Slashdot Mirror
What's Known About the PS3
1up has an expansive piece up exploring everything they know about the PlayStation 3. They cover rumours, prices, technology, and the limited information currently out there on upcoming games. From the article: "While the hard facts are still tough to nail down, the general consensus is that the PlayStation 3 is the most powerful of the three next-generation systems, although probably not by as much of a margin as Sony would like us to think. The arguments for the technical strengths of the PS3 go into CPU floating-point capabilities and the difficulties surrounding programming for parallel architectures, but the long and short of it is that whether or not the advantages of the PS3 are apparent will depend on developers' ability to utilize the PlayStation 3's unique architecture."
i think the thing that gets me is "hey, why all the secrecy?" if you are gonna release a product, at least TRY to convince me its better then the competition. when people start getting (publically) fired for making opinions known, it makes you wonder
Because physics was good enough in Super Mario 1. Not all games need, or want, realistic physics. In most cases, unrealism is prefered (try a true Newtonian physics space sim- changing directions is hard). Whats needed is gameplay innovations, and they don't make hardware for that.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
OK, looks like xBox360 is going to lose a lot of market share when it ships, probably starting in December when most of the new titles ship.
Probably since the XBox 360 has 100% market share for the newest generation.
The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
XBox360: Shipped
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Considering all the launch problems with PS2 this is good if it's meant as irony, and funny if not.
Today, game consoles compete on graphics capbility. I find that kinda funny since most people I know can't tell the difference between 640x480 and 1440x1080, can't distinguish a progressive image from an interlaced one, aren't bothered by aliasing, think 24fps isn't choppy, and can play Mario cart in 1/4th of the screen just fine. I bet the console manufacturers could support 480p, wide screen, and then upscale to everything else. Just keep it above 24fps. The gamers wouldn't notice or care.
Personally, I'm more interested in new controls and new game play innovation.
Maybe the consoles are really made just to impress the reviewers?
ANYTHING you've heard at this point is just hype.
It stops being hype when it ships. Until it ships...it is nothing but hype, rumor, and PR.
No reason to lie.
I agree with you that game quality and play are far more important than resolution, but I should point out that I went and bought the xBox version of Sims 2 instead of the GameCube version, due to the better graphics.
So, for a cross-platform game, I think it's critical.
For a single-platform, or console (PS3) plus portable (PSP) decision, I don't think it matters that much. It won't make me buy one console over the other.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Who said the chip has to compute realistic physics?
Millions of blocks all falling on the same screen takes a ton of CPU time. Now, weather they are falling with an acceleration of 9.8 m/s^s is immaterial to CPU time -- millions of real-time collisons take loads of number crunching, realistic or not.
Waiting for games to trickle out isn't my idea of fun.
Buying a new game every month or so isn't MY idea of fun. I'd rather have four titles a year with superlative replay value than 20 a year that get stale after three weeks.
Why? Are you holding yourself out as some kind of expert? Do you believe that your slashdot postings are so important that it's vital that nobody rely on them without full disclosure? Do you think that you have such an important position of slashdot trust that must be maintained by disclosing conflicts of interest?
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Caveat emptor means the buyer beware. It's a general disclosure principle in most aspects of the law, specifically in real property and contracts, that says the buyer is not under a duty to make sure YOU know everything that could possibly concern that which you are buying. It's the court's way of saying YOU as the buyer needs to take some initiative to make sure you're getting a good product because YOU as the buyer are the one that will be harmed if you didn't make a prudent and informed decision.
As for ethics, nobody is buying stock on your word. NOBODY. You don't have a duty to disclose your ownership of MS stock because you're not creating some kind of reliance in us upon your word wherein your status as an MS stockholder makes us suspicious of conflict of interest. It's not like we have reason to believe you're neutral or that otherwise you'd be misrepresenting yourself by not telling us.
It's not relevant at all. You want to pretend it's relevant because you want us to be impressed. That's why you're throwing out that BS 15k range of stock value.
The ethical thing is to tell us truth about a situation when that truth has an impact on the situation. Supreme Court justices tell us their stock holdings when there's a potential conflict of interest because their decision may have some effect on the US. YOU telling us how much money you'd like to have invested in MS is equal to me posting "PS, I own a Ford and plan to buy another when this one dies" every time I mention cars because hey, that was a huge 5k-20k investment I made in that company, or that I took out student loans through one bank (becuase hey, that's a huge 16k-130k investment in that company) or that I took out a mortgage through another bank (because hey, that's a huge 1k-250k investment in that company.)
Your logic is so illogical it's like, I'm having trouble even semi-seriously attempting to take your concept of ethics seriously, it's like a doctor walking in, seeing that you have Nikes on and then telling you he prefers Converse and just wants you to know that despite his preference in shoes, he's going to try to not kill you on the operating table.
Let's be realistic here. In NO way is Sony going to ship this in Q1 06. Where are the production SAMPLE units, SKUs or final plastics? No one has even developer SDKs that are in any way finished or polished (besides Sony owned entities) and they are still throwing about theoretical performance numbers. If Sony was any way serious about launching in this time frame, you'd see their factories gearing up for such a launch. The only thing happening here is that they're trying to steal away hype from the 360 launch...and doing pretty well at that it seems.