So.....It hasnt been long since the X-Box 360 has been released. Anyone have any comments on it? For me, I think that Sony and Nintedo should have developed there new consoles earlier so they could release it at the same time as the X-Box 360 but since they didnt! I think X-Box 360 will dominate the gaming industry cause by the time PS3 and Nintedo Rev come out it'll be too late! As for getting it...I can't afford one and there arent really any games I want for it....
Yah, I basically made this topic because I'm extremly bored and tired so what are your thoughts on the X-Box 360? Getting it?
Oh and one more thing, If ya put a X-Box game into the X-Box 360 will the graphics look better?^.o.....Yah Ill stop now...heh..
Edit: Actually....Maybe PS3 can catch up..But Nintedo eh...
Yah, I basically made this topic because I'm extremly bored and tired so what are your thoughts on the X-Box 360? Getting it?
Oh and one more thing, If ya put a X-Box game into the X-Box 360 will the graphics look better?^.o.....Yah Ill stop now...heh..
Edit: Actually....Maybe PS3 can catch up..But Nintedo eh...
Strayato said:I agree. The only possible appeal Nintendo has on gamers is the Old-Skool playability. Other than that Nintendo has been out of the competitive market since the N64... really.
PS3 has the ability to kick X-Box 360's ass. It's so wrong when people compare the PS2 to the X-Box. The PS2 was released much time prior. Not only that but the size of the system, especially in regards to the slimline pstwos, there's really no comparison at all.
I feel that if anyone of the consoles is to compete against the X-Box 360, it's going to be the PS3 because not only is it comparable (compare-able), but sony has a few cutting edges to their system such as the pioneered proprietary media format: blu-ray (bigger games), as well as many types of connections (smart card, etc), seemless reverse-compadibility (without additional cost), as well as dual (independant) composites, which could be later used so each player has his/her own screen while playing multiplayer on the same console.
First up, the brains of the machines.
Much has been said on the difference between the two machines' noggins, some biased towards the Microsoft and others towards Sony. The CPU in the latter has more going for it in terms of "core" hardware but the former's cores - while fewer - are more powerful. According to game designer Nick Harper,
The cores really place the power in the hands of developers. The Xbox 360 has 3 running at 3.2GHz each, the PS3 has seven apparently. So theoretically the PS3 is faster, much faster, which means it can do a lot more complex things. These days complex things refer to physics calculations and graphics operations. But it's all about how to use them as the power can only be exploited by using the cores together. It's a bit like having several complex puzzles to solve with several clever people available. If you give each person one puzzle will they solve it quicker than if you give all the people one puzzle at a time? The better developers will make their code efficient, meaning theoretically better games.
The PS3 will be more complex to develop for, which might mean that the first wave of games will be better on the 360. Having said that, the PS3 line up looks a lot more impressive right now. We'll have to wait and see what Greg plays with on the floor at E3.
In terms of the active memory on access, the PS3 is two times as powerful as the PS2 and the Xbox 360 is twice that.
Nick says,
The reason memory speed is an issue is purely for framerate. If you have a massive polygonal monster (err literally) to display that's a lot of vertices to process, on top of texture mapping, normal mapping, light mapping, per pixel shading etc etc yawn. And you're trying to squeeze all that data down a pipe to be processed and spat out at the other end. The faster your memory the more you can squeeze down the pipe at once, meaning the more data you can process. So memory and processor speed are very connected.
Now for those teraflops. The more there are, the faster the machine can do sums. In more high-tech speak, gamesindustry.biz says:
a measurement of how many of the floating point operations crucial to the graphics and physics in modern games can be processed per second
Sony wins in tech-talk on this crucial ground, with two times the terraflopping of the Xbox 360. Says Nick,
Expect to see this utilised for physics and world realism. The actual core games probably won't change that much because we're still using the same input devices - analogue stick joypads. But certainly expect to see more going on. Some of it will be irrelevant to a game but pretty - trees swaying, individual leaves being affected by wind and so on; some of it will be much more relevant - armies of bad guys swarming toward you, massive explosions, things collapsing with true physics, etc.
With all the different processors added up, PS3 can perform twice as many raw calculations per second. In practise though, the different chips will need to wait for each other to catch up, so it will never run at full tech speed.
Next, the graphics.
High-Definition, High-Definition, High-Definition. It's all about HD. Both companies are "totally stoked" about the HDTV revolution expected to take the US by storm (propelled by the media, of course), which should saturate the market with screens twice as detailed as current widescreen products. Of course, because both Sony and Microsoft purport to be releasing media centres, this means there'll be plenty of HD for non-gaming applications. For interactive software, however, the PS3's announcement suggests that the graphics in the machine are twice the current market leader on PCs.
PS3 will be able to output a higher-resolution (i.e., more high definition) signal, but there are very few TVs in existence that can use this highest resolution. In a few years though, who knows? Games will also have to be made in widescreen compatible. In the meantime, I'm pleased that both companies will still support my old televisual clunker.
Sony's machine is unique in that it offers two HD outputs, for the ultimate in multitasking. Game on one, FAQ via the Ethernet connection on the other. They don't want us to move ever again, do they? Can I have fries with that?
Third, memory.
There is far far far more memory in both of these machines than most people will be able to fill, but that's not stopping either Sony or Microsoft from calculating for future profits from upgrade sales on removable hard drives. Microsoft's will probably ship with 20GB - a behemoth amount (think 5,000 songs on an iPod). PS3 purchasers will have to buy their hard drive at the pay point. Both machines support memory cards. Microsoft's will be 8 times larger than PS2's current 8 MB card, but Sony's will support their SD memory sticks. More memory will come from the USB ports - a whopping six on Sony's machine and three on the Xbox 360. That means I'll be able to save my draft PhD thesis on my new console, as well as on computers strewn throughout the UK and USA. Egad, the possibilities. More normal folk will be able to view files and listen to tunes that they'll keep on these removable memory devices.
Fourth, music.
The days of stereo are over; let's move on to surround sound. As with the previous iterations of the consoles, both the 360 and PS3 will feature Dolby 5.1.
Fifth, controllers.
For some reason, Sony will support the odd number of seven controllers on its PS3. A theory going around my house is that they suddenly realised they had more Bluetooth-width than expected and bumped up the number of possible controllers to seven. An alternative view is that they oversubscribed with eight and are now having to make the best of the limitations. Whichever, the PS3 supports more players in the same room than the Xbox 360 which only offers four. Really, though, with internet access on both machines and the new HDTV taking up most of the space in the living room why have so many friends in person; just play with them online.
Sixth, online.
Both machines will release with out-of-the-box Ethernet capabilities. Both will be WiFi enabled (but hopefully will be better than my current provider whose "wireless" adaptor is attached to my laptop with a very long wire and whose service is infuriatingly sporadic) and both hope to corner the market on downloadable content. Internet access, music downloads, movie downloads, video and text chat (with the later-released video cameras): this is the showdown space for the non-gamers, and this is where Microsoft kicks butt. For gamers, Microsoft is also in the lead with their profiling service which should offer a useful service to folks who want to play hard-core online titles, meander through the Final Fantasy MMOG or just play drafts.
Microsoft simply has more experience with the online medium, so it's expected that their implementation of Live will be better. From what I've heard on the inside, it's definitely easier to design for.
Finally, release dates.
The Xbox 360 will be released everywhere by the end of the year, and the PS3 will be out (for sure in Japan) in Spring 2006. Just enough time to take the wind out of Microsoft's sails.
The pretty pictures on display at the Sony launch may have wowed some of the gathered, but as others have already commented earlier on this blog, Sony has a habit of showcasing amazing video clips at their launches and the gameplay in the actual products can leave much to be desired. Unfortunately there's not one chunk of hardware that can make gameplay better or worse; it's up to the designers to craft the interactive experience in a suitable, engaging and balanced way.
Although graphics will improve with every generation, these new consoles appear to be pushing processing power beyond the point where it places limits on gameplay. Good games for the next generation will depend purely on the imagination of their creators rather than the raw power of the consoles, while uninspiring games will continue to be disguised by ever prettier visuals.
Much has been said on the difference between the two machines' noggins, some biased towards the Microsoft and others towards Sony. The CPU in the latter has more going for it in terms of "core" hardware but the former's cores - while fewer - are more powerful. According to game designer Nick Harper,
The cores really place the power in the hands of developers. The Xbox 360 has 3 running at 3.2GHz each, the PS3 has seven apparently. So theoretically the PS3 is faster, much faster, which means it can do a lot more complex things. These days complex things refer to physics calculations and graphics operations. But it's all about how to use them as the power can only be exploited by using the cores together. It's a bit like having several complex puzzles to solve with several clever people available. If you give each person one puzzle will they solve it quicker than if you give all the people one puzzle at a time? The better developers will make their code efficient, meaning theoretically better games.
The PS3 will be more complex to develop for, which might mean that the first wave of games will be better on the 360. Having said that, the PS3 line up looks a lot more impressive right now. We'll have to wait and see what Greg plays with on the floor at E3.
In terms of the active memory on access, the PS3 is two times as powerful as the PS2 and the Xbox 360 is twice that.
Nick says,
The reason memory speed is an issue is purely for framerate. If you have a massive polygonal monster (err literally) to display that's a lot of vertices to process, on top of texture mapping, normal mapping, light mapping, per pixel shading etc etc yawn. And you're trying to squeeze all that data down a pipe to be processed and spat out at the other end. The faster your memory the more you can squeeze down the pipe at once, meaning the more data you can process. So memory and processor speed are very connected.
Now for those teraflops. The more there are, the faster the machine can do sums. In more high-tech speak, gamesindustry.biz says:
a measurement of how many of the floating point operations crucial to the graphics and physics in modern games can be processed per second
Sony wins in tech-talk on this crucial ground, with two times the terraflopping of the Xbox 360. Says Nick,
Expect to see this utilised for physics and world realism. The actual core games probably won't change that much because we're still using the same input devices - analogue stick joypads. But certainly expect to see more going on. Some of it will be irrelevant to a game but pretty - trees swaying, individual leaves being affected by wind and so on; some of it will be much more relevant - armies of bad guys swarming toward you, massive explosions, things collapsing with true physics, etc.
With all the different processors added up, PS3 can perform twice as many raw calculations per second. In practise though, the different chips will need to wait for each other to catch up, so it will never run at full tech speed.
Next, the graphics.
High-Definition, High-Definition, High-Definition. It's all about HD. Both companies are "totally stoked" about the HDTV revolution expected to take the US by storm (propelled by the media, of course), which should saturate the market with screens twice as detailed as current widescreen products. Of course, because both Sony and Microsoft purport to be releasing media centres, this means there'll be plenty of HD for non-gaming applications. For interactive software, however, the PS3's announcement suggests that the graphics in the machine are twice the current market leader on PCs.
PS3 will be able to output a higher-resolution (i.e., more high definition) signal, but there are very few TVs in existence that can use this highest resolution. In a few years though, who knows? Games will also have to be made in widescreen compatible. In the meantime, I'm pleased that both companies will still support my old televisual clunker.
Sony's machine is unique in that it offers two HD outputs, for the ultimate in multitasking. Game on one, FAQ via the Ethernet connection on the other. They don't want us to move ever again, do they? Can I have fries with that?
Third, memory.
There is far far far more memory in both of these machines than most people will be able to fill, but that's not stopping either Sony or Microsoft from calculating for future profits from upgrade sales on removable hard drives. Microsoft's will probably ship with 20GB - a behemoth amount (think 5,000 songs on an iPod). PS3 purchasers will have to buy their hard drive at the pay point. Both machines support memory cards. Microsoft's will be 8 times larger than PS2's current 8 MB card, but Sony's will support their SD memory sticks. More memory will come from the USB ports - a whopping six on Sony's machine and three on the Xbox 360. That means I'll be able to save my draft PhD thesis on my new console, as well as on computers strewn throughout the UK and USA. Egad, the possibilities. More normal folk will be able to view files and listen to tunes that they'll keep on these removable memory devices.
Fourth, music.
The days of stereo are over; let's move on to surround sound. As with the previous iterations of the consoles, both the 360 and PS3 will feature Dolby 5.1.
Fifth, controllers.
For some reason, Sony will support the odd number of seven controllers on its PS3. A theory going around my house is that they suddenly realised they had more Bluetooth-width than expected and bumped up the number of possible controllers to seven. An alternative view is that they oversubscribed with eight and are now having to make the best of the limitations. Whichever, the PS3 supports more players in the same room than the Xbox 360 which only offers four. Really, though, with internet access on both machines and the new HDTV taking up most of the space in the living room why have so many friends in person; just play with them online.
Sixth, online.
Both machines will release with out-of-the-box Ethernet capabilities. Both will be WiFi enabled (but hopefully will be better than my current provider whose "wireless" adaptor is attached to my laptop with a very long wire and whose service is infuriatingly sporadic) and both hope to corner the market on downloadable content. Internet access, music downloads, movie downloads, video and text chat (with the later-released video cameras): this is the showdown space for the non-gamers, and this is where Microsoft kicks butt. For gamers, Microsoft is also in the lead with their profiling service which should offer a useful service to folks who want to play hard-core online titles, meander through the Final Fantasy MMOG or just play drafts.
Microsoft simply has more experience with the online medium, so it's expected that their implementation of Live will be better. From what I've heard on the inside, it's definitely easier to design for.
Finally, release dates.
The Xbox 360 will be released everywhere by the end of the year, and the PS3 will be out (for sure in Japan) in Spring 2006. Just enough time to take the wind out of Microsoft's sails.
The pretty pictures on display at the Sony launch may have wowed some of the gathered, but as others have already commented earlier on this blog, Sony has a habit of showcasing amazing video clips at their launches and the gameplay in the actual products can leave much to be desired. Unfortunately there's not one chunk of hardware that can make gameplay better or worse; it's up to the designers to craft the interactive experience in a suitable, engaging and balanced way.
Although graphics will improve with every generation, these new consoles appear to be pushing processing power beyond the point where it places limits on gameplay. Good games for the next generation will depend purely on the imagination of their creators rather than the raw power of the consoles, while uninspiring games will continue to be disguised by ever prettier visuals.
Only a dead fish goes with the flow
<a href="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/register.php?commander=HamsterLord"> <img src="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/badge.php?user=HamsterLord" width="440" height="100" border="0"> </a>
<a href="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/register.php?commander=HamsterLord"> <img src="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/badge.php?user=HamsterLord" width="440" height="100" border="0"> </a>
Whoa!? I didnt know PS3 was going to use Blue-Ray disk, does that mean no more multiple CD's? Lost one of my disk for FFVII
On another note I saw a X-Box 360 up close and WOW is the power supply huge...
but graphics were really nice...
On another note I saw a X-Box 360 up close and WOW is the power supply huge...
but graphics were really nice...
HEY, dont count the nintendo out, the GC was an excellent system just it was marked as "kiddie", and the zelda game for it didnt help take away that title. If it wasnt for damned developers backstabbing on their "only for gamecube" logo's GC would be a must have. For example, Tales of Symphonia, and Resident evil 4 were both gamecube exclusive UNTIL Konami and Capcom decided to port them to the PS2, with more features. Plus gamecube is cheaper.
Now, for the new systems, Only reason i'd really buy XBOX 360 is for Perfect Dark Zero, BUT i'm hoping, that it will someday come out for the PC, I never even liked halo that much so forget it for that. And remeber Nintendo hasnt showed off that much on the revolution, of course this is what kinda did sega down under, but if Nintendo can get online going nicely (Mario kart ds online ftw) it will kick ass, why? Super smash bro's, metroid prime, Mario Kart, and so fourth.
Now, for the new systems, Only reason i'd really buy XBOX 360 is for Perfect Dark Zero, BUT i'm hoping, that it will someday come out for the PC, I never even liked halo that much so forget it for that. And remeber Nintendo hasnt showed off that much on the revolution, of course this is what kinda did sega down under, but if Nintendo can get online going nicely (Mario kart ds online ftw) it will kick ass, why? Super smash bro's, metroid prime, Mario Kart, and so fourth.
iRO Chaos
Karusho - Future Rogue /omai
Karusho - Future Rogue /omai
Well i do admit, Nintedo Revolution's new controller is really impressive, wouldnt mind playing some Zelda or Resident Evil on it add a bit more excitment and if they made it online with those controllers that would be even more crazy! But I still think Nintendo eh...heh...
New Controller for those who havent seen it yet
New Controller for those who havent seen it yet
Strayato said:Blu-Ray discs hold 27 single-layer, 54 dual-layer. They are the same size of the DVD, very similar, however as the name suggests it's a blue-laser (which burns groves much smaller than standard, but is also the hardest color to produce).
They named it Blu-Ray b/c you can't copyright a word like blue, according to an article that I read.
There's also an interesting nuggit of information: if you took a standard 700 meg CDR and you rolled out the data flat, it would cover over 3 miles in length. So imagine a blue-ray
. DarkNeo0 said:it was marked as "kiddie", and the zelda game for it didnt help take
away that title. If it wasnt for damned developers backstabbing on
their "only for gamecube" logo's GC would be a must have.
Nintendo had it coming to them. Square moving away from Nintendo was the first example of this. Next was Capcom and Rare. I think Nintendo just doesn't make it nice and friendly when it comes to development.
I read an article on GameSpot recently (seeing as I'm a complete member). I guess GC has only sold 16M units, compared to X-Box which has sold 22M units. But blowing both of them out of the water: PS2 sold 92M units.
Sony continues to have the molopoly, unless X-Box can tactically increase their sales, it goes to show someone would much rather have a PS over X-Box. Nevertheless, Microsoft with their recruitment of some high-end developers, that may be bound to change. Also consider the fact they released their system over a half a year in advance to their comparable rival brother: PS3.
Personally I find nothing TOO compelling to buy X-Box at this point. Give it a year, more titles, cheaper system, cheaper games. I may also consider doing the same when the PS3 is released, unless its launch presents different.
Last note: Obviously (once again) Microsoft is taking a loss with the price they're charging with the system. Nearly the same as when the X-Box was released (-$126).
only reason i'd buy an xbox 360 would be perfect dark zero. personnaly i never liked the halo series, halo 2 multiplayer was nice though
iRO Chaos
Karusho - Future Rogue /omai
Karusho - Future Rogue /omai
never liked console games...im more on PC games
Only a dead fish goes with the flow
<a href="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/register.php?commander=HamsterLord"> <img src="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/badge.php?user=HamsterLord" width="440" height="100" border="0"> </a>
<a href="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/register.php?commander=HamsterLord"> <img src="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/badge.php?user=HamsterLord" width="440" height="100" border="0"> </a>
I am a fan of PD too. I exausted all the gameplay out of the first, and I'm naturally a Rareware fan.
hmm i think I only played console games like ps1 because of FF9...i downloaded a PS1 emulator and im trying 2 figure it out on how 2 gonfigure the video system coz in evrykind of game needs a diffrnt video config.
Only a dead fish goes with the flow
<a href="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/register.php?commander=HamsterLord"> <img src="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/badge.php?user=HamsterLord" width="440" height="100" border="0"> </a>
<a href="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/register.php?commander=HamsterLord"> <img src="http://genshu.shogunwars.com/badge.php?user=HamsterLord" width="440" height="100" border="0"> </a>
If the rumors are true, then I probably will go with the XBox-360. Rumor has it that the PS3 is going to have a cost range of 500-700 dollars. (I've heard rumors of $699.99). And I thought the XBox-360 was rediculously priced. Makes me wonder what the Revolution will cost.
As far as cost, have you all looked at the pricetag on XBox-360 games? $49.99 - $59.99. $60 for a game? Holy crap. I'm not so sure I want to stick with the console war anymore... prices are just getting too high (I understand with technicalities comes a price.)
On any note, I'm definitely going to be getting a 360. Why? DoA4 is all you need.
As far as cost, have you all looked at the pricetag on XBox-360 games? $49.99 - $59.99. $60 for a game? Holy crap. I'm not so sure I want to stick with the console war anymore... prices are just getting too high (I understand with technicalities comes a price.)
On any note, I'm definitely going to be getting a 360. Why? DoA4 is all you need.
"Even though, Passed this time alone
Somewhere so unknown, It heals the soul"
-Foo Fighters "February Stars"
Somewhere so unknown, It heals the soul"
-Foo Fighters "February Stars"
You must login or create an account to reply to a topic.