@Jorge

Quote:

am just curious. As fascinating this tech might be, why wold one build their own customized CPU to just put another abstraction layer on top of it to make it look like the same across all boards again ?

I'd say it's summoned up nicely in the article:
Moving to a new platform will merely be a matter of moving XNA to it.

Thus the Live titles from the original Xbox could have been running on Xbox 360 from day one instead of having to be ported. I suppose supporting new things in the framework on newer Live versions could be accomplished with a simple recompile.

And yeah, it was indeed AmigaAnywhere I was thinking of...

@Trezzer

Is the XNA based on Microsoft's .NET technology?

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Feb-2007 at 09:09 AM.

@Jorge

Quote:

Funny, hah ? CLR ... Common Language Runtime. At least they always come up with new names. We called that VP (virtual processor), or what. Why do I think, AmigaDE had that since years ? And before it was and is called TAO Intentend ? Well, must be good now, its from MS.

Microsoft .NET, now one of the major development platforms, is based on a "virtual machine", first released in 2002. It is safe to say Microsoft was working on it before or at least at the same time Amiga Inc. partnered with TAO. I would assume .NET has more to nod towards Java than anything from the Intent camp.

As for .NET... It is excellent. I was surprised Microsoft was able to one-up Java, but they did. .NET is also very, very standards compliant, very anti-Microsoft in that regard.

@MikeB

Oh for goodness sake! No-one said they wanted you to go, just that they wanted you to engage in discussion properly. Perhaps you might find a forum in some dusty corner of the ‘net where people only ever post about how great Sony is.

You asked a question here, and people gave you their opinion when you seemingly expected them to just agree with you. If you didn’t like their opinion that is your problem, you shouldn’t have asked them for it.

@Hannibal_Smith

Quote:

No-one said they wanted you to go

OK, I take your word for it. At least the discussion has moved back on topic.

Quote:

just that they wanted you to engage in discussion properly

I am not going to change my opinions (being enthusiastic or optimistic, where I truly are feeling this way), I personally like my writing style as well. I prefer in depth discussion regarding the PS3, I don't like diverting discussions towards writing styles. (Personally I think I have seen much more "outrageous" writing styles from some XBox 360 and HD-DVD advocates in these PS3 threads, genuine degrading and insulting comments, even together with data which has been proven to be incorrect) If I offend someone, which I certainly don't want to do just hit the abuse button available to you.

If someone doesn't agree with my opinions or analysis I prefer this person to provide counter-arguments, provide data debunking my perspectives, counter-opinions, etc. And I will be thankful for this, nomatter if I agree with them or not. Everyone is entitled to an opinion including myself.

@jtsiren

Quote:

If I wasn't, you certainly made me one. Your support of the PS3 is so outrageous at times it is easy to feel for the other side. But you really should believe me when I say this: it wasn't more than a month or two ago that I was still very much going to buy a PS3 come March. I have outlined my reasons for changing my opinion in this thread. If that makes me a Xbox 360 fan, so be it. I guess I know what my current preference is - that may change.

IMO this is dishonest zealot-like talk. You were doubtful about the PS3 and enthusiastic with regard to the XBox 360 before this. You suggest the information and data I provided effected your opinions on the PS3 negatively, you claim I didn't give enough credit to your beloved XBox 360. You and I are entitled to our opinions, personally I think I gave the XBox 360 credit where credit is due. Advising my sister to look into the XBox 360 as one of the best option available at the time (considering my parents have a good HDTV) IMO points out that I have nothing against the console itself.

Last edited by MikeB on 22-Feb-2007 at 11:14 AM.
Last edited by MikeB on 22-Feb-2007 at 10:40 AM.

@Trezzer

Quote:

Trezzer wrote: @MikeB Quote: News reports indicated NPD figures should have become available yesterday, but for some reason there has been a delay, here some rumoured figures floating around, it would be great for the PS3 if they turn out to be correct, I expected January and February 2007 to be slow months due to the software availability gap until the European launch: 1) Wii 430,000-500,000 2) PS3 280.000-300.000 3) X360 220,000-340,000 I'm still waiting for confirmation, but since I'm off to bed and vgcharts seems really overloaded, I thought I'd share what appears to be the numbers for January: Wii 435,503 PlayStation 2 299,352 Xbox 360 293,774 PlayStation 3 243,554 Nintendo DS 238,869 PlayStation Portable 210,719 Game Boy Advance 179,482 GameCube 33,806 Xbox 833

My analysis MikeB-style. People, please provide counter arguments like the Wii is outselling everyone (topping any recent console launches, shortages) or such!

The North American data is now available and the rumoured figures are very close to real NPD data, IMO this has been an excellent month in North America for Sony home consoles, let me explain why, the data:

Hardware sales:

Wii 485,000 - Totals: 1,728,250
PS2 338,250 - 43,385,500
X360 332,250 - 5,435,250
DS 288,000 - 10,446,250
PS3 275,500 - 1,035,500
PSP 256,750 - 7,596,750
GBA 202,000 - 39,954,500
GC 38,500 - 12,608,500
XBox 1,000 - 15,943,500

Total home console hardware sales last month:

1) Sony PS2 + PS3 = 613,750
2) Nintendo Wii + GC = 523,500
3) Microsoft X360 + XBox = 333,250

Software totals:

PS2 3,949,250 422,188,750
DS 2,725,000 40,101,750
X360 2,516,500 28,572,000
Wii 1,634,250 6,276,000
PSP 1,623,250 28,838,000
XBox 952,750 166,310,250
GC 942,250 115,914,500
PS3 745,000 2,246,750

Total home console software sales last month:

1) Sony PS2 + PS3 = 4,694,250
2) Microsoft X360 + XBox = 3,469,250
3) Nintendo Wii + GC = 2,576,500

As I said before I think February data for all consoles will be much slower, this was a record January for the North American gaming industry.

Last edited by MikeB on 22-Feb-2007 at 11:16 AM.
Last edited by MikeB on 22-Feb-2007 at 11:08 AM.

@MikeB

Quote:

IMO this is dishonest zealot-like talk.

Well, "thank you" for skipping my point to point response to you regarding my history and preferences. I think there is more to me than this. I think my greatest problem with you is not your position on Xbox 360, but with your way of debating. I want to point that out. That has affected my perception of PS3 somewhat, probably unfairly towards the PS3 (as in, what has PS3 got to do with you), so I'll try to ignore that emotion. I continue to research the facts on PS3.

Quote:

You suggest the information and data I provided effected your opinions on the PS3 negatively

Not the information and data itself, but your way of having a debate about PS3 and Xbox 360 did, at the end, shed unfavorable light on the platform you are advocating. That is the emotion it created in me, not necessarily a rational conclusion I came to. Importantly: I did not have anything agaist PS3 coming into to this discussion (a closed thread or two ago) other than my disappointment in it not (yet?) kicking Xbox 360's butt. Debating it with you certainly created a few new emotions on the topic.

Edit: Who was it that said he thought your style of advocacy for OS4 had also created negative publicity for OS4? I think that was a similar situation.

Quote:

you claim I didn't give enough credit to your beloved XBox 360

I think the overall feel I got from your postings was that you were not prepared to discuss PS3 and Xbox 360 objectively. Just like in the old Amiga Inc. vs Genesi debate, you continued to paint Sony in favorable light while discussing Microsoft and Xbox 360 usually in a completely different way (even when facts were similar). I think this was not only my experience, this has been the experience of others too who have agreed with me. You have a more hypocritical than usual debating style. We are all hypocritical at times, but your style is way above the norm IMHO.

Why you refer to Xbox 360 as "my beloved", I don't know. To mock me? I have explained you time and time again my position on the Xbox 360 (like saying I'd throw it in the dumpster in a heartbeat if Sony came up with something I wanted to replace it with). I have no blind loyalty, probably no loyalty (other than some investment made, but not all that much), towards it. I think at the moment it is the best performer as gaming platform, and was disappointed that the PS3 outlook of beating it is by no means certain. I certainly have the money saved for the PS3, I could still buy one... or the black Xbox 360... or nothing.

You continue to look for any and all reasons and strawmen so as to not have to look for any fault in yourself. If you disagree with me and others on our opinion of your debating style, fine, we can be wrong too, but at least have the decency of separating our other opinions (like our opinion on PS3 or Xbox 360 or MorphOS) from that... and not say just because we "attack" (to quote you, not that I think the discussion is an attack) your debate style, we must be fans of something of which you are not.

Quote:

Advising my sister to look into the XBox 360 as one of the best option available at the time (considering my parents have a good HDTV) IMO points out that I have nothing against the console itself.

Look, we have two disagreements that you continue to view as one, but are really two separate disagreements:

1) PS3 vs. Xbox 360
2) jtsiren vs. MikeB

To recap:

1) Our entire difference of opinion, in my opinion, on PS3 and Xbox 360 is quite well evidenced by the quote above about your sister. I don't think you hate Xbox 360. I certainly don't hate PS3. I think we have come to different conclusions about which console at this time and likely in the future will rule and for what reasons. You say, for sure PS3 will be the most powerful. I say we don't know. You say PS3 didn't disappoint on launch, I say it did. I continue to see potential, at least the potential for potential, in Xbox 360 far beyond than you apparently think.

2) The other debate we are having, and the one that indirectly gave some bad vibes for me concerning PS3, is your style of debating. You also said it is my style of debating, so I guess we are both at odds on this one. I don't think you hate Xbox 360, but I do think you have chosen PS3 as the side you are rooting for in this debate, and that combined with your style of debating puts Xbox 360 in a rather unpleasant place as far as your postings go. You have this very distinct style of advocating the side you have chosen and looking down, ever so subtly, on the other side. This has been seen many times, be that OS4 vs. MOS, Moo vs. AW.net, now PS3 vs. Xbox 360.

Back on topic:

As March approches, I continue to debate myself what to do with this new platform emerging as an option. Last generation I had both PS2 and Xbox. One option would be to have both this time around too. Originally I had intended to get only PS3 (and Xbox 360 just to wait for it), but now that Xbox 360 has proven its value a bit more I find it unlikely I will "throw it in the dumpster". I am also tempted by that new black Xbox 360.

I still have not closed the door on the PS3 no matter what MikeB would like anyone to believe. This discussion has left a bad taste in my mouth from one PS3 advocate, but the platform certainly has its merits too. I came in all those posts ago to discuss why I felt the PS3 launch was disappointing and how didn't live up to the hype. The debate has certainly gotten a life of its own, for myself as well, but my objectively speaking my position on PS3 remains pretty much the same.

Nothing still out there to say it is or will be the most powerful console, PS3 still lacks some niceties (such as the rumble, online gaming seems to be a shamble etc.), so it is not the superior-in-all-aspects console of its generation I hoped it would be, and that is disappointig for sure. It would have been nice to be able to move on from one system to the next without feeling you are leaving something behind.

Beyond all that, I might be interested in PS3 if for no other reasons that to play some of the exclusive games coming out for it. Maybe there will be some nice use of the PSP as well on PS3 games, since I already have the PSP. I don't play all that much (and for instance, I haven't played online for quite a while so poor online experience in PS3 would not really bother me that much at least right now), but I like to be able to choose which games I play without too many limitations.

I recently almost pulled the plug on a Wii, but "luckily" none were available. I guess that would have been an impluse buy, since I do think its non-HD graphics limit its appeal for me.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Feb-2007 at 11:32 AM.

@MikeB

Quote:

1) Sony PS2 + PS3 = 613,750 2) Nintendo Wii + GC = 523,500 3) Microsoft X360 + XBox = 333,250

What happens when Sony retires PS2?

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

Quote:

What happens when Sony retires PS2?

More importantly, IMHO, why is PS2 relevant in a discussion of next-gen systems? Other than to put Sony in a better light.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Feb-2007 at 11:53 AM.

@jtsiren

Quote:

I think the overall feel I got from your postings was that you were not prepared to discuss PS3 and Xbox 360 objectively. Just like in the old Amiga Inc. vs Genesi debate

IMO I have criticized Amiga Inc enough especially regarding their PR in the past. I did my best to improve communication between Amiga Inc and the community in the past, but that didn't work out well for everyone, maybe the timing wasn't good as BBRV at the time had financial and contractor influence on other Amiga websites.

I have no problems with Genesi, unless they start talking about AmigaOS4 as if they have any ownership over the product.

Quote:

Why you refer to Xbox 360 as "my beloved", I don't know. To mock me?

Not really, my beloved (dear to the heart) Nintendo DS is doing extremely well in Japan.

Quote:

You say PS3 didn't disappoint on launch, I say it did.

What I said is that the platform performed as well as I expected (high price for a games console, developers taking time to show off the cell, weak or so-so launch titles except for Resistance). Do you understand the difference?

Last edited by MikeB on 22-Feb-2007 at 12:02 PM.

@itix

Quote:

What happens when Sony retires PS2?

This won't happen until the PS3 moves closer towards the PS2 price range. Sony is planning some major PS2 marketing for this year and will release the highly anticipated God of War 2.

@jtsiren

Quote:

More importantly, IMHO, why is PS2 relevant in a discussion of next-gen systems? Other than to put Sony in a better light.

I think the answer to that is quite simple if you dig inside discussions regarding the PS3. Some examples:

1) The PS3 is near fully backward compatible with the PS2.
2) Price point wise the PS2 is more of a competitor to the Nintedo Wii than the PS3 is.
3) People like to spout doom and gloom with regard to Sony's gaming devision, the PS2 is an important part of their gaming devision!

Last edited by MikeB on 22-Feb-2007 at 12:01 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

My analysis MikeB-style.

Well, that certainly was MikeB style. We agree on that.

I hope you did it in jest though, it was a nice example of taking not so good numbers for PS3 and using PS2 to make PS3 in total look better (why else bring PS2 into a discussion about next-gen consoles).

I don't think anyone on this thread has posted nothing but praise for the market success of PS2. No need to imply anything else. Surprisingly WIi sold more hardware than PS2, though. I didn't know that.

@jtsiren

Quote:

I hope you did it in jest though, it was a nice example of taking not so good numbers for PS3 and using PS2 to make PS3 in total look better (why else bring PS2 into a discussion about next-gen consoles).

The PS3 is selling better than the XBox 360 did last year, later I may provide a chart of how the PS1 and PS2 did in comparison to the PS3. This may point out why my expectations were lower than your's were.

Also take a look at my prior posting, how the PS2 relates to the Nintendo Wii and PS3.

@MikeB

Quote:

1) The PS3 is near fully backward compatible with the PS2.

Sure, but I don't think that is significant enough for a post like yours.

Quote:

2) Price point wise the PS2 is more of a competitor to the Nintedo Wii than the PS3 is.

PS2 is far cheaper, though. Relatively speaking the price-difference of PS2 and Wii vs. Wii and PS3 in the U.S. is about the same. Wii is over twice the price of a PS2 and PS3 at cheapest is less than twice the price of Wii.

Again, not much to do with a discussion that has been about next-gen consoles. Wii may be technically part of that, but I think the consensus here has been that it is in a different league due to less power, no HD etc.

Quote:

3) People like to spout doom and gloom with regard to Sony's gaming devision, the PS2 is an important part of their gaming devision!

This, I think, is the most relevant argument, of the three, if still somewhat flimsy. BTW: I never did agree with Sony's gaming division or the company going under or whatever the doomsday nonsense is these days...

4) Using PS2 figures with PS3 figures makes PS3 look better. :)

@MikeB

Quote:

This won't happen until the PS3 moves closer towards the PS2 price range.

Or PS2 sinks. Game companies cannot support PS2 forever.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

Quote:

Or PS2 sinks. Game companies cannot support PS2 forever.

Good point.

Wii might actually help PS2 in this regard a bit, just a guess. New games made for Wii might work nicely on PS2 too (as far as technical level is concerned), using traditional controls. It might be worthwhile to port them to PS2 (which has a huge installed base) in addition to the Wii version.

@jtsiren

Quote:

Wii might actually help PS2 in this regard a bit, just a guess. New games made for Wii might work nicely on PS2 too (as far as technical level is concerned), using traditional controls. It might be worthwhile to port them to PS2 (which has a huge installed base) in addition to the Wii version.

Only until companies start exploiting the Wii hardware, it's twice as powerful as the PS2.

_________________

@AMiGR

Quote:

Only until companies start exploiting the Wii hardware, it's twice as powerful as the PS2.

Considering that GC was already more powerful than PS2 (at least as far as results on the screen were any indication) that is easy to believe, although I haven't read upon that and Nintendo hasn't been really all that forthcoming about tech specs. It is interesting to note, though, if the more advanced control mechanics use some of that new power or are they comparable to reading regular controls.

Anyway, PS2 games were already stripped down from more advanced Xbox games, so I guess even if Wii were somewhat more powerful, its games might scale down to PS2 better than, say, your typical Xbox 360/PS3 game scales down to PS2.

Of course PS2's popularity might also help Wii. Many PS2 games may end up being ported to Wii. If Wii was the only "lower powered" console in the world, some games might never make it to Wii... but that (just as Wii helping PS2 to stay longer) is just a wild guess/thought on my part, I could be totally, utterly wrong on this.

@jtsiren

Quote:

Sure, but I don't think that is significant enough for a post like yours.

Has nobody ever bought an A500 game for their A1200 or A4000?

PS2 games alone is no reason to buy a PS3, but certainly a strong PS2 market in combination with PS3 titles can be a huge benefit. (Compare good A500 games).

I personally will most certainly buy God of War 2 for my PS3 and I know I am not alone. IMO in the large picture the PS2 shouldn't be written off, heck it was globally the top selling home games console last year by a good margin!

@MikeB

Quote:

Has nobody ever bought an A500 game for their A1200 or A4000?

Difference of AGA and ECS games wasn't really as huge (especially during Commodore years) as difference of PS3 and PS2 games, especially for a HD gamer. But sure, I'm sure many did.

Certainly some PS3 owners will buy PS2 games to play on their new box, but I'm not sure how many. I think more significant is probably those with large PS2 libraries adopting PS3 because of this. I'm not trying to downplay this, PS2 will influence PS3 (brand alone is important), but I don't think the numbers game you pulled above brought anything of value to this discussion about PS3 (and its competition). But we disagree on that, so I guess nothing further can really be said.

My own experience: I bought and played two PSone games on my PS2, the Medal of Honors (wanted to see the first ones after playing the two versions I had on Xbox). The experiece was dreadful from a graphical point of view (at this time Xbox was already out)... yuck! Half the resolution and what felt like less than a quarter of detail... But the games were decent enough and I enjoyed them moderately. Some of the Medal of Honor magic was there, but once I had seen so much better graphics, that affected my perception for sure. I understand why you contemplate getting God of War 2, but personally I think I might not enjoy it as much due to the lower resolution.

I know, I know, good graphics don't a good game make, but visuals are an important part and when you do a significant upgrade those old titles lose something for me. This is why I never really save old game libraries when moving on, even if the new machine is compatible. I would rarely play those old games when new, more spectacular ones are available.

Edit: I guess I'm shallow.

Last edited by jtsiren on 22-Feb-2007 at 01:50 PM.