Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
E3 Sony PlayStation (Games)

PlayStation 3 Unveiled 905

Posted by Zonk
from the psp-and-bluetooth-and-boomerangs-oh-my! dept.
The PlayStation 3 was unveiled yesterday afternoon in a press conference at Sony Pictures Studio. The event was full of beautiful demonstrations, specifications, and talk of the games of tomorrow. The machine is certainly impressive, with backwards compatibility, support for up to seven Bluetooth controllers, multiple HD signals, and intimate interactions with the PSP. Coverage, screenshots, and specs available from 1up.com, Gamespot, Joystiq, NYT, Voodoo Extreme, Gamespy, BBC, GamesIndustry.biz, Engadget, Anandtech, Kotaku, Gamasutra, and CNN Money. The only downside I see so far? The controller. Update: 05/18 21:35 GMT by Z : Gamespot has up a comprehensive look at the console based on what is known so far.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PlayStation 3 Unveiled

Comments Filter:
  • by HTL2001 (836298) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:07AM (#12553771)
    guess we wont be taking any servers down on this article...
    • by SilentChris (452960) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:30AM (#12554086) Homepage
      I'll boil it down: here's what you need to know.

      * The hardware absolutely rocks. The tech demos they showed off were incredibly impressive, and it's very clear that Cell (programmed correctly) will be the most powerful platform out there.
      * There's already signs of DRM and locking down the platform. There was a slide on "hardware security built-in" (they probably meant the way the Cell protects data when shuttling it off to another processor, but it's easy to get the double-meaning).
      * As it stands right now, this thing is going to blow the doors off of Xbox 360. This is coming from an Xbox fan (I've got 30 titles lined up in the den). I'm a gamer, but I also love the best hardware. Barring what Nintendo introduces (and they could very well surprise us, despite the "graphics don't matter" marketing they've been doing), this is clearly going to be the most powerful console around.
      • by KirkH (148427)
        It may have more FLOPS, but I'm not sure that's going to necessarily translate into much better games. Both systems are PowerPC derivative chips running at 3.2 GHz with PC-like video chipsets and are coming out within six months of each other. I suspect the game quality (graphics, etc) will be very close between the two.
      • by MORB (793798)
        Too much technology kills the games.

        Do you realize that to produce graphics that make use of the ever more powerful technologies out there, it takes more and more time, more and more sophisticated tools, and thus more and more money ?

        The amount of money to produce one hour of game content is rising after each new generation of technology.

        The game development budgets aren't rising.

        Result: games life duration is shortening. Innovation is more and more relegated only to things that make the game more appea
        • by SilentChris (452960) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:30AM (#12554893) Homepage
          That's an incredibly cynical approach. This generation we've had:

          * Zelda Windwaker, that took the idea of cel shading and perfected it.
          * Halo 2, which perfected playing online with an incredibly strong interface.
          * PSP, which shows you can turn a game console into a strong movieplayer and vice versa.
          * World of Warcraft, that brought MMORPGs to the masses and along the way redefined "art" in a video game.
          * Grant Theft Auto 3, the first truly mass market game.

          All of these have great gameplay AND great graphics. Would WW, Wow, etc. be the same without great graphics? Not really. The core gameplay would likely still be fun, but there's a reason we don't play Space Invaders anymore.

          The developers have proven time and time again that new power is a tool, and they're more than happy to get their creative juices flowing to use it (think Katamari Damarcy). Yes, there's fluff -- there was fluff with the 80s generation of games too (remember ET)? The gaming industry, however, produces a lot of original ideas to combat the fluff, and frankly it's never been stronger.
      • by Malor (3658)
        Basically, I'll believe it when they actually ship it -- in both cases. One of the mainstays of FUD is to announce your own much better product that won't come out for a long time, to try to distract momentum from the product you can actually buy TODAY.

        Admittedly, in neither case can you actually buy the consoles in question, but Sony is going to be late to the party... so even if they don't ship what they promise to, or if it doesn't work as well as they claim, they might believe that the backlash would
  • a related link (Score:3, Informative)

    by jbeaupre (752124) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:07AM (#12553774)
  • Controller (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jarnis (266190) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:08AM (#12553790)
    Yup. The new contoller looks crappy. Trying to tweak perfection = bad idea.

    I hope they either provide a way to connect old PS2 controllers (bluetooth device with controller ports?) or release a 'classic' controller identical to PS2 model as option.
    • by valkyriekl (788246) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:16AM (#12553895)
      might look crappy...but it might work out fine...

      I like the old PSX controllers, except for one point: the grips are too small for my hands; after a couple hours of intense gameplay, my hands ache from trying to squeeze something so small. The XBox controllers, on the other hand, fit my hands quite nicely (although I don't really like where the buttons are), and everyone seemed to pick on the controllers back when the XBox was released.
    • Re:Controller (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Trurl's Machine (651488) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:18AM (#12553923) Journal
      I hope they either provide a way to connect old PS2 controllers (bluetooth device with controller ports?) or release a 'classic' controller identical to PS2 model as option.

      Since it is supposed to be - quoting TFA - "backward compatible all the way to the original PlayStation" - it will be obviously possible. Backwards compatibility was the key factor for me to chose PS2 instead of XBox - I just would miss Syphon Filter and my kids would miss Crash Bandicoot games too much to scrap all our old collection of our favorite games. PS2 even reads PSX memory cards, so we could move even our saved game profiles. I hope this will be possible with PS3 too. If it will - and it looks like it will - then Microsoft has nothing to offer me. Again.
      • Re:Controller (Score:4, Insightful)

        by falzbro (468756) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @12:00PM (#12556156) Homepage
        Since it is supposed to be - quoting TFA - "backward compatible all the way to the original PlayStation" - it will be obviously possible. Backwards compatibility was the key factor for me to chose PS2 instead of XBox

        What would the original Xbox be backwards compatible to? I'm sure there are lots of comments here about modding the Xbox already, but I'm quite happy that my Xbox is "backwards compatible" with perfect emulation of all 16-bit and earlier generation consoles/arcade games.

        --falz
    • Re:Controller (Score:4, Interesting)

      by digidave (259925) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:43AM (#12554239)
      Everybody said the same thing when they first got a look at the PSX controllers, too. It was crazy... the traditional D-pad was replaced by four buttons! How absurd!

      Sony kept the same controller around for two console generations so you know they're not the type of company to come out with a new design just because there is a new console. They probably did hundreds of hours of user testing.
      • Re:Controller (Score:5, Insightful)

        by GeckoX (259575) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:06AM (#12554546)
        And if you look at the new one, it's really not very different at all from the existing ones.

        The only thing that really seems to have changed are the 'arms' or whatever.

        I don't think judgement can be passed on the controller until it's been tried in person.
    • by Gudlyf (544445) <gudlyf@nOSPAm.realistek.com> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:02AM (#12554495) Homepage Journal
      I heard each controller comes with a utility belt, a 300-lb. zipline and gas pellets.
    • by de Siem (840522)
      I wonder when it will be used in a lesbian porn flick as a replacement double dildo. (or vibrator rumble pack pending).
  • Why 7? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by XgD (578260) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:09AM (#12553813)
    7 bluetooth controllers? Why 7? not 8? even the current Playstation 2 lets you have 8 controllers!

    Seems a step back... 8-way FIFA games are awesome!
  • Only long hours of gameplay experience will reveal the merits of the new Playstation-3 controller. Don't get all huffy - yet. One thing I'm wondering about is the # of controllres. Why 7? Is it a bluetooth limitation?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:10AM (#12553832)
    Looks like my sister will love this controller what not with it's vibration function.
  • by cOdEgUru (181536) * <cherian,abraham&gmail,com> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:12AM (#12553845) Homepage Journal
    The top five reasons why Sony might want to rethink the controller design:

    1) Players would use it as a boomerang to exact revenge on their opponents outside the realm of the PS3

    2) A certain religious group might object to the "crescent" shaped design and might get their panties in a knot.

    3) The controller ends up being a tool to massage your pressure points and used less for gaming

    4) Female Players take it further and use it to simulate two spots at once. Oh goody!

    5) It looks like one of those guns in Battle Field Earth [tribute.ca]
  • Rehashed quote? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Richard_at_work (517087) <richardprice@nOSPam.gmail.com> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:13AM (#12553857)

    The console also boasts a new graphics chip from Nvidia, which Sony claims can create movie-quality images in real time in games.

    Sure there was something said about the Playstation 2, Toy Story and realtime graphics quality that never turned out to be true......

  • by acomj (20611) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:14AM (#12553870) Homepage
    This will get Blu-Ray players into peoples home like the playstation did with dvds.

    Interesting to compare tatics, as MS is ending xbox games development this year and Sony is continuing for 2 more. Nintendo is also continueing development.

    Also playstation will be backward compatable. This is great, because there will be a huge library of working games for it. Also they get that games are not just about the graphics, so HD will not be requires .

    From NYT
    "
    While every Xbox 360 title must be developed in high definition, Sony officials are playing down that aspect of the new PlayStation. "Blu-ray technology guarantees the highest graphic quality," said Jack Tretton, executive vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment America. "HD is not the be-all and end-all," Mr. Tretton said, noting that the depth of game play could be more important.

    Microsoft executives have decided to end internal development of games for the current Xbox this year, but Sony will continue to create titles for the PlayStation 2.

    "We'd be crazy to abandon them," said Mr. Tretton, speaking of PlayStation 2 owners.
    • untrue (Score:3, Insightful)

      Completely untrue that microsoft is ending xbox game development this year.

      also, blu-ray technology guarantees the highest graphic quality....what. i guess sony are planning on making FMV games then? Sure you might be able to store more textures on a blu-ray disc, but really you could do the same exact thing with DVDs, just might need multiple ones.

      from gamespy

      "While just about everyone is (rightfully) focused on the future, Robbie wanted to make sure gamers knew that Microsoft would still be very suppo
  • by brian0918 (638904) <brian0918@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:15AM (#12553888)
    I'm fairly certain the Feral Kid used the PS3 controller in Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior.
  • Controller (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ctid (449118) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:22AM (#12553972) Homepage
    Did anyone else look at that controller and think, "steering wheel". I wonder what is inside it.

  • by NeMon'ess (160583) <<moc.oohay> <ta> <dimxnilf>> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:24AM (#12554003) Homepage Journal
    Can someone who actually has a clue speculate on what it means to compare the

    PS3: [yahoo.com] PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
    1 VMX vector unit per core
    512KB L2 cache
    7 x SPE @3.2GHz
    7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
    7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE * 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy

    to the xbox360: [xbox.com]
    Three symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each
    Two hardware threads per core; six hardware threads total
    VMX-128 vector unit per core; three total
    128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
    1 MB L2 cache

    Also, what is XDR RAM? I've never heard of it, but the PS3 has 256MB of it running at 3.2GHz. It also has 256MB of GDDR3 VRAM at 700MHz.

    The xbox360 has 512MB GDDR3 RAM at 700MHz unified, for the ATI video chip and CPU to share. How will these compare? Unified vs 256MB of blazing fast? Is it too late and or costly for Microsoft to switch to XDR?
    • Anand's [anandtech.com]
    • Here is a better comparison, taken from CNN.com:

      Revolution will be "two-to-three times more powerful than GameCube," according to Nintendo, which also acknowledges that the next-generation race isn't solely about new technologies. By contrast, Microsoft's Xbox 360 console is 13-15 times more powerful than the first, according to the publisher. And Sony says it's PlayStation 3 is roughly 35 times more powerful than PlayStation 2.

      What does it all mean? Absolutely nothing. Statements like this show how it's all marketing b.s. that can't be believed. When we see how the technology is used in an actual game, then it will matter. In the meantime, I'm about four-to-five times more excited for this generations console launch then I was last time.
      • If you look at the specs at GameSpot for the current generation. You'll see that the PS2 and XBOX are 5 to 10 times more powerful than the GameCube. This is, of course, not true.

        Nintendo never gives what I call "pissing contest" specs, even when asked for them.
        • by digidave (259925) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:07AM (#12554569)
          "Nintendo never gives what I call "pissing contest" specs, even when asked for them."

          That's because it's been *years* since they've been in the technological lead. They used to tout the SNES' scaling and rotation over the Genesis every chance they could. Even with the N64 they constantly talked about their fog effect even though it was really nothing more than a way to hide the system's horrible performance at drawing scenes at a distance (where you could see the background being drawn in on racing games, for instance).

          Nintendo still makes a great system with some great games, but they just don't compete with Sony or MS technology. They have to win with great games.
    • by linuxbikr (699873) <[mpickering] [at] [mindspring.com]> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:48AM (#12555153)
      What isn't being explained to the uninitated is that line for the Cell on '7 x SPE @ 3.2Ghz'.

      The Cell isn't a single core: it's 8! The CPU (or PU as it is called) is a POWER5 core. It is connected to 7 APUs/SPEs (Attached Processor Units/Single Processing Elements (whatever you want to call them)). Each SPE is a limited CPU in its own right with its own local caches and memory. The PU acts as a controller, dispatching work to the APUs.

      Each APU is essentially a very fast CPU optimized for moving data streams and calculations. Cell was designed to chew on large amounts of similar data very, very fast. It isn't a general purpose core like the POWER or Intel cores found in Xbox 360 or the original Xbox (or your PC for that matter).

      Caches aren't everything. PCs and XBox depend on caches to maintain performance levels as in a mixed instruction stream it is tough to know what's going on. A cache miss in a general purpose core can (and is) expensive in terms of cycles. Cell (and the original PS/2) get around caching issues by simply not having them (or just enough to feed the processor) and rely heavily on moving data across a very wide and fast memory bus on demand, as needed and repeated as necessary. Dramatically simplifies the architecture and permits much more focused optimization of code. Programmers for PS/2 had to learn to live without caches and learn a new way of development since PC experience doesn't translate over into the PS/2 world and clearly not into the PS/3 world.

      A big part of this contest between XBox 360 and PS/3 is seeing how programmers managed to take advantage of that parallel power. Multiple cores in XBox will be useless if they can't be taken advantage of. Same goes for Cell.

      I think PS/3 has the advantage and will eventually win. I'm surprised at the specs as original discussions on the machine had indicated it would be fitted with FOUR Cell processors, not one. Perhaps the initial round of prototypes are single Celled (forgive the pun) to permit development and gaining familiarity with the hardware. Perhaps inside are empty slots for more chips.

      Don't confuse PS/3 with a PC because it's not. It is designed to be a very fast SIMD media machine focusing on graphics, video and audio. It may suck as a general purpose server and perhaps a PC can hammer it on some benchmarks but if Cell performs half as good as the information on it speculates in the media realm, there isn't a PC (or Xbox) out there that can hope to keep up with it.
      • by nokiator (781573) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @12:09PM (#12556233) Journal
        The PowerPC core in the PS3 cell chip is probably not a Power4 or Power5 core. According to this Microprocessor Report article [ibm.com]:
        But the team didn't just take an existing core like the PowerPC 970FX and build an SoC around it. The core for Cell is new and appears to have been designed before the clock-frequency-is-dead era. The core was designed to reach certain power and die-size goals and is designed to be able to run at clock frequencies in the 4+GHz range. The engineering theam did simply some of the core design (for example, it's an in-order design and only a dual-issue superscalar) and used some dynamic logic in the design in certain critical timing areas.

        The core complies with the PowerPC instruction-set architecture version 2.02 (and the 2.01 public version of teh specification). The core was designed with a particular balance of die size, clock speed and architectural efficiency that is different from that of PowerPC 970. This instantiation of the Power Architecture still has a relatively long pipeline, much like the Power 4 and PowerPC 970, but the Cell design does not have a very wide issue pipeline or out-of-order execution, nor does it have as many functional units.The Cell Power core has hardware fine grain multi-threading.

        So it looks like the PS3 core is a lot simpler than even the simplified Power4 core in the PPC970. Looks like they decided that instruction level parallelism does not help with game code and went with a smaller dual issue design with reduced number of instruction units.

        This is quite insteresting. Unlike general purpose processors, which are often optimized for a set of specific benchmarks, the processor for a game console is actually designed to optimize the performance for a specific set of applications, i.e., 3D games. The most demanding applications driving the performance of high end PCs today also happen top be 3D games. I wonder if we are going to see a transition to back to simplified cores with higher clock speeds soon. Given the current trend to integrate multiple cores on a single processor die, a multi-core design with a large number of simple, high speed processors would be an interesting design trend.

        The multi-threading feature of the Cell core may be ported over from the Power5 design as a way to deal with memory latency at high clock speeds.

        I think it would be pretty safe to assume that the PowerPC core in the Xbox360 chip is very similar, if not the same design. Here is an IBM paper [ibm.com] that shows, at least in the lab, they were able to run the cell processor above 4GHz.

    • XDR is a Rambus technology [rambus.com]. This doesn't make the PS3 evil by association imho, Sony chose the technology, they weren't forced by patent lawyers to use it.
  • by ProppaT (557551) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:27AM (#12554042) Homepage
    At least when you get pissed off at the game and throw the controller at the tv, it'll come back to you now...
  • Killzone (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ford Prefect (8777) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:27AM (#12554046) Homepage
    There's a utterly spectacular Killzone video [filerush.com] doing the rounds, along with some rather pretty screenshots [eurogamer.net].

    Except they look a bit too good. Almost, dare I say it, pre-rendered. Has Sony done the ultimate and presented a completely non-PS3, non-game 3D animation as actual gameplay?
    • Re:Killzone (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ilyaaohell (866922)
      Check the video of the full conference at the bottom of this page [gamespot.com].

      While they did not say it is real-time or not, as far as Killzone is concerned, the PS3 seems more than capable of making a game look like this. The only issue I have with how the clip is presented is that it's a hell of a lot more "cinematic" than what actual gameplay would look like. I don't care if you script the hell out of everything that happens on the screen, it will still not end up looking like you're inside a CG "movie". It probabl
  • Xbox 360 v. PS3 (Score:5, Informative)

    by Pao|o (92817) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:30AM (#12554089)

    I took the time out to compare and contrast between the Xbox 360 & PS3 and I came to to this conclusion.

    Xbox 360 has a CPU FPS of 45 GFlops*
    PS3 has a CPU FPS of 218 GFlops

    Xbox 360 has a GPU FPS of around 955 GFlops**
    PS3 has a GPU FPS of 1.8TFlops

    Xbox 360 has a combined FPS of 1TFlops
    PS3 has a combined FPS of 2.18TFlops

    Xbox 360 has a DVD-ROM
    PS3 has a BD-ROM

    Xbox 360 is WiFi ready
    PS3 is WiFi built-in

    Xbox 360 has 3 x USB 2.0 ports
    PS3 has 6 x USB 2.0 ports

    Xbox 360 has support for 4 wireless controllers
    PS3 has support for 7 wireless (Bluetooth) controllers

    Xbox 360 uses Memory Units
    PS3 uses MS Standard/Duo/Pro, SD standard/mini & Compact Flash Type I/II

    Xbox 360 has support for select Xbox1 games
    PS3 has support for PS1 & PS2 games

    Xbox 360 has support for 1 720p & 1080i display
    PS3 has support for 2 480p, 720p, 1080i & 1080p displays

    Note:
    * Derived from CPU Game Math Performance of 9 billion dot product operations per second
    ** Derived from subtracting published Overall System Floating-Point Performance of 1TFlops with derived from CPU Game Math Performance of 9 billion dot product operations per second

    Source:

    Wikipedia's PS3 Tech Specs
    Official Xbox 360 Fact Sheet
    Formula for Dot Product Operations Per Second to GFlops

    • by Queer Boy (451309) * <dragon.76@mac . c om> on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:50AM (#12554331)
      All that and Gameboys still dominate.
    • Re:Xbox 360 v. PS3 (Score:4, Informative)

      by KirkH (148427) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:04AM (#12554523)
      The Xbox 360 CPU is actually rated at 115-130 GFLOPS depending on your source. A Sony slide at the PS3 unveiling showed it (the 360 CPU) at 115 GFLOPS.

      Don't forget the hard drive: included on the 360, an expansion item for the PS3. You didn't overlook it on purpose, did you? :)
      • Re:Xbox 360 v. PS3 (Score:3, Insightful)

        by EulerX07 (314098)
        Don't forget the hard drive: included on the 360, an expansion item for the PS3. You didn't overlook it on purpose, did you?

        That's a non-consequential detail when not taking into account the price of the hard drive. Basically if the PS3 + HD is the same cost as the Xbox, who cares?

        Anyhow, I wouldn't put a dinky 20 gig HD in there, if they let me put anything it will be the best performance 80+ gig 2.5" HD I can find.
      • are you sure? (Score:3, Informative)

        by KZigurs (638781)
        http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i =2417&p=3 [anandtech.com]

        As far as I understood it - PS3 WILL have a hdd.
    • The items from that list that might matter to me would probably be:
      • backward compatibility edge for Sony (in overall "you don't have to worry" scope, in vastly larger number of games, and in previous market share);
      • WiFi ready as opposed to built-in

      Technical specs could theoretically have made the difference for Dreamcast -- if one or the other had just conspicuously kicked the competitor's butt -- but for Joe buyer it comes down to "There are two cool new systems, and they're both about the same in coo

    • So it begins (Score:3, Interesting)

      by superultra (670002)
      Oh geez.

      Remember back in the day, the debates we would all have in our neighborhood backyards as kids, about how certain consoles had more bits and therefore were better?

      Looks like *flops are the new bits.
  • Bluetooth? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lussarn (105276) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:31AM (#12554103)
    I have a logitech dinovo blouetooth keyboard/mouse combo and I do not use that mouse for gaming. It's way to laggy, I think bluetooth has maximum update of 80hz or something. Have they worked around that?
  • controller (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Paralizer (792155) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @09:34AM (#12554140) Homepage
    Why not stick with a controller for a few systems. I understand new items are added to controllers to upgrade performance or add some new element to the game (rumble pack for GC for example), but there's a clear threshhold where a controller doesn't need to be "enhanced" much more to be suitable for a new system. Just update the system, gamers will probably like you better for it. Then again, they aren't getting the extra sales for those controllers they would have been selling... perhaps thats the motivation.
  • Finally the Review (Score:3, Interesting)

    by a3217055 (768293) on Tuesday May 17, 2005 @10:08AM (#12554587)
    You guys should check out the gamespot.com E3 coverage. You can use bugmenot.com to login for free and take a look at the Sony Press Conference. Also it is a windows media stream, sorry *NIX guys. The stream is about 1 hour 50 mins long. It shows all the new games and tons of presentations. Lot of stuff about capturing new markets but the PS3 console looks amazing.
    http://www.gamespot.com/e3/e3live.html [gamespot.com]

    The Cell processor is IBM's jewel, it might be the single killer against the x86 market. Not to mention that the Cell processor in PS3 is revision 3 while the one in the xbox is revision 2. The new cell processor is gonna knock the socks of all you folks.
    Trust me :)

    Another thing is that 7 controllers that run Blue Tooth, I don't get it either. But the main thing is that games will be more and more interactive. But the Final Fantasy games out there look amazing but beyond that the Gran Turismo games are also kick ass (please cars flip over...please ) But the Tekken for PS3 was an amazing intro. You could see Jin's muscles and sweat and then the heat rising from his body and with the punch you could see sweat fly from his fists. There was another game a FPS that was amazing where marines come in through the sky and fight on the ground urban warfare style. I don't know how much of it are rendered movies and how much is real time work but the Unreal PS3 engine was amazing, it really was the explosions with the rockets and the smoke. But beyond that they had the CEO of EA come in ( yeah I know he didn't pay overtime ) and brought in Fight Night, that was great with the facial expressions of the boxers at every punch I just can imagine Rockstar Games' new GTA will definately be something. And also there are tons of new API's in the Nvidia GFX processor subsystem that have tons of stuff, like transparency and skin diffusion, water refraction. Amazing stuff. Xbox to be cool had to come on MTV, Sony being classy just went to E3 and showed who's who what there lil box can do. But over all whole press conference was kick ass, marketing venture yes. But the xbox360 on MTV was so .... teenager oriented that the PS3 is for bigboys, and the lil'boys. Sony was cool and professional while the Xbox 360 was like in your face kind of advertisement. End result xbox360 looks good PS3 looks kickass, kungfu punch, matrix lobby scene better. Also the PSP using 802.11 can become an auxillary input into the PS3 ( huh, why what do they want us to buy everything that Sony has to offer or what?? ).
    But the dual HD output is great, and it also takes VGA :) . And it is backward compatiable with PS, PS2 etc.
    But the estiemated price of the PS3 is $250 for just the gaming rig and $500 for the works. But definately they will sell there console for a loss.And make money on the games. Looking at the way the PSP sold I wouldn't be suprised it would sell for US$300.
    Also our beloved Hedijo Kojima of MGS showed up, may the Lord Bless his soul, yes there is going to be a MGS for the PS3.
    The xbox 360 has major major competiton. Cell technology puts them on the same playing field including the Nintendo Revolution. What makes them different are the games they have to offer. Even with life like reality in the end it is the simple thrill of Pong and Pacman and Mario Bros. that makes us want to play more and more games.
    Frag away, Drive away, Super Combo away and what ever Final Fantasy does ...

Philogyny recapitulates erogeny; erogeny recapitulates philogyny.

Working...