X Box 360 or Playstation 3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rav.

By the way, do you seriously think Sony was stupid enough to spend millions and millions of dollars on Blu-Ray Research without any proper "reason" ??? (:

---

This comment actually made me think of SecuROM and most other anti-pirating technology. How much has been spent on what effectively only denies legitimate owners the right to play their games? ;)

Also, as I have stated before Game Devs have made it known to the System Devs that it is not the size of the disc that matters but the streaming. This is one of the reasons why out of all of the last gen systems supporting DVD and the many games produced, there were very little multiple disc or DL games. If they needed the space DL was there and I can count on one hand the amount of DL games that I can think of that were produced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pkt-zer0

What I find amazing is what sort of content would only be able to fit on 30GB+ discs. Doom 3 takes only 3 discs, even with all the data decompressed it only takes up ~5GB, which is near the capacity of a single layer DVD. The next-gen consoles haven't yet shown anything that sported better graphics or more content (which would make the bigger size necessary) than Doom3 or Half-life 2, so that's why I assumed that there's no need for 30GB of space.

I should've said that I see the BRD as nothing more than an anti-piracy measure, because there's really no need for that much space, especially with consoles becoming more powerful.
As for compression issues: what I meant in my previous post was not compression, simply removing dummy files and such, no actual data loss. Zone of the Enders 2 takes up about 2GB, and it looks pretty impressive on a PS2.
The thing that ate up disc space in the PSX days (and I'm thinking this was the same reason for some PS2 games) was streaming video, FMVs, and their like. Not much compression could be applied to those because of the relatively slow CPUs. With newer consoles, that's not a problem, just whack a DivX codec on there, and you'll be able to enjoy 3 hour long DVD quality movies, that take up around 1,5GB.

I'd like to point out that the Gamecube's GPU was able to compress and decompress textures real-time, not putting any stress on the CPU or the developers for additional compression.


Sony might as well be trying to gain grounds for its BRD standard against DVD in all forms of multimedia use. I'm not sure if it'll work.

---

Thanks for putting up a fair arguement, saving me time.

The BRD is not needed. People didnt clamor for a new format when the PSone was released with 2 CD games quite quickly, and I dont see it happening now.

Again, the 360 isnt a failure by anymeans. If you think that they wont be showing off the PS3 on HDTVs, youre nuts. Of course it makes games look better, thats what the job is. You can only fit so much quality in a 680x480 standard TV. Ever try running HL2 on that resolution? Sure, it looks good, but no where near if you ran it at 1280x1024.

I'm sorry but I don't know what your getting at. I have outputted 1024X768 to my normal TV Playing Unreal 2K4 and have had opinions from several different people that have agreed that the visual of the outputted 1024X768 on the Normal TV (32" Normal TV with a Flat Screen) seemed to be of better quality then the 1024X768 on my 17" UltraSharp LCD Monitor (it is not a piece of crap either, it's brand new).

Things look horrible on normal TVs, you just don't notice it.

When the next lot of consoles come round will they all be opting to support HD TVs 100% and not let anyone without one be left in the dust? Also will Sony ever think up an original console name? PS1, PS2, PS3, OMG whats the next one gonna be called? Wait... I think I got it! Could it be... PS4?!

How lame and unoriginal will that be?

it was originally a psx, not a ps1. and naming sony's 4th console ps4 is about as lame as naming a console Revolution

How is the codename "Revolution" lame? Now the name "Xbox" is lame.

although i dislike the xbox, it is microsoft's 1st console so i'll excuse'em for that. even if thats lame also. but you'd think nintendo would know better than to use a lame name like the revolution. a vibrator for a control does not make an entire console revolutionary. nor does playing old roms on the console make it revolutionary.

"Revolution" is only the "Code Name", it may not be called that at the final release. When the "GameCube" was in production it's "Code Name" was "Dolphin". That is where the GameCube Emulator Dolphin got it's name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey

although i dislike the xbox, it is microsoft's 1st console so i'll excuse'em for that. even if thats lame also. but you'd think nintendo would know better than to use a lame name like the revolution. a vibrator for a control does not make an entire console revolutionary. nor does playing old roms on the console make it revolutionary.

---

Do you not think that 3D movement sensory technology is revolutionary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey

it was originally a psx, not a ps1. and naming sony's 4th console ps4 is about as lame as naming a console Revolution

---

Wrong again, Mikey.

"Confusingly, PSX is also a popular nickname for the original PlayStation video games console. The "X" appears because Sony originally developed the PlayStation as a CD-ROM and SNES hybrid unit. When the project was halted by Nintendo, Sony decided to redesign the PlayStation as a stand alone console, which was known internally as the PlayStation Experimental. The media caught wind of the name and it has stuck ever since."
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSX_(DVR) )

The Playstation is the Playstation, the PSone (small obviously), then the rest you know. The PSX is the PS2/DVR combo unit.

Thought so, when it was first out it was known as the PS1 and later when new technologies came out they revised their design (like the slimline PS2) and called them the PSX instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToolPunk

I'm sorry but I don't know what your getting at. I have outputted 1024X768 to my normal TV Playing Unreal 2K4 and have had opinions from several different people that have agreed that the visual of the outputted 1024X768 on the Normal TV (32" Normal TV with a Flat Screen) seemed to be of better quality then the 1024X768 on my 17" UltraSharp LCD Monitor (it is not a piece of crap either, it's brand new).

---

A TV is unable to output 1024x768. It must get rid of pixels in order to do it, eliminating detail.

I didn't say that the TV outputed 1024x768. I said I outputted 1024x768 to the TV. It looks better on the TV to me then the Monitor. There doesn't seem to be quality loss. The only big difference I can tell is that on the TV it is smoother where as to the trained eye you can see the pixelation on the Monitor.