520°

PS3's Power Confined to Prosperous Exclusives

"Since the release of Sony's PlayStation 3 back in 2006, gamers around the world have debated the fact that PS3's superior hardware to its competitor, the Xbox 360, should push its titles beyond what's capable on the Xbox 360. With titles such as Killzone 3 and Uncharted 2 now on store shelves, these discussions are likely to contain mention of such software titles as leverage, but how does the co-founder and designer of his own studio feel about this?"

-TheGamerAccess.com

Read Full Story >>
thegameraccess.com
Nick2120044758d ago

I wonder if what Sony has learned from the development side of things with the PS3 will have an impact on how they approach their next console.

Shaman4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

Of course they learned...They should have dumped Cell and blu ray,really.With dumping blu ray they could easily went for 1GB of ram(as all the consoles would have HDD disk space wouldn't be such a problem) and dumping money into cell was wrong idea IMO since with that kind of money they could probably get specially designed,considerably better GPU than 360 had and not only would games look better than 360 counterpart,3rd party would turn on PS3 much and they wouldn't miss 2005 launch because of blu ray diodes.

Its evident that they learned it since NGP looks to be much more GPU focused machine than CPU focused.Generally,its not that the "learning to develop" for console is giving better results as time goes by,its developers knowing ins and outs of system and having much better and optimized algorithms than couple of years before.

Testament to that is just how fast MLAA pass is on 360(1.2ms on 720p).Its not that you can't do it,you just have to find smart way to do it...

RedDead4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

This^^^ Cell was not needed. Could have just threw in a good Gpu instead of it along with the RAM. Seems they have learned, best option would be to wait a year after the Xbox 3 to comes out and 1-up it with a better GPU. Simple enough, the Ps3 will obviously be more powerful on every level with that, devs will like too work on it aswell. Good choice with the Ngp

Obviously the disagrees though 8\ Power of the Cell!

I dunno if I agree about Blu ray aswell, extra space helpped, although the Dvd constant spin speed makes it a better disk so too speak. Just can't store alot of info on it.

Cenobia4758d ago

I'm pretty sure bluray was a big win for Sony. It may have prevented some earlier games from going to the PS3, but they crushed HD-DVD, and we are seeing the benefits of the larger format in a lot of recent games.

BrianG4758d ago

I agree that Sony could have played the safe route and simply made a more powerful GPU and used more RAM.

But Sony has been known for pushing the envelope, which is what they did when designing the Cell architecture. The same can be said about Bluray.

Now we all know that Bluray has indeed paid off for Sony, clearly showing its superiority to other HD formats on the market. The Cell on the other hand wasn't as big of a success. But how would we have new things like Bluray without trying new things?

If every company played it safe, we would be dealing with the same CPU and GPU architectures for decades to come. "I know, add a core" "Time to release are new chip, add a core".

In theory the Cell architecture makes perfect sense, blurring the line between CPU and GPU since it can handle what used to be natively GPU processes. Also having many SPU's to assist the main processing unit. I think the Cell would have been a definitive success if it utilized 3 PPU's instead of only 1. It would have helped the unfamiliar developers port games easier while giving experienced developers more horsepower to play with.

Just my thoughts. I don't disagree with your opinion or facts presented. At the same time I understand why Sony made the decisions they did for the PS3, risky, but paid off in the long run. Plus we have the added bonus of developers now knowing new ways to work game code to fit tight resources.

death2smoochie4758d ago

Nothing wrong with Blu-Ray at all. The limitations for the PS3 as for the Xbox360 also was lack of RAM and Bandwidth that is associated with both.
One of Sony's BIGGEST mistake (and it seems they have corrected this fully with the development of the NGP) was the fact they took NO advice or after thought from game developers when they designed the PS3. They built a system with the idea:

"Build it, they will come..."

and this hurt Sony for the first few years of the PS3 life as game development was very hard.
Sony has always had poor software development tools compared to MS and even Nintendo.
You can bet your ass, based on how Sony has courted developers this time around with the NGP, that they will do the same with the PS4 and make it a more developer friendly system with better software development tools.
However as I said, Blu-Ray imo was a smart move on Sony's part

darthv724758d ago

I dont know so much about the bluray being a win for sony. It has been a win for movie studios but we are really NOT seeing the benefit of such high capacity in games. For all intents and purposes we have been told that the capacity of the bluray would make games longer and more involving. Not sure how because it is a storage medium and nothing more.

Like carts and CD's and hdd's. It simply holds the data that the main hardware loads into memory to process. Nothing is processed from the disc itself except cutscene data. The linear nature of a movie plays out on the disc like records used to from beginning to end.

Games are not linear which adds to the fact that data is read at various points of the disc. I am expecting 100's of hours of gameplay and story but we are not going to see that. At least in the typical $60 game because we know that development time costs $$$$.

Sony also knows that there has been more improved efforts made in the fields of compression to which bigger games now are still able to fit on DVD. Yeah I will get smited for that but in seriousness. Why can a game still fit on a DVD and come out looking and playing the same as the bluray version?

That last statement is questionable because it is the 3rd parties responsible for the content as opposed to the dedicated 1st/2nd ones that handle the exclusives. Yes PS3 exclusives look and play great but unfortunately this gen has been overrun by the 3rd parties and the idea of equality among platforms.

It is really sad that MS had not focused its efforts on securing such talent like Sony has. We 'could' likely see quality development on the 360 that equates to that on the PS3. MS I suppose wanted to make a platform to be as diverse and straightforward as it could to entice the 3rd party development. It comes as no surprise that 360 life is from 3rd party games. It has the highest ratio of 3rd to 1st/2nd of any platform I remember seeing before it.

MS has achieved in making the 360 a very primary focus like they did with their windows platform. People may hate it but it doesnt mean its all bad. These companies are under no obligation to make their games the way they do. They do so at their own choice. So when we criticize a game for its equality in presentation, it's like one side is jealous that the other is getting a version of equal value instead of when the Genesis and SNES had real differences we could see and hear.

Power is only as good as those who are using it. I have seen things on the Genesis never thought possible because of the way it was designed. Yet the proof is right there. Same hardware that the game Altered Beast (launch game) played is also playing Ranger X or Gunstar Heroes.

Creative developers are the ones able to surpass the "limitations" and deliver the goods.

sikbeta4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

You guys still think Blu-Ray was a bad move for Sony? come on people, this format is here to stay, even if Sony, for some reason couldn't push it with the PS3, the Movie Industry could have take care of it but with Sony have their Movie Division, they did it...

zag4758d ago

The reason for little ram is it has the fastest ram from rambus (from memory) intel used to use it then everyone had a whinge about it costing 3 times the amount for a stick of ram compared to DDR.

The ram bus in the PS3 is like 50gigbytes or so in speed.

it's way and above the fastest DDR stuff you can get in a PC.

You can't use the Cell and use slow ram it just won't work, so if you use a big chunk of that ram when hardly anyone uses it well it's going to cost a bucket load for each stick.

DragonKnight4758d ago

Even before NGP, Kaz Hirai emphasized that for the next PS console, they will bring in the devs to help design it. Developers will have a say in what's going into the next PS console, so you can bet it will be very developer friendly.

And please stop with this nonsense that Blu-Ray is slower than DVD. It's faster than DVD, it's just that the PS3 uses a 2x BR drive, which happens to be slower than the 12x DVD drive in the 360. Don't make me post the link comparing the speeds because a 3x BR drive is faster than a 12x DVD drive.

gamingdroid4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

With an install required on many games, I fail to see why Blu-Ray is needed on the PS3. You could have as easily installed the assets into to hard drive.

It will load faster, and installation from a DVD drive would have been faster than Blu-Ray's 2x speed and cost you less.

Then the question about the Cell? Why not just dump a faster GPU in instead of making the CPU support the GPU? Seems like a complete backwards design.

I do have to give Sony credit for creating a solid low failure rate console, with a very solid feel. The PS3 phat looked like one piece expensive technology (and it was) and no other console since has the same aura including the Xbox 360 S.

jetlian4758d ago

its not just that. 360 has and uses better compression which makes the gap bigger.

ProjectVulcan4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

Bluray was as much as marketing move as it was for being genuinely useful for games. Saying that, it began to be clear that catering for the lowest common demoninator (i.e 360's dvd) meant it would only ever be good for exclusive PS3 games. It did introduce me to bluray movies too though, and i am a big movie fan so no regrets here.

With regards hardware, then the GPU is the worst choice. The problem was that sony did not commission a custom GPU like microsoft nor select a recently released GPU, but instead opted for a design that was already 18 months old when PS3 launched.

Admittedly this was partly down to delays beyond sony's control, but really you shouldn't be releasing a console with a slower GPU a year after your primary rival. It should have been faster. It should have been custom designed based on Geforce 8- which in the end launched the week BEFORE PS3.....

Sony could have asked Nvidia to basically halve their latest and greatest in development at that time, an 8800GTX, and throw it into PS3, it would have been a lot faster than what RSX is but most importantly more flexible.

DragonKnight4758d ago

@gamingdroid: "With an install required on many games, I fail to see why Blu-Ray is needed on the PS3. You could have as easily installed the assets into to hard drive."

There are 4 reasons.

1. Sony was anticipating the size of games to be much greater than a standard DVD9 would be capable of holding on one disc.

2. Because of number one, and the fact that there are people who like having a physical copy that can't suddenly be erased, they went for an optical drive.

3. PC's still use discs to install games, so what's the big deal?

4. It was a marketing move for Sony in the movie industry as well.

"It will load faster, and installation from a DVD drive would have been faster than Blu-Ray's 2x speed and cost you less."

Again, DVD is slower than BR.

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/...

We see here that a 1x drive of BR has a data transfer speed of 36Mbps vs the DVD's 11.08Mbps

So this idea that it would be faster with a DVD drive only hinges upon the type of BR drive. a 3x BR drive is faster than a 12x DVD drive. As for cost, that's relative.

"Then the question about the Cell? Why not just dump a faster GPU in instead of making the CPU support the GPU? Seems like a complete backwards design."

Because Sony didn't want a console that did only beautiful scenery and characters. It wanted a console that could push console physics to another level as well, plus they figured they could reduce memory usage with the way the Cell is designed.

@jetlian: "its not just that. 360 has and uses better compression which makes the gap bigger."

Ummm, no. A compressed assets take longer to load than non-compressed assets. The potential with Blu-Ray is to have whole uncompressed games on a disc, which would obviously load faster. In this case, speed of the games is all up to the devs, not the hardware.

gamingdroid4758d ago

"Because of number one, and the fact that there are people who like having a physical copy that can't suddenly be erased, they went for an optical drive"

Re-install it if it got erased. You have it on a physical DVD disc anyhow.

"We see here that a 1x drive of BR has a data transfer speed of 36Mbps vs the DVD's 11.08Mbps "

Nice mis-information there. PS3 Blu-Ray drive tops out at 2x speed. That means Blu-Ray tops out at 72 Mbps and DVD at 12x tops out at 132 Mbps (that's taken from your source 1x at 11Mbps). Now granted the difference is likely to be small in practice, due to the CAV speed of DVDs except you can optimize the data on the outer edge of the DVD.

"...plus they figured they could reduce memory usage with the way the Cell is designed."

It not sure how PS3 reduces memory usage? If anything, it puts constraints on how you use the little available memory. Maybe you can enlighten us on how the Cell reduces memory usage?

I'm sure Sony had their reasons, but I don't see enough of a value. If anything, pushing technology out to early actually holds it back for competitive reasons. I betcha MS would have released a new console sooner if faced more pressure, but Sony's got to recoup their cost on PS3.

IHateYouFanboys4758d ago

@DragonKnight:

"There are 4 reasons. "

no, there is only 1 reason - sony used the PS2 as the trojan horse for blu-ray so they could make it the standard format for movie releases. thats the only reason blu-ray is in the PS3.

"Again, DVD is slower than BR. "

but again, the DVD drive in the 360 is faster than the Blu-Ray drive in the PS3 95% of the time. it doesnt matter if a 3x BR drive is faster than a 12x DVD drive - the PS3 doesnt have a 3x BR drive!

the DVD read speeds of the 360 are 8-16MBps variable. the BR read speed of the PS3 is 9MBps constant. so at the SLOWEST read speed, the 360 reads 1MBps slower, but at its fastest it reads almost DOUBLE the speed. at its average, say 12MBps, its 33% faster than the PS3s read speed.

"Because Sony didn't want a console that did only beautiful scenery and characters." yes they did, because thats what the fanboys eat up.

most of their big games that have anything to do with physics use an off the shelf physics engine that has been used in every game under the sun - Havok. Naughty dog made their own physics engine for Uncharted, but dumped it and used Havok in Uncharted 2 because it simply wasnt as good as Havok. Physics engines dont need some sort of super CPU to run.

"A compressed assets take longer to load than non-compressed assets. "

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahaha.

oh boy. are you serious? so youre saying that loading a 1MB compressed file takes LONGER to load than a 10MB uncompressed file? are you serious? compression is used to DECREASE load times, as decompression is done basically 'on-the-fly' at no processor cost. reading 1MB off a disc is a LOT quicker than reading 10MB, thats just basic common knowledge.

compression is GOOD, and any developer whos not doing it is just kidding themselves. the only things that should be left uncompressed are uncompressed audio (obviously) and FMVs.

Persistantthug4758d ago

The problem was the tools.

Sony didn't design the tools to give game developers the EDGE they needed to do proper development.

When I say EDGE, I mean that literally and figuratively.

For the next gen for Sony's PS4, I expect them to use another, but ADVANCED CELL Processor and/or derivative of it.

Same with BluRay....Same but bigger and better.

DragonKnight4758d ago

@Fanboy who hates himself: "no, there is only 1 reason - sony used the PS2 as the trojan horse for blu-ray so they could make it the standard format for movie releases. thats the only reason blu-ray is in the PS3."

You wish. Your statement would hold merit if anyone other than Ken Kutaragi designed the PS3. Ken designed the PS3 to last, not just to play movies. He knew that the size of games was going to increase, and as a man with a engineering background took the necessary steps to ensure that the PS3 would be able to sustain a 10 year life cycle. Sony wouldn't need the PS3 for Blu-Ray at all.

"but again, the DVD drive in the 360 is faster than the Blu-Ray drive in the PS3 95% of the time. it doesnt matter if a 3x BR drive is faster than a 12x DVD drive - the PS3 doesnt have a 3x BR drive!"

Specious reasoning. Blu-Ray reads at a faster constant rate. Just because the PS3 doesn't have a 3x drive (btw, you're arguing semantics) doesn't mean Blu-Ray itself is slower.

"most of their big games that have anything to do with physics use an off the shelf physics engine that has been used in every game under the sun - Havok. Naughty dog made their own physics engine for Uncharted, but dumped it and used Havok in Uncharted 2 because it simply wasnt as good as Havok. Physics engines dont need some sort of super CPU to run."

It is a fact that the computational ability of the Cell is unmatched in console history. You are now trying to argue the devs use of the architecture as a method to talk down the hardware when, in fact, you can't. Again, it comes down to the devs. Just because they don't use the full ability of the Cell, doesn't mean Sony didn't intend for the Cell to be used to it's greatest strengths.

"oh boy. are you serious? so youre saying that loading a 1MB compressed file takes LONGER to load than a 10MB uncompressed file? are you serious? compression is used to DECREASE load times, as decompression is done basically 'on-the-fly' at no processor cost. reading 1MB off a disc is a LOT quicker than reading 10MB, thats just basic common knowledge.

compression is GOOD, and any developer whos not doing it is just kidding themselves. the only things that should be left uncompressed are uncompressed audio (obviously) and FMVs."

See, this is where you show your ignorance and fanboyism. First, you try to stack the argument in your favor by using varying sizes of data. It is a fact that uncompressed data loads faster than compressed data because it doesn't need to first uncompress and then load. In all likelihood, that 1MB of compressed data may load at the same speed as that 10MB of uncompressed data. But why don't you try to use the same amount of data next time.

And then you chastise devs for NOT wanting to reduce the quality of their game by compressing the data? Wow, MS has you by the nuts don't they? Fact: Compression is only used because it has to be, not because it should be.

MaxXAttaxX4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

The CELL works with the GPU and processes some of the graphics before it even gets to the GPU.

IT GETS THE JOB DONE! Just look at the results. The graphics look great, especially with exclusives.
_____

And Blu-ray:
Really? People are still in denial about this?
Does LA Noire ring a bell. Or better yet, how about Final Fantasy 13? We all know how that turned out.
When will people learn.

And Blu-ray is not slow!
It requires less rotation speeds to read larger amounts of data. So there goes your "slow" theory.

But I guess fanboys will downplay what they fear.

gcolley4758d ago

the PS2 was also hard to code for. they didn't learn then, maybe this time though as games get ridiculously expensive to make

JBaby3434758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

Thank you DragonKnight for intelligent posts.

Blu-Ray is a better format than DVD end of story. Yes when the PS3 released 2x BD drive was all that was available so DVD has the edge between the two consoles but now you can get 8x drives that smoke DVD drives so I'm happy Sony pushed the technology even in the early stages because otherwise we'd still be stuck with DVDs for the next gen.

Uncompressed assets are always better to stream in than compressed assets because they don't have to be decompressed first. That's common sense. How can anyone argue to just stick with compression when you have the space (and speed as illustrated above) to have uncompressed assets?

Best Line in this discussion "Fact: Compression is only used because it has to be, not because it should be."

With regards to the CELL. "Why not just dump a faster GPU in instead of supporting a weaker GPU?"

Fact is GPUs are taxed much more than CPUs in today's gaming environment so it actually makes a lot of sense to use the CPU to pick up slack if it can (and the CELL can like no other). The problem is that Sony did not plan for a proper GPU (the plan for 2 CELLs didn't pan out so they grabbed what they could at the last minute) so the GPU suffered for it. RAM and bandwidth are also a problem but using the CPU to assist the GPU to allow the GPU to do even more makes perfect sense.

Now that devs know how to use the CELL and we see what it can do, I would love an upgraded CELL plus the latest GPU with upgrades to XDR RAM and DDR with system bandwidth increases across the board. That would be quite a system.

Dragun6194757d ago

Wow, we still have some Blu-ray Haters?

Blu-ray delivers 4x space than regular DVD's and more than that if it dual layered. How can you guys hate more space? MGS4, LA Noire, FFXIII, etc & all Ultimate/Goty edition games like Borderlands, GTA4, & Dragon Age, have all benefited from Blu-ray along with Movies, easily using Blu-ray to deliver 1080p HD quality, with 5.1/7.1 surround sound.

And The Cell has help produce great games such as Uncharted 2, MGS4, God of War 3, Heavy Rain, Killzone 3, & soon Infamous 2, Resistance 3, Uncharted 3 The Last Guardian, Starhawk, etc. I dunno about you but PS3 exclusives are looking better and better.

Man, you haters are getting weak.

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 4757d ago
metsgaming4758d ago

well with the NGP they made it easy to develop for so you can say they learned. They learned that they should talk to devs and let them know what they are going to do. I dont think they will switch over to make it develop like the pc but they will talk to the devs especially in house.

miyamoto4758d ago

good point mate

" I dont think they will switch over to make it develop like the pc"

because many analysts like Hideo Kojima see that its games made for mobile devices like smartphones & tablets that is starting to take huge chunk of the gaming market in the near future.

The way I see it many NGP & PlayStation Certified games will be PS3 compatible which will make the PS3 alive and well on the mobile era.

ALFAxD_CENTAURO4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

They learned to improve more, when it is compared to 2006 status.

Sony is the Company that make risks in the Gaming Industry.

And with those Risks, they can have a successful plan or receive a bad report in different aspects.

Mr Tretton4758d ago

Dump BD? lmao

More memory would have been nice but it's all irrelevant as we approach next gen

baker_boi4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

My bad this was supposed to be for the posts above.
-----EDIT-----

Yeah the Blu-Ray market was clearly bust for Sony, ya know, selling all those Blu-ray movies and games.

And The military and certain other groups using networked PS3s for super computers? Man such a bad idea. The CELL just really wasn't needed.

/sarcasm

miyamoto4758d ago

I remember this scenario during the 16-bit era:
The SNES vs The Genesis

360/Genesis one year head start > PS3/SNES
360/Genesis great American support > PS3/SNES
360/Genesis initially sells faster > PS3/SNES
360/Genesis at the time FPS/Sports console of choice by Americans > PS3/SNES
PS3/SNES arrive a year later > 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES more powerful > 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES more powerful graphics > 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES more potential > maxed out 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES more longevity/staying power > 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES more support in Japan & Asia > 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES more exclusive games > 360/Genesis
PS3/SNES bank on exclusive 3D games > 360/Genesis

I love my Genesis as it had great action games & more reliable hardware than my SNES. I loved my SNES for its great JRPGS and great graphics. I hope Sony & Microsoft learn a lot from history.

Istanbull4758d ago

You are obviously a young kid who doesnt know anything about Sony. The PS2 was also said to be difficult to develop for, but after time passed on, the complaints stopped. And after 7 or 8 years in PS2s lifecycle, we got really great looking games who competed with first gen games of the 360 like GoW2 or FF12. Thats what Sony means with 10 years plan. I hope you're not too young to understand this.

gcolley4758d ago

you are obviously a fanboy

no PS2 games looked as good as the best xbox1 games, let alone the 360. looking at games like riddick and doom 3 on xbox, GoW2 and FF12 didn't even come close. it just didn't have the horsepower

10 year plan doesn't really mean anything to core gamers. if you stick to a console for 10 years you get left behind. within a year or 2 of a new console release, most people have forgotten about the previous one

Jocosta4758d ago

They disagreed with a rhetorical question. Priceless.

Foliage4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

The Cell and Blu-Ray are two reasons why the PS3 has excelled. I'm not sure what basis the poster is running from, but it is incredibly misinformed.

The only real shortcoming you can point to in the PS3 design, opposed to the 360 one, is the RAM structure. They both have the same amount of RAM, but not having it shared like the 360 was a severe blow. Sure you can create kernels to share the CPU RAM for the GPU, but despite the Cell being the better processor (compared to the 360) it is not efficient enough on it's own to make up for a 256 MB hard ceiling.

If your game is CPU heavy (these days, which game isn't?). The PS3 does become a problem.

With that said, the rest of the design on the PS3 is far superior in all regards when it comes to hardware. You can argue the GPU is slightly worse, but it's hardly worth discussion.

The Cell and Blu-Ray ARE NOT A PROBLEM.

saladthieves4758d ago

Is it me, or is it that every time this guy speaks about something in the video, I'm busy concentrating on the video game screen on the left, not even paying attention to him?

kikizoo4758d ago

"dragon
its not just that. 360 has and uses better compression which makes the gap bigger. "

GAP ? living in the opposite world of xfans or what ?
the "gap" is getting bigger beetween ps3 exclusives and competition, and it's not because "they don't want to make that kind of quality games/graphics on 360", they just can't !

PS3 is more powerfull, cpu, ram, and bluray...nobody with a real tv, good eyes and the consoles can't deny that.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 4757d ago
trainsinrdr4758d ago

im still waiting for the ultimate ps3 game

metsgaming4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

well you obviously haven't been looking.

Happythedog4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

GT5, MGS4, Uncharted 2, God OF War 3, GT5 and MotorStorm AP

Those are ultimate Ps3 games.

I put GT5 twice cause its that dam good.

Killzone3___4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

heavy rain , demon soul , little big planet 2 , killzone 2-3 , warhawk , inFAMOUS 1-2

motor storm one is the best one , i don't like the others ...

GodofSackboy4758d ago

There is only one ultimate game on PS3, nay, any console.

Metal Gear Solid 4

MysticStrummer4758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

Everyone seems to be assuming trains is trolling but he's right, even though it may be unintentional. PS3 still has upside. The competition is gassed. Whether that will mean anything in terms of the "war" remains to be seen.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4758d ago
Alos884758d ago

I know he's saying exclusives, but I keep hearing "excluses" when he says it.

trophywhore14758d ago (Edited 4758d ago )

I swear still after 6 years, its the same arguments. Yes the xbox is easier to programe for according to developers, but look at what you COULD accomplish with talent and enthusiasm. God of war3 uncharted 2 and killzone 3 for example.

BrianC62344758d ago

These dumb third party developers are robbing us of great games by making the PS3 versions the same as the 360 games. It's getting old. Shame on them if they're too lazy to make real PS3 games.

death2smoochie4758d ago

It's a money issue. It will cost more man power an finances to put in the extra effort to make the PS3 version stand out when it comes to multi-platform games. Most 3rd party companies WILL not do this because time is money.
And your argument can also go towards PC multi-platform games.
The majority of PC games this generation have been just ports of console games. In almost every case the PC version looks almost the same or slightly better and THAT should never be the case taking into consideration the power and head room a PC has over any of these consoles.
The reason why? As stated above. The cost of development.
1ST, 2ND party games for the PS3 are funded by Sony so they have the time and effort to put into these games.

BrianC62344758d ago

My answer to you death2smoochie is these third party developers are holding the PS3 back. Sony continues to show how great PS3 games can be. The third party developers are letting us gamers all down. I don't want a mediocre version of a game if I can have a better version.

user83971444758d ago

Another thing is that GOW3 and Uncharted 2 have no install and no loading times! And they are easily the best looking games out there.

guigsy4758d ago

Yeah but all those examples are exclusives. The video argues that multiplatform developers don't have the resources to invest heavily in the PS3 architecture, so you're getting multiplatform games will are often of the same quality (and sometimes worse) then their 360 counterparts, rather than looking much better. It's nothing to do with talent and enthusiasm, some smaller developers simply can't afford to bring out the best in the PS3.

jrisner4758d ago

ummm Isn't any console's strength based on it's exclusives?

just wow.....

Bell Boy4758d ago

That's what I thought..lol

MysticStrummer4758d ago

Of course exclusives are important. The only people who don't admit that are fans of the competition. Exclusives have been the main factor in console "wars" since Atari 2600 vs Mattel Intellivision. Also... LOL @ all the "They should have dumped the Cell and Bluray" talk above.

Show all comments (91)
200°

Sony shares big new PS Plus stat, but not the one we want to see

PlayStation Plus has improved the split of PS4 and PS5 players on its priciest tiers, but Sony continues to hide total subscriber numbers.

Read Full Story >>
theloadout.com
mandf1d 9h ago

lol acting like it’s equivalent to ms numbers

Mr Logic1d 9h ago

Uh...They're definitely not equivalent.

"Microsoft’s Xbox Game Pass service now has 34 million subscribers."

"the total number of PS Plus subscribers across all tiers was 47.4 million"

darthv721d 9h ago (Edited 1d 8h ago )

That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN.

bloop1d 5h ago

That's not the "gotcha" you think it is Darth.

darthv721d 4h ago

^^it's not supposed to be bloop.... it's just an interesting observation.

Einhander19721d 3h ago

darthv72

"That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN."

Have you ever heard of a PC before? I hear they are pretty popular.

fr0sty21h ago

MS started lumping gold subscribers in with those GP numbers... keep in mind.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 21h ago
shinoff21831d 8h ago (Edited 1d 8h ago )

What. Definitely more os plus subscribers but that makes sense due to actual console sales

Darth the difference between the bases are huge your right but you gotta think. Ps players buy more games, where as the Xbox base relies on gamepass for their gaming. So it makes perfect sense

darthv721d 7h ago (Edited 1d 7h ago )

What makes perfect sense though? You say PS players buy more games... so then logically there should be more PS+ subscribers given the increased number of online multiplayer games in the PS4 generation alone. The PS4 was the first time that + was required for online play much like Gold was for 360 users.

Keep in mind we are talking subscribers, not simply XB/PS users. I assume you meant to say offline single player games, which is most likely true as well. That gen also saw a significant increase in games with an online component comparted to the previous gen.

victorMaje1d 7h ago

I for one will be going back to essential at the next renewal. When I feel a game is good & right up my alley, I’ll check trusted reviews & just buy it.

jznrpg1d 6h ago (Edited 1d 6h ago )

I have the top tier until 2028 as they gave me a massive discount for all the years I had left but I’ll most likely go to essential as well. I buy my games but my kids do use the service occasionally. They do prefer to own their games as well since any game can leave the rental service at some point and they don’t like that idea. They mostly use it to demo games then ask me to buy games if they really like it.

RedDevils1d 1h ago

For me, I will cancel it all together but unfortunately I still have it till 2030 lol

meganick1d 5h ago

I would like to see Sony add a fourth tier of PS Plus for people who just want to be able to play games online without any of the perks like monthly games, store discounts, or anything like that, and it should cost $20 annually, $30 maximum. There’s no way I’m paying $80 just to play games online. Even the original $60 fee was too much, and I would often wait for sales to re-up my subscription.

P_Bomb1d 1h ago (Edited 1d 1h ago )

Essential is too expensive, I agree. We’ve got one Essential and one Premium sub. Dropping the Premium when it expires.

gamerz22h ago

Just let my subscription lapse for the first time since 2010. Will sub again every now and then for a month or so to access my old ps+ games but for me it's the end of an era.

DivineHand12521h ago

Let those numbers continue to drop because it is now too expensive. $80 per year just to play online. I noticed they didn't offer any discounts on the subscription or controllers during this year's days of play for the first time in many years and they will feel it when people choose not to renew.

My subscription will lapse next month and it will stay that way until further notice.

KevtheDuff18h ago

There were savings on subs and controllers here in the UK? I bought a controller yesterday in the sale..
It would be weird if those deals were not in other territories too?

300°

Sony Says The PS5 Is Its “Most Profitable Generation To-Date"

During Sony’s recent business segment meeting and investor presentation regarding its game and network services, the PlayStation company revealed that PlayStation 5 is the company’s “most profitable generation to-date.”

It’s the top slide of the presentation, showing that in its first four years, the PS5 generation has already hit $106 billion in sales, having almost caught up to the PS4’s total $107 billion generated.

Operating income for the PS5 generation has also already surpassed that of the PS4, having now reached $10 billion.

ApocalypseShadow3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

I wouldn't doubt it. They released a high quality system. A lot of high quality games from themselves and their support of 3rd party developers and indies. They released many high quality remakes and remasters. They released a high quality GaaS game going against the naysayers thinking Sony would abandon single player games. And they most likely are profiting a lot more than PS1, PS2 PS4 and the loss leading PS3 that drained all their profits.

Now, I'll wait to see what's cooking tomorrow. But can you use some of those profits to better support your high quality VR headset? Because, by supporting it, you can sell more games and more systems and make more profits?

jznrpg2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I want RPGs for PSVR2! Good ones of course

shinoff21832d ago

If it had some rpgs I would buy right fking now. It looks dope and alot of fun, but it's biggest game resident evil 4(maybe) I've got no interest in. I'm not a fan of racing games, even with that metro game coming i was never much into that series. Rpgs would be fantastic.

MrNinosan2d ago

Lemme know if ya wanna play some Zenith 🙌
Bought it at release, but haven't played it more than 1-2 hours but for sure on my "todo list".

Cacabunga2d ago

Normal when they released mostly cross gen games so far. That’s a lot of money saved..
We haven’t seen what PS5 can do yet. 4years in and PS4 games still look great to me. The gen leap isn’t quite there yet.

--Onilink--2d ago

The interesting metric for me is the $106billion in operating income/profit (not sales as mentioned in the article) reaching the same as the PS4 did with only half the consoles sold.

In particular because they all are supposed to be making the most per hardware sold after a few years when manufacturing costs are down.

So even putting inflation aside(and the higher console price), it is interesting that they could reach PS4 $ with just half the consoles sold.

Maybe there is more to the metric thats whats seen at face value, but they have clearly been making a lot more money than before on the software side (with also less games released I suppose, given its only been half the generation so far)

VersusDMC2d ago

The bulk of the money has to be coming from the 30% cut on all games and microtransactions. Especially on all the free to play juggernauts like genshin, apex, fortnight, etc.

--Onilink--2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

@Versus

They are definitely making a lot on that for sure (which the $70 price increase factors into as well), but its not like many of those games werent around for the PS4 too.

They might be counting the gen as a whole and not just PS5 itself (so extra profit from PC sales, whatever that may be)

PS+ price increase and different tiers probably amount to part of that too.

But in general, its still quite a surprising metric. Half the time, half the consoles sold, less first party games released so far and still already making more of a profit than last gen is quite something, and as mentioned, there is probably more to it that we dont know, after all, since we are talking about operating income, all the expenses they have also factor into it, so it is also possible that they have found ways to significantly reduce that + all the means of increased revenue that appear to be factoring into the equation

All in all, just an interesting situation from a business perspective

porkChop2d ago

It's for the whole generation, so it would likely be including PC. They also make much more profit on digital sales vs retail, and digital is far more prominent these days. The generation also started at the height of COVID when everyone was home, spending far more money on gaming/hobbies. It makes a lot of sense for this gen to be more profitable.

Abnor_Mal2d ago

This will surely shut up all the new trolling accounts trying to spread lies and non facts in other articles comment sections before this article is posted.

Hofstaderman2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Obscurely, those trolls or troll will not show in these articles as the truth is contradictory to his or their orchard-sized daily dose of copium and hopium.

Tacoboto2d ago

Or... They're intentionally trolling you guys specifically. Because they know it upsets you so easily.

Name-dropping Orchard, after this many months? How long has it been and he's still in your thoughts?

Elda2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I'm quite sure the individual is reading these positive comments downvoting & seething at the same time. Edit: It just downvoted my comment...lol!!

Hofstaderman2d ago

No I'm entertained by this individual. I love unhinged people, they are so interesting lol.

repsahj2d ago

Wow! I am super impressed that in just 4 years, ps5 already caught up to the PS4's. Congratulations.

JackBNimble2d ago

That happens when half of your games are cross platform. I'm still waiting to see what the ps5 is capable of, because they sure haven't pushed any limits.

And where are all these ps5 exclusive games?

sagapo2d ago

Not really surprised as Sony barely has any competition at the moment.

Show all comments (47)
150°

Sony CEO says although AI "has been used for creation," it's "not a substitute for human creativity"

"AI is not a substitute for human creativity. We position it as a technology that supports creativity. Creativity resides in people. We will continue to contribute to people's creativity through technology," the CEO said.

Read Full Story >>
gamesradar.com
1nsomniac9d ago (Edited 9d ago )

...not yet but 100% within the next 10 years!

..Then Sony will use it like the drop of a hat. They're no different to the others.

isarai9d ago (Edited 9d ago )

They used to be 😞 sure it was always a business, and money's always the priority, but they used to have a very strong stance on supporting artists and creativity. "Dont f#@k with the artist" was a phrase they touted a few times back in the ps1-ps3 era, a philosophy carried over from their music branch PlayStation was created from. It's not COMPLETELY gone, but it's barely there compared to what it was back then, i just want them to return to that.

Eonjay8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

I am highly encouraged by their statement about human creativity. "Dont f#@k with the artist" is exactly what they are saying. But at the same time, I don't think people understand that Sony is a corporation. If they don't realize growth, they don't get to exist. When you say 'Sony', you are talking about a bunch of investors. To speak about them any other way is a illogical and incorrect. They haven't changed. They have been a group of investors since they became a public business.

isarai8d ago

Ugh, i really wish people would stop gambling people's livelihoods by turning a project/game into their political soapbox. Im all for statements and having your own opinion, but there's more people working on this than just druckman, ham fisting your political beliefs onto just seems inconsiderate for everyone elses job security when it can result in a failure due to people avoiding it for that reason.

I play games for escape, im so tired of nearly every AAA game blatantly dragging real world issues to shove in my face when I'm trying to take a break from it all. They don't even bother to be subtle about it, quite the opposite, it's blasted and force fed to you and it's just getting exhausting

Einhander19728d ago

People are taking a whole interview and cutting it down to clips that make him look bad and take what he actually was saying out of context. For example he also said things like this AI has "ethical issues we need to address"

-Foxtrot8d ago

@Einhander

Why defend him at this point?

It’s not taking things out of context, he said what he said.

Old ND would never talk about soulless AI taking over so many creative things they are well known for. The whole “ethical issues” is just a good PR spin people who push this crap fall back on to make their statements not seem as bad. So many AI lovers do this.

AI has no place is so many creative based things.

Einhander19728d ago

Well yeah, because everyone else is using it so they need to stay competitive. It's the same as paid online, they didn't want to go that route but their competition was making so much money they needed to add paid online just to keep up.

RaiderNation8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

AI will never replace humans in game development in terms of conceptualizing new games. Humans still need to come up with the ideas and what they want to implement. However much of the day to day menial coding could be AI driven to reduce production time and team size. I could also see AI being used for bug testing/optimization that could lead to better quality games at launch. I'm actually very optimistic about how AI can positively impact game development.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 8d ago
XiNatsuDragnel9d ago

Good statement but hopefully this holds up

NotoriousWhiz8d ago

People that aren't software developers just don't understand the benefits of AI. People who's only exposure to A.I is the Terminator movie and other related sci fi films won't understand the benefits it provides.

It's not about replacing human labor. It's about making human labor easier.

Many years ago, I had laser eye surgery done. It was performed by a robot. The doctor took my measurements and calibrated the machine to make sure it would do what needed be done. And then the robot corrected my vision in 10 seconds.

15 years later and I still have 20/20 vision.

Eonjay8d ago

AI in and of itself is not a 'bad'. Money is bad. Money is evil, and corporations will do whatever they can to get more of it. They will find ways to implement AI to replace as may jobs as possible. This isn't even up for debate. It is the charge of the corporation to maximize returns for the investors. They have no choice. I'm a developer and I know that my job will absolutely be replaced. Therefore, I have decided to become an AI dev. AI has a lot of potential to help us solve problem on a scale most can't even imagine. The issue, as ever is that our monetary system only ever allows us to focus on greed and fiscal growth.

But I am a pragmatist. Perhaps an AI model can be built to help protect us from our most dangerous instincts and habits. And perhaps Congress can pass laws to protect us from people who would use AI to manipulate and control us (spoiler: they wont).

RaiderNation7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Progress is inevitable. Nobody driving cars today is complaining that the horse and buggy is no longer around. Yes, some jobs will be lost but guess what? With innovation comes new job opportunities. It's how the cycle of the job market works.