Slashdot Mirror
More On PS3 and Xbox 2
News for nerds writes "The BBC has news about the next-generation game consoles, with comments from various third parties. According to Rory Armes, studio general manager of EA in Europe, they have already received the development kits from Microsoft, but not yet from Sony and Nintendo. He assumes Sony's PlayStation 3 will have a little more under the hood and be more cost-efficient than Microsoft's Xbox 2. Gerhard Florin, head of EA in Europe, remarks 'PS3 will provide graphics indistinguishable from movies.' Spider-Man 2 or Toy Story 2, that's the problem."
In the article they mention that a big thing they'll be able to do with the improved processing power is more realistic physics. ??? Does anyone else find that a bit weird? I remember like 20 years ago I played a game with monkeys on buildings throwing bananas at each other. That thing had gravity you could adjust :)
The screenshot does look amazing though... it's going to be really interesting to see where this technology (games) goes not only in the next 18 months, but 5-10 years down the road. Maybe we'll have holodecks after all :)
I store my recipes online (the way nature intended)
Would it be too much to speculate that Apple can easily come out with a iGame console similarly sized like a Mac Mini?
Last time Apple tried to make a game console, the result was the Pippin. It flopped. But by the time the Nintendo Revolution comes out, we'll probably have a half-height GameCube SP to match Sony's new thin PS2.
I look forward to the price drop in PS2 games and consoles, particularly in the used market. Granted the games won't have all the eye candy appeal that the PS3 games will, but I figure the new influx of games will keep me happy until the PS3 price drops (probably around xmas of 2006).
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
The same thing (rendering Toy Story like movies in real time) was said about the PS2 and Xbox. Has this happened? No. And it won't happen with the Xbox 2 and PS3. They'll look great, but they won't be of that quality.
I'm with you, but not as strongly. Unfortunately, the PS2 is really starting to get long in the tooth. I'll be sad to see it go as the new war begins. I am however, still pissed at Sony and Nintendo for rushing this DS/PSP thing, as the software lineups for both show is obviously the case.
As for Microsoft, they may be trying to push forward a *little* bit early, but console history shows it's about time to introduce the new generation for early adopters.
Don't worry about your XBox though, people still have PS1's lying around, and many a good game was released for that generation after the launch of the PS2/XBox etc. This generation of consoles still has some life yet, they just won't be media darlings anymore.
-- I have fans? Wow.
Well, your computer would only have to generate a maximum of say, 1600x1200 resolution frames. To put something on a film, which is projected on a 40-100ft (diagonal) screen, you need something on the order of 4000dpi images. (not sure what that works out to in pixels, as the aspect ratio is different between computer and film) Either way that's a heck of a lot more pixels. Plus, a lot of advancement has been made in 'shortcutting' to better-looking graphics. Jurassic Park probably used a lot more polygons than they would take to do the same job nowadays. You have pixel shaders, normal mapping, and a slew of other things that can be done in real-time now. Granted, there will probably be a disernable(sp?) difference to the trained eye, but that's just a fallacy of being educated in the art of the polygon. :)
Case in point. Read this time article from before PS2 came out:
http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/2000/0320/j apan.sony.html
Don't believe it till you are holding it in your hands.
And Playstation 2 can presumably render the original Toy Story in real time, right? Just like Sony claimed before PS2 was released ( http://www.dvdfuture.com/features.php?id=2)?
I plan on buying a bunch of used XBoxes, modding them, and using them for everything from XBox Media Center to Folding@Home number crunching boxes...
Would it be too much to speculate that Apple can easily come out with a iGame console similarly sized like a Mac Mini?
I'd much rather see them partner with an established console maker. The key to a successful console is the games. You need a lot of them. You need a few really good ones. You need at least one excellent, exclusive title. This would be really hard for Apple to swing all at once.
I'd like to see them partner with Nintendo or Sony to release a built in gaming environment and compatible drives with the media. These companies make their real money on games and the licensing fees. Apple computers could all be extra consoles that sell more games. It would give games an extra market, it would solve the lack of games problem on OS X, and it would provide some 3rd parties with the opportunity to sell game pads and accessories.
That would be a killer feature for Tiger. I don't think it is going to happen, but I'd really like to see it.
Well, yeah, but the Xbox, great as it is, is getting a bit old. The PS2 is positively ancient. The tech is from the late nineties, basically (OK, the Xbox is tip of the century, but only just), so it's nice to see it upgraded. What I'm most worried about, is the mod scene. They have to go right back to scratch with the next Xbox and the next PS3. I wonder how long it'll take'em to hack'em.
Where the hell did that beautiful picture come from?
g /_40753511_ea_screenshot203.jpg
It's definately rendered - but from what?
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40753000/jp
George II -- Spreading Freedom and American values, one bomb at a time.
The fact that they've had mixed success in getting third parties to produce even desktop software for their machines does not bode well for their ability to attract game developers to the platform, either.
Actually, developers are all about OS X. Heck I am sitting two offices away from some people developing Windows only software, that they are developing on powerbooks. I mean have you seen how much freeware/shareware there is for OS X? People love to develop on OS X. Businessmen on the other hand, aren't so keen on investing a pile of money into funding development for OS X, given it's small market share. Many of them just don't want to bother. Even big, entrenched players like Adobe, are less than stellar about committing to developing their products on OS X. Partly this is because so many companies have stupidly moved to MS owned technologies, and are now trapped. Partly this is just because management does not see the business case.
Development on OS X is great. Development for OS X is a dream job for many. It is a profitable endeavor as proved by many companies. What many suits don't get is that Mac users are generally more affluent and willing to shell out money for things than the typical user. They are also often power users and aficionados that devote a relatively large portion of their funds to computing. You occasionally see a company like Adobe kill off development for a product on the Mac, even though it accounts for more than half of their user's. Thick skulled managers either assume that the Mac is dying and are trying to save money by getting ahead of the curve, or don't pay attention to their market share. Framemaker, for example, was cancelled after crappy sales for about 2 years (after they failed to make an OS X native version which everyone was waiting for).
Basically, I disagree that they cannot find developers, but agree that they cannot find a large number of big development houses. Smaller shops do a lot better on the Mac. No what Apple will do if they are smart, is partner with Sony or Nintendo, and include an emulation environment with OS X. That way they get the games, and the development is taken care of by an already established player.
This is the second thread today that is a direct throwback to The Wizard.
Is something burning?
Oh, it's my karma.
"A gamer could buy a starter disc for 10 euros. When he goes home he goes online and he could buy AI and levels as you go. It's much smarter if you can get levels as you go."
Sounds like another subscription service, which is definitely smarter for the manufacturers. Smarter for us? While it does mean that we can constantly get new levels, it also means that the game may not work without being able to go online to download the levels, or will be sold with crappy levels to encourage you to sign up.
http://bike.stu.ph/rides - free GPS routes available for Garmin, Magellan, GPX and Google Earth
Would it look like this?
I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
Let's face it, except for the Super NES days, Nintendo is largely irrelavent. The Gamecube has not been a huge success outside of Japan (and even then, it's dominated by PS2). Nintendo is known for innovations, but not necessarily leading edge hardware. Nintendo's biggest problem is getting 3rd party support. They were so protective in the past (and also their younger audience stigma) that it's going to be hard for them to get 3rd parties to develop on the Nintendo. It seems like 90% of the games on the Gamecube are by Nintendo, and 80% of those games are sequels. I currently own all 3 systems, and I have the fewest games for the Gamecube. I would prefer if Nintendo became a developer for PS3 or XBox rather than try and introduce yet another machine as it's getting harder and harder to buy a console just for 3 games.