Understanding Sony's philosophy on the PS3

[MrGFunk]

The PS3 makes no sense. It's CPU is better than anything we have for the PC, but it's GPU is roughly as fast as a geforce 7800GTX. That's roughly between budget/mainstream performance nowadays.
It makes no sense for a gaming machine, to pair a slow GPU with a fast CPU.

...Exactly.

I don't see the problem with this. People always harp on about how gameplay is the most important thing and graphics don't matter "look at the Wii" (I don't care for the Wii, but people say it).

Graphics in gaming has reached a very high standard which the PS3 ably produces, so if it's a standard why not have a standard GPU and have a high-end CPU. This means SONY and other developers can spend their time making quality games with better AI and improved game mechanics.

Previous to this generation, consoles didn't try to compete graphically with a PC. Why do they need to now?
PCs are mutable, consoles are locked in to their hardware I don't think it's a fair comparison.

 

[squid5580]

Hurrah another thread telling us to hurry up and wait for the PS3 to wow us. Sure blu ray is probably sweet to watch movies on (if you have an HD tv). How about some good exclusives (MGS 4 and LBP hold no appeal to me) and some real proof that the dodads inside the PS3 make gaming a better experience than the 360. Not practically the same in terms of graphics.

 

[Jumplion]

See, this one reason why I do not like PCs, what the fuck are those numbers supposed to mean?!?!?

You don't like something because you don't understand it?

Daaaawww...Human nature at its best.

Umm......dur?

You smartz peoplez can deal with it, I haz no reasun to.

And Computer Models, coding, CPUs, GPUs, Mommyboards, Plasma-wirings, Zeta-missiles, and Sadvich port manipulation isn't exactly the easiest thing to learn in the world, is it?

And I said it's one of the reasons why I'm annoyed at PC gaming. I'd name more but for the life of me I don't want to raise you or Eggo's blood pressure any higher

 

[MrGFunk]

My crazy ass point is that...consoles shouldn't be locked in for their entire hardware cycle. It would save everyone a lot of money and provide the genius console manufacturer who does it first with a shitload more profit.

Crazy, isn't it?

How could they do that though? Would they send out update kits with new boards? Wouldn't that be like having a rented PC? Personally I like to have them as separate, PC and consoles.

 

[goodman528]

It's typical Japanese business strategy. Dump high quality, hi-tec stuff at a loss to grab market share, then make the profit through gradual improvements.

I'm a pc gamer who believes in buying consoles towards the end of their life, because that's when the best game collections for them are all out, and the consoles themselves cost next to nothing.

 

[Eric the Orange]

The biggest failure in this entire thread is making the false assumption that the PS3 is powerful in terms of gaming.

Woops.

You know, you make it hard to support you.

Could this be a rift between ID and Eggo. Can PS3 fanboyism not co-exist PC fanboyism.

but anyways...

...The gamer of today craves the highest details, the most powerful graphics...

hmmmm, really, I never gave a damn about graphics, and from polls i've seen on this site i'm in the majority.

...As Blu-Ray becomes increasingly popular and used, DVD demand will decrease and will take the route of the VHS, allowing for Blu-Ray to become the default....

Apparently you never heard what happened between VHS and Betamax. I'll give ya a quick run down. Back in the 80s there were bouth VHS and Betamax tapes and players. The situation was pretty similar to the one that exists now between DVD and blu-ray, with betamax being the more technologicaly advanced one (also fronted by sony). Sony even used many of the exact same arguments they are using now. But the fact that people already had VHS, being that it came out eariler, the difference in quality wasen't enough to make people want to switch over. So beta-max failed. It wasen't untill DVD which had a signifigent jump in quality, combined with extra features, scene selection, not having to rewind, ect., did VHS leave the throne. I'm guessing DVD and Blu-Ray will do the same.

heres the Wiki article on Betamax if your interested
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta-max

 

[Vlane]

Universities such as Massachusetts and NSCU hook up around 8 to get the some processing power as a basic super computer, obviously no way near the specs of industry super computers, but never the less, still supercomputers effectively.
And killzone 2's graphics are far better than crysis, in everyway. Check out the demo if possible; if not just have a gander at the videos.
You have to remember, even though a consoles hardware is permanent, it means games can be optimised for the CPU and CPU, something pcs will never have. In this way it means if you want to emulate a console eg. PS2, you needs significantly higher PC specs to play the games as a friend found out.

I agree completely that the public is stupid, but so are the vast majority of gamers.

Indeed, hence their inability to basic math eg. 360 pricing and the broken wii (motion-plus anyone?)

There is so much fail and/or fanboyism in this post.

You say Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis? I played the demo of Killzone 2 and I played Crysis and I have to say that that is just wrong.

 

[BubbleGumSnareDrum]

because back then, they couldn't update the systems online with fixes, so they made absolutely sure that it worked. while nowadays, things can be updated with fixes, which makes companies much lazier in releasing a bug free console.

hell, my playstation 1 still works.

Well, not only that, but older consoles are also much less complex. The PS3 and Xbox 360 are more like personal computers than video game consoles, and as such, they are much more fragile and prone to overheating or component failure.

Even the PS2 and PS1, some of the first systems to use compact discs and DVDs, were much more stable simply because they were much simpler. They both had one main purpose; read and run video games. Being able to play CDs/DVDs was just a bonus.

Now they try to make consoles do everything like computers can and that's why the rash of bum hardware made console gamers so angry; we are finally realizing that the technology we are being provided with is far beyond what we used to have at our disposal. My N64 may not be able to draw great graphics or play movies, but goddamnit, the thing is ancient and it still works. I doubt I'll be able to say that about my 360 in eleven years, or that any PS3 owner will be able to say it either.

 

[chronobreak]

The only thing I can see helping them right now is to offer more bundles, like get an HDTV and a PS3 for $1000. They would lose money initially, but get the consoles into more people's homes, which would sell more Blu-Ray movies and games. Once more people have the console, they can start charging a subscription fee for online play. That's just my idea, anyways.

People won't buy the PS3 without an HDTV, so they have to make the whole package accessible.

 

[Jumplion]

I've played both & all the reviews are prasing killzone 2 for having the best gfx to date, and not just for a PS3 game, but for any FPS. I'm pretty sure every sight wouldn't have made the mistake of saying it has stunning/best ever seen graphics if they were not as good as a game released in 2007.

I wouldn't say that Killzone 2 has overall better "graphics" than Crysis, but I would probably say that Killzone 2 has more "atmosphere" than Crysis. Atleast from what I've played/seen/read/observed.