Sony says PS2 for 2-3 more years | PS3 for 9

[Thund3rball]

Oh I have huge faith in the developers getting more out of the hardware and pushing the limits over time. It's only natural really. Just as long as the hardware is going to be available. No-one is pushing the limits of XBOX 1 because there aren't any around. It's all 360. But I can go buy a white or silver PS2 from BB when the store opens this morning if I want to

 

[Hardin]

I didn't say it was, I said it was a customized version of direct X that incorporates aspects of DX9 and DX10 along with specific 360 instructions.... did I not?

That doesn't make him more correct because he said it had a customized version of dx 10. The Parhelia was dx 8 card because it didn't fully support dx 9. It's the same with the xenos. If anything it would be called dx 9.C+

 

[rainless]

That doesn't make him more correct because he said it had a customized version of dx 10. The Parhelia was dx 8 card because it didn't fully support dx 9. It's the same with the xenos. If anything it would be called dx 9.C+

Well I can no longer find the article that mentioned that, but you are correct: The 360 uses DirectX 9.0C. Though the point I wanted to make was the same as Fudge's only I made it backwards: It's a custom Directx 9.0c that allows for some DirectX 10 elements. I had stated that it was a custom DirectX 10... but that's not really what I meant.

 

[FudgeNuggets]

Well I can no longer find the article that mentioned that, but you are correct: The 360 uses DirectX 9.0C. Though the point I wanted to make was the same as Fudge's only I made it backwards: It's a custom Directx 9.0c that allows for some DirectX 10 elements. I had stated that it was a custom DirectX 10... but that's not really what I meant.

6 of one, half dozen of the other bro

 

[>HyperlogiK<]

AFAIK the 360's graphics API is very largely based on DX9C.

Also, bear in mind that Xenos is really underpowered compared with current gen PC hardware, and even the 8800 series struggle with Crysis, the one DX10 game that actually looks significantly better than recent DX9 titles. Just because your API supports certain features, it doesn't mean you have the horsepower to take full advantage of them.

I read an interview some time ago with the lead programmer on Crysis (I think in PC Zone) where he said that the 360 would never be capable of DX10 class graphics. He didn't elaborate, but I suspect it is both a limitation of Xenos and the API.

 

[zexmarquies01]

AFAIK the 360's graphics API is very largely based on DX9C.

Also, bear in mind that Xenos is really underpowered compared with current gen PC hardware, and even the 8800 series struggle with Crysis, the one DX10 game that actually looks significantly better than recent DX9 titles. Just because your API supports certain features, it doesn't mean you have the horsepower to take full advantage of them.

I read an interview some time ago with the lead programmer on Crysis (I think in PC Zone) where he said that the 360 would never be capable of DX10 class graphics. He didn't elaborate, but I suspect it is both a limitation of Xenos and the API.

Heh, you'd think that the people that cry out "OMG!!! LOOK AT THIS CONSOLE HARDWARE, PC GAMING IS GOING TO DIE" would learn from stuff like this. Sure, the day that a new console hits the market, it has great hardware. But within a year ( sometimes less ), the hardware is already out-dated, and sub-par compared to the power of computers.

Except for the Cell processor, which, if fully taken advantage of could be better than the processors in most computers...the video cards in a console are always out-dated pretty quickly.

Hell, Nvidia is supposedly to release their Geforce 9xxx series around February. there's no way a current gen console will come close to the power of a new video card.

 

[FudgeNuggets]

but you pay as much or more for a damned video card as you do a console every 2 years to get better than console graphics

 

[ghost_recon88]

So what was the original topic of this thread again?

 

[Hardin]

but you pay as much or more for a damned video card as you do a console every 2 years to get better than console graphics

Not really. You don't have to buy the high end video cards every generation. I certainly don't and yet my computer keeps up very well in games like Gears of War. I can definitely say it is on par with the 360 version if not better. Using a mouse and keyboard is just a bonus to that graphical goodness. It's true that with a console your pretty much set for a few years but eventually you'll start to notice its age while the pc moved on a long time ago.

 

[FudgeNuggets]

I just don't like PC gaming or mouse and keyboard controls or even PC controls using a PS2 dualshock with a USB adapter, it just doesn't play the same.

 

[Hardin]

Well I don't think that's the point of this thread and I didn't want it to end up this way.

 

[rainless]

So what was the original topic of this thread again?

PS3 for nine years. I think the 7 that the PS2 lasted is more realistic. Both Microsoft and Nintendo came out with superior hardware last time, but were unable to make a DENT in Sony's marketshare. PS2 developers simply poured their hearts and souls into digging out every last ounce of power the PS2 had. They dug in their heels and, in the end, the PS2 came out on top.

I can see that happening this time around too. Especially with the new 40 gig system going for 399.99. That's exactly what I paid for my 360 (in Vegas) last year. So now "price" is becoming less of a stretch of the imagination. Particularly when you see that a $349 360 is going to charge you $49 for Xbox Live Gold and you'll wind-up right back at $400 anyway.

And, as far as PC gaming goes, all that fancy hardware will never matter again because more and more game publishers program on Consoles instead of PCs. Crysis is the only PC exclusive game I can think of in recent memory. UT3, Call of Duty 4, even the F'N Orange Box... All of them were on consoles. Then there's all the games that are only on Console.

 

[ghost_recon88]

PS3 for nine years. I think the 7 that the PS2 lasted is more realistic. Both Microsoft and Nintendo came out with superior hardware last time, but were unable to make a DENT in Sony's marketshare. PS2 developers simply poured their hearts and souls into digging out every last ounce of power the PS2 had. They dug in their heels and, in the end, the PS2 came out on top.

I can see that happening this time around too. Especially with the new 40 gig system going for 399.99. That's exactly what I paid for my 360 (in Vegas) last year. So now "price" is becoming less of a stretch of the imagination. Particularly when you see that a $349 360 is going to charge you $49 for Xbox Live Gold and you'll wind-up right back at $400 anyway.

And, as far as PC gaming goes, all that fancy hardware will never matter again because more and more game publishers program on Consoles instead of PCs. Crysis is the only PC exclusive game I can think of in recent memory. UT3, Call of Duty 4, even the F'N Orange Box... All of them were on consoles. Then there's all the games that are only on Console.

O yea, thats right

 

[FudgeNuggets]

360 got too big a jump on them with the earlier release and then a year of high prices, they can't and won't catch up. They'll finish 3rd with Nintendo winning this battle and MS coming in at #2...... If you want to purely talk hardware sales. I mean BluRay aside, there STILL is no compelling reason to get a PS3...

 

[ghost_recon88]

360 got too big a jump on them with the earlier release and then a year of high prices, they can't and won't catch up. They'll finish 3rd with Nintendo winning this battle and MS coming in at #2...... If you want to purely talk hardware sales. I mean BluRay aside, there STILL is no compelling reason to get a PS3...

I agree. I see no reason from a game-playing stand point to get the PS3 unless you just want bragging rights that you have the most expensive of the 3 systems Then again there are some people that would pay for that Just my $0.02 on the PS3 anyways...

 

[Hardin]

Well the ps3 will have Tekken 6. That's something you can't take away from it. Eventually the ps3 will have enough exclusives to make it a viable option. It already has Ratchet and Clank and Uncharted.

 

[FudgeNuggets]

It's taking too long though Hardin, the install base of the Wii and 360 is insurmountable. Had Sony not been stupid and brought the PS3 out at $399 or perhaps even $499 it is likely that they would have given at least MS a beating if not Nintendo.

 

[Hardin]

So maybe it doesn't have the install the base the ps2 had. That doesn't mean people will stop making money and be unable to afford it now. There are plenty of people who play exclusives like Metal Gear Solid that will buy the ps3. They are already increasing their sales with the 40gb ps3. Not to mention it's usage as a blue-ray player. I never thought I would be defending sony, but they have games coming out now and your fud can't change that.

 

[rainless]

360 got too big a jump on them with the earlier release and then a year of high prices, they can't and won't catch up. They'll finish 3rd with Nintendo winning this battle and MS coming in at #2

That's completely delusional. Since when, in the past ten years or so, has Nintendo ever won any non-portable battle? They didn't win the battle of the PS1, they sure as hell didn't win the battle of the PS2, and they aren't going to win this battle ever.

All the millions who bought a Wii will think it's a cute toy for a couple of years and move on.

I mean people keep talking about the number of systems Nintendo sold... How many GAMES have they sold? Some low multiple of the number of games that Microsoft... or even Sony... has sold. The Wii is just the new beanie baby of the electronics industry.

Once the fad cools off... They're done.

I don't know how much gaming history I have to present... How much evidence and how many points I have to bring up before somebody gets that.

They don't (and won't) have the third party support. Which means they won't have the games. Which also means they'll never really have an active user base... and I'm not talking about people that just ran out and bought the system and it's been collecting dust in a corner ever since... I'm talking about people who actually go out, buy games, and are actively involved. They aren't even interested in online gaming. Meanwhile Sony and Microsoft are racking up tens of millions of subscribers.

I've heard of short-sighted... but you're going MR. MAGOO!

 

[Hazaro]

But Nintendo makes money on the GameCube 1.5's it makes

Sony and MS have to worry that hardware sales counter act production cost.