PS3 Specs and Console Pic

Welcome to the Digital Sportspage forum.

Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady

Inuyasha
DSP-Funk All-Star
DSP-Funk All-Star
Posts: 4638
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 3:00 am

Post by Inuyasha »

TRI wrote:
Jimmydeicide wrote:You can talk about specs all you want ,its still up to the developers to utilize everything.
You are right, it will come down to the talent of the developers because the better specs only make it possible to do more. It will take time to learn the new hardware and to code for multi core processors though.

Why can't they get this right? Even the dreamcast had the technology to get rid of jaggies. How come sony can't? That's one thing I noticed about the ps3 demos compared to the x360. the ps3 still had that ps1/ps2 type of graphics feel, it's hard to describe, but it's not as clean looking as say Xbox.
User avatar
TRI
Benchwarmer
Benchwarmer
Posts: 340
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:00 am

Post by TRI »

Weaver2005 wrote:
TRI wrote:
Jimmydeicide wrote:You can talk about specs all you want ,its still up to the developers to utilize everything.
You are right, it will come down to the talent of the developers because the better specs only make it possible to do more. It will take time to learn the new hardware and to code for multi core processors though.

Why can't they get this right? Even the dreamcast had the technology to get rid of jaggies. How come sony can't? That's one thing I noticed about the ps3 demos compared to the x360. the ps3 still had that ps1/ps2 type of graphics feel, it's hard to describe, but it's not as clean looking as say Xbox.

The PS2 had only 4MB of video ram. The PS3 will have about 256 MB of video ram. The problem with the graphics for the PS3 is a lack of video memory bandwidth. It is not too bad though and most people will probably not notice it too much. IT is much worse for the PS2.
skinsfan
Utility Infielder
Utility Infielder
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 3:00 am
Location: Central Kentucky

Post by skinsfan »

jLp vAkEr0 wrote:
Weaver2005 wrote:well at least this one looks sleeker :

Image
The console looks great, it's the controller that looks but-ugly.
That controller looks exactly like my favorite 3rd party controller for PS1,the Alps Interactive.I called it the Batarang.
User avatar
Footy_la_la
Mario Mendoza
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:00 am

Post by Footy_la_la »

Weaver2005 wrote:well at least this one looks sleeker :

Image
Hi everyone 1st of all!!! My 1st post.

The system itself looks very nice. Especially the black one. I'm willing to not "judge a book by it's cover" with the controller, because I absolutely hated the XBOX controller when it first came out. However, I could'nt feel more comfotable with another one right now.

I reckon one of the reasons that the PS3 will edge out the x360 in sales, is becasue of the design. The stand up on the 360 is something that I would'nt go for personally. It should be optional like the PS2 was, plus, PS2 have already done it.
When I think standing up and console, I see, entertainment unit, surround sound speakers and a TV. Both consisting of magnetic force that can create damage to the console. (Or is that old school video gaming????)

The footage I have seen is absolutely outstanding. When all the buzz about new consoles came out, my first thought was.....I doubt they can get that much better, where I will be busting my but to get one.

However, If those vids are not just trailer quality, and are in fact actual "in - game" footage, then I think I may just be saving up some cash.

I'll still probably wait atleast a year or 2 though. My BOX is running sweetly enough.

I must admit, I've never been a big fan of Racing games since.......OOOOOooooh! Pole Position, Out Run. I did play a little NFS Hot Pursuit and some other one. Could'nt really get into it though. Did'nt like the undergrounds, GT's were'nt enough for me to hold my patience and have not yet tried Forza.

However......this new GT. 8O 8O 8O
Now that looks amazing. If the online play for the PS3 steps up, then I will definately get one of those. As far as I know PS on line is free???

If it remains that way, then I'll be going all out online.
User avatar
thejake
Mario Mendoza
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 3:00 am

Post by thejake »

Footy_la_la wrote:
I reckon one of the reasons that the PS3 will edge out the x360 in sales, is becasue of the design. The stand up on the 360 is something that I would'nt go for personally. It should be optional like the PS2 was, plus, PS2 have already done it.
The Xbox360 can go vertical or horizontal.
Xbox Gamertag = thejake6
User avatar
James_E
DSP-Funk All-Star
DSP-Funk All-Star
Posts: 2460
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
Location: : Toronto, Ontario

Post by James_E »

wco81 wrote: If you're invested in XBL, there is no reason to change. After all, you have your settings and friends list all set up. No point in going to another service even if it's "better" (which is going to be subjective).
"Invested" in XBL? LOL. This has absolutely zero bearing on my decision. Doing my 'settings" and setting up a friends list takes... what... 10 minutes initially? Then about 10-60 seconds each time you want to add a new friend as they come online to a new service. Geesh.
User avatar
wco81
DSP-Funk All-Star
DSP-Funk All-Star
Posts: 9575
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 3:00 am
Location: San Jose

Post by wco81 »

James_E wrote:
wco81 wrote: If you're invested in XBL, there is no reason to change. After all, you have your settings and friends list all set up. No point in going to another service even if it's "better" (which is going to be subjective).
"Invested" in XBL? LOL. This has absolutely zero bearing on my decision. Doing my 'settings" and setting up a friends list takes... what... 10 minutes initially? Then about 10-60 seconds each time you want to add a new friend as they come online to a new service. Geesh.
I don't necessarily mean invested in the literal (financial) sense.

I mean if you've gotten used to XBL, especially gaming with just the people on your friends list. If most of the people on your list are staying with XBL, some people are more likely to as well.
User avatar
pk500
DSP-Funk All-Star
DSP-Funk All-Star
Posts: 33884
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
Contact:

Post by pk500 »

Welcome, Footy. Soccer fan?

Post your Gamertag in your sig if you're on XBL, and don't be a stranger.

Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles

"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature

XBL Gamertag: pk4425
User avatar
James_E
DSP-Funk All-Star
DSP-Funk All-Star
Posts: 2460
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
Location: : Toronto, Ontario

Post by James_E »

wco81 wrote:
James_E wrote:
wco81 wrote: If you're invested in XBL, there is no reason to change. After all, you have your settings and friends list all set up. No point in going to another service even if it's "better" (which is going to be subjective).
"Invested" in XBL? LOL. This has absolutely zero bearing on my decision. Doing my 'settings" and setting up a friends list takes... what... 10 minutes initially? Then about 10-60 seconds each time you want to add a new friend as they come online to a new service. Geesh.
I don't necessarily mean invested in the literal (financial) sense.

I mean if you've gotten used to XBL, especially gaming with just the people on your friends list. If most of the people on your list are staying with XBL, some people are more likely to as well.
I know you didn't mean financially. It's the whole theory of "gotten used to" and "setup" influencing the decision that I don't buy. However, it is correct that whatever most of my XBL friends (almost all DSP/OS) choose (PS3 or XB360) will have a large bearing which way I go.
Post Reply