@MikeB

Monster Hunter 3:Tri under-performed? It sold half a million copies in 1 week followed by 130,000 copies in week 2. Capcom shipped 1 million copies so retailers took it upon themselves to discount it after about 3 weeks to get them off the shelf. Seems to me the problem was retailers expecting a 1-week sellout.
Infact:
Quote:

which received a perfect 40/40 score from Famitsu recently, sold ~520,000 units of its initial million shipment over its first two days of release to become the third best start on Wii

If it doesn't have a long tail, then show me a hardcore game that does.

As for the UK it debuted at #5 in the all formats chart.

I have yet to see US sales data but I reserved my copy 5 days before it launched and the Special Edition was sold out.

Having been bored with most games that are not RTS+RPG, this is one action-rpg game that is alot like WoW shrunk to a console. It's almost perfect. My only complaint is that it may actually be too hard core. It seems like you have to go farming and really get to know the terrain prior to taking up quests or you may not find what you are looking for. Also, the fact that they are timed and you can only take up one at a time is both good and bad. It's also too easy to fill up your pouch farming along the way...but that is part of the realism I suppose. But World of Warcraft has similar limitations as does any RPG. With WoW you can be on up to 25 at once and rarely are they timed

Unlike you, I'll happily expose the limitations of my games/systems.
The game is still pure crack.

@Tomas

Quote:

Tomas wrote: @Lou Quote: Having the SPU's assist with graphics processing would have been great if they then didn't have to push that over the the video RAM from main RAM and that introduces an inherent latency that the 360 doesn't have with its unified memory. Would also help if it had a better GPU in first place. The PS3 GPU is a joke compared to even the older GPU of the XBOX 360.

Yes, everyone but MikeB knows that. The SPU thing would/could have made up for it if there was unified memory. Instead data must be moved about which is why most cross-platform games take a framerate hit on the PS3.

@Lou

The PS3 GPU is the achilles heal of the system. Had something similar to the 360 GPU been used one could have truly 'Play Beyond'(tm).

@Lou

Quote:

Monster Hunter 3:Tri under-performed? It sold half a million copies in 1 week

I did not state Monster Hunter is an unpopular franchise in Japan, actually I stated the exact opposite. For example Monster Hunter Freedom for the PSP sold 1.5 million units its first week in Japan and halfway through 2009 already topped 3.5 million units.

Performing below expectations regards something else, a Monster Hunter game releasing in 2009 and hitting the bargain bins the same month of release is not considered normal and was qute unexpected (also considering that Famitsu score).

Sure, Monster Hunter is the most popular (in terms of total sales) 3rd party effort on the Wii so far, but did not perform as well as most hoped.

Quote:

Seems to me the problem was retailers expecting a 1-week sellout.

Yep, they shouldn't have over-ordered the game.

@Lou

Quote:

Yes, everyone but MikeB knows that. The SPU thing would/could have made up for it if there was unified memory. Instead data must be moved about which is why most cross-platform games take a framerate hit on the PS3.

It will probably remain a problem for some time to come with fans of rival systems claiming they understand the PS3's architecture while they clearly do not. Even today there are plenty of fans who claim the Cell's SPU aren't real processors and rather useless for performing tasks or that the Blu-Ray's far more capacity and constant streaming is useless. And they will often use games which technically aren't impressive at all (compared to the more impressive PS3 games) and porting issues as evidence.

But they will contrinue to be dissapointed with exclusive PS3 developments in the future as well, of course not really understanding why things unfold as they do and will continue to unfold in this direction.

The cheap approach of unified memory is not common at all for highly powered solutions (only in some cheap systems or non-gaming laptops). It's not a positive performance wise that the CPU has to deal with relatively slow main memory, nor is it a technical benefit the CPU and GPU have to share bandwidth as done on the XBox 360. It's technically a better approach to have the GPU using dedicated memory and the CPU using low latency faster memory without such bandwidth constraints.

Like I always stated the GPU vs GPU issue is far from as black and white as you guys believe it is. Both the XBox 360's Xenos and the PS3's RSX have their advantages and disadvantages. For example the RSX can perform well more shader operations per second than the Xenos, it has 8 more TMUs with twice as much cache per TMU but the most critical thing which most don't seem to understand (or don't want to understand) is that a large part of the RSX is dedicated to taking advantage of the Cell processor, it sports a very high bandwidth direct link to the Cell processor.

A Xenos style GPU isn't at all a good compagnion for the Cell processor. The RSX is! (not saying a better GPU wouldn't be better, but that would not be a Xenos style GPU!)

The Cell does not fix issues with the RSX, the RSX is designed to be a good fit for the Cell processor. Together the Cell/RSX is much more powerful than the Xenon/Xenos combo and you shouldn't look at this in any other way technically with regard to the PS3. The RSX is more powerful than the Xenos where it counts, technically speaking.

Despite similarities between XBox 360 and the PS3, there are plenty of very crucial differences between the two platforms which can result into porting issues.

Last edited by MikeB on 16-May-2010 at 11:59 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou Quote: Yes, everyone but MikeB knows that. The SPU thing would/could have made up for it if there was unified memory. Instead data must be moved about which is why most cross-platform games take a framerate hit on the PS3. It will probably remain a problem for some time to come with fans of rival systems claiming they understand the PS3's architecture while they clearly do not. Even today there are plenty of fans who claim the Cell's SPU aren't real processors and rather useless for performing tasks or that the Blu-Ray's far more capacity and constant streaming is useless. And they will often use games which technically aren't impressive at all (compared to the more impressive PS3 games) and porting issues as evidence. But they will contrinue to be dissapointed with exclusive PS3 developments in the future as well, of course not really understanding why things unfold as they do and will continue to unfold in this direction. The cheap approach of unified memory is not common at all for highly powered solutions (only in some cheap systems or non-gaming laptops). It's not a positive performance wise that the CPU has to deal with relatively slow main memory, nor is it a technical benefit the CPU and GPU have to share bandwidth as done on the XBox 360. It's technically a better approach to have the GPU using dedicated memory and the CPU using low latency faster memory without such bandwidth constraints. Like I always stated the GPU vs GPU issue is far from as black and white as you guys believe it is. Both the XBox 360's Xenos and the PS3's RSX have their advantages and disadvantages. For example the RSX can perform well more shader operations per second than the Xenos, it has 8 more TMUs with twice as much cache per TMU but the most critical thing which most don't seem to understand (or don't want to understand) is that a large part of the RSX is dedicated to taking advantage of the Cell processor, it sports a very high bandwidth direct link to the Cell processor. A Xenos style GPU isn't at all a good compagnion for the Cell processor. The RSX is! (not saying a better GPU wouldn't be better, but that would not be a Xenos style GPU!) The Cell does not fix issues with the RSX, the RSX is designed to be a good fit for the Cell processor. Together the Cell/RSX is much more powerful than the Xenon/Xenos combo and you shouldn't look at this in any other way technically with regard to the PS3. The RSX is more powerful than the Xenos where it counts, technically speaking. Despite similarities between XBox 360 and the PS3, there are plenty of very crucial differences between the two platforms which can result into porting issues.

Mike, we've gone over this. Many times.

360 games can now be installed to HDD in order to over-come multi-disc limitations. It's gpu is easily more powerful than RSX. Cell is more powerful than Xenon...but game engines aren't the bottleneck this generation, full screen effects @ 1080p are.

At the end of the day, the 360 makes the prettier picture and that is what all the graphics snobs care about. Sony continues to slap it's fans in the face by removing features from the console and is being sued over it.

Next generation won't even be close. It will be a 2-horse race.
With BluRay players

@Lou

Sorry Lou, but time and time again you have shown you don't really understand what you are talking about with regard to technical stuff. I don't understand why you would want to portray yourself as such... Especially with regard to the RSX/Cell, it's quite confusing you still put yourself forward as "Mr Know it al" with regard to that...

Although a default harddrive would have been great for developers on the XBox 360, even if it did the 6.8 GB data limitations on 360 disc would still lead to sacrifices.

For example ID software aren't exactly the most PS3 foccused developers, but they also state:

"As Carmack puts it, Microsoft charges a fee to use three discs in a single Xbox 360 game, something Carmack's company obviously wants to avoid. So unless Microsoft makes an exception, Rage will be compressed onto two Xbox 360 discs and suffer from noticeable imperfections, said Carmack."

A dual layer Blu-Ray disc can hold over 7 times as much data than a dual layer 6.8 GB capacity XBox 360 disc, probably even more as with multi-disc releases usually more data duplication is required (to prevent disc swaps).

Eurogamer (in the past often sounded like 360 fanboys): "It's games like this [God of War 3], along with Uncharted 2: Among Thieves and Killzone 2, that give the platform holder ownership [Sony] of the bleeding edge of console gaming technology in the current generation."

More 3rd party developers are starting to develop games in the way the Cell/RSX was intended. We already saw superior MLAA style anti-aliasing implemented on the Cell in a 3rd party game another example comes from Bizzare Games which are doing realtime deferred lighting on the Cell's SPUs:



http://www.slideshare.net/nonchaotic/a-bizarre-way-to-do-realtime-lighting

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou Sorry Lou, but time and time again you have shown you don't really understand what you are talking about with regard to technical stuff. I don't understand why you would want to portray yourself as such... Especially with regard to the RSX/Cell, it's quite confusing you still put yourself forward as "Mr Know it al" with regard to that...

LOL

Quote:

Although a default harddrive would have been great for developers on the XBox 360, even if it did the 6.8 GB data limitations on 360 disc would still lead to sacrifices. For example ID software aren't exactly the most PS3 foccused developers, but they also state: "As Carmack puts it, Microsoft charges a fee to use three discs in a single Xbox 360 game, something Carmack's company obviously wants to avoid. So unless Microsoft makes an exception, Rage will be compressed onto two Xbox 360 discs and suffer from noticeable imperfections, said Carmack." A dual layer Blu-Ray disc can hold over 7 times as much data than a dual layer 6.8 GB capacity XBox 360 disc, probably even more as with multi-disc releases usually more data duplication is required (to prevent disc swaps).

It makes sense that packaging 3 discs vs. 1 disc will have an added cost, no?
Regardless, if 2 discs containing media can be installed, there should be no need for swapping there after. The game could be marketed to require a hard drive or 16GB USB flash as now the 360 can use that as storage. Not a biggie.

Quote:

Eurogamer (in the past often sounded like 360 fanboys): "It's games like this [God of War 3], along with Uncharted 2: Among Thieves and Killzone 2, that give the platform holder ownership [Sony] of the bleeding edge of console gaming technology in the current generation."

Uncharted 2 has already been picked apart with it's bullets that hit nothing and linear gameplay. It's merely a game of pre-determined eye candy with meh gameplay.

I have not seen God of War in action so I can't comment on it. Killzone was another sales fail, iirc.

I noticed you ignored my comments on MAG - typical.

April US NPD:

DS – 440,800
Wii – 277,200
X360 – 185,400
PS3 – 180,800
PSP – 65,500

01. Splinter Cell: Conviction (360, Ubisoft) - 486,000
02. Pokemon SoulSilver (DS, Nintendo) - 242,900
03. New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Wii, Nintendo) - 200,300
04. Pokemon HeartGold (DS, Nintendo) - 192,600
05. God Of War III (PS3, Sony) - 180,300
06. Wii Sports Resort (Wii, Nintendo)
07. Battlefield Bad Company 2 (360, EA)
08. Wii Fit (Wii, Nintendo)
09. Just Dance (Wii, Ubisoft)
10. Super Street Fighter IV (PS3, Capcom)

Also, Netflix reports over 1,000,000 Wiis have connected to its service.

PS2 console sales are no longer tracked.

@Lou

Our thought processes are so radically different I think we have a too big barrier to continue discussions together much further. BrianK and most others I can follow with their thought processes despite I seldom agree with them.

You think Uncharted 2 is meh, that's OK, but that's not the general consensus of reviewers and most people who played the game. You don't like linear games, that's fine with me, but lots of loved games tell a linear story.

Killzone 2 is a multi-million seller, which considerably outsold Killzone 1 with a much smaller install base upon release. But even if it sold less or 10 times as much it would not really make the game much different.

Quote:

pre-determined eye candy

I have to wonder what open world game lacking pre-scripted events you like so much on the Wii apart from the recently released Monster Hunter game? Would you still like Monster Hunter if it would be improved for the PS3?

Quote:

I noticed you ignored my comments on MAG - typical.

What comment from you about MAG do you want my perspectives on?

MAG is a first person shooter allowing for up to 256 simultaneous players to combat eachother, a first for this kind of game, but I haven't played the game yet. For me 32 online gamers such as in Killzone 2 or Warhawk is plenty for now, maybe in the future I will try that game.

Last edited by MikeB on 17-May-2010 at 03:22 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Even today there are plenty of fans who claim the Cell's SPU aren't real processors

This might be in how one defines a processor. The SPU doesn't contain a memory controller. As such the SPU passes it's address to the SPE for handling. I'd see the SPE closer to a CPU than a SPU.

Quote:

The Cell does not fix issues with the RSX, the RSX is designed to be a good fit for the Cell processor.

It may be said the RSX fixes issues with the Cell. Remember Sony first stated that their console would be run by Cell. Turned out the Cell wasn't as capable of a graphics chip as their early notice predicted.

Quote:

Together the Cell/RSX is much more powerful than the Xenon/Xenos combo and you shouldn't look at this in any other way technically with regard to the PS3. The RSX is more powerful than the Xenos where it counts, technically speaking.

'much more powerful' is paper. Slightly more power has been shown by a handful of games at best. 'Much more'? Especially the 2x performance Sony claimed is yet to be a demonstrated reality.

Kevin vs Jack:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-buGYgRBrIQ

@BrianK

Quote:

The SPU doesn't contain a memory controller. As such the SPU passes it's address to the SPE for handling. I'd see the SPE closer to a CPU than a SPU.

You sound confused, Amiga had processors lacking MMUs. Each SPU is part of a SPE (which includes the MMU). SPEs are usually referred to as system on a chip as they have their own memory and can run isolated from the rest of the system to a great extend.

In the past MMUs were seperate optional chips, but nowadays they are part of CPUs.

Quote:

It may be said the RSX fixes issues with the Cell. Remember Sony first stated that their console would be run by Cell. Turned out the Cell wasn't as capable of a graphics chip as their early notice predicted.

The Cell is capable, however the Cell/RSX combo is more capable. The RSX is good in terms of raw performance compared to the Xenos, the Cell adds a lot of additional flexibile power with regard to graphics functions and hence is greatly more powerful technically compared to the Xenos/Xenon combo.

We already knew since 2004 that nVidia was working on a GPU for the PS3.

Quote:

Especially the 2x performance Sony claimed is yet to be a demonstrated reality.

The Cell is well more than 2 times as powerful than the Xenon, probably whatever you read referred to that.

Last edited by MikeB on 17-May-2010 at 03:56 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

You sound confused, Amiga had processors lacking MMUs. Each SPU is part of a SPE (which includes the MMU). SPEs are usually referred to as system on a chip as they have their own memory and can run isolated from the rest of the system to a great extend.

MMU != memory controller

But yeah, they are considered to be vector SOCs pretty much.

Last edited by Zardoz on 17-May-2010 at 04:02 PM.

_________________

@Zardoz

Yes the MFC includes the MMU, DMA and bus interface. The point remains the same.

Quote:

vector SOCs

They are not vector units though (nomatter if that they are powerful for this), they real processors.

@MikeB

Quote:

Yes the MFC includes the MMU, DMA and bus interface. The point remains the same.

Of course, all I'm saying is that you can (and typically do) have a memory controller with no MMU, nothing more.

Quote:

They are not vector units though (nomatter if that they are powerful for this), they real processors.

Didn't say they are but their strength is their SIMD (vector) performance, it'd be a bit of waste to use them for single integers for instance, so you could call them vector processors (not units).

Last edited by Zardoz on 17-May-2010 at 05:09 PM.
Last edited by Zardoz on 17-May-2010 at 04:37 PM.

_________________

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou Our thought processes are so radically different I think we have a too big barrier to continue discussions together much further. BrianK and most others I can follow with their thought processes despite I seldom agree with them.

Mike, I think mine is better than being oblivious to all critisisms like you do in order to target your ads.

Quote:

You think Uncharted 2 is meh, that's OK, but that's not the general consensus of reviewers and most people who played the game. You don't like linear games, that's fine with me, but lots of loved games tell a linear story.

All the thorough reviews mentioned the big letdown once you hit the arctic stage. About gun-fights not being about skill but about firing X # of shots before the sequence ends. About bullet collisions being ignore.

Quote:

pre-determined eye candy

Your path is linear and you have no control of your point of view so that they could dump resources into what you see from a given view. This is the on-rails shooter of action adventure games.

Quote:

I have to wonder what open world game lacking pre-scripted events you like so much on the Wii apart from the recently released Monster Hunter game? Would you still like Monster Hunter if it would be improved for the PS3?

That's just it, Uncharted 2 is not open-world. GTA4 is open-world.
As for Monster Hunter 3 on the PS3, it might be in 720p on the PS3 - big friggin deal.

Quote:

Quote: I noticed you ignored my comments on MAG - typical. What comment from you about MAG do you want my perspectives on? MAG is a first person shooter allowing for up to 256 simultaneous players to combat eachother, a first for this kind of game, but I haven't played the game yet. For me 32 online gamers such as in Killzone 2 or Warhawk is plenty for now, maybe in the future I will try that game.

256 people do not combat each other. Here is a segment from a review:
Quote:

When you first hear that MAG supports 256-player online matches, you may be inclined to picture hordes of soldiers swarming on top of one another and filling the air with thousands of bullets. The reality is that skirmishes play out on a much smaller scale

You only spout hype and not how a product actually delivers. You never point out shortcomings even when they smack you in the face.
You and the PS3 have always been over-hyped and under-delivered.
Its plain annoying and you need to get over yourself and the PS3.

@Lou

Quote:

Your path is linear and you have no control of your point of view so that they could dump resources into what you see from a given view. This is the on-rails shooter of action adventure games.

It's clear you haven't played Uncharted 2.

Quote:

That's just it, Uncharted 2 is not open-world. GTA4 is open-world.

That's not what I asked and you make it sound like I said Uncharted 2 is an open world game. I love the Grand Theft Auto series, do you?

Quote:

256 people do not combat each other.

They do and it does it well technically speaking (not laggy). Biggest criticisms seem to be still too chaotic (despite efforts to spread people around the map) and no single player campaign (and I believe there is no LAN option like there is in Warhawk).

@MikeB

Quote:

You sound confused, Amiga had processors lacking MMUs. Each SPU is part of a SPE (which includes the MMU). SPEs are usually referred to as system on a chip as they have their own memory and can run isolated from the rest of the system to a great extend.

Again I go back to this is relates to how one views the definitions.

The SPE moves code from DMA to local store. The SPU performs the operations. If you want to relate this to the Amiga the SPE is more like the 030 with the SPU being the 68881/2.

The SPE can't do branch prediction. It doesn't do the code scheduling. It can't reorder instructions. It can't rename registers. It doesn't have control logic. While I see why one might want to call it a system on a chip. It might be called a PowerPC 601 with a wider execution core, more cache, and discarded control logic. I see it as a SIMD processor.

Quote:

hence is greatly more powerful technically compared to the Xenos/Xenon combo....The Cell is well more than 2 times as powerful than the Xenon

This thread discusses gaming consoles. As I compare games on my 360 and on my PS3 nothing proves to be a twice as powerful improvement. This isn't to say that the PS3 isn't more powerful. I think a handful of games show this. However, these games don't show the claimed performance from Sony. Hence my comment 2x on paper as it's not been realized.

I think further 3D gaming on the PS3 doesn't show the 2x the power. Games, even as simple as Wipeout HD, are going to be downscaled in resolution, degraded in quality, and slowed in FPS to apply 3D. It's a bit strange to me that Sony claimed 1080p to be the 'Holy Grail' of HD. Motorstorm is going to be sub-HD and upscaled by the PS3 while in 3D. Sure this is the first generation of 3D games so perhaps the coders just aren't up to snuff. IMO the 2x isn't there if the developers can't use it. It's like writing the #11 on your speaker and claiming it's louder than 10. (If you haven't seen this is Spinal Tap go rent it.)