Page 1 of 1
Current PS3 Games Use Less Than Half of System Potential
Posted: 2006-12-22 09:48am
by Ace Pace
Then What was the point of it?
When asked for his opinion on the PlayStation 3’s launch, Harrison said, “2007 is the year of software, is how I'll answer that,” perhaps acknowledging the lack of software for the new machine. He did go on to elaborate that the aim for PlayStation 3 games is to break free from the old model of buying a game, finishing it, and then never to play it again. “The video-game business for the past 20 years was about shipping closed experiences,” he said. The new trend, he hopes, is “the start of the relationship with the consumer is when you launch the game … Next year you're going to see user-created experiences in a number of interesting ways on PlayStation 3.”
[snip]
On the topic of PlayStation capabilities, Harrison said that it takes end-of-cycle games such as Gran Turismo 2 for the PSone and God of War II for the PS2 to full explore a system’s full potential.
He believes that the current PS3 launch titles use “less than half” of the system’s computational power, but even more interesting is his bold statement that “Nobody will ever use 100 percent of its capability.”
Whether he is implying that the PS3 has limitless potential or that developers will never fully overcome the complexities of the Cell architecture is unclear. In either case, gamers should expect better games in 2007.
Lets go over this carefully.
Next year you're going to see user-created experiences in a number of interesting ways on PlayStation 3.”
Hi, Xbox Live.
And..
He believes that the current PS3 launch titles use “less than half” of the system’s computational power, but even more interesting is his bold statement that “Nobody will ever use 100 percent of its capability.”
So tell me, Sony,
what exactly was the point of the CELL? What was the point of your incredible XDR RAM? What the flying fuck is wrong with you?
Posted: 2006-12-22 09:56am
by phongn
Well, he's technically right. No game will use 100% of any modern computer's power.
Posted: 2006-12-22 09:59am
by Ace Pace
phongn wrote:Well, he's technically right. No game will use 100% of any modern computer's power.
Quite true, but in this case I belive he means that we won't see anyone managing to sqeeze amazing preformance out of CELL as we saw with the PS2.
Posted: 2006-12-22 10:58am
by Medic
Ace Pace wrote:phongn wrote:Well, he's technically right. No game will use 100% of any modern computer's power.
Quite true, but in this case I belive he means that we won't see anyone managing to sqeeze amazing preformance out of CELL as we saw with the PS2.
Yes, I remember well Official Playstation Magazine wanking to the untapped power of the Emotion Engine which gave us eventually a Gran Turismo 3, but not much else in the way of blow-your-mind graphics.
And those jaggies!
Posted: 2006-12-22 01:34pm
by Stark
That's a pretty awesome reason to not even think about buying a PS3 until middle of next year.
You know, if you needed one more.
Posted: 2006-12-22 01:36pm
by SirNitram
Nothing surprising here. Compare the graphics of the launch titles on the SNES to the ones right at the end. Or indeed, any console's whole lifetime.
Posted: 2006-12-22 01:42pm
by Pezzoni
Developers always get better at utilising the consoles full potential as time goes on. Look at Mario64 vs Conkers Bad Fur Day, for an example. This isn't massively surprising.
Posted: 2006-12-22 01:43pm
by Stark
SirNitram wrote:Nothing surprising here. Compare the graphics of the launch titles on the SNES to the ones right at the end. Or indeed, any console's whole lifetime.
Dammit you missed the asscovering! Don't treat this as a reasonable statement of any console's life, laugh at the shifty 'no guys it'll get better we promise'-ness.
Posted: 2006-12-22 01:43pm
by Darth Wong
phongn wrote:Well, he's technically right. No game will use 100% of any modern computer's power.
The problem is that he's trying to imply that therefore, there is realistic room to grow. So he's engaging in a non sequitur; if no game will ever use 100% of any modern machine's power, then it is pointless to pretend that the current games' failure to do so means that future games will necessarily blow them away.
Posted: 2006-12-22 01:49pm
by SirNitram
Stark wrote:SirNitram wrote:Nothing surprising here. Compare the graphics of the launch titles on the SNES to the ones right at the end. Or indeed, any console's whole lifetime.
Dammit you missed the asscovering! Don't treat this as a reasonable statement of any console's life, laugh at the shifty 'no guys it'll get better we promise'-ness.
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the awesomeness of my DS. Did you know it'll get Dragon Quest? Squee. Squee, I say, good sir.
None of the Next Gen Consoles are peaking yet for graphics. Not the 360, not the PS3, not the Wii. This, however, doesn't really help the PS3. It means the 360 will get better looking, so they'll still be fighting over the tiniest fractions of more-realistic like two rabid wolves trying for the same bone. And the Wii, well, the Wii will get better graphics and more applications of it's interface. I think we can see which console this favours, yesno?
Posted: 2006-12-22 02:33pm
by Elaro
SirNitram wrote:Stark wrote:SirNitram wrote:Nothing surprising here. Compare the graphics of the launch titles on the SNES to the ones right at the end. Or indeed, any console's whole lifetime.
Dammit you missed the asscovering! Don't treat this as a reasonable statement of any console's life, laugh at the shifty 'no guys it'll get better we promise'-ness.
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the awesomeness of my DS. Did you know it'll get Dragon Quest? Squee. Squee, I say, good sir.
None of the Next Gen Consoles are peaking yet for graphics. Not the 360, not the PS3, not the Wii. This, however, doesn't really help the PS3. It means the 360 will get better looking, so they'll still be fighting over the tiniest fractions of more-realistic like two rabid wolves trying for the same bone. And the Wii, well, the Wii will get better graphics and more applications of it's interface. I think we can see which console this favours, yesno?
I'm hoping for refinements to the motion-sensing. 1:1 controls plzthx.
Also, please. Make the jaggies stop. (TP on 480p HDTV for the
)
Posted: 2006-12-22 03:37pm
by phongn
Darth Wong wrote:The problem is that he's trying to imply that therefore, there is realistic room to grow. So he's engaging in a non sequitur; if no game will ever use 100% of any modern machine's power, then it is pointless to pretend that the current games' failure to do so means that future games will necessarily blow them away.
Oh, I understand that.
Posted: 2006-12-23 02:34am
by Alan Bolte
Unexplored computational potential does offer possibilities in terms of physics, AI, or sheer complexity. The 360 has had a year to mature already, and the Wii does not have as much room to grow except in its control scheme. To suggest that the PS3 has quite a bit more coming for it than has been seen in the first months is reasonable.
And what's with that 100% quote? Smells like bullshit.
Posted: 2006-12-23 05:38am
by The Kernel
Cell was designed to work with a dumb render much like the PS2. What the hell did they expect would happen when you drop a modern GPU in instead? Now the Cell no longer will handle any of the FP heavy geometry or shader ops and has shitty integer performance. It's no wonder nobody can find anything to do with it, it was never designed for this application in the first place.
Posted: 2006-12-23 05:45am
by The Kernel
SirNitram wrote:Nothing surprising here. Compare the graphics of the launch titles on the SNES to the ones right at the end. Or indeed, any console's whole lifetime.
That's not really fair considering that late era SNES games actually had
physical upgrade chips built into the carts.
Posted: 2006-12-23 09:38am
by Vendetta
Alan Bolte wrote:And what's with that 100% quote? Smells like bullshit.
It was probably meant as marketroid bullshit, but I suspect it may be truer than Sony would like. Given the complexity of the system, the limits of it's memory architecture, and the poorness of the development environment, I very much suspect that no-one
will use the system to it's full potential.
That's not really fair considering that late era SNES games actually had physical upgrade chips built into the carts.
True, but you can make the same comparison between early and late PS2 titles with equal ease. Ring of Red compared to Soul Calibur 3 anyone?
Posted: 2006-12-23 02:21pm
by SirNitram
The Kernel wrote:SirNitram wrote:Nothing surprising here. Compare the graphics of the launch titles on the SNES to the ones right at the end. Or indeed, any console's whole lifetime.
That's not really fair considering that late era SNES games actually had
physical upgrade chips built into the carts.
Okay. Original Super Mario vs. Super Mario Bros. 3. Or any other beginning of console/end of console comparison. The differences are always big, because by the end, the studios have experience in how to wring every last cycle out of the hardware.