choices, choices...

[lentoPastel]

maybe this is a good time to ponder... now that the next gen battle is undecided, what things, were you a top MS,Sony or Nintendo exec, based in what we know will have you made differently?

I can think on several items:

-embrace blue ray or hit the market sooner?
-go RSX (more power) or go with 10MB's FrameBuffer (where do you prefer those transistors?)
-in-order or out-off-order CPU (a little old topic)
-512MB or more? in this case, if you think 768 is better for PS3, where would you add those extra 256MB? for RSX or for cell?
- Free internet gameplay or invest in servers and charge for them?

I loved the Dreamcast, so if I were a top MS exec, I would have been made pretty much the same things they did, there is a lot in common except the money. If I were Sony's, the first thing I would do is to make a Geometry Wars clone but better (I´m a huge robotron fan). Secondly, instead of those 6 USB ports, compact flash, etc, etc, I would add an extra 256MB of memory, that would guarantee an advantage over the now in stone xbox360' 512MB. Nintendo is the poor player here, cant really compete in terms of hardware, so they gone the innovation's way, with a lot to lose but also a lot to win. They have a choice too... they excel at game´s development. They could have gone the same path as Sega... but if I where a Nintendo's exec I would ahve been afraid to mention that...

I really would like to know what you -much more knowlegadble than I- would have done *differently* than what they did (until what we know).

see ya in five years, I have a gift to the winner in forecasting weaknesess and strongneseess!!!

 

[sfried]

I wouldn't exactly think Nintendo's the poor player, much like 360 isn't exactly "poor" compared to PS3, now that some revelation has come to light. High end specs on paper doesn't guarantee success. Nintendo learned that from the N64 and GC era, and are more supportive of third parties than ever before.

I'd like to say that the reverse case has happened now with Sony, with their increased licensing costs and development kits, they're becomming much more like Nintendo was during the 64-bit era: archaic.

As for MS, it's quite a surprise they're getting help from more Japanese developers despite their failure in Japan. Perhaps a second wave will sway the masses of the Rising Sun?

On short, time will tell. I don't think any company will "win" or "lose" this gen. Heck, if prediction is correct, they might all "lose" (since everyone can seem so discontent with gaming nowdays).

 

[dukmahsik]

I think the choice is easy, go with the system that has the games you like the most

 

[lentoPastel]

I think the choice is easy, go with the system that has the games you like the most

An the end that is true, as a consumer, but I am playing the game of designing the plataform for that fantastic game. You have a limited budget, how do you spend it? and you have in the other side a pro player doing the same thing. What mistakes do yo spot in their's desings?

 

[superguy]

This is an awesome post. I will probably reply to this about ten times.

-embrace blue ray or hit the market sooner?

In my opinion clearly Sony provided a great weakness with Blu Ray. It's costing them an arm and a leg, delays, etc. They may be able to get away with it because MS did not hammer them with greater system power (which Microsoft easily could have, for the amount Sony is spending on Blu-Ray), but that doesn't change that it was, and is, very, very dangerous. The payoff is obvious, but I ask, what payoff would there have been if they got HAMMERED in the videogame market because of it?



-go RSX (more power) or go with 10MB's FrameBuffer (where do you prefer those transistors?)

Definitly RSX. We will see how it plays out, but I hate EDRAM. Really we must see who's games look better to determine this though.

-in-order or out-off-order CPU (a little old topic)

Out of order. I think a dual core A64 would have fit the bill nicely and been a dev dream. You do have some argument that Cell can do special things a conventional CPU cannot, but we will see if Cell's alledged revolutionary capabiliies pan out in games.


-512MB or more? in this case, if you think 768 is better for PS3, where would you add

Uh more, duh. I'd add to VRAM I suppose.

- Free internet gameplay or invest in servers and charge for them?

Free, I think. Free is big.

 

[lentoPastel]

-512MB or more? in this case, if you think 768 is better for PS3, where would you add

Uh more, duh. I'd add to VRAM I suppose.

yeah, that seems as obvius, but if you add more memory, you add more price. Is that really better? I guess that if that come true, Sony is going to take some other thing out, and I guess they are already out of budget... what I think they could have been made is to make a powerfull (as they are) console whith 1GB in RAM (giving them a tangible advantage over the competition), but they went for the all in one machine aproach. It is one or the other. I am not qualified to say wich is better at this time, but from their point of view, the all in one aproach makes more sense, given theirs other bussiness like movies, music, content, etc

 

[superguy]

Yeah which is better. PS3 with 1GB Ram and DVD or with Blu-Ray?

Blu-Ray would probably be more expensive than the RAM at first, but less later.

But seriously, think hard about it because it's tough. Blu Ray gives much more disc storage which is very nice. Whereas RAM alone isn't really upping system power per se. However, it would give the PS3 an area of clear tech superiority, and would likely make it highly preferred by developers. Which alone can win "The War". Can you imagine MGS4 with 1 GB RAM to push to the limit?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Ideas of jiggering around with PS3's configuration seem targetted at making it a 'better' console. eg. Removing all those connectors and instead adding an extra 256 MB RAM to give an edge over XB360. That defeats the true purpose of PlayStation according to KK's vision - it was never intended to be just a console. It all depends on how PS3 plays out, but if it's successful in what it's intended to achieve, Sony'll make far, far more money than by having it as just a console.

 

[NANOTEC]

-embrace blue ray or hit the market sooner?

I think it's pretty obvious that PS3 would not have been ready for a spring launch BR or not. SONY only had two choices..spring or fall and that has nothing to do with BR.

 

[dukmahsik]

while we're all wishing, I'd like the edram in 360 to be 12MB instead and xenos to be 4 cores instead of 3, 1gb shared ram instead of 512mb, oh and keep it all under 299 with the hdd

 

[Jabjabs]

I think it's pretty obvious that PS3 would not have been ready for a spring launch BR or not. SONY only had two choices..spring

Well we could still have a spring launch down here in the southern hemisphere.

 

[pegisys]

while we're all wishing, I'd like the edram in 360 to be 12MB instead and xenos to be 4 cores instead of 3, 1gb shared ram instead of 512mb, oh and keep it all under 299 with the hdd

that seems a little more then a wish, I think you mean dream

The only question I'm going to reply to is this one

go RSX (more power) or go with 10MB's FrameBuffer (where do you prefer those transistors?)

because I would rather have xenos, and we really don't know if the graphics on the PS3 is going to be noticeably better or not. I would rather have slightly less effect and AA, because once you get used to AA it's hard to play without some form of it

 

[Farid]

Yeah which is better. PS3 with 1GB Ram and DVD or with Blu-Ray?

Blu-Ray would probably be more expensive than the RAM at first, but less later.

Except that, in the facts, it's a lot more complex than that.

The BRD drive may (as in, it's not even a certitude) cost more than at launch compared to 512MB or RAM in supplement of the actual 512MB. But while the cost of the BRD will, without a doubt, fall quite rapidly as time passes (The BRD drive is not unlike any other classical optical drive in nature).
The price of the PCB, the changes made to the PCB each time they change the RAM chips and the prices of the RAM chips won't decrease as rapidly.

I would rather have slightly less effect and AA, because once you get used to AA it's hard to play without some form of it

In a nomal IMR GPU (without eDRAM), the developer can chose to activate or not the AA, and then "pay the price" of this AA. So, you 'll get less effects and AA.
Furthermore, when you're CPU bound, the AA can be turned on without any real penalty.

Also, I thought that we determined that most folks, including some who were vocal about the presence and the benefit of the AA in the games, couldn't tell if the games use AA or not on HDTVs. A lot of folks were certain that PDZ or Kameo used AA, while both games didn't use any. Only the blur effects (MB and DOF) did alleviate the Aliasing problem a bit.

I'm still thinking that the PPI of HDTVs and the relative distance this one os from the player (in most cases) make AA lot less important compared to what it is for SDTV or PC monitors. But that's OT, and just an opinion.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Except that, in the facts, it's a lot more complex than that.

The BRD drive may (as in, it's not even a certitude) cost more than at launch compared to 512MB or RAM in supplement of the actual 512MB. But while the cost of the BRD will, without a doubt, fall quite rapidly as time passes (The BRD drive is not unlike any other classical optical drive in nature).
The price of the PCB, the changes made to the PCB each time they change the RAM chips and the prices of the RAM chips won't decrease as rapidly.

Not to mention Sony can justify raising the BOM for BR, as it is a potential revenue source down the road. Adding an extra 512mb of ram off has no pay-off (other than perhaps increasign marketshare indirectly), so it would be much less likely it would have been included.

They simply would've launched at a lower pricepoint.

 

[liolio]

I should choose a boost xbox360 to match ps3 bom.
I would go for a xenon with more cache.
A 192bit bus to the northbridge (in the xenos).
A slightly bigger edram with a part locked and working as a L3 cache
a rabbit aka alice in wonderland

 

[Tahir2]

Bluray is a big risk but as with all big risks the payoffs are huge should they be a success.

IMHO: the major thing that Sony needed to do different is not to have so many expansion ports (this costs money at the end of the day) and to have added a third party graphics specialist to aid Cell earlier (NVIDIA, ATI or whoever else) as this would have probably cost them less and made the design more suited for a console architecture. I am saying this without any real hard facts and exploration of what "RSX" is but based on speculations on this board.

 

[ninzel]

For the Revolution,more RAM and a bigger flash drive so devs could use some for caching.

 

[quest55720]

Yeah which is better. PS3 with 1GB Ram and DVD or with Blu-Ray?

Blu-Ray would probably be more expensive than the RAM at first, but less later.

But seriously, think hard about it because it's tough. Blu Ray gives much more disc storage which is very nice. Whereas RAM alone isn't really upping system power per se. However, it would give the PS3 an area of clear tech superiority, and would likely make it highly preferred by developers. Which alone can win "The War". Can you imagine MGS4 with 1 GB RAM to push to the limit?

I would rather have the gig of ram and DVD instead of blue ray. If I am going to spend thousands of dollars to upgrade to blue ray or HD-DVD I will do it on a stand alone player. When I say thousands of dollars I mean a new TV with HMDI inputs and many many discs. I don' t think my PS2 was used for a DVD player since I got it all those years ago.

The only 3 things I would of liked MS to do would of been to add 2 more US arrays, better AF and a Physics processing unit. Hell I would be happy with any of those.

 

[akira888]

Secondly, instead of those 6 USB ports, compact flash, etc, etc, I would add an extra 256MB of memory, that would guarantee an advantage over the now in stone xbox360' 512MB.

The price of six USB ports, a CF I/II slot, et alia are quite likely an order of magnitude lower than that of 256 MiB of 700 Mhz GDDR3 RAM. I would not be suprised if external memory was the single most expensive component in the PS3 by far.

 

[EndR]

For me..the 360 is excellent in many ways.. but some things would have helped it out better in the long run..

More cache - easier for devs, more possibilities
More Mhz on GPU - ATI.. what happened with FAST 14. 600Mhz GPU would have been a nice little boost
HDD included on all units - helping devs out and giving more possibilites..