What? They'll choose what has the best library. Quantifying "best" is a difficult task, but being as the PS3 has more Triple A titles available than the other 2 systems, as long as you factor in backward compatibility, then currently it looks like the PS3 takes the Best library issue hands down. Both the 360 and the PS3 have a extensive list of titles that are highly anticipated, and the Wii seems to have a slightly smaller list in this category.
People will also chose the system that they already have a large library for, which that is hand down the PS3 as well since the number of PS2/1 game units sold is staggering compared to the other systems. The PS2 had an abysmal library until well into it's second year.
And no, the PS3 is now way behind the PS2 in sales based on week...Past the first few weeks is when you get your real look, and VG Charts clearly has the PS3 lacking compared to last gen. You need to understand a few things about market cycles and how they compare for weekly sales of products. The only reasonable comparison is for a complete production run and even then over a long enough time frame. Prior to the 42 week of sales the PS2 and PS3 were nearly neck and neck. At around the 42 week the PS2 had a large market push and a number of relatively high profile releases. In the 50 something week (what ever week this is) the PS3 has had a significant price drop and a number of high profile games being released in short order. You will see in the next few weeks that the PS3 sales will jump ahead of the PS2 production run sales for the same number of weeks of production. On average they will remain nearly identical.
In general you sound much like the Dreamcast supporters who thought their 10 million unit head start would amount to success in the last generation when in reality it ended with a complete dead last and to demise of the manufacture, as a console manufacture. Predictions about this generation will not even be close to accurate for another 16 months or so. You will see significant changes in the rankings as of this holiday season.
The XBox just made it's only stab at dominance, and as much as Halo 3 will boost sales it's certainly not enough to be on the top of the market after the 5-7 span of the generation. The Wii is having impressive sales but is showing serious signs of that pattern not lasting long.The PS2 has the largest fan base of GH players (having had 3 releases) and many of those fans are going to want to upgrade to a new system so they can have downloadable content and they will, in many cases, dare I say the majority, mean purchasing a PS3 to play it on (not to mention Rock Band which leaves the Wii out in the cold and the million strong R&C fan base). You can make any prediction you want but counting the PS3 out as a contender for this generations top seller is just being ignorant of markets and market strategy.
Uh, you think the PS3 selling over 100 million units is a "reasonable expectation?" Anyone that does not is just holding on to hope that some other console manufacturer will be able to crack Sony's dominance. The Prior 2 generations have be completely dominated by Sony, more so than any other console maker in history has done. This is not a guarantee of future dominance but when factoring in the current generations sales you can see that 100 million is the most likely outcome for the PS3.
The Last Generations total console sales were 164 million units so far, with Sony the only manufacturer still selling significant numbers of previous generation units. Of those 164 million units, over 60% of the sales (split among 4 manufacturers) a attributed to the PS2. This means that a stagnant market can support 160+ million consoles. So far this generation has seen just around 25 million units sold, which means the vast majority of units in consumers hands are still the last generation. It will still be some time before the still remaining 115 million PS2 owners decide to upgrade to the current generation and it is very safe to say that they will be likely to choose a console from a brand they already use and trust. Recently Wii sales have noticeably dropped off, 360 sales are up and PS3 sales have stayed even and happen to match pretty close to the growth rate of last generation.
I know it's nice to think that Sony is failing and that this is some sort of payback for their root kits, exploding batteries and other such nonsense, but in reality (A.K.A. off of slashdot) most people do not know about or care about these issues and are just waiting for the PS3 to have a larger library and a lower cost. As of the end of this year they will have both of those, so we will probably some change in sales at that point.
Not to mention that 360 has been out much longer and the market is already more saturated with 360's. You are totally correct with this statement, but you don't realize that this is not a good thing for the 360.
The reasonable expectation of total sales of 360s would be a moderate improvement over previous generation sales. Last generation the XBox sold less than 24 million units world wide, meaning the current 12 million units 25% (significant growth) To 50%(no growth) of the total expected sales of the console this generation. This is a significant in comparison to market saturation and means future sales will be much slower than current.
On the other hand the PS3 has reached very little toward market saturation as its current 5 million units is less than 5% of the reasonable expectation, and even less when your realize it's predecessors market is still growing.
The Wii has actually gone and carved it's own new market, which seems to be having little effect on the other market, that may or may not have room for considerable growth so it's saturation point is entirely unpredictable.
I wouldn't want to buy into a platform that is unlikely to see this generation's Guitar Hero, or Katamari, or Shadow of the Colossus. Guitar Hero is already slated for release on the PS3 as is Rock Band. Katamari is a sad loss but will hopefully get released for PS3 once the publisher sees it undergoing the same effect as Oddworld had when they changed platforms. Shadow of the Colossus is developed and published by Sony Computer Entertainment, good luck seeing it's successor be released on another system. Not to mention the development of LittleBigPlanet which is certainly the most quirky game currently announced for any system.
Sony will continue to get the risky games, like Eye of Judgment, and they are doing better than either of the others in embracing independent developers like Thatgamecompany.
I'm not defending Sony, being as they just pulled the one move that really irritates me, discontinuing development of the PS3s backward compatibility, but seriously if you are going to bag on a system at least get a few things right.
First no one is talking General Purpose algorithms since this is for very specific scientific computing which can be optimized for a GPU since it's normal matrix processing. This changes the context of the use of the PPUs/SPEs and GPU considerable. The general rules you mention for Cell programing is why very little of importance is being done on them at this time and why it takes an researcher to attempt to put advanced algorithms into practice.
Second, access to the GPU has been accomplished, or at least there is claim of accomplishment, It just has not been used for graphics generation. It would very well be possible that hypervisor avoids setting up graphics context objects for the GPU yet it is remain possible to gain direct access to the GPU. This sort of access is perfect for High throughput vector processing while the SPEs handle highly repetitive tasks.
I'm certainly not an expert but getting much greater than 150 GFlops out of a single PS3 is most likely achieveable, and numbers as high as a single TFlop is not impossible.
Lastly it's important to note that these units where provided directly by sony and may allow access to the the 7th SPE (or even 8th) and the GPU, but the article does not say anything about that.
8 PS3s gives you 1.2 teraflops of single-precision performance or a similar number if you stick to integer operations (6 SPUs/PS3 gives ~150 GFlops). First of all you are ignoring the operations of the PPC cores (or so it appears), which brings the flops per node closer to 200 GFlops. Second you make the assumption that the team that has created this cluster has not been able to utilize the GPU, which I know is restricted by the hypervisor but that will be by passed at some point in the PS3s life cycle. Assuming the Team is smart enough, they should be able to get a little less than 2 TFlops out of each not or over 10 times your estimate.
If she stole 25 CDs from a record store, she'd have to return the stolen goods and she'd go to jail for *up to* six months (in california - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft#United_States) I bet her income is less than $440,000 a year. But what about the years of future earnings she would lose after having a criminal record, not to mention the value of pride and dignity, which would also be lost after imprisonment. Less than 1/4 million dollars that she will likely never pay is getting of lightly.
Had the tides been turned and this was an individual suing the RIAA most the people here would be upset that the judgment was so low, no mater what the case was about.
Civil cases are almost always about the message and not the fine. If the punishment for theft was just that you had to return the items then there would be no deterrent since being caught would only mean you were back were you were before you were commit the crime, no real loss. It is in the courts and peoples interest that the punishment for criminal activity is strong enough to deter future offenders, and hopefully this case does just that.
But in reality, the Cell's massively parallel architecture isn't well suited for emulation (a very serial problem) and HLEing the entire Graphics Synthesizer to offload it to the RSX chip isn't likely. Emulation is indeed a very parallel problem as the systems that are being emulated are loosely coupled parallel systems. Looking at the PS2 you have multiple processors (MIPS core, 2 Vector Units, Image unit, Graphic Synth, etc.) each of which has it's own pipeline. Emulating the in serial would require considerably more operations per second than emulating each pipeline separately as they are in the hardware. This is why standard serial emulation performs poorly, relative to available clock cycles, and why virtualization is becoming more popular than emulation.
No, my point was that the media industries were not attempting to get people to purchase content repeatedly until unauthorized copying became common place, so common that some claim you can't find someone that has never used an unauthorized copy of some media. I'm not saying if I agree with the media companies or not, only saying that if we don't stop the escalation of power between copy protection and piracy we will end up with out the ability to purchase media at all, but rather license it for limited time and use. If you really want to go down that path then feel free to support piracy, drm or both. But if you actually want to put an end to the escalation of power then stop supporting either side, by not paying for DRM encumbered media and not using unauthorized copies, that do not fall under the fair use clause, of media.
$222 thousand was a fraction of what the record companies where seeking, and the verdict was handed down by a jury not a judge. These are people just like you and me, that after hearing all the evidence presented decided to side with the companies. I don't think any of us on slashdot can accurately quantify the loss these companies may have had do to this persons sharing of copyrighted material, that is why we have trials and juries to determin these things. Our legal system may be unfairly in favor of those with money but that is because we, as citizens, allowed this to be, and should not be a reason to blame a company for trying to defend what it believes to be it's right.
I agree that it is really shitty that the artists will not get a penny, but the artists sold their rights to the record company, and in a way deserve what they get.
and best of all you'll be doing YOUR part to help kill the record industry! Good idea, I mean it's not like any of us actually like music, or the ability to find out about music without having to know exactly what you are looking for. And while we are at it lets take down the movie industry since we know everyone prefers Indie films and we are all getting sick of these multi billion dollar productions like LOTR. I mean who else could possibly get hurt but killing off the media industries? There is no way it could hurt musicians or screen writers, or recording studies, or high end mixing equipment manufacturers. I mean everyone can afford the time and money it takes into producing quality media, we don't need an industry.
if the entertainment companies made something worth looking at people might pay money for it. If it's not worth looking at then why do people care if there is DRM on it, or why do people continue to make and distribute unauthorized copies?
Personally I agree with you that it's not worth while, and this has been true of every single artistic work that has been encumbered by explicit DRM, but obviously somebody thinks it has enough value to violate the law to acquire it.
I obviously do not pirate artistic or copy protected works either, I don't even buy used works if there is another option, but I will purchase directly from the artist if possible.
Face facts: the music and movie industry don't care about you. They care about their own pocket books. Gee Wiz you are so insightful. I mean who would have ever thought that a corporation would be out to make money rather than love, joy and happiness for all. I almost gave some credence to your comments but then I realized you don't even understand the basics of capitalism.
Why is it that supporting anti-piracy automatically gets you labeled as being blind or somehow in favor of perpetual copyright. I happen to think our copyright duration is far to long and also think that we should not allow someone to maintain copyright on a work that they are not actively producing or promoting. But that has nothing to do with the point.
History shows that prior to the easy of unauthorized reproduction that we have today there were no explicit copyright protection mechanisms. Yes copyright was protected by the simple fact that copying a phonograph or a written work was difficult and/or cost prohibitive, but even when it first became easy it was no threat to copyright holders. Having been in the scene that caused the need for copy protection, which were the software hackers of the 80s if you really wanted to know, I understand where the copyright holders are coming from. And guess what, the copyright holders are not only large corporations, and even the copyrights controlled by larger corporations where voluntarily granted to them by the original artists.
I don't like DRM any more than most of the anti-drm zealots out there, I just happen to understand that the blame should be placed squarely on those producing and distributing unauthorized copies of original artistic works.
If you don't like DRM I support your decision to not purchase DRM'ed works, but I do not support acquiring unauthorized copies of artistic works just because you can't get them the way you want. If you want free unencumbered artistic works then make them yourself, or purchase from those that release their works that way, or start your own production company, just don't bitch about companies attempting to make the most money they possibly can, unless you are ready and willing to stand up against capitalism as a whole, which I doubt your are ready and willing to do.
I know most people will consider your comment flamebait or trolling, but it is one of the most accurate statements I've read in a while.
There was no copy protection on Records, tapes, or even early video cassettes and software. It was not until unauthorized copying and distribution became mainstream that companies felt they needed to add copy protection to their products. I don't know if eliminating unauthorized copying would allow companies to go back to unprotected content or not, but I'm sure they companies would like to be able to remove the cost of added copy protection.
My issue is that a flag ship AAA title for the leading HD console is not only not pushing 1080, like other games including a couple on the same console, but it's also not pushing 720. This is a sign of either, weak hardware, bad programing, a rushed product or some combination. I'm guess it was a rushed product and with in 2 years we will see games on the 360 pushing 720 with even higher detail than Halo.
I'm just saying that if you are going to pointed out that at video game is outputting at a lower than expected resolution you might as well compare it to the maximum target resolution for the system and readily available monitors.
A youngin' who lacks the breadth and depth of your experience will need to compromise lest they find themselves out of a job. They already compromised by accepting lower compensation (Money, paid time off, etc.).
Those that have true HD TVs expect modern A/V Equipment to output 1080p resolution, though we will accept 1080i for video originally engineered at 30 fps or less. The fact that the 360 is incapable of outputting 1080i or p at 60fps in a real world scenario (Halo 3) does not make the previous comment invalid.
So the real numbers I want are 1920 X 1080 = 2073600
1152 X 640 = 737280
73280/2073600 =.35
So, it's rendering at 35% of the pixels available on a true HD display and the resolution used by other current generation video games.
It's worse than that. They are ignoring over 1 million pixels (actually ignoring nearly twice as many pixels as they are using) on full HD displays (1080 resolution). So in the end they are using.7 million pixels instead or 2 million pixels so that they can have a slightly smoother frame rate (or so they say). I guess it couldn't possibly be that they would have had to sacrifice a heck of a lot more than a few frames to get the 360 to output 1080 resolution (even interlaced).
If you cant get 1 hour of original play per $ you spent on a game its not worth it.
Having to repeat the same scenes numerous times to learn the pattern is not a reasonable way to extend the duration of a game or making scenarios out of long repetitive processes (a.k.a. Bosses). Mind you I will accept $4 per hour (since that is inline with movies) and excuse repetition in certain cases (such as collaborative/multiplayer specific games or games that have rankings that can continually improve, like rhythm games). Then again I happen to really enjoy ICO which can be completed in 4 hours or maybe even less, but still worth the $50 original cost.
If you have 2 adults in the household you need two cars, regardless if only one person works... That's totally false. I know a number of households with two adults that only have a single motor vehicle, and this is not in locations that have reasonable public transit. In my team nearly half of my coworkers have this type of situation. As long as the two adults in the home tend to do things together then there really is no reason for a second car which gets very little use. There is usually no need for a person to have a vehicle with them as they sit 8 hours in their place of business so it is very easy to have one adult drop the other off. These things even work if both adults are working. A requirement of more than one vehicle per household is bullshit.
I have been satisfied with my salary for many years. If you are in IT and not happy with your salary it is because you either settled for too little initially and are afraid to find a new job, you work harder than you need too in a location where hard work is not rewarded (you work in the South West US rather than the north east), or you are greedy and don't realize how good you have it.
Spend a week in Compton, or Bed-Stuy, or any other area with a concentration of low income earners and you will realize that you are probably compensated very well for what little work you actually do.
Slashdot is not a place for me to teach engineering principles. Study engineering, any kind, be it electrical, mechanical, structural or even civil then come back once you understand what engineering is. If you are working in systems that are performance critical enough to need to use a language that uses pointers and you have a need to write custom data structures because you can't use a common library then continue to seek out people with those skills, or sharpen your assembly and machine code skills to write truly efficient applications (or design a cpu that has a native C interpreter). If you are working on business applications or otherwise using common libraries then stop wasting your time on hiring people who understand pointers and recursion as it tends to get you programers that don't understand how to do anything without reinventing the wheel. Beyond that I'm serious when I say take a look at the basic engineering principles used in every other field of engineering, you will end up being able to run or be part of far more efficient teams and develop better software faster. At least read Brook's Mythical Man Month, that would be a start.
Thank you for making thoughtful, intelligent posts. That's funny since I started this thread with a comment intended to do nothing but be humorous and show my personal distaste of economic libertarians, and then continued to refer to economic libertarians as morons in every single comment. It's too bad that when I'm actually being intelligent and thoughtful that I tend to get modded negatively.
Slashdot Mirror
People will also chose the system that they already have a large library for, which that is hand down the PS3 as well since the number of PS2/1 game units sold is staggering compared to the other systems. The PS2 had an abysmal library until well into it's second year. And no, the PS3 is now way behind the PS2 in sales based on week...Past the first few weeks is when you get your real look, and VG Charts clearly has the PS3 lacking compared to last gen. You need to understand a few things about market cycles and how they compare for weekly sales of products. The only reasonable comparison is for a complete production run and even then over a long enough time frame. Prior to the 42 week of sales the PS2 and PS3 were nearly neck and neck. At around the 42 week the PS2 had a large market push and a number of relatively high profile releases. In the 50 something week (what ever week this is) the PS3 has had a significant price drop and a number of high profile games being released in short order. You will see in the next few weeks that the PS3 sales will jump ahead of the PS2 production run sales for the same number of weeks of production. On average they will remain nearly identical.
In general you sound much like the Dreamcast supporters who thought their 10 million unit head start would amount to success in the last generation when in reality it ended with a complete dead last and to demise of the manufacture, as a console manufacture. Predictions about this generation will not even be close to accurate for another 16 months or so. You will see significant changes in the rankings as of this holiday season.
The XBox just made it's only stab at dominance, and as much as Halo 3 will boost sales it's certainly not enough to be on the top of the market after the 5-7 span of the generation. The Wii is having impressive sales but is showing serious signs of that pattern not lasting long.The PS2 has the largest fan base of GH players (having had 3 releases) and many of those fans are going to want to upgrade to a new system so they can have downloadable content and they will, in many cases, dare I say the majority, mean purchasing a PS3 to play it on (not to mention Rock Band which leaves the Wii out in the cold and the million strong R&C fan base). You can make any prediction you want but counting the PS3 out as a contender for this generations top seller is just being ignorant of markets and market strategy.
The Last Generations total console sales were 164 million units so far, with Sony the only manufacturer still selling significant numbers of previous generation units. Of those 164 million units, over 60% of the sales (split among 4 manufacturers) a attributed to the PS2. This means that a stagnant market can support 160+ million consoles. So far this generation has seen just around 25 million units sold, which means the vast majority of units in consumers hands are still the last generation. It will still be some time before the still remaining 115 million PS2 owners decide to upgrade to the current generation and it is very safe to say that they will be likely to choose a console from a brand they already use and trust. Recently Wii sales have noticeably dropped off, 360 sales are up and PS3 sales have stayed even and happen to match pretty close to the growth rate of last generation.
I know it's nice to think that Sony is failing and that this is some sort of payback for their root kits, exploding batteries and other such nonsense, but in reality (A.K.A. off of slashdot) most people do not know about or care about these issues and are just waiting for the PS3 to have a larger library and a lower cost. As of the end of this year they will have both of those, so we will probably some change in sales at that point.
The reasonable expectation of total sales of 360s would be a moderate improvement over previous generation sales. Last generation the XBox sold less than 24 million units world wide, meaning the current 12 million units 25% (significant growth) To 50%(no growth) of the total expected sales of the console this generation. This is a significant in comparison to market saturation and means future sales will be much slower than current.
On the other hand the PS3 has reached very little toward market saturation as its current 5 million units is less than 5% of the reasonable expectation, and even less when your realize it's predecessors market is still growing.
The Wii has actually gone and carved it's own new market, which seems to be having little effect on the other market, that may or may not have room for considerable growth so it's saturation point is entirely unpredictable.
Sony will continue to get the risky games, like Eye of Judgment, and they are doing better than either of the others in embracing independent developers like Thatgamecompany.
I'm not defending Sony, being as they just pulled the one move that really irritates me, discontinuing development of the PS3s backward compatibility, but seriously if you are going to bag on a system at least get a few things right.
First no one is talking General Purpose algorithms since this is for very specific scientific computing which can be optimized for a GPU since it's normal matrix processing. This changes the context of the use of the PPUs/SPEs and GPU considerable. The general rules you mention for Cell programing is why very little of importance is being done on them at this time and why it takes an researcher to attempt to put advanced algorithms into practice.
Second, access to the GPU has been accomplished, or at least there is claim of accomplishment, It just has not been used for graphics generation. It would very well be possible that hypervisor avoids setting up graphics context objects for the GPU yet it is remain possible to gain direct access to the GPU. This sort of access is perfect for High throughput vector processing while the SPEs handle highly repetitive tasks.
I'm certainly not an expert but getting much greater than 150 GFlops out of a single PS3 is most likely achieveable, and numbers as high as a single TFlop is not impossible.
Lastly it's important to note that these units where provided directly by sony and may allow access to the the 7th SPE (or even 8th) and the GPU, but the article does not say anything about that.
Had the tides been turned and this was an individual suing the RIAA most the people here would be upset that the judgment was so low, no mater what the case was about.
Civil cases are almost always about the message and not the fine. If the punishment for theft was just that you had to return the items then there would be no deterrent since being caught would only mean you were back were you were before you were commit the crime, no real loss. It is in the courts and peoples interest that the punishment for criminal activity is strong enough to deter future offenders, and hopefully this case does just that.
I have two words for you sar casm.
No, my point was that the media industries were not attempting to get people to purchase content repeatedly until unauthorized copying became common place, so common that some claim you can't find someone that has never used an unauthorized copy of some media. I'm not saying if I agree with the media companies or not, only saying that if we don't stop the escalation of power between copy protection and piracy we will end up with out the ability to purchase media at all, but rather license it for limited time and use. If you really want to go down that path then feel free to support piracy, drm or both. But if you actually want to put an end to the escalation of power then stop supporting either side, by not paying for DRM encumbered media and not using unauthorized copies, that do not fall under the fair use clause, of media.
$222 thousand was a fraction of what the record companies where seeking, and the verdict was handed down by a jury not a judge. These are people just like you and me, that after hearing all the evidence presented decided to side with the companies. I don't think any of us on slashdot can accurately quantify the loss these companies may have had do to this persons sharing of copyrighted material, that is why we have trials and juries to determin these things. Our legal system may be unfairly in favor of those with money but that is because we, as citizens, allowed this to be, and should not be a reason to blame a company for trying to defend what it believes to be it's right.
I agree that it is really shitty that the artists will not get a penny, but the artists sold their rights to the record company, and in a way deserve what they get.
Personally I agree with you that it's not worth while, and this has been true of every single artistic work that has been encumbered by explicit DRM, but obviously somebody thinks it has enough value to violate the law to acquire it.
I obviously do not pirate artistic or copy protected works either, I don't even buy used works if there is another option, but I will purchase directly from the artist if possible.
Why is it that supporting anti-piracy automatically gets you labeled as being blind or somehow in favor of perpetual copyright. I happen to think our copyright duration is far to long and also think that we should not allow someone to maintain copyright on a work that they are not actively producing or promoting. But that has nothing to do with the point.
History shows that prior to the easy of unauthorized reproduction that we have today there were no explicit copyright protection mechanisms. Yes copyright was protected by the simple fact that copying a phonograph or a written work was difficult and/or cost prohibitive, but even when it first became easy it was no threat to copyright holders. Having been in the scene that caused the need for copy protection, which were the software hackers of the 80s if you really wanted to know, I understand where the copyright holders are coming from. And guess what, the copyright holders are not only large corporations, and even the copyrights controlled by larger corporations where voluntarily granted to them by the original artists.
I don't like DRM any more than most of the anti-drm zealots out there, I just happen to understand that the blame should be placed squarely on those producing and distributing unauthorized copies of original artistic works.
If you don't like DRM I support your decision to not purchase DRM'ed works, but I do not support acquiring unauthorized copies of artistic works just because you can't get them the way you want. If you want free unencumbered artistic works then make them yourself, or purchase from those that release their works that way, or start your own production company, just don't bitch about companies attempting to make the most money they possibly can, unless you are ready and willing to stand up against capitalism as a whole, which I doubt your are ready and willing to do.
I know most people will consider your comment flamebait or trolling, but it is one of the most accurate statements I've read in a while.
There was no copy protection on Records, tapes, or even early video cassettes and software. It was not until unauthorized copying and distribution became mainstream that companies felt they needed to add copy protection to their products. I don't know if eliminating unauthorized copying would allow companies to go back to unprotected content or not, but I'm sure they companies would like to be able to remove the cost of added copy protection.
My issue is that a flag ship AAA title for the leading HD console is not only not pushing 1080, like other games including a couple on the same console, but it's also not pushing 720. This is a sign of either, weak hardware, bad programing, a rushed product or some combination. I'm guess it was a rushed product and with in 2 years we will see games on the 360 pushing 720 with even higher detail than Halo.
I'm just saying that if you are going to pointed out that at video game is outputting at a lower than expected resolution you might as well compare it to the maximum target resolution for the system and readily available monitors.
Those that have true HD TVs expect modern A/V Equipment to output 1080p resolution, though we will accept 1080i for video originally engineered at 30 fps or less. The fact that the 360 is incapable of outputting 1080i or p at 60fps in a real world scenario (Halo 3) does not make the previous comment invalid.
.35
So the real numbers I want are 1920 X 1080 = 2073600
1152 X 640 = 737280
73280/2073600 =
So, it's rendering at 35% of the pixels available on a true HD display and the resolution used by other current generation video games.
It's worse than that. They are ignoring over 1 million pixels (actually ignoring nearly twice as many pixels as they are using) on full HD displays (1080 resolution). So in the end they are using .7 million pixels instead or 2 million pixels so that they can have a slightly smoother frame rate (or so they say). I guess it couldn't possibly be that they would have had to sacrifice a heck of a lot more than a few frames to get the 360 to output 1080 resolution (even interlaced).
If you cant get 1 hour of original play per $ you spent on a game its not worth it.
Having to repeat the same scenes numerous times to learn the pattern is not a reasonable way to extend the duration of a game or making scenarios out of long repetitive processes (a.k.a. Bosses). Mind you I will accept $4 per hour (since that is inline with movies) and excuse repetition in certain cases (such as collaborative/multiplayer specific games or games that have rankings that can continually improve, like rhythm games). Then again I happen to really enjoy ICO which can be completed in 4 hours or maybe even less, but still worth the $50 original cost.
I have been satisfied with my salary for many years. If you are in IT and not happy with your salary it is because you either settled for too little initially and are afraid to find a new job, you work harder than you need too in a location where hard work is not rewarded (you work in the South West US rather than the north east), or you are greedy and don't realize how good you have it.
Spend a week in Compton, or Bed-Stuy, or any other area with a concentration of low income earners and you will realize that you are probably compensated very well for what little work you actually do.
Slashdot is not a place for me to teach engineering principles. Study engineering, any kind, be it electrical, mechanical, structural or even civil then come back once you understand what engineering is. If you are working in systems that are performance critical enough to need to use a language that uses pointers and you have a need to write custom data structures because you can't use a common library then continue to seek out people with those skills, or sharpen your assembly and machine code skills to write truly efficient applications (or design a cpu that has a native C interpreter). If you are working on business applications or otherwise using common libraries then stop wasting your time on hiring people who understand pointers and recursion as it tends to get you programers that don't understand how to do anything without reinventing the wheel. Beyond that I'm serious when I say take a look at the basic engineering principles used in every other field of engineering, you will end up being able to run or be part of far more efficient teams and develop better software faster. At least read Brook's Mythical Man Month, that would be a start.