Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
At The Back => Time Out => Topic started by: Miracle Man Matt on May 07, 2007, 03:58:05 PM
-
TO ALL THOSE WHO DONT THINK THE PS3 IS ANY GOOD/NOT MUCH BETTER....
First of all I dont own any consoles apart from a PS2 that i have 3 games for and have not played it in over a year.
I do Cybernetics and Artificial Intelligence and at am a member of the IET. just before we had easter, i went to a lecture on the PS3 and was blown away!!!
The most powerful PC at the mo has 4 cores running at 3.4Ghz
The PS3 has 9 running at 3.6 although it will go up to 5.4Ghz...That is incredible!!!!
this comprises of 1 main core, 1 black boxed off and 7 VPU cores (for grafix processing ectr)
The Bus bandwidth is double that of a PC
And the grafix card owns.. although doesn't seem as powerful as the latest DX10 cards for a PC.
some of the demo's we saw were absolutely astounding. I have a fully speced up PC and just the core of the PS3 would whip its ass compared to the whole thing...well maybe not, will have to see when DX10 games come out.
HOWEVER the games I have seen for it at the mo in the shops were absolutely wank. and did not look like it deals with ani-aliasing
I do not doubt tho that there will be some amazing things to come.
the PS3 IS light years ahead of the 360, just the games are not here yet
end off..
sorry i just had to get that off my chest after reading the first page of the PS3 topic.
-
Yes - but at the end of the day it is still a games console and terefore not much use to me...
Sorry - being cheeky and flippant.
Just never have been into computer games
I do agree that gaming forces big advances in technology and delivery of IT services ( as does pornography so they say in tech circles)
-
you have to take into account that the most powerful DX10 graphics cards for the PC, cost about as much as the console itself ;)
i am SERIOUSLY tempted to go out and buy the PS3.
-
I have always been a Playstation guy, never got into Xbox and only rarely play Nintendo's. I want one but i will wait for a price drop.
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
I was shocked how backwards-looking England is towards video games when I was over last week. Totally different attitude than the US.
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
it has the same games as any PC out there, and the cost of a GOOD PC, that will run every game, is in the ballpark of a custom shop guitar.
quit yer bitchin
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
Awful games?! It's only just come out, and they looked alright to me...
-
As you say, specs mean nothing if the games aren't up to it. (anyone played \ seen Fear on the PS3??? EURGH!!)
the PS3 has all the bells and whistles in the world, but right now developers still cant get 2 year old games like Fear to run as good as they do on a 2 year old PC :P
When Crysis comes along on the PC, it will blow away EVERYTHING on the xbox 360 \ PS3, and by the time the console games start to live up to it, the next next next gen games will be arriving on the PC...
You can either spend thousands on a top spec PC and enjoy cutting edge gaming as it happens, or by a console and enjoy it several months later, and to a lesser degree... for most people its a worthwhile trade off.
-
You can either spend thousands on a top spec PC and enjoy cutting edge gaming as it happens, or by a console and enjoy it several months later, and to a lesser degree... for most people its a worthwhile trade off.
for a fraction of the price of a full fledged PC, not to mention it will run without the extensive hassle that you get with the PC.
for gaming, it's the best to buy a console, unless you are prepared to dish out a boat load of money, to make everything look SUPER.
with the PS3 it's like this.. they will start making games that will be tailored to the specs of the PS3.. as opposed to games being made for the PC, that always push the envelope and require a more and more powerful PC, as each new game is released. me, i can live without buying a new computer every 6 to 10 months, to play the newest games.
besides, computers require constant maintenance, unless you only do some internet and word processing with it.
so, the console gets my vote. and i was a long time PC supporter as far as graphics and performance go, but you got to take in account, at what price you get that. cos if you find a system for 600€, that will perform equally well, than the PS3 (for years to come) then PLEASE, tell me where i can find it.
and there is nother side to this arguement:
As you say, specs mean nothing if the games aren't up to it.
sharp graphics and eye candy mean nothing if the computer isnt up to it.
-
PS3... how do I feel? 'Tomorrow is anoth...' (nope) Ah yes...
'Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.'
I've played video games since the Atari 2600 and Vic 20. I've played games on C64, Amiga, ST, 2600, Colecovision, Famicom, Super Famicom, Master System, Playstation, Saturn, NeoGeo, XBox, PS2 and PC. I've played arcade games since before Space Invaders.
And you know what? I've lost interest. Square have killed off Final Fantasy as far as I'm concerned. (I never hated random battles, don't like real time combat.) I don't like FPS or RTS. I liked beat-em-ups, but Tekken 5 and Dead or Alive 3 killed that with their stupidly difficult bosses with their cheap moves. I still like all the old games, the 2D beat-em-ups, shoot-em-ups and puzzles, but...
To quote the theme from 'Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads.'
"Is the only thing to look forward, to the past"
[Does anybody know a good USB Arcade Stick for the Mac? MAME's enough for me]
-
sharp graphics and eye candy mean nothing if the computer isnt up to it.
Thats not really the point though, unless you only consider a good game to only be all eye candy and graphics? Remember a pc game is tweakable from all the gfx options...
Its called gaming, not 'looking at pretty pictures' after all :P
Anyway, hopefully this year will open up to some truly great console games aswell as PC ones... my xbox 360 hasn't been turned on in a while due to lack of proper new releases :(
-
gameplay > graphics.
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
it has the same games as any PC out there, and the cost of a GOOD PC, that will run every game, is in the ballpark of a custom shop guitar.
For a start - No it doesn't.
And secondly - Every household has a computer regardless of whether they play games or not - Are you telling me it's between a computer and a PS3?
And that people prioritise gaming over say - The internet? Word Processing? Photo editting? Movie making? THE BKP FORUM?!
You can either spend thousands on a top spec PC and enjoy cutting edge gaming as it happens, or by a console and enjoy it several months later, and to a lesser degree... for most people its a worthwhile trade off.
for a fraction of the price of a full fledged PC, not to mention it will run without the extensive hassle that you get with the PC.
for gaming, it's the best to buy a console, unless you are prepared to dish out a boat load of money, to make everything look SUPER.
with the PS3 it's like this.. they will start making games that will be tailored to the specs of the PS3.. as opposed to games being made for the PC, that always push the envelope and require a more and more powerful PC, as each new game is released. me, i can live without buying a new computer every 6 to 10 months, to play the newest games.
besides, computers require constant maintenance, unless you only do some internet and word processing with it.
Every 6-10 months? If that was true no top end game would hit the top 10 until 6 months after it was first released.
so, the console gets my vote. and i was a long time PC supporter as far as graphics and performance go, but you got to take in account, at what price you get that. cos if you find a system for 600€, that will perform equally well, than the PS3 (for years to come) then PLEASE, tell me where i can find it.
and there is nother side to this arguement:
As you say, specs mean nothing if the games aren't up to it.
sharp graphics and eye candy mean nothing if the computer isnt up to it.
Ever heard of settings?
Now honestly.
Console fans - I'm honestly clueless here - Targetting the PS3/Xbox generation of games - Have there been ANY particularly great ones?
GTA was good - But I'll be frank. Boring. Fast. At least on the PC version you could mod in the Batmobile... (Aswell as actually having a mouse to aim...)
Halo? No thanks. Every PC shooter is better - Really.
The recent Final Fantasies? Perhaps - But not much of an FF fan so I can't comment here - Haven't played any of them all the way through either.
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
it has the same games as any PC out there, and the cost of a GOOD PC, that will run every game, is in the ballpark of a custom shop guitar.
For a start - No it doesn't.
And secondly - Every household has a computer regardless of whether they play games or not - Are you telling me it's between a computer and a PS3?
And that people prioritise gaming over say - The internet? Word Processing? Photo editting? Movie making? THE BKP FORUM?!
You can either spend thousands on a top spec PC and enjoy cutting edge gaming as it happens, or by a console and enjoy it several months later, and to a lesser degree... for most people its a worthwhile trade off.
for a fraction of the price of a full fledged PC, not to mention it will run without the extensive hassle that you get with the PC.
for gaming, it's the best to buy a console, unless you are prepared to dish out a boat load of money, to make everything look SUPER.
with the PS3 it's like this.. they will start making games that will be tailored to the specs of the PS3.. as opposed to games being made for the PC, that always push the envelope and require a more and more powerful PC, as each new game is released. me, i can live without buying a new computer every 6 to 10 months, to play the newest games.
besides, computers require constant maintenance, unless you only do some internet and word processing with it.
Every 6-10 months? If that was true no top end game would hit the top 10 until 6 months after it was first released.
so, the console gets my vote. and i was a long time PC supporter as far as graphics and performance go, but you got to take in account, at what price you get that. cos if you find a system for 600€, that will perform equally well, than the PS3 (for years to come) then PLEASE, tell me where i can find it.
and there is nother side to this arguement:
As you say, specs mean nothing if the games aren't up to it.
sharp graphics and eye candy mean nothing if the computer isnt up to it.
Ever heard of settings?
Now honestly.
Console fans - I'm honestly clueless here - Targetting the PS3/Xbox generation of games - Have there been ANY particularly great ones?
GTA was good - But I'll be frank. Boring. Fast. At least on the PC version you could mod in the Batmobile... (Aswell as actually having a mouse to aim...)
Halo? No thanks. Every PC shooter is better - Really.
The recent Final Fantasies? Perhaps - But not much of an FF fan so I can't comment here - Haven't played any of them all the way through either.
Metal Gear Solid 4 will kick majopr ass.
And resident evil 4 is far better on the gamecube and ps2 than on the pc.
-
I honestly couldn't give a cr@p how great the PS3 is.
In the end it has awful games, no exclusives and a price tag over the cost of a good guitar.
it has the same games as any PC out there, and the cost of a GOOD PC, that will run every game, is in the ballpark of a custom shop guitar.
For a start - No it doesn't.
And secondly - Every household has a computer regardless of whether they play games or not - Are you telling me it's between a computer and a PS3?
And that people prioritise gaming over say - The internet? Word Processing? Photo editting? Movie making? THE BKP FORUM?!
You can either spend thousands on a top spec PC and enjoy cutting edge gaming as it happens, or by a console and enjoy it several months later, and to a lesser degree... for most people its a worthwhile trade off.
for a fraction of the price of a full fledged PC, not to mention it will run without the extensive hassle that you get with the PC.
for gaming, it's the best to buy a console, unless you are prepared to dish out a boat load of money, to make everything look SUPER.
with the PS3 it's like this.. they will start making games that will be tailored to the specs of the PS3.. as opposed to games being made for the PC, that always push the envelope and require a more and more powerful PC, as each new game is released. me, i can live without buying a new computer every 6 to 10 months, to play the newest games.
besides, computers require constant maintenance, unless you only do some internet and word processing with it.
Every 6-10 months? If that was true no top end game would hit the top 10 until 6 months after it was first released.
so, the console gets my vote. and i was a long time PC supporter as far as graphics and performance go, but you got to take in account, at what price you get that. cos if you find a system for 600€, that will perform equally well, than the PS3 (for years to come) then PLEASE, tell me where i can find it.
and there is nother side to this arguement:
As you say, specs mean nothing if the games aren't up to it.
sharp graphics and eye candy mean nothing if the computer isnt up to it.
Ever heard of settings?
Now honestly.
Console fans - I'm honestly clueless here - Targetting the PS3/Xbox generation of games - Have there been ANY particularly great ones?
GTA was good - But I'll be frank. Boring. Fast. At least on the PC version you could mod in the Batmobile... (Aswell as actually having a mouse to aim...)
Halo? No thanks. Every PC shooter is better - Really.
The recent Final Fantasies? Perhaps - But not much of an FF fan so I can't comment here - Haven't played any of them all the way through either.
Metal Gear Solid 4 will kick majopr ass.
And resident evil 4 is far better on the gamecube and ps2 than on the pc.
Like 2 and 3 "kicked ass"?
And RE4 isn't that great a game on any medium to be frank. It was good - Not great.
-
Heh,
on the original posting as opposed to graphics / gameplay theme it has turned into ;)
Coming from low level programming (would be called kernel hacking these days) & hardware design background it always cheers me up to see shuch discussions.
Oops dissertation alert sorry folks
Clock speeds, bus bandwidth, number of cores or whatever count for nothing if theyre not used properly.
Take a look at, Linux, Windows or Mac OS X they are totally unable to make proper use of dual core procesors. For the most part they simply offload a single task completely to another core (or processor) such as antivirus, wordprocessor or a game, and leave the rest of the operating system running on the other core. Yeah you get a speed increase but it's not double. Getting interprocess communication (bad enough on a single processor) is more than doubly difficult with 2 processors.
The OS coders can't even cope with multiple processors, and having spent several years being called in to optimise game code that isn't running fast enough I can assure you that the vast majority of games coders wont be able to do it either. TBH many of them cant cope with one processor.
Gabe Newell (of Halflife developers Gearbox), sums up much of the PS3 situation where it looks nice until you try to use it. Search for his comments, yes he is opinionated but unfortunitely he knows what he is talking about
On so called (massively) parallel systems your main code is running across several cores (or processors), if your scheduling is just a little off, you will end up with most of the these tasks stalling becasue you are awaiting data from somewhere else). Multiply that across the several DSPs and processing chips on the PS3 and you get a product that if likely to be a victim of it's own complexity. You are already seeing such issues in the current crop of PS3 games
Google for Inmos Transputer to see the lengths you have to go to for parallel processing (and also see how the UK goverment screwed things up).
Yes the PS3 has a huge potential (as does the 360 BTW), however from friends that still work in the games industry the problem is that Sony give you the hardware but you are on your own in tying it all together.
Anyway I'd love a PS 3 (or a 360 or Wii) for my son (and myself) but I'm too skint ATM.
Regarding the PC,:
Consoles are more cost effective on the whole. But then on a PC (or Mac) you don't actually need antialising & filtering, as when I'm playing games I'm concentrating on not getting killed I don't care worry if theres a texture in the middle distance isn't perfect ;)
GFX cards are expensive as theyre doing a lot of parallel processing, at very high speeds. A while back I wrote some code for breaking some encryption using the GFX card rather than the normal PC processor. Using my cheap (120 quid) Geforce 4 card was about 10 times faster than my then employers fastest server (4 x 3Gig xenons).
Anyway I'm back to breaking Spectrum turbo loaders on a Spectrum emulator now (without using any of the emulators advanced features), becasue this (work) laptop is too slow for anything else (and I'm all maimed out)
Rob...
-
And RE4 isn't that great a game on any medium to be frank. It was good - Not great.
that game is awesome.
and when it comes to halo.... yes... im sure every PC shooter is better...
but i dont think console games are even trying to be 'better' than any PC games... its a different concept altogether..
no matter how good a PC shooter is, you cant sit there playing it on a sofa with 3 mates, whilst exchanging insults with people from around the world on Xbox Live...
-
Atari rules.
The end. :D
-
Console fans - I'm honestly clueless here - Targetting the PS3/Xbox generation of games - Have there been ANY particularly great ones?
Well... I liked Final Fantasy up to about 8. Chrono Trigger was fun. NeoGeo/Saturn cover all the 2D Beat-em-ups and shoot-em-ups you could want.
GTA was good - But I'll be frank. Boring. Fast. At least on the PC version you could mod in the Batmobile... (Aswell as actually having a mouse to aim...)
Never got into GTA, never played it for that matter...
Halo? No thanks. Every PC shooter is better - Really.
Played Wolfenstein and Doom, then lost interest...
The recent Final Fantasies? Perhaps - But not much of an FF fan so I can't comment here - Haven't played any of them all the way through either.
Too much Real Time stuff in 12 and 13 promises to be even more so...
-
Console fans - I'm honestly clueless here - Targetting the PS3/Xbox generation of games - Have there been ANY particularly great ones?
Well... I liked Final Fantasy up to about 8. Chrono Trigger was fun. NeoGeo/Saturn cover all the 2D Beat-em-ups and shoot-em-ups you could want.
GTA was good - But I'll be frank. Boring. Fast. At least on the PC version you could mod in the Batmobile... (Aswell as actually having a mouse to aim...)
Never got into GTA, never played it for that matter...
Halo? No thanks. Every PC shooter is better - Really.
Played Wolfenstein and Doom, then lost interest...
The recent Final Fantasies? Perhaps - But not much of an FF fan so I can't comment here - Haven't played any of them all the way through either.
Too much Real Time stuff in 12 and 13 promises to be even more so...
it isnt really real time
it just integrates rather than switching toa battle field. the only thing that is different really is the fact you can run around. it is still all time based.
And WOW someone other than me who likes the sega saturn
and to noodle
MGS3 was amazing.
-
FF12 is awesome and it's exclusive to PS2. FF13 will be exclusive to PS3. If there was a reason for me to buy PS3 that will be it :D
Next console would probably be wii though I really wanna play the new Zelda. the boxing on the wii sport is supposed to be a lot of primitive fun as well.
-
too much to quote
my point is, you get no hassle with finding the right settings at which the game will run smoothly and still look great on the PC. because no matter how good the gameplay is, if the game looks like shite, noone will play it. and if i want the most out of the game, i need a monster computer.
sure, they will run decently on a medium system, but what about the next generation of games? i can play HL2 on 1600x1200 on my laptop without a problem.. i try that with fear, my computer cr@ps its guts. i cant even play NWN2 on the computer cos of the inferior specs. every time something new comes out, you got to upgrade. i'm sorry but I won't play that game anymore. cos of that i havent been following new releases at all, cos i dont want to wonder if the game will run on my computer. with a console you're at least sure it will run.
-
too much to quote
my point is, you get no hassle with finding the right settings at which the game will run smoothly and still look great on the PC. because no matter how good the gameplay is, if the game looks like shitee, noone will play it. and if i want the most out of the game, i need a monster computer.
sure, they will run decently on a medium system, but what about the next generation of games? i can play HL2 on 1600x1200 on my laptop without a problem.. i try that with fear, my computer cr@ps its guts. i cant even play NWN2 on the computer cos of the inferior specs. every time something new comes out, you got to upgrade. i'm sorry but I won't play that game anymore. cos of that i havent been following new releases at all, cos i dont want to wonder if the game will run on my computer. with a console you're at least sure it will run.
I built my computer in christmas 05, and I still play C&C3, Stalker, etc on full graphics - So honestly I don't see your point.
And surely the fact that consoles don't have upgrading hardware is a weakness?
PS3 games will reach a peak this time next year and will look the same for the following 5 years untill they release the next one.
In the end money is totally irrelevent, since you can spend however much or however little in gaming as you want. Nobody's forcing you to upgrade your computer, infact the opposite, game designers are making it so their games can be played on low spec computers - Why? So more people can buy them.
Anyway - If you do feel you're forced to buy the latest hardware - You can buy an X1950 PRO for under £100 currently - Which is a slightly lower spec version of the 2nd best chipset currently on the market - While being able to get an 8800 for £170.
-
you should all bury yourselves in your 30th century technology and go back to PS1... Metal Gear Solid 1!!!!! great game, with an even better soundtrack :twisted: has a cool storyline
-
argue all you want, it makes no difference.
i'll buy a PS3 now and play games, that will still look great 3 years from now, while you'll have to buy a new computer, to play the next generation of games.
have you seen new games that are run on low spec computers? they look like they've been made in '98.
besides.. the fact that you dont have to hassle around with drivers, this or that incompatibility, too low graphics card specs or whatever (not to mention games crashing without any reason) is good enough for me.
-
you should all bury yourselves in your 30th century technology and go back to PS1... Metal Gear Solid 1!!!!! great game, with an even better soundtrack :twisted: has a cool storyline
true metal gear solid was amazing
twin snakes on GC made it better though
-
argue all you want, it makes no difference.
i'll buy a PS3 now and play games, that will still look great 3 years from now, while you'll have to buy a new computer, to play the next generation of games.
have you seen new games that are run on low spec computers? they look like they've been made in '98.
besides.. the fact that you dont have to hassle around with drivers, this or that incompatibility, too low graphics card specs or whatever (not to mention games crashing without any reason) is good enough for me.
I'll keep my current PC which I use everyday for EVERYTHING, I'll play today's games at graphics as good as PS3, and then in a few years I'll upgrade and play games that are much better graphics than PS3.
And I won't have problems with drivers cos I know wtf I'm doing.
And my PC which never crashes will live on. While the PS3 which crashes repeatedly since release will continue to do so.
-
whatever makes you sleep at night ...
-
you should all bury yourselves in your 30th century technology and go back to PS1... Metal Gear Solid 1!!!!! great game, with an even better soundtrack :twisted: has a cool storyline
true metal gear solid was amazing
twin snakes on GC made it better though
very true. MGS was the best game ever. The gamecube one was stunning, tbh Konami should remake them all and bring them out all with Next Gen or graphics. That would make my life complete. all the original Metal Gears in good graphics, great sound etc etc..
We can always dream....
On the PC thing. My pc is only a 1.8ghz sempron with a 6600GT and 1gig of Ram... I can run the newest Battlefield on Full spec at 1600x1200 no problem. Although i will upgrade the processor soon
-
Haha so funny how a games console dispute can get out of hand so quickly :lol:
-
argue all you want, it makes no difference.
i'll buy a PS3 now and play games, that will still look great 3 years from now, while you'll have to buy a new computer, to play the next generation of games.
have you seen new games that are run on low spec computers? they look like they've been made in '98.
besides.. the fact that you dont have to hassle around with drivers, this or that incompatibility, too low graphics card specs or whatever (not to mention games crashing without any reason) is good enough for me.
I'll keep my current PC which I use everyday for EVERYTHING, I'll play today's games at graphics as good as PS3, and then in a few years I'll upgrade and play games that are much better graphics than PS3.
And I won't have problems with drivers cos I know wtf I'm doing.
And my PC which never crashes will live on. While the PS3 which crashes repeatedly since release will continue to do so.
Console vs. PC gaming is like a gamers Strat vs. LP. There isn't really a better one.
I get both points - by the time the PS2 came to be replaced the specs were miles behind an average PC, and the same will be true with the PS3.
But where can you buy a PC with equal specs to an Xbox 360 for £300?
Horses for courses and all that, the end of the matter is: You are never going to resolve this debate through an online forum or through any other medium, ever.
-
I'm not that clued up on most of what's been posted but my desktop PC which i bought in 04 still runs games that are new, its P4 3.2ghz, 1G ram and a 256 graphics card, 400G HD. Most of the ads for new pcs don't seem to out do it,but then again whats a duo core cpu? :?
-
Just what it says on the tin
theres two cores on the chip, so in theory you can get twice the performance.
That's not worked, generally, though some stuff works better than others.
-
I'm seriously considering waiting for the XBox 360 Elite to come out so that I can get Gears of war & the forth coming Lost odyessy (looking likely to be the best RPG since final fantasy 7), but also alowing for me to run a HDMI cable from it & hooking up a HD-DVD player so that I can keep playing for quite a few years & get the best graphics out of a dvd player as well
-
I can't help but wonder if all this fancy graphics isn't essentially the same as Tim firing all his staff and selling his workshop to fund diamond coated pickup covers, which don't actually have pickups in anymore...
-
I can't help but wonder if all this fancy graphics isn't essentially the same as Tim firing all his staff and selling his workshop to fund diamond coated pickup covers, which don't actually have pickups in anymore...
:)
BTW rumour is the PS4 is to be launched in 2 years, with add on cards to be available for the PS3 around the same time.
Oh yeah some ducal core cr@p is in my overly long posting previously.
In windows vista, they will probably use one core to look after the DRM, as sony will use a core or 2 to do the same thing for vidio on demand via the PS3
IE they will use your horse power to do something you don't even want !
Rob...
-
Regards Kilby's parallel processing comments, good programmers who can actually do parallel processing are pretty thin on the ground as you actually have to be able to think, rather than just having sat a bunch of exams in college :). True concurrent programming requires the ability to hold many abstract situations in your head at once which is a relatively rare skill.
Regards the PS3, this works both for and against the console. All PS consoles have supported some form of parallelism, which makes them hard to program for, but also means that once you get a team together who can actually do it the results are amazing.
I personally believe Sony does this on purpose. The tricky architecture results in a natural quality improvement over time as the software houses start to get to grips with the system. For example, about 2 years into the PS1's life, sony released a 'tuning' pack that let the games developers see where they could improve the performance of their games regards the parallel set up. This almost immediately led to a jump in quality on the same hardware - no new graphics cards required or extra RAM; but you still get better games. The best example of this is say a comparison between Ridge Racer, a release title on the PS1, and perhaps (in terms of software coding) the greatest game of all time - Gran Turismo 1 which is frankly amazing given the hardware it was running on. I believe they even used part of the sound card to do the physics modeling :)
Anyway, my point is this:
A console that is simple to program for gives you instant quality, but has no where to go over time as the coders master it almost straight away.
A nasty and subtle beast like the PS3 gives you good quality to start with, and as the coders get the hang of it (either on their own or through carefully timed help from the manufacturer) game quality keeps improving through the lifespan of the console, therefore continually drawing people back to it.
[/list:u]
The PS3 therefore has nowhere to go but up!
My interest is purely technical though, obviously the playability of the games themselves also has a factor :)
-
^ That post deserves a gold star! :idea:
-
in a related note, and good news for 360 owners:
The Forza Motorsport 2 demo hits TONIGHT on xbox live.
http://forzamotorsport.net/default.htm
Gran Tourismo? Pfft :P
-
HAHA PS4 in 2 years, that's a good one! When Sony say 2 years they usually mean about 10!
-
HAHA PS4 in 2 years, that's a good one! When Sony say 2 years they usually mean about 10!
i used to own a ps4 ages ago and a ps7.....
they were jacksons like.
-
in a related note, and good news for 360 owners:
The Forza Motorsport 2 demo hits TONIGHT on xbox live.
http://forzamotorsport.net/default.htm
Gran Tourismo? Pfft :P
+1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i dont see the fuss about gran turismo... about 962356 years ago when it was reasonably fresh and pretty much the only decent racing game, i thought it was pretty cool.... but my god.... forza actually just thrashes it entirely in my opinion.
damn i want a 360 now.... Oblivion, Gears of War, Dead Rising, Forza 2, Saints Row.... all great games that i need so baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad!!!
-
heh, i'm download the Forza 2 demo now :P
Gears of War is !!!!!! good
-
i dont see the fuss about gran turismo... about 962356 years ago when it was reasonably fresh and pretty much the only decent racing game, i thought it was pretty cool.... but my god.... forza actually just thrashes it entirely in my opinion.
GT has undoubtedly since been surpassed in terms of gaming experience, however at the time it represented a turning point for consoles in terms of both technological accomplishment and gaming experience.
IMHO, Gran Turismo is up there with Doom in this respect - done far better since but also a game that changed everything that came after it.
Forza is a superb title, but it owes a lot to GT, in the same way that <insert current best FPS> owes a lot to Doom.