[Depth]

Originally Posted by donutstix

Exactly. Nintendo ruled the roost for a long time before the 64 and Cube came up short. They're back on track now, but to assume previous dominance means anything at all now is just wrong.

Nintendo makes most of their profit from the wide open, hand held market, they're doing great with the Wii, but they won't be as dominate in the console market as they were in the past.

[donutstix]

Originally Posted by Depth

Nintendo makes most of their profit from the wide open, hand held market, they're doing great with the Wii, but they won't be as dominate in the console market as they were in the past.

The company (Nintendo) will probably always be fine. I just think the way Nintendo lost their console lead to the PS1 is very similar to the way Sony may end up losing their lead with the PS3.

[drostj2]

I gotta say. This article makes me want to buy a PS3 as soon as it's power fully manifests itself as opposed to buying one tomorrow.


You just saved me hundreds OP! Thanks!

[SpacePotato]

Originally Posted by hotti_killer

I don't see how you have to change a system that is better in everyway to an xbox360, what they need to do is sort out the developers and get more games, the ps3 owns the 360 in terms of power.

What do you base this on? The fact that on multiplatform games the PS3 version always has a lower frame rate and less graphical detail than the 360 version?

[Iron Blade]

Originally Posted by Depth

One of the top Sony guys saying that developers will not be able to fully use their console's capabilities for 4 or 5 years is not bad?

That's pretty much like saying, don't buy or judge it now, give it 4 to 5 years.

do you think MS and Nintendo are going to wait that long to develop and release their new consoles?

It's not like the PS3 is churning out 8 bit graphics as it is right now. This way the graphics will still be improving throughout the next few years and I won't have to shell out another 500 bucks for a new system every year.

[Maki]

Originally Posted by Iron Blade

Why is this a bad thing?

Because the PS3 would already be nearing its final year before PS4 comes out.

[hotti_killer]

The fact that it has more power as has been stated by the people who develop games, even depth would admit the playsation 3 has more power. I am not saying it is a better games playing experience but the hardware is superior in power to an xbox360.
The reason the games are not running as well is because the developers have had more time to spend on the 360 so far.
In terms of the future the ps3 has more potential, i will admit the 360 has a better selection of games and a good online experience but next year the ps3 will have some excellent games out and we will see the true power of the consoles.

[SpacePotato]

Originally Posted by hotti_killer

The fact that it has more power as has been stated by the people who develop games, even depth would admit the playsation 3 has more power. I am not saying it is a better games playing experience but the hardware is superior in power to an xbox360.

Sorry, this is wrong. You will not find anyone actually working in the industry (who is not being sponsored by Sony) who will tell you that PS3 is more powerful than 360. There is one area where PS3 has the potential to do more calculations -- if you have some game where you need to do massive amounts of parallel calculations, but not much load on the display system, the PS3 will do that better than 360. In theory at least; no one has demonstrated this in a game yet.

But regardless of what calculations you can do, for typical video game applications, the PS3 is throttled by an underpowered graphics system, and that will remain a problem for some time. If the PS3 ever gets a substantial market share, people will begin to architect their games to work well on the PS3's goofy hardware as well, but with their minor market share now, it just does not merit all the extra effort to try to coerce the PS3 hardware to give you the same performance as the 360. Thus all the PS3 games running at half the frame rate of their 360 counterparts. PS2 had the market share to make it worth putting all that extra effort into getting performance out of the goofy hardware architecture; it remains to be seen if PS3 will succeed in that area.

[hotti_killer]

So what you have said is that it is more powerful and it needs the developers to work with the more goofy hardware. I am not saying that they use the power well but that is not the same thing as the true core power of the system.
In terms of graphic's and their problem's, killzone 2 has shown better graphics than anything the 360 has released or in anyway previewed. Even the people from ati admit that on paper the nvida crad is more powerful, but it is not used effectively. They say that with the unified shaders they think it will be more effiicinet but they have no way proved this yet, especially in the current selection of games and future releases we have seen.

[shibaraski]

ps3 can push graphics 1.5 times more than 360
but 80% of game developers dont have a program to make graphics look better and stuff.

so they say by year 2011 or 2012, they will probably come out with a program that can push ps3's graphics to max