Ken Kutaragi Calls the Xbox 360 the "Xbox 1.5"

Zoglog

Zoglog

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
Side-swipe at "Xbox 1.5" as the father of PlayStation lays out his future vision

Sony Computer Entertainment boss Ken Kutaragi has outlined his vision for the PlayStation 3 as an media centre which excels at all forms of entertainment, not just games - and criticised the design of Xbox 360.

Speaking in an interview with Japanese website Impress PC Watch, which has been partially translated by GameSpot, Kutaragi argued that the PS3 "is not a game machine", saying that the company has "never once called it a game machine".

Instead, he says, it has been designed as "a computer that's meant for entertainment", fulfilling the motivation of Sony Computer Entertainment to "[explore ways of] applying the power of computing to entertainment and enjoyment".

Kutaragi highlighted the specialised nature of the hardware within the PlayStation 3, including the custom-designed Cell microprocessor, which he claims gives the system supercomputer-style processing power and is designed specifically with entertainment functions in mind.

"PCs that are currently available have been created as work tools," he commented. "They've begun selling computers with media playback capabilities, such as the Media Centre PC, but those just imitate the functions of home electronics. It's not like those machines have been created solely for entertainment."

He then extended this comment to make a dig at Microsoft's Xbox 360 console, which is due out later this year, saying that the system is more like an "Xbox 1.5", since it seems like an extension of the original console, and criticising its architecture - which uses multiple general purpose CPUs - saying that it "will only benefit general applications" as opposed to entertainment functions.

Speaking more specifically about the functionality of the system, Kutaragi said that an online storage system called Cell Storage would allow users to store their media and process and refine it using idle time on the Cell chip itself, performing tasks such as scaling up standard video to High Definition. The system's security will also enable users to make protected "rips" of their DVDs, he claimed.

PlayStation 3 was unveiled in Los Angeles last week, and is expected to launch in Japan in the middle of next year.
Click to expand...

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=9158

fight!!!
 
Kutaragi argued that the PS3 "is not a game machine", saying that the company has "never once called it a game machine".

He's right, it's not a game machine, it's a grill and a boomerang; perfect for a day at the beach!
 
*YAWN* One thing I have learned is that Sony hyped the PS2 to be so powerful that they claimed the govt. had to take a close look at it so people can't make bombs with it. I think the PS3 is way overhyped compared to the other two consoles (which is what Sony wants), and it won't be far more powerful than the Rev or Xbox360 (if at all).
 
If he's going to start offering opinions before the system is even released, he's just as big an asshat as the rest of the system fanboys out there.
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']C&p?[/QUOTE]
Kutaragi talks up PS3 as entertainment centre
Illustration
Rob Fahey 11:42 25/05/2005

Side-swipe at "Xbox 1.5" as the father of PlayStation lays out his future vision

Sony Computer Entertainment boss Ken Kutaragi has outlined his vision for the PlayStation 3 as an media centre which excels at all forms of entertainment, not just games - and criticised the design of Xbox 360.

Speaking in an interview with Japanese website Impress PC Watch, which has been partially translated by GameSpot, Kutaragi argued that the PS3 "is not a game machine", saying that the company has "never once called it a game machine".

Instead, he says, it has been designed as "a computer that's meant for entertainment", fulfilling the motivation of Sony Computer Entertainment to "[explore ways of] applying the power of computing to entertainment and enjoyment".

Kutaragi highlighted the specialised nature of the hardware within the PlayStation 3, including the custom-designed Cell microprocessor, which he claims gives the system supercomputer-style processing power and is designed specifically with entertainment functions in mind.

"PCs that are currently available have been created as work tools," he commented. "They've begun selling computers with media playback capabilities, such as the Media Centre PC, but those just imitate the functions of home electronics. It's not like those machines have been created solely for entertainment."

He then extended this comment to make a dig at Microsoft's Xbox 360 console, which is due out later this year, saying that the system is more like an "Xbox 1.5", since it seems like an extension of the original console, and criticising its architecture - which uses multiple general purpose CPUs - saying that it "will only benefit general applications" as opposed to entertainment functions.

Speaking more specifically about the functionality of the system, Kutaragi said that an online storage system called Cell Storage would allow users to store their media and process and refine it using idle time on the Cell chip itself, performing tasks such as scaling up standard video to High Definition. The system's security will also enable users to make protected "rips" of their DVDs, he claimed.

PlayStation 3 was unveiled in Los Angeles last week, and is expected to launch in Japan in the middle of next year.
 
After playing many (if not all) the playable 360 titles at E3...i have to admit, he isn't wrong.
Then again, its probably too early to tell.
 
It's interesting to hear whenever somebody makes a comment about "360 is 15 times more powerful than Xbox, while PS3 is 36 times more powerful than ps2!", but the Xbox is already 2-3 times more powerful than the ps2! It's easy for Sony to say/show how much more poweful the ps3 is when compared to the ps2, but it's not really a fair comparison.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Yeah, and the PS3 is basically the PS2.5. I expect the Revolution to be the only truly innovative of the next-gen systems.[/QUOTE]

Yes, because inventing an entirely new CPU architecture radically different than anything made before is just a minor update, and downloading emulators from the internet is highly innovative.
 
KK is right PS3 won't be a game machine. It will be the most expensive paperweight you'll ever buy. You can call sony "eminem" cuz they never forget about DRE. Buying sony launch hardware is about as smart as being the first to buy the new version of windows. Gee... I wonder if I'll have problems.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Yes, because inventing an entirely new CPU architecture radically different than anything made before is just a minor update, and downloading emulators from the internet is highly innovative.[/QUOTE]


lol do I detect some sarcasm ;)?
 
The May 23 issue of Time had an interesting article about the 360. A quote from Bill Gates:

"If there's anything we're confused about, about what Sony's thinking, it's when do they get their act together on the equivalent of Live?"
 
[quote name='evilmax17']It's interesting to hear whenever somebody makes a comment about "360 is 15 times more powerful than Xbox, while PS3 is 36 times more powerful than ps2!", but the Xbox is already 2-3 times more powerful than the ps2! It's easy for Sony to say/show how much more poweful the ps3 is when compared to the ps2, but it's not really a fair comparison.[/QUOTE]

As much as i've seen of the XB I never concidered it "2-3 times more powerful" it has better antialising and more memory for textures but it's hardly that much more powerful. if anything is BS it's the claim that either of these systems will be better than their predecessor by a multiple with 2 digits.

I do think that Kutaragi has a firm mental impression of how he feels his system is better designed and this really does show a deep comitment to designing a useful device, but the question is whether or not this will translate into the actuall consumer market. Building a system with entertainment in mind means nothing if the competator's media management device is comparable even if it's just a general computing device with media applications.

Also people have been ripping movies to Xbox for a while now the only differance the PS3 is offering in this regard is to "protect" them which we all know, just means you can't share it.
 
Well, someone pointed out the "least common denominator" concept in producing cross-platform software. I wouldn't expect a PS3 version of an EA title to look remarkably better (higher poly count, for instance) than a 360 version, based upon economic necessity. It may be more powerful, but that may only become relevant for titles exclusive to the PS3; that's a moot point, since it won't be available for other consoles (e.g., Jak and Dexter).

What's significant for this generation is the heavy involvement of Japanese development companies in making 360 titles, something it was seriously lacking in this generation. This is only important if it translates into a greater market share in Japan; at the moment, if Microsoft sells over 500 units a week, it's cause for a fucking celebration.

myke.
...the console price is also important. I wonder what economists think the threshold is for making the cost of a console too high?
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Yes, because inventing an entirely new CPU architecture radically different than anything made before is just a minor update, and downloading emulators from the internet is highly innovative.[/QUOTE]
There's obviously more to the Revolution than just the back-catalog, smartass. We just don't know what it is yet.

And are you trying to tell me that having a new CPU architecture is going to be innovative for gaming? It's innovative, technologically, but in no way does it intrinsically make games better. It's still gonna put the same image, on the same screen. I don't care how it does it's operations. It is a minor update, really.

I find it funny that it seems there are people who would rather know that their console is moving electrons around in a slightly different manner to do the math to run their games, then have innovative ways to play their games.
 
[quote name='shieryda']The May 23 issue of Time had an interesting article about the 360. A quote from Bill Gates:

"If there's anything we're confused about, about what Sony's thinking, it's when do they get their act together on the equivalent of Live?"[/QUOTE]

OMG that has got to be the most visious state of denial I've ever seen. Who says Sony even wants to follow his vision of online gaming. his thinking has got to be just as biased as Kutaragi's... hell it's actually WORSE by thinking his way is the best way and that other people must want be just like him.
 
[quote name='BIG5']Kutaragi argued that the PS3 "is not a game machine", saying that the company has "never once called it a game machine".

He's right, it's not a game machine, it's a grill and a boomerang; perfect for a day at the beach![/QUOTE]

He said the same thing about the PSP..

something along the lines of:

"Shoot anyone who calls this a game machine"
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']There's obviously more to the Revolution than just the back-catalog, smartass. We just don't know what it is yet.[/QUOTE]

:roll:
 
[quote name='Snake2715']He said the same thing about the PSP..

something along the lines of:

"Shoot anyone who calls this a game machine"[/QUOTE]

He also was incredulous that anyone would dare criticize the design of the machine, despite the "square button issue" and dead pixels.

But, have you let the PSP make you pancakes? Why don't you go do that, and then I dare you to call it a game machine!

myke.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Well, someone pointed out the "least common denominator" concept in producing cross-platform software. I wouldn't expect a PS3 version of an EA title to look remarkably better (higher poly count, for instance) than a 360 version, based upon economic necessity. It may be more powerful, but that may only become relevant for titles exclusive to the PS3; that's a moot point, since it won't be available for other consoles (e.g., Jak and Dexter).
[/QUOTE]

Bravo. That is right on the money. :applause:
 
[quote name='heyyoeddie']Bravo. That is right on the money. :applause:[/QUOTE]

yeah but it could also lead to developers not supporting the 360 as much in a few years as the differences in performance becomes more noticable.
 
I read this article earlier in the day.

It all really amounts to a whole lot of nothing. Look at the XBOX, PS2, and GC. They all play games. Are they really THAT much different? Yeah one may be a little better than the other or one might play DVD's where another one doesn't but does it make a difference at this point? It is all a matter of personal preference. Even then a lot of hardcore gamers just end up with all the consoles.

A good online gaming model is good but Live is also charging a fee where Sony doesn't. Not to mention if anyone should have a solid online arena it is M$.

The graphics of each system are going to matter less and less as time goes by.

Do I need my gaming console to play DVD's, MP3's, and cook bacon? Nice additions but not exactly needed. Yeah High Definition will be nice but I don't have any plans on buying an HD TV anytime soon so it doesn't matter to me. It's great how these companies say these aren't gaming machines but I don't see Joe (could care less about video games) picking up a PS2 to play his DVD's. For a gamer it may sway them into owning one or another but for the average person they see it as a toy.

Why not address the fact that the planned games for the PS3 are MGS4, Devil May Cry 4, and Tekken 6? Or Halo 3 for the XBOX 360? Or Mario 128 for the Revolution?

Now that gaming is a highly profitable market we see more and more catering to the public and less and less innovation. I hope Nintendo has something new and exciting but we will have to wait and see.

While the CELL processor may be very powerful and the BLU-RAY format can store a shit-ton of information it really comes down to if they will be able to take advantage of all that it has to offer.

I'm sure when I see new graphics and games I'll be like WOW that rocks but statements like this are just plain stupid. I'm tired of all the hype. I just want to play some games that are fun.
 
[quote name='javeryh']yeah but it could also lead to developers not supporting the 360 as much in a few years as the differences in performance becomes more noticable.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, look at how PS2 support has dwindled to nothing.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Yeah, look at how PS2 support has dwindled to nothing.[/QUOTE]

The PS2 is the obvious exception because it has an overwhelmingly large userbase that doesn't just beat the competition, it dwarfs it. I fully expect the PS3 to dominate the next generation as well because I don't think 6 months is enough time for the 360 to build up a huge lead. With a smaller userbase and inferior power under the hood I think the multiplatform games will be developed on the PS3 first to take full advantage of the hardware and then ported crappily to the "lesser" systems rather than the other way around as has been suggested... once these titles stop selling on the "lesser" systems, developers might slow down support...
 
Ignorance at it's finest. I'm not a fanboy, but he doesn't know what he's talking about. PS3=PS2.5 then. Both Sony & M$ are improving on basically the same things on their consoles, so then they would both be just "current console.5".
 
I kinda agree, for one the jump in graphics and power isnt THAT "revolutionary", kinda like ps2's jump from dreamcast.

the ps3 on the other hand, BIG leap.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']There's obviously more to the Revolution than just the back-catalog, smartass. We just don't know what it is yet.

And are you trying to tell me that having a new CPU architecture is going to be innovative for gaming? It's innovative, technologically, but in no way does it intrinsically make games better. It's still gonna put the same image, on the same screen. I don't care how it does it's operations. It is a minor update, really.

I find it funny that it seems there are people who would rather know that their console is moving electrons around in a slightly different manner to do the math to run their games, then have innovative ways to play their games.[/QUOTE]

Nonsense. CPU architecture can make a huge difference if you have specific goals in mind. Some silly people have been talking about Cell becoming the new CPU of choice for PC or Apple using it as their future platform. This demonstrates a failure to understand just how specialized the Cell is for multimedia tasks and how lacking it is for conventional applications. If you ported OS X to it the application performance would be horrible compared to a single processor G% with a good video board. Multimedia performance is only one component of a general computer's jobs to fulfill.

Another example can be found here in a discussion of the Xbox 360 CPU design. It isn't just three 970 cores slapped on a single die. This design very specifically targets techniques to support where game design is headed.
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/xbox360-1.ars

This also illustrates why IBM was a better choice than Intel for a game console CPU. IBM is pursuing a lot more experimental paths since they don't have a monster cash cow market like the PC to depend upon. They need to be much more versatile to reach their customers. In the case of the Xbox 360 CPU the design draws both upon work that led to the Cell and ideas first seen in the Gekko CPU of the GameCube. The importance of IBM's contribution to the GC is often overlooked in favor of the ArtX Flipper chip.

The PC market has caused the x86 world to be rather narrowly defined as none of the embeeded markets offer enough volume to make investment in major customization worthwhile. When x86 is used in embedded apps it's generally because a PC is desired but in other embedded apps the chips vary wildly. For instance, there are dozens, possibly hundreds by now, customized ARM designs that have the essential instruction set in common but also have a variety of execution units on board specific to that one design. Add in the tuning for the application and two seemingly identical on the ISA level processors can deliver very different performance of the same task if one is specialized for it and the other isn't.
 
Blah blah blah, sounds like more, typical, Sony bullshit. Lets see how those braggart SoBs do at release time, and well into their console's lifespan. They promised SOOOOOOOO much with their "Emotion Engine" in the PS2, but the damn thing was just like everything else of it's generation, without the well utilized innovations such as XBox's Online Play and Hard Drive.

This isn't a dig on the PS2, it's a great console... but it's the most general of the current generation, and Sony promised it to be so much more than it turned out to be. The PS3 will probably be a good, quality game console that any one would like having... but to be more then that? I'd be very suprised. Especially since Sony pulled this same overdone PR BS before the PS2's release.

/rant off

Oh, Zoglog... thanks for the article, interesting reading regardless of how many feathers it ruffles =)
 
All this coming from the aspect of a company who got their peepee smacked for copying controllers then take designing hints from 3rd party controllers that made it to the bargin bin within 4 days?....sweet!

Sad thing is, people believe this crap without seeing anything. Personally, other than the fact I've enjoyed my XBox more this gen, I haven't seen much to base an opinion either way yet.
Looks to me the Sony hype machine is about to go into overdrive though.
 
[quote name='javeryh']The PS2 is the obvious exception because it has an overwhelmingly large userbase that doesn't just beat the competition, it dwarfs it. I fully expect the PS3 to dominate the next generation as well because I don't think 6 months is enough time for the 360 to build up a huge lead. With a smaller userbase and inferior power under the hood I think the multiplatform games will be developed on the PS3 first to take full advantage of the hardware and then ported crappily to the "lesser" systems rather than the other way around as has been suggested... once these titles stop selling on the "lesser" systems, developers might slow down support...[/QUOTE]

That was my point. Installed base trumps power after the launch period. Sony is repeating themselves in doing all they can to prevent consumers from becoming invested in a competing system that has an earlier launch.

Kutaragi is engaging in pure hyperbole and snake oil sales if he really thinks the 360 is Xbox 1.5. Unfortunately, too much of the market is too ignorant to appreciate what a big difference there is between those development stations and the final product. In cruder terms, does anyone who has seen the difference between playing a game like Far Cry or HL2 on a entry level system vs. a high end CPU and GPU combination think they're just seeing PC 1.5? Or when you consider how many early PS2 realeases where upgrade PS1 projects and were easily recognized as such, where does Kutaragi get off?

The more he engages in this kind of trash talk the more my expectations for PS3 are lowered.
 
[quote name='omegaweapon7']I kinda agree, for one the jump in graphics and power isnt THAT "revolutionary", kinda like ps2's jump from dreamcast.

the ps3 on the other hand, BIG leap.[/QUOTE]

Keep in mind you haven't seen a real Xbox 360 game yet. All you've seen is stuff running on a Mac G5 development kit that doesn't allow a major portion of the 360 feature set to be used yet.

We won't see real demos of the final hardware for about three months, at least. When they have a good set of near final launch titles to use, a whole new round of PR blather will begin.
 
[quote name='Aleryn'], without the well utilized innovations such as XBox's Online Play and Hard Drive.
[/QUOTE]

No offense, but from what I saw of the hard drive this gen was that it wasn't well utilized at all.

I actually remember Microsoft was dissapointed that more developers didn't take use of the hard drive, except for adding custom music and having it be a glorified memory card.

There were a ton of possibilities for it, but I don't think anyone really capitalized on it well at all.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']After playing many (if not all) the playable 360 titles at E3...i have to admit, he isn't wrong.
Then again, its probably too early to tell.[/QUOTE]

I felt the same way after playing all the playables of the 360 games...It just didn't feel "next-gen".
 
[quote name='Roufuss']No offense, but from what I saw of the hard drive this gen was that it wasn't well utilized at all.

I actually remember Microsoft was dissapointed that more developers didn't take use of the hard drive, except for adding custom music and having it be a glorified memory card.

There were a ton of possibilities for it, but I don't think anyone really capitalized on it well at all.[/QUOTE]

It wasn't utilized enough but many of the Xbox's console exclusive titles were possible solely because of the hard drive and the caching it allowed. On just about every Xbox game that is only otherwise available on PCs you'll see a lot of hard drive activity. As well, many ports to other consoles had to cut features or simplify elements of the game to deal with both lesser RAM and slower secondary storage access. In ports to the Xbox from the PS2 the addition of hard drive caching often made for much more pleasant game play with load time greatly reduced. This is one reason the Xbox is often favor when people who own multiple consoles are choicing which version of a multiplatform game to buy.

One area that was really lacking was MMORPG. There were no fewer than five such projects at various time for the Xbox but none reached release. FFXI was one of those. The Xbox 360 version will be a port of the Xbox version with support for HD display modes added.
 
[quote name='mykevermin'] He also was incredulous that anyone would dare criticize the design of the machine, despite the "square button issue" and dead pixels.

But, have you let the PSP make you pancakes? Why don't you go do that, and then I dare you to call it a game machine!

myke.[/QUOTE]

You beat me to it.

Kutaragi realizes that controversial comments will get people talking about the PS3. That was the only point behind this. Maybe he is concerned because Microsoft is the first American hardware manufacturer in a LONG time that has a real chance to challenge Japanese console domination (outside of Japan at least).
 
The Square button thing was blown out of proportion, I've yet to see anyone complain about it after the US release, and it's not like they changed the position or anything.

yeah Sony could do with a little less bragging because all it does is make people critisize them more when they make a mistep which every company eventually makes at some point but when it's Sony it's always magnified.

I dont think this is fear it's just the same PR stunts that companies always try when they're in a heated fight for our money. He want's people to think they'll be the better choice just like Bill did last gen spending milions ontop ot millions of dollars stuffing the Xbox brand name down our throats.
 
Personally, I don't think many people have the money to dish out a monitor capable of 1080i. Sony is trying to force next generation home electronics down the consumer's throat. Do you want to replace your DVD collection with new Blu-Ray movies? I don't. Neither does the average consumer. Is the PS3 a moster machine? Yeah, without a doubt. Games consoles keep moving more and more to a centralized object of home entertainment, and I don't like that. Sony knows that by pushing consumers to purchase higher end electronics, they stand to profit being that they manufacture those goods (HD TV, being one of the creators of the new Blu_Ray, etc). Xbox is just as guilty, trying to integrate Media Center into the Xbox to centralize everything with a Windows flair.

Of course Revolution perks my interest, because it's possibly something new and unseen. I want fresh air to be breathed into this hobby.

Maybe I just feel old, seeing how I grew up with this hobby and seeing it go from something fun into more of a serious business. I just don't feel like I'm seeing the same degree of originality and fun as I did in my old games growing up.

Who gives a rats ass about how powerful any of the consoles are (Although I love a few of the games on it, Saturn is a much more powerful machine than the PS1. It was the PS1's multitude of good games that kept it alive and the Saturn's lack thereof that decided the fate of those two consoles). I want to know if the profitability of this business is going to spark increases in price points. I want to know if the unnacceptability of the majority consumer base for unique titles is going to make developers lazy and just push out mundane easy-selling sequels in franchises..

Flame me if you want, but in the past few years, I've been seeing a few disturbing trends starting to take shape.
 
[quote name='Skylander7']Personally, I don't think many people have the money to dish out a monitor capable of 1080i. Sony is trying to force next generation home electronics down the consumer's throat. Do you want to replace your DVD collection with new Blu-Ray movies? I don't. Neither does the average consumer. Is the PS3 a moster machine? Yeah, without a doubt. Games consoles keep moving more and more to a centralized object of home entertainment, and I don't like that. Sony knows that by pushing consumers to purchase higher end electronics, they stand to profit being that they manufacture those goods (HD TV, being one of the creators of the new Blu_Ray, etc). Xbox is just as guilty, trying to integrate Media Center into the Xbox to centralize everything with a Windows flair.

Of course Revolution perks my interest, because it's possibly something new and unseen. I want fresh air to be breathed into this hobby.

Maybe I just feel old, seeing how I grew up with this hobby and seeing it go from something fun into more of a serious business. I just don't feel like I'm seeing the same degree of originality and fun as I did in my old games growing up.

Who gives a rats ass about how powerful any of the consoles are (Although I love a few of the games on it, Saturn is a much more powerful machine than the PS1. It was the PS1's multitude of good games that kept it alive and the Saturn's lack thereof that decided the fate of those two consoles). I want to know if the profitability of this business is going to spark increases in price points. I want to know if the unnacceptability of the majority consumer base for unique titles is going to make developers lazy and just push out mundane easy-selling sequels in franchises..

Flame me if you want, but in the past few years, I've been seeing a few disturbing trends starting to take shape.[/QUOTE]

:applause: Very well said. The only problem with what you said is about the Revelution. I have yet to see any thing new with it. I love my DS and I wanted Nintendo to go with the same type of new gaming experience. I have not seen Nintendo do anything new with the Rev yet. Selling the same game I bought 10 years ago is not my idea of something new but a step back. I see 360 doing something new with live and every game built around it. It seems I am the only one seeing the potential of that.
 
[quote name='Skylander7']Personally, I don't think many people have the money to dish out a monitor capable of 1080i. Sony is trying to force next generation home electronics down the consumer's throat. Do you want to replace your DVD collection with new Blu-Ray movies? I don't. Neither does the average consumer. Is the PS3 a moster machine? Yeah, without a doubt. Games consoles keep moving more and more to a centralized object of home entertainment, and I don't like that. Sony knows that by pushing consumers to purchase higher end electronics, they stand to profit being that they manufacture those goods (HD TV, being one of the creators of the new Blu_Ray, etc). Xbox is just as guilty, trying to integrate Media Center into the Xbox to centralize everything with a Windows flair.

Of course Revolution perks my interest, because it's possibly something new and unseen. I want fresh air to be breathed into this hobby.

Maybe I just feel old, seeing how I grew up with this hobby and seeing it go from something fun into more of a serious business. I just don't feel like I'm seeing the same degree of originality and fun as I did in my old games growing up.

Who gives a rats ass about how powerful any of the consoles are (Although I love a few of the games on it, Saturn is a much more powerful machine than the PS1. It was the PS1's multitude of good games that kept it alive and the Saturn's lack thereof that decided the fate of those two consoles). I want to know if the profitability of this business is going to spark increases in price points. I want to know if the unnacceptability of the majority consumer base for unique titles is going to make developers lazy and just push out mundane easy-selling sequels in franchises..

Flame me if you want, but in the past few years, I've been seeing a few disturbing trends starting to take shape.[/QUOTE]

There was a time when 800x600 was considered the high end of PC monitor resolution. Most people weren't very concerned with how well a game performed at 1600x1200 because they never expected to own such a display. Today I can buy a 21" CRT that offers that performance for around $300. Comparable LCD screens are moving in the direction at a steady pace.

Don't look at the displays in Best Buy today and assume that is the model for all future sales. Volumes will reduce prices quite a bit, particularly after the range of content grows to include most next gen game titles. (I say most because Nintendo hasn't spoken on the subject yet.) Most PC gamers wouldn't dream of looking at anything in 640x480 anymore and haven't for years. But that is where home video movies and games are still languishing. The mass market hasn't yet been offered the stuff that will motivate their next TV purchase and in turn drive down HDTV prices. But that time is coming next year.
 
[quote name='Skylander7']

Who gives a rats ass about how powerful any of the consoles are (Although I love a few of the games on it, Saturn is a much more powerful machine than the PS1. It was the PS1's multitude of good games that kept it alive and the Saturn's lack thereof that decided the fate of those two consoles). I want to know if the profitability of this business is going to spark increases in price points. I want to know if the unnacceptability of the majority consumer base for unique titles is going to make developers lazy and just push out mundane easy-selling sequels in franchises..

[/QUOTE]

Taking a bunch of chips and adding their benchmark scores together is a very poor way to rate system power. The Saturn was an engineering train wreck and very difficult to use effectively. Far more so than the oft criticised PS2. While the PS2 requires a certain unconventional way of thinking the Saturn was simply a mess. The PS1 by comparison was very easy to get good results from and rewarded efforts to exploit it fully. For most developers that is a better measure of power.

This claim that orginality is diminishing is hogwash. A few genres have always dominated each generation. Platformers and scrolling shooters were dime a dozen for a very long time. When 3D capabilites made FPS viable it came as no surprise the genre saturated the market. T'was ever thus.
 
Mission accomplished, ken kutaragi. :roll:

kinda sucks that even after E3, all we know are theories, hearsay, guesstimates and their distant relative- specs.

Can't wait to see what XNA will do for developers

Can't wait to see the PS3 cash some checks

Can't wait to see the Revolution...........do stuff

Wanna see all this talk put into action! I have a horrible case of E3 blue balls.
 
[quote name='Skylander7']Personally, I don't think many people have the money to dish out a monitor capable of 1080i. Sony is trying to force next generation home electronics down the consumer's throat. Do you want to replace your DVD collection with new Blu-Ray movies? I don't. Neither does the average consumer. Is the PS3 a moster machine? Yeah, without a doubt. Games consoles keep moving more and more to a centralized object of home entertainment, and I don't like that. Sony knows that by pushing consumers to purchase higher end electronics, they stand to profit being that they manufacture those goods (HD TV, being one of the creators of the new Blu_Ray, etc). Xbox is just as guilty, trying to integrate Media Center into the Xbox to centralize everything with a Windows flair. [/QUOTE]

I totally disagree. HDTV is the future. Once you get used to it you just can't go back. Progress doesn't happen quick enough IMO. I don't want to replace my DVD collection - but who says I have to? If I don't I'm going to be watching those movies in 480p anyway. I'd rather have the option for something better. More advanced visuals, while not the be all end all to a better game, sure do help a lot. I'll never play Resident Evil for PS1 ever again because the GCN version is far superior or take Madden 95 compared to Madden 2005. Both are great for their times but I'm not digging out my Genesis any time soon to get a football fix. Bring on the new technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top