News

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 19, 2005 12:31)

Don't jump to conclusions, all we know is Sony plans for full compatibility to PS1 and PS2. It would be in their best economic interests to do what Microsoft is doing, if I made the desicion, it would be the one MS made.

Comment by: arcanix (Nov 19, 2005 15:13)

Quote:

---

Don't jump to conclusions, all we know is Sony plans for full compatibility to PS1 and PS2.

---

Yeah, I shouldn't. But if Sony plans to sell ps3 with 600$ or something like that, then I say screw the backwards compatibility. Although that was just the thing that made ps2 popular, but that matter is different now. MS made some cuts (like no hd-dvd drive) and ps3 has a bluray drive. We're going to see that in ps3's price.

Comment by: nuttin_88 (Nov 19, 2005 18:56)

yea true. I don't really care about ps1 games. The only one i used to play on my ps2 is metal gear solid. But i think they should add ps2 compatibility.

Comment by: l34merik (Nov 19, 2005 23:31)

Didn't the PS2 emulate the PS1 and not have a PS1 chip inside it?

Comment by: chaos5258 (Nov 20, 2005 00:11)

yep and the same will happen with the PS3

Comment by: arcanix (Nov 20, 2005 09:03)

Quote:

---

Didn't the PS2 emulate the PS1 and not have a PS1 chip inside it?

---

Emulation was hard to make, so they just included ps1 chip in ps2. So ms is first do this with emulator. And if sony doesn't do it, then next will be revolution.

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 20, 2005 16:05)

Sony is shooting for $400 for the barebones system, the PS3, cables, wired controller. It is very reasonable and they will be losing much more money than MS is losing on the 360.

Comment by: arcanix (Nov 20, 2005 16:17)

Quote:

---

they will be losing much more money than MS is losing on the 360

---

Yeah, and 360 will be cheaper when ps3 launches. It's going to be hard time to sony, but ps3 is far more anticipated console than 360. So it will not be likely that ps3 will sell alright.

And about that backwards compatibility... Microsoft decision has an clear advantage. Old xbox games (those which will even run) will run with better graphics. Like we saw with ps2 (which had ps1 chip included), ps1 games ran with same crappy graphics that they run on the original ps1 games.

Comment by: chaos5258 (Nov 20, 2005 18:32)

$400 is a lot of money you could do a lot of stuff for that much money not to mention the $60 for the game plus tax damn thats just too much money I think I won't buy more than one console this time around at least not right now. $400 to have fun I think I'll just go out and play basketball with my buddies.

Comment by: SGSeries2 (Nov 20, 2005 20:15)

Last I recall, Sony originally had the ps1 hardware in the ps2, yes, but then switched to an emulator solution once they found it viable and more cost effective. (Some games I do believe were at one time not compatible with it, and could possibly be the case for the xbox emulator on the 360 as well.) I could be wrong, but that's the last I heard of the story.

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 21, 2005 09:45)

The stakes will always get higher because mor ean dmore poeple are interested in gameing now, and want to, and will pay for, serious performance during the five years the console is around.

Think about this though, $300 for a 3 core 3.2GHz power pc CPU, that alone stomps the top $1000 CPUs on the market today. It is a very good deal, they are losing money, not making $960 in profit like is made on $1000 CPUs. You heard me, manufacturing costs of a CPU is $40 to $60, they just charge what you will pay.

And $400 for the cell is extremely good, you're looking at a new architecture capable of handling 9-10 threads at a time, and is designed very well for massive CPU networking and resource sharing. It's revolutionary, and should be a big hit for Scientific purposes that will put ten of them together without payign a supercomputer price.

Comment by: SGSeries2 (Nov 21, 2005 11:27)

I'd really like to see a game use 9-10 threads. I would like to see just about anything (a single program, not an os) use 9-10 threads (and really makes good use of all of the threads). I know someone will find something for me...

"massive CPU networking and resource sharing"?

Although I do recall the cell going to be used in other devices, how do those advancements affect gaming? If you don't mind, I'd like to know what you mean by cpu networking, are you talking about something like resource distribution like folding@home or the like? How does it benefit gaming on a gaming machine?

Anyways, isn't the technology involved in the new gpus coming out in the ATI R580? That's (supposedly) not too far away. Just give processors time, and you use a "standard" processor for much more than just gaming. (Well, at least I do. :) ) Alas, your argument does have relevance though.

Speaking of which, I think it'll be interesting to see how some of the new games on the 360 stack up to the PC versions. (After all, the 360 should be better, right? :) )

Somewhat off-topic: I thought the 360 pre-release demo of Call of Duty 2 somewhat unimpressive myself. It just looked unpolished. I expect more from a demo; don't show what you're not finished with. Strong policy, I know. (I thought the king kong demo was pretty impressive though, and I'd like to see what it's like on the other systems.)

Comment by: Razengan (Nov 21, 2005 12:40)

I played Call of Duty 2 in 360 as well, and wasn't particulary impressed. I've seen it run better on PC's. Expensive PC's though. I'm a PS2 Owner, one of the very firsts when it came out, and I'm considering to buy the 360 if the PS3 price is too high. I believe that a next generation console for $299 is a great deal, but I won't make the mistake I made when I bought the PS2. This time I'll wait to see and test both systems to choose the best and let the price lower a bit as well. Hopefully, by then the better games will arrive. Most current XBOX 360 titles suck.

As for backward compatibility, I kind of look forward for it on the 360, since I didn't had an XBOX and couldn't play most of the old games. But not too much. For the PS3 I don't care, since I have 2 PS2's at home and I won't be playing any old titles that I already played.

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 21, 2005 12:59)

Gaming you now see may not e multi-threaded, but the PS3 and the cell are for more than just games. The PS3 will run linux, a plus for me, I will take full advantage of Linux on a 9 thread CPU.

Gaming in the future, which happens to be these consoles, will utilize individual threads for sound, graphics, physics, etc. Eveyrthign your CPU and GPU handles now will be divided up to increase what they can do with the game. The 5.1 surrond on the xbox 360 is likely optimized ot run on it's own thread. You get my drift?

Comment by: SGSeries2 (Nov 22, 2005 11:23)

Just as long as they can handle the deadlock and other possible conflicts, I'm all cool with that. :)

Just think, they could even run multiple versions of their ps2/xbox emulator on the ps3/360! (Oh, wait, there's only one drive, oh well, there goes my grand vision. :) )

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 23, 2005 20:00)

I got two premium packages, and here is a super short summation-

Very Loud, Very Very Hot after 20 minutes, this whole thing is a vent the top the bottome the sides and the back, except for the pretty front. And it still gets blistering hot.

The Power Supply more than doubles the weight and is probably just as big in volume, just thicker and more rectangular. It's cords weren't long enough to make it from it's position in my rack mount A/V system to the power supply, I had to move the power supply which wasn't far away. The high def cables were plenty long.

The protective stickers over the crome left a strange residue that still haven't come off with Goo-Gone, I am just going to srape it with something that won't damage the crome.

Hard drive capacity when formatted and leaving room for drive caching in game, is 12GB, that's an 8GB loss. It blew me away.

Loading times were ridiculous for a next gen console, it took about 30-45 seconds, but this is including the very valuabled drive caching.

The overall construction is very cheap, the plastic flexes and opens the joints uncomfortably for me who prefers this system says it'll last five years. NOT IMPRESSED, the cheap construction and HIGH HIGH build up of heat scare the hell out of me.

The wireless adaptor to play Xbox live is not built in like the spec sheet CLEARLY STATED, go look. It pissed me off, it's an extra $100 USB device.

All the serious dissapointments aside, gameplay is beautiful and AMAZINGLY detailed, damn it's o sweet. The control feels ooo good too, i love it. That's all I got for the good things though.

Overall, if you are getting only one system, I'd wait for PS3. I have a bad feeling about this one, and it definitely didn't impress like it should have. The graphics on Perfect dark Zero Weren't up to snuff as the call of duty 2 demo displayed. But don't get me wrong I will not touch PS2 and Xbox again, this thing is such a breathe of fresh air.

Questions anyone? I have Perfect Dark and two premiums, and I'd be glad to answer them. Or someone post me a link to a thread that has this topic.

Comment by: Ofnir1 (Nov 23, 2005 20:26)

I wonder if rubbing alcohol would help at all? Not sure about the reactions if you were to use it though, I know if you were to use it on your cars paint it'd mess it up royally. I'd make a HUGE complaint about the wrieless adapter that was supposed to be there. Perfect Dark Zero and Call of Duty 2 looks so fun, how was it like?

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 24, 2005 00:22)

Perfect Dark Zero doesn't really have a solid story line, but it is there. Gameplay is fin, very addicting and worth it, it may be because it's my first game for it though.

I'm not going to put any more chemicals/liquids to it, when i feel like I scrape it off with discretion.

Comment by: rapnxbox (Nov 24, 2005 16:50)

i dont care about the backword capatable soon there going to stop selling the xbox and ps2 games its a matter of time before xbox and ps2 games gets sent out to goodwell for 25cent a game lololololol

Comment by: LEO1WOLF (Nov 25, 2005 17:29)

Please Advise arcanix & Reasons?: My Sony Viao has an 845GV w./64MB dynamically shared memory Graphics card. Would either one of you (or both) want to recommend an upgrade (as well as Audio card), $ amount to upgrade my Vaio? ALSO, what do you two have to say about Alien Ware gaming P.C.'s? I've been kind of eye-balling those rather than upgrading mine, but boy are those pricey! I like your discussions & any input you two would share would be GREATLY appreciated. You might be able to tell that I am still just a novice & humbled by your knowledge.

Comment by: Reasons? (Nov 26, 2005 02:11)

Is your Vaio a Desktop or Laptop, I'm not familar with the brand specifically. And is you can figure out what slot your card goes in whether AGP or PCI-E or if it's embedded.

Comment by: mobywalt (Oct 29, 2006 21:31)

has any1 done this update and was it worth it i seen someone on ebay selling the disc to upgrade for £5 but i was wondering is it free to download.

Comment by: LEO1WOLF (Dec 08, 2008 21:59)

Thank you most kindly for your response Reasons?. I recently built my own P.C. from the box to the motherboard. My Vaio's back up & running as a back-up (my Wifey's P.C. now). Don't need any other input there.

But thanks again for posting.

-Lone Wolf

Comment by: Jemborg (Apr 04, 2017 04:01)

Kenny142 has been busy

Comment by: KillerBug (Apr 07, 2017 05:06)

Originally posted by Jemborg:

---

Kenny142 has been busy

---

Yeah, someone needs to kill Kenny, or at least his account.