Hahahahaha @ PS3 news

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 09 Sep 2006, 18:58

I see it from this angle: for the price of a PS3, without even a game to play on it, I can have:

Wii
three extra controllers
Metroid Prime 3 (best action-adventure game, ever)
LoZ Twilight Princess (best action-adventure game, ever)
Super Mario Galaxy (best action-adventure game, ever)
Sonic (best action-adventure game, ever)
Super Smash Bros Brawl (best fighting game, ever)
a dozen NES, Sega, SNES, N64 games
and a down-payment on a freaking house.

Snipawolf · Post by **Snipawolf** » 09 Sep 2006, 18:59

Okay then.. But I still don't wanna buy a 60-80$ game

Meh, the only game worth 60$ I ever have seen was Oblivion..

Anyhow, I don't pay attention to names, So I don't know who Hirai is..

Edit: Damnit Caydr, don't post while I am.. lol
Edit2: Don't we get this for free? LoZ Twilight Princess

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » 09 Sep 2006, 19:02

Kaz Hirai is one of the higher ups in the Sony hierarchy, not sure what role exactly he has. He said "Well, we're not going to make games cost 100$ when the PS3 comes out" and many took that as "they'll cost 100$ later".

Games are at an optimum price point (largest sales * profit per unit) or even above that. I don't think making games more expensive is going to help bring in more profit. I also don't think Sony's gamble (expensive console despite taking a big loss per unit) is going to pay off, they're throwing a lot of money at a bet that doesn't pay well. Nintendo threw much less money at the Wii and it could pay off much more than Sony's gamble. Let's see if Sony will confirm the "noone lasts more than two generations at the top" rule of the home console market or if they'll go down in history as the biggest proof that we really are sheeple.

Snipawolf · Post by **Snipawolf** » 09 Sep 2006, 19:15

Heheheh, Sony is dying.. The Wii is gunna cost less than my cube cost

Honestly, I don't care for real life graphics.. Who thinks Sony also wasted money getting a PPU?
*Raises hand*

Edit:

Let's see if Sony will confirm the "noone lasts more than two generations at the top" rule

What? Sony was on top with PS2, hahah, yeah right..

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » 09 Sep 2006, 22:55

Perhaps you live in some alternate reality but in this world the PS2 sold more and had more games than its competitors combined (excluding handhelds, those are a different market). To the end user that means he can buy a PS2 and get like 90% of the games out there while the other consoles offer only a fraction of that. The Xbox doesn't even compete and my GC has been gathering a lot of dust lately since the last compelling game came out for that some time last year and there aren't the full bargain bins with dozens of games I've never played like there are for the PS2.

Snipawolf · Post by **Snipawolf** » 09 Sep 2006, 22:59

Hope game developers understand Wii is the way to go.

And I do live in a different reality..

0FF-Topic (In a way) I hate sports games with a passion...

Drone_Fragger · Post by **Drone_Fragger** » 09 Sep 2006, 23:29

35├é┬ú is the most you can honestly expect people to pay for a game. Any higher and they don't buy it.

Thats why Xbox 360 sucks. 50├é┬ú for a game.

j5mello · Post by **j5mello** » 10 Sep 2006, 00:37

do u just not buy computer games till they are a year old? cause most new computer games (assuming they aren't bargain basement crap) are atleast $40-50 (and don't give me that currency conversion bullmilk)

Aun · Post by **Aun** » 10 Sep 2006, 00:48

The RRP of most games in the UK is ├é┬ú40, good places will knock that down to ├é┬ú30-35...

$55.96-65.29 at the current exchange rate. I just order most games from lik-sang, getting them at least ├é┬ú5 cheaper and a lot earlier...

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 10 Sep 2006, 01:01

you can get games very cheap online if you get them in bulk too, at least a fiver off

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » 10 Sep 2006, 09:22

This sounds pretty real to me. Especially that "We won't approve your PS2 game unless you announce something for the PS3 at E3!" sounds a LOT like the NES/SNES era Nintendo.

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 10 Sep 2006, 10:13

Remember though, the Nintendo policy then was enacted to control quality and avoid the pitfalls of Atari. At this point we've proven that quality doesn't matter to the average player, so Sony can't fall back on that concept.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 10 Sep 2006, 11:24

I hope sony does well soully because they included the PPU. The PPU is something that violently increases physics performance in games and makes completely astonishing things possible. Volumetric flamethrowers are a piece of cake, thousands of physics objects on screen at once, no problem, fluid dynamics effortless. The PPU is a technology that NEEDS gamers support to get it moving. I could care less about sony's blue ray, wireless controllers, or the other crap they advertise on the PS3, the PPU is something that I want to see be a revolution in gaming simply because of what it's capable of. I see it as a failing for 360 and wii to not support the PPU design team, that shows to me a desire to profit at the expense of the industry, I don't find it at all impressive.

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » 10 Sep 2006, 11:40

SwiftSpear wrote:I hope sony does well soully because they included the PPU. The PPU is something that violently increases physics performance in games and makes completely astonishing things possible. Volumetric flamethrowers are a piece of cake, thousands of physics objects on screen at once, no problem, fluid dynamics effortless. The PPU is a technology that NEEDS gamers support to get it moving. I could care less about sony's blue ray, wireless controllers, or the other crap they advertise on the PS3, the PPU is something that I want to see be a revolution in gaming simply because of what it's capable of. I see it as a failing for 360 and wii to not support the PPU design team, that shows to me a desire to profit at the expense of the industry, I don't find it at all impressive.

It doesn't have a PPU in the physics processing sense, the general-purpose core of the Cell is known as PPU or PPE (Power Processor Unit or PowerPC Embedded). While Agaeia claims their PPU does fluid dynamics I didn't see any of that in their demo videos, only particle (i.e. discrete object) physics.

Mugslugs · Post by **Mugslugs** » 10 Sep 2006, 13:18

there is no way that sony included a ppu in the ps3 the numbers just don't add up what they did was licence ageias physics sdk and just has the physics stuff running on cell think about it a 78xx card is like ├é┬ú180 a cell is rumoured to be about the same a PPU is ├é┬ú210 the bluray drives are like xxx to produce
sony would be far beyond the $12 billion they are to spend on the ps3.

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » 10 Sep 2006, 14:09

The physics SDK is Havok. AFAIK the Wii includes some physics system as well (not sure if it's completely software or partially hardware accelerated).

Mugslugs · Post by **Mugslugs** » 10 Sep 2006, 16:18

ps3 has both sdks sublicenced actually and the wii's physic thing is on the hollywood chip its not a gfx chip for the last time it does the motion sensing etc as well and is specialiesed to do so.

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 11 Sep 2006, 04:54

Recent article I read, probably at TH or a similar benchmarking site, found that a physics processing unit only increases the performance of things like cloth simulation. Yes, it's dramatic, but on the other hand, ATI claims you can buy a X1600 or a similar-pricepoint next-gen card and use it as a PPU eventually, and come of with better performance.

Take it with a grain of salt naturally. But it seems like the more I hear about these physics cards, the less impressed I am. Essentially all they do is take a load off the CPU, but virtually anything with a few hundred million transistors, like any modern graphics chip (even a cheap one), can do the same job.

Specialization is all well and good, but if you can get just a generic graphics card and have poor efficiency but a lower price point, where's your money going?

SinbadEV · Post by **SinbadEV** » 11 Sep 2006, 05:20

<rambling>
basically what a GPU is is a processor that is specifically designed for the types of things you need to calculate in modern game.. while a PPU does the same thing with a different group of things... so the theory is that a CPU with a math co-proccessor is good, a CPU with a math coprocessotr and a GPU is better, and a CPU with a math coprocessor and a GPU AND a PPU is super better... and at a basic level, if the PPU really is that much better at the kinds of calculations it does, and a program (game most likely) does a lot of that kind of calculation, then it's going to improve performance on that aspect of gamepaly... and basically if I remember correctly what it does is calculate things like real-life collision detection, thermal dinamics, fluid dynamics etc... so for games going for realism it will help... and unless you can make a GPU as good at these physics calculation as the PPU without loseing other funtionality, specialization is good...
</rambling>

basically, PS3 will likely be pretty awsome but with a price tag that high I'd rather buy a new video card, processor, physics card and some more ram... or screw it all and get a wii.

1v0ry_k1ng · Post by **1v0ry_k1ng** » 11 Sep 2006, 13:40

599 american dollars.599 american dollars. hit GIANT ENEMY CRAB, underside for massive damage. 599 american dollars. anyone remember the game Ridge racers? Riiiiiiiiiiidge-RAAACERS.599 american dollars.

after a press conference like that the sony is going to be pushed over by a hulking russian who will then stamp on its neck and use it as firewood. its only just. Teach them to overshadow the N64.

Spring RTS Engine

Hahahahaha @ PS3 news