Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PlayStation (Games) Entertainment Games

PS3 Release Not Until 2006, PSX Firmware Upgrade? 40

Posted by simoniker from the sony's-mysterious-ways dept.
Thanks to GamePro for its coverage of a Famitsu interview from former Sony CTO Nobuichi Okamoto, discussing the PlayStation 3. Okamoto, who is still involved in the Cell project (which will power the PS3) to some degree, notes: "Development of the Cell started in spring of 2001 as a 5-year project. Hence the project will end in spring of 2006. Although it is not known whether or not game consoles will be sold immediately, we can expect products using the Cell chip to start emerging around that time." He also suggests 2004 may not see any console announcements from Sony: "From my experience, to produce games on new hardware it takes at least a year to research the hardware and to start planning for software titles. If at this time the software production environment is not ready, I think it will be difficult to announce new hardware this year." Elsewhere, Sony has announced a downloadable firmware upgrade for its Japanese-released PSX 'media center', which "returns most of the promised features that were cut shortly before the system's release."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PS3 Release Not Until 2006, PSX Firmware Upgrade? More

PS3 Release Not Until 2006, PSX Firmware Upgrade?

Comments Filter:

  • MP3 Support (Score:2, Redundant)

    by Hougaard ( 163563 )
    And MP3 support is back - Sony has finally come to their senses, now we just need OGG :-)
  • Because I really love those jaggies that the PS2 has now.

  • ps2 success (Score:4, Insightful)

    by johndoejersey ( 679948 ) on Tuesday January 27, 2004 @10:22AM (#8099167) Journal
    The success of the PS2 provides sony with a little more leeway with regards to the release of the "next-gen" console.
    They are in the position where they can spend more time on delivering a competition beating product.

    On the other hand Microsoft and Nintendo may see this as an opportunity to rush out a console for 2005/early 2006.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Why didn't the N64 beat the pants off of everyone else then? Couldn't Nintendo leverage the SNES into more time for delivering a product that could beat the competition?

      The N64 didn't win that round of consoles but did do well enough - in part due to the strong following Nintendo has in the gamers community. I'm not sure Sony has such a strong following. No, you're incorrect - console companies can't rest on past truimphs or they risk becoming yesterday's news.

  • Not much to see here... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Crash Culligan ( 227354 ) on Tuesday January 27, 2004 @10:29AM (#8099251) Journal

    Those pesky non-disclosure agreements! You've tried scrubbing, you've tried soaking...

    I find it interesting that development on the guts for the PS3 began in 2001 when the PS2 first came out. They had no idea if it would boom or bust and they started working on the successor that same year.

    Given that, the development cycle on the PS3 was probably influenced by the potential boominess or bustiness of the PS2.

    • PS2 selling well? PS3 development can take a good, long time. The gamers will be happy that we got all the quality into the product.
    • PS2 jamming up the distribution channels like the morning after free samples night at the cheese shop? Quick, get that PS3 up and running stat! We need a new next big thing to make up for our last next big thing! (And it would probably be coming out right now with fewer bells and whistles.)

    I also want to see what kind of power-effort curve they design into PS3.

    More than once I've cited the design philosophy behind the PS2: make a powerful system, and developers will learn to deal with its complexities. Contrast this with the Xbox's take: make a system easy to develop with, and developers will get more power out of it.

    I want to know how that strategy worked for them, and will they be continuing it on the next next-generation game-box.

    • "I find it interesting that development on the guts for the PS3 began in 2001 when the PS2 first came out."

      You find this interesting? This is SOP. Nintendo does this. Sony does this. Sega did this. Microsoft does this. Come on, hardware development takes time. You don't hire a bunch of hardware guys to build you a console and then tell them to come back in a few years to build another one - you keep them on working.

      +3 Insightful? Broken Slashdot moderation strikes again.

      • +3 Insightful? Broken Slashdot moderation strikes again.

        Yup, the parent also mistakenly attributed the 2006 launch to marketing decisions on the part of Sony. Oh please! Anyone who has been following the drive to next gen consoles knows that Sony is using an new IBM chip and cannot get the PS3 out the door until the cell chip is production ready. IBM wanted to have it ready for 2005. Wwhat is interesting about the article is that a guy in the position to know, pretty much stated that IBM is behind sc

    • Re:Not much to see here... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by bluGill ( 862 ) on Tuesday January 27, 2004 @12:00PM (#8100250)

      When intel decided to design the successor to the 486 they started two teams (not nessicarly at the same time). One team went for a quick powerful release and made the Pentimum chip. The other went for a longer release and made the Pentimun pro chip (which eventially became the PII and PIII after some latter additions)

      It takes a long time to design new chips. What would be interesting is if the rumor mill suggested that sony was starting a design team now. Such would imply the PS3 would have a shorter life, to be replaced in 3 years (as opposed to the usual 5) with a PS4.

  • ... 2006 it just 2 years away, and it's not really likely that Nintendo and Microsoft can get some new hardware out and make a real breakthrough in a such relatively short time.

    The only unknown is what online console gaming will be in two years... till now isn't really much more than a buzzworld in the mouth of the marketing people... celebrate the millionth customer of XBox live while sony is shipping the 70millionth ps2 it's just a proof you don't play in the same league :-)
    • 2006 it just 2 years away, and it's not really likely that Nintendo and Microsoft can get some new hardware out and make a real breakthrough in a such relatively short time.

      Ever think that maybe Microsoft and Nintendo are simply holding off until E3 to announce their next-gen systems?

      As for comparing online console gaming subscribers to the number of systems sold, thats not a case of different leagues, its a case of different games. Sony can sell 70 millions PS2s, but if 40 million have broke or were simpl

    • The X Box is likely to be released around the same timeframe, (in time for Christmas 05 if they are lucky otherwise early O6). Nintendo is planning to have something definitely in the 2005 timeframe. You'll know they are close when current generation hardware prices fall to $99, figure about a year or so at that point.
  • I was starting to get a bit worried with all of these talks of console sequals. I was, and still am a bit worried that the whole lifetime of a console will spin completely out of control. My NES was good for at LEAST 5 years before a "new, better thing" came out. And I feel that was just barely long enough for that console to be completely exausted of potential.
  • >PS3 Release Not Until 2006

    Why 2006, will it run Longhorn?
  • and we have plenty of time to start saving our pennies so we can have enough money to buy our new system in two years. Wonder how much this one will cost....

  • PS3 a winner? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bombcar ( 16057 ) <racbmob@bo[ ]ar.com ['mbc' in gap]> on Tuesday January 27, 2004 @07:27PM (#8105942) Homepage Journal
    A major key factor for the PS2's success was that it was backwards compatible with PS1 games. So if you had a PS1, it was a no-brainer to get the PS2. And if you didn't, you knew that the PS2 would play all those cool games that your friends had, so you picked it up.

    If the PS3 is backwards compatible with the PS2 & PS1, I think it will do pretty well.

    Backwards compatibility is starting to get important for the console manufacturers. The N64 was NOT backwards compatible with anything, and so it was harder to get moving. Nowadays, the lack of backwards compatibility will slow down adoption (note that Mac OS X; Windows XP, etc all have some form of backwards compatibility.)

  • I am not convinced sony will have enough units around in 2006. This thing will be sold out faster than bread in a starving communist country.

    They better ramp up the factories etc etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Close