Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gaming' started by Derrik Draven, Apr 19, 2003.
At least that's what the guys here www.teamxbox.com are saying.
Hmmm...I wonder why.
It doesn't matter, the PS3 is a few years off anyway.
I tend to ignore 'reports' printed about a platform printed on a web site devoted to the competition of that platform.
I get a kick out of how at the end they turn it into an opinion piece:
The story's actually from a EE technical magazine, not TeamXBox.
I'm not too surprised that the Cell architecture wasn't going to be ready in time for the PS3. I've studied the patent application quite a bit and what they're shooting for seemed more ambitious to me than would be practical for mass production in that time frame. Too bad, it's an exciting design. This does beg the question of what they hell they're going to use instead for the PS3.
I don't know much about computer chips but is it realistic to get that much power in a new system?
Surely this if true is bad news ... i'd love to see what games would be like with a chip supposedly 1,000 times more powerful than the PS2.
Please, you didn't actually buy into the whole "cell" announcements by Sony concerning the PS3 did you? It was a laughable marketing ploy, just like the ones they used for the PS2 years before its launch. Not for a second do I think that any reasonable person would have bought into it. Now if Sony stated that the PS3 would have 128Mb of RAM, a harddrive, ethernet port, four controller ports, HD support, DD5.1 in every game, and a little LCD panel on every controller, that would have been a little more believable.
Sony didn't use any marketing ploys. I expect that any day now, U.S. troops will stumble across a warehouse of PS2's to be used in an Iraq supercomputer.
Just wait until Ninendo and Microsoft send off their marketing "ploys" for their next machines. Could get interesting in la-la land.
I hope consumers learn from the past (even if little by little) and don't go for all the hype. Remember how all powerful the PS2 was supposed to be? The most impressive looking game I've seen on it is GT3 which isn't saying a whole lot. And then there's the people who say that game is only using 65% or so of the machine's power, whatever...
Hey, everyone has their own devious marketing spin. Nintendo said the Ultra 64 was like a mini-SGI workstation. Microsoft can be pretty devious, but I can't think of any ploys regarding Xbox. But regardless, this thread is about the silly Sony's Cell announcements. If Nintendo and M$ pull something similar, I will certainly react in the same way.
But while we're on this subject, I'd love to speculate what you all think will stand out in the NextGen hardware? Personally I hope that 1080i can be a display resolution without any developer sacrifice. I would be very happy.
Things that I think should be standard:
LED displays on controllers
Hard drives of a decent size (none of this 5 or 10 gig nonsense)
Wireless controllers (hopefully bluetooth or RF)
AV Component size & front-loading
HD resolutions standardized with DVI output
All I know is that although I'm looking forward to the next generation of consoles, I'm not going to get excited about any specific specs until they are official and final. Although I passed on getting a PS2, I would still say that it's a fine machine and lots of fun can be had on it. I'd assume that the PS3, although potentially inferior to the next Xbox, would still be a great machine as well. Plus, it's not like these machines are so expensive that most people can't own more than one over a few years time anyway.
I was checking out some random gaming mags this evening and one story was that PS3 and X Box 2 will release on the same day sometime in 2005. If that happens it will add an interesting twist to the console wars. Had PS2 and X Box been released on the same day I think that would have taken a huge chunk out of the PS2's lead in sales.
me no like DVI give me component for my tv