Cell-based PS3, in 2007?

[R420]

now it looks like PS3's release is leaning towards early 2007, if not
late 2006, even for Japan. I'm sure that will please those who don't
want to see new game consoles anytime soon.

http://www.1up.com/article2/0,2053,1606958,00.asp

_______________________________________________________________________________
Cell Processor To "Make A Sensation" In 2007?
By David Smith
6/3/2004

Sony plans for its Cell microprocesser to come into its own beginning
early in 2006, Nikkei Electronics reports today. Speaking at Sony's
recent strategic meeting last month, vice president and COO Ken
Kutaragi said the company plans to "make a sensation" with the new
processor once its ongoing Transformation 60 restructuring plan
concludes with fiscal 2006.
Sony's 2006 fiscal year ends in March 2007 -- the company just
recently concluded fiscal 2003.



The Cell, co-developed with IBM and Toshiba, is to power the company's
next game console and many other home entertainment devices, as
outlined by Sony Computer Entertainment chief technology officer Masa
Chatani at E3. In a recent interview, Sony's Nobuyuki Idei proposed a
Cell-powered television with broadband capabilities for downloading
video and other entertainment content.

The first product employing the processor will be a new computer
workstation developed with IBM. Prototypes of the workstation, which
Sony expects to prefigure the development system for its next game
console, are due for delivery late this year.

On a related note, Kutaragi addressed Sony's progress in the DVD
recorder market, which he pegged as an important sector of the
electronics business in coming years. He said that Sony plans to
implement more standardization between its different models of digital
video recorders -- the PSX multipurpose console, as well as other
products solely focused on digital video -- to save on production
costs and keep each line competitive.

Conventional wisdom expects Sony to release its next console in late
2006 or 2007, later than its rivals at Nintendo and Microsoft --
Kutaragi's comments lean towards the later end of that window. More
concrete information won't be forthcoming for some time, but we'll
report whatever details pop up until then.
_______________________________________________________________________________

 

[gary watling]

pay no attention to this, ps3 will still most likely be out in 2006 as was
inferred the other week when sony said they would have cell chips in high
end tv in Q2 2006 but said the ps3 would be the first to use the cell chip
maybe in Q1 2006, this article features on the cell chip being put into
devices like tv's and dvd recorders and cell phones etc

now it looks like PS3's release is leaning towards early 2007, if not
late 2006, even for Japan. I'm sure that will please those who don't
want to see new game consoles anytime soon.

http://www.1up.com/article2/0,2053,1606958,00.asp

____________________________________________________________________________
___
Cell Processor To "Make A Sensation" In 2007?
By David Smith
6/3/2004

Sony plans for its Cell microprocesser to come into its own beginning
early in 2006, Nikkei Electronics reports today. Speaking at Sony's
recent strategic meeting last month, vice president and COO Ken
Kutaragi said the company plans to "make a sensation" with the new
processor once its ongoing Transformation 60 restructuring plan
concludes with fiscal 2006.
Sony's 2006 fiscal year ends in March 2007 -- the company just
recently concluded fiscal 2003.



The Cell, co-developed with IBM and Toshiba, is to power the company's
next game console and many other home entertainment devices, as
outlined by Sony Computer Entertainment chief technology officer Masa
Chatani at E3. In a recent interview, Sony's Nobuyuki Idei proposed a
Cell-powered television with broadband capabilities for downloading
video and other entertainment content.

The first product employing the processor will be a new computer
workstation developed with IBM. Prototypes of the workstation, which
Sony expects to prefigure the development system for its next game
console, are due for delivery late this year.

On a related note, Kutaragi addressed Sony's progress in the DVD
recorder market, which he pegged as an important sector of the
electronics business in coming years. He said that Sony plans to
implement more standardization between its different models of digital
video recorders -- the PSX multipurpose console, as well as other
products solely focused on digital video -- to save on production
costs and keep each line competitive.

Conventional wisdom expects Sony to release its next console in late
2006 or 2007, later than its rivals at Nintendo and Microsoft --
Kutaragi's comments lean towards the later end of that window. More
concrete information won't be forthcoming for some time, but we'll
report whatever details pop up until then.

____________________________________________________________________________
___

 

[dementia]

pay no attention to this, ps3 will still most likely be out in 2006 as was
inferred the other week when sony said they would have cell chips in high
end tv in Q2 2006 but said the ps3 would be the first to use the cell chip
maybe in Q1 2006, this article features on the cell chip being put into
devices like tv's and dvd recorders and cell phones etc

Looks like I'm going back to PC gaming fulltime soon

 

[Robert Myers]

Looks like I'm going back to PC gaming fulltime soon

Because there's a dearth of fresh game material? If so, are you (or
were you) expecting that a Cell-based PS3 will change that state of
affairs significantly?

RM

 

[dementia]

Because there's a dearth of fresh game material? If so, are you (or
were you) expecting that a Cell-based PS3 will change that state of
affairs significantly?

The graphics on the PS2 and XBox are almost to the systems capacity.
In order for them to push the hardware other aspects of the game will have
to suffer. Why would I or anyone want to wait 2 years past a systems life
cycle for new hardware when it's already readily available with PC's? I
left console gaming 3 1/2 years after the PS1 was released and came back 6
months or so after the PS2 was launched. I am just saying I will most
definitely do the same thing within the next several months to a year.

 

[Robert Myers]

The graphics on the PS2 and XBox are almost to the systems capacity.
In order for them to push the hardware other aspects of the game will have
to suffer. Why would I or anyone want to wait 2 years past a systems life
cycle for new hardware when it's already readily available with PC's? I
left console gaming 3 1/2 years after the PS1 was released and came back 6
months or so after the PS2 was launched. I am just saying I will most
definitely do the same thing within the next several months to a year.

When I've asked previously about competition between PC's and game
boxes, I've been told that the two platforms attract different kinds of
titles and buyers, with differnt kinds of titles naturally going to
different platforms.

You're framing the issue entirely in terms of performance. Documents
quoting game designers on Intel's web site have indicated that we have a
long way to go before game designers run out of things they can think of
to do with more graphics performance, but I'm a little surprised that
performance limitations would be so obvious to a player.

That is to say, I would expect more performance to show up in subtle
ways: better lighting, more realistic textures, and so on. A
particularly insightful player might well conclude that (say) PS2 games
have become hardware-limited relative to PC games, but do you think that
would be a reaction that would be common enough even to create a buzz?

RM

 

[Jumpkick]

The graphics on the PS2 and XBox are almost to the systems capacity.
In order for them to push the hardware other aspects of the game will have
to suffer. Why would I or anyone want to wait 2 years past a systems life
cycle for new hardware when it's already readily available with PC's?

man, I just wait for new games not for new hardware ...I'd rather upgrade
every 5 years than every 2 years so I could spend more on games

 

[Sergio]

gameplay means nothing to you then?

The graphics on the PS2 and XBox are almost to the systems capacity.
In order for them to push the hardware other aspects of the game will have
to suffer. Why would I or anyone want to wait 2 years past a systems life
cycle for new hardware when it's already readily available with PC's? I
left console gaming 3 1/2 years after the PS1 was released and came back 6
months or so after the PS2 was launched. I am just saying I will most
definitely do the same thing within the next several months to a year.

 

[Blig Merk]

Are you suckers actually going to believe anything that idiot R420
posts? He is like a random number generator: meaningless. This article
was answered by Gamespot in their Rumors: Bogus or Not Bogus column.
Result: Bogus.

RUMOR #3: Sony executives have said the PlayStation 3 won't be
released until 2007.

Source: Japanese online business newspaper Nikkei Electronics.

The official story: "We haven't announced anything since E3 regarding
the progress of The Cell processor."--Sony Computer Entertainment
American spokesperson.

What we heard: In a May 27th article on Sony's recent strategy
meeting, Nikkei Electronics quoted Sony Corp. vice president and COO
Ken Kutaragi as saying, "We [Sony] are going to cause a storm after
FY2006" with the Cell processor. Since the high-speed chip at the
heart of the PlayStation 3 and Japanese financial years are one year
behind the current year--versus Western financial years, which are one
year ahead--some sites assumed that Kutaragi's comment meant the PS3
wouldn't be out until 2007. However, native Japanese speakers who read
the article said that Kutaragi's "storm" comment was more about a
whole wave of electronic products that will incorporate the Cell,
which will be seen in high-end workstations later this year, rather
than the PlayStation 3, which is expected in 2006. (For the record,
GameSpot adjusts Japanese financial years to match Western
ones--life's confusing enough as it is.)

Bogus or not bogus?: Bogus.

 

[dementia]

gameplay means nothing to you then?

Games genre's are tapped out.
There is rarely anything new in the way of innovation. Most games today are
just sequels or rehashes anyway.
After this upcoming holiday season I have a feeling the current systems will
have reached their full potential. There will be a couple games (maybe) for
each system that will push the envelope even further, but for the most part
it will be been there, seen it, done that after Christmas. I was hoping the
new systems would be launched 2005. Most systems usually only last 5 years
and the PS2 will be 5 years old in 2005.

 

[dementia]

man, I just wait for new games not for new hardware ...I'd rather upgrade
every 5 years

The PS2 will be 5 years old next year.
That is when I was originally expecting the new console to be launched from
Sony.

than every 2 years so I could spend more on games

Who purchases new hardware every 2 years?
Did you just purchase a PS2?

 

[dementia]

When I've asked previously about competition between PC's and game
boxes, I've been told that the two platforms attract different kinds of
titles and buyers, with differnt kinds of titles naturally going to
different platforms.

To me a gamer is a gamer.
FPS, Racing, Flight sims and RPG's shine on the PC as well as consoles, with
the exception of FPS on the PS2.

You're framing the issue entirely in terms of performance. Documents
quoting game designers on Intel's web site have indicated that we have a
long way to go before game designers run out of things they can think of
to do with more graphics performance, but I'm a little surprised that
performance limitations would be so obvious to a player.

I disagree.
If you have to look hard for graphic improvements, are they then really an
improvement?

That is to say, I would expect more performance to show up in subtle
ways: better lighting, more realistic textures, and so on. A
particularly insightful player might well conclude that (say) PS2 games
have become hardware-limited relative to PC games, but do you think that
would be a reaction that would be common enough even to create a buzz?

Not among casual gamers which make up thr vast majority but to die hards
like myself........it matters.
I am just saying "I" will be moving on to my PC mainstream after this
upcoming holiday season. My PS2 is fighting neck and neck with my GameCube
bottom rung. I cant remember the last time I fired it up.

 

[poldy]

The PS2 will be 5 years old next year.
That is when I was originally expecting the new console to be launched from
Sony.

That's what I did, go from PS1 to a PC in '98 for online gaming as well
as better graphics. Then got PS2 in 2000.

Thought about getting a PC again the past couple of years but online
sports games are fine on PS2 for now. I could spend a couple thousand
for a new rig or wait until fall/winter of 2005 when at least Xbox 2 is
expected to launch.

Maybe even look at PSP if it's not too ridiculously priced to tide me
over.

But PS2 games are still viable. Maybe not the prettiest but they can be
progressive. Xbox of course looks better but it can't really do enough
720p games that well. ESPN Baseball can't run online in HDTV mode and
ESPN NFL 2K5 won't have 720p mode.

True HDTV resolutions will come with next generations. Then the PC
won't have quite the resolution advantage over TV-based consoles.

 

[dementia]

That's what I did, go from PS1 to a PC in '98 for online gaming as well
as better graphics. Then got PS2 in 2000.

Thought about getting a PC again the past couple of years but online
sports games are fine on PS2 for now. I could spend a couple thousand
for a new rig or wait until fall/winter of 2005 when at least Xbox 2 is
expected to launch.

I thought MS said they wont be releasing their new system until 2006?

 

[Robert Myers]

Games genre's are tapped out.

Maybe we need new genre rather than new hardware?

There is rarely anything new in the way of innovation. Most games today are
just sequels or rehashes anyway.
After this upcoming holiday season I have a feeling the current systems will
have reached their full potential.

You don't necessarily need new hardware to have a fresh flight of
imagination, but I'm sure you know that. New hardware, the possibility
of new effects, more elaborate whatever might encourage fresh flights of
imagination, or it might encourage more of the same, only more so.

You seem pretty steady in your conviction that lifting performance
limitations will result in noticeably better games. If it's just a
feeling you have, that's okay, of course, but if you or if others have
specific notions of the ways in which hardware issues limit game
creativity, it would be interesting to hear about them.

In another post, you say

I disagree.
If you have to look hard for graphic improvements, are they then really an
improvement?

Just as a guess, I'd say that current game addicts are not necessarily
representative of the population that will eventually become active
"gamers," even if they don't think of themselves that way. The
population that is eventually sucked in (loaded phrase, but accurate, I
think) will be grabbed on production values that don't matter all that
much to many current gamers. I mean, how much more realistic could
Flight Simulator become? The answer is *much* more realistic, and the
realism will come from subtle production values that gobble resources.
The average movie-goer might not easily be able to identify the
production values that garner Academy Awards, but they do notice them,
whether they look for them or not, and, more important, they pay for them.

The slickest production values, which are currently targeted at feature
films and high-end television, are realized on big render farms using
high-end creative talent. When that kind of processing power is
available on a game console or PC, the creative talent and the audience
won't be far behind, and people will be nostalgic for the cheesy
production values of today's games the way they are nostalgic for Pacman.

RM

 

[dementia]

Maybe we need new genre rather than new hardware?

No, it's time for new hardware in 2005.
If you give developers more to work with they wont have to take away or come
up with tricks to tap out hareware.

You don't necessarily need new hardware to have a fresh flight of
imagination, but I'm sure you know that.

Of course I do but imagination isn't the problem when a system is in it's
4th year, power limitations are.

New hardware, the possibility
of new effects, more elaborate whatever might encourage fresh flights of
imagination, or it might encourage more of the same, only more so.

You seem pretty steady in your conviction that lifting performance
limitations will result in noticeably better games. If it's just a
feeling you have, that's okay, of course, but if you or if others have
specific notions of the ways in which hardware issues limit game
creativity, it would be interesting to hear about them.

The XBox is currently the most advanced system there is. It is 1 1/2 years
newer technology than the PS2.
This is just an example of where hareware holdsyou back:
Show me one FPS game on the XBox that runs above 60fps. If you do I will
bet it has poor textures and lighting effects or suffers from severe drops
in frame rate and slowdown. Most FPS games on the XBox only run @ 30fps
(with frame drop and some slowdown) and most of them are stripped down
versions of their PC counterparts.

In another post, you say


Just as a guess, I'd say that current game addicts are not necessarily
representative of the population that will eventually become active
"gamers," even if they don't think of themselves that way. The
population that is eventually sucked in (loaded phrase, but accurate, I
think) will be grabbed on production values that don't matter all that
much to many current gamers. I mean, how much more realistic could
Flight Simulator become? The answer is *much* more realistic, and the
realism will come from subtle production values that gobble resources.
The average movie-goer might not easily be able to identify the
production values that garner Academy Awards, but they do notice them,
whether they look for them or not, and, more important, they pay for them.

Apples to oranges.
This isn't the movie industry.
I just saw Shrek 2 which is suppose to be a big step up from Shrek 1 with
CGI. I noticed it but the kids and other adults I went with had to have it
pointed out to them. If you have to have it pointed out to you it's not
worth mentioning, unless of course your the CGI program team

 

[dementia]

Show me one FPS game on the XBox that runs above (typo - I meant = 30fps
nopt 60) 30fps. If you do I will
bet it has poor textures and lighting effects or suffers from severe drops
in frame rate and slowdown.

 

[Chris Lee]

Looks like I'm going back to PC gaming fulltime soon

Who cares?

 

[Chris Lee]

Because there's a dearth of fresh game material? If so, are you (or
were you) expecting that a Cell-based PS3 will change that state of
affairs significantly?

RM

No, Like most PC gamers, he's a WAREZ dude.

 

[dementia]

Who cares?

Nobody cares.... about your opinion on any given subject