PS3 Release Not Until 2006, PSX Firmware Upgrade?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PS3 Release Not Until 2006, PSX Firmware Upgrade?

Posted by simoniker on Tuesday January 27, 2004 @12:11AM from the sony's-mysterious-ways dept.

Thanks to GamePro for its coverage of a Famitsu interview from former Sony CTO Nobuichi Okamoto, discussing the PlayStation 3. Okamoto, who is still involved in the Cell project (which will power the PS3) to some degree, notes: "Development of the Cell started in spring of 2001 as a 5-year project. Hence the project will end in spring of 2006. Although it is not known whether or not game consoles will be sold immediately, we can expect products using the Cell chip to start emerging around that time." He also suggests 2004 may not see any console announcements from Sony: "From my experience, to produce games on new hardware it takes at least a year to research the hardware and to start planning for software titles. If at this time the software production environment is not ready, I think it will be difficult to announce new hardware this year." Elsewhere, Sony has announced a downloadable firmware upgrade for its Japanese-released PSX 'media center', which "returns most of the promised features that were cut shortly before the system's release."

40 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

MP3 Support by Hougaard · 2004-01-27 00:28 · Score: 1, Redundant

And MP3 support is back - Sony has finally come to their senses, now we just need OGG :-)
1. Re:MP3 Support by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 00:47 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, maybe when they fix it so it doesn't produce crackles. I used the latest OGG codec to encode 32 CDs and every single one has bad artifacts.
2. Re:MP3 Support by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 03:16 · Score: 0
  
  You must be stupid.
3. Re:MP3 Support by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 03:41 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, the bugs in the Ogg codecs are my fault.
  
  Moron.
4. Re:MP3 Support by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 12:53 · Score: 0
  
  I ripped plenty of cds without crackles.
  
  Stupid.
Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by ObviousGuy · 2004-01-27 00:59 · Score: 1

Because I really love those jaggies that the PS2 has now.

--
I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
1. Re:Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by xenophorm · 2004-01-27 02:13 · Score: 2, Troll
  
  Don't get me started on jaggies. When I see then, I know that the game I have purchased is terrible, and not worth playing at all, because only graphics are important. It has nothing to do with gameplay, story, etc.
2. Re:Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by chrismcdirty · 2004-01-27 02:42 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, graphics do not make the game. But when you're playing a game like Madden and your team's white jerseys are sharply contrasting against the deep green field to the point where you have to squint your eyes to create anti-aliasing, I'd say there's a problem.
  
  --
  It's like sex, except I'm having it!
3. Re:Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 06:13 · Score: 0
  
  No, you just suck. period.
  
  One big reason why I never liked the EA Sports games on the PS2 were the jaggies and flickering. I rented NCAA Football 2004 and I seriously got a headache because the player models weren't smooth and had jagged edges and the white lines in the end zone and the down markers were flicking and annoyed the hell out of me.
  
  I did though get it for the Xbox and I am glad I did. Better graphics, AA, and NO FLICKER! Even though the PS2 has online play for the EA titles, I will take a version that doesn't hurt my eyes over some novelty.
4. Re:Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 06:52 · Score: 0
  
  That problem being, that you are playing Madden!
5. Re:Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by JMMurphy · 2004-01-27 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, graphics do not make the game. But when you're playing a game like Madden and your team's white jerseys are sharply contrasting against the deep green field to the point where you have to squint your eyes to create anti-aliasing, I'd say there's a problem.
  
  Just wait till it snows. Then those darn white jerseys will just blend right in.
6. Re:Anti-aliasing going to make the cut for Cell? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 21:53 · Score: 0
  
  Go back to playing games with pong-level graphics, you blind elitist fuck. Leave the rest of us to the present and the future. The state of the art has evolved beyond the PS2's capabilities, and while graphics should not be the only driving factor behind a game's design, they are important nonetheless.
  
  You're one of those dumbasses that confuse graphics design and technical capability, aren't you? Tell us, would you still play your favorite game if every character, object, and interface element in the game was replaced with brown squares of differing shades? You stupid motherfucker. Get your hands off your keyboard and back on your own genitals where they belong.
Re:Is this an original name? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 01:54 · Score: 1, Funny

Are you retarded?
Re:Is this an original name? by TechniMyoko · 2004-01-27 01:55 · Score: 1

The acronym was not copied you idiot. Just cause two words start with the same number and are followed by the number 2 doesnt make it a copy
No, you fool by EnglishTim · 2004-01-27 01:57 · Score: 1

No you fool - it was copied from the keyboard plugs you get on the back of your computer!
ps2 success by johndoejersey · 2004-01-27 02:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

The success of the PS2 provides sony with a little more leeway with regards to the release of the "next-gen" console.
They are in the position where they can spend more time on delivering a competition beating product.

On the other hand Microsoft and Nintendo may see this as an opportunity to rush out a console for 2005/early 2006.
1. Re:ps2 success by DrEldarion · 2004-01-27 07:51 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Part of the reason for the success of the PS2 was DUE to the fact that it got out well before the competition. Between everyone wanting to get a "next-generation" console and software developers wanting to get in on the action early, the time advantage was hugely beneficial.
  
  Competition-beating products aren't necessarily the ones that are the most technically complex. Look at the Xbox VS the PS2. The XBox is completely superior when it comes to hardware, but that still didn't save it from getting crushed by the PS2.
  
  That time advantage is just what the other companies need to overtake Sony, and I'm sure they'll both be rushing to get their products out as soon as possible to take advantage of it.
2. Re:ps2 success by Albert+Pussyjuice · 2004-01-27 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  Why didn't the N64 beat the pants off of everyone else then? Couldn't Nintendo leverage the SNES into more time for delivering a product that could beat the competition?
  The N64 didn't win that round of consoles but did do well enough - in part due to the strong following Nintendo has in the gamers community. I'm not sure Sony has such a strong following. No, you're incorrect - console companies can't rest on past truimphs or they risk becoming yesterday's news.
  
  --
  DID YOUR MOM SERVE YOU AN EXTRA HELPING OF DUMB TONIGHT?
Not much to see here... by Crash+Culligan · 2004-01-27 02:29 · Score: 3, Insightful
Those pesky non-disclosure agreements! You've tried scrubbing, you've tried soaking...

I find it interesting that development on the guts for the PS3 began in 2001 when the PS2 first came out. They had no idea if it would boom or bust and they started working on the successor that same year.

Given that, the development cycle on the PS3 was probably influenced by the potential boominess or bustiness of the PS2.
- PS2 selling well? PS3 development can take a good, long time. The gamers will be happy that we got all the quality into the product.
- PS2 jamming up the distribution channels like the morning after free samples night at the cheese shop? Quick, get that PS3 up and running stat! We need a new next big thing to make up for our last next big thing! (And it would probably be coming out right now with fewer bells and whistles.)
I also want to see what kind of power-effort curve they design into PS3.

More than once I've cited the design philosophy behind the PS2: make a powerful system, and developers will learn to deal with its complexities. Contrast this with the Xbox's take: make a system easy to develop with, and developers will get more power out of it.

I want to know how that strategy worked for them, and will they be continuing it on the next next-generation game-box.
--
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
1. Re:Not much to see here... by Acidic_Diarrhea · 2004-01-27 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  "I find it interesting that development on the guts for the PS3 began in 2001 when the PS2 first came out."
  You find this interesting? This is SOP. Nintendo does this. Sony does this. Sega did this. Microsoft does this. Come on, hardware development takes time. You don't hire a bunch of hardware guys to build you a console and then tell them to come back in a few years to build another one - you keep them on working.
  +3 Insightful? Broken Slashdot moderation strikes again.
  
  --
  I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
2. Re:Not much to see here... by bluGill · 2004-01-27 04:00 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  When intel decided to design the successor to the 486 they started two teams (not nessicarly at the same time). One team went for a quick powerful release and made the Pentimum chip. The other went for a longer release and made the Pentimun pro chip (which eventially became the PII and PIII after some latter additions)
  It takes a long time to design new chips. What would be interesting is if the rumor mill suggested that sony was starting a design team now. Such would imply the PS3 would have a shorter life, to be replaced in 3 years (as opposed to the usual 5) with a PS4.
3. Re:Not much to see here... by nelsonal · 2004-01-27 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  I've heard that in order to meet graphics chips 6 months cycle (this was back in the 2000-2001 timeframe) times N'Vidia used to have three or four hardware teams each working on new chip design.
  
  --
  Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
4. Re:Not much to see here... by trixillion · 2004-01-27 05:36 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  +3 Insightful? Broken Slashdot moderation strikes again.
  
  Yup, the parent also mistakenly attributed the 2006 launch to marketing decisions on the part of Sony. Oh please! Anyone who has been following the drive to next gen consoles knows that Sony is using an new IBM chip and cannot get the PS3 out the door until the cell chip is production ready. IBM wanted to have it ready for 2005. Wwhat is interesting about the article is that a guy in the position to know, pretty much stated that IBM is behind schedule on the Cell chip. Hence Xbox is going to get the first mover advantage this time around.
5. Re:Not much to see here... by JVert · 2004-01-27 06:35 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Now they have three or four marketing teams working on new model numbering designs.
6. Re:Not much to see here... by John+Harrison · 2004-01-27 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  Except that XBox is going to use an IBM chip as well. What will that chip be?
  
  --
  Lasers Controlled Games!
7. Re:Not much to see here... by trixillion · 2004-02-02 06:47 · Score: 1
  
  Xbox is using the G5 which is already in production.
Stay calm while you're winning... by imperator_mundi · 2004-01-27 04:14 · Score: 1

... 2006 it just 2 years away, and it's not really likely that Nintendo and Microsoft can get some new hardware out and make a real breakthrough in a such relatively short time.

The only unknown is what online console gaming will be in two years... till now isn't really much more than a buzzworld in the mouth of the marketing people... celebrate the millionth customer of XBox live while sony is shipping the 70millionth ps2 it's just a proof you don't play in the same league :-)
1. Re:Stay calm while you're winning... by MMaestro · 2004-01-27 05:02 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  2006 it just 2 years away, and it's not really likely that Nintendo and Microsoft can get some new hardware out and make a real breakthrough in a such relatively short time.
  Ever think that maybe Microsoft and Nintendo are simply holding off until E3 to announce their next-gen systems?
  As for comparing online console gaming subscribers to the number of systems sold, thats not a case of different leagues, its a case of different games. Sony can sell 70 millions PS2s, but if 40 million have broke or were simply tossed out, thats a serious difference from what they advertise. Out of the original half million PS2 units sold in the U.S., how many units do you think are still used?
2. Re:Stay calm while you're winning... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 05:21 · Score: 0
  
  70 million PS2s...maybe only half of which are still working to this day. =P
  
  On a more serious note, Nintendo and Microsoft (like Sony) were working on their next project the day of their system's release (if not earlier). Do you honestly think Nintendo is just sitting around and won't start R&D'ing their new system until late 2004?
3. Re:Stay calm while you're winning... by nelsonal · 2004-01-27 05:36 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  The X Box is likely to be released around the same timeframe, (in time for Christmas 05 if they are lucky otherwise early O6). Nintendo is planning to have something definitely in the 2005 timeframe. You'll know they are close when current generation hardware prices fall to $99, figure about a year or so at that point.
  
  --
  Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
4. Re:Stay calm while you're winning... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-27 07:06 · Score: 0
  
  Production on Cell ends in mid 2006 (so says the article). Factor in console manufacturing time, development tools, games, bugs, shipping, etc and your looking at best a late 2006 for Japan and early 2007 for US. Realistically its probably going to be early 2007 for Japan and a mid to late release (xmas?) in 2007 for US and Euro.
  
  By that time, the PS2 games will look horrid compared to the final generation of Xbox and Cube games. This is already starting to happen. Look at the sales figures. Sony's sales have dropped considerably while Xbox is the only console to show any positive figures (up by 6% last I checked). You can also contribute it to the market being oversaturated and that most gamers are looking for something new.
  
  It may not seem like a big deal considering that there are 70+ million PS2 owners, but consider that as more and more Xbox's are sold, it heightens the chance that a current Xbox owner will like what he see's (esp against PS2's weak future lineup) and plunk down the cash for Xbox2.
  
  Do I think Xbox2 will beat out PS3? Probably not, but I do think that if M$ is able to corrale more Japanese developers, up the existing Xbox user base worldwide (which shows developers that they are standing behind the console) then I think they can place a very close second instead of a distant second.
  
  My .02
5. Re:Stay calm while you're winning... by scot4875 · 2004-01-27 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  Xbox is the only console to show any positive figures (up by 6% last I checked)
  
  Umm, except the 'Cube, which increased year-on-year sales by better than 50% for several months.
  
  Also, most things I've read put the XBox's YOY sales as mostly flat.
  
  --Jeremy
  
  --
  Jesus was a liberal
6. Re:Stay calm while you're winning... by scabb · 2004-01-28 05:53 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "Probably not, but I do think that if M$ is able to corrale more Japanese developers, up the existing Xbox user base worldwide then I think they can place a very close second instead of a distant second." Why does everyone automatically discount Nintendo, the current "distant second"? /zealousy
Relief by TheRealMindChild · 2004-01-27 06:00 · Score: 1

I was starting to get a bit worried with all of these talks of console sequals. I was, and still am a bit worried that the whole lifetime of a console will spin completely out of control. My NES was good for at LEAST 5 years before a "new, better thing" came out. And I feel that was just barely long enough for that console to be completely exausted of potential.

--

"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
Not Until 2006 by mobby_6kl · 2004-01-27 06:28 · Score: 2, Funny

>PS3 Release Not Until 2006

Why 2006, will it run Longhorn?
now we know by odorf · 2004-01-27 08:07 · Score: 1

and we have plenty of time to start saving our pennies so we can have enough money to buy our new system in two years. Wonder how much this one will cost....
PS3 a winner? by Bombcar · 2004-01-27 11:27 · Score: 2, Interesting

A major key factor for the PS2's success was that it was backwards compatible with PS1 games. So if you had a PS1, it was a no-brainer to get the PS2. And if you didn't, you knew that the PS2 would play all those cool games that your friends had, so you picked it up.

If the PS3 is backwards compatible with the PS2 & PS1, I think it will do pretty well.

Backwards compatibility is starting to get important for the console manufacturers. The N64 was NOT backwards compatible with anything, and so it was harder to get moving. Nowadays, the lack of backwards compatibility will slow down adoption (note that Mac OS X; Windows XP, etc all have some form of backwards compatibility.)

--
Fellowship 9/11
More like 2007 by superpulpsicle · 2004-01-28 05:20 · Score: 1

I am not convinced sony will have enough units around in 2006. This thing will be sold out faster than bread in a starving communist country.

They better ramp up the factories etc etc.