Next Gen Insight From J Allard

well seeing as the boys runig the xbox show kept saying "the xbox 360 will be the strongest platform" it could be construed that they where implyign the the total package of the game playign abaility, the live, and the media connectivity aspects will result in the strongest overal... or to help explain it for my fellow nerds...
ps3= fighter class: all power no finnese
rev= wizard class: no power at all
and xbox360= cleric worshiping a war god... ie... wizard with a war hammer!

as for you one little quote... go you for having a subsciption that i dont and havign a magazzine i dont... your very lucky finding the one time anyone missrepresnted the 360... congrats robbie just ruined my entire argument... oh wait... i almost forgot... my point was... im not suprised in the slightest that the ps3 is stronger... its going to be newer... just liek how the xbox is stronger than the ps2... its a freaking year newer.

i realize this is a place to tlak about things... but it just doesnt even seem like an issue... if ms is top notch when they come out and sony are top notch when they come out...6 months later (or more like a year if i was betting)... whos is strongest?

gee, i wonder?!

_________

damn you being right

heres hoping its true!

i know a bit about programming and real time graphics... but i have no idea if those nonsensical calculations mean dick... although i will say that the 360's incredible amount of bandwidth is rather intruiging
_______

This shows two things :

1) Microsoft is really concerned, because they actually know that the PS3 will be more powerful than the Xbox 360;

2) IGN is a joke as far as professional journalism goes!

yeah i so laughed while reading this but what's even more striking is that they had some staffer opinion article titled something like :Killzone 2 real or not? and not one said it was real
If only they'd tried PS2 version they'd know if this one's real or not.

Bah! I hoped we'd avoided anyone mentioning that ridiculous comparitive "analysis" on SPOnG's hallowed pages.

Didn't that article come from Major Nelson, Xbox Live's Programme Director? So it's got an inherent bias, right?

Right! The whole thing is so full of marketing holes anyone should be able to see right through.

"The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell."
Okay, so this is a comparison of the 3x PPCs in the 360 to the 1x PPC core in the CELL. How "general" can you get? Erm, what about the 8x SPEs that give the CELL its grunt?

"The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU."
Has the PS3's RSX spec been completely unveiled? I thought we'd had a bunch of figures, but no final spec. Going on some of the tech demos, if the RSX was short on flexibility, the CELL could easily help out.

"Now that the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 specifications have been announced, it is possible to do a real world performance comparison of the two systems."
Once the'yre both on the production line, in final silicon, THEN we can do a real-world comparison.

What I say is, let's wait until we actually have some hardware to play with and compare before we acknowledge the blatherings of these corporate drones.

PS. Is "nelson" some sort of euphemism?

They put one Bluetooth piconet in it, that allows eight devices, one of which has to be the receiver. That leaves seven for the controllers.

If they had put two receivers in there, you would have had up to 14 controllers, then wehere would you be with split screen?

And speaking of split screen, the PS3 shown at E3 had two HDMI outputs on the back. These can drive HD televisions, each one at 1080p.

That means if you divide them up four each (seven for the players, one for stats?) you get 960x540 pixels for each player (1080p has 1920x1080 pixels).

Given that the top resolution for a PAL display is 720x576 interlaced and NTSC is 720x480 interlaced. You'll be getting about a full television of resolution PER PLAYER!!

Without interlacing!

Plus one for a map or scores or stats of some sort.

Then imagine putting that beast on a network!!

Of course, this is in a hypothetical "money no object" world, but the seven controller thing isn't going to be a bad thing, believe me.

while im sure its not a bad thing at all, i seriously doubt it will get any real use... more than likely most things will only support 4 players, the idea that the thing could run what amounts to roughly 7 displays at higher res than todays progressive scan games is a bit far fetched, not that its impossible, but the graphics woudl definely have to take a hit filling 2 1080p screens. Also, on the weird number front, why two out puts? historically most games that actually took advantge of multiple monitors where racing and flying games, which always use an odd amount... leaving one for the all important center view whiel the rest are just perifery (sp?).

While im sure some titles may support some kind of dual screen 7 player death match (8 if you plug a dual shock into a usb port perhaps) i certainly doubt it woudl be anywhere close to the norm.

what is most likely the case is just that that is the max number of controlers a bluetooth is capable of so they list the true spec, even if they have no intention of using it (except perhaps for other peripherals, camera, dance pad, POWER GLOVE?!). The dual display thing however is perplexing to me.
_____________

One screen's for playing on while the other is for Sony to convince yourself it's a good game, perhaps? ;P

I'd have thought those devices would be more suited to the USB connection, except perhaps the power glover which could be safely stored in the cylindrical filing cabinet.

Has to be on there for a reason, it's gonna up the cost of the console. Maybe the GPU is just that good? It may be that NVIDIA have done a double up thing like their recent PCI cards?

It's probably a "well, it's costing us nothing extra" addition. After all, the only Sony franchise that could possibly need seperate screens is, well, Time Crisis...

J Allard said its all about the games long before Sony put out there specs.

Also X-Box has more original titles coming out then Sony... so at least there actions seem to point to it being indeed all about the games. Meanwhile Sony has like 2-3 original games out of the 10-15 talked about.

Sony: Its all about selling ther blue-ray and cell chip... f**k games bitches!

i dont personally think controllers are very well suited for wirelessness... do the 360 pads even rumble? i dont remeber the one at the shows rumbling (and they where wired) but then i wasnt paying as much attention to the controller as i should have been.




not necesarily... there are three expantion type ports on a game cube if i remebr correctley... *goes to check*... yup three... one for the network adapter, one for the gba player... and one for f**k whatever. the genisis and snes both had similar set ups... and the gen was the only one to ever use it. (for cd purposes).
The sLI theory is interesting but i would think they would just have them hooked up together inside like the pc versions... plus having a y connection cable by default woudl look rather stupid... i should hope they coudl unify the output inside the box. (i dont even know is the SLI pc cards use one or both out puts)

plus the way sli iworks is not by having each card to an even half a screen... but rather shifting the load around... since in an outdoor environment the card rendeing the static sky woul dbe seriously underutilized. Im sure it coudl be programmed to output to two monitors, but that is not how it is meant to be used. Plus, whiel its not impossible, i seriously doubt sony is going to put 2 of those chips in each system. they are already going to be taking a bath on the cost to manufactur... and the graphics chip is the most expensive part (especially considering hwo cheap cells are supposed to be to make compared to triple core powerpc chips)

my magic eight ball says to ask again later... worst five dollars i ever stole.
_______________