The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
My personal thought-X-Box 360.Post yours.
Page:
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> No, better as in 'more power, with more storage for potentially
> bigger and better games'. And titles are largely the same for all
> formats these days anyway.
Hmm, experts already disecting the 360 and PS3 graphics chips already believe the 360 chip to be faster and more future-proof due to it's unified shader architecture. This the standard requirement for Windows Graphics Foundation compatability (D3D9s replacement when longhorne comes along).
Meaning the 360 will be able to support the graphics processing capabilities of PC games for a long while where the PS3 is a DirectX9 compatible part, being phased out of use in the next couple of graphics iterations for top-end cards.
There's also the issue with the processors capabilities being very over-estimated on both sides of the marketting hype.
No one yet has mentioned in a marketting sense that both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 do not do out of order code execution or have branch prediction capabilities in their cores.
This means that things such as gameplay code, physics code scripting etc which rely heavily on branching and the ability of x86 PC processors to reorder their instructions to run as efficiently as possible will suffer badly on both new consoles.
No one knows yet which will be better than the other, either way games written as cross-platform will be made to meet the lead-platform or the lowest common denominator meaning the performance difference of the two is redundant anyway.
> No, better as in 'more power, with more storage for potentially
> bigger and better games'. And titles are largely the same for all
> formats these days anyway.
Hmm, experts already disecting the 360 and PS3 graphics chips already believe the 360 chip to be faster and more future-proof due to it's unified shader architecture. This the standard requirement for Windows Graphics Foundation compatability (D3D9s replacement when longhorne comes along).
Meaning the 360 will be able to support the graphics processing capabilities of PC games for a long while where the PS3 is a DirectX9 compatible part, being phased out of use in the next couple of graphics iterations for top-end cards.
There's also the issue with the processors capabilities being very over-estimated on both sides of the marketting hype.
No one yet has mentioned in a marketting sense that both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 do not do out of order code execution or have branch prediction capabilities in their cores.
This means that things such as gameplay code, physics code scripting etc which rely heavily on branching and the ability of x86 PC processors to reorder their instructions to run as efficiently as possible will suffer badly on both new consoles.
No one knows yet which will be better than the other, either way games written as cross-platform will be made to meet the lead-platform or the lowest common denominator meaning the performance difference of the two is redundant anyway.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
>
> Two months to convert the entire Unreal Engine. Not an issue, I'd
> say.
[URL]http://ukchatforums.reserve.co.uk/display_messages.php?threadid=129571&forumid=130[/URL]
Considering how many games the unreal engines are used to make I'm sure a lot of priority was given to making sure that particular engine was running fine. If such a prioroty was given then the fact that it took 2 months could be said to be rather worrying.
> The controller seen widely in press photos for PS3 is not the final
> version.
So whether you like the controller or not is still a factor regardless.
> "Fairly sharpish", as I've already said!
and as I've said, it'll be an uphill struggle if the public doesn't warm to it.
> I don't see that this has any relevance. You can still record DVDs
> and play them in your Blu-Ray player, just as you could record CDs
> and play them in your DVD-ROM drive before DVD writers were widely
> available and affordable. It didn't stop people buying DVD-ROM
> drives.
You were talking about DVDs being phased out so I'm afraid me saying that DVDs will continue is indeed rather relevant, anyway it appears you agree with me now.
>
> If anything, the CD format is probably safer than the DVD at the
> moment. The DVD hasn't replaced CD because of the plain audio
> format. Blu-Ray, though, does everything DVD does.
Which means that if Blu-Ray takes off DVD will become cheaper and we'll see more products make use of the DVD thanks to the cheapness. Cheaper dvd's holding a large amount of music files could seem like a better alternative to the CD - atleast as burnable media anyway.
>
> It could, but it's unlikely.
If people accept the format, that's what it all comes down too.
The format already has the majority of
> major players behind it, and will be in millions of homes through
> PS3.
and the movie discs will no-doubt cost more, meaning not everyone will want to take advantage of the new format as far as movies go. Especially if they can get the same movie cheaper on DVD and even more so if they haven't got a HDTV.
> Are you sure? PS2 continued to out-sell Xbox even when it was more
> expensive.
Shame I don't like the controller or feel the need to play any of the PS2's exclusives then really. I still intend to pick one up at some-point but there's certainly no rush.
>
> If the movie industry starts to withdraw DVD, releasing new movies
> only on the new format, the public will warm to it quite quickly.
> People won't stop buying movies.
No but your casual purchaser won't be driven to buying a new Blue-Ray player just to watch a few new movies that aren't on DVD.
They took ages to withdraw VHS and it's likely that, as DVD will be cheaper and HDTV not a must for every consumer, DVD movies will be around
for quite a while yet.
Without a HDTV what's the point in paying more for a Blu-Ray version of a movie? A lot of people will stick with their DVD players until prices are lower. DVDs aren't likely to be phased out overnight, especially as there's already a DVD userbase out there compared to any new format entering the market:
If the movie companies withdrew the DVD format they'd be shooting themselves in the foot just like a band releasing their album only on mini-disc.
Until the number of Blu-Ray playing machines overtakes the number of DVD playing machines DVD will be the dominant format and movies will be released on it to sell to the largest userbase.
>
> Two months to convert the entire Unreal Engine. Not an issue, I'd
> say.
[URL]http://ukchatforums.reserve.co.uk/display_messages.php?threadid=129571&forumid=130[/URL]
Considering how many games the unreal engines are used to make I'm sure a lot of priority was given to making sure that particular engine was running fine. If such a prioroty was given then the fact that it took 2 months could be said to be rather worrying.
> The controller seen widely in press photos for PS3 is not the final
> version.
So whether you like the controller or not is still a factor regardless.
> "Fairly sharpish", as I've already said!
and as I've said, it'll be an uphill struggle if the public doesn't warm to it.
> I don't see that this has any relevance. You can still record DVDs
> and play them in your Blu-Ray player, just as you could record CDs
> and play them in your DVD-ROM drive before DVD writers were widely
> available and affordable. It didn't stop people buying DVD-ROM
> drives.
You were talking about DVDs being phased out so I'm afraid me saying that DVDs will continue is indeed rather relevant, anyway it appears you agree with me now.
>
> If anything, the CD format is probably safer than the DVD at the
> moment. The DVD hasn't replaced CD because of the plain audio
> format. Blu-Ray, though, does everything DVD does.
Which means that if Blu-Ray takes off DVD will become cheaper and we'll see more products make use of the DVD thanks to the cheapness. Cheaper dvd's holding a large amount of music files could seem like a better alternative to the CD - atleast as burnable media anyway.
>
> It could, but it's unlikely.
If people accept the format, that's what it all comes down too.
The format already has the majority of
> major players behind it, and will be in millions of homes through
> PS3.
and the movie discs will no-doubt cost more, meaning not everyone will want to take advantage of the new format as far as movies go. Especially if they can get the same movie cheaper on DVD and even more so if they haven't got a HDTV.
> Are you sure? PS2 continued to out-sell Xbox even when it was more
> expensive.
Shame I don't like the controller or feel the need to play any of the PS2's exclusives then really. I still intend to pick one up at some-point but there's certainly no rush.
>
> If the movie industry starts to withdraw DVD, releasing new movies
> only on the new format, the public will warm to it quite quickly.
> People won't stop buying movies.
No but your casual purchaser won't be driven to buying a new Blue-Ray player just to watch a few new movies that aren't on DVD.
They took ages to withdraw VHS and it's likely that, as DVD will be cheaper and HDTV not a must for every consumer, DVD movies will be around
for quite a while yet.
Without a HDTV what's the point in paying more for a Blu-Ray version of a movie? A lot of people will stick with their DVD players until prices are lower. DVDs aren't likely to be phased out overnight, especially as there's already a DVD userbase out there compared to any new format entering the market:
If the movie companies withdrew the DVD format they'd be shooting themselves in the foot just like a band releasing their album only on mini-disc.
Until the number of Blu-Ray playing machines overtakes the number of DVD playing machines DVD will be the dominant format and movies will be released on it to sell to the largest userbase.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Games that don't require masses of data can still be provided on
> DVD-ROM, but there will be the potential for much bigger game worlds,
> more music, larger files for clearer sound effects, more/better
> textures... almost unlimited potential.
That's not technically true, because these things will be limited by RAM and bandwidth anyway not storage capacity........
The consoles have only 512Mb RAM in total, so whether you have a 9Gb disc or a 45Gb disc is irrelevant to anything other than the length of game you can produce, not what can be done in a single level.
There's also the issues with bandwidth of streaming data from a disc and the fact that multiple DVDs may even be cheaper than a single new high capacity disc for a while meaning multiple dvd games for the 360 are an option, although not ideal, definately not a problem as such.
> Games that don't require masses of data can still be provided on
> DVD-ROM, but there will be the potential for much bigger game worlds,
> more music, larger files for clearer sound effects, more/better
> textures... almost unlimited potential.
That's not technically true, because these things will be limited by RAM and bandwidth anyway not storage capacity........
The consoles have only 512Mb RAM in total, so whether you have a 9Gb disc or a 45Gb disc is irrelevant to anything other than the length of game you can produce, not what can be done in a single level.
There's also the issues with bandwidth of streaming data from a disc and the fact that multiple DVDs may even be cheaper than a single new high capacity disc for a while meaning multiple dvd games for the 360 are an option, although not ideal, definately not a problem as such.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Hedfix wrote:
> Apart from when it comes to porting PC games across, so no: not
> better all round, actually.
>
> Two months to convert the entire Unreal Engine. Not an issue, I'd
> say.
The current version of the Unreal engine which was ported didn't make use of a unified shader architecture so would have been easier to port to PS3 than the newer architecture of the 360 which will be seen in PCs sometime next year.
> DVD will be the cheap 'write to' media and will continue for quite
> some time, probably replacing the CD.
>
> I don't see that this has any relevance. You can still record DVDs
> and play them in your Blu-Ray player, just as you could record CDs
> and play them in your DVD-ROM drive before DVD writers were widely
> available and affordable. It didn't stop people buying DVD-ROM
> drives.
>
> If anything, the CD format is probably safer than the DVD at the
> moment. The DVD hasn't replaced CD because of the plain audio
> format. Blu-Ray, though, does everything DVD does.
The only real difference to the end user is capacity and what you can fit on them. High quality DVD-Audio never took off but high-def movies will, eventually. I don't see this as an issue for anything other than the capacity of the discs for some games.
> No, but the price is an issue. Like I said it could go the way of
> other 'better formats' that have come before.
>
> It could, but it's unlikely. The format already has the majority of
> major players behind it, and will be in millions of homes through
> PS3.
No one knows who's going to win, which is exactly why Microsoft is hedging it's bets. Sony pushing it's own blu-ray was always a more likely winner because of the PS3 connection, although only time will tell.
> As far as a slight loss of quality vs the price I'd rather take the
> saving and so would many others I'd wager.
>
> Are you sure? PS2 continued to out-sell Xbox even when it was more
> expensive.
Not true, many early adopters who decide which way public opinion swing don't or don't feel inhibited by price and want to have the best stuff. At the end of the day the discs wont really cost much of a difference to buy in the shops and both formats could quite happily live side by side if the movie publishers back both, but that's not likely from Sony pictures now is it?
> Aside from price, the fact that the public has to warm to the new
> format and no doubt a few other factors too.
>
> If the movie industry starts to withdraw DVD, releasing new movies
> only on the new format, the public will warm to it quite quickly.
> People won't stop buying movies.
Spot on, if the industry relies on people buying two machines to play their films two formats wont last, if publishers support both, they will last. The one which sells through the most will win and with the PS3 making up such a large price, Sony will get the movie player spot on this time (the PS3 will support 1080p for instance where most dvd players and the 360 wont) meaning the PS3 will be a serious piece of entertainment kit for the living room and may well be the thing which decides the format which lives and dies.
> Hedfix wrote:
> Apart from when it comes to porting PC games across, so no: not
> better all round, actually.
>
> Two months to convert the entire Unreal Engine. Not an issue, I'd
> say.
The current version of the Unreal engine which was ported didn't make use of a unified shader architecture so would have been easier to port to PS3 than the newer architecture of the 360 which will be seen in PCs sometime next year.
> DVD will be the cheap 'write to' media and will continue for quite
> some time, probably replacing the CD.
>
> I don't see that this has any relevance. You can still record DVDs
> and play them in your Blu-Ray player, just as you could record CDs
> and play them in your DVD-ROM drive before DVD writers were widely
> available and affordable. It didn't stop people buying DVD-ROM
> drives.
>
> If anything, the CD format is probably safer than the DVD at the
> moment. The DVD hasn't replaced CD because of the plain audio
> format. Blu-Ray, though, does everything DVD does.
The only real difference to the end user is capacity and what you can fit on them. High quality DVD-Audio never took off but high-def movies will, eventually. I don't see this as an issue for anything other than the capacity of the discs for some games.
> No, but the price is an issue. Like I said it could go the way of
> other 'better formats' that have come before.
>
> It could, but it's unlikely. The format already has the majority of
> major players behind it, and will be in millions of homes through
> PS3.
No one knows who's going to win, which is exactly why Microsoft is hedging it's bets. Sony pushing it's own blu-ray was always a more likely winner because of the PS3 connection, although only time will tell.
> As far as a slight loss of quality vs the price I'd rather take the
> saving and so would many others I'd wager.
>
> Are you sure? PS2 continued to out-sell Xbox even when it was more
> expensive.
Not true, many early adopters who decide which way public opinion swing don't or don't feel inhibited by price and want to have the best stuff. At the end of the day the discs wont really cost much of a difference to buy in the shops and both formats could quite happily live side by side if the movie publishers back both, but that's not likely from Sony pictures now is it?
> Aside from price, the fact that the public has to warm to the new
> format and no doubt a few other factors too.
>
> If the movie industry starts to withdraw DVD, releasing new movies
> only on the new format, the public will warm to it quite quickly.
> People won't stop buying movies.
Spot on, if the industry relies on people buying two machines to play their films two formats wont last, if publishers support both, they will last. The one which sells through the most will win and with the PS3 making up such a large price, Sony will get the movie player spot on this time (the PS3 will support 1080p for instance where most dvd players and the 360 wont) meaning the PS3 will be a serious piece of entertainment kit for the living room and may well be the thing which decides the format which lives and dies.
Hedfix wrote:
> Apart from when it comes to porting PC games across, so no: not
> better all round, actually.
Two months to convert the entire Unreal Engine. Not an issue, I'd say.
> Wait for a version with a few negligible differences? And that's
> assuming you like the controller.
The controller seen widely in press photos for PS3 is not the final version.
> "Once", and this will be when exactly?
"Fairly sharpish", as I've already said!
> DVD will be the cheap 'write to' media and will continue for quite
> some time, probably replacing the CD.
I don't see that this has any relevance. You can still record DVDs and play them in your Blu-Ray player, just as you could record CDs and play them in your DVD-ROM drive before DVD writers were widely available and affordable. It didn't stop people buying DVD-ROM drives.
If anything, the CD format is probably safer than the DVD at the moment. The DVD hasn't replaced CD because of the plain audio format. Blu-Ray, though, does everything DVD does.
> No, but the price is an issue. Like I said it could go the way of
> other 'better formats' that have come before.
It could, but it's unlikely. The format already has the majority of major players behind it, and will be in millions of homes through PS3.
> As far as a slight loss of quality vs the price I'd rather take the
> saving and so would many others I'd wager.
Are you sure? PS2 continued to out-sell Xbox even when it was more expensive.
> Aside from price, the fact that the public has to warm to the new
> format and no doubt a few other factors too.
If the movie industry starts to withdraw DVD, releasing new movies only on the new format, the public will warm to it quite quickly. People won't stop buying movies.
Anyway, it's time for me to go to bed. G'night!
> Apart from when it comes to porting PC games across, so no: not
> better all round, actually.
Two months to convert the entire Unreal Engine. Not an issue, I'd say.
> Wait for a version with a few negligible differences? And that's
> assuming you like the controller.
The controller seen widely in press photos for PS3 is not the final version.
> "Once", and this will be when exactly?
"Fairly sharpish", as I've already said!
> DVD will be the cheap 'write to' media and will continue for quite
> some time, probably replacing the CD.
I don't see that this has any relevance. You can still record DVDs and play them in your Blu-Ray player, just as you could record CDs and play them in your DVD-ROM drive before DVD writers were widely available and affordable. It didn't stop people buying DVD-ROM drives.
If anything, the CD format is probably safer than the DVD at the moment. The DVD hasn't replaced CD because of the plain audio format. Blu-Ray, though, does everything DVD does.
> No, but the price is an issue. Like I said it could go the way of
> other 'better formats' that have come before.
It could, but it's unlikely. The format already has the majority of major players behind it, and will be in millions of homes through PS3.
> As far as a slight loss of quality vs the price I'd rather take the
> saving and so would many others I'd wager.
Are you sure? PS2 continued to out-sell Xbox even when it was more expensive.
> Aside from price, the fact that the public has to warm to the new
> format and no doubt a few other factors too.
If the movie industry starts to withdraw DVD, releasing new movies only on the new format, the public will warm to it quite quickly. People won't stop buying movies.
Anyway, it's time for me to go to bed. G'night!
Chr1s wrote:
>
> I suppose so. Depends whether you want to put convenience over price.
That's what happens in a competitive marketplace.
>
> I suppose so. Depends whether you want to put convenience over price.
That's what happens in a competitive marketplace.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
>
> No, better all round, actually.
Apart from when it comes to porting PC games across, so no: not better all round, actually.
> It does when you know you'll get a better version. :-)
Wait for a version with a few negligible differences? And that's assuming you like the controller.
> Not really. I can see DVD being phased out fairly sharpish once the
> movie companies have their new format.
"Once", and this will be when exactly? DVD will be the cheap 'write to' media and will continue for quite some time, probably replacing the CD.
>
> The move from VHS to DVD has been slow, because it meant having two
> completely different machines, as you DVD player obviously wouldn't
> play your old VHS movies. Not an issue with the move from DVD to
> Blu-Ray.
No, but the price is an issue. Like I said it could go the way of other 'better formats' that have come before.
>
> Indeed. But compression of any form means some loss of quality.
But there are masters of compression out there beavering away. ;)
As far as a slight loss of quality vs the price I'd rather take the saving and so would many others I'd wager.
On
> an average game, you'll be able to use uncompressed textures; no loss
> of quality, zero decompression time. Just one potential benefit.
> Even if you do use compression, you still have more storage, which
> means more textures. There is no down-side.
Aside from price, the fact that the public has to warm to the new format and no doubt a few other factors too.
>
> No, better all round, actually.
Apart from when it comes to porting PC games across, so no: not better all round, actually.
> It does when you know you'll get a better version. :-)
Wait for a version with a few negligible differences? And that's assuming you like the controller.
> Not really. I can see DVD being phased out fairly sharpish once the
> movie companies have their new format.
"Once", and this will be when exactly? DVD will be the cheap 'write to' media and will continue for quite some time, probably replacing the CD.
>
> The move from VHS to DVD has been slow, because it meant having two
> completely different machines, as you DVD player obviously wouldn't
> play your old VHS movies. Not an issue with the move from DVD to
> Blu-Ray.
No, but the price is an issue. Like I said it could go the way of other 'better formats' that have come before.
>
> Indeed. But compression of any form means some loss of quality.
But there are masters of compression out there beavering away. ;)
As far as a slight loss of quality vs the price I'd rather take the saving and so would many others I'd wager.
On
> an average game, you'll be able to use uncompressed textures; no loss
> of quality, zero decompression time. Just one potential benefit.
> Even if you do use compression, you still have more storage, which
> means more textures. There is no down-side.
Aside from price, the fact that the public has to warm to the new format and no doubt a few other factors too.
Hedfix wrote:
> Oh you mean 'slightly more' power in some areas but 'less power' in
> others being the two machines rather close when the specs are
> averaged out?
No, better all round, actually.
> Titles sell machines, whether there the same on both formats won't
> make much of a difference if they're on the 360 6 months or more
> before the PS3.
It does when you know you'll get a better version. :-)
> That the xbox uses DVDs - ie the best format at the moment. Blue-Ray
> will have a big hill to climb before it attains the popularity of the
> DVD format.
Not really. I can see DVD being phased out fairly sharpish once the movie companies have their new format.
The move from VHS to DVD has been slow, because it meant having two completely different machines, as you DVD player obviously wouldn't play your old VHS movies. Not an issue with the move from DVD to Blu-Ray.
> Which compression techniques seem to be managing rather well at the
> moment.
Indeed. But compression of any form means some loss of quality. On an average game, you'll be able to use uncompressed textures; no loss of quality, zero decompression time. Just one potential benefit. Even if you do use compression, you still have more storage, which means more textures. There is no down-side.
> Oh you mean 'slightly more' power in some areas but 'less power' in
> others being the two machines rather close when the specs are
> averaged out?
No, better all round, actually.
> Titles sell machines, whether there the same on both formats won't
> make much of a difference if they're on the 360 6 months or more
> before the PS3.
It does when you know you'll get a better version. :-)
> That the xbox uses DVDs - ie the best format at the moment. Blue-Ray
> will have a big hill to climb before it attains the popularity of the
> DVD format.
Not really. I can see DVD being phased out fairly sharpish once the movie companies have their new format.
The move from VHS to DVD has been slow, because it meant having two completely different machines, as you DVD player obviously wouldn't play your old VHS movies. Not an issue with the move from DVD to Blu-Ray.
> Which compression techniques seem to be managing rather well at the
> moment.
Indeed. But compression of any form means some loss of quality. On an average game, you'll be able to use uncompressed textures; no loss of quality, zero decompression time. Just one potential benefit. Even if you do use compression, you still have more storage, which means more textures. There is no down-side.
Hedfix wrote:
> Chr1s wrote:
> There's only so far you can go with it though, there isn't unlimited
> space on a disc.
>
> I'd imagine the quality would be better as well if you weren't
> having
> to squeeze everything down.
>
> Which is where you get games on more than 1 disc. Like I said if it's
> cheaper to get 2 or more DVD's than 1 blu-ray disc you'll see a lot of
> things out on multiple DVDs instead (or aswell as).
I suppose so. Depends whether you want to put convenience over price.
> Chr1s wrote:
> There's only so far you can go with it though, there isn't unlimited
> space on a disc.
>
> I'd imagine the quality would be better as well if you weren't
> having
> to squeeze everything down.
>
> Which is where you get games on more than 1 disc. Like I said if it's
> cheaper to get 2 or more DVD's than 1 blu-ray disc you'll see a lot of
> things out on multiple DVDs instead (or aswell as).
I suppose so. Depends whether you want to put convenience over price.
Savatt78 wrote:
> If any of these large game worlds come about though, they can just be
> put onto multiple discs, its no big deal really. Developers still
> have deadlines to meet and money to make, so I doubt you'll see too
> many huge games around anyway.
I can forsee future issues with MMORPGs, but that's what a hardrive's for anyway. ;)
>
> And Mob - the PS3 won't be cheaper than the XBox 360, because the
> Blu-ray format will make it more expensive and......... you know
> what, nevermind mate.
Indeed.
> If any of these large game worlds come about though, they can just be
> put onto multiple discs, its no big deal really. Developers still
> have deadlines to meet and money to make, so I doubt you'll see too
> many huge games around anyway.
I can forsee future issues with MMORPGs, but that's what a hardrive's for anyway. ;)
>
> And Mob - the PS3 won't be cheaper than the XBox 360, because the
> Blu-ray format will make it more expensive and......... you know
> what, nevermind mate.
Indeed.
Page: