Sony delays PS3 to 2006, concentrates on PSP !?

[zidane1strife]

That's true, but we dunno what could happen in the future... you saw the n64, psx market leader change... IF ms remains on the market they could eventually take advantage of any future mistakes made by the market leader at that time....

I would prefer another company came into the market, maybe panasonic/matsu., or sega's return...

 

[clem64]

I think it's obvious that MS and Ninty didn't want to launch in 2005, but that they understand they can't afford to give Sony a one year head start. And frankly, this is really good news to me. Having GC and Xbox last only 4 years didn't sound good to me at all. I think it's also too early for the three companies to be even talking about their next-gen hardware. Having the next gen launch in 2006 or 2007 would mean that we'd get as much gaming out of PS2/GC/XB as possible and also that the next wave of consoles will be significantly more powerful.

Personally I think that 5 years is too short to begin with. People don't want to buy consoles, they do so to get to the games. And also, as far as graphics are concerned, I think we're starting to reach the point of diminishing returns. The improvements are less dramatic with each passing generation IMO. If the industry could get to a point where the usual life cycle for consoles would be around 6-7 years, I think it would be better for everyone.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Sony has even started to back off the one bit of information everyone thought they knew about the next PlayStation. Japanese executives have recently made statements indicating the Cell processor--the cutting-edge chip being developed by Sony, IBM and Toshiba--may be too expensive and too late to market for the next PlayStation.

How did the reporter reached this conclusion from this:

Kaz Hirai, president of Sony Computer Entertainment of America, declined to offer any clarification. "We're working on the Cell, making a big investment on that technology," Hirai said. "But where that chip is ultimately going to end up is up in the air at this point."

"But where that chip is ultimately going to end up is up in the air at this point."...

Is this the processor for PlayStation 2 ( question at January 1999 IEEE conference )...

answer: No comment... ( and something along the lines of the same statement you find up there... )...

 

[London Geezer]

Personally I think that 5 years is too short to begin with. People don't want to buy consoles, they do so to get to the games. And also, as far as graphics are concerned, I think we're starting to reach the point of diminishing returns. The improvements are less dramatic with each passing generation IMO. If the industry could get to a point where the usual life cycle for consoles would be around 6-7 years, I think it would be better for everyone.

PERSONALLY i think 5 years is just fine, even too much maybe....

i mean, 5 years for a console is a whole lot, and the jump between each generation is always gonna be huge...

and as for pricing, 5 years for something that costs 299 at launch and soon gets cut to 199 is a hell of a deal.... it's 16p a day for christ's sake.... 5 quid a day.... 60 quid a year.... really it's absolutely NOTHING....
7 years is way too much, by 2007 PS2 (and also XBOX and GC) will look REALLY antiquated, be it in graphics as in any other aspect.... and although i personally never had problems with the hardware, a delicate little thing like PS2 will not last 7 years to everyone....
all this to say, ps3 in 2005 COOL... Ps3 in 2006 OK... PS3 in 2007 NO WAY...

 

[PiNkY]

I'd agree with London-Boy there, 4 year of "prime life-time" for a game console is not too short. Also take a look at psx, it is still going strong, so I don't think the release of ps3/XBox next/ gcII will immediately outdate ps2/xbox/gc... At these low hardware prices (especially in relation to game prices) I'd rather invest 300€ in new hardware 2 years from now and get some nextgen games at 50€, than lay down those 50€ for then really outdate current generation stuff...

 

[Paul]

Kaz Hirai, president of Sony Computer Entertainment of America, declined to offer any clarification. "We're working on the Cell, making a big investment on that technology," Hirai said. "But where that chip is ultimately going to end up is up in the air at this point."

Oh please.. SCEI has already confirmed Cell to be in the Next Generation Computer Entertainment console.

What they are doing now is basicily doing what they did with Emotion Engine, denying it having anything to do with PS2.

The reporter is using the designchain article for this article, which we all know turned into bullshit. It was false.

 

[megadrive0088]

the original, original timeframe for Playstation3 was 2006, going back to 1999 when Sony first started talking about PS3, and their three Phase plan for increasing graphics performance and chip complexity.

The Phase 3 workstation, scheduled to appear around 2005-2006, will have the Emotion Engine 3 and Graphic Synthesizer 3, which will have drastically changed architectures. [re: CELL!] As a result, the workstation will have 1,000 times performance of the development tool workstation, and will handle 4,000 x 2,000-pixel pictures at 24-to-120p. At this stage, Playstation3 will be taking a shape, Sony said.

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG19991006S0040

bringing PS3 out in 2005 makes less and less sense now. Sony can milk PS2. they dont have a Dreamcast to worry about. and they can make the graphics features of PS3's GS3/Visulizer (the GPU) even better. perhaps, just perhaps, they can have .045 process ready for 2006. although perhaps that is more like 2007. I dont know (Panajev ?)


oh and Nintendo and MS will most likely NOT release in 2005, before Sony.
no way! (almost no way!) they would be VERY glad not to have to cut their lifecycles to 4 years. 5 years makes perfect sense for GC & XB while 6 years makes perfect sense for the leader, Sony PS2.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I do not know... they haven't completely finished R&D on the 45 nm process so they haven't released more data on it...

I think that launching late 2005 or early 2006 they will finsih working on thew 45 nm process and will bring the yelds of their 65 nm lines to a very good status and will have time to benchmark the architecture more and make last minute minor changes ( when I say last minute I meansome months before real mass production starts... by launching later the whole R&D cycle is stretched ) push the process ( clock-speed wise, by optimizing the circuit design ) and they will improove programming libraries, developers tools and work on having better games when the system launches...

Thanks to the increased yelds, the manufacturing costs of PlayStation 3 would be lower and this would save them money ( that can be invested... keep reading ).

I am sure developers would all jump ship if Sony promised to sweeten the delay with lower PlayStation 2 fees ( introduction of a very cheap PSTwo model ), special "thank you for PlayStation 3 support" package containing low PSP license fees and the deliver of great high level APIs, powerful development tools and great docs on PlayStation 3 architecture to them

Also increased would be the chances of full-blown Blu-Ray functionality ( meaning a bit more than the Blu-Ray "lite" I was expecting [lite, but still Re-Writable] ) and better PSX and PlayStation 2 backward compatibility, etc...

This delay might be related to Cell and to the R&D spent to produce a Cell based CPU for the PSP using 90 nm technology...

The delay would not be horrible for them ( if, taking advantage of this supposed "delay", they ship with GT5, FFXIII, Jak & Daxter Next, Virtua Fighter 5, maybe Z.O.E. 4 or MGS5 [MG 10] and so on they could have one more source of huge hype surrounding them [they know how to generate hype ] and would make the PSP quite special ( it could network with the PlayStation 3 very nicely )...

If Playstation 3 is delayed to late 2005 or early 2006, I am sure Sony will take advantage of the extra time very well

 

[Tagrineth]

I can see Christams 2005 as a great time for Nintendo and Microsoft to release.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Yes... they would get nice sales if they released in the U.S., in Japan Christmas season is a bit less fundamental than in the Western world.

Still they would have PlayStation 3's hype right around them... which should be VERY strong at that time...

PlayStation 3 might release in Japan in that period as well with 2006 for the North American launch...

 

[PC-Engine]

I can see Christams 2005 as a great time for Nintendo and Microsoft to release.

Yep by that time GCN would be about $50 so who cares if GCN2 turns out to not be backwards compatible. It would be cool if the GCN controllers and broadband adapters etc. are compatible with GCN2 though.

 

[Brimstone]

Sony only has really one bad scenario for the next generation in my opinion. If they go with the Panjev PS 3 option in 2005, while Microsoft goes with deeply influenced Intel X-Box 2 (Intel creating and fabricating the CPU and VPU), Sony would be in a very bad situation. Both consoles would be the equivilent of each other technology wise, but pressure on Sony to recover its investment in its fabs tremendous. The software lineup would have to propel Sony into an early lead otherwise consoles sales numbers could turn into a war of attrition that favors Microsoft in the long run.

The Panjev option in 2005 works great as long as Microsoft doesn't answer with something equivilent. Sony probably has serveral potential PS 3 consoles in the works following different timelines. I suspect the PS 3 battleplan is far from finalized. Also Sony not confirming Cell tech in their next console shouldn't be surprising. Why would they give away what they might be up to?

 

[Paul]

And what makes you so sure that both the consoles would be the same technology wise? If anything PS3 will blow Xbox2 away if they are released at the same time, Intel won't have anything that can touch a 1tflops Cell, and im doubting Nvidia would be able to match the GS3 spec wise for a while.

 

[PC-Engine]

If anything PS3 will blow Xbox2 away if they are released at the same time, Intel won't have anything that can touch a 1tflops Cell, and im doubting Nvidia would be able to match the GS3 spec wise for a while.

The Dark Side is strong...

 

[Brimstone]

And what makes you so sure that both the consoles would be the same technology wise? If anything PS3 will blow Xbox2 away if they are released at the same time, Intel won't have anything that can touch a 1tflops Cell, and im doubting Nvidia would be able to match the GS3 spec wise for a while.

Technology wise I just don't feel there will be a big difference. The PS 3 may have a more elegant design compared to a legacy x86 architechture of a X-Box 2, but the advantages gained by Sony having a highly customized design will hardly be that great. Microsoft just feeds off of the PC industry which all the time upholds Moores Law regardless of architechture. Sony isn't going to blow away Moores Law.

 

[Blade]

Sony might be getting a little cocky here. Giving strong competition from MS/Nintendo a year head-start reminds me somewhat of what Nintendo did in 1996 and also in 2001.. and it lost them their huge marketshare.

BTW, I think I'm going to have to hear exactly who is supporting the PSP 100% before I consider it competition.

 

[Paul]

A 1tflops CPU, and possibly a total system power of 1.256TFLOPS+ when adding the GPU into fray would be able to push an ENOURMOUS amount of polygons, we are talking about 15-20B polys here. Can you see Nvidia being able to top that in two years time? I don't.

Polygon performance isnt the only thing, you will have the insane bandwidth, GPU features and all that good stuff.

I would say the ps3 with a 1+tflops total system power wouldn't just be a little bit over xbox2, I would say it would whip the hell out of it spec wise.

As for Moores Law, I would say Cell is quite ahead of things.

 

[marconelly!]

I hope the new consoles launch at 2005. I'm sorry that MS and Nintendo were late this time and that their consoles may last four years only, but by then our consoles will be like ancient technology. How much memory will PCs have then by standard? 3-4GB RAM, 4-5GHz vs 32-64MB, 300-700Mhz doesn't sound good to me.

 

[Vince]

OMG! Like something new for Chap to get excited over...

We have an EA employee stating how he can envision Sony delaying PS3 a year because they're kicking everyone's ass in the PS2 generation and his word is suddenly Sony doctrine? "They may decide" - Right...

And then there's the unknown, phantom "Japanese executives" (because being Japanese lends credibility) who are talking up doom stories when appearently these phantoms know more than IBM's Fellow Kayle or Toshiba who thinks they'll be producing at Oita in late 2004.

Goddamnit, I love unnames sources. Why are we even believing this? Show me someone whose publically stated this and is willing to take responcibility, not these Inquirer-esque phantoms whose very livelyhood I question.

Because in August of 2002 there were stories circulating on EETime, EDC Magazine that stated that the Cell Project was nearing netlist/tape-out status. This flies in diametric opposition to that.

 

[ChryZ]

Chap's little hidden agenda is so obvious, it almost hurts to see so many people falling for it.
Fear leads to Anger. Anger leads to Hate. Hate leads to Suffering.