Playstation 3 e3 thread 3

[London Geezer]

Having watched the Sony presentation they seemed to be quick to say what was CELL and what was RSX and what was realtime--at that, I take it EVERYTHING not mentioned to be one of those was not realtime. ANd so far that seems about right.

Definately, and that also shields them from complaints of false advertising. They never said the Killzone and other videos were realtime. They specified which ones were realtime (Getaway, all the nifty little demos etc), and just didn't say anything about the VERY pretty ones like Killzone and Motorwhatever.

Well, just to add something to the thread that hasn't been discussed to death 800 times:

I can't wait to see ZOE on PS3, after seeing the Leaves demo thing.

 

[HappyBread]

Guerrilla Talk Killzone PS3.

Do you have the link for that interview?

Thanks.

Silly me

Here you go.
http://www.playstation-e3.com/index.html?jumpTo=en_GB

 

[Pugger]

London-Boy having worked in PR for 7 years know I'm pretty sure what happened. The guys at Sony, probably the European and US divisions probably went through the media they had to show. They would highlight what was realtime demo's and say nothing about what was pre-rendered. They would do this knowing full well that fanboy websites and spotty game Journo's would report not what Sony told them but what they didn't tell them. Its a classic PR stunt. Microsofts problem was they were to truthful as to the media they showed This seems to me becasue they went into E3 way overconfident in their ability to grab the media spotlight at E3. And KZ is pre-rendered and all the bull about how we expect it to look is again PR bull.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Listen to the announcement before the KX footage. They say something like (only heard it once) they gave it over to their development partners to produce something they think is attainable. What his actually chice of words, it sounded to my like a vague enough statement saying 'prerendered artist's impression' that people mistook it to mean 'this is the real deal'. They certainly preceeded the footage with a statement and if anyone could dig up the exact wording, that get us closer to seeing if they were deliberately trying to mislead, or just being coy in not saying 'this is prerendered'.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Did MS say what was prerendered and what not in their conference?

 

[London Geezer]

Listen to the announcement before the KX footage. They say something like (only heard it once) they gave it over to their development partners to produce something they think is attainable. What his actually chice of words, it sounded to my like a vague enough statement saying 'prerendered artist's impression' that people mistook it to mean 'this is the real deal'. They certainly preceeded the footage with a statement and if anyone could dig up the exact wording, that get us closer to seeing if they were deliberately trying to mislead, or just being coy in not saying 'this is prerendered'.

Well i have the conference on my hard drive at home, i'll have a look.

 

[MechanizedDeath]

No they probably needed all that time to put it all together. Art, animation, editing, direction. It's quite a long process. The rendering shouldn't take THAT long. Especially seeing how there's nothing fancy going on in the video, in the world of CGI that is. It's in-game assets being rendered offline, there's no raytracing or any other time-consuming stuff going on.

That's what I gathered too. I hope it's right, b/c that'll bode well for the finished product. Looks like they're gonna get a great deal of detail in those characters. PEACE.

 

[Cobra101]

If I may diverge from the topic (is there one?), PS3 design, like, totally sucks.

Nintendo did a great design job, kudos to them. I'd get that one just as an accessory for my living room, it's so beautiful.

A great job?

Its a square box! Teh innovation!

 

[Entropy]

If I may diverge from the topic (is there one?), PS3 design, like, totally sucks.

Nintendo did a great design job, kudos to them. I'd get that one just as an accessory for my living room, it's so beautiful.

A great job?

Its a square box! Teh innovation!

Yes but it's a non-ugly square box. That's the innovation. Hell, maybe that's the Revolution!
Since this is the PS3 thread, I must say that I felt it looked great. While many seem to assume that the low clock-rate was for yield, I'm not so sure. They have quite a bit of time to tweak for yield. It may be that they clock it so low due to heat concerns. Judging from the data given by IBM, at 3.2 GHz the CPU shouldn't draw much at all.

 

[Monty]

If I may diverge from the topic (is there one?), PS3 design, like, totally sucks.

Nintendo did a great design job, kudos to them. I'd get that one just as an accessory for my living room, it's so beautiful.

A great job?

Its a square box! Teh innovation!

well it's one nice looking square box...

and personally, the prerendered videos look blatantly prerendered, how people can think they are real-time is beyond me.

reminds me of the ff8 days, amount of people who i knew who thought that was ingame graphics, well funny.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

BTW...

Where is the entire "PS3 will be built around 65nm cell which will be shipping in volume in 2005...and process is everything" crowd?

 

[mckmas8808]

Hey Joe what exactly are you trying to ask? Whats your point, that the PS3 won't have 65nm tech?

 

[wazoo]

at the show conf, they were talking about 90mm, no ??

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Hey Joe what exactly are you trying to ask? Whats your point, that the PS3 won't have 65nm tech?

Not the first iteration.

 

[Qroach]

Vince was banned ages ago, and he's spreading his usual cheer over at gaming age. I'm a fan too, look I even have a quote he made in my sig.

I just love that quote, it's so wrong and so right.

 

[Phil]

First of all, Vince wasn't banned and secondly, it was anyones guess back then. There was info that implied it could be possible, but there were also realtime considerations that pointed the other way. In the end, what does this prove that it will be shipping at 90nm? It doesn't prove 65nm wasn't a likely possibility, just that the yields and costs attached to it isn't ready relative to the market and their competitors (Microsoft pushing for an early launch).

 

[rabidrabbit]

In the Microsoft conference video, it was said total 1 time that a video is a real time rendered on the fly on xbox360, and that was the final SquareEnix demo.
All the others... well they were just presented as this and that title by this and that studio/publisher.

So by the logic that is applied here to Sony's presentation, that because at some demos they very specifically said they were real time and at some they didin't say so... well then there were waaay more realtime demos on PS3 versus only one on xbox360

 

[Joe DeFuria]

In the end, what does this prove that it will be shipping at 90nm?

It proves that:

just that the yields and costs attached to it isn't ready relative to the market and their competitors (Microsoft pushing for an early launch).

Which is exactly what I was espousing (process is NOT everything, and there are other factors.) This is exactly what Vince was NOT espousing.

Now, to be clear, it's all fine to have a different opinion (that was never the issue)...the issue was his outirght dismissal of what turned out to be the truth ...and labeling people (such as myself and Baumann) with that belief as "just PC chip people who know nothing about console business."

BTW...I think Vince would have a heart attack if he heard you say that Sony was reacting to MS. Sony sets the pace, everyone else follows, don't you know!

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I've seen someone Google up some Sony marketing talk about the PS3 from 2002 and 2003. Back then, it was supposed to be a thousand times faster then PS2, so fast that no GHz-speed memory would be enough for it. A little bit later they went down to 200-300 times PS2, and now we have 35-40 times as a result.

There were comments here on B3D as well from people who fully accepted that...

 

[Phil]

I'm not going to argue in Vince's favour, but I belief the point that was being argued wasn't what Sony will do, but rather what kind of situation we believed Sony to be in and how they would/could use it to their advantage.

There were numerous sources and news tidbits on the progress of the Sony fabs which were being upgraded for 65nm production, as were Toshiba fabs making great progress. All I'm saying is that back then, it was a very likely possibility (of course in an optimal scenario).

While some believed Sony would be launching in late 2006, some thought it would be fall 2005 as well (I remember Paul, as Vince believing that). IMO, I'm surprised that it's in fact Spring of 2006 - I myself thought Sony would play their mindshare advantage and launch in late 2006, a full year after Microsoft.

I also didn't want to say that I believe Sony was forced to schedule themselves accoarding to Microsofts plans - but rather that it was the safest bet. Do they really need 65nm? Given Microsofts hardware (I don't see them pushing the envelope with Xb360), I'd say the answer is no. To my disappointment actually.