Delusional SONY: PS3 Is #1!

[GameUser-16-32-128]

Okay okay so SONY chairman Kaz Hirai doesn't say that, but his comments are just the most ridiculous I've ever read!

http://gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=21933

[Tanegashima]

Reminds me of Trip Hawkens and all his insane claims about the 3DO crushing the competition.

[16-bit]

I like the PS3 and everything, but the one thing that pisses me off about it is how cocky the Sony execs are, were they like this the last two generations? I wasn't paying attention back then.

[Rusty Venture]

Game companies get cocky, then they eat an extra large helping of humble pie.

Atari, Nintendo, Sega...and pretty soon Sony.

[Dirt Ball Gamer]

If they plan on riding the PS3 for 10 years won't computer technology just move on and far surpass it? I'm not a tech guy but I would guess computers in 10 years should become way more powerful than today's PS3. I guess they could release a PS3 32x upgrader or something.


Edit: I just realized this same thing is being discussed in the 360 just red ringed thread. My apologies to all those that were harmed or may have experienced eye strain or perhaps even nerd induced stroke in reading this post

[gamevet]

I like the PS3 and everything, but the one thing that pisses me off about it is how cocky the Sony execs are, were they like this the last two generations? I wasn't paying attention back then.

I guess that depends on what your view was with the PS2.

Sony bent over backwards for the developers, when they were establishing the Playstation and its developer tools. The PS2 was a bit more difficult to program and Sony's selling point was the DVD player and specs that I don't think anyone ever proved to be real.

Sony is doing the same thing with the PS3, touting Blu-Ray playback as a big selling point and offering hardware ( on paper) that is the best of the bunch, but we rarely see any software that backs up that statement.

[Zebbe]

What is the difference between the PS3 and the 360 when it comes to specs?

[Blammo]

I like the PS3 and everything, but the one thing that pisses me off about it is how cocky the Sony execs are, were they like this the last two generations? I wasn't paying attention back then.

They didn't have to be. They were winning, so they didn't have to make excuses. Now they do.


Game companies get cocky, then they eat an extra large helping of humble pie.

Atari, Nintendo, Sega...and pretty soon Sony.

Again, I think they're being cocky because they know they screwed up big time with the PS3 but they can't admit it in public. Companies that commit to something wrong and have to ride it for ~ 5 years have a certain amount of damage control to be getting on with in the meantime.

[Sega Uranus]

His comment telling us to do the math with Microsoft not having a console out for more than four years really reminded me of the Jaguar. The only reason the Playstation 3 is still alive (and will remain alive) is because Sony has so much extra money that they really will not have to worry for the next six or seven years at least.

While we are on the topic of consoles failing... Is it just me or do the early Playstation 3 ads remind anyone else of early American Saturn ads?

[TheEdge]

PS3 is #1

Its winner of who is losing the most money.

[16-bit]

While we are on the topic of consoles failing... Is it just me or do the early Playstation 3 ads remind anyone else of early American Saturn ads?

It's not just you, the early Saturn adverts and and the early PS3 adverts are very similar, in the sense that both were just damned creepy and made it so you didn't want to buy the console.

[jesus.arnold]

I specifically love this section


We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" Yeah, cos you really don't want most people to be able to take advantage of the hardware do you....wait a minute :confused:

[AD2101]

Yeah, cos you really don't want most people to be able to take advantage of the hardware do you....wait a minute :confused:

Yea I'm still scratching my head at that one. What do you guys expect though, for Sony to admit "defeat" this early in the game? Sure their getting their ass handed to them by literally everyone but everything considered it could be way, way worse for them.

[Tanegashima]

I still think its the best system on the market right now...

[ooXxXoo]

In the end, with the PS3, Sony will bent and do a "Harakiri" as a good old Samurai will do....

[Iron Lizard]

Game companies get cocky, then they eat an extra large helping of humble pie.

Atari, Nintendo, Sega...and pretty soon Sony.

+1

[gamevet]

Yea I'm still scratching my head at that one. What do you guys expect though, for Sony to admit "defeat" this early in the game? Sure their getting their ass handed to them by literally everyone but everything considered it could be way, way worse for them.

The PS3 is still further along than the original Playstation was at year 2.

[16-bit]

I still think its the best system on the market right now...Hopefully I won't get flamed for saying this, but I agree.

[Blammo]

The PS3 is still further along than the original Playstation was at year 2.

Games were a lot cheaper to make back then though, particularly in the graphics and physics areas. The PS3 doesn't just need numbers, it needs to make economic sense to developers.

Besides, at year 2 the PS1 didn't have the Saturn and the N64 outselling it two-to-one each. Tha availability of competition can influence what PS3 owners choose to buy in the future, and that's probably bad news for Sony.

[Melf]

SONY chairman Kaz Hirai... comments... ridiculous

http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/nothing_to_see_here.jpg

[Mamba Tabac]

What is the difference between the PS3 and the 360 when it comes to specs?

PS3
CPU - 3.2GHz PowerPC Core, 7 SPE (3.2GHz each), 512KB L2 cache
GPU - Nvidia 550MHz RSX, 256MB GDDR 3 Video RAM at 700MHz, Bandwidth:22GB per sec.
Memory - 256MB XDR RAM (3.2GHz), Bandwidth: 25GB per sec.
Sound - Stereo, Dolby Digital 5.1, Dolby Digital 7.1, DTS, 320 (compressed) audio channels
Overall performance - 2 Teraflops

XBox 360
CPU - 3.2GHz IBM PowerPC Custom Core, 3 Symmetrical core (3.2GHz), 1MB L2 cache
GPU - 500MHz Xenos with 10MB DRAM (ATi), 512MB GDDR 3 Video RAM at 700Mhz, Bandwidth: 22GB per sec.
Memory - 512MB GDDR3 RAM (700MHz), Bandwidth: 22GB per sec.
Sound - Dolby Pro Logic II, Dolby Digital 5.1, DTS, 256 audio channels
Overall performance - 1 Teraflop

Informantion taken from the Guiness gamer's edition - so don't shoot the messenger if it's wrong :p

[GameUser-16-32-128]

Now the question is why game devs are complaining about why is it so hard to make games on PS3?

[gamevet]

Now the question is why game devs are complaining about why is it so hard to make games on PS3?

The 7 SPE coprocessors seem to be the problem.

[Metal_Sonic]

The lack of memory is also a big problem for developers

[gamevet]

The lack of memory is also a big problem for developers

Not if you go to M.I.T. (http://www.geek.com/articles/games/mit-offers-free-playstation-3-programming-course-20080117/)



Any budding games programmers reading this may want to pay a visit to the M.I.T. website. Through the school’s free online learning resources, M.I.T. is now offering a course where you can learn all about programming the PlayStation 3.

Students will learn about multi-core architectures, parallel programming, and the resources include practical exercises that are done directly on a PS3 console. When the course was run at M.I.T. it included a competition for best project. Although the competition is over, students now benefit from the source code being made available from those projects.

The website for the project includes instructions on how to get Linux or the Cell SDK on to a PS3. There is also source code available for a Backgammon game, Blue-Steel ray tracer (competition winner), and battery modeling software.

I recommend any programmers trying to get into the games industry take a look at these resources. Programmers with PS3 experience are in great demand at the moment, so even a PS3 course on your resume is going to score you a few extra points at an interview.


Ubisoft doesn't think it's all that difficult and Bethesda was able to tweak Oblivion on the system as well.

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/08/17/ubisofts-graw-team-denies-ps3-programming-difficulty/2


It's long been said that programming for the PS3, or any new console, is a daunting task. Some have said the PS3 is particularly difficult. Are they right? The dev team behind Ubisoft's GRAW2 says that no, it's not that tough after all. One member of that team, Yann Le Tensorer said "It's wrong to say it's harder to code on the PlayStation 3, it's just something that needs to be learnt ... It's not harder to develop on the PS3 than it is on the 360, it's just a different console. Developers might says it's harder because it just takes time to understand the technology, we're still early in the lifecycle." Sounds like a fair estimate to us.

The GRAW2 team are happy with the PlayStation 3. With all the hubbub on the internet regarding the "sluggish" version of Madden on the PS3, or the rumors that Rockstar had to delay GTAIV because it was either difficult to port to the 360 or it was difficult to program for the PS3, we really need to find out what the true answer is. Are developers growing lazy, unwilling to learn how to properly code? Is it really difficult, but Ubisoft got lucky? Either way, with this kind of talk, we wholly expect the PS3 version of GRAW2 to match the 360 version in every way.

[GameUser-16-32-128]

This system will never sell within "10 Years". They need to lower the price of this bitch. The 360 is becoming more and more enticing for me to get someday.

[tomaitheous]

You really think a developer for the PS3 is really going to publicly bad mouth the system? Whatever problems they do have, I'm sure it's kept to a minimum as far as PR. And then there's the NDA they've signed.

From what I've read on the main core of the PS3 CPU, it's a cut down version of the Power PC architecture. It's main purpose is to keep track of the other 7 SPE cores (threads), which aren't CPUs. It's a drastically different setup than the 360, which is a true multi processor core setup.

The 360 GPU also has a faster fillrate(pixel) than the PS3. PS3 games tend to render in a lower resolution, then upscale it to keep it from dropping the frame rate. Upscaling != true output resolution.


Developers might says it's harder because it just takes time to understand the technology.

Umm.. that's what difficulty means. Dunno, looks like they're biting their tongue to me.


If they plan on riding the PS3 for 10 years won't computer technology just move on and far surpass it? I'm not a tech guy but I would guess computers in 10 years should become way more powerful than today's PS3

PCs already are.