Nintendo has hyped next-generation gameplay for their Revolution console, but they haven't actually shown anything to demonstrate this (and in fact their descriptions sound closer to "last generation gameplay", in that they want to make games really simple for the relatively small group of nongamers out there). So "announced" might be too strong of a word...
Other traffic wouldn't make much sense in a PGR-style racing game, but the developers at Bizarre are adding crowds all over the track in PGR3 that respond to your actions (including running in terror if you slam into a barrier they are behind). These are race context specific, too, so that the bigger the race the bigger the crowds you will see. No real photos of these crowds have been released of these crowds yet, but at least the developers are striving to make the world feel less empty than it has in the past.
And one thing a lot of people seem to be missing (presumably because they haven't played any of the PGR games) is that you don't spend all of the race at such high speeds. PGR is really based on skillful driving more than most racing games even, and this is usually demonstrated through taking turns as perfectly as possible. This nearly always involves slowing down quite a bit, and this happens pretty frequently. So players will get plenty of chances to see the environment up close.
But the case of the DS is different. The DS will go online. It's just that the online titles aren't yet ready. Mario Kart DS will be an online title, and Animal Crossing DS will be, too. Hunters won't, and it was never meant to be.
That's a reasonable sounding argument, but I am not sure how valid it really is. Obviously release dates change, but currently Mario Kart DS is coming out less than a month after Hunters is (and Animal Crossing comes out about five weeks after). That gap is so short that I really am not convinced a defense based on Nintendo's network being unfinished (or the online titles not being ready) makes sense.
Gaming media (or at least most of it) sickens me as well, though for different reasons. But 1-up's frustration with this didn't occur in a vaccuum. Gamers have been complaining for years that Nintendo hasn't supported online play. It isn't just "because this one game won't have online play", it's because this is a sign that Nintendo still doesn't get it.
Metroid Prime: Hunters is essentially a deathmatch game AFAIK, completely lacking the style of single player experience that a normal Metroid game offers. It is an FPS game that seems utterly designed for competitive play, really more Quake3Arena than Super Metroid. Not allowing it to be played over the internet is inarguably a big mistake. Even the demo that came out for the DS launch screamed for the inclusion of netplay.
Maybe more importantly, this makes people wonder if Nintendo is really as serious as they say they are concerning online play. Bitching about it extremely loudly (arguably even whining) is an attempt to make what a large segment of gamers want as clear as possible to Nintendo so they don't also screw up Mario Kart DS, Smash Bros. Revolution, etc. That's presumably why some people like the 1-up editors are making such a big deal out of this game (it is also possible they are hoping this will push for another delay to add it in, much like what MS did with Crimson Skies - that delay turned an otherwise fun single player game into a truly special and extremely popular 'complete package').
I am not remotely an expert in this area, but my understanding is just that wireless is less reliable. You simply will always get some packet loss with a wireless connection, and the need to resend these packets equals at least a small bit of lag. We probably aren't talking another 20 milliseconds added to your ping, but five or so seems normal. That doesn't matter for most games, but it certainly does for some.
Environmental interference can also be tricky. Maybe the newer wireless technology deals with this better, but every wireless network I've ever dealt with simply doesn't manage to get a truly excellent connection 24/7. Even having the two devices in the same room doesn't fix this (and in that case you are better with a wire anyway). And you just have to hope the wireless connection doesn't need to pass through a bookcase or something even worse on the signal.
I suspect part of the problem is also the general immaturity of the technology. Wired connections and their hardware have been hashed out for years, but it seems many wireless routers still manage to get firmware updates that optimize the connection or the like.
Doom 3 was looking good, as was Halo 2. Then I saw the physics demo for Half-Life 2, and promptly stopped paying attention to anything else.
This is kind of funny, seeing as how Halo 2 uses the exact same middleware physics library that HL2 does. As do quite a few other games (Psi-ops comes to mind especially, since it did its own version of a gravity gun well before HL2 was released - did it better IMO, too).
I know that isn't really your main point or anything, I just find it really interesting that Valve somehow managed to convince a large segment of the gaming population that their physics engine was unique, even though they frequently noted it was done with the Havok engine.
I do disagree that HL2 had any real focus on AI (HL1's AI was better, for example, not to mention plenty of other FPS games like the Halo series), but your basic point is very sound.
That would be an utterly terrible place for a trackball. It would be uncomfortable at best, and more likely just plain unusuable. And that's ignoring that a trackball would probably require a lot more space around it and would add a not insignificant amount of weight to the controller.
It wouldn't really add too much needed capability, either. Yeah, POGs will complain that there is no mouse for FPS games, but analog sticks work fine as long as the game is designed around the controls (meaning aiming is just one of many necessary skills - accurate pixel pointing really doesn't have to be the most important element in an FPS). Maybe it would help strategy games, but consoles are very capable of doing their own types of games in that genre with a standard controller (and again, as long as the game isn't designed too much around micro-management, which is the way it should be in a good game IMO, you'll probably be fine).
But a nice feature of the 360 controller is that the headphone jack on the bottom of the controller can be used for other things. A mini-keyboard has been mentioned as an example, so a trackball or something similar is completely doable. Assuming you could find a use for one, of course...
You could almost think that Nintendo wants you to concentrate on the controllers and the games...
Which is probably why they have demonstrated neither so far, right (while MS has)?;)
Obviously the games are the most important thing for a gaming console. But creating a distinctive and iconic design for the hardware matters too. They need to sell these systems before people will buy any games for them! From what I've seen of the Revolution design, the controller better be iconic enough on its own, because the system (admittedly a prototype) is utterly boring and forgettable.
(At least it's better than the PS3, of course. Yikes!)
I've been having similar problems with the RAM usage in Firefox (and yeah, people, it's a known bug). I got so sick of it I actually switched back to plain old Mozilla, which seems much more stable than Firefox. Last time I checked it even has slightly better performance since it uses a newer version of Gecko.
So I recommend you switch too and see if that works better for you. Your problem does sound more plugin related, but it's entirely possible that it's just yet another Firefox bug.
Americans had nothing to do with it. Gainax's official English title for the series is Neon Genesis Evangelion. Yes, it doesn't make much sense, but it sounds pretty and is definitely unique. That's undoubtedly why they chose it, AFAIK even before an American company had even tried to license it...
Basically there is two different endings in Evangelion: there are the original last two episodes of the 26 episode TV series, and two films that 'replace'/augment them. The two different endings seem to actually depict the exact same events, just in two very different ways. Though honestly, it isn't entirely clear to me if they literally end at the same point, but 99% of them depict the same events. The creators intend for you to watch the TV series (including the TV ending) first, then the two films (they haven't retroactively eliminated the last two TV episodes or anything).
The confusion is over the quality and (more importantly) fan reaction to the different endings. Towards the end of Eva's TV run the animators at Gainax were having budget, censorship (due to the show's increasing popularity), and even severe psychological issues, leading some fans to suggest that the last two episodes aren't what the creators actually wanted, or that it somehow is untrue to the episodes that came before them. Apparently there was a big fan backlash in Japan against Gainax because of the ending, leading to them creating the two films as a 'new' ending.
But that's just one perspective on the quality of Evangelion's TV ending. It's shouted so often by some very loud people that newbies to the series sometimes think it is some law or definite settled issue. So unfortunately a lot of fans who found the TV ending too bizarre or not filled with enough fanservice tell a lot of people to just not even bother with the last two episodes, which is a shame. I personally felt the TV ending was practically perfect, capturing entirely what the series was actually about - which is not giant robots, crazy religious imagery, and aliens, but the characters and their relationships (and on another more important level, our own relationship to the world and those around us). The TV ending does an excellent job dealing with this stuff. It's raw, it's brutally honest, it's even more experimental than the rest of the series is, and it doesn't give any clear answers (ie you have to figure it out for yourself what it exactly means). The films have some extremely entertaining scenes in them and some wonderful animation, but they are filled with an overabundance of things that were merely fun windowdressing in the series (like the religious imagery). IMO it's too focused on what the fans apparently wanted, partially at the expense of the creator's desires. It's almost like they confused the dessert/candy with what the real meal was. There is still some of this depth, but the ratio between candy/meal is far too slanted for the former. They also overexplain what exactly happens, which makes you lose some of that wonderful quality the series has in that the viewer questions their own values and perspective (though the film does have some of this too, I think it is a little too arty and pretentious for its own sake). I found the films to be admittedly enjoyable, but fairly weak/uneven by the standards of Evangelion (though the last few minutes are amazing). And it doesn't help that the US release of the last film has a killer translation error that can really confuse viewers...
Further confusion comes from the fact that there are multiple versions of the films. AFAIK in the US there is only one version of each film released, but in Japan there were quite a few. That's probably why some people get the feeling there are three or even more endings. But there aren't really any major story changes in the different film versions. It's interesting to read about or watch after you have seen it all, but it's nothing to worry about until after you see the series and two films.
And I am not happy with this news, largely because the Eva English dub is pretty bad (partially because the Japanese dub is so perfect). The inevitable censorship will suck as well. Please, just buy/rent/download the DVDs...
Some big misinformation there, even if your general point is probably correct.
The PSP launched at less than $200 in Japan, making the eventual US release actually more expensive! You're right that this is normally the other way around, but it wasn't for the PSP.
Sony has always claimed that the price drop for the US release of the PS1 was due to manufacturing improvements. Supposedly they sold it roughly at cost. (I don't have a link for this handy, but this was pretty widely reported. I am sure some smart searching will find it if you don't believe me for some reason.) You could of course argue that Sony was lying, but I am not sure there is actual evidence you could use for that.
I do think it is likely that Sony will price the PS3 competitively with the Xbox360. But it is entirely possible that they might try and make it out to be the more premium product, with a slight price difference to match (much like they currently do with the PSP). Sony isn't doing that well financially, so I am not sure how much they can realistically lose on each PS3, assuming it ends up being as pricy as it could...
It doesn't matter. Halo 3 isn't ready. Giving Bungie another 1.5 years to finish it is a pretty reasonable time frame. It's more coincidence and lucky timing on MS' part than them actually holding a Halo 3 back for the PS3 launch. It's kind of smart, too - MS has a lot more than the Halo series as an Xbox exclusive, but getting more series (like PD0 and Gears of War sometime early next year) will really help them out.
And everybody will be able to play Halo 2 on the Xbox360 anyway at launch. If MS is smart they'll just make the emulator give a better framerate, maybe higher resolution. Not quite a new Halo, but still a nice enticement for all of the many Halo freaks out there...
Other Sony PR people have said it is a "concept video". When G4 interviewed one of the bigger Sony executives (I want to say head of Playstation Europe) he actually gave both contradictory answers in the same interview. Sony wants the public confused about the Killzone video, which is why they are doing this. The fact that the PS3 hardware's videochip wasn't even taped out yet at the time of E3 (and still isn't, AFAIK) is proof enough that this wasn't actual PS3 footage. But just a careful visual inspection of it shows that it was clearly prerendered.
RTFA. Sony lost a lot of money on the PS2 during the first year (nearly half a billion dollars), no matter what some videogame retailer in Canada says on his website.
1) The Xbox 360 will still be using DVDs. Guess what, we have already managed to fill up a full DVD with some games. Because we're going with HD games now, that'll take up more space (or processor time if we compress it to save space) which we don't have.
Very, very few Xbox games use a full dual layer DVD today (MGS2 is the only one I can think of, though there are probably more). Better content compression will help, but there are other tricks at a developer's disposal. Procedurely generated content is one that is being pushed by MS. This has potential benefits in creating content faster too, so it's a win-win situation. Any games that really do need more than a DVD are probably lengthy single player adventures, and it's easy enough for them to just go with two discs.
2) The Xbox 360 is using 2.4GHhz wireless controllers last I heard. Not a bad concept, but what happens when the battery dies mid-game? What about the cost of batters that add up over time? What happens if I have some other 2.4GHz device such as a phone or wireless router in the near location? I'm not the most knowledgable about wireless communications, but could this cause some interference?
Then just plug in the special cable for the controller that charges it. It will charge the battery at the same time you are playing, too. It isn't clear yet if this cable (plus special battery) comes with the console or not, but battery problems are being taken care of by MS.
The controllers use some very fancy frequency hopping technology. Interference really shouldn't be a problem.
3) Backwards compatability might not be included. Every day I hear a different story. Please, someone tell me it's going to be there for sure. Shouldn't Microsoft be more worried about pissing off the installed customer base that they had to fight to get than trying to get a few more flops out of a processor?
Backwards compatibility is included. This was confirmed way back at the start of E3. The only question is how complete this compatibility will be at launch. The emulation team is trying to get 100% and they very well could accomplish that, but it isn't clear at launch what standard the emulation will meet. It will play games like Halo 2, for example, but we might have to wait for an update to play something like Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Just my opinion, but let's focus more on the games than the hardware.
Sure, but if you focused on the hardware just a little more maybe you wouldn't have so many silly questions.:D
No. Xbox games today are able to use a full dual-layer DVD (Metal Gear Solid 2: Substance is an example of a game that does this). I am not sure what you are referring to - maybe the amount of space given to a game for a hard drive cache?
Maybe it's silly, but I kind of expected a rocket scientist to have at least basic reading comprehension skills.
You don't honestly think they meant that the land itself was talking, do you? It was obvious they meant that in general most Americans would claim the US is a Christian nation. I see very little evidence to go against that assertion.
It's possible for both Sony and Nintendo to have made bad controllers for this current generation, because they have. Just because the Dual Shock 2 is pretty bad doesn't nullify the general badness of the GC controller. It's not a monopoly-style position!
(And speaking of monopoly, a lot of people would argue MS screwed up with their first Xbox controller, too. Thankfully they at least fixed that...)
It depends on your definition of "failed", really, and your definition of "generation" too. The PC Engine (ie Turbo Graphics 16) was more of a NES competitor, IMO, but it still did great business in markets like Japan (which actually really mattered back then). The same is true of the Sega Saturn, which for a reasonable time period in Japan was actually beating the PS1. Both consoles made their manufacturers some nice profits, even though they certainly didn't come in number one place.
I actually find captions on films and games to be really distracting. It does hurt my enjoyment of the experience to read what the characters say before they say it (it's purely reflexive, too, so the best I can do is just ignore the entire lower third or so of the picture - not fun). I am sure I am not the only viewer who finds this. But thankfully it does sound like there are caption solutions that don't distract people who aren't equipped to see them, so there's no real need to do "captions for everyone".
What? 1080i has over twice as many pixels as 720p. Interlacing is just a matter of pushing the pixels in a different order and 1080i needs AA just as badly as 720p does. What are you talking about?
I am certainly no expert, but the experts I have read have always suggested that the interlacing does make a big difference in hardware requirements.
It appears I was wrong about 1080i sometimes requiring less performance than 720p, but as LocalH demonstrated they definitely are close. *shrug*
(And it's obvious that 720p looks better, of course - maybe I was confused by the fact that 720p screens at least used to be more difficult and hence expensive to make than 1080i screens.)
Most games support 480p because it's relatively simple. Standard Def TV is analog 480i and the only difference between 480i and 480p is that 480i is interlaced. 480i and 480p are putting out the same number of pixels/sec at the same resolution so you don't have many issues switching between the two. I don't see any reason for this to change in the next 2 years. Making your game look worse on 90% of the screens out there so that the other 10% get a sharper picture doesn't make sense. HDTV penetration need to be higher before developers will support 720p and higher.
That is only true depending on what your hardware supports. You are completely wrong about progressive display not affecting performance - it is double the pixels. Some console hardware like the Dreamcast and the Xbox internally draw graphics at 480p anyway, making an 480p image essentially free. But the PS2 doesn't automatically do this (though it is capable), which is why so many PS2 games (the vast majority, actually!) don't even support 480p. There is definitely a potential performance cost when you double your pixel output.
And I guess we'll find out in November for sure, but I'll be shocked if any Xbox360 games don't support 720p. The hardware is simply designed for it, just like modern PC videocards are designed for higher resolutions. Sure, gameplay might suffer a little on 480i TVs, but the same is true right now of gamers using crappier (or even non-480p) TVs now. Developers will surely test their 360 games on a 480i screen (MS is actually specifically encouraging that).
Microsoft has been saying 4xAA will be "free" at 720p because of the 10MB of eDRAM. I don't know how they are making this work unless they are planning on having everything running in 16bit color; each frame of 720p@32bits eats over 3.5MB. I think this is all marketing bull.
The Xenos chip basically takes a tiling approach. This extensive article explains how it's done (I would start from the beginning, but that's a link to a later page that describes how the framebuffer RAM is used). Apparently this will actually cost some performance, but we are talking a low single digits percentage - close enough to "free" for that not to be a lie, IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo has hyped next-generation gameplay for their Revolution console, but they haven't actually shown anything to demonstrate this (and in fact their descriptions sound closer to "last generation gameplay", in that they want to make games really simple for the relatively small group of nongamers out there). So "announced" might be too strong of a word...
Other traffic wouldn't make much sense in a PGR-style racing game, but the developers at Bizarre are adding crowds all over the track in PGR3 that respond to your actions (including running in terror if you slam into a barrier they are behind). These are race context specific, too, so that the bigger the race the bigger the crowds you will see. No real photos of these crowds have been released of these crowds yet, but at least the developers are striving to make the world feel less empty than it has in the past.
And one thing a lot of people seem to be missing (presumably because they haven't played any of the PGR games) is that you don't spend all of the race at such high speeds. PGR is really based on skillful driving more than most racing games even, and this is usually demonstrated through taking turns as perfectly as possible. This nearly always involves slowing down quite a bit, and this happens pretty frequently. So players will get plenty of chances to see the environment up close.
Gaming media (or at least most of it) sickens me as well, though for different reasons. But 1-up's frustration with this didn't occur in a vaccuum. Gamers have been complaining for years that Nintendo hasn't supported online play. It isn't just "because this one game won't have online play", it's because this is a sign that Nintendo still doesn't get it.
Metroid Prime: Hunters is essentially a deathmatch game AFAIK, completely lacking the style of single player experience that a normal Metroid game offers. It is an FPS game that seems utterly designed for competitive play, really more Quake3Arena than Super Metroid. Not allowing it to be played over the internet is inarguably a big mistake. Even the demo that came out for the DS launch screamed for the inclusion of netplay.
Maybe more importantly, this makes people wonder if Nintendo is really as serious as they say they are concerning online play. Bitching about it extremely loudly (arguably even whining) is an attempt to make what a large segment of gamers want as clear as possible to Nintendo so they don't also screw up Mario Kart DS, Smash Bros. Revolution, etc. That's presumably why some people like the 1-up editors are making such a big deal out of this game (it is also possible they are hoping this will push for another delay to add it in, much like what MS did with Crimson Skies - that delay turned an otherwise fun single player game into a truly special and extremely popular 'complete package').
I am not remotely an expert in this area, but my understanding is just that wireless is less reliable. You simply will always get some packet loss with a wireless connection, and the need to resend these packets equals at least a small bit of lag. We probably aren't talking another 20 milliseconds added to your ping, but five or so seems normal. That doesn't matter for most games, but it certainly does for some.
Environmental interference can also be tricky. Maybe the newer wireless technology deals with this better, but every wireless network I've ever dealt with simply doesn't manage to get a truly excellent connection 24/7. Even having the two devices in the same room doesn't fix this (and in that case you are better with a wire anyway). And you just have to hope the wireless connection doesn't need to pass through a bookcase or something even worse on the signal.
I suspect part of the problem is also the general immaturity of the technology. Wired connections and their hardware have been hashed out for years, but it seems many wireless routers still manage to get firmware updates that optimize the connection or the like.
I know that isn't really your main point or anything, I just find it really interesting that Valve somehow managed to convince a large segment of the gaming population that their physics engine was unique, even though they frequently noted it was done with the Havok engine.
I do disagree that HL2 had any real focus on AI (HL1's AI was better, for example, not to mention plenty of other FPS games like the Halo series), but your basic point is very sound.
Have you ever held a controller before? :p
That would be an utterly terrible place for a trackball. It would be uncomfortable at best, and more likely just plain unusuable. And that's ignoring that a trackball would probably require a lot more space around it and would add a not insignificant amount of weight to the controller.
It wouldn't really add too much needed capability, either. Yeah, POGs will complain that there is no mouse for FPS games, but analog sticks work fine as long as the game is designed around the controls (meaning aiming is just one of many necessary skills - accurate pixel pointing really doesn't have to be the most important element in an FPS). Maybe it would help strategy games, but consoles are very capable of doing their own types of games in that genre with a standard controller (and again, as long as the game isn't designed too much around micro-management, which is the way it should be in a good game IMO, you'll probably be fine).
But a nice feature of the 360 controller is that the headphone jack on the bottom of the controller can be used for other things. A mini-keyboard has been mentioned as an example, so a trackball or something similar is completely doable. Assuming you could find a use for one, of course...
Obviously the games are the most important thing for a gaming console. But creating a distinctive and iconic design for the hardware matters too. They need to sell these systems before people will buy any games for them! From what I've seen of the Revolution design, the controller better be iconic enough on its own, because the system (admittedly a prototype) is utterly boring and forgettable.
(At least it's better than the PS3, of course. Yikes!)
I've been having similar problems with the RAM usage in Firefox (and yeah, people, it's a known bug). I got so sick of it I actually switched back to plain old Mozilla, which seems much more stable than Firefox. Last time I checked it even has slightly better performance since it uses a newer version of Gecko.
So I recommend you switch too and see if that works better for you. Your problem does sound more plugin related, but it's entirely possible that it's just yet another Firefox bug.
Americans had nothing to do with it. Gainax's official English title for the series is Neon Genesis Evangelion. Yes, it doesn't make much sense, but it sounds pretty and is definitely unique. That's undoubtedly why they chose it, AFAIK even before an American company had even tried to license it...
Basically there is two different endings in Evangelion: there are the original last two episodes of the 26 episode TV series, and two films that 'replace'/augment them. The two different endings seem to actually depict the exact same events, just in two very different ways. Though honestly, it isn't entirely clear to me if they literally end at the same point, but 99% of them depict the same events. The creators intend for you to watch the TV series (including the TV ending) first, then the two films (they haven't retroactively eliminated the last two TV episodes or anything).
The confusion is over the quality and (more importantly) fan reaction to the different endings. Towards the end of Eva's TV run the animators at Gainax were having budget, censorship (due to the show's increasing popularity), and even severe psychological issues, leading some fans to suggest that the last two episodes aren't what the creators actually wanted, or that it somehow is untrue to the episodes that came before them. Apparently there was a big fan backlash in Japan against Gainax because of the ending, leading to them creating the two films as a 'new' ending.
But that's just one perspective on the quality of Evangelion's TV ending. It's shouted so often by some very loud people that newbies to the series sometimes think it is some law or definite settled issue. So unfortunately a lot of fans who found the TV ending too bizarre or not filled with enough fanservice tell a lot of people to just not even bother with the last two episodes, which is a shame. I personally felt the TV ending was practically perfect, capturing entirely what the series was actually about - which is not giant robots, crazy religious imagery, and aliens, but the characters and their relationships (and on another more important level, our own relationship to the world and those around us). The TV ending does an excellent job dealing with this stuff. It's raw, it's brutally honest, it's even more experimental than the rest of the series is, and it doesn't give any clear answers (ie you have to figure it out for yourself what it exactly means). The films have some extremely entertaining scenes in them and some wonderful animation, but they are filled with an overabundance of things that were merely fun windowdressing in the series (like the religious imagery). IMO it's too focused on what the fans apparently wanted, partially at the expense of the creator's desires. It's almost like they confused the dessert/candy with what the real meal was. There is still some of this depth, but the ratio between candy/meal is far too slanted for the former. They also overexplain what exactly happens, which makes you lose some of that wonderful quality the series has in that the viewer questions their own values and perspective (though the film does have some of this too, I think it is a little too arty and pretentious for its own sake). I found the films to be admittedly enjoyable, but fairly weak/uneven by the standards of Evangelion (though the last few minutes are amazing). And it doesn't help that the US release of the last film has a killer translation error that can really confuse viewers...
Further confusion comes from the fact that there are multiple versions of the films. AFAIK in the US there is only one version of each film released, but in Japan there were quite a few. That's probably why some people get the feeling there are three or even more endings. But there aren't really any major story changes in the different film versions. It's interesting to read about or watch after you have seen it all, but it's nothing to worry about until after you see the series and two films.
And I am not happy with this news, largely because the Eva English dub is pretty bad (partially because the Japanese dub is so perfect). The inevitable censorship will suck as well. Please, just buy/rent/download the DVDs...
It really shouldn't. Videogame store owners are often poorly or misinformed. Go talk to one sometime and see for yourself.
Some big misinformation there, even if your general point is probably correct.
The PSP launched at less than $200 in Japan, making the eventual US release actually more expensive! You're right that this is normally the other way around, but it wasn't for the PSP.
Sony has always claimed that the price drop for the US release of the PS1 was due to manufacturing improvements. Supposedly they sold it roughly at cost. (I don't have a link for this handy, but this was pretty widely reported. I am sure some smart searching will find it if you don't believe me for some reason.) You could of course argue that Sony was lying, but I am not sure there is actual evidence you could use for that.
I do think it is likely that Sony will price the PS3 competitively with the Xbox360. But it is entirely possible that they might try and make it out to be the more premium product, with a slight price difference to match (much like they currently do with the PSP). Sony isn't doing that well financially, so I am not sure how much they can realistically lose on each PS3, assuming it ends up being as pricy as it could...
It doesn't matter. Halo 3 isn't ready. Giving Bungie another 1.5 years to finish it is a pretty reasonable time frame. It's more coincidence and lucky timing on MS' part than them actually holding a Halo 3 back for the PS3 launch. It's kind of smart, too - MS has a lot more than the Halo series as an Xbox exclusive, but getting more series (like PD0 and Gears of War sometime early next year) will really help them out.
And everybody will be able to play Halo 2 on the Xbox360 anyway at launch. If MS is smart they'll just make the emulator give a better framerate, maybe higher resolution. Not quite a new Halo, but still a nice enticement for all of the many Halo freaks out there...
But anyway, here's one of the devs of Killzone 2:
That sounds like prerendered to me. That interview is enlightening.
RTFA. Sony lost a lot of money on the PS2 during the first year (nearly half a billion dollars), no matter what some videogame retailer in Canada says on his website.
1) The Xbox 360 will still be using DVDs. Guess what, we have already managed to fill up a full DVD with some games. Because we're going with HD games now, that'll take up more space (or processor time if we compress it to save space) which we don't have.
:D
Very, very few Xbox games use a full dual layer DVD today (MGS2 is the only one I can think of, though there are probably more). Better content compression will help, but there are other tricks at a developer's disposal. Procedurely generated content is one that is being pushed by MS. This has potential benefits in creating content faster too, so it's a win-win situation. Any games that really do need more than a DVD are probably lengthy single player adventures, and it's easy enough for them to just go with two discs.
2) The Xbox 360 is using 2.4GHhz wireless controllers last I heard. Not a bad concept, but what happens when the battery dies mid-game? What about the cost of batters that add up over time? What happens if I have some other 2.4GHz device such as a phone or wireless router in the near location? I'm not the most knowledgable about wireless communications, but could this cause some interference?
Then just plug in the special cable for the controller that charges it. It will charge the battery at the same time you are playing, too. It isn't clear yet if this cable (plus special battery) comes with the console or not, but battery problems are being taken care of by MS.
The controllers use some very fancy frequency hopping technology. Interference really shouldn't be a problem.
3) Backwards compatability might not be included. Every day I hear a different story. Please, someone tell me it's going to be there for sure. Shouldn't Microsoft be more worried about pissing off the installed customer base that they had to fight to get than trying to get a few more flops out of a processor?
Backwards compatibility is included. This was confirmed way back at the start of E3. The only question is how complete this compatibility will be at launch. The emulation team is trying to get 100% and they very well could accomplish that, but it isn't clear at launch what standard the emulation will meet. It will play games like Halo 2, for example, but we might have to wait for an update to play something like Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Just my opinion, but let's focus more on the games than the hardware.
Sure, but if you focused on the hardware just a little more maybe you wouldn't have so many silly questions.
No. Xbox games today are able to use a full dual-layer DVD (Metal Gear Solid 2: Substance is an example of a game that does this). I am not sure what you are referring to - maybe the amount of space given to a game for a hard drive cache?
Maybe it's silly, but I kind of expected a rocket scientist to have at least basic reading comprehension skills.
You don't honestly think they meant that the land itself was talking, do you? It was obvious they meant that in general most Americans would claim the US is a Christian nation. I see very little evidence to go against that assertion.
It's possible for both Sony and Nintendo to have made bad controllers for this current generation, because they have. Just because the Dual Shock 2 is pretty bad doesn't nullify the general badness of the GC controller. It's not a monopoly-style position!
(And speaking of monopoly, a lot of people would argue MS screwed up with their first Xbox controller, too. Thankfully they at least fixed that...)
It was called Leviathon, right?
It depends on your definition of "failed", really, and your definition of "generation" too. The PC Engine (ie Turbo Graphics 16) was more of a NES competitor, IMO, but it still did great business in markets like Japan (which actually really mattered back then). The same is true of the Sega Saturn, which for a reasonable time period in Japan was actually beating the PS1. Both consoles made their manufacturers some nice profits, even though they certainly didn't come in number one place.
On another note, who modded this post as 'insightful'?
Probably mods that at least understood that "Lack of faith" is a very famous Darth Vader quote from the films.
I actually find captions on films and games to be really distracting. It does hurt my enjoyment of the experience to read what the characters say before they say it (it's purely reflexive, too, so the best I can do is just ignore the entire lower third or so of the picture - not fun). I am sure I am not the only viewer who finds this. But thankfully it does sound like there are caption solutions that don't distract people who aren't equipped to see them, so there's no real need to do "captions for everyone".
What? 1080i has over twice as many pixels as 720p. Interlacing is just a matter of pushing the pixels in a different order and 1080i needs AA just as badly as 720p does. What are you talking about?
I am certainly no expert, but the experts I have read have always suggested that the interlacing does make a big difference in hardware requirements.
It appears I was wrong about 1080i sometimes requiring less performance than 720p, but as LocalH demonstrated they definitely are close. *shrug*
(And it's obvious that 720p looks better, of course - maybe I was confused by the fact that 720p screens at least used to be more difficult and hence expensive to make than 1080i screens.)
Most games support 480p because it's relatively simple. Standard Def TV is analog 480i and the only difference between 480i and 480p is that 480i is interlaced. 480i and 480p are putting out the same number of pixels/sec at the same resolution so you don't have many issues switching between the two. I don't see any reason for this to change in the next 2 years. Making your game look worse on 90% of the screens out there so that the other 10% get a sharper picture doesn't make sense. HDTV penetration need to be higher before developers will support 720p and higher.
That is only true depending on what your hardware supports. You are completely wrong about progressive display not affecting performance - it is double the pixels. Some console hardware like the Dreamcast and the Xbox internally draw graphics at 480p anyway, making an 480p image essentially free. But the PS2 doesn't automatically do this (though it is capable), which is why so many PS2 games (the vast majority, actually!) don't even support 480p. There is definitely a potential performance cost when you double your pixel output.
And I guess we'll find out in November for sure, but I'll be shocked if any Xbox360 games don't support 720p. The hardware is simply designed for it, just like modern PC videocards are designed for higher resolutions. Sure, gameplay might suffer a little on 480i TVs, but the same is true right now of gamers using crappier (or even non-480p) TVs now. Developers will surely test their 360 games on a 480i screen (MS is actually specifically encouraging that).
Microsoft has been saying 4xAA will be "free" at 720p because of the 10MB of eDRAM. I don't know how they are making this work unless they are planning on having everything running in 16bit color; each frame of 720p@32bits eats over 3.5MB. I think this is all marketing bull.
The Xenos chip basically takes a tiling approach. This extensive article explains how it's done (I would start from the beginning, but that's a link to a later page that describes how the framebuffer RAM is used). Apparently this will actually cost some performance, but we are talking a low single digits percentage - close enough to "free" for that not to be a lie, IMO.