Has the PS3's time come?

You can substitute the PS2 for any other console. No console reached its performance so soon in its lifespan, what makes you think the 360 is so simple in comparison to any other console? Parallel processing in games is a new approach for all systems, including PCs, so every platform is currently suffering because of it and not reaching their potential (bar the Wii of course).

It's about degrees. Relatively speaking, there is nowhere near as much untapped power in the 360 as the ps3. The 360 has been lead platform for years now and has received massive investment in time and resources, not to mention the fact that it is a general purpose architecture and thus requires little or no change in development approach. The ps3 is a different kind of machine and has had relatively little investment compared to the 360.

So, are you going to ask me again "what makes you think the 360 is so simple in comparison to any other console". Have I not answered that question 4 times in this thread already? Perhaps you could tell us why you think the latent power of the 360 is still untapped?
 
It's about degrees. Relatively speaking, there is nowhere near as much untapped power in the 360 as the ps3. The 360 has been lead platform for years now and has received massive investment in time and resources, not to mention the fact that it is a general purpose architecture and thus requires little or no change in development approach. The ps3 is a different kind of machine and has had relatively little investment compared to the 360.

So, are you going to ask me again "what makes you think the 360 is so simple in comparison to any other console". Have I not answered that question 4 times in this thread already? Perhaps you could tell us why you think the latent power of the 360 is still untapped?

I just seriously doubt that the PS3's "untapped power" is really as great as you're expecting it to be. It takes exponentially more time and effort to squeeze out the last bits of power of a system and, much like the PS2, if the power is there then only 1 or 2 development teams will be able to extract it. The idea of the cell doing the graphics rendering is a cute idea but it has a lot of limitations in this generation, like I said I expect the idea to truly bloom in the next generation.

And no you haven't really answered the question as you differentiate the development processes and learning curves of making PS3 and 360 games a little too much when they both require a lot of new development with parallel processing, but I won't ask it again.
 
Oh dear god, I think we have just reached the pinnacle of debate and oratory right here. Oh wait a sec, was that a cop out?...

Chill mate, no need to start getting aggressive in an interesting debate. Keep composed and reply accordingly :)

I suppose we should refine this discussion, are you talking about peak theoretical performance or what we can expect from the average "90 percenter" game on each console?
 
what percentage of hdtv owners will be that ? less than 1% ?

What ever the percentage is it's irrelivant because at some point the majority of TV owners will replace their current set and their only option now is a HDTV, unless of course they buy secondhand....

Once in possession of a HDTV they will ask the question "what is the benefit of a HDTV" and the response will be Sky HD & BR.

This is exactly what my father in law asked me & now he has Sky HD and will be buying a PS3 within the next couple of months.
 
what percentage of hdtv owners will be that ? less than 1% ?
or the companies should care about the people that get cam rips from their mates?

Well, there are no statistics or anything, but it's worth noting that not even 1-5mb speeds are up to snuff to consider download services seriously. If you think download speeds in general can support Microsoft's plans of download services being the primary media format, you are sorely mistaken.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7098992.stm

Most nations can only muster 5-7mb at best.
 
ok lets say i agree with you.
this talk is about games though.



and edz, build your uncle a htpc ,it will be better if he wants just films.
 
I just seriously doubt that the PS3's "untapped power" is really as great as you're expecting it to be. It takes exponentially more time and effort to squeeze out the last bits of power of a system and, much like the PS2, if the power is there then only 1 or 2 development teams will be able to extract it. The idea of the cell doing the graphics rendering is a cute idea but it has a lot of limitations in this generation, like I said I expect the idea to truly bloom in the next generation.

I agree, I just think that it's a little unfair to compare the 360 and ps3 when one has clearly had more time and effort put into it whilst the other has much more complicated and unfamiliar architecture.

And no you haven't really answered the question as you differentiate the development processes and learning curves of making PS3 and 360 games a little too much when they both require a lot of new development with parallel processing, but I won't ask it again.

Whilst they are both threaded archictures, the 360 (being general purpose) gives the devs much more freedom in coding than the ps3 would (if one wanted to get the best performance). It's all theory right now of course, but on paper anyway, the cell does offer a lot of performance that the 360 couldn't equal.
 
Was it a case of Devs where making games for the 360 to be then ported to the PS3, and THIS is what caused the difficulties?

I thought it was now the fact that they made the game for the PS3, then ported it to the 360 the whole process was a lot easier!?
 
Chill mate, no need to start getting aggressive in an interesting debate. Keep composed and reply accordingly :)

Sorry, thought you were going all signle line answers on me! ;)

I suppose we should refine this discussion, are you talking about peak theoretical performance or what we can expect from the average "90 percenter" game on each console?

Yeah I guess so. I'm wondering when the ps3 becomes the lead platform, how much more performance will they get out of it compared to what they got out of the 360 while it was lead platform.
 
Yeah I guess so. I'm wondering when the ps3 becomes the lead platform, how much more performance will they get out of it compared to what they got out of the 360 while it was lead platform.

Burnout is a good example of this - the PS3 was the lead platform, and it's to date the best port so far between the two systems. Both are virtually indistinguishable from each other.
 
Ultimately like pc's it's the graphics chip that makes the difference and ps3 (7800gtx) and the 360 (x1900) are not miles apart, the 360 has the advantage if anything. The ps3 'cell' is a bit talked up imo, at the end of the day it is just a processor, anyone remember the ps2 'emotion engine' hype?

That's wrong.

The 360 doesnt have a x1900. Its a hybrid from the DirectX 10 line of Ati cards. So DirectX 9.5 if you will. It's got 36 pipes with 48 pipes closed for better yield rate.

Josh
 
OK something I am really confused about:

article from OP post said:
Digital Illusions Creative Entertainment's Sean Decker praised the PS3 cell processor because it has been able to let DICE studio push the resolution of the textures to a higher level.

I am confused how the cell is able to let them use higher resolution textures? Surely actual memory available to the console would have a bigger impact on this?
 
That's wrong.

The 360 doesnt have a x1900. Its a hybrid from the DirectX 10 line of Ati cards. So DirectX 9.5 if you will. It's got 36 pipes with 48 pipes closed for better yield rate.

Josh

It has 48 unified shader pipelines doesn't it?! Well at least every tech spec I have seen for the 360 shows that.
 
Why would this suddenly be the point when the last game released, GTA4, proves it isn't? :confused:

In the future, probably, almost certainly, but not at this moment.
 
OK something I am really confused about:



I am confused how the cell is able to let them use higher resolution textures? Surely actual memory available to the console would have a bigger impact on this?

The Cell basically offloads certain graphical tasks off the RSX, allowing more room for textures to be loaded in.
 
Back
Top Bottom