Slashdot Mirror
The Tech Of The Next-Gen Console Wars
Sergey writes "Ars Technica has an inside look at the next-gen console wars, with a focus on what we know about the
hardware in the PS3, Xbox 360, and the Nintendo Revolution. In particular, the coverage of the Nintendo's Broadway processor is the most thorough and best-compiled available right
now, and I think it shows that the Revolution won't be nearly as weak as its opponents suggest." An interesting sidenote from a Eurogamer article: the Revolution's specs may never be fully revealed by Nintendo. They consider the information irrelevant.
I suspect that technical specs only really matter to one group of people: the developers. I need to know the specs of my PC so I know what games it's capable of. A console has a defined specification that doesn't change during its lifetime (unless you buy a "core" system....), so you know a game for that console will run on the one you have at home. Also, much of the specs released for the Xbox360 and PS3 are gibberish to laymen. Having said that, I do like to know little things like this, but then I'm a developer. If Nintendo's console is more powerful than rivals are suggesting maybe they should release them and say "Told you so!"?
Why? Because they're trying something different, it might really help gameplay in ways that haven't been thought of.
However I do want to know the specifications, because I'm curious. I know it isn't relevant for a closed-box system, but that doesn't sate my curiosity!
Anyway, wasn't the PS3's PPE redesigned (resulting in a larger PPE) recently? Does the XBox360 utilise three PPEs from the earlier design? Will the Revolution use v1 or v2 PPEs? Or WayFaster(tm) 750 variants like the GameCube's Gecko processor?
And why shouldn't they? You're not going to be hacking into the Revolution to make it run Linux; I'd suspect the controls would make for a slightly wacky computing experience. You're never going to need to upgrade the system.
More importantly, as the last gen showed us, power doesn't mean much anymore. The three systems were able to offer very comparable experiences with the consoles differing in power, save for the fact that the Xbox versions of titles tend to be prettier than PS2 or GC ports. Hell, there were plenty of tri-console titles even in the last generation; even if the PS1 version of Spider-Man, for instance, was uglier, it still played the same as the Dreamcast version. If the specs didn't matter then, why should they now?
If I buy a console, it's for the games. Not for the specs. The era of classifying systems by bits is over.
Goo goo g'joob.
Look at AMD and Intel, both are now going in different ways to say "we're better". AMD has used more multipliers, and Intel is trying to get more gigs.
I mean why does my 2.4 AMD run faster then a 3.0 Intel?
At the same time tell me why I'm stilling playing PS2 and not interested in the Xbox or GCN games (I own a GCN but I buy easily 10 times as many games for PS2) PS2 brings out hit after hit yet it's a weaker system? odd.
The fact is the game is what matters, NOT the hardware. Apple has constantly been a better computer number wise then a PC, Great for graphical and physics but let me ask you this? why is it that all "gamers" own PCs? Because the Mac doesn't have the software. Yes they get some games, but rather then have a couple games why not get access to all the games that come out. Why is it that Japan doesn't by the more powerful Xbox over both the GCN and PS2? Because they get many many more games for BOTH systems then the Xbox.
So I have to say that Nintendo's opinion is pretty correct. That the Specs doesn't matter. I think the big hurdle Nintendo has is to prove the worth of the controller, and they can to most but the most stubborn fanboys, as long as they get the games this time. Once they accomplish that, it should be an easy ride, and COMPLETE backwards compatibility? definatly going to make fans happy.
Now I'm 21 and I want games that:
My first thought when I saw the Revolution promo was, "Man, Wario Ware is going to be awesome." This is not a series that is known for fantastic graphics.
So, I think Nintendo is going to be okay if they stay just behind the cutting edge in the graphics department. Especially if it lets them seriously undercut MS and Sony.
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
Although hardware specs are nice and can contribute to a game it is the games themselves that matter.
Without quantity AND quality a system will die. It's simple.
Show me where the good games are and that will be the system that I will buy.
-- What's this '-r *' file doing here? -- Oh well, a simple 'rm' should do the trick.
I'll tell you who else they matter to: The Nintendo of America Marketing Department. As we all know, some people DO base their console buying decision on wanting "the most powerful system" or at least knowing what their getting.
Here's an interesting PR suggestion. Nintendo can say now that they believe that console specs are irrelevant. Say it a lot. Say it so that it gets in every piece of press or publicity imaginable. Then choose either the PS3 release or the Xbox 360 release. In releasing the official specs, cite either "developer demand" or "popular demand." Nintendo maintains street cred and dampens one competitor's thunder with something that Nintendo doesn't even care about.
How about it?
And now, for a sig that's a complete copout.
Everyone here seems to be concentrating in Nintendo vs. the world crap.
But damn, that there's a truly insightful article. I mean, I know that it's Sony vs. Microsoft for control of the living room, vs. Nintendo for video games, and I know that Sony's position as pure content and closed-system appliance provider dictates their system, while Microsoft, as pure medium (soft or hard), has to cut a different path, but this here article spells out what their strategies translate to in real terms.
Yeah, this is a "me too" post, but come on folks, y'all are talking like you got statues of mario in your backyard. Yes, the article here gives a big window for Nintendo, lets Microsoft have a shot, and suggests that Sony's gonna be selling a White Elephant. But like any good journalism, it leaves that interpretation open to the reader. Who knows? It's Sony's game to lose after all.
I'm glad I don't play consoles (yet). Watching them come to market is entertainment enough.
I think I really dig Hannibal's analysis.
Basically, he thinks that the PPE used in the PS3 and 360 will be the core for the Revolution. Why? It has a much better integer math performance compared to the PPC 970 (G5). The PPE has a flaw of its own though: poor(er) branch performance. But this flaw can be fixed by having a large L2 cache (think, Pentium M). So Revolution will drop down to 1 or 2 cores and load up on the L2 cache for two reasons: 1) Lower power consumption and 2) Greatly improved branch performance. Personally, I think they'll go with 1 core and maybe beef it out in other ways.
So, PS3 and 360 will have tons of raw computational power because they just plain have more computational real estate. BUT! And this is a big "but," they will actually have lower branch performance compared to Revolution. What's that mean? What good is that anyway? Branch performance means physics, AI, and game logic. A meatier gameplay experience.
If this pans out in the benchmarks I think Nintendo may have its coup. What good is all that processing power in the PS3 and 360 if you can only play back 3D benchmarks and decode HD video streams? Aren't these supposed to be GAME consoles?
Ken Kutaragi: "Chiken! Pok-pok-pok!"
Steve Ballmer: "I'll fuckin' bury Nintento no matter what their fuckin' specs are!"
Gamer: "This all just shows how immature Nintendo is."
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
There must be some insider joke here I'm missing?
Humans usually use decimal numbers, he'd be 10101 in binary.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
as John carmak said in one of his interviews that maybe PS3 is better than 360 in all aspects but still 360 has better developer cummunity so 360 wud be better than PS3 and wud sell more than that ..... so, i think when it comes to consoles the developer thind matters most coz u can't run games developed for some machine onto another .......
i work for money, if u want loyalty, Go get a Dog.
Why? Because their articles are full of unfounded speculation disguising otherwise. Oh, but it's fun to read their silly articles after they're debunked as false.