PGR4: No day/night cycles per city. This feature doesn't fit onto a DVD

[TrungGap]

Actually, including Blu-ray in the PS3 was a very smart idea, it gives developers a lot more space and freedom to work with. Plus, it also help pushing the Blu-ray format.

I know I'm contributing to derailing the thread...but you're right. The BR is a very smart move for Sony in their overall strategy of world domination. But in regard a gaming device, I'm not sure it's a smart move...well, we'll have wait and see how Wii and 360 do.

I believe if Sony released a PS3 with DVD and came to market at the same time as 360 (and priced the same or even less), they wouldn't be in 3rd place. I've confident that they'll the same problem as Nintendo, that is keep up with demand.

Back on topic, it's nice that developers are offering more content, but realistically is that practical? I mean if the 360 had BR or HD-DVD, I have a feeling they would still complain about not having enough room for textures with different weather condition.

The question is really is not whether the developer have enough space, because clearly there are more than one way to skin a cat...And that's the developer's job so solve. The question is whether the content delivered on DVD is enough to satisfy the consumer. Well, basing on what is shown, I do...so far.

 

[-tkf-]

I believe if Sony released a PS3 with DVD and came to market at the same time as 360 (and priced the same or even less), they wouldn't be in 3rd place. I've confident that they'll the same problem as Nintendo, that is keep up with demand.

Was the PS3 in any shape to be launched at that time? Cell ready, and in enough numbers? RSX? Memory? What about Development Tools, we all followed the release of the Dev Kits. When was the first Dev kit released that contained a full speed Cell SPU and RSX processor? How far was the PSN? And what games would have been ready at that time?

Afaik the first actual working PS3 running a Warhawk Demo was "found" by Carl B, at the 2006 E3. And it was still prototypes

http://psinsider.e-mpire.com/index.php?categoryid=20&m_articles_articleid=546

 

[TrungGap]

Was the PS3 in any shape to be launched at that time? Cell ready, and in enough numbers? RSX? Memory? What about Development Tools, we all followed the release of the Dev Kits. When was the first Dev kit released that contained a full speed Cell SPU and RSX processor? How far was the PSN? And what games would have been ready at that time?

Afaik the first actual working PS3 running a Warhawk Demo was "found" by Carl B, at the 2006 E3. And it was still prototypes

http://psinsider.e-mpire.com/index.php?categoryid=20&m_articles_articleid=546

Cell and Memory, I would say so. However, you're right to question whether the RSX and SDK are ready. As for the PSN, it's a moot point, as it's clearly not ready to compete against LIVE.

The thing I don't understand is this. Playstation is cash cow, how could they be this far behind in development schedule. I mean the Cell at the time as proving itself pretty well in many other applications. Maybe do to the lack of resource? A missed step somewhere? I really want to know that were the missed steps as I doubt that Sony sat on their ass and were caught off guard with the 360 roll out schedule. Coz, even though they did say that they would sell millions of PS3 without software, I doubt they really meant it...

[edit: typos]

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Was the PS3 in any shape to be launched at that time? Cell ready, and in enough numbers? RSX? Memory? What about Development Tools, we all followed the release of the Dev Kits. When was the first Dev kit released that contained a full speed Cell SPU and RSX processor? How far was the PSN? And what games would have been ready at that time?

Cell has been in PS3 devkits since 2004. Memory was probably complete aswell. RSX was finished in february 2006

 

[tha_con]

Cell and Memory, I would say so. However, you're right to question whether the RSX and SDK are ready. As for the PSN, it's a moot point, as it's clearly not ready to compete against LIVE.

The thing I don't understand is this. Playstation is cash cow, how could they be this far behind in development schedule. I mean the Cell at the time as proving itself pretty well in many other applications. Maybe do to the lack of resource? A missed step somewhere? I really want to know that were the missed steps as I doubt that Sony sat on their ass and were caught off guard with the 360 roll out schedule. Coz, even though they did say that they would sell millions of PS3 without software, I doubt they really meant it...

[edit: typos]

I think the clear difference between the hardware in both consoles illustrates very well why the PS3 came out later.

Hardware faults asside, I think the PSN is only lacking two key features from live, and that's the 4 channel voice chat (cross game) and the integrated cross game invites from all games.

Also, It's not like Sony created the PS3 and magically knew how to program the hell out of it. They designed the hardware, and optimizing your software to utilize it does not come in a package with new hardware, even if you design it yourself. I think it's clear that Edge has solved many of those problems, and that Sony has come quite a long way in recent months.

 

[Arwin]

Was the PS3 in any shape to be launched at that time? Cell ready, and in enough numbers? RSX? Memory? What about Development Tools, we all followed the release of the Dev Kits. When was the first Dev kit released that contained a full speed Cell SPU and RSX processor? How far was the PSN? And what games would have been ready at that time?

To people who have kept track of PS3's progress, these questions sound rhetorical: obviously not. Even PS3's big guy said they might launch in March 2006, or they might not, depending on whether there would be any games in decent enough shape. That in the end it was the diode that caused the delay matters only little.

The only question that remains is how many third parties decided to focus some of their development energy on other platforms instead away from getting games finished for the PS3 in time for Christmas, because there wouldn't be sufficient numbers of consoles out. Similarly, it is unknown how this has influenced development for the PS3 over time.

And finally, the European delay was definitely caused by the diode shortage. Also, potentially the diode shortage is responsible for raising the cost of producing the PS3 a little. Though in theory it could also have lowered the cost - it all depends on whether or not they were able to accurately predict the shortages and delay production of other components, perhaps.

 

[TrungGap]

I think the clear difference between the hardware in both consoles illustrates very well why the PS3 came out later.

Also, It's not like Sony created the PS3 and magically knew how to program the hell out of it. They designed the hardware, and optimizing your software to utilize it does not come in a package with new hardware, even if you design it yourself. I think it's clear that Edge has solved many of those problems, and that Sony has come quite a long way in recent months.

Sure, the Cell is harder to program. But it's that much harder than the 360. Both faces the same multi-threading issues. Yes, get full power out the Cell is a difficult at first, but RSX is familiar friend. And the PS3 would be going up against 360 launch title, so they would be on even footing. Because at then end of the day, you're not competing launch games vs launch games, you're competing what's on the shelves.

If MS could do it, why not Sony? Yes, MS is a software company, so they have a lot of experience at it, but you have to realized that MS is not a console gaming company. Sony been doing gaming console for a long time, they have all the experiences to figure out all the software aspect of it. I'm sure Sony is a capable company.

What I'm saying beside the BR diodes issue, what cause Sony to be so far behind? It's surely not because lack of planning, resources or time. It's not 3rd party developers either, because everyone is on the PS3 bandwagon. It's got to be some miscalculations.

Hardware faults asside, I think the PSN is only lacking two key features from live, and that's the 4 channel voice chat (cross game) and the integrated cross game invites from all games.

My point about PSN is it's a moot point. If it's not really ready for 2006 launch, it won't be ready for 2005, so it should not hold up the launch. Beside, Sony can continue to play the same strategy of promising how great their network is going to be, because clearly it's working...since the day of the Dreamcast.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

To people who have kept track of PS3's progress, these questions sound rhetorical: obviously not. Even PS3's big guy said they might launch in March 2006, or they might not, depending on whether there would be any games in decent enough shape. That in the end it was the diode that caused the delay matters only little.

Oh, please.

If bluray wasn't on the PS3, and they targeted a fall 2005 launch, they would reach it, (You don't think nvidia would be able to finish of a slight modification of a year old GPU in time? The cell was allready at good yield rates. Memory probably to. Bluray caused the delay along with HDMI standarts that weren't finished.) Games would also be done, yes the games may have suffered and all that because they where more rushed, but there would be games out.

Oh, and everybody and their mother knew Sony had no intentions of launching a PS3 in March 2006, it was just PR statements to make people wait a little longer and not buy a X360, whatever Sony's big guy stated was just lies to keep people on ice..

 

[morlock]

I don't think Sony never really intended to release the PS3 in fall 05 och spring 06 for that matter. Considering how well the PS2 was doing and are doing, there would be foolish to kill that generation too early. They sure stressed MS to release too early though.

The best thing the blu-ray has offered games are the scratch-resistance, the BD-roms are extremely durable.

 

[rabidrabbit]

I had to scroll to the top of the page to check the thread title.
I thought I'd clicked a wrong thread but no, this is indeed about PS3.... no I mean PGR3
Edit: PGR4 of course

 

[Carl B]

Agreed - though it may be easy to fall into it, the conversation should not be about BD per se, but DVD specifically, and its implications/workarounds in this instance. While it's be ok to mention storage pitfalls associated with the media in general, things have really gone off too far in that direction now in terms of the convo topic.

It was with the mind of avoiding a descent into PS3 vs 360 that only the technology thread on the subject has been kept alive.

EDIT: (In my best MC voice) Reeeeewiiiind!

Posts deleted, back on track. Guys - p l e a s e - no explicit BD/PS3v360 discussion here. This is about PGR4, DVD, and its workarounds.