with because it's true.
Some PS3 fanboys think that blu-ray automatically means more of everything and bigger maps, weapons and better AI.
Simply not true at all.
i never said anything about blu-ray, and no, things on screen are not determined by RAM, not sure where you get this from. RAM is best used for multitasking applications, other than that, only mild amounts are needed for doing 1 application, especially when its just gaming. and, as i clearly pointed out, the GPU has access to 512 mb of ram"the amount of content availble at anyone time is determined by the RAM. In otherwords, how many textures,character meshes, and maps can you fit into one multiplayer game? 512 mb worth"
That's the part I was agreeing with because it's true.
Some PS3 fanboys think that blu-ray automatically means more of everything and bigger maps, weapons and better AI.
Simply not true at all.
LosDaddie
1) That there are similarities is kind of undeniable at this point, hes on the record saying a dictatorship would be easier, saying he answers to a "higher father" hes invaded sovereign countries without any approval of the international community, spies upon his own people, uses fear as a weapon against dissent, has severely restricted the rights of the citizens and discriminated against certain groups. After all that I'm not even directly comparing him to that particular person. 2) Theres no proof that weed is harmful to the public, its the one narc that has never killed anybody. I've also not called for guns to be banned outright (I'm all for it and weapons education too)..I've called for assault weapons to be banned again as they serve no practical purpose. Hunting with them is overkill, using them for self-defense is overkill..the only place it isn't overkill is in a military situation and as militias no longer exist in the US I see no purpose for them to be legal other than that people want to splatter chipmunks with 50 rounds of ammo. 3) Drinking has proven harm, but in Europe where it is legal at a younger age, rates of abuse are far lower..because people actually know how to drink responsibly. Thats not just a slogan, its something requires education and when you have it banned for anybody under 21 parents can't and won't teach their children this. Also I'm not advocating letting a child see ****, what I'm advocating is a return of "artistic ******" which most people seem to classify as ****. ******* is not ****, despite what many will say about it, even if it is mostly geared towards that group.
Wow, another person comparing bush to hitler...because the two are so alike...i get it....NOT. Also its funny how you think that the ban of marijuana is against constitutional rights and should be legalized, yet you want to take away the right to bear arms( and yes it is in the exact quote you used towards the end of the sentence where it says the right of the people to bear arms will not be infringed) because you dont see that guns are not the root of murder, but the person pulling the trigger is. Not only that but many people use these weapons of death as you refer to them for things such as hunting and going out to the shooting range with their children in order to teach them how to safely handle a weapon, just as you suggest is ok with alcohol(which can be viewed in just as negatively a light so dont even try that). Calling someone who appreciates the artwork it takes to design weaponry a wacko is pretty dang prejudiced too-don't insult and categorize people because you feel differently than they do, if you havent learned from the civil rights movement thats wrong. And when it comes to children, not all children are mentally prepared for some of the stuff in rated r movies, thats where it becomes the parent's responsibility to do what they feel is best for the child, and as long as a parent is there to buy the ticket- thats ok already. Letting a child see pornography before they are at least past puberty is just screwed up from the psychological standpoint and guess what-the taboo of nudity is in our culture and it wont change any time soon. I agree with you about peta though lol
longhorn7
[QUOTE="mazdero"][QUOTE="burnoutfan2"]He's comparing Halo , and.....................Killzone :|
Ownage denied! burnoutfan2
Ownage is denied, but not for the reason you're thinking. Its not a good Idea to compare these two games right now, because neither is out. We do not know what either game has to offer, or how good or bad it will be. He was refferring to space limitation on the disk media, and he should have said Killzone2 has POTENTIAL for more content than Halo. if they choose to utilize it or not, remains to be seen.
It's so stupid when people on these forums go on, and on about how much more content they can get because of BR. The fact is that content costs $$$$, and it's expensive enough to develop games for the PS3 as it is.
It is stupid at the moment because that extra content has not been seen. Thats not to say that it won't be seen. The extra space could end up being a determining factor, time will tell. It is expensive to dev for consoles period. The cost is going to get higher as technology advances and more can be done. This is why some games include advertising, which i don't agree with, but hey, if they have to do it to bring their visions to life, so be it.
[QUOTE="mazdero"][QUOTE="burnoutfan2"][QUOTE="setyono"][QUOTE="jaspey"]a lot less money ? like what ? 99 CAD for WiFi ? 199 CAD for hd dvd player add on ? a lot more like ? fps, fps and fps ? i'm sick of fps already.considering x360 offers a lot more for a lot less money.
------
You must be kidding right?.
burnoutfan2
1. MS doesn't force you to buy the HD-DVD player unless you want to
2. Where i live the PS3 core costs more than twice as much as the 360 premium.
3. fps,fps,fps well that describes the genre of the only good PS3 game that is out atm, but you clearly haven't seen the list of upcoming 360 titles.
1. Sony isn't forcing you to buy anything. BR is for GAMING, HD-DVD is NOT. I as well as many others am glad that they added BR. It makes the celing Higher on the PS3 than on the 360. And no multiple disks are not cool, that is 2 gens ago. This is 2007, everything should fit on one disk.
2. I am sorry you live there, but where you live doesn't reflect the rest of the world. 1000 dollars for a PS3 is ludacris. You should buy one from the states and ship it to you, it will be much cheaper.
3. I am sorry to tell you this, but 360 is a system over run with shooters. I like shooters so its cool, but you need more. FPS is the 360's niche. Even Oblivion can be called an FPS. The titles coming for the 360 are more shooters. Bioshock is an FPS. Mass effect is an RPG/TPS. Both games will be amazing, but the guy was right man. An FPS being the only good game for the PS3 is purely your opinion. There are people enjoying games on the PS3 other than Resistance.
1. Because it's so much work to walk 5 feet, and insert a disc
2. Maybe i will look into that :)
3. Well i'm not that much of a shooter fan myself, but in most aspects the 360's list of upcoming games is just as good, If not better than the PS3's. Unfortunetly the PS3 is definetly more solid in the JRPG department *fights the urge to pre-order a PS3*
1. its not that it is hard work, its that we shouldn't have to. technology has proggressed far enough in that one disk is all that should be needed. I believe the makers of Mass Effect agree with this.
[QUOTE="mazdero"][QUOTE="burnoutfan2"][QUOTE="xxgunslingerxx"][QUOTE="CaptainCrazy"]I agree with you, Sony may be eating a lot of the cost but hey, it was their stupid decisions that led to the extremely high cost of producing PS3's. Right now the current price isn't justified considering x360 offers a lot more for a lot less money. Sony shoudl have just focused on making the best gaming system period, but no, they had to take too many risks trying to make the PS3 some ultimate fusion of media functionality.burnoutfan2
the ps3 is the best deal over all
you fail
Not really...
its not the best over all yet, but it can be. No one knows, it is way too early to tell.
Yeah, but i don't really see the point. What matters is wich console that suits your preference.
I completely agree with you here. It doesn't matter to me which turns out the best because i will eventually own all three. Some people are obsessed with who will come out on top. If one ends up being a tiny bit better, who cares. This is turning out to be a case of, "my penis is bigger than yours"
[QUOTE="Gzus666"] i think both of you need to learn how they work. AI and Physics are computed by the SPE's on the Cell in the PS3, then routed to the GPU. the GPU then has acess to 512 mb of ram, 256 of its own DDR, and 256 of the main boards XDR(quite a bit faster than DDR ram that is on the 360, which means it has more bandwidth and less access time, AKA faster) on top of that, each SPE has their own 256mb of ram, thats 6 SPE's, each at 256, then the PPE itself has 512 cache, and that is dual core. so, try again there Mr. WizardLosDaddie
I know how they work.
That's why I said blu-ray has nothing to do with AI, weapons, and physics or "larger maps". What you posted basically reinforced that.
Thanks! ;)
EDIT: It seems you're still not informed on quite a few subject on this matter. I recommend you check out both Beyond3d.com and arsetechnia.com's articles on both console's architecture.
Actually here's where you fail. Blu-ray is the paper on which to paint the portrait. So while you think weapons and physics are not affected you are wrong. The amount of game determines how much space theere is to make the game..for example you can have Oblivion or you can have a game where the world is 5 times larger. OR you can have a world 2-3 times larger with FAR more objects, streams, physics or what not available. That's the difference Blu-ray makes...because as much as we all loved Gears it's biggest complaint was length and story two things we could have had more of if it weren't restricted to 9 GIGsTo the original poster....I live in North Vancouver and picked up a 60 GB for 649.99 at launch. The thing that people forget is that the price is "Suggested Retail Price". That means as the currency markets change RETAILERS not Sony change the prices higher or lower.
What I would suggest is try and find a place that is offering it at the lower price, go to your local retailer and get them to price match it. Most companies will do so to keep you as a customer
I dont know about nyone else but i live in Canada, i dont own a ps3 but i really want one. So the **** at sony decide to instead of lower the price which was at $656.99+tax=around $750. THEY ACTUALLY MAKE IT MORE PRICY AT 699.99+tax= PRETTY MUCH 800 FRIKIN DOLLARS. do they not want to sell the system at all?I live in Manitoba and I got mine for $659.99. If you went to Best Buy or Future Shop, they raised the price, not Sony. The difference isn't much either.
smeags11
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment