@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @wegster The PS3 isn't at the break even point yet, production costs have nearly halved but Sony is still making a loss on the hardware unless users buy some Blu-Ray movies, games or a Sony HDTV to compensate for this loss. Sony may break even soon though and have room for a pricecut, smaller, thinner and cheaper Cell, RSX, Blu-Ray drive and heatsinks have been reported. They are well underway towards a slimline PS3.

Hmm, numbers seem wrong, or maybe I'm misremembering their original loss? I thought they used to be losing $100 or so per console? If that # is right, and they've halved production costs, they should be in the black by now, no?

Well, I'll never be buying a Sony HD TV - there's no compelling reason to - higher $, can get same or better quality elsewhere.

I don't buy BD or DVDs often at all, but they'll see some effect as I do rent them via NetFlix.

Games - I won't be buying any more than already planned by the second PS3 purchase, so I guess 'net to Sony' is another unit sold, and some additional revenue indirectly by I'll watcgh more BD movies, although rental, not purchased by me.

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@wegster

No production costs alone are now about around retail pricing according to my figures.

So they are losing money on retailer share, shipping, advertising, local taxes, etc. The 600 dollar PS3 launch costed them a 2 billion dollars gaming devision loss, this despite healthy PS3, PS2, PSP software sales and profitable PS2 and PSP hardware sales, so it's a big improvement and the last reported quarter (Christmas sales) they were back in the black for their gaming devision.

Last edited by MikeB on 25-Apr-2008 at 06:31 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 25-Apr-2008 at 06:29 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

Please don't confuse the console version with the PC version. ...

You assume too much.

Quote:

The game does look good, but you know it's a video game and I don't see much done with lighting.

Refer to
http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/41788/Far-Cry-Instincts/
http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/gallery/869/Far-Cry-Instincts/p1/

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@MikeB

Quote:

Don't confuse the SPU shader *model* with just shader ops. It's a design approach similar to how GPUs are handling things, it's not limited to the kinds of operations GPU are good at.

But note the application and the required render techniques.

One shouldn’t bundle ATI with NV GPU's capabilities i.e. note the different GpGPU results between ATI vs NV GPUs. GPUs like ATI RV670 also excels at non-GPU computations e.g. Fold@Home GPU2 client vs Fold@Home PS3 client.

Fold@Home GPU2 exceeds Fold@Home PS3 client in the type work and performance(running on RV670). My RV670 is concurrently processing a CAL (Compute Abstraction Layer) application (e.g. Fold@Home GPU2) and DX3D operations (e.g. AeroGlass).

AMD's ACML (AMD Core Math Library) is available in both CPU (AMD64)and GPU (R6x0 version is on alpha release).

Quote:

On the Cell you can use the SPU shader model approach for many different things besides just GPU shader ops.

Depends on the GPU e.g. ATI RV670 with CAL (bypass DX layer). CAL exposes RV670 as a stream computation device.

Last edited by Hammer on 25-Apr-2008 at 10:44 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: @Lou Quote: The game does look good, but you know it's a video game and I don't see much done with lighting. Refer to http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/41788/Far-Cry-Instincts/ http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/gallery/869/Far-Cry-Instincts/p1/

Still it's only on explosions. SW looks more realistic and has effects like self-shadowing at all times...

Quote:

An interesting comment from PlanetGTA: "Interesting indeed, I myself - who is a big fan of the Xbox 360 - will be getting the PlayStation 3 version, as I've read and heard personally from people who have played the game already that this version is undoubtedly superior to the Xbox 360. Granted, not as much that I would recommend going out to buy a PS3 console if you have a 360 already. Too bad that episodic content is Xbox exclusive, is Take-Two/Rockstar regretting that decision now?" I read reports of better graphics (more realistic and less aliasing issues on the PS3), slightly better framerate on the PS3 and more activity (headcounts and carcounts in scenes). We have seen many comparison reviews before, I'm sure this title will spark some in depth comparisons. Anyway if so, not bad for a title which started development on the 360 and was then moved to the PS3. Other often mentioned reasons stated by users for getting the PS3 version instead of the 360 version: 1) RRoD problems (360) 2) Free online multi-player (PS3) 3) Playstation style controller 4) 360 noise generation 5) Free Home integration (PS3) 6) Disc scratching (360) 7) XBox Live issues 8) DVD too small for GTA V (sequel) 9) More people will own PS3s than 360s (online play) 10) Popular sequels to exclusive games, MGS4, Gran Tursismo 5 and Final Fantasy XIII are most mentioned

The first reviews are in, only perfect 10s for the PS3 version so far.

The differences highlighted between the two versions so far:

IGN:
- Game loads faster on the PS3
- More texture pop-in issues with the 360 version. "PS3 has far less pop-in."

IGN: "The 360 has richer colors, but the PS3 has better anti-aliasing making it look a little cleaner.", "For those wanting to know which version looks better, the edge goes to the PS3."

But EGM states: "PS3 Version looks slightly more vibrant and sharp"

My take: If you like more vibrant colors adjust your TV settings. A Rockstar representative stated he prefers the way the PS3 version is being rendered. Enabling Full Range HDMI on the PS3 may help as well. For games like Assissin's Creed many reviewers mistakenly reported more vibrant colors for the 360 version, but enabling this feature on a capable TV nulified this claim.

So after some weak 360 to PS3 ports and later more demanding multi-platform games like COD4, Assassin's Creed, Burnout Paradise, DMC4, Dirt, etc being about on par, the most demanding multi-platform game is technically better on the PS3. The situation is improving regarding multi-platform development and note that Rockstar stated they feel they haven't yet really mastered the Cell well enough (lots of room for improvements) and hinted GTA V would be too big for DVD.

A very important game which will help trigger HDTV gaming.

This is only the beginning:

Multi-platform designers:

Todd Howard (Fallout 3’s Executive Producer) - from Oblivion developer Bethesda - understands that PS3 “has more than enough power. No single game is using it all yet - not even close”.
Richard Baker (COD4 developer): "This just reaffirms how vital of a role the SPU's are to the PS3.", " PS3 games are now going to be setting the bar higher than ever before."

The leading PS3 exclusive designers:

Insomniac: "What's most exciting is the way things are headed right now I think we'll see just as big a leap from our second generation engine to our third as we did from the first to second."
Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

Last edited by MikeB on 26-Apr-2008 at 02:41 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 26-Apr-2008 at 02:39 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

Duh! Only a theoretical performance increase of ~320x.
PS2 Theoretical performance -- 6.2GFlops
PS3 Theoretical performance -- 2TFlops ~ 2,000GLOPS.

Last edited by BrianK on 26-Apr-2008 at 08:51 PM.

@BrianK

They mean relatively they expect to make bigger advancements. Like early PS2 games vs God of War 2, a bigger relative technical gap.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: [quote]Insomniac: "What's most exciting is the way things are headed right now I think we'll see just as big a leap from our second generation engine to our third as we did from the first to second." Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

Funny, why is it that in this generation that 1p mode of a game is completed in 8 hours when last generation it was more like 16. If anything, the games have shrunk in half just to do a 3x-5x bump in detail 50% of which of the work is done by changing settings on a scanner...and the like.
Oblivion being the exception...
Oh it gets better...
Then you get to pay $10 extra and it gets better still...
You get to buy additional content that should have been there to begin with..
Then you get to download hundreds of megabytes of patches because they don't spend enough money on QA...

Now, don't get me wrong here, this isn't a fault that the PS3 has, but one that both the 360 and PS3 have.

Atleast the FPS Wii launch title, Red Steel, took me 16 hours to complete... And then there was Legend of Zelda..

Yes, Sony and Microsoft have truly revolutionized gaming...FTL!

Last edited by Lou on 26-Apr-2008 at 11:44 PM.

@Lou

Oblivion is more than 100 hours.

With regard to creating new franchices I think I already addressed this. It´s quite easy, new technology is introduced, developers adjust to this technology and overhaul their gaming engines, this combined creating new gaming assets for new franchices.

Naughty Dog´s first Jak and Daxter games were much shorter than the sequels. The game settings, characters, general approach, etc could be improved on and expanded on with sequels.

GTA IV and MGS4 games are huge.

IMO generally speaking I prefer quality over quantity, I rather buy a game I finish in 8 hours but knocks me off my feet (thus having replay value) than a lacklustre game which takes me 16 hours to complete... I guess you are pointing specifically towards Heavenly Sword which can be completed in about 8 hours on normal, but it´s a pretty slick experience though.

COD4´s single player campaign is super short (around 5 hours, multiple times shorter than the launch title Resistance). That´s probably due to DVD limitations for the kind of experience they were trying to push, people still seem to love the game though for its multiplayer features. I asked some things to one of the devs, but he didn´t want to share his views in public.

It´s easy to make games much bigger using repetitive measures. But it´s usually not the aim to make the longest game, but rather create the best user experience. So such approaches goes against this.

Last edited by MikeB on 27-Apr-2008 at 12:10 AM.

@Lou
Games with higher textures, better AI, etc. all take more time and energy to make. Game companies need the right balance of increased prices and decreased game length in order to turn the desired profits. Afterall, this is a business.

$10 more for something isn't bad depending upon how desireable that something is. But, if it's to unlock something already on the disc that's a ####er.

FPS -- seems most are relying on multi-player online play to gain their value. Make the engine tight, small, get people online playing maps, then sell them new maps. Definitely a ripe category for price gouging.

Zelda? -- RPGs are a different category. They shouldn't be 8 hours but in the 60-100 range at least. Or have enough diversity that one would want to visit them again, playing a different character, doing quests in different order. Oblivion is actually pretty good at this.

Sony and Microsoft have revolutionized gaming by allowing developers more flexibility and ways to profit.

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote: @Hammer Quote: Hammer wrote: @Lou (SNIP) Refer to http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/41788/Far-Cry-Instincts/ http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/gallery/869/Far-Cry-Instincts/p1/ Still it's only on explosions.

Refer to
http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/41046/Far-Cry-Instincts/
http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/41047/Far-Cry-Instincts/
http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/screen/39520/Far-Cry-Instincts/

Quote:

SW looks more realistic and has effects like self-shadowing at all times...

For full time environmental shadows effects on XBOX NV2A Refer to http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/gallery/226/Doom-3/p1/

Last edited by Hammer on 27-Apr-2008 at 09:37 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@Lou

Quote:

In SW:RS3:RS, the entire game looks like a movie.

That would be subjective. http://au.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/starwarsroguesquadron3/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all

Forest scenes are nowhere near real life i.e. not in same league as Crysis.

Real SW


VS (GameCube)

The game doesn't look like the movie.

Last edited by Hammer on 27-Apr-2008 at 10:45 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 27-Apr-2008 at 10:40 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 27-Apr-2008 at 10:38 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 27-Apr-2008 at 10:38 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 27-Apr-2008 at 10:36 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

With regard to GTA IV Swedish Game Reactor states: "The PS3-version features better colours, contrast, load times and what looks to be better resolution textures. The game also looks sharper and has a more stable fps."

@Hammer

the pics you link through have a black border within a 640x480 image when clicked to view full size, still glancing through them you can see the games has to keep track of many more objects at once and the lighting a shadowing, reflections etc look great for in-game shots...

...where as Doom 3, where is the player's gun/HUD in those shots? They all look like target renders and cutscenes... Infact reviews of the Xbox version critsized it for looking worse than the published screenshots...

Finally, Wii is becoming the "base" platform:
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/28/joystiq-impressions-crash-bandicoot-mind-over-mutant/
Graphics are to be downscaled to PS2 and upscaled to 360/PS3 for the next Crash Bandicoot game.

It seems while some developers are still "waiting for the fad to end", others are starting to recognize the Wii for what it is: the most popular platform of this generation. With this new target in mind, now we will see Wii games look better instead of looking like upscaled PS2/PSP games...

Last edited by Lou on 28-Apr-2008 at 12:29 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou Oblivion is more than 100 hours. With regard to creating new franchices I think I already addressed this. It´s quite easy, new technology is introduced, developers adjust to this technology and overhaul their gaming engines, this combined creating new gaming assets for new franchices. Naughty Dog´s first Jak and Daxter games were much shorter than the sequels. The game settings, characters, general approach, etc could be improved on and expanded on with sequels. GTA IV and MGS4 games are huge. IMO generally speaking I prefer quality over quantity, I rather buy a game I finish in 8 hours but knocks me off my feet (thus having replay value) than a lacklustre game which takes me 16 hours to complete... I guess you are pointing specifically towards Heavenly Sword which can be completed in about 8 hours on normal, but it´s a pretty slick experience though. COD4´s single player campaign is super short (around 5 hours, multiple times shorter than the launch title Resistance). That´s probably due to DVD limitations for the kind of experience they were trying to push, people still seem to love the game though for its multiplayer features. I asked some things to one of the devs, but he didn´t want to share his views in public. It´s easy to make games much bigger using repetitive measures. But it´s usually not the aim to make the longest game, but rather create the best user experience. So such approaches goes against this.

I was pointing to all "next-gen" games on the PS3 and 360 and I noted Oblivion as the exception, which you may have missed.

Here's a 360/PS3 comparison on GTA4:
http://kotaku.com/384422/which-version-of-gta-iv-should-you-buy-we-compare-the-ps3-and-360-versions

The PS3 requires a 3.4GB 7+ minute install, which helps it reduce pop-in over the 360 version which does not require an install. They also note the framerate is more stable on the 360. I suppose if the 360 version was made to require an install, it would have beaten it more handidly overall. They and other sites cite the ####-poor motion controls on the PS3 version...yet the author still preferred the PS3 version mostly because he likes the DualShock3 controller, lol...are those standard yet?

@Lou

Quote:

The PS3 requires a 3.4GB 7+ minute install, which helps it reduce pop-in over the 360 version which does not require an install. They also note the framerate is more stable on the 360. I suppose if the 360 version was made to require an install, it would have beaten it more handidly overall

I understand Microsoft wants to support all 360s including those w/o harddrives. I'm surprised an optional module which could be loaded couldn't have been made for those users who have a harddrive.

Interesting from your article:
The Xbox 360 version seemed capable of achieving a smoother frame rate in certain circumstances, such as in confined spaces or during light traffic, but both versions seemed to regularly run at a similar clip.

So the PS3 doesn't come out the clear winner. They seem about equally matched even with the 3+GB install needed on the PS3. BTW I feel for those 40GB PS3 owners. After 8 games there will be no room for any more. Switching DVDs is bad which Blu-Ray helped fixed. But, IMO swapping HDDs to play your game is even worse.

Last edited by BrianK on 28-Apr-2008 at 02:56 PM.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: The PS3 requires a 3.4GB 7+ minute install, which helps it reduce pop-in over the 360 version which does not require an install. They also note the framerate is more stable on the 360. I suppose if the 360 version was made to require an install, it would have beaten it more handidly overall I understand Microsoft wants to support all 360s including those w/o harddrives. I'm surprised an optional module which could be loaded couldn't have been made for those users who have a harddrive. Interesting from your article: The Xbox 360 version seemed capable of achieving a smoother frame rate in certain circumstances, such as in confined spaces or during light traffic, but both versions seemed to regularly run at a similar clip. So the PS3 doesn't come out the clear winner. They seem about equally matched even with the 3+GB install needed on the PS3. BTW I feel for those 40GB PS3 owners. After 8 games there will be no room for any more. Switching DVDs is bad which Blu-Ray helped fixed. But, IMO swapping HDDs to play your game is even worse.

Yes but then the "afficanados" will say they can put in any industry standard hard drive in there that is bigger, to that I say that they then paid for a 40GB paperweight...

But yeah, the should have made HD install "optional" on the 360 rather than non-existant.

@Lou

Quote:

The PS3 requires a 3.4GB 7+ minute install, which helps it reduce pop-in over the 360 version which does not require an install.

I think for a game like this this is preferred. You could also formulate it like this, "the 360 version does not allow for a harddrive install".

On the PS3 the developer can decide if harddrive install makes sense or not, it may in some cases result into lazy dev decisions. But that's not the case for Rockstar.

BTW, the 360 version (pop-in animated GIFs):

http://dot50cal.the-horror.com/gta4/fucktrees.gif
http://dot50cal.the-horror.com/gta4/popin1.gif

Rockstar hinted their game engine isn't yet well adapted for the PS3 (still not "cracked it") and development was lead on the 360. So the end result seems very promising.