Which Console? Part 2!

[JB0]

I just saw this news.

PS3 Hardware Slow and Broken. 

405592[/snapback]

Wait, so Sony's system is fundamentally crippled and outperformed by a competing system that's out now?

Where have I seen this before?

[Radd]

Just how reliable is this news source, though?

[Gaijin]

Yes, because so far, MGS4, Lair, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, FF XIII, and all the others look significantly worse than 1st gen 360 titles.

Inquirer is extremely anti Nvidia and anti Sony so this "article" comes as no surprise. Time will tell...if the system is really that bad, then all the blogs and articles of internet know-be's won't be needed...the games will tell the story. PS2 was horrible and yet....

[Radd]

...it had the largest library due to rabid marketing, and an easily mislead market. It survived on hype alone even after the release of the Gamecube and Xbox, but since it already had such an install base, developer support stuck with it, giving it an unrivaled gaming library even in the face of superior hardware on all sides.

What's all that have to do with an unreleased system with no gaming library to speak of yet?

I do agree that this article seems questionable, though. For what Sony is asking, pricewise, I have little doubt that the PS3 will be able to produce better graphics than the 360, even if the games wind up not looking quite so good as the demos.

Especially since I'm not willing to pay what Sony wants for the PS3, I'm more than willing to wait and see how things turn out when the system and games actually arrive.

[JB0]

...it had the largest library due to rabid marketing, and an easily mislead market. It survived on hype alone even after the release of the Gamecube and Xbox, but since it already had such an install base, developer support stuck with it, giving it an unrivaled gaming library even in the face of superior hardware on all sides.

What's all that have to do with an unreleased system with no gaming library to speak of yet?

You forgot the Dreamcast beat the PS2 to market and IT was superior as well.

The PS2 had a major advantage in that it was price-competitive, though.

I do agree that this article seems questionable, though. For what Sony is asking, pricewise, I have little doubt that the PS3 will be able to produce better graphics than the 360, even if the games wind up not looking quite so good as the demos.

I think the price on the PS3 is because Sony can't afford to take a loss on them right now.

The PS2 sold at a loss when it was launched to keep it at a competitive price point.

The XBox has sold at a loss since the launch of the original system, and it continues to this day on the 360.

The PS3 is what happens when you build without considering affordability and then aren't in good enough shape to sell the finished product at a loss.

Sony's thrown systems on the market with issues before. I don't see a reason to expect anything diffrent here.

In fact, the PS2 had severe memory bandwidth issues, which is the alleged PS3 problem.

[Gaijin]

...it had the largest library due to rabid marketing, and an easily mislead market. It survived on hype alone even after the release of the Gamecube and Xbox, but since it already had such an install base, developer support stuck with it, giving it an unrivaled gaming library even in the face of superior hardware on all sides.

What's all that have to do with an unreleased system with no gaming library to speak of yet?

405662[/snapback]

Which is most likely how it will turn out again. Not saying it's right...just practically written on the wall. The PS2 had no library at launch compared to the Dreamcast and noticably inferior games for nearly a year until Sega finally closedu p shop on Hardware since PS2 sales (yes, on name and DVD alone) trounced them. They didn't "Mis-lead" people.....people wanted it...they got it...they seemed to be happy. Welcome to the mass market.

And, to this day, average joe six pack honestly can't tell the difference between the 3 current consoles especially when they hooked them up through RF or composite connections.

Sony does make some odd choices in their hardware design...but like the PS2, if the mass market accepts it (which will most likely happen in 2007), developer support will be there and thus the game library.

BTW, OT, but some tidbits:

the PS3's PS2 backwards compatibility will be hardware based and not software.

Warhawk will support 32 players online, 60 FPS, up to 800 enemies on screen (I dunno about that one), seamless worlds, as well as land and other vehicle support.

360 Backwards compatibility update is supposedly coming...though Moore was quoted in an interview saying backwards compatibility wasn't what people were concerned about. Methinks they're giving it up soon.

[JB0]

Which is most likely how it will turn out again.  Not saying it's right...just practically written on the wall.  The PS2 had no library at launch compared to the Dreamcast and noticably inferior games for nearly a year until Sega finally closedu p shop on Hardware since PS2 sales (yes, on name and DVD alone) trounced them.  They didn't "Mis-lead" people.....people wanted it...they got it...they seemed to be happy.  Welcome to the mass market. 

And, to this day, average joe six pack honestly can't tell the difference between the 3 current consoles especially when they hooked them up through RF or composite connections.

Sony does make some odd choices in their hardware design...but like the PS2, if the mass market accepts it (which will most likely happen in 2007), developer support will be there and thus the game library. 

But mass-market acceptance of the PS1 and PS2 wasn't hindered by a high price tag.

Sony or not, the 600$ suggested retail WILL hurt them.

Or do I need to remind everyone of the Saturn?

Contrary to popular belief, Sega was near their peak when the Saturn launched, not in an uncontrolled freefall from failed Genesis expansions(though the 32x was certainly an uncomfortably recent bruise, it was no nastier than Nintendo's Virtual Boy, and Nintendo recovered. SegaCD was a LOT better recieved than people give it credit for now).

Playstation beat the Saturn by being cheaper to make, cheaper on store shelves, and developer-friendly(it was easy to code for, easy to utilize a good deal of the hardware's capability, and Sony had very generous developer licensing at the time).

So Sony had a 300$ system on store shelves with more games than Sega's 400$ system, AND more new games coming.

The PS took off, the price wars began, Sega started bleeding red ink on every sale of a Saturn that just wasn't ready for launch, and it was all downhill from there.

Fast forward a decade and the PS3 is the most expensive system on the market, Sony has earned a reputation as being very hostile to developers, and the PS3 is a batty and a half to program for from what I've heard.

In short, PS3 = Sega Saturn.

BTW, OT, but some tidbits:

the PS3's PS2 backwards compatibility will be hardware based and not software. 

That's the rumor.

If it's true, it'll have to be a hybrid solution(like the PS1 compatibility on the PS2 is).

If nothing else, controller and memory card access HAS to be emulated, because the PS3 doesn't have PS2 controller or memory card connectors.

(Byebye, GunCon. We'll miss you.).

Edited June 6, 2006 by JB0

[mikeszekely]

360 Backwards compatibility update is supposedly coming...though Moore was quoted in an interview saying backwards compatibility wasn't what people were concerned about. Methinks they're giving it up soon.

Moore has been pretty much against backwards compatibility from the get-go. Backwards compatibility through emulation was added later, because Xbox fans caused a ruckus when they heard that the 360 wasn't going to be backwards compatible. And now Moore's telling us again that we don't want backwards compatibility, and again the Xbox fans are causing a ruckus. And again the emulation team is telling us that they're working on it.

Bottom line? Moore's been telling us no backwards compatibility, and the emulation team has been telling us their goal is 100% Realistically, it's somewhere in between. The emulation team is never going to reach 100%, but updates for popular software are going to continue well after the next few times Moore tells us we don't need it.

[Gaijin]

But mass-market acceptance of the PS1 and PS2 wasn't hindered by a high price tag.

Sony or not, the 600$ suggested retail WILL hurt them.

405709[/snapback]

They aren't planning on staying at $600 for too long. Just to take as least of a loss as possible (as well as to appease the other CE companies making Blu-ray players) since honestly, they don't have to release at $400 this season and let scalpers make an actual profit on the hardware.

And I know the Saturn story all too well. That said, I still have two of them (but none of the original gray ones anymore).

[Radd]

Sony insinuated that the PS2 would be able to produce graphics on the same level as the Final Fantasy movie. If that's not misleading, I don't know what is. Faked demos on beefed up hardware come to mind. FMV passed off as in-game footage. Sony has a reputation these days.

But still, a $600 price tag will mean the PS3 will likely not enjoy the immeadiate market saturation of the PSX and PS2. And if people hold off long enough for Sony to drop the price, developers will see this and begin developing more for other consoles, and possibly less for the PS3.

Right now the Sony is relying on two main factors. Their graphics, and brand loyalty. History has shown that neither are completely reliable for sales.

I'm not saying that Sony corporate headquarters is going to sink into the ocean a few days after a dismal PS3 launch, but I do not share the optimism in the idea that Sony will remain the undisputed console king simply because of the success of their last two consoles. If the top dog always remained the top dog simply because they were the top dog, we'd all still be playing Atari consoles.

[Gaijin]

Sony insinuated that the PS2 would be able to produce graphics on the same level as the Final Fantasy movie. If that's not misleading, I don't know what is. Faked demos on beefed up hardware come to mind. FMV passed off as in-game footage. Sony has a reputation these days.

405861[/snapback]

Bah, Microsoft (or any other company)is no better...Gates said "Toy Story 2 Level detail " and unlimited graphical visuals before the XBox launch (commonly an urban myth as Sony's quotes by Microsoft fans):

Toy Story quality graphics

"We're approaching the level of detail seen in Toy Story 2," he said, referring to the computer-generated kids film from Disney/Pixar.

"Game developers will finally be able to develop games as they can visualize it in their minds, without having restrictions placed on them due to performance."

Sound familar each generation?

I never bought into the PS2 boasting at launch (anyone that owned a Dreamcast were playing stronger games at launch than PS2 games. Take any graphics boasting with a grain of salt. If they achieve it be happy.

E3 '05...all 3 made boasts and ahem...weird statements...PS3= awesome visuals...360= backwards compatibilty with best selling XBox titles and non gamers will buy 360 so they can sell stuff they designed to gamers on Live (why would a non gamer buy a game system?) Nintendo= Graphics on Rev will make you say "Wow".

One year later E3' 06

Yes, Wii's controller is innovative but, graphically the Wii games look exactly like Gamecube titles (Which would explain why Zelda is being released day and date for both). Wii= impressive controller that will be a hot new fad...cool but not sure if it will truly win over the people in sustaining power after a couple years (Only Nintendo could sell you basically a Gamecube 1.5 with a new controller and get away with praise..if MS or Sony did that with a PS2 or XBox, people would say it's just a gimmick).

MS= Umm...I guess they showed Halo 3 so all's well in 360 owner land

Sony= Shocks the world with price and sell your sister financing on PS3. Heavenly Sword demonstration indistinguishable from last year's trailer...but they don't even touch on it much..in fact their press conference was boring as hell).

These reputations are taken to the nth level on the internet...all companies make absurd claims.

All of them.

Nintendo is the most kiddie friendly company in the world it would seem but behind the curtains, they have done a lot of nasty things in the industry (16 bit wars cough...cough). MS does the same, and Sony...welll just does some really stupid things sometimes. Take it all with a grain of salt but I think the "sony lies and your in PS2 is really a bomb waiting to go off so you have to buy a new one"!!! or "MS is the devil incarnate evil"!!! things you hear online is mostly exagerrated fanboy ranting.

And to make one last point: did anyone really think the PS2, Xbox, or whatever have you would produce the level of details in a demo from everyday games? A couple might. The power might be there...real world usage always dictates a drop in highest specs.

Ever had once a year car wax actually stay on for a year (sprayed with water 52 times in a day long test does not equal one year in the real world) ? My search gloves are "sharps proof" including needles...for about 2 months. Cell phone batteries talk time....any battery operated device's operating time (always at the lowest power setting doing nothing so CE companies can give the highest number available). Ever get a Big Mac that looks like one on TV?

Just smile and play the games you like. These reputations mean nothing to the mass market.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Gaijin

[yellowlightman]

(Only Nintendo could sell you basically a Gamecube 1.5 with a new controller and get away with praise..if MS or Sony did that with a PS2 or XBox, people would say it's just a gimmick). 

405891[/snapback]

And yet Sony keeps reusing the same horrible controller design and no one seems to mind.

[Zentrandude]

Sony insinuated that the PS2 would be able to produce graphics on the same level as the Final Fantasy movie. If that's not misleading, I don't know what is. Faked demos on beefed up hardware come to mind. FMV passed off as in-game footage. Sony has a reputation these days.

405861[/snapback]

Bah, Microsoft (or any other company)is no better...Gates said "Toy Story 2 Level detail " and unlimited graphical visuals before the XBox launch (commonly an urban myth as Sony's quotes by Microsoft fans):

Toy Story quality graphics

"We're approaching the level of detail seen in Toy Story 2," he said, referring to the computer-generated kids film from Disney/Pixar.

"Game developers will finally be able to develop games as they can visualize it in their minds, without having restrictions placed on them due to performance."

Sound familar each generation?

I never bought into the PS2 boasting at launch (anyone that owned a Dreamcast were playing stronger games at launch than PS2 games. Take any graphics boasting with a grain of salt. If they achieve it be happy.

E3 '05...all 3 made boasts and ahem...weird statements...PS3= awesome visuals...360= backwards compatibilty with best selling XBox titles and non gamers will buy 360 so they can sell stuff they designed to gamers on Live (why would a non gamer buy a game system?) Nintendo= Graphics on Rev will make you say "Wow".

One year later E3' 06

Yes, Wii's controller is innovative but, graphically the Wii games look exactly like Gamecube titles (Which would explain why Zelda is being released day and date for both). Wii= impressive controller that will be a hot new fad...cool but not sure if it will truly win over the people in sustaining power after a couple years (Only Nintendo could sell you basically a Gamecube 1.5 with a new controller and get away with praise..if MS or Sony did that with a PS2 or XBox, people would say it's just a gimmick).

MS= Umm...I guess they showed Halo 3 so all's well in 360 owner land

Sony= Shocks the world with price and sell your sister financing on PS3. Heavenly Sword demonstration indistinguishable from last year's trailer...but they don't even touch on it much..in fact their press conference was boring as hell).

These reputations are taken to the nth level on the internet...all companies make absurd claims.

All of them.

Nintendo is the most kiddie friendly company in the world it would seem but behind the curtains, they have done a lot of nasty things in the industry (16 bit wars cough...cough). MS does the same, and Sony...welll just does some really stupid things sometimes. Take it all with a grain of salt but I think the "sony lies and your in PS2 is really a bomb waiting to go off so you have to buy a new one"!!! or "MS is the devil incarnate evil"!!! things you hear online is mostly exagerrated fanboy ranting.

And to make one last point: did anyone really think the PS2, Xbox, or whatever have you would produce the level of details in a demo from everyday games? A couple might. The power might be there...real world usage always dictates a drop in highest specs.

Ever had once a year car wax actually stay on for a year (sprayed with water 52 times in a day long test does not equal one year in the real world) ? My search gloves are "sharps proof" including needles...for about 2 months. Cell phone batteries talk time....any battery operated device's operating time (always at the lowest power setting doing nothing so CE companies can give the highest number available). Ever get a Big Mac that looks like one on TV?

Just smile and play the games you like. These reputations mean nothing to the mass market.

405891[/snapback]

huge differernce between FF and toystory 2. If billy gates said be like that monster one where they had to render lots of hair and fur then I would belive you.

[JB0]

Nintendo is the most kiddie friendly company in the world it would seem but behind the curtains, they have done a lot of nasty things in the industry (16 bit wars cough...cough).

16-bit? Try 8-bit.

They weren't anywhere NEAR as ruthless on the SNES as the NES. Admittedly it was largely because Sega got their footing in the US before the SNES was ready, but still...

[Radd]

You misunderstand me, Gaijin. I don't think that Sony is a terrible evil company, while Nintendo and Microsoft are all flowers and unicorns, I just think that Sony is top dog right now, and they've fallen very much into the "lazy and egotistical" mindset that most top companies fall into. Nintendo did it. Microsoft is known for it in the PC world. That's why compeition is good. The lazy and egotistical company falls from the good graces of the mass market to be replaced by someone actually trying to be competitive.

Also, if you didn't fall for the pre-launch PS2 hype, good for you. Lots of fanboys did. So much so, that a year later when the Xbox and Gamecube were coming out, people were skeptical on the Xbox outperforming the PS2, and outright adamant that the Gamecube couldn't come close to either console. Of course, it soon became clear that the Xbox was powerful hardware, though people didn't realize that the Gamecube pushed better graphics than the PS2 until sometime after it had launched.

(Only Nintendo could sell you basically a Gamecube 1.5 with a new controller and get away with praise..if MS or Sony did that with a PS2 or XBox, people would say it's just a gimmick).

I don't believe that. Not if Sony or Microsoft did as Nintendo has, shown that it works, and works well, and really pushed it as the system's primary controller. At least, they'd get the same critical praise, it remains to be seen how well Nintendo's strategy will work on the mass market. Odds look good for them, but if anything I imagine if Sony did it they'd be even more of a success with it just because they're so popular right now.

As for 'Gamecube 1.5', while it's true that the Wii does not pack the graphical punch of the other consoles, there is still a very noticible jump in the graphics quality. Combined with screenshots of games for the 360 and PS3 not looking quite as good as the demos and trailers, I'm wondering just how wide the visual gap is going to actually be.

Of course, you were wuite right in one of your previous posts, how the average joe can't tell the difference in graphics.

Edited June 7, 2006 by Radd

[JB0]

You misunderstand me, Gaijin. I don't think that Sony is a terrible evil company, while Nintendo and Microsoft are all flowers and unicorns, I just think that Sony is top dog right now, and they've fallen very much into the "lazy and egotistical" mindset that most top companies fall into. Nintendo did it.

And Atari and Sega.

People generally laugh when I point it out because "Dude, you can't beat the Playstation!", but lately Sony's been doing EXACTLY what those who came before did right before their fall.

Microsoft is known for it in the PC world. That's why compeition is good. The lazy and egotistical company falls from the good graces of the mass market to be replaced by someone actually trying to be competitive.

Amen.

Of course, it soon became clear that the Xbox was powerful hardware, though people didn't realize that the Gamecube pushed better graphics than the PS2 until sometime after it had launched.

They still don't believe it. Find a Resident Evil 4 PS2 review. Listen to them talk about the identical(maybe even improved) graphics. Then find some side-by-side screenshots and shudder at the massively reduced visual quality on the PS.

As for 'Gamecube 1.5', while it's true that the Wii does not pack the graphical punch of the other consoles, there is still a very noticible jump in the graphics quality. Combined with screenshots of games for the 360 and PS3 not looking quite as good as the demos and trailers, I'm wondering just how wide the visual gap is going to actually be.

It'll be signifigant. The Wii isn't nearly as beefy as the PS3 and XBox360.

Of course, the advantage the PS3 and 360 have at standard definition is limited, and the Wii is SD only.

It's once you move to higher resolutions that the Wii is really going to look bad next to the competition.

Of course, you were wuite right in one of your previous posts, how the average joe can't tell the difference in graphics.

Yah. I guarantee there's a lot of people that do or will have 360s and PS3s hooked to an old TV that only has composite inputs that'll be bragging about how much better they are than Wii owners because they have "HDTV graphics!111"

[David Hingtgen]

I guarantee there's a lot of people that do or will have 360s and PS3s hooked to an old TV that only has composite inputs that'll be bragging about how much better they are than Wii owners because they have "HDTV graphics!111"

They do that NOW with a DVD player because they have "HDTV" component cables (Monster brand, of course) hooked up to a converter to run it through their RF connection...

[Radd]

It'll be signifigant. The Wii isn't nearly as beefy as the PS3 and XBox360.

Of course, the advantage the PS3 and 360 have at standard definition is limited, and the Wii is SD only.

It's once you move to higher resolutions that the Wii is really going to look bad next to the competition.

Of course, I don't doubt the difference in quality between HD and SD. However, it seems to me that most people still have SD television sets. I picked up an HD set recently (or rather, the fiancee did), but no one else I know has one. No one else I know is planning to get one.

Of course, with the cheaper PS3's lack of HDMI support...

Still, if you hooked up a Wii, a 360, and the PS3 to SD sets...will the Wii really look a generation behind? Or will the gap be more similar to how the PS2 falls behind the Gamecube and 360?

[Graham]

I wonder what's going to be the situation regarding development of new games for the PS2, after the PS3 is released at the end of this year?

I'm hoping that development of new PS2 games won't dry up too quickly, given that so many people own PS2s and the PS3 is so damn expensive.

What does everybody think? Are new PS2 games going to be extinct soon after the release of the PS3, or will they continue to be released for a long while yet?

Personally, I'm still happy with my PS2 and have no desire to buy a PS3, especially at the proposed retail price. I'd continue to buy good PS2 games if they continue releasing them though.

Also, I have no interest in Blu-ray or the ability to watch Blu-Ray movies on a PS3. Heck, I 've also never even used the DVD player on my PS2 either . I've too many stand-alone DVD players to ever have to mess around with the PS2 one.

Graham

[David Hingtgen]

Some of the best PSX games arrived well after the PS2 came out, and I know several developers said they abandoned the PSX too quickly.

MS on the other hand seems to want the original XB dead as soon as possible.

[Radd]

It's just a matter of time before PS2 releases dry up. Most of the major attention is going to be on the new systems. That doesn't mean that the old consoles will be dead the day the new ones launch (except for the Xbox/360 it would seem). Given the price of the PS3 many people will probably hold off for price drops. That means two probablilities, either developers will continue to stick with the PS2 for a while yet, waiting for the PS3 to pick up steam, or that people will pick up a cheaper console in the meantime, such as the Wii, in which case developer attention might wander in that direction.

Of course, if the PS3 does become an instant success, and the market decides it's willing to uspport $600 systems, then developers will continue to concentrate on the PS3.

[Gaijin]

It's just a matter of time before PS2 releases dry up. Most of the major attention is going to be on the new systems. That doesn't mean that the old consoles will be dead the day the new ones launch (except for the Xbox/360 it would seem). Given the price of the PS3 many people will probably hold off for price drops. That means two probablilities, either developers will continue to stick with the PS2 for a while yet, waiting for the PS3 to pick up steam, or that people will pick up a cheaper console in the meantime, such as the Wii, in which case developer attention might wander in that direction.

Of course, if the PS3 does become an instant success, and the market decides it's willing to uspport $600 systems, then developers will continue to concentrate on the PS3.

406063[/snapback]

PS2 hardware and games make money for Sony...they will not be abandoning that anytime soon...I'll give it a couple more years of good titles before we get the bargain developer titles only trickling into the stores.

[Gaijin]

Nintendo is the most kiddie friendly company in the world it would seem but behind the curtains, they have done a lot of nasty things in the industry (16 bit wars cough...cough).

16-bit? Try 8-bit.

They weren't anywhere NEAR as ruthless on the SNES as the NES. Admittedly it was largely because Sega got their footing in the US before the SNES was ready, but still...

405906[/snapback]

True, but we all got that cool coupon from the class action lawsuit good for more stuff from Nintendo so it's all good!

[Radd]

PS2 hardware and games make money for Sony...  ...trickling into the stores.

406070[/snapback]

Oh, I agree. When I say "It's only a matter of time" I'm not speaking in days or even months, but it's the nature of the beast. No console will really be "the console" that lasts forever.

I've known people who, every time a new generation of consoles is announced, complain that console developers should make one console and stick with it forever.

[mikeszekely]

Hey, Guitar Hero 2, God of War 2, Final Fantasy XII... the PS2's not dead yet.

Oh, and I'm not personally interested, but GTA came out yesterday. Porting PS2 games to PSP was irritating, but for some reason, I'd like to see more PSP games on PS2. Wipeout, Maverick Hunter X, Megaman Powered Up, and the new Gradius collection would all kick ass on the PS2.

Edited June 7, 2006 by mikeszekely

[F360°]

Sony insinuated that the PS2 would be able to produce graphics on the same level as the Final Fantasy movie. If that's not misleading, I don't know what is.

405861[/snapback]

Please refresh my memory on this? like somekind of link or something, because the only thing I remember regarding the Final Fantasy Movie Spirit Within (the only FF movie) demo were done with a Nvidia chipset.

[F360°]

(Only Nintendo could sell you basically a Gamecube 1.5 with a new controller and get away with praise..if MS or Sony did that with a PS2 or XBox, people would say it's just a gimmick). 

405891[/snapback]

And yet Sony keeps reusing the same horrible controller design and no one seems to mind.

405899[/snapback]

You'll be surprise that lots of people do like the Dual Shock design. My controllor for PC is a Sony Dual Shock with a Usb adapter

[Radd]

It's difficult to find news articles and whatnot from back then. If you look hard enough you can still find Sony's PS2 demo video which includes test shots from Final Fantasy:TSW. I think that same video includes the Final Fantasy 8 ballroom demo that was running on basically an SGI machine, though at the time Sony claimed it was running on the PS2 hardware.

[Radd]

You'll be surprise that lots of people do like the Dual Shock design.  My controllor for PC is a Sony Dual Shock with a Usb adapter

406112[/snapback]

The Dual Shock isn't terrible. It's a decent, and very useable controller. Better than a lot that have come down the pipe. However, it's not particularly ergonomic, and better designs have since come and gone.

The most likely reason they decided to try a new controller design for the PS3 in the first place was probably to improve the ergonomics of the design, make it more comfortable to hold. Whether or not the 'boomarang' controller achieved that, we'll never know due to gamer technophobia.

[F360°]

The differnce is Graphics between Final Fantasy 8 ballroom demo and Final Fantasy TSW is freaken HUGE.,, which is why I think you got mix up with one or the other. I was checking out videocards back then and like I said before, I only remember Nvidia that has a demo of Final Fantasy TSW.

FF 8 is not FF the movie.

[F360°]

You'll be surprise that lots of people do like the Dual Shock design.  My controllor for PC is a Sony Dual Shock with a Usb adapter

406112[/snapback]

The Dual Shock isn't terrible. It's a decent, and very useable controller. Better than a lot that have come down the pipe. However, it's not particularly ergonomic, and better designs have since come and gone.

The most likely reason they decided to try a new controller design for the PS3 in the first place was probably to improve the ergonomics of the design, make it more comfortable to hold. Whether or not the 'boomarang' controller achieved that, we'll never know due to gamer technophobia.

406114[/snapback]

Yeah,, I would love to try out the "'boomarang" controller too,, it's just too bad. I might love it, I might hate it. But with the Dualshock,, I know I wouldn't hate it.

I guess that's why Sony choose to stick with that design because most already gotten use to it over the years.

[Radd]

The differnce is Graphics between Final Fantasy 8 ballroom demo and Final Fantasy TSW is freaken HUGE.,, which is why I think you got mix up with one or the other.  I was checking out videocards back then and like I said before, I only remember Nvidia that has a demo of Final Fantasy TSW.

FF 8 is not FF the movie.

406115[/snapback]

Whoa, whoa, whoa there. Read my post again. I mentioned the ballroom scene as a seperate demo on the same video. That video also included a lot of Ridge Racer fmv, and various other demos.

I am well aware of the difference in quality between FF8 and the movie, which is why I obviously would not confuse the two.

I guess that's why Sony choose to stick with that design because most already gotten use to it over the years.

Nope. They decided to stick with the Dual Shock design because of the vocal fanboy outcry when the 'boomarang' was first revealed.

Gamers are, oddly enough, very technophobic when it comes to anything besides graphics, sound, and including a hard drive in their consoles. Controller design is one of those especially touchy subjects. Anything that strays too far from the security blanket gamers are so used to, and there's a panic.

Lots of people don't even know how to correctly hold an N64 controller(or simply refuse to). It's really that bad.

[F360°]

Here is the link to the 2001 Nvidia Final Fantasy Technology Demo.

"At SIGGRAPH 2001 NVIDIA unveiled the *Square Final Fantasy Technology Demo. Running on an NVIDIA Quadro DCC, the demo exemplifies interactive real-time 3D rendering on a standard computing platform.

Check out the incomparable power of the NVIDIA Quadro solutions in the following Final Fantasy Demo facts."

http://www.nvidia.com/object/final_fantasy.html

[Radd]

Right. I don't understand why you're showing this, though.

[F360°]

Right. I don't understand why you're showing this, though.

406128[/snapback]

to show that your memory might have mix up a small bit over time with this and the Ps2 FF8 dancing. Since it happened over 5 years ago.

This is how rumors starts sometimes,, base only on someones IIRC.