borman, if you're so tired of all this then why post? just ignore it and move on. its that simple.
Printable View
borman, if you're so tired of all this then why post? just ignore it and move on. its that simple.
Because, why not post, and make a point? Wait until the damn systems are released. I love how people can take a basically imaginary system and put it against something thats actually out. Why do people post false crap in the first place?
the thing is, that point has always been made, not just by you.
Any yet the idiots here continue arguing about products that dont exist.
Point being?Quote:
Originally Posted by Borman
Those are just opinions, no more valid than any other statement you might make about even an existing system. What Mikey said, ignore it. You can't stop the fanboys anyway. :P
Opinions on what they think something will be, and yet these opinions cause all of the stupid rumors. Why are threads like this even allowed here, when there are obviously better things to be done. Hell, i dont even mind SNES vs Gen or whatever since the systems are done and over with production wise. Or put it in the hangout or something so people like Mikey cant get this huge post count from arguments.
what does my post count number have to do with any of this?
it's goin to be for the PS3 in a interview (read Game Informer)Hideo kojima stated hes tried the Xbox and the gamecube but didnt get as much feedback than he got from the playstation, so he is gonna make games for the console that got metal gear solid where it is today.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToolPunk
For those of you saying that you want the PS3 because that is what MGS4 is going to be on think again. There is a chance it could also be on the XB360. Iluding to how similar "the PS3, 360 and PC" are, you never know, if they go a step further it might even end up on the PC.
and another thing about the 360, many developers have said that they are goin to switch to making games for sony because the 360's is more complex and takes alot longer to develop games than it would for the PS3, MGS FO LIFE!! (Till Snake Dies..............)
well lets say that the xbox 360 is having some big problems and it is not working out.
What I would like to know is what here do you claim to be false?Quote:
Originally Posted by Borman
Also yes, M$oft did deliver, too early, a piece of crap. I have had hands on experience with the system. I just love how all of these XB360 kiosks are being setup on HD tv's so as to make it look so good. Just another ploy to get you to buy it. Where it stands, the larger % of the population still have a normal TV. I have tested a few games that are on the XB360 that have also been released on the current gen systems and there was not much of a boost in quality. I am not impressed with the XB360 and niether are all the other stackable customers that purchased it that are experiencing distortion in graphics, slowdowns and the all to offten crashing.
To sum up all of my posts I have not been solely standing up for the Revolution, I just feel that it will be the All Around right way to go for me. Also, I am just trying to stick up for the consoles that are being bashed for the wrong reasons and trying to make people aware of the pros and cons. I do not know yet if the PS3 will be soo bad but I do know that I myself do not agree with them on the idea of the BRD's.
careful what you say toolpunk. bad mouthing microsoft in anyway shape or form will result in a rather unpleasant tongue lashing by ep's resident xbox fanboy.
I'm sorry but I am just stating the obvious they should have just took more time and worked out some bugs that are killing the system's reputation.
I second that, here here! :cheers:Quote:
Originally Posted by ToolPunk
To begin with I was feeling like I would maybe get an XB360 before I definetly get my Nintendo Revolution (no matter what shape or size or controller design), but after seeing how poorly the XB360 was deleivered I have started to shift more to the PS3 side of the war between Sony and Microsoft.
However that does not mean I am definetly getting a PS3 nor does this mean I have succumed to the torrential rain of hype about its allegedy super duper hardware specs, especially about the Blue Ray Discs. I think Sony is making a mistake with those discs as they will end up making the cost of the games as extortionate as the XB360 games are currently due to it being a brand new portable information storage technology that won't be available publically for years yet. Though that will stop the odd hacker from creating new games with those type of discs it could have chosen a much easier storage device to code onto.
The Blu-ray Discs are simply anti-piracy measures, nothing more. They'll probably be copied sometime, but not in the beginning. Also, remember how some PS2 games could be fit on a single layer DVD or even a CD? It's not going to be any different for the PS3.
So, all I think they've done with the Blu-ray technology is drive the manufacturing costs up a bit.
And I'd like to point out that the X360 and PS3 supposedly had about the same power, so it the former was a piece of sh*t, the other could be as well...
But it's pretty obvious that (if Sony has any sense at all) they'll try to watch out for pitfalls that the X360 didn't avoid.
I don't fully agree with that. SIZE DOES MATTER. The max size available in DVD format, as all of you might be already knowing, is 8.2 gb on a dual layered disc. Whereas, TDK released a report where they mentioned that they were successful in making a 50-GB Blu-Ray disc, which is quite amazing. I also remember reading on Gamespot and on other websites that developers were not happy with Microsoft still sticking to the DVD format as many of the Next-Gen games had already crossed 3 dual-layer DVD discs O_O and they were forced to cut back on the "contents" of the game so it could fit on a single DL disc.Quote:
Originally Posted by pkt-zer0
Where did you get your BRD info? BluRay Discs are NOT Just simply anti-piracy measures. There is a considerable difference between what we have now and the BluRays as I have stated in another post.Quote:
Originally Posted by pkt-zer0
In this instance a DL PS2 Game (9-10GB Max) can be ripped and compressed to fit on a SL DVD (4.7 GB Max). That is about a 50% Max compression with visable quality loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by pkt-zer0
When you go as far as to make a CD version rip from a SL PS2 Game you get very bad results, missing sound, graphics glitches, skipping and freezing. Compared to the average PS2 game size that would be a 75% compression.
The BluRay discs are NOT Just simply anti-piracy measures. They have a capacity of 25-50GB so if you had a way to read these discs through a drive or streaming to make backups you would have to use close to that 75% compression ratio. So you pay out all this money for this wonderful system so that you can play really crappy quality backups???
I also read that Microsoft was convincing developers that they are trying to develop a better compression method which can be used on Xbox360 games so developers don't have to cut back on the "contents", but developers are facing another problem with that coz the Xbox360 console will have to decompress the data "on-the-fly" and of course that will require processing power. So the Xbox360 processor will have to deal with it AND the rest of the stuff like graphics, sounds, etc, etc (aka whatever a processor is supposed to process in a game :P).
Whereas, the Playstation 3 is never going to face this problem as it won't have to decompress anything "on-the-fly".
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" ??? (:
Phony Gaystation alll the way! Gayness shall rule one day!
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rav.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToolPunk
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rav.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rav.
As Pkt mentioned there is no reason to use the BRD technology because there are no games at the moment that will even come close to needing a 5th of that disc space while decompressed, so unless they create a 200+ hour Final Fantasy games - that developers say is too big and isn't advisable for sales because people don't want to play for that long, they want short easy games - then maybe just maybe they might need the major capacity BRDs.
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? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rav.
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
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.
Do you not think that 3D movement sensory technology is revolutionary?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey
Wrong again, Mikey.Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
A TV is unable to output 1024x768. It must get rid of pixels in order to do it, eliminating detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToolPunk
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.
Try to read medium-small text on that TV.
I don't think your getting my point. Compare playing a game and just doing regular computer stuff on the TV. There is a big difference the game appears on the screen in a totally different environment. At your desktop or viewing a text file the screen apears to be fuzzy (This is due to the flicker filter) and "medium-small" text is hard to read. When I load up a game though the whole world changes I can read even the smallest text very clearly. This is also the same when it comes to playing movies from your PC to your TV. You have to have an OK PC setup to know what I am talking about. One of the points I am trying to make is that just because the TV's Screen Resolution is limited this does not limit what the hardware can manipulate and output to the TV. Yes an HD-TV may be somewhat crisper and Sharper but they have yet to impress me. The only real drastic change I see is in the Flat Panel TV's size.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vhailor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a summary of a small hands on review and also some more on why I think the XB360 should not have launched so early (the link to the full article can be found at the bottom of the quote).
Quote:
Originally Posted by malloc @ Maxconsole.com
About the blue ray discs, there's one MAJOR reason that hasn't been mentioned yet, high def movies. DVD's aren't the final form of media for movies, we're moving into high definition stuff very soon and there's a war between who will win. DVD's are being replaced by either BRD or DVD-hd, and well, SONY is backing BRD. By incorperating BRD technology into their ps3 you're not only buying a ps3 game machine, but a high def movie player. What this gets SONY is the ability to help BRD get a foothold into the market before DVD-hd does.
Besides, it's always best to add more capability to something if you have the ability to, especially if the cost isn't that crippling.
BRD might be a bit more expensive at the moment, but in a year they'll be much cheaper, and 2 years, and 3 years, and 4...
When developers have the ability to fill up 50gigs of space, who knows what tricks and uses they can make for it. Giving developers more freedom is always a good thing.
The jump from the xbox to the xbox360 isn't as large as the jump from ps2 to ps3 will be, which is a huge jump in power.Quote:
Originally Posted by pkt-zer0
so to be fair although they are both supposedly close in power in some forms, the xbox360 isn't that impressive by comparison, but the ps2 to ps3, even if it were a "peice of sh*t" would still be a massive improvement over the ps2, and so welcomed.
... I'm tired, sleepy time.
x box 360 is sold out in so many places, but microsoft did the stupidest thing in the world. No fan in x box 360 and did that just so it can be as quiet as possible.
Interesting blurb on the Revolution here. Looks like it's going to be really cheap in comparison to the competition.