360 HD DVD add-on coming to US, Europe in mid-November for $200/?200/£130
by Ross Miller 
{ Sep 27th 2006 at 2:00PM }
Microsoft has confirmed today that the Xbox 360 HD DVD drive will arrive mid-November for the US and Europe. The price will be $199.99 in the US, €199.99 in Europe and £129.99 in the United Kingdom. The European prices beat Game Industry.biz's predictions from earlier this month. The HD DVD drive will be bundled with Peter Jackon's King Kong and the Xbox 360 Universal Remote.
"[The HD DVD drive] will work with either Core or SKU. It puts [the price] on par with people who want to watch movies," said Scott Henson, Director of the Game Development Group at Microsoft. "The key part for us is to give consumers choice. We're not gonna lose money on this, but we will give it value."
Just last week, Microsoft's Peter Moore announced that the Japanese HD DVD drive would launch November 22 for ¥19,800 (about $170).
By region, the Xbox 360 + HD DVD combo is virtually the same price as the PlayStation 3, even among their respective models, in the US and Europe. The core consoles are different by a meager ¥300 in Japan (even after both consoles dropped their price); we cannot compare the premium editions because Sony has an open price for the megaton PS3. In the United Kingdom, however, a PlayStation 3 will cost you £375 to £425, while the Xbox 360 + HD DVD will only be £330 to £410. Will the British price delta sway any videophilic gamers out there?
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 3)
serbz @ Sep 27th 2006 3:17PM
@crono 141
u no that applys to the 360 too
but good try genius
agent864 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:17PM
I've played Oblivion, yes its big, yes its pretty but its not the end all be all of next gen. We'll all be able to sample RFOM at kiosks in stores around the country in less than a month (hopefully) why don't we reserve judgement as to whether a size advantage exists/doesn't exist until we play a game that actually takes advantage of the extra space.
samik @ Sep 27th 2006 3:19PM
Hey it must hurt to watch all the cool vids from TGS and see the nice games of the PS3. I mean every 360 must confess that your console has no support from japanese developers, i mean common two games are not sufficient to win, although they are not bad(Lost Ody. Blue Drag.).But you know the PS3 has all the big names : MGS4,DMC4,Virtua Fighter5,FF13,LAIR and last but not LEAST ==== White Knight Story !!! I mean go and watch the trailer and then look to your xbox 360 and regret your investment! I am so happy that i had the chance to sell my 360 , yeah i had one, and therefore i am not a sonyfanboy, take your comments foryourselves! You know the 360 games are not comparable to the PS3 titles, i mean i had almost every great title for the 360 but they sucked ! Virtua Fighter alone is worth to pay the whole price of the PS3 only for this game, you know, you can only dream about such titles. And i must make something clear, every time when i hear people praising the 360, i can only smell jealousy ! Go and watch the TGS movies and see what Next Gen is, 1080p at 60 fps = Ridge Racer 7 . Thats what im calling a next step and not a 360 = Xbox 1.5 !
The Hedon @ Sep 27th 2006 3:22PM
#40, MS has already confirmed that playback is silent. Nice try though.
killploki @ Sep 27th 2006 3:25PM
@48
all your points are valid, and could easily be used as an arguement for the 360 as well. microsoft has the games, the hardware changes and could (will) also lower the price of their system to undercut sony if needed. microsoft already has a prooven online system in use so no waiting there. the main differece i see is that the people in the microsoft camp dont have to wait for anything at this point. they have been enjoying their system for a while now.
AK @ Sep 27th 2006 3:26PM
I won't invest in a next gen movie format until/if, there is a market winner.
I learned my lesson with Laserdisc and Divx.
All this nonsense about next-gen games needing next-gen disc formats is nonsense. Maybe when the ps4, xbox1080, and mii come out 5-6 years from now.
You have to wait for HDTV's to catch up to DVD's before you can force the new format upon people.
If half the people don't have HDTV's (and I am being rather generous here, because it is probably closer to 80%) how can you expect a high definition movie format to become the new movie/game standard? Three fourths of the population has to have HDTV's before you can start imposing HD movie formats.
Cage @ Sep 27th 2006 3:28PM
"We'll all be able to sample RFOM at kiosks in stores around the country in less than a month (hopefully) why don't we reserve judgement as to whether a size advantage exists/doesn't exist until we play a game that actually takes advantage of the extra space."
People are tired of waiting. We have been waiting since the 360 has launched. We have heard all the lies Sony has spouted off with everything from when its launched to what games will launch with it and exclusitivity. Time to jump on board with the console that makes the most sense financially (Thank you MS for giving me the option for HD-DVD but for now I will pass) and gamically (Yes, I made that up. The 360 at this point destroys the PS3 in games). I know there are a lot of people having second thoughts about the $600 monster...
DBX00 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:40PM
#52 I bet they won't confirm that it won't overheat on you though. lol
Andrew @ Sep 27th 2006 6:58PM
"Either way, the fact that Xbox 360 will do 1080p over VGA with seemingly RCA audio is a deal breaker for me. I am one of the people who's ready for 1080p, and with that high-end video I need high-end -OPTICAL- audio. Maybe such a cable will be released for the 360..."
Are you retarded or just simple? Have you ever looked at the A/V hook-up for a 360? Apparantly not.
Petey @ Sep 27th 2006 3:30PM
KOTAKU ARE AT IT AGAIN!!! MICROSOFT FANBOY ALL-RANGE MODE!!! FROM THE TITLES "News Shocker Summary", TO THE POSTS "It sounds like X06 was quite an amazing press conference, filled with the sort of surprises and delights befitting a regular carnival of gaming.", "We've posted all of the news on the site" NO SHIT??? TONS OF POINTLESS POSTS, WHAT THE F**K ARE WE INTERESTED IN KOTAKU STALKING "MAJOR" NELSON... THEY SEEM TO BE A BUNCH OF FANGIRLS GIGGLING ABOUT NOTHING!!! THEY ARE SO INTOXICATED BY THEIR OBSESSION ABOUT EVERYTHING MICROSOFT THAT THEY PASSED THE RIDICULOUS STAGE A CENTURY AGO... I HOPE THEY ARE WELL PAID BY MS BECAUSE THEY DO A HELL OF A JOB PROMOTING THE 360!!! WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY THEY DON'T ASSUME THEMSELVES & CALL THE SITE KOTAKU 360!!!
crono141 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:28PM
"Put Oblivion and change all the texture files to 1080p, add 7.1 Dolby HD"
I have 1920x1280 pictures at home. Compressed they take up about 1 meg each.
Adding 2 more audio channels and them compressing/encoding them to 7.1 Dolby should take up a paltry amount of space as well. Wait, what am I saying. That crap is generated (in game) on the FLY, so it should take up NO extra space other than a little more code for sound generation.
And if oblivion is just over 4 gb now, you think it will DOUBLE in size but bumping resolution up a hair?
Can we get a Sony de-Brainwashing in here?
Nick @ Sep 27th 2006 3:30PM
About Madden, I'm telling you what people tell me as a manager at Gamestop. It's missing features, Madden 06 did not have voiceovers, character creation and the rest of the game was DUMBED down, because of LACK of DVD storage. Put the game in your computer, look how much it takes up! That's why the Xbox version of the same game has more gameplay options, but less in the graphical department. When Madden 07 came out, we had several returns and trade ins on it to buy the xbox/ps2 version of the game.
Tillman @ Sep 27th 2006 3:30PM
@13 Actually I looked into it yesterday. The cheapest 1080p DLP TV at BestBuy.com has VGA in AND supports 1080p through it
Phranctoast @ Sep 27th 2006 3:31PM
crono141.
Its future proofing. That is never a bad thing.
Evan @ Sep 27th 2006 3:32PM
Most HDTVs use 1366x768 panels. Many Plasmas use even lower resolution panels. Why is everyone complaining that they can't send a 1080P signal to a 720P panel?
The few HDTVs that can actually display 1920x1080 pixels mostly do support 1080P over VGA and component.
crono141 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:33PM
"u no that applys to the 360 too
but good try genius"
1. What applies to 360? Could you be more specific when you insult someone.
2. No it doesn't, because DVD-9 read speed is about twice as fast as blu-ray speed.
3. If thats not what you were talking about... then I have no idea what your talking about. See point 1.
Draco @ Sep 27th 2006 3:36PM
Cronos, he's talking about the 80 core IBM you spoke of, it makes the 360 cpu just as obsolete as the Ps3 one.
Dominic @ Sep 27th 2006 3:37PM
If you honestly think that Sony is going to have a price drop in the U.S. you are sorely mistaken. The only reason they are cutting prices overseas on the cheaper verison is because they only alloted 100k launch units to them.
So when the holidays role around and everyone in Japan can't buy a PS3 cause its sold out and low and behold the Wii and 360 are sitting on the shelf what do you think they are going to do?
I think releasing the HD-DVD "add-on" is a great price point. Because it is just that, an add on! You don't have to have it. Just like you don't have to have 25gb BR discs to have a great looking fun game. For example like many others, look at Oblivion, yeah I know "render it in 1080p with 7.1 audio then see if it fits on a single DVD9..." The game as it is right now is just over 4gigs, take out the audio now and redo it with the proper compression and add in the new audio and it will still come in under 8.5 gigs.
I am just as excited about the PS3 as all of the fanboys but come on it isn't even out yet and you guys are talking about how badass it is, how sweet the games are. What games? Resistance? Great if Microsoft came out with Resistance every Sony fanboy would be "look another crappy fps.." just because you are looking forward to it doesn't mean it is going to be the end all be all of gaming. See: Killzone
jjrooster @ Sep 27th 2006 3:38PM
Backing up games with relative ease is the 360's best feature, fools! I bet lots of blackbeards are very happy MS went with DVD9 instead of HD discs. Won't be as easy for the bluray fans on PS3, will it? yarrr
DBX00 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:40PM
AK
You have to have high definition content to push the sales of HD televisions. The PS3 and other players give consumers a reason to upgrade their current televisions. Therefore pushing penetration through the market. Sony has made this investment a little safer by bundling it with a gaming console and selling it at a pricepoint well below its current value.
The value of additional storage could play into gaming simply with the fact that developers can include all languages on a single disc and since games are now region free, you save on production and development costs associated with producing different game discs for different regions. Now you have games that are released worldwide at once, when a smaller developer would only have the ability to sell the product in Japan or North America because they didn't know the demand aspects of other countries. Another smart Sony business decision that would otherwise be overlooked by the consumer.
killploki
I definitely don't disagree that Microsoft has the proven online component, but they've built their console on online play and not everyone is interested with playing games online and dealing with some of the hassles associated with that. The PS3 isn't built around that aspect of gaming, but hopefully will provide it to a greater extent this generation. I just think that the XBOX players are more your traditional PC gamers and PS3 players are more interested in games with excellent single player aspects. As far as people still waiting for the PS3; that should show you just how much loyalty Sony has built up over the years. The difference between Sony and Microsoft is that at the end of the day Sony does listen to their customers. We demanded HDMI and a price cut (now that I think about it, you can still import the PS3 for cheaper and since Japan is in the same region as the US you're fine with movies as well as games) and we got both of those things. If they deliver on a free online service then we're good to go.
crono141 @ Sep 27th 2006 4:42PM
"Its future proofing. That is never a bad thing"
See previous post. If sony claims their tech is going to last 10 years, then they have no plans for another console until that time. X360 and Wii have no such self imposed restrictions. In 2 years there will be an aftermarket 80 core intel chip. In 5 years, you could see a Nintendo or Microsoft new console using a 25 core chip, dwarfing the capabilities of ps3 only halfway through its projected life cycle.
So "future proofing" is garbage. They want you to drop 500-600 dollars, and are saying you won't have to do it again for another 10 years because it will last that long. Well it won't, and it can't. Its just more Sony marketing hype.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/26/intel-developers-forum-roundup-four-cores-now-80-cores-later/
Tim @ Sep 27th 2006 3:45PM
I really hope some of you get laid some time soon.
Steve @ Sep 27th 2006 3:47PM
Uh, Nick (#57), you're not making sense. Yes, Madden is missing features on the 360, we know this and have known this for some time. It has SOD ALL to do with the space on the DVD though, it's just EA being bloody lazy about updating their code base to the new platform. The 06 games were rushed and the 07 games, while better, are still suffering for what we can reasonably assume is MUCH higher overheads associated with creating a next-gen graphics engine when there's only one platform available for those games. Otherwise, by your logic, Madden 07 would not have had a single feature more than 06.
Let's put this another way, as you're the manager of a gamestore look through the boxes of the latest PC games. Pick the biggest, baddest, most graphicaly-intense game you can find. Have a look at the hard disc requirements for that game. If you find anything over 9Gb I'd be surprised, and even then remember that the same game developed for two resolutions (SD and HD) built to run on a system that doesn't have to deal with multiple hardware configurations will take up FAR less space than a PC install. Just as a very fast example, look at Doom3. Total installed size on my hard disc right now with all the latest patches and a few extra maps is less than 2Gb. My entire Steam folder, including Half Life 2, Counterstrike Source, Day Of Defeat (original and source), Lost Coast, Half Life Source, Half Life Blueshit and a load of other titles comes in almost bang on 9Gb. That's Half Life 2, a game that certainly qualifies as graphically impressive and a game that's never been shy about gobbling hard drive space thanks to Steam and all the bloat / extra content that comes with it (delete as appropriate).
DBX00 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:50PM
crono141
Just read this interview. Thanks.
http://www.dvd-intelligence.com/main_sections/executive_interviews/spath.htm
Matt @ Sep 27th 2006 3:52PM
DBX00, so we meet again. How has Sony's marketing department treated you? Are they happy with their newest viral marketing tool? Keyword for you players at home: tool.
Caching a game with uncompressed textures would imply you are, in fact, caching the textures. The textures are what would take up the majority of the 25-50GB of the Blu-Ray disc, and as such would be needed to load the Goddamned game quickly. Also, if you will notice, Devil May Cry 4 was in it's early stages, and therefore probably not subject to 20 gigabytes of texture, as it was also lacking 1080p.
There is no doubt in my mind that Blu-Ray games consuming, I don't know, the confines of a DVD9-capacity disc, wouldn't have a problem loading. It is when the games become larger than 9 or 10 gigabytes that we would see a problem.
Also, DBX00, you seem to like using Oblivion as your one-trick-pony, if you will, in terms of insulting your beloved fanboy brands' competition. This is interesting. What makes you think either the Xbox 360 or the Playstation 3 would be capable of running Oblivion with uncompressed textures at 1080p? The Xbox 360 struggled to run Oblivion at half the quality a high-end PC could achieve, and while part of this can be blamed on the low system shelf life at the game's release (and therefore insufficient coding for the particular platform, resulting in lack of efficeincy and slowness in comparison), most of it has to do with the system's hardware in general.
The Playstation 3 and the Xbox 360 are very similar in power. The only real, discernable differece, between the two is that the Playstation 3's processor is far faster than that of the Xbox 360. That does not matter much, however, when you take into account the fact that the video processing capabilities of any machine, computer or console, are limited to the graphics processing unit, or the GPU. The problem then lies in the fact that the PS3 is outfitted with a GPU not much faster than the Xbox 360, and therefore the PS3 is then bottlenecked to graphics performance comparable to that of the Xbox 360.
How this is important, if you are wondering, is that the Xbox 360's limitations will then be able to be projected, in certain scenarios, onto the Playstation 3, particularly in situations in which the system is limited by the graphics processor.
The point is that while the PS3 has more room (and therefore textures) to work with, that does not mean it is then magically capable of processing these items any faster than the Xbox 360 could, which effectively negates most advantages the PS3 holds in terms of storage capacity, particularly when viewed from a "loading tens of gigs worth of crap from the slow BD-ROM" stand-point.
Preach larger storage capacity and resolution all you want.
Larger storage capacity does not mean a damned thing unless you can process it quickly.
Higher resolution graphics mean nothing if your system is not fast enough to use them.
High resolution graphics are not going to be used in conjunction with high-partical models or large pixel counts, as several Sony and Microsoft reps have stated previously, as that would be too much work for the system to do.
Sony themselves have admitted that 1080p would most likely only be used in situations where a developer did not already embelish the pixel count. (i.e. cost-saving)
Resources, as stated by Sony themselves, would be better spent (quality-wise) on higher detail and pixel-count imagery and textures, and therefore 1080p will not be used much.
If you can't read more than your fanboy-ish company tells you then do not, in turn, write. Please.
riskbreaker @ Sep 27th 2006 3:51PM
um... the ps3 can do this for $500. yes, there is a $500 dollar ps3 with a 20gb hdd
Matt @ Sep 27th 2006 3:52PM
The key to being an intelligent videogame commentator is being able to see all sides of things. Both the strengths and weaknesses of your favorite brand and other brands. In short, you really, truely, probably should not have a favorite brand if you wish to maintain credibility, and therefore have anybody actually want to read what you have to say.
Jake @ Sep 27th 2006 5:15PM
How is the PS3 the "latest" in tech, compared with 360, when all of the components were available when the 360 launched.
The main reason that PS3 is out so late is the difficulty with the Blu-ray.
So, PS3 fanboys, I hope the 1 year wait for Blu-ray is worth it.
killploki @ Sep 27th 2006 3:54PM
@67
"we demanded HDMI and a price cut...." yes, sony may have been listening to its fans, but it may have also been doing some damage control from the negative pr leading up to that. as loyal as you say the sony fans are, they would buy the system without the price drop.
i dont understand the whole brand loyalty myself, i buy systems for the games. i plan on owning a 360 and if the ps3 impresses me i will buy that as well. at this point i will wait and see what happens for the holidays. get a good 360 bundle for now, and maybe next year get a ps3 when some better games come out and the price comes down.
aZn_1080p @ Sep 27th 2006 3:55PM
darth pixel thats a good point, the 360 already sounds like a hoover on low, when you add the drive, it will be way too loud... I want silence during quiet film passages, not the sound of a hairdryer.
DBX00 @ Sep 27th 2006 3:58PM
Steve
PC games are built to remain compressed when they are installed on a hard drive. Secondly, while he's looking through that store, see if you find any games that have Dolby HD or run in native 1080p.
My point is that PC gaming has the luxury of building the games around the fact that their is significant amount of compression on the disc and even once the game is installed. Load times and CPU usage would prevent the XBOX from utilizing the CPU for such tasks as decompression when you want to push the graphical envelope of the system.
Tony @ Sep 27th 2006 3:56PM
If Oblivion is the zenith of next gen' gaming then God help us.
Thankfully it, and its use of disc space, isn't as good or as big as it gets. Here's to bigger better games, with less repetitive textures and snow that doesn't follow the player around the landscape.
KBeat @ Sep 27th 2006 3:59PM
@68 LOL
I've got to say as a happy 360 owner, who was quite pleased with all the gaming news from X06 today, I think this add on is going to be bad news for MS. For one, I think it's too expensive. It's essentially a drive unit only, as all the processing is done on the 360 itself. And as a device aimed targeted at videophiles, lack of HDMI is a far more glaring omission than it is on the 360 alone.
Additionally, look what this does for the pro PS3 camp from a sales perspective, as the pitch might go to the average consumer in Best Buy or Circuit City.
"You can by a PS3 and get the latest and greatest DVD technology, wifi connection, motion sensing controls, and next-gen graphics all for $599. To achieve the same with the XBox you'll need to pony up $697 and you'll have to make room for extra equipment."
I'm by no means sold on the PS3, and I'm all over BioShock, but this really muddies the waters on the sales floor for the XBox IMHO.
Nick @ Sep 27th 2006 4:07PM
Exactly, If Oblivion is about a full DVD disc, why stop there? Why should Oblivion be the standard just because its a great looking, great playing game that fits on a dvd? When it comes to next gen, I want it to put my computer to shame, Oblivion looks pretty good on my computer, and I don't feel like I am playing a truly next gen game. I'm just saying that PS3 is going to have the room to truly take advantage of a larger disc medium, even if the systems are completley equal in graphical power. Longer games, cooler cut scenes, and quite possibly sharper graphics that will (in due time, years perhaps) push the power of the system.
Of course this goes with any system, as time goes on developers learn to push an old system as hard as it can go. As they do this the games near the end of a systems life look almost as good as lets say a PS4. I'm just saying a larger storage medium is going to help developers really expand on what the system can do, specifically in the future. I'm not expecting many ps3 games to look amazing, or even be good games at all. Much like any new systems launch lineup, or even the first year for that matter. I'm looking at every system here, ps2, ps3, 360 and gamecube. Now the Wii on the other hand actually looks like it might have a few instant classics when launch hits.
AK @ Sep 27th 2006 4:07PM
DBX,
Then why didn't Super Audio CD, or DVD-Audio succeed?
There was content.
People had CD players, and DVD players. Why didn't these formats take off, if the content was there?
It is more than just content. It is the market's willingness to accept the content, and abandon what they currently own.
lekko @ Sep 27th 2006 4:10PM
isn't the 360's DVD reader only 8x for dual-layer discs, which most games already are? At that speed, BD at 2x would beat out the 360 in read times.
I also remember from way back when that 360 DVDs are limited to 7GB due to formatting. I havn't really been following the 360 that closely, did that change? Also, if that is true, why is that?
Steve @ Sep 27th 2006 4:14PM
@Matt - I apologise if this is wrong (it's been a long day and the brain isn't working too well) but couldn't using uncompressed / unoptimised textures run the risk of flooding the graphics bus and/or graphics memory in certain situations? After all, if you're chucking 2Mb textures around as opposed to, say, 500k (numbers pulled from thin air) you're going to need a LOT more memory / throughput aren't you? And it's not as if either next-gen console has a spare 512Mb dedicated to the graphics hanging around, the PS3 has, what, 256Mb of graphics memory to play with? In theory anyway couldn't that lead to a situation where the PS3 has to take an uncompressed texture, apply compression and then actually chuck it at the graphics card?
With regards to what that space would be used for, the only thing I can realisticly think of is a ton of FMV cutscenes. Which lead me on to another thought, do we know yet what format PS3 game developers are using for their game FMV? Just thinking about the ongoing arguments between HD-DVD and BluRay movies, is this a case of 360 using something like VC-1 while PS3 is going the MPEG2 route for whatever reason? Maybe to ease the decoding load?
agent864 @ Sep 27th 2006 4:14PM
its amazing to read all these "expert" opinions on what can fit on a DVD9 disk. Procedural Synthesis is like magic, you dont even need a disk any more 'cause it can do procedural synthesis. The whole game can be done with 1m HD textures and Procedural Synthesis and voice files that only take up 256k each. Why, its amazing that they didn't stick with a CD drive!
Truth is that none of you know what you're really talking about technically, if you did you'd be too busy working 100 hour weeks actually programming / developing games. Maybe some of you looked some stuff up on wikipedia, but mostly the talk here is all a bunch of talking points that don't really say anything, no matter whats your platform of choice.
DBX00 @ Sep 27th 2006 4:22PM
Matt
I just try to bring some maturity to the discussion. If I weren't around nobody would effectively argue the other side of the coin around here. I'm not exactly a fanboy of any console and plan on getting a PS3 and Wii if third party development holds up.
"Higher resolution graphics mean nothing if your system is not fast enough to use them."
- Wasn't the cell processor built to handle these calculations? I thought one of the benefits of the cell processor is that it could handle some of the GPU processing as well, which is why it was so hard to program for.
Load times for Ridge Racer 7 (I believe it was 100% complete at TGS in 1080p)
- "Namco Bandai's Ridge Racer 7 is gorgeous. After 36 minutes of waiting in line and 13 seconds of loading screens, we got a chance to play a track of one of the few PS3 games running in 1080p." Once again, I don't have to load all the textures from the disc as you may only require a fictional 1 mile radius at a time.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09/22/joystiq-hands-on-ridge-racer-7-ps3/
- I bring up Oblivion because that's the game that XBOX users keep referring to constantly. You ever think that the console version of the game lacked the graphical nature of the PC counterpart because they couldn't fit increased textures into the DVD format because the compression of the game had to be catered towards streaming off a DVD drive instead of installed on a hard disc like a PC game?
Steve @ Sep 27th 2006 4:28PM
The New Revelation, the SXRDs that came out earlier this year do not do more than 1366x768 over VGA.
Look it up for yourself on page 60.
http://www.sonystyle.com/intershoproot/eCS/Store/en/documents/specifications/KDSA2000.pdf
I would also mention for $499 Sony gives you HD playback, 20GB HD, wireless/rechargable controller and HDMI.
MS charges $598 ($399 full system + $199 HD-DVd drive) for HD playback, 20GB, wireless controller. No HDMI, and a rechargeable pack and charger for your controller is $20 more.
MS' bundle price point is truly awful. Sony is killing them on value of you want HD playback.
crono141 @ Sep 27th 2006 4:36PM
But, on the other hand, if you want good games, X360 is killing PS3 on value.
killploki @ Sep 27th 2006 4:53PM
there is no such thing as future proofing. you cant predict what new type of technology will come out in a few years.
even talking about 80 core intell chips, 5 years from now there could be a new type of holographic 3d laser processing core that is equal to 1000 regular cores.
technology evolves too much, too fast to try and stay ahead of it or adapt with it.
Matt @ Sep 27th 2006 4:56PM
Steve, you are pretty much correct.
The only difference, if I recall, is that if a developer wanted to use uncompressed textures, he would then order them all to be thrown at the video card. Obviously 256MB of memory meeting, say, 10GB of video textures would not be pretty. And that's the fundemental problem with consoles, and for the most part even PC gaming.
With a computer, you have the option of a 512MB VRAM video card, and certainly games such as Oblivion and the up-coming Crysis have and will use all the VRAM you have. I've said, many times, that Oblivion looks twice as goood on my PC as my 360 (with an HDTV) and I wasn't lying, that's just how things work. To be fair, my computer is worth roughly $2,000 in parts, whereas my 360? $399.99.
The very point ends up being that no console (and almost no PC) can handle the kind of large-capacity Blu-Ray games that Sony is talking about here, at least not in a disclosed manner.
Basically it's like taking smoke and mirrors and playing games with PR.
The PS3 can use high-resolutions (1080p), and it can store massive amounts of data on Blu-Ray (25GB single and I think 48GB dual layer). Both of these things are true. Nobody is arguing that they are not.
What is not true is the illusion that 25GB of pixels will be shown on-screen at once in 1080p, as Sony would have you believe.
It is either going to be big textures (that are really not much bigger than the 360's because of the PS3's video processing limitations) or a high resolution (that isn't much higher, because in order to run at an acceptable frame-rate, the textures will have to be dumbed-down).
What this all comes down to is that we, as consumers and gamers, will not notice a graphical difference in 95% of the games we play, on either system. Period.
That should effectively, for anybody intelligent enough to read and comprehend vocabulary at the tenth grade level, nullify the arguement on that front.
Then all it comes down to is the price of the two systems, and most importantly the games.
The Xbox 360 is a good choice in that it doesn't require consumers to have high-definition movies unless they want them, but at the same time does not natively support 1080p (unless over a bullshit cable, although it can be argued HDMI is equally bullshit) and the HD-DVD attachment is easily quite large when combined with the side of the 360. At the same time, let's not forget that most PS3 games will not use 1080p.
So the "1080p arguement", if you will, is basically only reserved for Sony fanboys incapable of thinking of anything intelligent to say, and therefore sticking with large terms, terms they do not understand mind you, to try and win an ever-old and failing battle of words.
The Playstation 3 is great for those who want high-definition, particularly those who want Blu-Ray. However, let's face one simple fact:
most people don't give a flying fuck about next-gen movie formats
and, of those who argue they do, probably only twenty-five percent of them can use the Goddamned things to begin with.
Anyway, the Playstation 3 is nice for those who want Blu-Ray movies, and who have the cash for it. It also promises exclusives in the form of Metal Gear Solid 4, SOCOM, and Final Fantasy. But the list (of exclusives) seems to end right there.
Now granted, Microsoft doesn't have much for exclusives on it's system (with Halo being the only game I can think of that anybody cares about, at this point) either, and that brings the arguement to a closing point:
Price. Oh, and availibility also.
The PS3, for 95% of gamers, is going to end up being an Xbox 360 that costs 50% more, plain and simple. You want to know why? We all know the differences between the two systems, but my grandmother does not, and she is the one who will be buying one come Christmas time for Little Billy. And I will tell you right now that, as a former EB employee, those who work at EB and Gamestop have always been quick to point out the advantages the Xbox 360 offers. Why? Because a) they know their customers will come back in November and they can find one, and b) they can find one RIGHT NOW.
"So uh, hey grandma? You wanna do some early Christmas shopping? How about buying an Xbox 360 right now, and avoiding the holiday rush? It's going to be, most likely, the only video game you can find come November, and it's also cheaper than the new Playstation."
It sounds like bullshit to some, but is very much true. Most people will look at a) the $200 (or 50%) difference between the PS3 and the 360 (both because the PS3 will be comprised of 80% high-end units and because any videogame salesman worth his balls in minimum wage-per-hour salary knows the PS3 is as much $600 as the 360 is $400, and that the low-end versions of both are a load of Bullshit), and b) the fact that they can buy a 360 and won't be able to find a PS3 for half a year, and they will make their decision.
Earliy today at X06, Microsoft announced what, either five or six million Xbox 360's having been sold globally, and they expect to break 10M come the end of the year. That's 4 or 5 million systems they expect to sell in November, on black friday, and they are very much correct in assuming it will be possible.
Now that price is out of the way, for those intelligent enough to understand what an average consumer thinks about all this (and the average consumer is the majority, as we hardcore gamers are the minority, therefore they make the sales figures and the systems purchased, not us), let's cover the last point of interest: availibility.
Not only is the Xbox 360 availible now, but even when the PS3 comes out, it will have a lead. Not only will it have a lead in game quantity, but quality.
Now I am the first to admit, my 360 library was not large.
I owned Ghost Recon 3, The Outfit, Dead Rising, and Chromehounds, with Prey, Oblivion, and Battle For Middle-Earth 2 being games I play on PC instead of console.
That's not a very large library, but in my opinion it comprises some of the best (non-sports)games the Xbox 360 has to offer currently (this was before Lego Star Wars 2 came out, btw). Whereas the PS3 launch has two games, that I can think of, that would be remotely interesting at launch:
Resistance: Rise (or Fall?) of Man and Warhawk.
The first of which is probably going to turn up as a rental at best, and the second of which I could see being cool for the fifteen hours the game will probably last, and then immediately be sold (thus probably a rental also), unless it has strong multiplayer. But enough of reviewing games before they come out.
My point is that the Xbox 360 offers the advatange of many games (now, and to come) over the Playstation 3. And when Joe-Blow consumer, of which constitutes the vast majority of games sales, by the way, goes into their local EB Games and sees a Playstation 3 display with eight games (two of which look good) and a SOLD OUT sign for the system, then sees the Xbox 360 display right next to it with maybe 80 games (including Gears of War), probably a dozen of which look good (not counting sports titles) and a sign that says STOCK PLENTIFUL, he'll want to buy it. Immediately. He will then learn that "shit, it is TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS LESS, DOOD", and that will effectively seal the deal for him.
If all of this sounds like bullshit, and to the Sony FanBoys in the audience I imagine it does, then that's fine. But I should not have to remind you that many people agree with what I have just typed, and that there is a very good reason for it.
The Playstation 3 will, I imagine, be a lovely system. It will not, however, be lovely (or worth $600) in November 2006. Perhaps in November 2007, and I would imagine definately by November 2008, but not this year.
If you can't see that, that's fine. I can't imagine Sony's shortage will matter much, though, as nobody in their right, un-biased mind would buy a PS3 at launch. Unless they fucking LOVED airplane games. :)
Flame on.
SeditioN VII @ Sep 27th 2006 5:45PM
PS3 eh? Have fun playing Halo 3 on LIVE, or for that matter ...anything online! PS-Online is free ...cause who would pay for that garbage? PS will always be in MS's shadow when it comes to online pay, all the graphics arguments in the world are not going to change that.
Donovan @ Sep 27th 2006 5:00PM
How is this going to be worth it? Walmart will be selling HD-DVD players for $14.99 by that point.
Matt @ Sep 27th 2006 5:02PM
I, too, have heard it can handle some of the GPU processing, DBX. The problem with this is two-fold: a) the Cell processor would have it's ass-kicked and it's lunch-money stolen, any day of the week, by a real GPU (thus limiting it's effectiveness), and b) all eight (or was it seven?) of the cores on the Cell processor end up sharing the same front side bus. What this means is that if one of the Cell's cores were used for graphics, it would share the same pipeline as the rest of the cores for logic, etc, and would just be slowed down.
Imagine, if you will, the Xbox 360's circuits being an eight-lane high way. The three cores of the system use the eight lanes in the most efficeint way they deem fit.
Now imagine the Playstation 3's circuits as that same eight-lane high way, only instead of three cores congesting it's roadways, you've got seven or eight. Therefore each core can do less work (effectively) and is therefore most likely limited.
Only time will tell how well this holds true, and developers will be the ones who make or break the PS3's ability to deliver content. :)
Lefty @ Sep 27th 2006 5:18PM
360's dvd is 12x not 8 x and at its slowest speed its still as fast as the 2x bluray players cosntant rate
also fanboys argue all u want. today was a good day to be a 360 gamer. live anywhere canlt wait
lekko @ Sep 27th 2006 5:20PM
"What is not true is the illusion that 25GB of pixels will be shown on-screen at once in 1080p, as Sony would have you believe.
It is either going to be big textures (that are really not much bigger than the 360's because of the PS3's video processing limitations) or a high resolution (that isn't much higher, because in order to run at an acceptable frame-rate, the textures will have to be dumbed-down).
What this all comes down to is that we, as consumers and gamers, will not notice a graphical difference in 95% of the games we play, on either system. Period."
....what about more levels? More content? I'm more excited by the idea that you could have game worlds be about 5x larger than last generation, using traditional non-procedural synthesis methods. Or even what about this? Create a world using procedural synthesis, freeze it after it was constructed, modify it and add in your own whatever touches to it to make it interesting, then stream the world off disc like GTA? That would free up your CPU to do other things rather than generating the world itself.
It's another debate entirely if developers actually use the space.. but it only takes one game to really show off what 25gb worlds are, and that game will be PS3 exclusive, and awesome.
Matt @ Sep 27th 2006 5:22PM
That would be awesome, lekko.
Being realistic, however, we have to understand that few (if any games) will take this approach. Certainly the games that fit your proposed bill will be awesome, and I intend to purchase them.
The problem comes in Sony's over-generalizing of the PS3: making the population believe every game will be as you've described, which as we all know is not going to happen.
charles82 @ Sep 27th 2006 5:34PM
hey people how;s it going well i plan buying the 360 hd dvd addon player when it comes out but i got a ? i was wondering if my tv will need an hdmi port or i was wondering if i could hook it up via component cables like m 360 on my hd tv