Bungie and Microsoft are no longer playing house.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 07 8:18 pmhttp://uk.gamespot.com/news/6180462.htm ... estnews;ti
In this thread it all falls down for Microsoft.
In this thread it all falls down for Microsoft.
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 07 8:18 pmPosted: Fri Oct 05, 07 8:28 pmI don't think its that big of a loss.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 07 8:58 pmOh we all saw it happening, they haven't fell out they're just the same old amazing developer again.
I cannot wait for a Oni sequel.
I cannot wait for a Oni sequel.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 07 10:34 pmHALO DS IS THE CATALYST IN THE WAR BETWEEN MICROSOFT AND BUNGIE, TELL YOUR FRIENDS
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 12:42 amThey finished Halo, now they will go and do something else.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 8:09 amLike Halo Wars?
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 9:32 amHahaha, I'm glad they're making Halo Wars. (originally what H was gonna be)
Yeah they kinda wanted to stop being owned because they didn't want to make Halos all their life.
Yeah they kinda wanted to stop being owned because they didn't want to make Halos all their life.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 6:46 pmHalo Wars was not the original concept.
It was a TPS (I believe) with much larger maps, more intelligent AI, and multiple other Spartans with you.
It was a TPS (I believe) with much larger maps, more intelligent AI, and multiple other Spartans with you.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 6:52 pmIt was going to be a RTS!
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 9:39 pmSPOILER
*BLAH BLAH*
Enjoy your one month warning.
*BLAH BLAH*
Enjoy your one month warning.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 9:40 pmI'm sure everyone here's already beaten halo 3 by now.. 
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 9:59 pmExactly.. now what is there to do.. not many good games comming out for Xbox.
This is why I have a ps3.
This is why I have a ps3.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 10:10 pmWhat els is their to do? Well.. theirs always the fun multiplayer.. o_o
Not many good games comming for the xbox? Huh.. Mass Effect FTL!
Not many good games comming for the xbox? Huh.. Mass Effect FTL!
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 10:16 pmWhat the hell is mass effect, that's one game, If It hasn't been heard of it's probably shit, just like most of the games launched for the 360. Millions of people play Ps3 online, it's very fun and has a fast response time, what else is there to do on the ps3? Listen to Music, watch movies, look at pictures, go on "home" the fre download also released his month.
Click beloew for the full "Home" Presentation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oInP2DAa3BA
Click beloew for the full "Home" Presentation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oInP2DAa3BA
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 10:21 pmI think you might be the only one here who doesn't know about mass effect. listen to music, watch movies, look at pictures. WE CAN DO THAT ON THE XBOX DASHBOARD TO OMG. What you need to do is watch E3
Jeeze I'm actually loling at almost everything you post. xD
Jeeze I'm actually loling at almost everything you post. xD
Derek [cataclyzm] wrote:MORE PEOPLE PLAY ON PSP THAN PS3
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 07 10:33 pmWe have better games and exclusives. look at the full home presentation. Yes, more people actually play more handheld consoles in general than play a standard console. Your also forgetting that PS3 graphic quality is amazingly higher than the 360's. Read everything I have said and tell me what console is the better deal and why. You're Obviously trying to defend your console.
I'm not really laughing that much anymore at you fanboys, it's not cool that microsoft did this to you.
Sometimes it's just better to stick with nintendo's and sony's consoles.
I'm not really laughing that much anymore at you fanboys, it's not cool that microsoft did this to you.
Sometimes it's just better to stick with nintendo's and sony's consoles.
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 07 12:14 amFine. I'll prove that the ps3 isn't the best console out their. Hopefully after you read this you'll quit being so god damn ignorant like most Sony fanboys are..
Sales:
You can say whatever you want and give your opinion but facts speak louder. Bloomberg recently reported that ps3 low sales will cause MASSIVE financial losses for the end of its last financial quarter. Bloomberg says it will be up to 664$ Million dollars.
Source:
http://www.firingsquad.com/
Their are reasons why Ken Kutaragi is no longer in charge of SCE. Kutaragi is being blamed for this whole mess. Now if we go by the numbers in each country will figure out that ps3 is having a low performance compared to what was expected. Like in April of this year, the ps3 was surprisingly outsold by the gameboy Advance, the numbers are the following:
Nintendo DS: 471,000
Nintendo Wii: 360,000
Sony Playstation 2: 194k
Sony PSP: 183,000
Xbox 360 (including Elite) 174,000
GameBoy Advance: 84,000
Playstation 3: 82,000
Source:
Http://spong.com/
Performance:
Prepare your little brain for the technical stuff. The following are the technical specifications for both consoles, these numbers were made public by Sony and Microsoft themselfs. Let's start with the CPU shall we?
CPU of the xbox 360:
# 90 nm process, 165 million transistors
(# 65 nm process SOI revision in 2007)
Three symmetrical cores,
each one SMT-capable and clocked at 3.2 GHz
# one VMX-128 SIMD unit per core, dual threaded.
# 128x128 register file
for each hardware thread, 2 sets per VMX unit.
1 MB L2 cable (lockable by the GPU)
# Dot product performance:
9.6 billion per second ( 33.6 billion per second combined with the GPU)
115 GFLOPS theoretical peak performance
# ROM storing Microsoft private encrypted keys
Now, here is the PS3's CPU:
PowerC-Base core @3.2 GHz
1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB LB cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
Dot Product performance at 22.4 billion (51 billion when combined with the GPU)
1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
Total float performance: 218 GFLOPS
If you analyze those numbers you'll see that the advantage goes to the ps3. Oh, but don't celebrate quite yet!
Both of the CPU's were tested under controlled environments, these numbers are just THEORETICAL, and do not represent how well the consoles preform. The most important example is that, according to this PS3's CPU produes 218GFLOPS. However, this test was done using the 8 SPE that cell has, however, the PS3 only dedicates 6 SPE for games. If you take that into consideration the number of GFLOPS produced can be reduced significantly. IBM, which tested a Cell in a controlled environment running the 8 SPE of Cell, it yielded a performance of 155.5GFLOPS. if it took 8 SPE to do that, theirs no way in hell a 6 SPE will be able to achieve that level of performance. Again, this was a CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT, they didn't include important elements such as DMA or the memory system. Take all that into consideration and the performance is reduced to 73.4GFLOPS, and even that is out of reach.
Its also a fact that PS2 had produced twice a much as the original XBOX, and that didn't even make the ps2 preform any better.
This is the explanation of why the specification numbers don't always determine how well a console will preform in the real world. Their is a difference between theoretical numbers and REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE!
The ps3 has one PowerPC core, similar to the 3 PowerPC cores of the 360. The ps3 also has 8 SPE, the 8th is disabled to improve yields and the 7th is used to run the operating system. That leaves us with 6 SPE available for games. >_>
Thanks to the 3 cores o the xbox 360 its able to work better with A.I and scripting then the ps3, because it has ONLY ONE CORE.
GPU:
Initially were told that the RSX (the ps3's video card) is capable of 1.8 Terraflops, which is NOT true. Rest assure that RSX will never achieve this type of performance.
Example:
the X1900XTX has far more raw horse power then the RSX, clocked at 650MHz speed, along with 24 more pixel shader Pipelines and yet X1900XTX is just over 500 GFLOPS. And to think a Videocard with far less raw horse power can achieve that level of performance is just plain IMPOSSIBLE!
0bv Sony shows this completely unreal levels of performance to hype their console, but it is far beyond of what it is really capable of. And you say us 360 owners were fooled? Think again you idiot..
The RSX is pretty much a 7800 GTX class GPU in some cases worse in some cases better, nothing that is really new.. Now the same cant be said about the 360's GPU at all.
the 360 GPU is a excellent piece of work, far more advanced with much better performance.
The ATI Xenos was clocked at 500MHz and it was 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader along with a polygon performance of 500 million triangles a second. Good... Fucking.... Game...
Can the 360's CPU achieve that? You damn right it can. But their would be no color, nor would their be any pixels at all. 0bv because of its 48 shader units are capable of performing vortex operations and they were all used to produce triangles in this test. 0bv in real world performance, not all 48 are used for triangles, their has to be color and pixels too.
Other GPU's are only capable of dedicating 8 shader units to vortex operations.
Operating System:
PS3:
32 MB out of the 256 MB that's available
GDDR3 memory off the RSX chip
64 mb of the 256mb available XDR memory off the Cell CPU
1 SPE of the 7 constantly reserved 1 SPE of 7 able to be "taken" by the OS at a moments notice (games must give it up if its requested)
XBOX 360:
32MB of the 512MB available GDDR3 RAM
3% CPU time on Core1 and Core2 (nothing is reserved on Core0)
The Xbox 360 wins because it is able to dedicate less memory to run its operating system, and more memory to run games. Nobody knows how the 360 can use such little amount of memory for this, some say its because of microsofts experience with operating systems.
Last but not least,
BLU RAY:
Some people say that because of blu-ray has more capacity games will have more graphics, well this aint true. the fact is that ps3 has two separated memory pools of 256MB a pop, it can best dedicate 256MB of memory to textures at any given moment..
However, Xbox 360 uses unified memory for a total of 512MB. That alone is a major limiting factor for blu-ray. blu-ray will lead to longer games? LOL!! Mass Effect will have over 60 hours of gameplay and Oblivion has over 120 hours. Compression also needs to be taken into consideration, and it has come a long way. Both consoles have amazing compression abilities.
Having more space does NOT mean the ps3 wont have to compress data, as it helps reduce load times. Speaking of which DVD's load faster than blu-rays, actually their are more cons then pros in the addition of blu-ray, it might benefit Sony, but NOT the customer.
I ask you again.. Who got fooled?? YOU DID!!
Will PS3 games have more levels and the kind of game content that would define a game experience?? People forget that whatever you see in a game level takes up space in memory. If the PS3 had 2 GB of ram THEN BluRay would be effective. But so far its just a motherfucking luxury.
Sources:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?a...
360 GPU from ATI and Microsoft
http://forum.teamxbox.com/printthread...
Long article explaining the 360 GPU
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xenos/
IBM White paper regarding PS3 CPU performance
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks.
block diagram of 360 gpu provided by ATI
http://www.techreport.com/etc/2005q2/...
block diagram of 360 cpu
http://media.arstechnica.com/articles...
block diagram of PS3 cpu
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks...
Interview with John Carmack about the CPUs of the 360 and PS3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_PFUw29U4J8
A picture provided by sony telling what the ps3 gpu is
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/d...
Picture showing the 360 GPUs daughter die, something no other GPU has
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xeno...
John Carmacks entire interview at Quackcon
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
Sales:
You can say whatever you want and give your opinion but facts speak louder. Bloomberg recently reported that ps3 low sales will cause MASSIVE financial losses for the end of its last financial quarter. Bloomberg says it will be up to 664$ Million dollars.
Source:
http://www.firingsquad.com/
Their are reasons why Ken Kutaragi is no longer in charge of SCE. Kutaragi is being blamed for this whole mess. Now if we go by the numbers in each country will figure out that ps3 is having a low performance compared to what was expected. Like in April of this year, the ps3 was surprisingly outsold by the gameboy Advance, the numbers are the following:
Nintendo DS: 471,000
Nintendo Wii: 360,000
Sony Playstation 2: 194k
Sony PSP: 183,000
Xbox 360 (including Elite) 174,000
GameBoy Advance: 84,000
Playstation 3: 82,000
Source:
Http://spong.com/
Performance:
Prepare your little brain for the technical stuff. The following are the technical specifications for both consoles, these numbers were made public by Sony and Microsoft themselfs. Let's start with the CPU shall we?
CPU of the xbox 360:
# 90 nm process, 165 million transistors
(# 65 nm process SOI revision in 2007)
Three symmetrical cores,
each one SMT-capable and clocked at 3.2 GHz
# one VMX-128 SIMD unit per core, dual threaded.
# 128x128 register file
for each hardware thread, 2 sets per VMX unit.
1 MB L2 cable (lockable by the GPU)
# Dot product performance:
9.6 billion per second ( 33.6 billion per second combined with the GPU)
115 GFLOPS theoretical peak performance
# ROM storing Microsoft private encrypted keys
Now, here is the PS3's CPU:
PowerC-Base core @3.2 GHz
1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB LB cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
Dot Product performance at 22.4 billion (51 billion when combined with the GPU)
1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
Total float performance: 218 GFLOPS
If you analyze those numbers you'll see that the advantage goes to the ps3. Oh, but don't celebrate quite yet!
Both of the CPU's were tested under controlled environments, these numbers are just THEORETICAL, and do not represent how well the consoles preform. The most important example is that, according to this PS3's CPU produes 218GFLOPS. However, this test was done using the 8 SPE that cell has, however, the PS3 only dedicates 6 SPE for games. If you take that into consideration the number of GFLOPS produced can be reduced significantly. IBM, which tested a Cell in a controlled environment running the 8 SPE of Cell, it yielded a performance of 155.5GFLOPS. if it took 8 SPE to do that, theirs no way in hell a 6 SPE will be able to achieve that level of performance. Again, this was a CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT, they didn't include important elements such as DMA or the memory system. Take all that into consideration and the performance is reduced to 73.4GFLOPS, and even that is out of reach.
Its also a fact that PS2 had produced twice a much as the original XBOX, and that didn't even make the ps2 preform any better.
This is the explanation of why the specification numbers don't always determine how well a console will preform in the real world. Their is a difference between theoretical numbers and REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE!
The ps3 has one PowerPC core, similar to the 3 PowerPC cores of the 360. The ps3 also has 8 SPE, the 8th is disabled to improve yields and the 7th is used to run the operating system. That leaves us with 6 SPE available for games. >_>
Thanks to the 3 cores o the xbox 360 its able to work better with A.I and scripting then the ps3, because it has ONLY ONE CORE.
GPU:
Initially were told that the RSX (the ps3's video card) is capable of 1.8 Terraflops, which is NOT true. Rest assure that RSX will never achieve this type of performance.
Example:
the X1900XTX has far more raw horse power then the RSX, clocked at 650MHz speed, along with 24 more pixel shader Pipelines and yet X1900XTX is just over 500 GFLOPS. And to think a Videocard with far less raw horse power can achieve that level of performance is just plain IMPOSSIBLE!
0bv Sony shows this completely unreal levels of performance to hype their console, but it is far beyond of what it is really capable of. And you say us 360 owners were fooled? Think again you idiot..
The RSX is pretty much a 7800 GTX class GPU in some cases worse in some cases better, nothing that is really new.. Now the same cant be said about the 360's GPU at all.
the 360 GPU is a excellent piece of work, far more advanced with much better performance.
The ATI Xenos was clocked at 500MHz and it was 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader along with a polygon performance of 500 million triangles a second. Good... Fucking.... Game...
Can the 360's CPU achieve that? You damn right it can. But their would be no color, nor would their be any pixels at all. 0bv because of its 48 shader units are capable of performing vortex operations and they were all used to produce triangles in this test. 0bv in real world performance, not all 48 are used for triangles, their has to be color and pixels too.
Other GPU's are only capable of dedicating 8 shader units to vortex operations.
Operating System:
PS3:
32 MB out of the 256 MB that's available
GDDR3 memory off the RSX chip
64 mb of the 256mb available XDR memory off the Cell CPU
1 SPE of the 7 constantly reserved 1 SPE of 7 able to be "taken" by the OS at a moments notice (games must give it up if its requested)
XBOX 360:
32MB of the 512MB available GDDR3 RAM
3% CPU time on Core1 and Core2 (nothing is reserved on Core0)
The Xbox 360 wins because it is able to dedicate less memory to run its operating system, and more memory to run games. Nobody knows how the 360 can use such little amount of memory for this, some say its because of microsofts experience with operating systems.
Last but not least,
BLU RAY:
Some people say that because of blu-ray has more capacity games will have more graphics, well this aint true. the fact is that ps3 has two separated memory pools of 256MB a pop, it can best dedicate 256MB of memory to textures at any given moment..
However, Xbox 360 uses unified memory for a total of 512MB. That alone is a major limiting factor for blu-ray. blu-ray will lead to longer games? LOL!! Mass Effect will have over 60 hours of gameplay and Oblivion has over 120 hours. Compression also needs to be taken into consideration, and it has come a long way. Both consoles have amazing compression abilities.
Having more space does NOT mean the ps3 wont have to compress data, as it helps reduce load times. Speaking of which DVD's load faster than blu-rays, actually their are more cons then pros in the addition of blu-ray, it might benefit Sony, but NOT the customer.
I ask you again.. Who got fooled?? YOU DID!!
Will PS3 games have more levels and the kind of game content that would define a game experience?? People forget that whatever you see in a game level takes up space in memory. If the PS3 had 2 GB of ram THEN BluRay would be effective. But so far its just a motherfucking luxury.
Sources:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?a...
360 GPU from ATI and Microsoft
http://forum.teamxbox.com/printthread...
Long article explaining the 360 GPU
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xenos/
IBM White paper regarding PS3 CPU performance
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks.
block diagram of 360 gpu provided by ATI
http://www.techreport.com/etc/2005q2/...
block diagram of 360 cpu
http://media.arstechnica.com/articles...
block diagram of PS3 cpu
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks...
Interview with John Carmack about the CPUs of the 360 and PS3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_PFUw29U4J8
A picture provided by sony telling what the ps3 gpu is
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/d...
Picture showing the 360 GPUs daughter die, something no other GPU has
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xeno...
John Carmacks entire interview at Quackcon
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 07 12:44 amPS3 Is new, XBox 360 is not that new...
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 07 12:46 amWhat's that suppose to mean??? LOL!
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 07 12:48 amOh, I just read the sale parts 
Nintendo DS: 471,000
Nintendo Wii: 360,000
Sony Playstation 2: 194k
Sony PSP: 183,000
Xbox 360 (including Elite) 174,000
GameBoy Advance: 84,000
Playstation 3: 82,000
And people are probs going to be saving money for the PS3 until Christmas. That is when the PS3 sales will go sky high!
Nintendo DS: 471,000
Nintendo Wii: 360,000
Sony Playstation 2: 194k
Sony PSP: 183,000
Xbox 360 (including Elite) 174,000
GameBoy Advance: 84,000
Playstation 3: 82,000
And people are probs going to be saving money for the PS3 until Christmas. That is when the PS3 sales will go sky high!
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 07 12:49 amWell see! ^_^
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 07 1:01 amGo Nintendo DS/Wii!
If I was offered an Xbox 360 or PS3 for free, I would deffinetly get a 360. PS3 is too new. It has very few games, most of which are like racing crap, and are not "Heard of" as you would put it AIDS (Yeah I'm gonna use your crappy immature name from now on).
Also, enjoy that 1 month warning for that post a few posts up ^^^
If I was offered an Xbox 360 or PS3 for free, I would deffinetly get a 360. PS3 is too new. It has very few games, most of which are like racing crap, and are not "Heard of" as you would put it AIDS (Yeah I'm gonna use your crappy immature name from now on).
Also, enjoy that 1 month warning for that post a few posts up ^^^
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 8:24 pmThe Xb360 is older, and sales have nothing to do really with the preformance of the console.. Some people can't afford the ps3, so they go over to xbox, etc.
Little do they know later on, that all the add on's they buy for their 360 add up to cost more than a ps3, which is also where microsoft kicks you in the ass
And thanks Kaiden.. Ily..<3
Little do they know later on, that all the add on's they buy for their 360 add up to cost more than a ps3, which is also where microsoft kicks you in the ass
And thanks Kaiden.. Ily..<3
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 8:25 pm)P(sHyCo)(K!//3R wrote:The Xb360 is older, and sales have nothing to do really with the preformance of the console.. Some people can't afford the ps3, so they go over to xbox, etc.
Little do they know later on, that all the add on's they buy for their 360 add up to cost more than a ps3, which is also where microsoft kicks you in the ass
And thanks Kaiden.. Ily..<3
What are you chirping about, its cheaper.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 8:26 pmTell me Jay, what do you think is cheaper, a 60gb ps3, or the Xbox 360?
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 8:27 pm)P(sHyCo)(K!//3R wrote:The Xb360 is older, and sales have nothing to do really with the preformance of the console.. Some people can't afford the ps3, so they go over to xbox, etc.
Little do they know later on, that all the add on's they buy for their 360 add up to cost more than a ps3, which is also where microsoft kicks you in the ass
And thanks Kaiden.. Ily..<3
£40 for XBL and ... uh ... games.
Just like any console.Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 8:27 pmThe Xbox 360 with a controller, plug and charge kit and live for 3 years.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 9:19 pmDOES THE PS3 HAVE A GAMERSCORE NETWORK, IF NOT, IT FAILS QUITE LIBERALLY.
I have btw.
I have btw.
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 9:24 pm)P(sHyCo)(K!//3R wrote:The Xb360 is older, and sales have nothing to do really with the preformance of the console.. Some people can't afford the ps3, so they go over to xbox, etc.
Little do they know later on, that all the add on's they buy for their 360 add up to cost more than a ps3, which is also where microsoft kicks you in the ass
And thanks Kaiden.. Ily..<3
....Did you even read everything I typed? Here you go being ignorant again. Let's just drop the damn ps3 vs 360 subject. Save yourself the embarrassment.
Zantinzuken wrote:DOES THE PS3 HAVE A GAMERSCORE NETWORK, IF NOT, IT FAILS QUITE LIBERALLY.
I have btw.
I think so... They call it.... "Skill Points"??
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 07 9:25 pmIt's only funny when Dan does it because he does the whole "PS3 IS DA BEST" routine and reminds me of the old dxpersonalities forum, other than that it's a little pointless...