Yeah right.

Whats this? Positive remarks for the PS3 from a Developer making one of 360's killer apps!

MS fanboys must be having fits right now!

Seriously though, thats good to hear that developers are optimistic about the system.

Its not in a good place for deveopers because of development costs, and with story after story of companies fearing bankrupcy and considering the alternative (making 360 and Wii games) all the is to me is a big name trying to sell a million dollar mistake, ie a launch game for the Playstation 3.

Mark Rein says Sony rocks? He also says big Gears of War news coming:

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/07/26/epic-drops-not-so-subtle-gears-of-war-clue/

I think there's an obvious (albeit shaky) conclusion to draw here, but I shall refrain for fear of inciting any form of fanboy backlash.

Development costs are probably higher then they really should be, because of the fact that most of the work is all done in studio. Instead of buying a license for an engine, developers prefer to develop their own stuff, even if there's something already availble to them that's twice as good and more thena third of the cost.

If I remember my reading from "Game Architecture and Design" by Andrew Rollings and Dave Morris, about 40-60% of the budget goes into developing their own engine for the games. Where as, buying a license version would be a heck of alot cheaper and would probably have a lot less bugs in it, do to other people using it and a company selling it as a commercial product. Worst of all, most of the time, they'll develop an engine, and, once the game is done, they'll shelf, never to be used again, unless a sequel pops up, instead of writing their own engine, with multiple purposes in mind for it in advance. It's a financial mistake waiting to take even the most financially advantaged developers.

It's not the earlier release of development kits that has caused all the uproar and doubt to go sony's way. It's been the fact that they pretty much screwed up everything else by slapping a $600 price tag on the PS3 and acting like they don't need anyone else's help to sell the PS3. So yea, sony may have been in a better position, before they started committing PR suicide.

He forgets of course that the 360 launched, to no competition and after an E3 where it was overshowed by the PS3's fancy FMV.

The PS3 will launch with 2 consoles having launched previous, both having royally stomped them at E3, both being cheaper and having more games. It'll have to contend with Metroid, Legend of Zelda, and epics own Gears of war. That's some pretty steep competition.

Intresting, thanks VerticalEvent.

"Its not in a good place for deveopers because of development costs, and with story after story of companies fearing bankrupcy and considering the alternative (making 360 and Wii games) all the is to me is a big name trying to sell a million dollar mistake, ie a launch game for the Playstation 3."

You seem to be implying that PS3 development costs are significantly higher than X360 costs. On what grounds to you base that?

The conventional wisdom is that engine development costs are the minority of the full cost of developing a title, and that's the only part unique to the PS3. Add to that the ready availability of 3rd party engines (e.g. Unreal Engine 3.0), and it's no more foolish than developing a first-gen game for the X360.

OK, if you're starting from the ground up, it's OpenGL vs. DirectX -- about the same.

Releasing a big-budget, platform exclusive game at the system launch is certainly foolish, but nobody's really doing that. And that's not the only option. Remember, many good franchises came out near launch. It's a chance to get good visibility, when there is a dearth of other titles. Sequels sell, so there's some wisdom in releasing at/near launch in order to build a franchise.

Try to think rationally, instead of repeating the mindless babble of a thousand vacuous fanboys. The PS3 is going to be *the* hot item this Christmas. Getting in on the ground floor has its advantages.

Dsub: This post is about the early release of Ps3 dev kits. This isn't another chance for you people to continue with the "Wah the Ps3 costs
$1,999 with 8 controllers and a game and an hdtv sony is sooooo arrogant wii60 for me ftw rofl etc." Shut the hell up and stop posting off topic shit. Thank you.

Comment #1 shows us a prime example of a post left by an idiot.

Rein's comments simply state the fact that Sony is in a better position for launch because developers have more time to release a quality product in time for the PS3's release. Already the first comment smacked of sarcasm and claims of yet another insider lying to us about a Sony product.

Grow up guys.

And slapping a $600 price tag on the PS3? It's not as haphazard as you imply, you know. The PS3 isn't very cheap to produce, and Sony needs to reduce their losses as much as possible. If that means pricing a Blu-Ray equipped system as 600 instead of 400 dollars in order to ease the pain of the launch, then Sony is entitled to give it a shot.

Hey, and you can only go down, right? If the PS3 is doing terribly because of the price, then Sony can lower it to a more digestable range. Who's ever heard of a system going up in price?

Anyway, back to my point. Don't be an asshat. Rein made a simple statement about Sony's position for their launch. It's not like the PS3 gets enough good press anyways. *cue eye roll*

Sony isn't really in a better place even if they have dev kits out earlier because (if developing for the ps2 is any indication) it is MUCH harder to get stuff running on their architecture. If development was exactly the same as other systems then yes, they are in a better position, but it isn't, and they aren't. Personally I Sony wakes up and is forced to make more developer friendly environments for us to work in, but I doubt that will happen.

"Rein's comments simply state the fact"

I stoped reading after that, its not a fact, go peddle your lies elswhere sonyboy

"You seem to be implying that PS3 development costs are significantly higher than X360 costs. On what grounds to you base that?"

Uh maybe from the fact that developers are actually saying that? Its known that PS3 is alot harder to work with programing wise, if its harder that means more time and effort are needed to be put into that, and guess what? time and effort cost money.

FACT is, Rein has time and again proved he has no idea what he is talking about. He blames poor pc game sales on Intel, and came out agaisnt episodic content saying players will end up experiencing the same thing over and over (yea thats nothing like unreal tournament, that game is 100% diffrent everytime) yea he sure knows what hes talking about.

So you grow up, and learn to not invest so much complete faith in something thats not even out.

Wow, a single developer says "So Sony's actually maybe in a better place vis-a-vis Microsoft in relation to launch," being pretty much as vague and noncommital as possible while still saying something PS3 positive.

I mean I guess this is news, I'm not faulting Joystiq for posting it or anything, but, in the grand scheme of things, it really means nothing.

Just another piece of meat to throw to the hordes of fanboys I guess.

With Gears of War as a launch title, I think PS3 will do just fine.

Does anybody have proof Xbox 360 is soooo much easier to develop for? Is it just the fact that the Ps3 looks hard to develop for? If that's the case, than saying the 360 is easier to develop for merely because of lesser graphical prowess is AN INSULT to the Xbox 360.

Gears of Wars is a 1st party Xbox 360 game. It is published by Microsoft Studios, so it won't EVER be coming to the PS3.

I don't KNOW the 360 is easier to develop for, but I do know the PS2 sucks to develop for. I've never worked on it, but my team lead is a PS2 guru and he said today that he wished the ps2 would die, cause he's hates working on it (finishing up a ps2 title now). Since the PS3 still has the Cell processor, I don't think it will be much different *sigh*. We do have 360 dev kits and they are easier then the xbox to develop for. Not really proof, but it's all I've got.

@15

Dude, come on...I thought the sarcasm was obvious.
If Sony had succeeded in pulling this one out, I would eat a pound of olives in 1 hour.

I have a question? How old are you people, 5, 6? My god, the people who are commenting here sound like a bunch of grade school children with nothing else better to do than to waste time writing flames to people just because they prefer another game system.

Here's a tip. if you're wasting time thinking up insults to lob at people over something as asinine as which system is better, then the only you're going to end up being a lonely 30 year old, with only Internet porn as the closest thing to a girlfriend you will ever have.

My god, we have Troops dying in Iraq, World War 3 starting up in near Israel, and a crackpot trying to nuke Japan and California. Yet, we have losers spending hours trolling Joystiq, and throwing insults at each other here because of VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS!

And people wonder why the world is so screwed up.

If you have honest disagreement to how a particular company is handling it's system, by all means, feel free to have a fair, and open discussion.

If you just hate the 360/Wii/PS3, and don't have the intelligence to articulate a difference of opinion without calling someone childish names, then please, shut the hell up.

@16

It's the first time CELL is used in a Sony console.

We can tell you know what you're talking about.

Hey someguy..

did I whine and bitch and go on and on about how the PS3 costs $1999 with 8 controllers and an HDTV? No. I just read my comment again to make sure, and I was wondering exactly where it was that you came up with that bullshit. All I did was state a fact.

My statement was simple. Mark Rein was quoted saying that Sony is in a better place for a launch than the 360 was because it's final dev kits were released sooner, i.e. the devs have more time to perfect their games. However, the reason that everyone has been doubting the PS3 launch has absolutely NOTHING to do with dev. kits being released earlier than they were for 360. All of the doubt that has risen on the PS3 launch has come about because of two things, the PS3's unusually high price tag for a console, and Sony's Big Wigs making statements that have come off as cocky. Thus, they have been dealing with a PR disaster as of late.

My post was ENTIRELY on topic, as it addressed the purpose of this entry and my opinion on the subject. Yours, however was not on topic in any way. Instead of commenting on the blog entry you decided to jump to conclusions and create false statements and attack me as if I'm some sort of anti-sony fanboy. Nice try though. Perhaps YOU should be the one posting on topic.

Anyways, back to the subject at hand...

I think sony will be okay in terms of selling out launch consoles, that's pretty much a given for any of the big three. There battle will be maintaining good sales numbers after the initial early adopters have got a PS3. The idea that developers have had more time to work on games is a plus for sony, especially since the 360 launched with a number of hardware problems and some software issues (2K sports games for one). However, developers are now MUCH more experienced with the 360 dev. kits as they've been using them for almost a year now, and I think great looking games like Epic's own Gears of War will fuel quite a bit of XBOX 360 sales this holiday season.

While I don't know what the differences in development cost between the 360 and PS3 actually are, having developed for neither, there are two things that differentiate the platforms:

1) The 360 is much more like developing on a PC, using familiar tools that developers have used for years. DirectX really is easier than OpenGL for complex graphics, and it encompasess a far larger set of functionality than just graphics.

2) The still-in-development XNA tools from Microsoft seem like a godsend for game developers. The ability to write games in managed code that work on both Windows and Xbox 360, leveraging a large game-specific base class library, is not something to be sneezed at.

We can't seem to get Sony to talk about their RSX GPU at all. Nvidia won't talk about it either.

In contrast, Microsoft and ATi can't stop talking about the Xenos GPU in the Xbox360. They've been talking about it a year before the 360's launch.

Sony and Nvidia?...............Silence

The Xenos has unified architecture and a MEMEXPORT function that will allow the 360 to generate geometry shaders.

Sony and Nvidia?...............Silence

The Xenos can perform multiple post processing tasks in one single rendering pass. No other GPU for console or PC can do this.

Sony and Nvidia?............more Silence

It's just strange. They just don't want to talk about the RSX. Meanwhile, developers like John Carmack can't stop raving about the Xbox 360, it's development tools and depth of documentation.

What's Sony waiting for?

Or, is it just possible that the PS3's hype didn't make it to reality? We anxiously wait to hear something.

Sorry Pixel, didn't know you were joking.

Two observations:

1) Mark Rein has once again shown that he is a resident of crazy town along with Kaz. Four months comparative lead time with final dev kits does not a race make. It's like saying "Well, 12 months ago, they were 4 months behind where we are now!" Yeah, sorry, now they're 8 months ahead.

2) Blogs have seriously changed how early adopters communicate with each other and how industry communicates with community. Sony has not figured out how to benefit from this yet. Obviously Microsoft has, and apparently, Ninty doesn't freakin' need it.

Look. Here is how the pricing lines up:
Retail price for a BR burner is... go ahead, guess... 799 USD. 799 DOLLARS. So when you add an amazingly fast processor, KICK.ASS. graphics card, the brand name, HDTV, controllers, and a hard drive, you get 600. that means you're paying -199 for the console, brand name, hdtv, controllers, hard drive... didn't anyone think of this??
seriously, if im wrong just slam me like you did to the rest of the stupid people (im a n00b, apparently) but if you go to the sony site you can pre order BR burners for 799, then the rest of the crap all in a package for retail 600... its not a bad deal if you think of it as a music/dvd/game/computer station, since it works as all. if ur buying this machine just for the gaming, you really must be out of your mind or have too much money to spend.
THAT is why sony can charge so much for a game console... it isnt just a gaming console. ur paying for alot more, and anyway since its probably going to be much superior to XBOX and Wii graphics/gaming/computing power, they can charge however much they want. if you think its a bad idea then say that, but dont be like "they r n00bs fo 5H0R3" cuz maybe its just you that's the close-minded n00b... enjoy

BOTTOM LINE/SUM UP for lazy ppl that dont want to read everything i said: BR burner makes the cost worthwhile as does the fact that its a versatile machine... works for alot more uses than gaming... this + giant widescreen = multimedia center

let me know if im wrong/stupid. thanks...

sure developers may have some kits now, but after talking to a sony rep yesterday Sony is having some trouble with the blue lasers. About 40% of them have been overheatig! So it is possible to develope a game, to press a game, to sell a game, but you can't play it.

"After all, the best place for the PS3 to be in would be someone's living room, and the only way it's going to get there initially is with the aid of some killer launch titles. Where are they?"

I would say Resistance Fall of Man, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword, Call of Duty 3, and many more are where they are. I think the PS3 has a much better launch lineup than the 360 did. And something to support that would be seeing only 4 million consoles sold worldwide in the first 8 months for the 360, compared to the expected 4 million units sold in two months for the PS3. Oh, and by the way, I will be keeping my PS3 in my bedroom.

@arjun gupta

Welcome to Economics 101. Today we will discuss what components contribute to the final price of a piece of consumer electronics.

Our case study is a Blu-Ray player(Not a burner, since the PS3 doesn't have one). The company currently selling Blu-Ray players we will focus on is Samsung.

First, all the parts for the player are purchased or fabbed at Samsung's plants. After all the parts necessary to read the BD disc have been assembled, it is then necessary to create the part of the player that decodes the data and outputs the data to the TV. When Sony wishes to put a BD reader in their PS3, the last step is not needed because the PS3 acts as the decoder and output. This means there are less materials involved in creating a consumer BD player than a PS3 BD drive.

After Samsung's drive has been built, they package it and ship it using big planes and big boats all over the world.

However, Ira Hagamuffins and Jasper Trambo will never know about the voodoo magic promised by Blu Ray by themselves. So Samsung advertises to these yokels, trying to get them to buy their product.

Of course, the shipping and advertising is only parts of the costs added to the retail price.

To be able to use the Blu Ray technology and name, Samsung had to give Sony a treasure chest of fine pearls and emeralds. The exchange rate of those jewels is also added to the retail price.

Finally, the store selling the items marks up the price even more so they can make money, pay for the shelf space, and pay their lackeys to hawk the wares to the aforementioned yokels.

As you can see, there is a metric SHIT TONNE of additional costs that Samsung passes on to the consumer. For these reasons, it is flawed to assume that the Blu Ray player in the PS3 costs 700.

Class dismissed, it's time for a smoke break.

@Todd Rabanus

Source??? Or did you make it up?

Wow. This site posted some good Sony news. Priceless.

arjun gupta

1. The br players sony will use in the ps3 will be much lower quality than the separate $800 units.

2. No matter the size of the brand name they are still a corporation. They want your money. Thats all they want. They are willing to screw you over.

3. You are paying for a game system and a lower quality br player. After purchase you have full access to the media markets that WILL charge a premium for music and video. Myspace like profile through their service? I already have a myspace.

4.I have access to itunes, myspace, and dvd retailers.
If I were to buy a ps3 I would do so for games. So im crazy if I do so? Well I wont be buying it then. Clearly you know everything and have superior knowledge than us.

5. Have any developers said the ps3 will be "much" better than the 360 and wii? Graphics wise on the wii the ps3s superiority is clear. When it comes to the 360 it isnt clear if their will be a defined difference graphics wise. On the side of gaming, well that is up to the developers isnt it? Computing power may be stronger than 360. The wii isnt about graphics or raw power though so stop grouping in with the other systems.

Youre not stupid. You are wrong to some degree. Dont flame me. Oh, ha ha and please use proper grammar and spelling. I have made many errors in my writing but im still in middle school so I have somewhat of an excuse. If you want to insult others grammar and elitist attitudes do not mimick them in your responses like you have so far.

1) Gears of War is published by Microsoft. It will not be on the PS3
2) The PS3 is in a ‘better position’ because it was delayed six months.

Why do anti-Sony posts get stars here but pro-Sony posts don't?

Anyway, I think that the PS3 right now is still shrouded in a cloud of mystery as to why the hell should we gamers be forced to pay 500 dollars for the PS3. Me, I can understand why I want a Ps3, but as this site and many others point out, many people do not know why they should fork over so much money, and when Sony begins to release some more info on things like: online, HDD, controller, PSP connectivity, linux, and the so called "computer" functionalty, then we will all be happy campers as we were with the PS2.

Reading these responces... Man, yeah, PS3 is going to "have Linux", but the whole idea of Linux is open source, and there's no way Sony is going to let us have that (they've proven this with their 1.0/1.5 PSP firmware battles).

I imagine the PS3 interface will look as much like, say, Ubuntu, as the Dreamcast interface looked like Windows CE. I really think people don't know what they're getting excited about... It'll probably be like the bastard child of the PSP and XBox 360 interfaces.

As for the Blu Ray player, I mean, I don't know many gamers with HD-TVs, I don't know many people who complain about DVD quality, I'm a tech guy, and I'm in the film industry, and other than DRM or the ease of DVD piracy, I don't see a reason to change formats. I don't see any benefit for me to have a movie on one of these HD formats.

We've replaced all our VHS movies, remade our collections, and I assume there's not enough money coming in from DVD sales now. Maybe that's why they're releasing random TV shows on DVD now...

So when it comes down to it, I'm not seeing any advantage the PS3 has over the Xbox 360 other than that it'll have Metal Gear and Final Fantasy.

And Mark Rein, I thought this guy was nuts a while ago. He probably belongs to some club with Peter Moore and the Sony guys. In fact, we should jam them all in a flat with Hiroshi Yamauchi and make it a reality TV show.

And Microsoft is in part bankrolling Gears, it won't be on PS3.

Uh, Ethan, Why are you compareing established numbers to "expected" sales? Didn't sony's FMV show at last years E3 show you that the proof is in the pudding. I mean, compare PS3's 4 million in 2 months to the 4 million the Xbox 720 is going to sell in the first 2 weeks.

As for those launch games, I haven't seen how Heavenly Sword plays, so I don't know if it'll be any good, I don't like Plane games, so Warhawk is pointless, Resistance looks like another FPS, but remember Rare, once made what is considered the most influential console FPSes of all time. Call Of Duty 3 is equal to COD2, but CoD3 isn't by Infinaty Ward, who did the first two CoD games.

Also add in the fact that the PS2 and PS1 launches were painful game wise... So sony has nowhere to go but up.. And this time, they do have compitition. While the PS3 will have some nice 3rd party titles, those 3rd party titles, ie, Sonic, CoD3, and such, will have a identical 360 counterpart.

@Stu,

"The Xenos can perform multiple post processing tasks in one single rendering pass. No other GPU for console or PC can do this.

Sony and Nvidia?............more Silence"

Actually, there is one console GPU that does this. It's called Flipper, and was developed by ArtX for the Gamecube before ArtX was bought by ATI. This was intentional on Nintendo's part, they requested that the GPU be designed to automate such tasks to make it easier for developers. The GPU in the Wii is an upgraded version of the Flipper chip to include technologies developed by ATI in the past 5 years.

@SonicRift,

That would be the most awesome reality show ever. In fact, it would be the 2nd reality show I've ever watched. I'd love to see a cage match between Yamauchi and Kutaragi, too.

It is my belief that PS3 has a very capable system out. How it will do in the long run beats me. It would seem that some of the better PS3 games will probably come out next year. It takes time to make the type of games that we expect from a system (Or any system for that matter) of its caliber. The games will win this war, with the 360 and PS3 costing so much, everyone just don't won't to place their money on the wrong horse.

The reason why Sony don't want "homebrew" on the PSP is because it does not have the security structure in place to lock out PIRACY. Therefore, in order to stop piracy, they must also stop "homebrew". It could be possible that they may later add functionality to allow some certain types of homebrew, but not anything that perhaps directly can access the hardware, but through a restricted abstraction layer. (This last part is just speculation though)

Amazingly, that is the foremost reason fo the "homebrew" on the PSP, piracy. Sony, as a company, likes to make money, so of course, they don't like piracy.

With the PS3 however, the hardware has support to run Linux in such a mode that it will get all the access it needs to the hardware for homebrew, while still not allowing for people to execute commercially sold PS3 games. How this is exactly done, I don't have the details on at hand, but as far as I've understood it, Linux will be executing in a layer just above the PS3 OS. Not as with VMWare and software emulation, but through hardware virtualization, which means that you get the exact same performance as if it was running on the hardware directly, which it in fact is.

I'll go look it up in the 600 page manual on programming for the Cell BE later after work. That is at least how I remember it to be.

#20 Fandel

"My god, we have Troops dying in Iraq, World War 3 starting up in near Israel, and a crackpot trying to nuke Japan and California. Yet, we have losers spending hours trolling Joystiq, and throwing insults at each other here because of VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS!"

*************************************

This is without doubt the most pathetic sanctimonious drivel I've ever heard. You're trying win points on a video game blog with simple minded emotional blackmailing. You couldn’t get much lower.

But I'll play your desperate game for this once. Of all the people in Iraq you care to mention, you mention the dying troops. What about the thousands upon thousands of dead civilians? Victims in their own homeland from the hands of "collateral damage". Get a sense of perspective you cretin, and take your misguided sympathies elsewhere.

"It's just strange. They just don't want to talk about the RSX. Meanwhile, developers like John Carmack can't stop raving about the Xbox 360, it's development tools and depth of documentation."

It's funny how you mention a PC dev when talking about consoles. As far as the RSX nothing needs to be said.

"And Microsoft is in part bankrolling Gears, it won't be on PS3."

And why wouldn't MS want GoW on another system? If they are going to get kickbacks I would imagine that they would have epic do such a thing.

I find no problems with Mark rein's statements about the PS3. Getting dev kits early is a good thing right? And he is right about the Intel thing also. Yes, consumers could buy better hardware,but when in business you go by what is actually being bought, not what could be bought. I am the hardware manager in my IT dept and half of our laptops have integrated graphics. i am sure that games designers would like to be able to sell games to my users, but the hardware they have cannot run them. Yes, there are people who buy igh end stuff, but not enough to really give PC game developers the install base they need. If I made games I know I would like it if every basic pc sold could at least run some of my stuff, rather than having to depend on the enthusiast. Back to Sony, i don't think in your eyes they could make a good move. And is E3 really that important? Next year this time everyone will have forgotten about it. And as for this ease of development thing. The original Xbox was easier than the PS2 to develop for right? Yet Halo was a launch title and the Xbox did not have a game surpass it for how long? Halo 2? That ease of development is crap. good programmers will always do a good job, and lazy ones won't. Yes the PS3 is using something different and it may be difficult at 1st, but the comments out there from devs is that it is easier than the PS2 was, and it did poorly right? the main issue is the mutli core design that both MS and Sony have gone to. Until devs get used to that on both systems and PC's, then its going to be hard. How many launch games on the 360 were using all the cores if its so easy. Let Sony have some good press every once in a while.

Even for someone who isn't going to buy a PS3 (-->me), it's a welcome change to hear something that isn't just absolutely fucknuts whacked, or bad for PS3 once in a while.

Epic is in a special position in it's relationships with both Sony and Microsoft because they are a game engine manufacturer that is licensing their Unreal 3 engine to many many many parties that are developing on one or the other or both systems.

If Epic wasn't happy with how development was going, then you could really say that Sony's PS3 effort was rotten at the root, because all those other titles relying on their engine would be at risk.

You better believe that Epic is going to have a good time developing for PS3. Sony's going to make damn sure of that.

@ herman

PS2 sold well because of the success of the PS just as the PSP is selling based on the success of the PS2. One thing the industry has told us time and again is that success in a previous generation does not guarantee success in the next. If that were the case then Nintendo would still be the top dog.

Sony has serious competition from Microsoft. Xbox 360 is more than capable of competing against the PS3 and it shows. Xbox360 also has better support than the orignal xbox did. Sony went on record and said that there is no contest between the ps3 and the 360, ps3 will be clearly superior. But even looking at MGS4, it's clear that Gears of War easily looks as good if not better in some respects.

The point is MS has a chance to come out big in the next gen. People are still going to buy the PS3 just as they will buy the PSP but sony can only run on brand recognition for so long. PS3 has to be offer an experience that the 360 can't and it has to be stable and it has to flatout work. Not work some of the time or perform its functions at a level that's "average" at best like the PSP. It has to clearly be better than the 360.
From what we've seen of the PS3 so far, there is not a lot of evidence that says PS3 will be better.

Time will tell but developers that speak for or against a particular console is obviously trying to gain attention to sell their wares. Mark is no different so you can't blame him for that. But if I had to give a realistic view on which would come out on top, I would still say PS3 but not by much.
If I answered that same question as a gamer, I'd want PS3 to fail miserably so that Sony comes back with a PS4 that's focused on games and not the jack-of-all trades master-of-none mentality.

Hmmmm, seems like I remember some news that came out last week that SOE just licensed Epic's Unreal engine. Let's see, cash in Mark's pocket...Mark saying good things about the PS3 a week later...could their possibly be a concidence??!! Nah, it must be a part of the cosmic unconciousness.

to the best of my knowledge, here's what makes the x360 easier to program for than the ps3. the 360 uses 3 general purpose cores, allowing for 6 threads. When programming a multi-threaded app, all you need to do is correctly apply the threading and the processor will use whatever is available to do the processing. This wouldn't be the case with the SPEs in the Cell. Apparently because of the nature of the processor, the code needs to be written to use specific SPEs as the threads are broken up. I'm not sure if the general PowerPC core in the cell can handle the task of assigning the SPEs to specific tasks (though I don't think it can). This forces the developers working on the PS3 to be more careful with the way they write the code for the games.

Though this could make programming a bit more difficult, I think that it would result in better organized code, with multi-threaded applications. This is not saying that the 360 can't do the same thing as the PS3, because in a way, it does allow for the same number of threads (6 threads for the 360's 3 cores, 6 SPEs after taking out the one for the OS, and not counting the general one that will be basically shuffling the data to and from the SPEs).

Regardless of the difficulty of programming, both systems will do great, and have amazing games. As for epic's stance on the PS3/360 "console war", they've got a sweet engine that's driving programs for both consoles! Why would they say anything bad about either one. They're making UT2007 for the PS3 (any word on that for 360 yet?? god i hope it comes to 360).

I'm just going off of what I've read (and understand) about the main difference between the 2 processors, if anybody knows otherwise, please correct me, as i'm always trying to learn more!!

I'm going to raise the same objection that I've raised dozens of times before.

There's no such thing as a killer launch title. Launch titles are average at best. In video gaming history, I can think of just one launch title that was truly hailed as great - Super Mario World.

Why is there the expectation that a system must have an incredible game to pick up at the system's launch when, historically, it has happened once in the history of the medium?

Even if PS3 have a better launch line-up then 360, the casual gamer will compare the current PS3 offering with the current 360 offering. They may feel that although the PS3 is new, the 360 has many more games, comparable graphics, and a cheaper price. So, the fact that Sony has sent out development kits earlier than MS did a year ago is probably irrelevant.

There's no way the Xbox 360 will have more games...I do believe the PS3 is going to be able to play all PS2 and PS1 games. Microsoft will never match that! On day one Sony will have more games than any other console. That's not disputable.