Current mind share on B3D

[darkblu]

1. the ps3 is too much of an orignal machine for me to skip on - the possibility to do homebrew/indy on it is way too tempting ..though i'm still waiting for sony to officially allow homebrew on the psp so the paltform can actually reach its potential.

2. the revolution will surely host one of my favourite games. the new HID is also inspiring and ninty just know how to enterntain.

3. maybe xbox360, if ms officially allow homebrew on it, no strings attached. their console (this time it's a console alright, not a funny-case, crippled pc) has this gpu that's just too curious to be neglected.

 

[Phil]

Disclaimer & Note: I am responding to the following because it wasn't stated as an opinion, but in fact it's a flawed assessment:

That's why I said 1st gen PS3 games will be going against 2nd gen X360 games, which is true.

I think you've got a very flawed idea of the distinction in games between generations. Both consoles have equally different CPUs which will take a lot of effort to get good performance out of. The result is a rather steep learning curve - one that is present on both consoles. In fact, I'd even go as far to say that each set of developers on either hardware will have a very similar learning curve in the development process,

1.) because the jump from Xbox's PC-ish architecture to Xbox360's is quite a big one in terms that now they have to deal with multiple cores and a more uniquely designed GPU. XNA is going to help I assume, but the fact that a big part of the developers on Xbox360 have been developing Xbox games isn't going to help them much.

2.) Sony PS2 already had a very different architecture to the other consoles with its two vector-units and its in-order CPU. I expect many of the PS2 developers going on to PS3 development will already be taking quite a lot of their experience with "multi-core" development with them, which will greatly benefit their learning curve on CELL. On the upside, better libraries and a API should also help the PS3 in being not as alien as the PS2 was in the beginning (lack of proper documentation, few libraries and compiler issues). PSP already was a step in the right direction - now with PS3 with help from IBM and a proper GPU with OpenGL, things can only improve which I'm sure it will.

The point being: both consoles will have a steep learning curve and a rather similar one at that. Since both hardware makers have their development kits out already and in roughly the same stage, most games will be following a similar timeframe. PS3 is launching in Spring in Japan at least, meaning games will effectively have more time on PS3 until they launch. There's nothing to refute that - Xbox360 games effectively have to be ready in a shorter timeframe and have a very similar learning curve. That also means that come when ever PS3 will be launching in North America, its games will be roughly within the same stage in development. It is not going to be 1st generation games vs. 2 generation games. In fact, if you take into account the devkit problems Microsoft is having and the fact that they are launching in less than 2 months, I'd dare to even call them 1st generation games - more like rushed launch games. In anycase and regardless what we call them, PS3's launch games - I repeat - will have the 4 months extra development time. By the time Xbox360 goes into its 2nd generation games, so will PS3.



As for your earlier nitpick about my reasoning for using support as a factor to support my decision for going with PS3 - even at the moment, it seems quite apparent that Sony's 3rd party support is higher - why wouldn't it? It's the safest bet for developers, not only accoarding to the developers themselves, but market research and analysts predict the same. Maybe this will change in the future, but at the moment, it's as I have stated is the more likely scenario. Yours is still up in the air. And before attempting another PS2 <-> Xbox reasoning with a 2 year launch difference, look no further than DC <-> PS2 in which the timeframe was shorter and DC had a very similar strong following backing it. Even sales were high... and yet the DC was held back by support because the PS2 seemed to be the safer bet and many of the devs were still riding on the success of the original PlayStation while DC was preparing for its launch lineup.

 

[Andy]

I'll be getting a PS3, possibly when it first launches, (whether it launches in Japan or US first, doesnt really matter) just keeping with tradition, I will most likely buy a Revolution when it hits shores in Australia, X360 I'm a little bit wary of, yes the launch line up looks impressive, but I recently updated my PC, so I'm not really in any great haste to buy one just yet, as the majority of its games end up on PC anyway.

Dont get me wrong I love XBox, particularly when my PC wasnt so crash hot, but since upgrading the PC, I've barely touched it, only really to play Ninja Gaiden. I think my favourite console this Generation due to its niche games, would have to go to Gamecube, which caters to most of my needs, followed closely second by PS2 which has a broader range of titles for me to pick and choose.

 

[.Melchiah.]

PS3 - definitely
Rev - doubtfully
X2 - not interested

(Pretty much the same as it was during this generation)


PS3 is my top choice mainly because of Final Fantasy and Silent Hill series, plus Sony's 1st & 2nd party developers. Also its possibilities and capabilities excite me, and the inclusion of BluRay is a nice bonus.

 

[Qroach]

Disclaimer & Note: I am responding to the following because it wasn't stated as an opinion, but in fact it's a flawed assessment:

Phil, you, Mckmas & Scooby just don't get the point of this thread!

 

[drpepper]

No, it could be a causation. I just don't know for sure. I find it odd that I have no real attraction to PS3 games that, objectively, I know are probably going to be as good as X360 games. So I think that it's quite likely that subconciously I have blocked getting interested in PS3 games because they are PS3 games.

Your original quote:
"PS3 is doubtful for me. I more or less only have time and money for one console, and MS seems to pick up more of the games I like. Or maybe I like them because MS has picked them up. I don't really know which way the causation works, but it did."

You put in doubt wether you'll pick up the console either (1) because MS picked up titles you like or (2) you like them because MS picked them up.

This is analagous to the classic: Alzheimers leads to accumulation of aluminum in the brain or, accumulation of aluminum in the brain leads to Alzheimers. The uncertainty leads to a correlation effect since we don't kow what causes what.

In your cause, you have en element of uncertainty, therefore I pinned it as a corelation. A classic first year psychology explanation. Not that I'm in psychology.

There's a degree of certainty in "causality", ie: my car didn't start because the battery is dead, not the battery is dead because my car didn't start; there's no two way about it as it was in your case. Sorry for going off topic.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Oh! Now I get this thread!
By it's very nature It's all about a personal preference and opinion "what will you get"... and the personal motivations for how one has come to that conclusion.

...but why are people still arguing about a poll???..... you should not even be able to argue over what someone enters in a poll, as it is purely personal preferences.

 

[London Geezer]

*happy i stayed well clear of this thread*

 

[mckmas8808]

Phil, you, Mckmas & Scooby just don't get the point of this thread!

Facts are that facts. Nobody is arguing anyone's opinion. Phil and I were saying that PS3 launch games would not be going against 360's 2nd generation games. That's all. Nothing more.

 

[Carl B]

Facts are that facts. Nobody is arguing anyone's opinion. Phil and I were saying that PS3 launch games would not be going against 360's 2nd generation games. That's all. Nothing more.

Right but what QRoach is saying is in this thread - nobody argue the facts either! I'm saying the same thing. Just leave it alone - if one person starts off on a tangent, just ignore it and let it slide. We don't want people that haven't posted yet to feel they'll get dragged down into an argument over minutiae in this thread.

So, let's all just walk away from it and enjoy people posting their opinions here.

I'm sure if anyone really wants to discuss it, starting a thread topic on: 'PS3 and 360 head to head: launch schedules' would get plenty of good debate. But let's keep this poll clean, and that includes your logic arguments DrPepper!

(feel free to PM me on this post anyone, but don't respond directly or that's just propogating the problem!)

 

[Qroach]

Facts are that facts. Nobody is arguing anyone's opinion. Phil and I were saying that PS3 launch games would not be going against 360's 2nd generation games. That's all. Nothing more.

There is zero "Fact" in anything either of you have said regarding this. I see no reason for you to start an argument over something that is clearly a matter of opinion. You don't agree, fine say you don't agree, and shut up about it, but Don't try and claim your opinion is fact. That's total nonsense.

Xbdestroya has the right idea. Good plan, and that's for understanding what this thread is about.

 

[manuvlad]

PS3 = 120 (40.27%)
X360 = 106 (35.57%)
Revolution = 64 (21.48%)
I have no current preference = 8 (2.68%)

 

[dizzyd]

I would like to get both the PS3 and the Xbox360, but since I also want to get a nice HDTV I can probably only afford one which would would be the PS3. The reason is it has the games that I am interested in.

Tekken
MGS
GT
FF
God of War
Ratchet and Clank
DMC
Killzone, etc.

 

[AlNom]

I'll get the 360 for sure. I'll wait and see with PS3 and Revolution.

 

[Powderkeg]

The point being: both consoles will have a steep learning curve and a rather similar one at that. Since both hardware makers have their development kits out already and in roughly the same stage, most games will be following a similar timeframe. PS3 is launching in Spring in Japan at least, meaning games will effectively have more time on PS3 until they launch. There's nothing to refute that - Xbox360 games effectively have to be ready in a shorter timeframe and have a very similar learning curve. That also means that come when ever PS3 will be launching in North America, its games will be roughly within the same stage in development. It is not going to be 1st generation games vs. 2 generation games. In fact, if you take into account the devkit problems Microsoft is having and the fact that they are launching in less than 2 months, I'd dare to even call them 1st generation games - more like rushed launch games. In anycase and regardless what we call them, PS3's launch games - I repeat - will have the 4 months extra development time. By the time Xbox360 goes into its 2nd generation games, so will PS3.

You are flat out wrong.

First off, some 360 developers have had dev kits since late 2003, and most since early 2004. By the time the PS3 launches, developers would have had 2 full years working with some form of 360 hardware and developers tools.

PS3 dev kits only shipped in March of this year, giving developers only a year and a half with the hardware before launch. However, Sony had supply problems with their dev kits, and as of July 21st, had only shipped out 100 kits in total. This means either only a handful of developers had kits at all, or up to 100 development houses had a kit, but only one.

So, as of July, you had either a small group of developers with any PS3 dev kits, or a bunch without enough kits for more than a couple of programmers to learn from.

That means that by the time the PS3 ships most developers will be almost a full year behind their 360 counterparts.



But beyond that, the 360 developers tools make porting content from the PC extremely easy, so in fact many developers were able to start on their content well before the 360 dev kits shipped. They didn't have to wait until the dev kits shipped to start on their game, which is why you see something as massive as Elder Scrolls: Oblivion shipping less than a month after launch.

So in truth, most 360 developers will have had 3-4 years to produce content, and 2 years to get their game engine together by the time the PS3 ships with the majority of it's developers having only had a year with the hardware and tools.

So yes, 360 developers will easily be into their 2nd generation games by the time the PS3 ships, and if anything, it will be the PS3 developers who are rushed.

 

[mckmas8808]

Right but what QRoach is saying is in this thread - nobody argue the facts either! I'm saying the same thing. Just leave it alone - if one person starts off on a tangent, just ignore it and let it slide.

Oh ok cool.

 

[mckmas8808]

Powerkeg you are breaking the rules baby. Chill that talk is not for this thread.

 

[Ragemare]

Just a bit of commentary.

This is quite interesting, but not unexpected. In polls on other websites the PS3 has pulled further away from the Xbox360, but here it's very close. Also there seems to be more interest in buying Revolution here which goes against the general notion that tech enthusiasts will be less interested in it than other gamers because of the lack of horse power. Not only that, but less people here have an interest in buying both the PS3 and Xbox360, and would rather just get one of them and possibly the Revolution.

It seems that a section of people in the tech community are buying into the idea of the Rev as a second console and arn't bothered too much by the lack of power. Infact peoples main concern about the Revolution seems to be the number of games that will be released for it and the functionality of the controller.

Peoples' main reasons for buying Xbox360 or PS3, pretty much come down to which one has the games they want. Not many people appear to be baseing their buying decision on which they think will be more powerfull, maybe because the general perception is they will be close enough in power that the quality of the games on each console will be decided almost exclusivly by the games' developers.

On the other hand saying your going to buy the PS3 because it is more powerfull than the Xbox360 or that your going to buy the Xbox360 becasue it has better development tools than the PS3, is bound to cause some bile to be spat in your direction. So maybe some forum members are being more diplomatic and just saying they want the games that are comeing out for console X, but not really stateing why that is.

BTW if somone states their opinion about a console as a fact in this thread, don't try and correct them, it's still their opinion and it's still mind share. The idea of this thread is to state your reasons for buying a console and to observe other peoples. Also I didn't ask for you to predict what other gamers will think or do, just to state your own opinion. I want to see what people really think, not what some people think they should think

 

[Edge]

> "In polls on other websites the PS3 has pulled further away from the Xbox360, but here it's very close."

Not surprising, and always thought this forum was overly Xbox fan heavy compared to other multi-console forums.

 

[Qroach]

Not surprising, and always thought this forum was overly Xbox fan heavy compared to other multi-console forums.

This forum? no not even close. For the longest time xbox was third behind the game cube around here. anyway i think the majority of people are basing thier purchasing preference on the games they see. I've been saying for a while that the general population bases thier purchases on the type of software that interests them. If you offer lots of choice, players will buy it.