Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming Entertainment Games IT Technology

Playstation 3 Development Underway 105

Posted by Zonk from the next-gen-shiny dept.
At least in the United Kingdom, developers are already being handed development hardware for Sony's next-gen platform in anticipation of its debut at E3. From the article: "Sony plans to show the next-generation PlayStation off in public for the first time at its pre-E3 conference in Los Angeles in May, where it will almost certainly debut within a few hours of the public unveilings of Nintendo's Revolution and Microsoft's next-gen Xbox."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Playstation 3 Development Underway More

Playstation 3 Development Underway

Comments Filter:

  • Too Fast? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nos. ( 179609 ) <andrew@nOSPAm.thekerrs.ca> on Monday March 21, 2005 @04:25PM (#12004115) Homepage
    I wonder at what point next-gen consoles will begin to not create the positive hype that seems to currently surround them. I'm not a huge console gamer, but at some point people will no longer be willing to shell out the money to move to the newest console until a time when the price of the console has dropped well below its initial levels. Even in the PC world, the percentage of people that will rush out to pick up the newest video card seems to be dropping. There isn't quite the anticipation that there once was.

    • Re:Too Fast? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Crimsane ( 815761 ) <clarke@nullfs.com> on Monday March 21, 2005 @04:36PM (#12004248) Homepage
      In most cases I would agree with you, but I would give an exception to the PS3.

      As a geek and longtime gamer, I'd let go of one of Natalie Portman's breasts to hold onto a cell processor right about now.

    • not any time soon (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ender Ryan ( 79406 ) on Monday March 21, 2005 @04:41PM (#12004317) Journal
      That hasn't even BEGUN to happen with consoles. Console generations are generally at least 5 years apart, whereas new high-end video cards are released like ever single year.

      People jump to upgrade graphics cards based on the games they want to play. Several notable games have caused huge surges in card sales.

      With PC games in general waning in popularity, and with current cheap cards being able to play the top games well enough, it's no wonder people aren't jumping to buy the latest and greatest all the time.

      • Re:not any time soon (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Bios_Hakr ( 68586 ) <xptical@@@gmail...com> on Monday March 21, 2005 @05:11PM (#12004792)
        When's the last time the resolution on your TV changed?

        For years, the PC monitor has had a resolution that cards couldn't max. That's starting to change.

        Especially with LCDs that top at 1280.

        But even with HDTV, the current consoles do just fine. A next-gen console has to offer something truly remarkable.

        Look at a PS game and then a PS2 game. Compare GT2 to GT4. But the differences between GT3 and GT4 are almost unnoticable.

        So, what will the PS3 offer? More CPUs to dedicate taskings between AI, graphics, and physics? Maybe another for sound? Then you add complexity to the developers's job. The games will become very expensive with the testing required to debug locking issues.

        Things I'd like to see:

        HDTV support.

        Better surround-sound.

        Better data caching to reduce load times.

        Support for a PC monitor.

        Headphone jack built in.

        Wireless controller standard built in.

        Standardised MP3 support for in-game audio.

        There are tons of other things they could add. But will they? Or will the PS3 be a PS2 with marginally better graphics?
        • I only have a ps2 so replies are taken from my knowledge

          > HDTV support.
          already there, it's more of a function of what games support it.

          > Better surround-sound.
          some games support dts(gtaIII vc) however i think it could be better because they don't support dts dynamically, but the do suport PL II very well. I think the next generation will have this wrapped up.

          > Better data caching to reduce load times.
          this is my biggest pet peeve. Or they could just put in a faster drive.

          > Support for a PC

          • Re:not any time soon (Score:3, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward
            > Support for a PC monitor.
            what's the point?

            An HDTV costs ~5 times as much as a CRT PC monitor, or ~3 times as much as a PC LCD. HDTVs are very hard to find in Europe. Finally, they're huge, and student apartments aren't.

            Never used a wavebird? I didn't notice any latency, and I'm usually pretty sensitive to it.

            Hard drive prices have come down, at least where I am. Right now I can order the cheapest (30GB ATA133) for under £25. 18 months ago that would have been £50 for a similar drive. I

          • Re:not any time soon (Score:3, Informative)

            by samdu ( 114873 )
            > Wireless controller standard built in.
            I hope not.
            1. you never loose a wired controller
            2. wireless control latencies are still more poor than my reflexes.

            1. You should keep track of things better. :)
            2. Clearly you haven't tried the Logitech Wireless Action Controller. There simply is no lag. It's a wonderful controller, second only to the OEM Dual Shock 2. If Sony can manage to create a wireless controller with the technical accumen of the Logitech WAC and the form factor of the DS II, they'd have jus
            • We're talking next-generation here, lets see some 7.1 or 9.1 DTS support instead.

              According to this article [eurogamer.net] DTS will be in the PS3, but we'll just have to see what kind of channel support there is.

              Don't forget, you can output Dolby Digital Mono as well (my satellite receiver gives me one of my TV stations as DD Mono - center speaker only).
              • Damn Right! 9.1 surround sound output to a real digital receiver, that's the way it should be in PS3.

                Though my ALL TIME request is bring back a light zapper. NES and Sega Master system are the only console ever to come bundled with guns straight from the original console manufacturers. What sup with all these 3rd party garbage nowadays.

          • I think he mentioned standardized MP3 for audio not like the Xbox, where you load up your MP3's to the HDD and can use them in-game, but I mean for developers to use MP3 in their own games (on the disc), instead of having to resort to MIDI which current gen games still use.
        • You forgot keyboard and mouse support!

          Though, when you add that this hypothetical PS3 console we're talking about starts to sound like a PC...
        • Things I'd like to see:

          Please don't forget 2048X768 so we can have two 1024X768 screens in splitscreen...I.e. a 4X3 tv source and a 4X3 desktop for web/email etc side-by-side in splitscreen. Widescreen gaming and movies is great, but it's only half the potention of widescreen displays.

          Most HDTV displays can barely display PC text in splitscreen because everything is horizontally squashed =(. Sadly no manufacturer has addressed this issue yet, and it's one of the mail reasons for wanting a widescreen LC

        • Re:not any time soon (Score:3, Interesting)

          by WasterDave ( 20047 )
          The games will become very expensive with the testing required to debug locking issues.

          No, I don't think so. Generally speaking games developers go to the shops and buy a game engine these days, and even if the cost of such things doubles it's still going to be fairly small compared to the art costs and the ludicrous quantities of hype.

          Had you suggested that games will become more buggy, of course, I'd have to agree :)

          Dave

        • Re:not any time soon (Score:4, Insightful)

          by MatthewNewberg ( 519685 ) on Monday March 21, 2005 @09:58PM (#12007737) Homepage

          TV resolution doesn't effect quality that much considering the current state of graphics. Much can be still be done even at normal TV resolutions. Sure HD is going to help quality, but resolution is only part of the graphics rendering problem, there are a lot of things (like lighting, bumpmapping, reflection) that developers are just now jumping into.

          The P3 is going to offer a lot more processing power in order to add new AI, new Physics, new levels of graphic detail, bigger worlds, better sound, more realistic sound. With more memory, faster processors, and better development tools(Cell Programming). Developers will hopefully not need to spend so much time tweaky every single last bit of performance out of the rather complicated PS2 system. If you really play games, the $300-$500 dollars is going to be completely worth it.

          And Yes, I am waiting for the p3 to have good surround sound for in game audio.

        • Re:not any time soon (Score:4, Informative)

          by DeadScreenSky ( 666442 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @03:33AM (#12009744)
          (I am assuming you are referring to the current console generation in general, not just the PS2.)

          > HDTV support.
          Done. Xbox, GC, and to a lesser extent the PS2 all support HDTV to some degree. So did the Dreamcast (via VGA). HDTV will get much better in this generation, of course. (Xbox2 will have all games support at least 720p, for example, which was something you only occasionally saw with Xbox1 games.)

          > Better surround-sound.
          Done. Xbox1 features ingame DTS. Good luck getting that on the PC nowadays with what happened to Soundstorm. This is an area where the PC actually needs to catch up...

          > Better data caching to reduce load times.
          Pretty much done. The PS2 has definite problems with load times, though many games are getting good at hiding it. But the Xbox and GC both feature very quick load times generally.

          > Support for a PC monitor.
          Done. Only the PS2 doesn't do this natively for most games. Consoles have done this since Dreamcast.

          > Headphone jack built in.
          ??? Consoles used to do this (ex: Sega Genesis). I really don't see any demand for this. Unless you meant more a headphone + mic adaptor, which is standard for Xbox2 controllers (and is easily accomplished on the Xbox1 and PS2 - both Gamecube and Dreamcast also had mic adaptors).

          > Wireless controller standard built in.
          Supposedly that's coming. I actually really don't want this (vibration support seems to get left out, and wireless mic audio is pretty bad in my experience), but I am apparently in a minority on this. I am perfectly happy with the Xbox1's extra long cables and special 'trip-guard'.

          > Standardised MP3 support for in-game audio.
          Xbox1 can do this now with various MS software. I believe it transcodes the MP3 to WMA, but it is basically done. Xbox2 takes this further (games apparently have to support custom soundtracks now).

          So current consoles should actually be meeting your standards pretty adequetely. :D So I will be shocked if the next-gen doesn't do the same...

          (Most of the known next-gen features are Xbox2 specific, but Sony will have to meet most of them to keep the PS3 competitive. Odds are they will even one-up MS in some areas, due to extra prep time if nothing else.)
          • I, for one, would like to see a headphone jack on future consoles. If you have to share a room with others, say a sleeping roommate or someone else who is watching TV, it makes things much more civil if one person can use headphones. I really wish my TV or my Xbox had a headphone jack to use.
          • The headphone thing, and wirelessw controller bit seem like perfect applications for some bluetooth devices. have corded controlelr ports for people who want them, but have a bluetooth module built in.

        • Look at a PS game and then a PS2 game. Compare GT2 to GT4. But the differences between GT3 and GT4 are almost unnoticable.

          The improvement from GT2 to GT3 was vast, but GT4 is still significantly better than GT3. Try it on a very large rear- or front-projection display, perhaps. I go the xbox route myself, but I bought a friend a PS2 with GT3 for xmas and frankly I was extremely disappointed, whereas I am routinely impressed (or at least satisfied) with the image quality in GT4. There is a big difference.
    • "Even in the PC world, the percentage of people that will rush out to pick up the newest video card seems to be dropping. There isn't quite the anticipation that there once was."

      Well, to be fair, what games are demanding to be run (and with good cause) on new hardware? With PC games, that's a serious issue. With console games, it's a given that new games will come along and take advanate of the hardware.

      We have 3 or 4 generations to go, at least before new consoles start losing their appeal. Earlier I
    • It's all about the "must have". Half-Life 2 and/or Doom 3 was supposed to push the envelope of technology so people would have to upgrade in order to play. Now, whether or not that actually happened depends on who you ask, of course.

      It also seems like the advances in each generation of video card is also declining. Look at the iterations from DX8 to DX9 to wherever we're at now. You essentially needed a new card to really take advantage of the latest version of DX. It doesn't seem like there have any

    • Re:Too Fast? (Score:3, Informative)

      by bigman2003 ( 671309 )
      "There isn't quite the anticipation that there once was."

      Well, that's conjecture really. Your two points are based on your own opinion, not necessarily the reality of the marketplace. The video cards for instance...

      Read this story [theregister.co.uk] about video card sales (Nvidia specifically). Nvidia had it's biggest (fiscal) year ever, even though it lost market leadership [theinquirer.net] to ATI.

      So, if the former number one company had its biggest year ever...and the former number two company has an even BIGGER year- then obviously
    • I would personally attribute it to less "wow" factor. For awhile there we had some real innovation. Sure video manufacturers always innovate, however the leaps and bounds are less pronounced. Now it seems as if it's merely window dressing.

      Can we make images look even better than a digital display? Sure.... and then?

      Can we keep piling on memory and shrinking the proc components? Sure.... and how long till we reach our limit?

      2 slots for video? For speed!? Only if it runs at least 2 heads.... That is the on
    • I dont agree with you. In this market the consoles themselves are heavily underpriced. The producors take that loss, expecting to make money from the games (or royalties for the games). You get the newest console for a very nice price - and the games are priced about the same as for your old (less powerful) console.

      In the PC-world you pay full price for your newest graphics adapter.

      I'd say the gaming console market is very upgrade-friendly for consumers, compared to most other consumer electronic markets!
    • You're 100% right to be concerned. Some of the older guys here might remember the video game crash back in the early 80's. Atari sold out a lemon system that had horrible-ass games compared to what you could play in the arcade. As a result, they threw out a newer console not too much longer after that, with better specs. But the generation of people they were selling to were used to living with most of their appliances without ever replacing them, such as TV's, radios, etc. People didn't buy the new sy
    • Short answer: Never.

      Long answer: That will happen as soon as the majority of console and console game purchases are made by a casual end user, not a parent or otaku.

      Although there are a lot of adult gamers, there are many more children (mommy buy me that) and fanboys (can't wait even a week for a PSP, have to get it NOW). Why are games $50+ on release? Both of these purchasing groups don't care much about price points (my kid isn't going to be the only one without Game Boy/I'll pay anything to play Halo 2

  • I don't get it (Score:5, Funny)

    by dauthur ( 828910 ) <johannesmozart@gmail.com> on Monday March 21, 2005 @04:27PM (#12004145)
    What's with all of this Playstation stuff? I've still got my NES.
    • (plays old Mario song in agreement) I don't really like 3D games as much either*. There are many more secrets in many 2D games**. Maybe it's because I get ADD and don't like a simple linear storyline. Or because it's harder to add regions to a 3D world that'd effectively hide said secrets. Or something.

      Obviously, teh 3D looks better though.

      *besides the Final Fantasies and Starfoxes of the gaming world. And perhaps Half-Life 2. But not Counter-Strike as much.

      **there's a lot in both FF7 and 10, from
      • Metroid Prime roundly proved that it's possible to do a 3D adventure platformer and do it RIGHT.
        • Maybe its just being an adult now ... but as a HUGE fan of the original metroid, I found Prime while a great game from a lot of standpoints -- impossible to play. I got through a lot of the game. I find being sent from one portion of the map to another to be tedious and a placeholder for *real* content. I know thats what the original game did -- but thats becuase thats all the original game COULD do with 256k of program/video space. I still had some fun with the game, but I absolutely gave up when it to
    • Man, you must have a real big lung capacity to still be able to get one of them cartridges to work after all these years!

  • NetBSD (Score:2, Funny)

    by SA Stevens ( 862201 )
    Okay. Who can port NetBSD to the 'development hardware' first?

  • Hrmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ianoo ( 711633 ) on Monday March 21, 2005 @04:44PM (#12004342) Journal
    Playstation 3 - IBM Processor.
    X-Box Next - IBM Processor.
    Nintendo Revolution - IBM Processor.

    Is anyone noticing a pattern here?
    • I dunno! You think IBM is dead in the water about now?!

      Heh. Whew, they're really going to clean up it seems.

    • Sony's next-gen consoles don't have stupid names?
      • "Sony's next-gen consoles don't have stupid names?"

        You don't think "Playstation" sounds stupid?
        • It's a form of fanboyism, a typical thing done by immature console users to help justify their brand decisions and blah blah blah.

          (Personally I think they all sound stupid. I even own and like an Xbox and think that it sounds stupid. The name currently that I don't mind is the Gamecube, because it's so zany. (OMG! A cube with games!))
          • Personally I think the name "XBox" is bland and unoriginal. Like Microsoft couldn't think of anything better so they were like "hey X is a cool letter and it is a box...so XBOX!"
            • Seriously...those are all weak. I think this is why everyone refers to them by their abbrviations...they're less embarassing that way.

              But look at the competition...I mean...PHANTOM?!
            • Like Microsoft couldn't think of anything better

              If legend is true, this is exactly what happened. Gates had envinsioned an MS console that was basically a "DirectX Box" that game programmers could use to target the DirectX platform. This eventually got shortened to "X Box" in in-house communications. The marketing department couldn't really come up with anything better except to remove the space, so they went with that. Be thankful for that bit of serendipity, though, or else we'd probably be using a "

      • Mod parent down. (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Playstation is a stupid name. It is just harder to see when it's been around 10 years.
        • PlayStation is a pun, it's supossed to be opposite of a WorkStation. I don't think it's a dumb name.

          However, I do think it's getting a bit boring to just keep adding numbers to the system's name. PlayStation, PlayStation2, PlayStation3... I think it's because Sony seems to think the PlayStation name is too valuable, and synonymous with "video game." Sorry Sony, but you've got a long way to go, "playing Nintendo" is still synonymous with "playing video games." But then again, these are the same people who

  • When did Microsoft ship out the PowerPC-based Xbox 2 (or whatever its called) dev kits?

  • Wow... (Score:4, Funny)

    by s4m7 ( 519684 ) on Monday March 21, 2005 @04:58PM (#12004556) Homepage

    from TFA:

    "they're more advanced than the PowerMac kits [Microsoft] has given us [for Xenon] - they're still prototypes, but they're closer to what'll be in the final console... The graphics chip isn't there, say, but we can get a pretty good idea by taking an NVIDIA 6800 and saying, okay, it'll be like this but faster."

    This seems a far cry from what Sony was promising us just after the release of the PS2... I can't seem to find the old press release but i remember them talking about integrating some kind of organic or biomechanical components into the processor and that the spare cycles from net-connected PS3's not in use would be available as some kind of grid computing enhancement. Way to deliver, Sony!!!

    • The "Cell" processors that will be used in the PS3 are not named that because they have biomechanical components, but rather because they run in parallel (I *think* the PS3 is going to have 6 of them, but I'm not looking at the place I read that as I type this) to create the core processing system, like cells do in living things. I don't know anything about the grid computing idea, though you may simply be referring to the connectivity between the individual Cell processors.

      • Re:Wow... (Score:2, Interesting)

        by AaronBrethorst ( 860210 )
        The grid computing thing was a bullshit story Sony passed around a year or two back about how the Cell would be so powerful that you could render ::cough:: Toy Story 2 in real time and still have spare cycles to sell to reasearchers curing cancer. You'd be able to harness the power of unused CPU cycles in gamers' machines around the world into some kind of vast distributed computing system blah blah blah. Typical Sony pre-release stuff.
    • It's not funny, it's true. This was actually being spread around a few years back. I presume by Sony.

      I really don't get why people still buy Sony in the console realm when there are two competitors with FAR better systems and FAR better in house development(if you factor in third parties while making these decisions you're making the classic Sega/N64 mistake and it WILL bite you on the ass one of these days). Even if one of them is the company I STILL haven't forgiven for ME and NT4.

      The XBox can take a
    • It's because way before the Cell was really announced and revealed, Sony said the PS3 would use "nanotechnology," which in actuality is used in organic technology such as eye implants or micro-pacemakers. They also said somethings like the PS3 wouldn't be a conventional set-top device but something small that could be put in any device, like a TV. They were really nuts back then (2002 ~ 2003). I guess they realized they started sounding like Nintendo.
      • What the hell? Sony never said that. They did say that Cell could be put in things like TVs (which is true). That's different from saying that you could put a PS3 in a TV!

  • Where's the CELL!? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jericho4.0 ( 565125 ) on Monday March 21, 2005 @05:23PM (#12004956)
    Unfortuantly, this article doesn't mention if the dev kits actually include a running Cell processor or not. Given the extraordinary promisses made regarding the Cell's performance, it kind of seems like it would have to have a real cell.(As compared to the Xbox2 dev kits, shipping with G5s). AFAIK, we've never actually seen real hardware yet.

    This is going to be the most interesting E3 ever, or I'll never fall for the hype again, damit.

    • Sony's hand is being forced by the XBOX Next. don't expect The ps3 to debut until a fair amount of time after the XBOX 2. But they have to make noise to keep peoples attention.

      Microsoft currently gets a lot of attention because they have let out the most info about their system. Sony and Nintendo aren't holding out on giving us specs to be secretive. They need to get the public's eye and hold it. They just don't have specs ready yet. The ones at E3 will probably be subject to change for all we know

  • With the launch slated to happen within the next year or two, I don't think "already" is the correct choice of word. Hell, considering what development times are now, I'd almost say they're a bit late.
  • ...where I think a new generations is maybe a tad soon. However, the advances in graphic engines and GPU's even since the XBOX was introduced are huge. Look at DOOM 3 and HL2 and then look at your PS2. They are nothing in comparison. The PS2 is in its prime of game development, and it will soon be around the time they have nothing left to do with it, (after FFXII, Grand Turismo 4 and a few other choice upcoming titles-- Phantasy star universe anyone?) there will be not much left to speak of for the sy

    • Re:This is one time... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hibiki_r ( 649814 ) on Monday March 21, 2005 @08:09PM (#12006736)

      Maybe you weren't paying much attention when Sony made the 'Rendering Toy Story in real time' claims. That sounded pretty revolutionary and cutting edge back in 2000. Unfortunately, it was all a big lie.

      A new console will cost up to $300 or so. Even if the console manufacturers take a, let's say, $100 loss on each console sold in the first year, it's still only $400 worth of hardware, built by the same companies that make computer processors and GPUs. The best we can hope for at a console launch is the same amount of raw power of a high end PC.

      If you were an ATI or nVidia executive, and you could manufacture a video card for a console manufacturer for, let's say, $200. Wouldn't you try to sell the same base components in the PC market for 2x the price? I know I would.

      • You make a good point. But my (albeit limited) understanding of the hardware is that just doesn't magically transfer to the PC market. Console hardware is much different. I could be wrong. it happens a lot.
      • That is untrue. When the PS3 comes out it will have graphics beyond anything that is available for the PC market. That will change soon after, of course, but it will have revolutionary graphics for a short while. It definitely will not be outdated before it leaves the gate.

        • Yep, memories are short... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by DeadScreenSky ( 666442 ) on Tuesday March 22, 2005 @03:17AM (#12009703)
          The same was true of Xbox1. It basically has an early Geforce4 in it (weaker than what eventually was released as a Geforce4 on PC, IIRC). This was released while the PC market was still making due with the cutting-edge Geforce3. Nevermind how many years it was before PC games were really written for that level of hardware...

          But yeah, early footage of next-gen console games (like Heavenly Sword [teamxbox.com]) destroys any coming game I've seen for the PC. Unreal3 engine tech is impressive, but I want to see games with release dates. That Heavenly Sword footage shows the kind of graphics the consoles are getting this year (and it will probably look even better, since that footage is of the game more than a year age).

          And a lot of the "high end PC games look better than console games always" argument is silly anyway when you look at the games. Panzer Dragoon Orta, Phantom Dust, Amped 2, Team Ninja's games, etc. all look just as good (and arguably better if you don't hold resolution to be the most important visual factor) than the best looking PC games. Writing to a unchanging dedicated gaming platform gives amazing performance benefits.

          Even if you want to argue that some PC game does look better than Panzer Dragoon Orta or GT4 (aesthetic tastes certainly vary), you probably won't find one in most of the genres that the consoles provide. Where are the beautiful PC fighting games? 3D action games (a la Ninja Gaiden and God of War)? Platformers (Ratchet & Clank)? Rail shooters (Rez, Panzer Dragoon Orta)? Etc.
          • But yeah, early footage of next-gen console games (like Heavenly Sword) destroys any coming game I've seen for the PC.

            Well... I looked at the screenshots and frankly I wasn't impressed. Look at character shadows, for instance. (I mean shadows from players and monsters, not just from terrain features). In the first screenshot, it looks like characters cast no shadows; and in the second screenshot the shadows are completely wrong (try matching shadows to the monsters: the leg and arm positions are complete
      • If you were an ATI or nVidia executive, and you could manufacture a video card for a console manufacturer for, let's say, $200. Wouldn't you try to sell the same base components in the PC market for 2x the price? I know I would.

        It's all about projected sales. Some big customers can demand a period of exclusivity if they make a large enough order. Guillemot (Hercules) often do this, and I'm sure Sony have the buying power to do the same. PS3 is a much bigger market than hardcore PC gamer.
      • As I recall, Son never made "rendering toy store in real time" claims. Some damned journalists said that, based on the performance specs of the EE.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Close