How well will the PS3 do?
Excellent! Sony takes over. Blu-ray absolutely becomes standard.
Like the PS2, most gamers get one, has the most/best games.
Okay, but there's better consoles to get.
Failure, blu-ray is new beta max, a handfull good games, slow death.
Complete failure, Sony's game division pretty much dies.
How well will the PS3 do?
Last edited by Prometheus|ANJ; May 14th, 2006 at 05:58 PM. Reason: typo
Jamen jag tror att han skäms, och har gömt sig. Vårt universum det är en av dom otaliga spermasatser som Herren i sin självhärliga ensamhet har runkat fram för å besudla intet.
I dunno.. I know i will be getting one eventually, to play games like metal gear solid and final fantasy.
(and lets not forget all the ps/ps2 games i already have - both my ps1 and ps2 are dead...)
Is that a trick question?
********************************
There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine and THE TRUTH.
It's a poll, maybe the thread shows up before the poll though.. took some time for me to write.
Jamen jag tror att han skäms, och har gömt sig. Vårt universum det är en av dom otaliga spermasatser som Herren i sin självhärliga ensamhet har runkat fram för å besudla intet.
LOL....sorry Prom...my post was meant to be sarcastic
I can't say it will do badly....but I have read a lot of views from across a few gaming forums and I believe it won't do as well as they hope it would. Nevermind what the fanboys say. Biggest sore point is the amount of difference between the 500 and 600 dollar systems and apparently you cannot upgrade it. 500 bucks is a lot of money...but the lack of options to allow you to add on later to make it equal to the 600 option is ridiculous.
********************************
There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine and THE TRUTH.
I really dont think sony will have to do much to get the biggest sales again, despite the crap games that have been announced (apart from a couple). More than anything, sony just seemed really lazy this E3. Maybe they thought it didnt matter, and they're probably right...It could do really shit though, but i'd be very suprised.
Blog
--------------------------------------------------------------
*Help a CA artist! Visit the Constructive Critique section! *
i was talking to my friend, Sartell on here, and we decided that despite the fact the ps3 is inferior to the xbox360 as far as hardware goes, and despite the fact that it doesnt have the sheer inginuity that wii has, the game library on the ps3 will cary it above and beyond the other two systems.
SSGX: The Tenacious Ten
Kronos- Tullie-SillyLing-llothcat-dfacto-Recursive_End-Advocate of Fate- EvilDisco
Are you kidding? PS3 has TWICE the computation capability compared to the X360. Hardware wise it is the most powerful among the 3 console contenders. The downfall of the PS3 will not be its hardware or its games. It will solely be in the hands of Sony's marketing "geniuses".Originally Posted by Advocate of Fate
********************************
There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine and THE TRUTH.
Is a hard question to answer, PS3 has a good selection of games for my taste, so I will get one eventually, at least me and my brother will ( to make up for the cost). All though i think the price is set for people whoo is to impatient and will probably order it right away, the price will go down fast after a couple of months.( if the sony marketing team is smarter than a gerbo)
Game selection aside, Sony is bringing people down latelly, not only as a gaming company. Sony is slowly dying, but in a 20 year proyection...that means that they might blew it big time for a PS5 or 6.
Take into consideration than PS is an entertaiment product, not only for gaming, that adds some points, plus the fact that is compatible with PS and PS2 games.
Other than that, I never, in my entire life, cared to much for the Nintendo franchises like Zelda, Mario or Metroid, and the Nintendo systems are made moslty for kids.
But PS3 won´t do as good as the PS2, maybe not even half as good.
Uh.Originally Posted by darth massacre
No it doesn't.
Where did you get that idea?
Anyway,
PS3 will obviously do well. People will buy any Playstation console at this point, even if its a cow which its not. Its fast, and will have games lots of people like. However, I think it will be much more even with the other consoles. PS3 is more expensive, is pulling some pretty silly voodoo trickery with the features (the 20gb model wont even have wireless controller support). Their version of Xbox Live wont do nearly as well considering its still up to the developer to handle the connections. So while it will definetly sell, past the rush of early adoption, people who are looking at the features might hesitate.
This will also have next to nothing to do with games. Every console (like the previous generation) will have excellent games that fanboys of each console will ignore.
Last edited by wassermelone; May 14th, 2006 at 10:41 PM.
Missing Option:
"Like the PS2. Most people will get one because Sony will release the highest volume of games which appeal to the lowest common denominator."
That's not to say the PS2 didn't have some great and even some quirky games. That's just not what made it successful. The Playstation established Sony's place in the market by being the best console of its generation. The PS2 succeeded in spite of being the worst of its generation because it rode on the coattails of the Playstation. The PS3 will definitely be successful, more or less by default at this point.
Whether or not Sony maintains their lead is going to depend on Microsoft and Nintendo and how they market themselves. Both companies have the hardware and licensing agreements to pull off a big win this generation. The question is, can they get the word out to the consumer? They couldn't last time, even though they both had stronger hardware offerings. Microsoft had far better online playability.
But Nintendo banked too much on their first party properties (which were the most successful games on the system, but that's not enough to take a market lead) and Microsoft just couldn't woo enough developers to challenge the PS2 (and they completely died in Japan, which will probably happen again).
I think Nintendo has the best chance of challenging Sony with their revolutionary hardware design and a huge library of downloadable content for the hardcore gamers (the vast majority of gamers are in the generation that grew up playing NESes and SNESes so nostalgia is a safe bet for some profit potential). But Nintendo doesn't seem to want the market lead. They're profitable every generation and that's enough for them, like Jim Davis, I think they're content to be wildly profitable without making any enemies.
-------------------------
In the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "I drank what?"
Just see the points as a 5-1 success scale with 5 and 1 being extremes. I couldn't cover everything I wanted with the poll anyways.
Regarding backwards compability, I think the price is going to play in in Wii's favor. The people who skipped the GC (probably owning a PS2) might get a Wii to also check out the older stuff they missed on the GC. With the PS3 price, people might not be so eager to get it for the backwards compability, and chances are they already have a PS2 and PS1.
/wild speculation
Jamen jag tror att han skäms, och har gömt sig. Vårt universum det är en av dom otaliga spermasatser som Herren i sin självhärliga ensamhet har runkat fram för å besudla intet.
From most of the review sites that you also have access to - minus the highly pro sony or pro MS articles. Plus personal point of view from friends who are developing for PS3.Originally Posted by wassermelone
Alright so its not twice as powerful, but its almost there.
Edit: I honestly don't think backward compatiblity is an important feature in consoles except in the first year of launch when there isn't much of anything to play with.
********************************
There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine and THE TRUTH.
Originally Posted by MEP
Now that was unnesesary.
A person by itself cannot guess that much. Appeal to the lowest common denominator??
There are great games for PS and there are good games in PS3 list, and I can say the ones I´m interested in are far from being "stupid games".
Like said before in this same thread, the desition lies in the games you are interested in. The succes will be pending on how the publicity of each console is played.
Games are fun, so let´s keep this healthy without indirectly call anyone stupid becuase of wish console will he/she buy.
Did you even read the rest of what he said?Originally Posted by Shamagim
He did not say all games made for the PS2 are for the lowest common denominator.
Don't put words in my mouth.Originally Posted by Shamagim
-------------------------
In the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "I drank what?"
Ah.....sorry about that, I´ll make up to you by posting the PS3 specs and the game list.
Again, sorry.
Central processing unit (CPU)
3.2 GHz Cell BE multi-core processor: 1 PowerPC-based 'Power Processing Element' and 8 3.2 GHz Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs). The PPE has a 512 KB L2 cache and one VMX (AltiVec) vector unit. Each of the eight SPEs is a RISC processor with 128-bit 128 SIMD GPRs and superscalar functions. Each SPE has 256 KB of software-addressable SRAM.
Only seven SPEs are active; the eighth is redundant, to improve yield. If one of the eight has a manufacturing defect, it is disabled without rendering the entire unit defective
Graphics processing unit (GPU)
Clocked at 550 MHz
1.8 TFLOPS
136 shader operations per clock
74.8 billion shader operations per second (100 billion with CPU)
Full high definition output (up to 1080p)
Multi-way programmable parallel floating point shader pipelines
128-bit pixel precision offers rendering of scenes with high dynamic range imaging
1.1 billion vertices per second
Memory
256 MB Rambus XDR DRAM clocked at CPU die speed (3.2 GHz)
256 MB GDDR3 VRAM clocked at 700 MHz
Theoretical system bandwidth
25.6 GB/s to Main Ram XDR DRAM: 64 bits × 3.2 GHz
22.4 GB/s to GDDR3 VRAM: 128 bits × 700 MHz × 2 accesses per clock cycle (one per edge)
RSX 20 GB/s (write), 15 GB/s (read)
SB 2.5 GB/s write and 2.5 GB/s read
204.8 GB/s Cell Element Interconnect Bus (Theoretical peak performance)[3]
Cell FlexIO Bus: 35 GB/s outbound, 25 GB/s inbound (7 outbound and 5 inbound 1Byte wide channels operating at 5 GHz) (effective bandwidth typically 50-80% of total)
Audio/video output
Supported screen sizes: 480p, 480i, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
S/PDIF optical output for digital audio
Multiple AV outputs
Composite
S-Video
Component video Can output up to 1080p
Digital video output (60GB model only)
HDMI port
Sound
Dolby Digital 5.1 minimum
DTS
LPCM (DSP functionality handled by the Cell processor)
Storage
Blu-ray Disc: PlayStation 3 BD-ROM, BD-Video, BD-R, BD-RE.
DVD: PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW
CD: PlayStation CD-ROM, PlayStation 2 CD-ROM, CD-DA, CD-DA (ROM), CD-R, CD-RW, SACD, SACD Hybrid (CD layer) SACD HD
Hard Drive: Pre-Installed 20GB/60GB (depending on package), 2.5", detachable/upgradeable, with Linux pre-installed.[5][6]
Memory card readers (60 GB model only)
Memory Stick standard/Duo and standard/mini slots
CompactFlash slot
SD/MMC slot
Communications
One Gigabit Ethernet Port
Bluetooth 2.0
USB 2.0 (x4)
Wi-Fi (60 GB model only)
IEEE 802.11 b, g standards
The game list is over here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tation_3_games
Last edited by Shamagim; May 15th, 2006 at 12:14 AM.
Well, that's still a whole year, and it'll build the user base and consequently the incentive for companies to make games for the console in question.Originally Posted by darth
Actually, I'm thinking of getting a Wii for just the backwards compability. I'll admit I'm a bit of a NES geek and hardly a significant demographic, but I was also on the edge of buying a GC for quite a while, but didn't do it. Being able to try out Windwaker, Metroid, and a few of the other interesting games increases my incentive to go for the Wii.
I also wanted to buy a PS2, it has a lot of fun games it seems, there's no denying that! I won't be getting the PS3 though, too big for my wallet. However, I could get one of them smaller PS2's when people sell them to afford the PS3... so no next gen there for me.
See where I'm coming from?
Jamen jag tror att han skäms, och har gömt sig. Vårt universum det är en av dom otaliga spermasatser som Herren i sin självhärliga ensamhet har runkat fram för å besudla intet.
Originally Posted by Shamagim
I remember the last couple systmes with superior hardware and high prices.
3DO. Philips CD-I. Neo Geo.![]()
Dreamcast.
» sketchbook
» blog
» website
(First rule of Pocket Club...)
Cartoon- shaddup!
PS2 size success i'm believing...
Juding from what I can tell by watching the press, Sony totally sucked this E3. Completely lackluster games were shown. A ridicuous price point. A metoo! controller design. More FMV seqences... And many of the hugh named games didn't even make a showing, Killzone, Motorstorm to name a few. I dont get it.
I was really expecting Sony to knock it out of the park. Backwards playback is good, but not imparitive IMO. More tech demos, Who gives a $@#%^&! I don't care how many pixels it can push or polys it can draw. Wheres the games? I think Sony handed over the next few years to Microsoft.
Nintendo had a decent show, but I don't think it will be enough.
ps games usually are fighting and driving... besides ff and mgs series.
So I'll be going for the lowest possible price, namely the nintendo box.
And xbox will never get into my house unless they're giving them away modded so i can simply download the games and not have to spend any cash on that system ever.
Yeah, I'm kinda against so many platforms. 1 platform that lasts 5 years and only costs 200 euro with games around 30 euro, much better.
Why?Originally Posted by Melancholie
Im surprised you didn't throw a M$ in there.
I'm really surprised by how lack lustre Sony's E3 prescence was. For a console that's less than six months from shipping, Sony showed us basically nothing of interest to get us to start slapping down preorders.
I think they're banking 100% on the success of their prior consoles to sell this one, and with MS already out the door and Nintendo getting ready to blanket the airwaves with Wiimote footage around the same time the PS3 launches, that seems like a really bad idea. They're going to have to come up with something to separate themselves from the pack or else they may lose their market dominance.
I think they'll still be successful this generation, but this could be the year that everyone remembers as the year Sony dropped the ball.
-------------------------
In the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "I drank what?"
well shit, those stats do rock. to be honest, i havent been following the 'console war' as well as i should, i was still basing my opinion on some of the earliest announcements. But what i said before is now reinforced: ps3 is going to rock. To me, playstation 2 feels more like a staple than the other two systems. Gamecube is for gamecube people, and xbox is for xbox people, while everyone has a ps2. Thats just out of personal observation, but it feels like it stands true. Hopefully, this will be the same way with ps3. Playstation has always had a place in my heart, as the core of my gaming experience, and i honestly pray that the ps3 will follow suit.
SSGX: The Tenacious Ten
Kronos- Tullie-SillyLing-llothcat-dfacto-Recursive_End-Advocate of Fate- EvilDisco
They're a corporation, so they can do all they want with it, really.Originally Posted by wassermelone
But they should've have stayed away from rare damnit...
Nintendo + rare was a friggin good combination.
In fact, i wouldn't have cared if they we're taken over, as long as the quality of games remained the same. But they fscked up the sequal to perfect dark...
I didn't even know that was possible.
So not mad about the fact they bought them out, it's their right, but they should have kept up the quality of rare games to it's previous value.
Actually, SaturnOriginally Posted by cartoonfox
![]()
Previously Wassermelone asked where I got my information that PS3 is more powerful. I've read and reread thru several reviews and like a fellow forumer on one of my gaming hangouts, we came to the conclusion that the PS3 might be more powerful in terms of brute force but it might simply be a little more of a hassle to program for than the X360 CPU. Which is basically the same as the Saturn. Its dual SH4 running at 25mhz was a lot more powerful than the single 33mhz PSOne. But the death blow was the PSOne's ease of coding (with Sony making sure every major developer have access to their dev kit and tech support). Almost every programmer felt the Saturn was more powerful, but felt it was a bitch to code for it.
We may be seeing the same here. Which in any case, brute computing strength really doesn't mean anything.
Personally I believe Sony's claims for the cell processor. But after Wass promted me to do a further read up, a side of doubt now exists because not many of PS3 demos are very far superior to existing 360 games. I mean honestly...how far "ahead" is MGS4 compared to GRAW or GOW.
And of course the VP whom I know working for Sony has "disappeared" right after E3.The whole forum is waiting for him to answer some questions
Yes I do...and thats exactly what Nintendo want, and what Sony don't want you to doOriginally Posted by Prometheus|ANJ
![]()
********************************
There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine and THE TRUTH.
Don't quote me on this, but i picked up somewhere from someone on the internet that the developing tools for ps3 are much more accessible than those for ps2, relying less on assembler coding and allowing more high level development.
But i guess to really use the additional computing capabilities you'd have to dig deep into the internals of the hardware. My guess is that, without extra work, you'll be stuck with XBox360 performance.
Super sonic anus manipulator 3D!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks