Got PS3?!(Pictures!!!!)

2furio · Post by **2furio** » 05 May 2005, 01:30

It's a bunch of wack. It's likely that the cell will end up on PCs rather than consoles. It's the same ol' story as when PS2 came out. Sony was bragging that it would state of the art graphics, blah, blah, blah but when it came out...pause....zero....results were not as expected.

Even if they do manage to place that chip in a console, the technology is very new, which leads to a very expensive console. With that kind of technology, the console can cost up to 1000 dollars, which leads back to PCs because then, PCs will actually be cheaper and still perform very well.

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 05 May 2005, 01:41

korge wrote: I got a ATI Radeon 9500 Pro 128mb, 512 RAM, and a AMD XP 1.7 ghz processor and im running HL2 on 1280 x 720 on all maxed setting including AA and AF, yea, exactly, so shut up if you dont know what your talking about...

I can damned max out every settings on each PC, but the question is.. Do you have a nice smooth framerate?

EmptyWords · Post by **EmptyWords** » 05 May 2005, 03:07

also the PC version of HL2 runs at about lets say 100fps with a good rig. and most PS2 games run at about 30fps at most.

korge · Post by **korge** » 05 May 2005, 03:21

PSZeTa wrote:
korge wrote: I got a ATI Radeon 9500 Pro 128mb, 512 RAM, and a AMD XP 1.7 ghz processor and im running HL2 on 1280 x 720 on all maxed setting including AA and AF, yea, exactly, so shut up if you dont know what your talking about...

I can damned max out every settings on each PC, but the question is.. Do you have a nice smooth framerate?

Yes mine does, otherwise i wouldnt crank mine up to the max options.. obvious..

Post by **TheStig** » 05 May 2005, 03:39

for one reason a console can not be better then a PC is because the games for every console and PC are build by a group of people BEHIND a PC!

korge · Post by **korge** » 05 May 2005, 03:44

TheStig wrote:for one reason a console can not be better then a PC is because the games for every console and PC are build by a group of people BEHIND a PC!

And all God's People say, "Amen."

*Korge sits and waits for sermon

jacoja06 · Post by **jacoja06** » 05 May 2005, 04:05

If you use a console, you do not have so much crap to worry about, such as - Installing stuff, graphics card, etc...

I DUNNO!

jemc · Post by **jemc** » 05 May 2005, 07:51

jacoja06 wrote:If you use a console, you do not have so much crap to worry about, such as - Installing stuff, graphics card, etc...

I DUNNO!

that's true. but if you have a PC and you loose a CD, something happens to it etc. you can always get a no CD crack and play the game normaly. you don't have that on consoles...you must buy a new CD for that game. and as many console games are on DVD a single scratch can ruin the DVD...depends on how many data it's on it, though.

Nasadus · Post by **Nasadus** » 05 May 2005, 11:07

2furio wrote:It's a bunch of wack. It's likely that the cell will end up on PCs rather than consoles. It's the same ol' story as when PS2 came out. Sony was bragging that it would state of the art graphics, blah, blah, blah but when it came out...pause....zero....results were not as expected.

Even if they do manage to place that chip in a console, the technology is very new, which leads to a very expensive console. With that kind of technology, the console can cost up to 1000 dollars, which leads back to PCs because then, PCs will actually be cheaper and still perform very well.

There is a fundemental difference between now and 5 years ago.Sony was saying that the PS2 would be able to produce incredible looking games,you could feel them or something like that.They never revealed the hardware that was used in the PS2.They knew if they had done that nobody would belive them and the PS2 would sell much less that it did.

This time however,they aren't saying what it can do,they are showing it.They have developed the first prototype and have showed it's capabillities at various occasions.And what's even more surprising is that the development of the new chip will be rather cheap or perhaps i should say not expensive.Read the press reports from IBM and Sony Group.

The Cell is also not very likely make it's way to PC's since it has a totally different architechture compared to the current CPU's from Intel and AMD.All the games and software would have to be re-designed to work with a multicore CPU.

I also have one more question for you.How can you even expect the PC games to look better that on the PS3?You obviously don't know much about it.Did you know that the PS3 will use Blu-Ray discs.These can hold 25GB of data and 50GB Dual-Layer.All the games will be in HD.That alone will outclass the PC games.Sure,when Blu-ray becomes a popular medium(due to the PS3) it will make it's way to PC.It won't be cheap however.

I don't expect the PS3 to cost more than â‚¬500.Seeing how large their userbase is i doubt it wil be more than that.

I may seem to defend the consoles but i'm not.I'm just trying to explain to you that whether you believe it or not The Cell is waaaaay more powerfull that any processor available today.All of those numbers that you saw are not BS.

jacoja06 · Post by **jacoja06** » 05 May 2005, 12:00

I go with Nasadus

He really knows what he's talking about.

...and I was going to mension the 'blue ray' earlier too !

btw, what is that very first car??
It looks exacly like a - Monaro / BA Falcon

......Infact, it is.

celluzion · Post by **celluzion** » 05 May 2005, 16:44

I'm not defending consoles, infact, I hate consoles, but it's true, the next-gen consoles WILL look alot better than PC.

Why? The PC is built on the x86 platform, it is extremely old and right now, we're already pushing what we can build on it.

The consoles however, are on an entirely different platform and is solely optimized for games, so yeah, go figure.

And not to mention Blu-Ray..

*Drool*

ca$h · Post by **ca$h** » 05 May 2005, 16:59

Celluzion is right.

vellu · Post by **vellu** » 05 May 2005, 17:03

I guess you could design and build a console with, let's say for example high-end pcie SLI level graphics, but it would cost far too much. A sli setup for pc can cost upto 1000$ or even more, a console with similar stuff would cost even more... Not many people would buy it.

On the other hand on the PC side there will always be people who don't care what something costs and they will get it. But you don't have to spend tons of money on a PC setup, you can survive with less then top of the line. But with a console, there is only one thing and one price.

One more reason why top of the line PC setup will a-l-w-a-y-s be far superior to any console setup. The price.

But hey, it's good that there are several platforms to choose from. Variety keeps the manufacturers on their toes and we can expect new gadgets every now and then...

Post by **Bojan** » 05 May 2005, 17:27

You keep forgetting something: a 2 GF6800 ULTRA SLI system would be very cheap if those cards were manufactured in 10s of millions.
When PS2 came out, it's graphics were far superior to anything PCish on the market then.

Death Ranger · Post by **Death Ranger** » 05 May 2005, 20:42

and another thing, don't forget that ps3 and xbox 360 are not out now, so ofcourse the cell loox superior but u can't imagine what amd and intel has instore for pc games... i guess will just have to wait till the ps\xbox will ship so we can compare

p.s sony, being a greedy hugeass corporation, obviously would more money of the cell than ps3 could generate, so i think there is a very high probobility that they will either sell the platform\rights to use it to intel or amd.... so u never know

korge · Post by **korge** » 05 May 2005, 20:49

Death Ranger wrote:and another thing, don't forget that ps3 and xbox 360 are not out now, so ofcourse the cell loox superior but u can't imagine what amd and intel has instore for pc games... i guess will just have to wait till the ps\xbox will ship so we can compare

p.s sony, being a greedy hugeass corporation, obviously would more money of the cell than ps3 could generate, so i think there is a very high probobility that they will either sell the platform\rights to use it to intel or amd.... so u never know

I go with Death..

Also... either 2 things will happen... Extreme price range and great gfx.... or low price and good gfx for the time being...
Btw, your forgetting the fact that these gfx are all created on PC first.. what do you think they test the gfx on.. you make me laugh sometimes... its like building a car with horse powered factories...

Nasadus · Post by **Nasadus** » 05 May 2005, 22:08

Well,you are partially right korge.The console games are made on PC but not with PC harware.They are made on console specific development kits.If you think that the console games are made on PC's why didn't they start making next-gen games already instead of waiting for the next-gen harware to be released?

^Sparco^ · Post by **^Sparco^** » 05 May 2005, 23:24

New pics

This is a realistic neon

:

Must love these shadows:

Again:

jacoja06 · Post by **jacoja06** » 05 May 2005, 23:30

WOW ! this is confusing the hell out of me.

That yellow car has:
the top front of a mazda 6,
The bottom front of a 02 Monaro
The body shape of a Monaro
And the tail lights of a Falcon

korge · Post by **korge** » 05 May 2005, 23:40

Nasadus wrote:Well,you are partially right korge.The console games are made on PC but not with PC harware.They are made on console specific development kits.If you think that the console games are made on PC's why didn't they start making next-gen games already instead of waiting for the next-gen harware to be released?

Sony is a company and since it is a company, its keeps goodness to its self... Do you think if I invented a new engine that ran on grass clippings, do you really think I'd sell my design to Ford? No, I'd keep it for my business and keep all my money to myself... This PS3 thing's got the same deal going on... its all a race to the top and Sony doesnt want anyone there with them... of course in about 2 years, PC will already have better gfx so im in no hurry to drool over these gfx.. sure PS3 will sell but with a obviously insane price range for such an intense system, not many ppl will buy them.. just like how only the hard core gamers will buy the insanely priced GFX cards...

btw, PC can power those gfx if they wanted too. The O So Popular "ATI Ruby" Vids were an AMAZING example of it... running 1280 by 1024 with insane polygons and textures.. it was basically watching Shrek 2 being rendered live on your PC.. Im not really that impressed by those gfx because ive already seen gfx that good on my dads computer...

In conclusion, PC can already power that game, the reason they wont release a game as such now for pc is because its all about the money.. Why would they release that game if they knew only 7% of the PC population would be able to run it? Exactly... it just wouldnt sell..

[Im not entirely disagreeing with you. PS3 will have the best gfx on the Market, But truly PC will always have the better gfx whether you know it or not, Isnt it obvious at all? How can a little child over power the father? Same thing your saying is that Console reign supreme over the computer.... Mhm... Not gonna happen]

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 06 May 2005, 00:03

If you say that it will always be to expensive..

Why the shiznit do we keep upgrading then.

2furio · Post by **2furio** » 06 May 2005, 00:27

I really LOVE this article from http://www.spong.com: - it outlines why PC is better than consoles.

"The PC is naturally the hardest platform of all to nail down technically, itâ€™s akin to a piece of string, a twisty piece. Because of the open architecture design of the platform it has constantly evolved at a "blink and youâ€™ll miss it" pace. Ideal for early adopters, but a nightmare for developers. Imagine trying to second guess the average PC spec 18 months in the future.

Originally designed for business, the early PCs had mono, character-based graphics and no sound other then the monotone 'beep'. Both sound and graphics were shoehorned into the PC in response to machines like the Apple Macintosh and Commodore Amiga. By 1990, the PC had just about got the games grunt of a NES or Sega Master System, but the games publishers were constantly pushing it as the "next big thing" in gaming. In reality, the PC was the bastion of boring flight sims and strategy games, because it simply could not handle fast action platform and beat 'em ups.

In reality the PC did not get it's gaming big break until Doom was released in 1993. This game changed the face of gaming, and made the PC the platform to have. From the release of Doom onwards, the PC has never looked back.

The PC represents the best and worst sides of gaming simultaneously. Sometimes, it can be a nightmare to get things working, many illogical things can go wrong.

For this reason, Microsoft invented Direct X, an API that standardises input and display, removing many early PC game troubles. Gone are the days of remembering what IRQ and DMA setting your sound card uses. The PC is a backwards-compatible machine, and this is to its disadvantage as far as gaming is concerned.

On the other hand, consoles become dated quickly and given their average life span of three-to-six years the PC will always be the most technologically advanced platform of all. You can replace your entire set-up or selected components as frequently as you choose, if you have the money. Unlike consoles PCs are not constrained by the limitations of television sets and can display resolutions up to four times the definition.

The myth of lazy PC developers is somewhat true, the trend of releasing bugged software is a common practice in the PC world. Patches are commonplace and sometimes you can spend days trying to make a game run only to release there is a fault with your version of Windows, or motherboard, or graphics card, orâ€¦

On the positive side, PC gaming is probably the most in-depth and grown-up face of gaming. Sims are extremely popular as is on-line gaming, it will take time for consoles to offer broadband and hard drives, bar the Xbox. If youâ€™ve got the time and money, the PC is an essential food group of your gaming diet."

korge · Post by **korge** » 06 May 2005, 01:51

Ahh.. i remember my old Commodore.. I played Dune so much... but then ofcourse came Command and Conquer.. now THAT game was the shyt...

Nice find Furio... the article really speaks for itself... Especially for the Outdatedness of Console.. My dad still has this thing about consoles... He says, even tho they have great gfx when they first come out, give Developers a month and well have the next upper hand...

EmptyWords · Post by **EmptyWords** » 06 May 2005, 02:14

i remember amiga600 man those were the good days.. i wish i was that young again where i had no worries :-\

bashderq · Post by **bashderq** » 06 May 2005, 08:49

jacoja06 wrote:WOW ! this is confusing the hell out of me.
That yellow car has:
the top front of a mazda 6,
The bottom front of a 02 Monaro
The body shape of a Monaro
And the tail lights of a Falcon

so the game makers dont need licenses to use manufacturer's original cars