Xbox 2 == Gc2

[Luke]

Sony want Playstation to become the standard, PS2 strenghtend the brand and fought off rivals. but Microsoft want Xbox to be the standard too. therein lies the problem.

But the question is whether if Microsoft and Nintendo teamed up and defined a standard, where multiple manufacturers could create a console, would they be able to establish a standard? and would this standard then be able to stand the test of time against any new bigger faster (but non-standard) technology?

I think the answer is 'yes' to both these things.

And due to the standard being a co-operative thing, I think once it had won the market off Sony neither they (or anyone else) could wrestle it back.

[Sprite Machine]

If you are a geek. If you are a dude on the street, they are both CG animated movies and they both look pretty nice.

Que?

There is a huuuuuge technical difference between the two movies. "They both look pretty nice" is not good enough. Toy Story is no more complex than a kid's room full of static plastic toy objects. Easy stuff to do.

Finding Nemo has water effects, advanced lighting effects, advanced fish 'flocking' movements, reflective surfaces, rippling water effects, more advanced textured surfaces, so much more going on at one time - a more believable environment that looks beautiful and often breathtaking.

Obviously as the viewer you aren't going to be aware of much more than "it looks pretty nice" due to the obvious fact that it is only displayed on your TV screen, but besides all that, you simply could not have created Finding Nemo at the time of Toy Story. The technology to do what they did then either wasn't available or wasn't financially viable. And since a console under your telly is essentially a 'film-studio-in-a-box', it needs to be able to do all that advanced stuff to make it possible to create something that is obviously more technically advanced.

Otherwise you're limiting yourself unnecessarily.

"Xbox 2 can handle a real-time version of Toy Story, but the technology to create a real-time Finding Nemo isn't there yet. However we aren't bringing out another console yet because apparently Toy Story is good enough as it looks pretty nice."

Fabulous.

[Andy_Tanner]

But the question is whether if Microsoft and Nintendo teamed up and defined a standard, where multiple manufacturers could create a console, would they be able to establish a standard? and would this standard then be able to stand the test of time against any new bigger faster (but non-standard) technology?

I think the answer is 'yes' to both these things.

And due to the standard being a co-operative thing, I think once it had won the market off Sony neither they (or anyone else) could wrestle it back.

how can it be any more of a standard than Playstation, why would this console do any better than xbox or gc bearing in mind that PS2 laughs in the face of both their sales figures anyway?

[Luke]

how can it be any more of a standard than Playstation, why would this console do any better than xbox or gc bearing in mind that PS2 laughs in the face of both their sales figures anyway?

Because it would be a defined standard where any manufacturer could license and use the technology.

It would be a standard in the way DVD is standard: you go and buy DVDs that will work on any DVD player, you don't buy DVDs that will only work on one.

It would be the same with games: you'd buy games that would work on any (standards compliant) games player, not just your XBox, PS2 or GameCube.

Also, think how many "exclusives" (exclusive to the stanard) MS and Nintendo would be able to get, combined they'd have a huge power to enable them to wrestle the market out of Sony's hands, that when they're main rivals are each other, they are just lacking.

It would also do even better if they could get other companies to license the standard and create their own consoles, or combine the console tech into DVD Players and so on.

I know it's been done before in a way, and hasn't worked, but I personally believe that if it was done by Nintendo and Microsoft together (possibly with Sega, Namco, etc thrown in for good luck), then it could be a HUGE success.

[Sprite Machine]

Also, think how many "exclusives" (exclusive to the stanard) MS and Nintendo would be able to get, combined they'd have a huge power to enable them to wrestle the market out of Sony's hands, that when they're main rivals are each other, they are just lacking.

Heh, if they're still lacking GTA, Tomb Raider and Fifa between them, it won't make a blind bit of difference!

[Luke]

Heh, if they're still lacking GTA, Tomb Raider and Fifa between them, it won't make a blind bit of difference!

I doubt they would be somehow.

[Andy_Tanner]

not gonna happen in the current market. let's face facts. SOny revolutionised the videogame insudtry with Playstation and they've kept to their plan i.e. achieve market dominance over 10 years. Xbox is struggling and MS is losing money. Nintendo aren't the force they once were, Sega is no more etc.

you can throw in Namco, Sega, Nintendo... it's still nothing compared to the support for Playstation.

[dam_aks]

There is little difference. Compare a PSone game to movies released at that time.

Its all closing up. The difference is diminishing.

PS2 games don't look that much different to PSone titles yet the suff going on in RoTK is waaaay beyond this or, imo, the nest generation of consoles.

Compare the graphics of the PSone and those with movies of its time, and then compare an Xbox game with movies now.

I'm not saying there is no difference, I am saying that the difference is becoming smaller.

The "standard" could easily come in two generations time.

As for the finding nemo VS toy story comments. Think of it like a cinema viewr not as a geek. Thats the whole problem, your average cinema goer and gamer knows jack.

[dam_aks]

you can throw in Namco, Sega, Nintendo... it's still nothing compared to the support for Playstation.

So having some of the worlds largest codeshops for exclusive games would not damage the PS brand?

You are insane.

[Sprite Machine]

As for the finding nemo VS toy story comments. Think of it like a cinema viewr not as a geek. Thats the whole problem, your average cinema goer and gamer knows jack.

But it doesn't change the fact that Finding Nemo would have been impossible to do at the time of Toy Story.

I'd rather not be limited to just the one. Would you? If Toy Story (the film) is 'good enough' would you not want to go and watch 'Finding Nemo' too? 'Cos without the technology to push it forward, Finding Nemo wouldn't happened.

[Luke]

So having some of the worlds largest codeshops for exclusive games would not damage the PS brand?

You are insane.

I came to that conclusion too.

[Luke]

But it doesn't change the fact that Finding Nemo would have been impossible to do at the time of Toy Story.

I don't think that's actually true.

It would have taken longer and been more difficult, but I think it would have been possible.

[Andy_Tanner]

So having some of the worlds largest codeshops for exclusive games would not damage the PS brand?

You are insane.

Sony already have unbridled support from "some of the world's biggest codeshops" and then some. what makes you think they'd all suddenly up sticks and abandon them in exchange for this new platform?

[Luke]

So having some of the worlds largest codeshops for exclusive games would not damage the PS brand?

You are insane.

Sony already have unbridled support from "some of the world's biggest codeshops" and then some. what makes you think they'd all suddenly up sticks and abandon them in exchange for this new platform?

$, £, ¥ and €

Also, the gaurantee of a stable platform that will be around for more than 5 years and that has the backing of more than one hardware manufacturer.

[Andy_Tanner]

So having some of the worlds largest codeshops for exclusive games would not damage the PS brand?

You are insane.

Sony already have unbridled support from "some of the world's biggest codeshops" and then some. what makes you think they'd all suddenly up sticks and abandon them in exchange for this new platform?

$, £, ¥ and €

Also, the gaurantee of a stable platform that will be around for more than 5 years and that has the backing of more than one hardware manufacturer.

Playstation is currently the most stable platform on the market, it offers backwards compatability and has the largest support. why do you think this is all about to change?

[Luke]

Playstation is currently the most stable platform on the market, it offers backwards compatability and has the largest support. why do you think this is all about to change?

Do you suffer from short term memory loss?

I don't think all this is about to change, I do however think it could change. Read back through the thread for reasons why.

Also, Playstation is the most dominant not the most stable platform. Reasons it's not stable:

1) 5 yearly upgrade cycle != stable

2) PS3 expected to have a greatly different architecture to PS2 (just as PS2 had compared to PS1)

3) Single hardware manufacturer

[kensei]

so we establish a new videogame 'standard' - a single format, and you seriously expect that standard to remain for, what 10 -15 years ? won't happen because 5 years after the standard is put in place a new manufacturer will come along with hardware x times as powerful and capable of much, much more both visually and in other terms.

DIMINISHING RETURNS! DIMINISHING RETURNS! FUCKING LISTEN TO ME!

The point is 5 years will not be enough to make a tangible difference to 99% of the population. No one will care about the extra graphics quality, because it simply won't be PS1 --> PS2. Think along the lines of GC -> Xbox. Those geeks pore over the pictures and yak on a lot, but I can't tell the difference 99% of the time. Hell, half the time I can't even tell with the PS2 version.

So 5 years and no-one cares. Or at least the massmarket doesn't, which is the only thing that counts. It might take 10 or 15 or 25 years to have a true quantum leap that actually looks tangibly better to most people. It might take a change in TV technology to facilitate it. Do you understand?

[Sprite Machine]

But it doesn't change the fact that Finding Nemo would have been impossible to do at the time of Toy Story.

I don't think that's actually true.

It would have taken longer and been more difficult, but I think it would have been possible.

So they would have needed... what? New computers for all the high resolution modelling? For speeding up the rendering time? It would've taken more than a little extra time, it would almost certainly have needed updated computer systems and powerful hardware and software.

And isn't that the whole point?

[Sprite Machine]

Think along the lines of GC -> Xbox.

These are the same 'generation' though, right? Technically the next jump should be far more pronounced.

But we'll have to wait and see!

[Andy_Tanner]

Do you suffer from short term memory loss?

no but i suffer from being realistic now and again.

I don't think all this is about to change, I do however think it could change.  Read back through the thread for reasons why.

to me there is no difference between PS3 vs Xbox 2 or PS3 vs Xbox2/GC hybrid. not one person has suggested why anyone would invest in this format over PS. no developer in their right mind would abandon Sony at this stage.

Also, Playstation is the most dominant not the most stable platform.  Reasons it's not stable:

1) 5 yearly upgrade cycle != stable

2) PS3 expected to have a greatly different architecture to PS2 (just as PS2 had compared to PS1)

3) Single hardware manufacturer

so this new format would never require upgrading?

[Luke]

So they would have needed... what? New computers for all the high resolution modelling? For speeding up the rendering time? It would've taken more than a little extra time, it would almost certainly have needed updated computer systems and powerful hardware and software.

And isn't that the whole point?

It wouldn't have needed more powerful software and hardware. Just longer to get the most out of what existed.

Anyway, I was being pedantic and objecting to your "impossible" claim, which I think is an exageration; however, if you truly believe it would have been impossible with the software and hardware they had at the time, then I think you're wrong.

[Sprite Machine]

So they would have needed... what? New computers for all the high resolution modelling? For speeding up the rendering time? It would've taken more than a little extra time, it would almost certainly have needed updated computer systems and powerful hardware and software.

And isn't that the whole point?

It wouldn't have needed more powerful software and hardware. Just longer to get the most out of what existed.

Anyway, I was being pedantic and objecting to your "impossible" claim, which I think is an exageration; however, if you truly believe it would have been impossible with the software and hardware they had at the time, then I think you're wrong.

Okay then. "Impossible within the same space of time".

and since consoles do things in real-time that CGI artists can render in advance, I'd say it makes some sort of, erm... point. Does't it?

[Luke]

no but i suffer from being realistic now and again.

well, how about trying it now? ;-)

to me there is no difference between PS3 vs Xbox 2 or PS3 vs Xbox2/GC hybrid. not one person has suggested why anyone would invest in this format over PS. no developer in their right mind would abandon Sony at this stage.

Many people have suggested why, please pay attention!

Some reasons:

1) The combination of Nintendo and MS would have a big fat wallet and would be very attractive prospect. Also, if they offered other incentives.

2) The combined backing of the 2 (or more) companies would mean it was less likely to die off than an MS or Nintendo offering would on it's own.

3) The platform would remain the same for more than 5 years.

4) It would be a move towards a single format (and not one owned and controlled by a single company) which is something I imagine developers would love.

5) There'd no longer be the descision to make as to whether to develop a game for the XBox and/or the Cube.

and there are more!

so this new format would never require upgrading?

You really aren't paying attention are you! Nobody has suggested it would never require updating.

Theres a BIG difference between upgrading every 5 years and upgrading after 15 to 20 years (or more).

[kensei]

These are the same 'generation' though, right? Technically the next jump should be far more pronounced.

But we'll have to wait and see!

ARRRGHH!

THAT'S. THE. POINT.

What we are saying is that in 1-2 gens time, the next jump isn't more pronounced, because of diminishing returns. It might be a big jump, but relative to everything that has gone before, it is not as pronounced. It might be even a big technical jump, but to 99% of the population if you subjectively measured it (there is science for this, btw), they would be unable to tell any tangible difference.

Please, go think on it for half an hour and then come back if you still don't understand. I will attempt a diagram.

[Luke]

Another thing with a standard that is only upgraded very infrequently:

There isn't actually anything stopping different companies adding better GPUs as long as it's done correctly.

The conditions that would satisfy it being done correctly would be that it was still 100% compatible with the standard so any game released for the standard would work on it still.

Games could then be developed that took advantage of the improvements on the standards, but they would only be granted a license if they still worked on a base-line model (just with less flashy graphics).

This would remove the feature-creep problem seen with PCs where anyone can release a game with whatever system requirements they choose, preventing people with older systems from playing the games.

[Sprite Machine]

These are the same 'generation' though, right? Technically the next jump should be far more pronounced.

But we'll have to wait and see!

ARRRGHH!

THAT'S. THE. POINT.

What we are saying is that in 1-2 gens time, the next jump isn't more pronounced, because of diminishing returns.

Do we know it won't be?

Why wouldn't it be a big jump? If it goes from [where we are now] to [absolute photo realism] then isn't that a big jump? I mean, any so-and-so on the street will be able to notice the difference, right?

It might be a big jump, but relative to everything that has gone before, it is not as pronounced. It might be even a big technical jump, but to 99% of the population if you subjectively measured it (there is science for this, btw), they would be unable to tell any tangible difference.

I still don't see real-time LotR battle scenes.

Graphics have a loooooong way to go. Surely I'm not the only one able to see that. Surely Joe Public also realises there is a huge visible, tangible difference between what he sees at the movies and what he sees from his games machine?

[kensei]

Another thing with a standard that is only upgraded very infrequently:

There isn't actually anything stopping different companies adding better GPUs as long as it's done correctly.

The conditions that would satisfy it being done correctly would be that it was still 100% compatible with the standard so any game released for the standard would work on it still.

Games could then be developed that took advantage of the improvements on the standards, but they would only be granted a license if they still worked on a base-line model (just with less flashy graphics).

This would remove the feature-creep problem seen with PCs where anyone can release a game with whatever system requirements they choose, preventing people with older systems from playing the games.

Bad idea, and asking for trouble. The absolute last thing anyone wants to happen is for the console to turn into a PC.

[Luke]

I really hope we do get to realism soon: then everyone will realise how dull these games actually are.

[Sprite Machine]

I really hope we do get to realism soon: then everyone will realise how dull these games actually are.

I already realise it.

[Andy_Tanner]

You really aren't paying attention are you! Nobody has suggested it would never require updating.

Theres a BIG difference between upgrading every 5 years and upgrading after 15 to 20 years (or more).

try not getting all flustered. i am paying attention i just don't agree with you.

if the hardware was that good it didn't need upgrading every five years then neither would Sony's. MS & Nintendo do not have a strong enough position in the market to persuade developers to move towards their proposed single format. and let's not kid ourselves they wouldn't do it unless they benefited so there would still be licensing fees etc. the hardware is one thing the business model is something else altogether. and Sony are supposed to just move aside and let them do this are they?