Some exciting PS3 rumors

[Piggus]

I don't normally take rumors or "insider info" very seriously, but this one is special. Two days after the following thread was created, three of the rumors regarding Resistance were confirmed as true in an MTV interview.

http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=667429&page=1&pp=15

Who would have just guessed that Resistance currently takes up 20 gbs, has a weapon that can bore through solid objects, and uses and advanced form of audio that adapts to the environment? It doesn't really sound like a lucky guess to me.

If all of these are true (and especially the ones about DVD9 limiting texture quality) then the 360 is going to have a much harder time keeping up with the PS3.

[Fry]

Could be right the PS3 online features got me thinking with the bigger games and more player it will probally chew through my download limit.

[5tatic]

This has gotten me excited. Sony seems to be doing everything to get people on their side. The price almost seems worth it now. The free internet service is great. With the xbox 360 you have to pay each year and also pay for download points which sucks. So in turn, you could say the PS3 is cheaper long term.

[Japisee]

That all looked aweomse, until he said that PSP is outselling DS. Where'd he get that?

[Jimmy_86]

It certainly made for a good read.
If all of these are true (and especially the ones about DVD9 limiting texture quality) then the 360 is going to have a much harder time keeping up with the PS3.
Of course, as coding improves and developers get better at being economical with disc space then the difference between the consoles may decrease. Just look at early XBox/PS2 games compared to recent games, you can notice the difference that a couple of years has made yet they're still on the same console.

Anyhow... nice find Piggus.

[phreak]

Still not spending $600 goddamn dollars on a console. I don't care who has OMFGS BETAR GFXS! You're being hynotised by Sony to spend almost $1,000 (console, games, acc.) on this thing when first released. You can wait unless you really have money to go all out and get this piece.

[Piggus]

Then spend $500. That's only $100 more than the 360.

I don't get why spending $400 on a system is perfectly okay, but spending $500 is just plain insane.

OMFDG IST TOO SPENSIVVEE!!!!111one and then you go out, buy a 360, ONE game, and an extra controller and think it's okay... Even though you've just spent $500. :rolleyes:

[Olin]

But we're still saving $100-200.

[Ritchie]

Still not spending $600 goddamn dollars on a console. I don't care who has OMFGS BETAR GFXS! You're being hynotised by Sony to spend almost $1,000 (console, games, acc.) on this thing when first released. You can wait unless you really have money to go all out and get this piece.
...Then don't buy it and stop moaning?

[Piggus]

Fine. We'll look at it this way then:

Premium 360 + two years of LIVE to play online = $500.

Come on. Microsoft even makes you pay for a damn charger for you controller. Couldn't they have just included a USB charger like Sony is doing?

If you like the games on 360, fine. But it is absolutely rediculous to say that you're getting a better deal with the 360 if you're looking at the technology/feature side of it. Because Microsoft can and will make you pay for loads of extra crap that should have came with the system in the first place, ie the play and charge kit, HD-DVD drive, hard drive as standard, online gaming, etc..

Honestly, you guys are running out of excuses. I've yet to hear a valid argument (other than a few exclusive games) as to why the 360 is a better choice than PS3.

[I'm a Robot]

It's going to be a huge hole in my wallet but i'm getting one hopefully by 2007.

[SA most wanted]

Another reason why i'm getting the PS3 also.

[I'm a Robot]

i can't wait for Metal Gear Solid 4 i hope Snake doesn't shoot himself.

PS3 and Xbox 360 it will be a close contest but seeing as how PS3 has a $1000 dvd player system(blu-ray) that is what will lead to PS3's victory in the console war.

[Fry]

But we're still saving $100-200.And your also getting a lesser console heres why wich in the long run costs more

1- PS3 has Blu Ray when if you want HD DVD on the 360 it will cost $200+$400=$600 wich= the price of the 60gig PS3
2- Free online, on the 360 its $50 a year = $50 dollars more then PS3
3- PSP/PS3 connectivity shits all over that Live Anywhere crap
4- 60 Gig HDD 3X the HDD space avalible for 360
5- Wi Fi
6- Dont have to pay for charger
All this = Better value than the 360

Edit- Not to metion the PS3 will last 8-10 years MS will probally release another Xbox in 4-5 years.

[iluvgta]

Then spend $500. That's only $100 more than the 360.

I don't get why spending $400 on a system is perfectly okay, but spending $500 is just plain insane.

You're completely undermining the fact that even $400 is a push for a lot people (most people I know say that the Xbox 360 is very expensive at £280) and that an immediate 'extra $100' is more significant than you're letting on. And when it's an immediate $200 - 50% more than the Premium 360 - that's when things go a bit crazy.

[Piggus]

$400 is a push? Most of you don't seem to think $400 is a push when you're buying at least two games with it. :P

Yes, $500 to $600 is expensive. But in the long run, you'll be spending less than you will with the 360 if you get Xbox Live.

[stealthbomber]

Then again, Xbox Live is actually original. Sony copped damn near everything from Xbox Live. Even though "Playstation Live" is free, the quality would probably be fucked.

[Fry]

Then again, Xbox Live is actually original. Sony copped damn near everything from Xbox Live. Even though "Playstation Live" is free, the quality would probably be fucked.But nothing else MS does is original!! Also how will PS online be fucked you haven't even played it so reserve judgement for Nov and it can support way more people up to 40 players i've heard.

[iluvgta]

$400 is a push? Most of you don't seem to think $400 is a push when you're buying at least two games with it. :P

Yes, $500 to $600 is expensive. But in the long run, you'll be spending less than you will with the 360 if you get Xbox Live.

I made my point with long-run spending (what you just said) taken into the account - and that's just it. You don't have to blow $600 in one go (without games included) - and that's hugely significant. You have to understand that retail doesn't always (in fact it hardly ever does) work in this ideal way you're envisioning wherein everybody buys - and can afford to buy - exactly what they need all in one go. Hence the 'funnies' (there's a relative bargain of a Mercedes in one, I believe, to put things in perspective) you may have seen that poke fun at the PS3's highly-priced value.

[Piggus]

Then again, Xbox Live is actually original. Sony copped damn near everything from Xbox Live. Even though "Playstation Live" is free, the quality would probably be fucked.

All I care about is playing the games online with other people. That should be a pretty basic feature, right? I mean we already pay for internet. So why should we have to pay to play games online when PC players have been doing it for free for the last decade?

Yes, it's only $50 a year, but that's $200 for four years of service. So in other words, with $600 you could get a Premium 360 with four years of Live, or a Premium PS3 with as much online playing as you want. When buying a product that is designed to last you five years, you should look at the long term aspect.

[stealthbomber]

All I care about is playing the games online with other people. That should be a pretty basic feature, right? I mean we already pay for internet. So why should we have to pay to play games online when PC players have been doing it for free for the last decade?

Yes, it's only $50 a year, but that's $200 for four years of service. So in other words, with $600 you could get a Premium 360 with four years of Live, or a Premium PS3 with as much online playing as you want. When buying a product that is designed to last you five years, you should look at the long term aspect.

Five years isn't that long. And by the time I've paid the same for a PS3, I'd already have an Xbox 720.

[Ritchie]

Then again, Xbox Live is actually original. Sony copped damn near everything from Xbox Live. Even though "Playstation Live" is free, the quality would probably be fucked.
I take it you played on the online network of the PS3 then?
Even if it's Live like, saying stuff like OGMF COPIED is pretty fucking sad.
Sony obviously knows Live is good, so why can't they make their own online system also good?

[iluvgta]

All I care about is playing the games online with other people. That should be a pretty basic feature, right? I mean we already pay for internet. So why should we have to pay to play games online when PC players have been doing it for free for the last decade?

Aside from Guild Wars (and that does actually have a lot of lag issues), I can't think of a well-executed free online gaming service for any PC game - especially for any recent releases.

[Shadow Conception]

You're pretty much ignoring the dozens of first person shooters that are coming out every week, and aren't paid. Compare Prey PC with Prey Xbox 360. On the 360, you have to pay for online. On the PC, you don't! I'm sure many people would prefer free online service over paid, especially when you're getting the same damn content. I personally think paying for online is an unneeded burden.

[Fry]

You're pretty much ignoring the dozens of first person shooters that are coming out every week, and aren't paid. Compare Prey PC with Prey Xbox 360. On the 360, you have to pay for online. On the PC, you don't! I'm sure many people would prefer free online service over paid, especially when you're getting the same damn content. I personally think paying for online is an unneeded burden.Exactly right but some people you cant explain that too.

[iluvgta]

You're pretty much ignoring the dozens of first person shooters that are coming out every week, and aren't paid. Compare Prey PC with Prey Xbox 360. On the 360, you have to pay for online. On the PC, you don't! I'm sure many people would prefer free online service over paid, especially when you're getting the same damn content. I personally think paying for online is an unneeded burden.

Wrong! Dedicated servers cost money. Now don't make me explain why it can't be specifically the same situation on a console (work it out for yourself), but THINK ABOUT IT.

[Shadow Conception]

Yet we see PS3 and Wii acheiving free online anyway. Looks like Microsoft is left out in this aspect, considering 2 out of 3 next-gen consoles have free online.

Oh yeah, and PC servers also require mostly dedicated servers. But we still have free, quality online games like Counter-Strike: Source!

[iluvgta]

Yet we see PS3 and Wii acheiving free online anyway. Looks like Microsoft is left out in this aspect, considering 2 out of 3 next-gen consoles have free online.

That's funny, because I haven't seen either service up and running nicely on my PS3 or Wii yet.

[stealthbomber]

Wii - Basically only to play vintage games. Nintendo could never put together a decent online service.
PS3 - Think Xbox Live, but NOT Xbox Live. More like a cheap imitation, like Laura Lynn Cola.

[Piggus]

Jesus, this has been gone over before. If people want to pay for a deticated server, they can and will do so. But most people don't and they're playing experience is fine. I have never paid for a server, and I enjoy playing BF2 and CSS with as many as 64 people online. Is there even a single Xbox or 360 game that supports that many people? The most I have seen for any Live based game is 32... And one of the PS3 launch titles already has support for 40 people.

[Shadow Conception]

That's funny, because I haven't seen either service up and running nicely on my PS3 or Wii yet.

Then why are we discussing the subject? It's called speculation, my friend. Before the system is released, we usually discuss how the actual system will be. :P

[Ritchie]

Wii - Basically only to play vintage games. Nintendo could never put together a decent online service.
...And you know this, why?

[Fry]

Wii - Basically only to play vintage games. Nintendo could never put together a decent online service.
PS3 - Think Xbox Live, but NOT Xbox Live. More like a cheap imitation, like Laura Lynn Cola.Do you have both consoles in front of you now and have played them online. NO! so top with your bashing of the 2 consoles!! Also Nintendo wont just be for the classics its also used for general online gaming like Live and PS network according to THE PRESIDENT of the company not some teen on a PC.

[iluvgta]

Jesus, this has been gone over before. If people want to pay for a deticated server, they can and will do so. But most people don't and they're playing experience is fine.

Some people have to pay for dedicated servers to allow other people (like you and myself) to have an enjoyable gaming experience. Now if you read what I'd posted then the jist of it was that dedicated server control probably doesn't work very well on the console platforms so it would make sense for there to be a distributed cost - at least it wouldn't be something you could complain about.

Then why are we discussing the subject? It's called speculation, my friend. Before the system is released, we usually discuss how the actual system will be. :P

Yeah, well you have absolutely no idea about the quality of a free online gaming service. We haven't actually seen this so-called free online gaming up and running, and I don't think anyone's made legally binding plans to ensure this situation doesn't change. But I'd sure as hell have higher hopes for a paid service - as I do when I join third-party dedicated servers for PC games.

[Shadow Conception]

Sir, I have a PS2, and am much more willing to have a free service than a paid service. I don't need "OMGZZ HIGH KWALITI ONLIEN", I'm fine with my free PS2 service, thanks.

[iluvgta]

OK well I guess it's a rather difficult point because then there are people like me who would be happy to pay as long as the experience is of the highest quality. Although of course the free service might be very good, it's just I wouldn't have high hopes - because it's free it's not like you can really complain if it isn't.

[stealthbomber]

But free services are underwhelming and hardly worth that $100 PS2 HDD. Not so free now, iight?

[Piggus]

You don't need the HDD to play online with the PS2. >__>

You need the online adapter which is what, $30? And the new PS2s have it built in.

[Fry]

But free services are underwhelming and hardly worth that $100 PS2 HDD. Not so free now, iight?
But you dont need to buy a HDD for the PS3 wich is obviously what we're discussing, so yes it is free.

[Shadow Conception]

The HDD isn't $100. You're forgetting the world of other features the PS3 has that the 360 doesn't have. Do some research, k.

Edit: I misread your post. Forgive me. PS2 doesn't need an HDD for online. However, some online games do, such as FFXI.

I guess it all comes up to opinion, iluvgta. An Xbox 360 is more suitable for someone who has less money to spare, while the PS3 is for people willing to pay for long-term value.

[stealthbomber]

I HAVE the money for a PS3. It's just my OPINION that MS has the better online service. I DO think about long-term, and I think Xbox Live HAS long-term value.

[Ritchie]

But free services are underwhelming and hardly worth that $100 PS2 HDD. Not so free now, iight?
Please, get out of this thread.
Your posts make no sense and you obviously have NO IDEA what you're talking about.
edit: hah, mature.
atleast leave your name.

[Olin]

The HDD isn't $100. You're forgetting the world of other features the PS3 has that the 360 doesn't have. Do some research, k.

Edit: I misread your post. Forgive me. PS2 doesn't need an HDD for online. However, some online games do, such as FFXI.

I guess it all comes up to opinion, iluvgta. An Xbox 360 is more suitable for someone who has less money to spare, while the PS3 is for people willing to pay for long-term value.I'm tired of this "Xbox 360" is for poor people bullshit.

IT IS ALL FUCKING PREFERENCE BECAUSE OTHERWISE IF THERE WERE NO GAMES YOU LIKED YOU WOULDN'T GET IT AT ALL SO Y'ALL STFU

It's also so easy to talk about how great something is when it's not even out. "PS3 ONLINE WILL BETTER BETTER BECAUSE IT'S FREE AND IT'S SONY." Well, you shut up and tell me that AFTER it's out and you've actually played it.

Edit: Make it, you've played BOTH it and Xbox Live.

[stealthbomber]

(1. Ritchie, you can't tell me what the hell to do.
(2. The last time I checked, the PS2 HDD WAS $100. Last time I checked.
(3. Copying your competitor's thing is a sign of weakness.

EDIT: Ritchie, what did I do again?

[Ritchie]

(3. Copying your competitor's thing is a sign of weakness.
GG?
If I'm not mistaken, the N64 was the first controller to have an analoge stick.
So yeah, PS and X-box should've stayed with only a D-pad then? Cause I mean, LOL NINTENDO HAD IT FIRST.
oh no wait, Nintendo was probably also the first with a D-pad.
Let's have a Playstation and X-box without controllers then!

[Shadow Conception]

Then why are we discussing the subject? It's called speculation, my friend. Before the system is released, we usually discuss how the actual system will be. :P

^ read that Olin, k.

[Olin]

Speculation is not "PS3 will be 999999999999x better!" That's just bias and ignorance.

[stealthbomber]

The N64 controller had only ONE anolog stick and it sucked ass.

[Ritchie]

The N64 controller had only ONE anolog stick and it sucked ass.
...I can still say the same then.
Sony had 2 analoge sticks first, so fuck, 360 can't have them!!
ROFL LOL MS IS SO WEAK NOW THEY COPIED SONY

[Shadow Conception]

I don't believe I've ever said that, Olin.

(1. Ritchie, you can't tell me what the hell to do.
(2. The last time I checked, the PS2 HDD WAS $100. Last time I checked.
(3. Copying your competitor's thing is a sign of weakness.

EDIT: Ritchie, what did I do again?

I misread your post, you baggot. And the PS2 doesn't need an HDD for online. The PS3 HDD, however, comes at no extra cost, comes bundled in, k.

[stealthbomber]

At SC...all you do is be bias towards the PS3 and say, "Xbox 360 is for poor people, blugh, blugh, BLUGH."
at Ritchie...MS improved the anolog stick by putting them on different axis.

[Shadow Conception]

Wow, just pulling random quotes out of your ass and saying I said them.

GG

I guess it all comes up to opinion, iluvgta. An Xbox 360 is more suitable for someone who has less money to spare, while the PS3 is for people willing to pay for long-term value.

That doesn't mean poor. That just means you can't shell out the extra money for the PS3. That doesn't necessarily mean you're poor.

And understand the quote "MORE SUITABLE". More suitable, not completely suitable. And keep in mind, this is an opinion, considering it has the word "more".

[Ritchie]

At SC...all you do is be bias towards the PS3 and say, "Xbox 360 is for poor people, blugh, blugh, BLUGH."
at Ritchie...MS improved the anolog stick by putting them on different axis.
rofl wow..
Then, what about the D-pad, and the Y-X-B-A buttons?
I mean.. Same place as Sony uses

[stealthbomber]

The d-pad are not in the same place as the Dualshock. The D-pad switched places with the Left Anolog stick. Have you EVER seen an Xbox controller?

[Ritchie]

Dude, that statement doesn't make sense at all.
How the hell does it improve the fucking analoge sticks by putting them, 1-2 centimetres higher?!
And yes, actually I have.
But if I follow your stupidity, explain the Y-X-B-A buttons then..

[Shadow Conception]

Oh yeah, and consider that Xbox took Dreamcast's controller almost completely. It's just the analogue sticks and black + white buttons that make it different.

But then again, I couldn't care less, originality is hard to find in today's world =)

[stealthbomber]

Dude, that statement doesn't make sense at all.
How the hell does it improve the fucking analoge sticks by putting them, 1-2 centimetres higher?!
And yes, actually I have.
But if I follow your stupidity, explain the Y-X-B-A buttons then..


They're easier to play with than shapes or numbers. And Nintendo fucked up the A-B-X-Y buttons with the Gamecube.

[Olin]

stealthbomber, you're kind of arguing about something that makes no sense. While I do prefer the Xbox controllers greatly over anything else, I can't see what it is you're trying to prove.An Xbox 360 is a poor man's way into the next-generation.:rolleyes:

Yeah, that's right. You never said it.

[Shadow Conception]

It's a figure of speech, sir, just as AMD is considered a "poor man's Intel".

[Fry]

The d-pad are not in the same place as the Dualshock. The D-pad switched places with the Left Anolog stick. Have you EVER seen an Xbox controller?I believe he was talking about the A,X,Y and B being in the same places and also if no company copied one another game consoles would be shit yes they do copy abit off one another but what console does not???

[Ritchie]

They're easier to play with than shapes or numbers. And Nintendo fucked up the A-B-X-Y buttons with the Gamecube.
...
What the fuck?
Cause the logo on the buttons are triangles/squares/circles and crosses it makes it more difficult to play?

[Olin]

It's a figure of speech, sir, just as AMD is considered a "poor man's Intel".That's bs. AMD is known to generally have more stability and their processors also run with higher performance at lower clock speeds.

[stealthbomber]

SC probably can't afford Xbox Live OR a 360 in the first place. I have this same problem. People always praise the PS3 even though they're stupid inbred trailer trash who make their living by planting my weed plants. $400 is hardly a poor man's entry into the next-generation.

[Shadow Conception]

I find letters harder to memorize than shapes, but then that's just me considering I've been playing with the DualShock since 5 :zero:

That's bs. AMD is known to generally have more stability and their processors also run with higher performance at lower clock speeds.

Not with Core 2 Duo around.

And Olin, considered. Not is.

SC probably can't afford Xbox Live OR a 360 in the first place. I have this same problem. People always praise the PS3 even though they're stupid inbred trailer trash who make their living by planting my weed plants. $400 is hardly a poor man's entry into the next-generation.

Hmph, that's why I'm getting a $600 PS3 this November.

[stealthbomber]

You ain't the only one who has played with a dualshock since a young age. I've been playing with one since I was seven. I just find the Xbox controller better suited to my very small hands. For some reason, I HATE very small controllers.

[Ritchie]

SC probably can't afford Xbox Live OR a 360 in the first place. I have this same problem. People always praise the PS3 even though they're stupid inbred trailer trash who make their living by planting my weed plants. $400 is hardly a poor man's entry into the next-generation.
Actually, I'm a 17 year old Belgian student who makes money by doing a summer job.
If we can't afford a 360 how the hell would we be able to afford a PS3?
:zero:

[Olin]

Not with Core 2 Duo around.

And Olin, considered. Not is.
So Intel releases a couple good processors after a bunch of (what I feel are) overpriced ones. It's not even like I can afford the Core 2 Duo, which would still leave me with getting an AMD processor.

[Shadow Conception]

You ain't the only one who has played with a dualshock since a young age. I've been playing with one since I was seven. I just find the Xbox controller better suited to my very small hands. For some reason, I HATE very small controllers.

Yeah, I hate small controllers, too. Doesn't change the fact I'm getting a PS3 this November, where I could've spent that $600 on an Xbox 360 instead.

So Intel releases a couple good processors after a bunch of (what I feel are) overpriced ones. It's not even like I can afford the Core 2 Duo, which would still leave me with getting an AMD processor.

Overpriced?

The $316 Core 2 Duo beats a $1000 AMD processor. Tell me now it's overpriced.

Well, opinions are opinions. By your logic, AMD is much more overpriced than Intel at this point.

Well, the original Intel processors were overpriced, yes, but not anymore.

EDIT FUCKING TYPOS

[stealthbomber]

Ritchie, we already knew you was Belgian. I'm just saying that saying the Xbox 360 is for poor people is total and utter bullshit.

[Shadow Conception]

I don't know where you got that from, stealthbomber. That quote was a figure of speech, not literal. Read my posts, please.

[Olin]

I'm not paying $316 for a Core 2 Duo which would leave me with getting a much more effecient processor from AMD that's a lower price. That is what I'm talking about.

[Piggus]

Let's try to get back on topic please. :)

About those PS3 rumors...

A PS3 Oblivion with uber textures would be pretty cool imo.

@Olin: As of now the Core 2 Duo kills just about everything AMD has to offer. If you got the $300 Core 2 Duo I doubt you would find an AMD with better performance in the same price range. And the C2D uses 60% less power than any other desktop CPU.

[stealthbomber]

Let's try to get back on topic please. :)

About those PS3 rumors...

A PS3 Oblivion with uber textures would be pretty cool imo.


Too bad it's not gonna happen. With the PS3's power, maybe they could actually make GTA look like the exact opposite of shit.

[Shadow Conception]

Actually, Core 2 Duo makes both faster and more efficient processors than AMD. It's worth the extra money to shell out from an X2 4000+ in the same price range, trust me.

Well, if you don't care about performance and have a budget of less than $1000, then AMD is advisable, undoubtedly. The huge AMD price cuts are great, and you can get a good 3800+ X2 for only $150, a bargain compared to earlier prices.

Okay, back on topic, Piggus :)

[stealthbomber]

Yo, SC. We're back to the PS3 rumors. I just want a good looking GTA or True Crime.

[Olin]

I'm really tired of seeing these arguments all of the time so I'm all for Piggus' suggestion.

[Piggus]

Too bad it's not gonna happen. With the PS3's power, maybe they could actually make GTA look like the exact opposite of shit.

Re-read the first post, and check out the thread I linked you to. At this point most people believe this guy is the real deal because of what he said about Resistance.

The other thing is he said some stuff he can't reveal until TGS, but didn't mention GC 2006. And so far, Sony has shown absolutely nothing at GC. You would think that if Sony had shown something, the guy in that thread would have mentioned it.

[Fry]

Let's try to get back on topic please. :)

About those PS3 rumors...

A PS3 Oblivion with uber textures would be pretty cool imo.

@Olin: As of now the Core 2 Duo kills just about everything AMD has to offer. If you got the $300 Core 2 Duo I doubt you would find an AMD with better performance in the same price range. And the C2D uses 60% less power than any other desktop CPU.That rumor has been denied by Bethesda.

[Ritchie]

...And there have been rumors about Oblivion going to PS3 for a while now
edit:
they said something like, no announcements about this have been made, no?

[Shadow Conception]

But resurfaced once again, as strong as it was before.

It'd be pretty cool.

Edit: yeah, that was it, Ritchie.

[Piggus]

Yeah, they said no announcements have been made at this time. They would be pretty stupid not to release it on PS3 anyway. It's not like they have an exclusive deal with MS or anything.

Here is a new rumor that came up today, by the way:

A story suggesting that an Eye-Toy like innovation may be Sony's secret weapon for the PS3 has landed on our news desk and since the origin is a reliable source which we call a MegaGames friend, we have to mention it.

In a time when everyone is heaping praise, and rightly so, on Nintendo for innovating and daring to be alternative, many have forgotten that Sony has a proven record of fresh ideas including the introduction of Eye Toy which all of its rivals will be using in some shape or form in their new consoles. This news seems to tie-in well with the Sony's innovative side and with the idea that the Japanese giant had to have an ace somewhere up its sleeve.

The message we received started with a rather ambitious claim, ...what is the unrevealed connection between PS3 and Minority Report? We scratched our heads, called a meeting and remembering Kaz Hirai's enthusiasm at E3 the answer was obvious; stiff acting by both casts, right? It seems there is more to it than that as the correct answer comes from Sony's involvement with Prime Sense, a new Israeli company that claims to be operating in stealth mode. The new company claims to have patent-pending technology that can ...reconstruct 3D topography without assuming anything about the user or environmental conditions.

If you are still unclear as to how that ties in with Sony, maybe the full description of the technology by Prime Sense will light that bulb over your head.
Prime Sense’s concept is a device, which allows a computer to perceive the world in 3D and derive an understanding of the world based on sight, just the way humans do.

The device includes a sensor, which sees a user (including their complete surroundings), and a digital component, or "brain" which learns and understands user movement within those surroundings.

Prime Sense’s interactive device can see, track and react to user movements outside the computer, all without change of environment or wearable equipment for the end user. The closed device is plug and play and platform independent.

The way our, very reliable, source was reminded of Minority Report has to do with a scene in the movie in which a user manipulates a computer screen using special gloves; only with this tech you do not need the gloves. This reminds us of what Gesture Tek have hinted is possible with XBox 360 but taken one big step further.

Our source became even more specific claiming that the add-on will be available for the PS3 on the console's global release in mid November while Logitech will come up with a PC version a few months later. Additionally we found out that the Department of Defense, has expressed an interest in the technology although that is unlikely to affect the PS3 version of the hardware.

In conclusion, we have a very reliable source that claims Sony will have a PS3 peripheral which will recognize a user and his entire environment as well as his movements and will incorporate them into useful, in-console actions. The applications of this tech to gaming are obvious and if this story is proved right, Sony may yet manage to steal Nintendo's thunder in this generation of the console wars.

For a link to the developer's website follow the download tab above and please bear in mind that their How we do it section is meant to be a joke rather than the real secret behind the technology.

Megagames (www.megagames.com)

By the way scon, did you catch the new MGS4 trailer?

[Shadow Conception]

Yeah, I loved it. If that's going to be in-game, we've a lot to look forward to in 2007 :D

[Fry]

...And there have been rumors about Oblivion going to PS3 for a while now
edit:
they said something like, no announcements about this have been made, no?No actually Bethesda denied the rumors (http://www.xboxtoday.ca/ledads/ledad.php) they didn't say no announcements at this time they said no PS3/PSP versions are in developement.

[Ritchie]

Link doesn't work.. And why do big online stores still have it online then? :\

[Piggus]

Yeah, they've really improved the framerate and there's a lot more going on on screen. That part where the biomech kicked over the cargo truck was amazing. The game has the best particle system I've ever seen. Kojima's team must have recieved final dev kits.

You guys should also read through that thread I linked to. He answers more questions later on.

[phreak]

$600 for the console and $60 a piece for the games. Lets see, for a PS3 with four or five games on release day, that's...up to $900. Now unless you've been saving your lunch money since 3rd grade or you have a job, I don't expect anyone to get a PS3 when they say they will.

Just saying, really :P

[Shadow Conception]

The only problem for me is the fact that PS3s are going to be dead hard to get a hold of on launch day. Since I missed out on the chance to preorder from FYE, my only options are to stand in line for 24+ hours (:(), or wait until after Christmas (grr).

[Ritchie]

I pre-ordered mine muahah ^^

[Piggus]

$600 for the console and $60 a piece for the games. Lets see, for a PS3 with four or five games on release day, that's...up to $900. Now unless you've been saving your lunch money since 3rd grade or you have a job, I don't expect anyone to get a PS3 when they say they will.

Just saying, really :P

Okay, we get it. You can't afford a PS3. :P

That doesn't mean everyone can't. And those 2 million units at launch will be gone within hours.

Also, I think I said to please stay on topic. And telling us something that really means nothing to us who can afford it isn't contributing to the tread.

[phreak]

Okay, we get it. You can't afford a PS3. :P

That doesn't mean everyone can't. And those 2 million units at launch will be gone within hours.

lol, I didn't say I couldn't afford it. Trust me, I can. I just won't spend that much right now. That's like, spending $20 on a Big Mac.

[Piggus]

lol, I didn't say I couldn't afford it. Trust me, I can. I just won't spend that much right now. That's like, spending $20 on a Big Mac.

I'm guessing you don't know much about the differences between PS3 and 360 to make a statement like that, but think what you will. :P

[Fry]

These threads just keep going around in circles, we know half of you think its too expensive get over it also the patent for the eye toy thing looks interesting.

[phreak]

I'm guessing you don't know much about the differences between PS3 and 360 to make a statement like that, but think what you will. :P

I know the fucking differences. Please, don't make assumptions like that. All I'm saying is, I want Sony to drop the PS3's prices to match that of the 360. If they can do just that, maybe I'll change my mind about them. I can't believe you, Piggus, are so fanboyish of Sony that you're willing to pay any price they put on their products (especially, but not limiting to, the Playstation 3). See? It's not cool when people make assumptions like that, is it? That's twice already. Please, unless I've specifically stated so, don't go on making things up.

Okay?

:rogier:

[Fry]

I know the fucking differences. Please, don't make assumptions like that. All I'm saying is, I want Sony to drop the PS3's prices to match that of the 360. If they can do just that, maybe I'll change my mind about them. I can't believe you, Piggus, are so fanboyish of Sony that you're willing to pay any price they put on their products (especially, but not limiting to, the Playstation 3). See? It's not cool when people make assumptions like that, is it? That's twice already. Please, unless I've specifically stated so, don't go on making things up.

Okay?

:rogier:Well the fact is the PS3 has more features than the 360 thats why the price is so high and i'm sure if the 360 had HD-DVD, 60gig HDD, WIFI and memory card slots its price would be higher too.

[Olin]

The Xbox 360 has memory unit slots. Geez.

[Piggus]

Proprietary ones, yes. The PS3 has three different kinds of slots though (SD card, memory stick duo, and compact flash) so that would contribute to the price. Probably not too much though.

And sorry Phreak, you're right. I shouldn't asume that. :P

I think asking for them to lower the price to the 360 level is a little much though considering that differences in features. I would love for a price drop as well, but that's like asking Dodge to bring the price of the Viper down to the level of the Corvette. Both are great cars, but it's obvious which one is worth more based on performance.

[stealthbomber]

I know the fucking differences. Please, don't make assumptions like that. All I'm saying is, I want Sony to drop the PS3's prices to match that of the 360. If they can do just that, maybe I'll change my mind about them. I can't believe you, Piggus, are so fanboyish of Sony that you're willing to pay any price they put on their products (especially, but not limiting to, the Playstation 3). See? It's not cool when people make assumptions like that, is it? That's twice already. Please, unless I've specifically stated so, don't go on making things up.

Okay?

:rogier:


Yeah, I know the damn differences, too. Guess what? If Sony keeps the $600 price tag, casual gamers ARE NOT gonna buy it. They don't care about the features because the features don't apply to them. All they see is a gaming console at $600.

[iluvgta]

I guess it all comes up to opinion, iluvgta. An Xbox 360 is more suitable for someone who has less money to spare, while the PS3 is for people willing to pay for long-term value.

What are you on about? We were discussing the nature of next-gen online services. Unless you wanted to ignore my more recent points and concentrate on the first I made in reply to Piggus.

Oh yeah, and PC servers also require mostly dedicated servers. But we still have free, quality online games like Counter-Strike: Source!

I didn't catch you saying that originally cause of the edit, but in case you still think CS is free (and that I didn't make you realise otherwise), you're wrong.

[Ritchie]

Yeah, I know the damn differences, too. Guess what? If Sony keeps the $600 price tag, casual gamers ARE NOT gonna buy it. They don't care about the features because the features don't apply to them. All they see is a gaming console at $600.funny how a few friends of mine (who just play a game every now and then, who buy the same old FIFA etc every year) have gone and pre-ordered it.
@phreak, I'd so give $20 for a Big Mac right now :P hungry as hell

[T-Virus]

There are lots of casual gamers who would buy a fucking 1000$ PC to play games. The PS3 costs a lot of money, but I realy don't think it will make that big of a difference.

[Shadow Conception]

What are you on about? We were discussing the nature of next-gen online services. Unless you wanted to ignore my more recent points and concentrate on the first I made in reply to Piggus.

Wow, GJ on quoting something we got over about ages ago in the thread. Read all posts before you post something pointless.


I didn't catch you saying that originally cause of the edit, but in case you still think CS is free (and that I didn't make you realise otherwise), you're wrong.

I was playing it for free yesterday with Piggus, so in that literal case for an average consumer, yes, it still is free.

[iluvgta]

Wow, GJ on quoting something we got over about ages ago in the thread. Read all posts before you post something pointless.

Got over? Nah, you got stuck on your back leg and decided to try and take the easy way out by posting something irrelevant. Whether or not that happened a while ago because I can't always be at my computer is of no importance.

I was playing it for free yesterday with Piggus, so in that literal case for an average consumer, yes, it still is free.

You've clearly missed the point by a long way (and it really isn't very difficult to understand) - so it seems it wasn't so silly to bring it back up, was it?

[Shadow Conception]

Wow, you seriously are demented.

I was playing the game at no cost yesterday. Was I paying monthly? No. Was I paying for an online service to enable me to play the damn game? No. The only payment I had to make to play the game was the $40 I spent on Half-Life 2 Game Of The Year Edition, in which I recieved 3 games in one, and am satisfactory with my money spent.

Got over? Nah, you got stuck on your back leg and decided to try and take the easy way out by posting something irrelevant. Whether or not that happened a while ago because I can't always be at my computer is of no importance.

Do you see anybody else whining about that post right now in this thread? Quit acting the baby and deepen your voice before trying to discredit me.

[iluvgta]

Wow, you seriously are demented.

I was playing the game at no cost yesterday. Was I paying monthly? No. Was I paying for an online service to enable me to play the damn game? No. The only payment I had to make to play the game was the $40 I spent on Half-Life 2 Game Of The Year Edition, in which I recieved 3 games in one, and am satisfactory with my money spent.

And this is exactly how you've missed the point. Your experience was not free, whether or not you paid for it. Use your fucking head and read things with a little intelligence next time, k, before you start trying to take digs at me owed to your own ineptitude? You did not play the game at 'no cost'. You don't need to major in Economics to understand distributed costs in these circumstances.

Do you see anybody else whining about that post right now in this thread? Quit acting the baby and deepen your voice before trying to discredit me.

Yeah, of course. Because if nobody else says anything you're right. OK. But I like how you've once again avoided the issue, this time by flaming me. It makes me feel all warm and tingly inside.

[Pignoah]

Hahaha, we can't have one comptuer game thread without arguing.








































Oh & iluvgta was right.

[Shadow Conception]

And this is exactly how you've missed the point. Your experience was not free, whether or not you paid for it. Use your fucking head and read things with a little intelligence next time, k, before you start trying to take digs at me owed to your own ineptitude? You did not play the game at 'no cost'. You don't need to major in Economics to understand distributed costs in these circumstances.

I understood that point of it, my experience was free, and that's what I was pointing out to you. May not've have been the same for others, as dedicated servers cost money, but it was entirely up to them whether they want to spend the money for a dedicated server. Source does not force you to pay to play their games as Xbox Live does, k.


Yeah, of course. Because if nobody else says anything you're right. OK. But I like how you've once again avoided the issue, this time by flaming me. It makes me feel all warm and tingly inside.

I'm avoiding the issue because there's no need to bring it up again. But nooo, you had to go back a few pages in the thread and pick out that select quote that nobody seems to care about anymore, and use as your key to pick out a fight with me. You should've understood that doing something as stupid as that would guarantee a fight, and an early closure to the thread. You don't see me going into the threads where AO and I were having "fights" and quoting them again just to flame myg0t members, do you? I think not.

[iluvgta]

I understood that point of it, my experience was free, and that's what I was pointing out to you. May not've have been the same for others, as dedicated servers cost money, but it was entirely up to them whether they want to spend the money for a dedicated server. Source does not force you to pay to play their games as Xbox Live does, k.

Sure, there's no absolute requirement for an individual such as yourself to play CS, but obviously you've missed its contextual relevance as the point, when it was made, was that no really high quality gaming is free. Some people do have to pay for dedicated servers. Now the point in context was that dedicated servers for console games couldn't probably be managed in the same way they are for PC. Therefore the sensible way to charge for this would be to distribute the cost. Now if a console service is completely free, something that is not widely present among PC titles, hopes for its quality may be justifiably lower.

If you do fully understand that and were purely making the point that you don't have to pay specifically, individually, to play PC games online (which I myself have understood from the start, very clearly if you read my posts), I can't see why you'd use that to support and rationalise a completely free online service which is actually completely different to, as has been said before, the services "PC users have been used to for years" (notable exceptions including Guild Wars). Therefore you just can't liken what Sony are offering to the vast majority of services available to PC users. It's not reasonable to say 'I don't have to pay on PC, I shouldn't have to pay on a console' because of the different infrastructures.


I'm avoiding the issue because there's no need to bring it up again. But nooo, you had to go back a few pages in the thread and pick out that select quote that nobody seems to care about anymore, and use as your key to pick out a fight with me. You should've understood that doing something as stupid as that would guarantee a fight, and an early closure to the thread. You don't see me going into the threads where AO and I were having "fights" and quoting them again just to flame myg0t members, do you? I think not.

You weren't prepared to turn yourself in like a man and admit you didn't have a point (I assume you've taken that stance or else I'd be quoting something entirely different from you here). It wasn't very long ago and whether or not people posted in between is of little concern to me as I can't always be here ready to post whenever you feel is appropriate. Why should there be a fight? If you agree with me on this then don't try to stage a little rebuttal of the fact I pointed it out. I wanted to know if you'd taken my point on board because your conclusive 'Xbox 360 is for people who want to spend less money immediately' (not exact quote) seemed to ignore that. I don't care about who AO or myg0t are and I don't understand why you'd want to make any more of this than the small debate it currently constitutes (or claim that it's already been made more of, because that's absolutely not my fault).

[Shadow Conception]

Wow, internet. You take it pretty seriously to actually write something as big as that o_o

Well, there's no such thing as a free lunch and let's leave it at that. You trying to burden my senses of as if I did something wrong is futile, and unnecessary, since I'm not affected at all by your intimidatingly long paragraphs.

Individually, you don't have to pay. That's what I've been trying to say since the start, and you seem to be going way over the boundary of simplification that I'm talking about. Look at it simply, don't go into macroeconomics here, half those terms are not understood by the majority of teenagers.

Oh, and what I said was a minor generalization. It didn't cover the entire population, but a good bit of it. Almost anywhere you go, you hear things like "OMGZZ PS3 $600 NEVAR I CANT AFFORD LOLZ!" Tell me now that what I said wasn't close to the truth. If people complain about how much something costs, it's bound to burn an unwanted deep hole in their pocket. One of the main reasons why celebrities don't care what they buy; in a sense, they have unlimited money.

Oh yeah, and you seem to be forcing me to say that I was wrong. If that's your goal, you can give up now and get out. I don't have to change my ways just because of you.

[Piggus]

I'm sure Sony has it all figured out, as the network platform is already online and can be used among developers with final hardware. If they were going to make users pay or if the system was laggy (obviously they're testing some online games) then I think by now we would have known.

By the way iluvgta (or should I say Fox), coming back to these forums just to argue after being permabanned is bad, k? :P

I also find it funny that nobody has considered how Nintendo will keep their service free. I'm looking at you, OKC. :D

[Pignoah]

Iluvgta just drop it man. This was supposed to be exciting!

[iluvgta]

Wow, internet. You take it pretty seriously to actually write something as big as that o_o

Didn't take long. The hard bit was trying to work out why you said what you did.


Well, there's no such thing as a free lunch and let's leave it at that. You trying to burden my senses of as if I did something wrong is futile, and unnecessary, since I'm not affected at all by your intimidatingly long paragraphs.

Please don't flame me, then.

Individually, you don't have to pay. That's what I've been trying to say since the start, and you seem to be going way over the boundary of simplification that I'm talking about. Look at it simply, don't go into macroeconomics here, half those terms are not understood by the majority of teenagers.

As was I, though with this realisation accounted for I couldn't understand why you used it to assimilate Sony's free online system and those used for most PC titles. At no point has anything become complicated beyond what may be reasonably understood by the average teenager.

Oh, and what I said was a minor generalization. It didn't cover the entire population, but a good bit of it. Almost anywhere you go, you hear things like "OMGZZ PS3 $600 NEVAR I CANT AFFORD LOLZ!" Tell me now that what I said wasn't close to the truth. If people complain about how much something costs, it's bound to burn an unwanted deep hole in their pocket. One of the main reasons why celebrities don't care what they buy; in a sense, they have unlimited money.

I don't understand the point you're trying to put across here or where exactly it's relevant to another post of yours/a rebuttal I've made to one of your points.

Oh yeah, and you seem to be forcing me to say that I was wrong. If that's your goal, you can give up now and get out. I don't have to change my ways just because of you.

Not at all, but you could've at least dignified my point after having partially debated it.

Iluvgta just drop it man. This was supposed to be exciting!

Apologies.

[Shadow Conception]

Overall, the main point is, Sony is trying to mimic Live's service with a free counterpart. Sure, quality may be deteriorated, but I couldn't care less, as I don't need super duper online services.

Of course, like I said before, it's all speculation. We have no final say on how Sony's online'll be until the actual system is released. Until then, hush.

Oh yeah, LOL FOX.

[stealthbomber]

In case you haven't noticed, Xbox Live is FREE. If you don't care to play multiplayer, you cheap bastard.

[Shadow Conception]

I care to play multiplayer, sir. And that's what Sony is offering for free.

[phreak]

Yeah I thought ILGTA was too intelligent to be a newbie :)

But seriously, stfu. :rogier: You and Scon both. :P

[Ritchie]

In case you haven't noticed, Xbox Live is FREE. If you don't care to play multiplayer, you cheap bastard.
Dude, the whole discussion WAS about multiplayer. :zero:

[Piggus]

Just as an example of what a difference final dev kits can do, watch the new MGS4 trailer:

http://dl.qj.net/dl.php?fid=9566

And for those too lazy to download it, here are three GIFs (not made by me) that show some of the coolest parts of the trailer.

http://www.maj.com/gallery/JitsuX/Gifs/lol2.gif
http://www.maj.com/gallery/JitsuX/Gifs/truckkick.g if
http://www.maj.com/gallery/JitsuX/Gifs/stomp.gif

In the E3 build of the game the framerate in that scene probably would have dropped pretty badly. But now that Hideo Kojima's team has final devkits, they can put that FlexIO bus to good use. :D

[Pignoah]

Nice one Piggus. That GTFO gif is awesome too.



Shame that video didn't reveal to much, cept it looked like a western vs eastern battle, with giant killer robots.

[Piggus]

You never really know what to expect with the MGS games until you actually play them. Like in MGS2, how everyone thought you played as Snake the entire time. But when the game came out, only about 1/5 of the game had you play as Snake. :P

I'm still waiting for some gameplay, but we'll probably have to wait for TGS before we see any. :(

[Shadow Conception]

First and second ones are perfect, third one is badass :D

[phreak]

Well if the PS3 is SERIOUSLY going to be like that, maybe I'll reconsider getting one. Even those little gifs look insane :D

I really didn't want to spend that much...But what can I do.

[Piggus]

Have you seen the 15 minute E3 trailer? It's absolutely amazing. The framerate drops pretty badly in one part but other than that it really shows what PS3 can do. And Hideo Kojima says the game will look much better by the time in launches.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=11394&type=wmv&pl=game

It's a big-ass file, but well worth it if you havn't seen it. I have a 1 Gb version of it as well. >___<

[Pignoah]

That's a damn good trailer. I wanna see Vamp because I know he's gunna be in it.

[Piggus]

Another rumor was confirmed today, so I think it's safe to say that this guy is truly legitamate.

A new PSP entertainment pack is coming next month. It costs $250 and includes a 1GB MSPD, ATV Offroad Fury: Blazin Trails (game), and Lords of Dogtown (movie). No headphones.

He claimed that in his original post. And look what was announced today:

http://pspupdates.qj.net/New-PSP-Entertainment-Pack-Coming-This-September/pg/49/aid/63681

Now I can't wait to see Oblivion and the latest build of Heavenly Sword on PS3. :D

[Ritchie]

Dude, if the guy is right..
Can't wait to see Killzone again :P

[Shadow Conception]

Woah, I really wanna see Oblivion on PS3! :D

[Super Beast]

Er, I should have waited for the PS3 to come out before deciding to buy the 360, oh well I guess i'll have to get both :P

[xXSoldierXx]

Sounds good to me. The PS3 really does look like it's gunna be an awesome system.

[T-Virus]

Woah, I really wanna see Oblivion on PS3! :D

That would be something.

[UnKnown X]

I have a 1 Gb version of it as well. >___<Torrent? Link? Anything?

[Piggus]

It was a torrent, which I got from TorrentSpy. I would link you but I'm on my PSP right now. :P

[UnKnown X]

It was a torrent, which I got from TorrentSpy. I would link you but I'm on my PSP right now. :P
Ah :p

Also, anything new about RE5? Been wanting to see some more stuff from that game for a while now.

[Piggus]

RE5 will probably be at TGS this year in some form, and rumour has it that it will be PS3 exclusive. :D

[Shadow Conception]

I'm not too surprised at at. Originally it was only for PS2, then Gamecube, then both PS2 and Gamecube. But judging the by the screens of RE5, it doesn't look like Wii can handle it, and Capcom has never released a sequential Resident Evil game on the Xbox 360, so PS3 seems like the only option.

The 360 could handle it, but I'm sure space would be the obstacle with it.

[5tatic]

You're making it sound ike the 360 has only 1gb of space.


9 GB is big enough to support games like Oblivion which has awesome graphics and is a very big game.


Sure the dvd may not be big enough in 4-5 years but then, you'd be expecting a xbox 3 on the market.

[Shadow Conception]

I'm kinda wondering how Resistance: Fall Of Man is already taking up 22GB of space, then. :P

[5tatic]

That's because Insomniac probably did not compress it, as usual gaming companies do to their games to fit on a media disc.

[Piggus]

But the DVD is why Oblivion has those low resolution textures. The thing that makes the game look good is the lighting and geometry detail. But if you look straight at the ground or if you get really close to an object, you can tell the game has much lower res textures than many other games currently out.

DVD9 can hold about 8Gbs of data, and Dead Rising takes up 7.9 of it. When your system hasn't even been out a year and you're filling your available media, there's a problem. Other than using heavy compression (which creates a potentially big performance hit, might I add), how can we expect 360 games to look any better in the future? I mean, there were even current generation games that had to have content cut out in order fit on a DVD. MGS3 being just one example. That game didn't use a ton of compression, but notice how it looks better than just about any PS2 game ever made.

When PS3 devs are using 20Gbs+ already, it should be clear that Blu-Ray is not a useless technology.

[Shadow Conception]

That's because Insomniac probably did not compress it, as usual gaming companies do to their games to fit on a media disc.

More space puts less load on the CPU and GPU to uncompress content, therefore, leaving more space to do other things, such as physics, graphical effects, HDR, etc.

[5tatic]

It is clear that Blu Ray will be a leading media disc, probably in a year or two.


But right now, the DVD is reasonable, for another year or two. By that time, Microsoft may start using the HD DVD drive for games instead of only movies.

[Shadow Conception]

Year or two isn't exactly ideal for a gaming console built to last 5+ years ;P

I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft changed their minds and began using HD-DVD for games. That would really piss off owners, though =\

[5tatic]

IMO, microsoft did not make the xbox 360 to last for 5 + years. That's infact the PS3 as Hirai said.

But by that time, Microsoft may have released something which would own the PS3 or atleast go to level with the PS3.

[Shadow Conception]

Industry standard is 5 years. If Microsoft were to release a brand new console in less than 5 years, I wouldn't be exactly tempted to buy a Xbox 360 knowing that I'd have to spend another $400 for it's successor in 3 years.

[5tatic]

That's what i'm worried about if I buy an xbox 360 =\ In another 5 years I may have to bust out another £400 for a console.

[Pignoah]

Ironically the only console to ever fail on me was my Gamecube. My PS2 can be a bit funny sometimes and take ages to realise there is aPS2 disk in there, a few resets and that, it won't play PS1 disks atall anymore, I have to get my original PS1 out for that(which still works btw). My XBOX works perfectly fine, never had a problem with that.

I leave my consoles on the floor all the time though, clothes on top of them, I tread on them, and nothing ever breaks.

[Piggus]

The 360 has to last five years if Microsoft wants to make any money off it. Remember that the Microsoft Games Division is hundreds of millions of dollars in dept thanks to both the Xbox and the 360. If they don't get out of the red with the 360, there probably won't be another Xbox.

[Pignoah]

Every time Ive played a 360 it's been sorta glitchy. They've more often then not been the ones in store though, and everything they own is glitchy as fuck.

[Olin]

My Gamecube has never frozen, skipped, nothing. My first PS2 crapped out, any others just wore out quickly (current one is doing alright). First Xbox had to be exchanged because two days after purchase it died, second wore out slowly because I played it all the time (still works though), third one had to be exchanged because of a video output problem, fourth and fifth work perfectly fine.

[5tatic]

Heh, I got one of the first xbox consoles when they were first released.


I have had no problems at all.

[Pignoah]

My Gamecube has never frozen, skipped, nothing. My first PS2 crapped out, any others just wore out quickly (current one is doing alright). First Xbox had to be exchanged because two days after purchase it died, second wore out slowly because I played it all the time (still works though), third one had to be exchanged because of a video output problem, fourth and fifth work perfectly fine.


Hahaha, go Microsoft! My Gamecube bust because of overplaying. I'm surprised my PS2 never did. I have a 300 hour FFX save. & I always leave it on overnight.

[supersaia777]

I'm kinda wondering how Resistance: Fall Of Man is already taking up 22GB of space, then. :P

It's weird they decided to release that information at this point. It could've been to create some forced hype about the necessity of Blu-ray or the developer might be very confident indeed. Divulging the size of your game before it's released will not bode well for the development team if the memory use isn't clearly justified post-release.

[Shadow Conception]

Seeing as how R: FoM is a PS3 exclusive game, I guess they would go out of their way to brag about the space it uses. They're trying to make it look as if Blu-Ray (or some other HD format) is a necessity for the next-generation, which undoubtedly, it will be.

[Olin]

Isn't the excessive size of textures going to kill the memory? They could have at least used slight compression rather than what looks like none at all, as that would allow less memory impact and little CPU impact to handle the textures and everything. But oh well.

[Shadow Conception]

Couldn't they use virtual memory, like Windows does? You could possibly set aside a pagefile, then, assuming the HDD is fast enough, you could use it as more memory, only a bit slower than the XDR Rambus RAM.

[Olin]

From what I see, the hdd wouldn't be fast enough to act as RAM if they somehow pulled it off. The hdd would have to transfer to the RAM before it would be processed, which it's already transferring data anyway meaning it just all wouldn't work.

[Piggus]

HDD caching will be done to improve load times mostly. But I'm sure they could use it in the same way as virtual memory. Who knows though. There will have to be some compression.

Still, the XDR ram in the PS3 is extremely fast. 3.2ghz versus the 800mhz max that you will find in high-end PCs and the 360.

[Pignoah]

Seeing as how R: FoM is a PS3 exclusive game, I guess they would go out of their way to brag about the space it uses. They're trying to make it look as if Blu-Ray (or some other HD format) is a necessity for the next-generation, which undoubtedly, it will be.


It's not a necessity at all.

[Shadow Conception]

HDD caching will be done to improve load times mostly. But I'm sure they could use it in the same way as virtual memory. Who knows though. There will have to be some compression.

Still, the XDR ram in the PS3 is extremely fast. 3.2ghz versus the 800mhz max that you will find in high-end PCs and the 360.

1066mhz RAM just came out recently from Patriot :P

But the RAM actually runs at 3.2GHz? That's pretty crazy o_o

[Rylo]

PS3 is looking pretty awesome these days. The games that are being planned are also alot better than before. This system looks to own the 360 pretty bad, but still have to see.

Scon, get on msn you fgt. :)

[supersaia777]

Seeing as how R: FoM is a PS3 exclusive game, I guess they would go out of their way to brag about the space it uses. They're trying to make it look as if Blu-Ray (or some other HD format) is a necessity for the next-generation, which undoubtedly, it will be.

That's what I said, but from a developer's point of view it's not a good idea to brag about the amount of memory your game uses as it's symptomatic of lazy programming (unless the game really justifies it, and it's silly to put pressure on yourself like that). It would be impressive to claim that your game only takes up a couple of gigabytes.

[Shadow Conception]

That would pretty much go against what Sony is standing for; more space equals better, more immersive games. And seeing as it's a PS3 exclusive, they don't exactly want to give that impression, do they? =\

[Olin]

Yeah, but it still doesn't look good. If they got up to that space naturally then it'd be different.

[supersaia777]

I don't think you really understand my point. Imagine you're a software developer working on a PS3 exclusive title. Now disclosing the fact that your game takes up a whopping 22GB of optical media (unless you're supremely confident that your game will absolutely justify the amount of space it 'requires') is potentially bad news for both you and the media's proprietor (Sony). This is because firstly the skill of your development team will be called into question if you're using 22GB for seemingly fuck all (relative to other titles), and secondly it will work against Sony's insistence on the necessity of Blu-ray.

[Shadow Conception]

So, basically, it's overhyping. That, I agree with you.

[Shadow Conception]

http://www.ps3portal.com/general/article/487.html

Double post so I can bump this. An article that just came out an hour ago. Reading it.