The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
PS3's Blu-ray over X360's standard DVD:
"If you ever hear someone say "Blu-Ray isn't needed for this generation," rest assured they don't make games for a living. At Insomniac, we were filling up DVDs on the PS2, as were most of the developers in the industry. We compressed the level data, we compressed the mpeg movies, we compressed the audio, and it was still a struggle to get it to fit in 6 gigs. Now we've got 16 times as much system RAM, so the level data is 16 times bigger. And the average disc space of games only gets bigger over a console's lifespan. As games get bigger, more advanced and more complex, they necessarily take up more space. If developers were filling up DVDs last generation, there are clearly going to be some sacrifices made to fit current generation games in the same amount of space.
Granted, some really great Xbox 360 games have squeezed onto a DVD9. Gears of War is a beautiful game and shows off the highest resolution textures of anything yet released, partly because of the Unreal Engine's ability to stream textures. This means that you can have much higher resolution textures than you could normally fit in your 512 MB of RAM. It also means that you're going to chew up more disc space for each level. With streamed textures, streamed geometry and streamed audio, even with compression, you can quickly approach 1 GB of data per level. That inherently limits you to a maximum of about 7 levels, and that's without multiplayer levels or mpeg cutscenes.
Sometimes people ask us, "If Resistance takes 14 gigabytes, why doesn't it look better than Gears?" Well, for one, Resistance didn't support texture streaming, so we had to make choices about where we spent our high-res textures. Resistance also had 30 single-player chapters, six multiplayer maps, uncompressed audio streaming, and high-definition mpegs. That all added up to a lot of space on the disc. Starting with Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction we are supporting texture streaming, which will make the worlds look even better, and will also consume even more space on disc.
There's no question that you can always cut more levels, compress the audio more, compress the textures more, down-res the mpeg movies, and eventually get any game to fit on a DVD. But you paid for a high-def experience, right? You want the highest resolution, best audio, most cinematic experience a developer can offer, right? That's why Blu-Ray is important for games, and why it will become more important each year of this hardware cycle."
Standard HDD:
"When we were developing for PS2, I was jealous of Xbox's standard hard drive. There are so many things this allowed you to consider as a developer – virtually unlimited save data, improved load times, custom music, downloadable content and user-created content just to name a few. But since hard drives, no matter what the size, never get cheaper than about $50, Microsoft lost money trying to compete with the PS2's price. That may be the reason they left it out of the cheaper Xbox 360 SKU, thinking that Sony would again leave out the hard drive on the PS3. Instead, Sony made the hard drive standard for both SKUs. This added to the cost of the PS3, but it also let developers use the HDD in games.
The problem with including a hard drive in one version of the 360 and not in the other is that developers can't use it for the games. Or, at least, they can't use it for any required features. When you are guaranteed to have at least a 20 GB hard drive in the console, you can write your load caching routines around it, or use it for your application's storage needs. To a developer, an optional hard drive is roughly equivalent to no hard drive at all.
Another advantage of the PS3 is that it will let you put in any third party hard drive you want. From a developer's standpoint, this is good news because the market will gradually be able to support larger downloadable games over the course of the PS3's life. As downloadable content gets larger and more sophisticated, PS3 owners can choose to buy larger hard drives at the best market price. The more this happens, the more developers will be encouraged to create better and better downloadable games."
PS3 has a major CPU advantage:
"The GPUs on the Xbox 360 and PS3 are roughly equivalent, with the Xbox 360 arguably having a slight edge. The difference in CPU power, however, is far greater with the PS3 enjoying the advantage. The PS3's eight parallel CPUs (one primary "PPU" and seven Cell processors) give it potentially far more computing power than the three parallel CPUs in the Xbox 360. Just about any tech programmer will tell you that the PS3's CPUs are significantly more powerful. The problem is that it has been challenging thus far to take advantage of the Cell's parallel architecture.
With the PS2, Sony got away with making a fairly developer-unfriendly system, and its success allowed their hardware designers to ignore developer's complaints as they made the PS3. People high up at Sony have realized that approach simply won't work anymore and are trying to fix the problem. Sony is actively improving their libraries, tools and developer support in order to make PS3 development easier. They are giving first party developed techniques and code to third-party developers so that multi-platform games should start looking better on PS3.
Games developed from the ground up on PS3 are the ones that will really show off the PS3's CPU advantage. The complexity of the distributed processing architecture means that PS3 engines won't fully blossom until a little later in the lifecycle than the PS2. This has put the PS3 at a disadvantage early in its lifecycle, but within two years you will see games that surpass what is possible on the Xbox 360."
The Wii fad will fade:
"OK, this one's going to be controversial, but I have to say it. I like Nintendo a lot. I think Nintendo has innovated far more than any other company in the industry. And I think the Wii is really, really fun. But... let me relate to you a story that may sound familiar:
Your friend Reggie invites you over for a Wii Party. It's awesome. You and your friends partake in whatever beverages are legally appropriate for your age group. The next day everyone who went to the party rushes out and buys a Wii.
A week later Reggie hosts another Wii Party. This time only half the group comes. It's still fun, but there isn't quite as much shoving to get at the Wiimote.
The next week Reggie hosts another Wii Party. You tell him you have bird flu.
Obviously I'm exaggerating, but the Wii does have many characteristics of popular mainstream fads. It's instantaneously accessible, it's unlike anything you've tried before, and it's great fun to share with friends. In short, it's everything Nintendo said it would be and it has captured the world's imagination. The only downside is that the world is easily distracted. Tickle Me Elmo captured the world's attention at one point, as did Furbies. They were both instantly accessible, were unlike anything people had seen before, and were fun to share with friends. But a year later, after everyone had seen them and tried them out, their popularity waned.
The Wii is currently riding on a massive wave of mainstream attention and has been purchased by lots of people who don't normally play games. But how many of those people who are hooked on Wii Sports will also buy Wii Need For Speed? Mainstream fads usually run their course within a year. As the honeymoon period fades, the Wii will be going up against more and more graphically impressive games on the PS3 and Xbox 360. More people will be buying HD televisions and looking for the most immersive and stunning experiences available. For these reasons, I think the Wii will be more successful than the GameCube or N64 but in the long run will still be outsold by the PS3."
PS2 Still outselling the X360:
"I know, it's outselling the PS3 by an even larger margin. But the continued strong PS2 sales really are a good thing for Sony. Anyone buying a PS2 at this point is probably not going to buy a PS3 or Xbox 360 in the next year. And when they do choose to buy the current generation of hardware, the PS3 will be in a lot better position. The price will have come down, the game library will be broad, and the top PS3 titles will probably have the edge in both graphics and sound. Just as important, the people buying into the PS2 now will be getting into many of Sony's exclusive franchises that they will then later want to play on the PS3."
Free Online:
"Among all the talk about the price of Sony's console, I almost never see anyone mention the significance of Sony's free online service. Xbox Live Gold costs $70 to sign up for 1 year, or $20 for three months [It's actually now $49.99 for a one-year subscription - Ed.]. You can renew your membership for $50 a year. So if the Xbox 360 stays around for five years, you'll be paying 70 + 50 + 50 + 50 + 50 = $270 to access features that Sony gives you for free.
I agree, Xbox Live is overall offering a better online service right now. But $270 better? And Sony is steadily narrowing the gap in online features. With improvements to the messaging system and support for background downloading, Sony is rapidly catching up with many of the key advantages that Live has enjoyed. Add to that the fact that Sony is offering virtually lag-free dedicated servers at no cost, while on Xbox Live you are paying for a more laggy peer-to-peer service. Furthermore, one of the biggest advertised features of Xbox Live is matchmaking, yet the implementation of this feature has been inconsistent since it is left up to the developer. The matchmaking service on Resistance: FOM, meanwhile, has been one of its biggest successes, proving that even at this early stage the PS3's online capabilities are very competitive. And free. As the PS3 community continues to grow with new features and player-generated content from Home and Little Big Planet, Sony's online service is looking better and better. And, again, they're not charging you $270 for it. "
"If you ever hear someone say "Blu-Ray isn't needed for this generation," rest assured they don't make games for a living. At Insomniac, we were filling up DVDs on the PS2, as were most of the developers in the industry. We compressed the level data, we compressed the mpeg movies, we compressed the audio, and it was still a struggle to get it to fit in 6 gigs. Now we've got 16 times as much system RAM, so the level data is 16 times bigger. And the average disc space of games only gets bigger over a console's lifespan. As games get bigger, more advanced and more complex, they necessarily take up more space. If developers were filling up DVDs last generation, there are clearly going to be some sacrifices made to fit current generation games in the same amount of space.
Granted, some really great Xbox 360 games have squeezed onto a DVD9. Gears of War is a beautiful game and shows off the highest resolution textures of anything yet released, partly because of the Unreal Engine's ability to stream textures. This means that you can have much higher resolution textures than you could normally fit in your 512 MB of RAM. It also means that you're going to chew up more disc space for each level. With streamed textures, streamed geometry and streamed audio, even with compression, you can quickly approach 1 GB of data per level. That inherently limits you to a maximum of about 7 levels, and that's without multiplayer levels or mpeg cutscenes.
Sometimes people ask us, "If Resistance takes 14 gigabytes, why doesn't it look better than Gears?" Well, for one, Resistance didn't support texture streaming, so we had to make choices about where we spent our high-res textures. Resistance also had 30 single-player chapters, six multiplayer maps, uncompressed audio streaming, and high-definition mpegs. That all added up to a lot of space on the disc. Starting with Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction we are supporting texture streaming, which will make the worlds look even better, and will also consume even more space on disc.
There's no question that you can always cut more levels, compress the audio more, compress the textures more, down-res the mpeg movies, and eventually get any game to fit on a DVD. But you paid for a high-def experience, right? You want the highest resolution, best audio, most cinematic experience a developer can offer, right? That's why Blu-Ray is important for games, and why it will become more important each year of this hardware cycle."
Standard HDD:
"When we were developing for PS2, I was jealous of Xbox's standard hard drive. There are so many things this allowed you to consider as a developer – virtually unlimited save data, improved load times, custom music, downloadable content and user-created content just to name a few. But since hard drives, no matter what the size, never get cheaper than about $50, Microsoft lost money trying to compete with the PS2's price. That may be the reason they left it out of the cheaper Xbox 360 SKU, thinking that Sony would again leave out the hard drive on the PS3. Instead, Sony made the hard drive standard for both SKUs. This added to the cost of the PS3, but it also let developers use the HDD in games.
The problem with including a hard drive in one version of the 360 and not in the other is that developers can't use it for the games. Or, at least, they can't use it for any required features. When you are guaranteed to have at least a 20 GB hard drive in the console, you can write your load caching routines around it, or use it for your application's storage needs. To a developer, an optional hard drive is roughly equivalent to no hard drive at all.
Another advantage of the PS3 is that it will let you put in any third party hard drive you want. From a developer's standpoint, this is good news because the market will gradually be able to support larger downloadable games over the course of the PS3's life. As downloadable content gets larger and more sophisticated, PS3 owners can choose to buy larger hard drives at the best market price. The more this happens, the more developers will be encouraged to create better and better downloadable games."
PS3 has a major CPU advantage:
"The GPUs on the Xbox 360 and PS3 are roughly equivalent, with the Xbox 360 arguably having a slight edge. The difference in CPU power, however, is far greater with the PS3 enjoying the advantage. The PS3's eight parallel CPUs (one primary "PPU" and seven Cell processors) give it potentially far more computing power than the three parallel CPUs in the Xbox 360. Just about any tech programmer will tell you that the PS3's CPUs are significantly more powerful. The problem is that it has been challenging thus far to take advantage of the Cell's parallel architecture.
With the PS2, Sony got away with making a fairly developer-unfriendly system, and its success allowed their hardware designers to ignore developer's complaints as they made the PS3. People high up at Sony have realized that approach simply won't work anymore and are trying to fix the problem. Sony is actively improving their libraries, tools and developer support in order to make PS3 development easier. They are giving first party developed techniques and code to third-party developers so that multi-platform games should start looking better on PS3.
Games developed from the ground up on PS3 are the ones that will really show off the PS3's CPU advantage. The complexity of the distributed processing architecture means that PS3 engines won't fully blossom until a little later in the lifecycle than the PS2. This has put the PS3 at a disadvantage early in its lifecycle, but within two years you will see games that surpass what is possible on the Xbox 360."
The Wii fad will fade:
"OK, this one's going to be controversial, but I have to say it. I like Nintendo a lot. I think Nintendo has innovated far more than any other company in the industry. And I think the Wii is really, really fun. But... let me relate to you a story that may sound familiar:
Your friend Reggie invites you over for a Wii Party. It's awesome. You and your friends partake in whatever beverages are legally appropriate for your age group. The next day everyone who went to the party rushes out and buys a Wii.
A week later Reggie hosts another Wii Party. This time only half the group comes. It's still fun, but there isn't quite as much shoving to get at the Wiimote.
The next week Reggie hosts another Wii Party. You tell him you have bird flu.
Obviously I'm exaggerating, but the Wii does have many characteristics of popular mainstream fads. It's instantaneously accessible, it's unlike anything you've tried before, and it's great fun to share with friends. In short, it's everything Nintendo said it would be and it has captured the world's imagination. The only downside is that the world is easily distracted. Tickle Me Elmo captured the world's attention at one point, as did Furbies. They were both instantly accessible, were unlike anything people had seen before, and were fun to share with friends. But a year later, after everyone had seen them and tried them out, their popularity waned.
The Wii is currently riding on a massive wave of mainstream attention and has been purchased by lots of people who don't normally play games. But how many of those people who are hooked on Wii Sports will also buy Wii Need For Speed? Mainstream fads usually run their course within a year. As the honeymoon period fades, the Wii will be going up against more and more graphically impressive games on the PS3 and Xbox 360. More people will be buying HD televisions and looking for the most immersive and stunning experiences available. For these reasons, I think the Wii will be more successful than the GameCube or N64 but in the long run will still be outsold by the PS3."
PS2 Still outselling the X360:
"I know, it's outselling the PS3 by an even larger margin. But the continued strong PS2 sales really are a good thing for Sony. Anyone buying a PS2 at this point is probably not going to buy a PS3 or Xbox 360 in the next year. And when they do choose to buy the current generation of hardware, the PS3 will be in a lot better position. The price will have come down, the game library will be broad, and the top PS3 titles will probably have the edge in both graphics and sound. Just as important, the people buying into the PS2 now will be getting into many of Sony's exclusive franchises that they will then later want to play on the PS3."
Free Online:
"Among all the talk about the price of Sony's console, I almost never see anyone mention the significance of Sony's free online service. Xbox Live Gold costs $70 to sign up for 1 year, or $20 for three months [It's actually now $49.99 for a one-year subscription - Ed.]. You can renew your membership for $50 a year. So if the Xbox 360 stays around for five years, you'll be paying 70 + 50 + 50 + 50 + 50 = $270 to access features that Sony gives you for free.
I agree, Xbox Live is overall offering a better online service right now. But $270 better? And Sony is steadily narrowing the gap in online features. With improvements to the messaging system and support for background downloading, Sony is rapidly catching up with many of the key advantages that Live has enjoyed. Add to that the fact that Sony is offering virtually lag-free dedicated servers at no cost, while on Xbox Live you are paying for a more laggy peer-to-peer service. Furthermore, one of the biggest advertised features of Xbox Live is matchmaking, yet the implementation of this feature has been inconsistent since it is left up to the developer. The matchmaking service on Resistance: FOM, meanwhile, has been one of its biggest successes, proving that even at this early stage the PS3's online capabilities are very competitive. And free. As the PS3 community continues to grow with new features and player-generated content from Home and Little Big Planet, Sony's online service is looking better and better. And, again, they're not charging you $270 for it. "
Page:
pb wrote:
> The whole point though is that it's not a MMORPG, or trying to
> be. It's not a game at all, just a way of communicating and
> meeting people to play the seperate online games.
So basically, it is like a "plush" version of Xfire?
Obviously with alot more fornt end to make it user friendly, give it more functions and make it look better but a communications tool instead of a game.
> The whole point though is that it's not a MMORPG, or trying to
> be. It's not a game at all, just a way of communicating and
> meeting people to play the seperate online games.
So basically, it is like a "plush" version of Xfire?
Obviously with alot more fornt end to make it user friendly, give it more functions and make it look better but a communications tool instead of a game.
So you dont know why its a rip off of Second Life either eh? :-)
The whole point though is that it's not a MMORPG, or trying to be. It's not a game at all, just a way of communicating and meeting people to play the seperate online games.
Garin wrote:
> pb wrote:
> And since Sony ripped of Second Life to create Home
>
> Not sure why people keep saying this.
Not exactly a hard one.
Answer: Because of the similarities.
> pb wrote:
> And since Sony ripped of Second Life to create Home
>
> Not sure why people keep saying this.
Not exactly a hard one.
Answer: Because of the similarities.
pb wrote:
> A 3D Metaworld with customisable Avatars and the ability to meet
> people, communicate and show off trophies
...which is also a description of pretty much every MMORPG too.
> Obviously it's not going to be quite so customisable, judging by
> what's coming out of Three Speech, but in both you can customise
> your Avatar and surroundings, use the software for 'matchmaking'
> and generally design the space around you.
Again hardly unique to Second Life is it. Whats special about Second Life is that its all user definable content. And Sony arent willing to go down that route it seems. From what I can see you'll just be able to buy customisations. And thats something you can find in pretty much every online game in the asian market.
So still not seeing this "Sony ripped off Second Life" point of view. Sony is one of the biggest players in the MMORPG market. So an online virtual world is hardly new territory for them either.
> A 3D Metaworld with customisable Avatars and the ability to meet
> people, communicate and show off trophies
...which is also a description of pretty much every MMORPG too.
> Obviously it's not going to be quite so customisable, judging by
> what's coming out of Three Speech, but in both you can customise
> your Avatar and surroundings, use the software for 'matchmaking'
> and generally design the space around you.
Again hardly unique to Second Life is it. Whats special about Second Life is that its all user definable content. And Sony arent willing to go down that route it seems. From what I can see you'll just be able to buy customisations. And thats something you can find in pretty much every online game in the asian market.
So still not seeing this "Sony ripped off Second Life" point of view. Sony is one of the biggest players in the MMORPG market. So an online virtual world is hardly new territory for them either.
A 3D Metaworld with customisable Avatars and the ability to meet people, communicate and show off trophies sounds a lot like Second Life but with a more games focus.
Obviously it's not going to be quite so customisable, judging by what's coming out of Three Speech, but in both you can customise your Avatar and surroundings, use the software for 'matchmaking' and generally design the space around you.
I still think it's a great idea. Second Life can be a pain and Home looks like it has all the right bits to make it work without being too bewildering. It should be a bit like a 3D Xbox Live community, I guess, with all the Achievements (trophies) and the ability to add friends (take them back to your house) and ask them to join games etc.
Obviously it's not going to be quite so customisable, judging by what's coming out of Three Speech, but in both you can customise your Avatar and surroundings, use the software for 'matchmaking' and generally design the space around you.
I still think it's a great idea. Second Life can be a pain and Home looks like it has all the right bits to make it work without being too bewildering. It should be a bit like a 3D Xbox Live community, I guess, with all the Achievements (trophies) and the ability to add friends (take them back to your house) and ask them to join games etc.
pb wrote:
> They took the basic idea behind it to create their own type of
> online meeting place.
I'm still not getting it though. The basic idea of what?
> They took the basic idea behind it to create their own type of
> online meeting place.
I'm still not getting it though. The basic idea of what?
Garin wrote:
> pb wrote:
> And since Sony ripped of Second Life to create Home
>
> Not sure why people keep saying this.
They took the basic idea behind it to create their own type of online meeting place.
It obviously suits consoles better the way Sony have designed it, but it's still not exactly an original idea. Doesn't mean its a bad idea, of course, but since Sony have done so well incorporating other people's strengths into their consoles, Microsoft should learn from this and do the same. On the other hand, Little Big Planet is unusual in that its something completely original, but this doesn't mean it won't be copied in time. If something's good, a duplicate of it will appear shortly, that's how the whole media industry works!
> pb wrote:
> And since Sony ripped of Second Life to create Home
>
> Not sure why people keep saying this.
They took the basic idea behind it to create their own type of online meeting place.
It obviously suits consoles better the way Sony have designed it, but it's still not exactly an original idea. Doesn't mean its a bad idea, of course, but since Sony have done so well incorporating other people's strengths into their consoles, Microsoft should learn from this and do the same. On the other hand, Little Big Planet is unusual in that its something completely original, but this doesn't mean it won't be copied in time. If something's good, a duplicate of it will appear shortly, that's how the whole media industry works!
I tried Second Life and was extremely disappointed. I couldnt even find a way to buy land. I got lost easily and sometimes it took me 5 minutes to get to where I wanted to go. So much wasted space.
What they should have done is something like The Sims. Except make a massive world and allow people buy cheap plots of land to build on. I'd enjoy that =)
Or does it already exist?
What they should have done is something like The Sims. Except make a massive world and allow people buy cheap plots of land to build on. I'd enjoy that =)
Or does it already exist?
pb wrote:
> And since Sony ripped of Second Life to create Home
Not sure why people keep saying this.
> And since Sony ripped of Second Life to create Home
Not sure why people keep saying this.
Page: