PS3 Details From Sony Game Day

Gamespot has up the record of a liveblog from yesterday's Sony Game day event. They dish a medium-sized helping of dirt, with information like controller price ($50), first-party title price ($60), what is actually in the box, launch window titles, and a bit on what the online experience will offer. From the article: "2:04 p.m.: Hirai says the final boxed product is rolling off the assembly lines as we speak. Then he shows the retail packaging. He says they will have 22 launch-window titles, including games like FEAR, Call of Duty 3, Full Auto 2, Genji: Days of the Blade, NBA Live 07, NBA 2K7, NHL 2K7, Rainbow Six Vegas, Tony Hawk's Project 8, Untold Legends, and Riiidge Racer 7. (Yes, he said 'Riiidge.')" Meanwhile, 1up has some details on the PS3's pre-order status in Japan ... if you're curious. As well you might be, because importing a PS3 is illegal, doncha know.

Re:How is it possible?

[Manmademan]

Resistance: Fall of Man is absent from your list but is widely considered to be the system seller at launch.

Re:Importing is illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's Lik Sang's version of the story. [lik-sang.com]

Re:PS3 - An opportunity for Sony OS???

[DrXym]

The PS3 can run Linux so it already has its own OS. It's not clear if Yellow Dog Linux 5.0 [terrasoftsolutions.com] is the official Linux for the PS3, but it's still a pretty awesome to see it at all. The FAQ even says you can download it for free (though paying for it gets you updates). Interestingly YDL has a Cell SDK and cluster management software. So you really could build a Beowulf cluster of these.

Details are pretty light so far. I'd like to know if YDL runs alongside the PS3 cross bar media interface, resides in it, or what.

Re:What "launch window titles" really means

[oc255]

If you have a Geforce 7950 Quad SLi setup you could easily play any game at 1920x1080 @60fps and probably could have 16xAF and 16xAA going at the same time...

Ok, good point. Let's go shopping!

- 7950GT from Newegg (times 4) = $1200
- We need a LCD monitor that can do 1920. Let's go with a Dell 24" = $1,199
- Quad pci-e motherboard = $200
- I'll assume we have a nice CPU and assume that we have nice memory that plays nice on the new chipset

Ok, we're at $2599 at the best. But then we have a PC that we can do other things with, like Folding @ Home. Oh wait, that only runs on ATI cards. Ok, well to avoid flaming anymore ... I guess it comes down to a few things:

- PCs are general purpose machines that don't compete with new consoles.
- Economies of scale, standard parts make consoles amazing bang-per-buck devices.
- PCs have advantages over consoles in many respects but not in "just play" features.
- People say their PCs do 1920. Maybe they have a really nice, old CRT? Maybe they have a 24" LCD?

The PS3's GPU is probably similar to a Geforce 7800GTX
Please source this. I say that the PS3's architecture is completely different from a PC in no comparable format except real-world tests that aren't even available yet. At the very minimum, people who have seen the PS3 in person running at 1080p have said it's "amazing and fluid". I haven't seen it yet.

How do you design a game that can run on a Pentium 4 2GHz with a Radeon 9800 and still take advantage of a the high end system I described?
You detect for card features, card model, opengl/dx version and whatever else you can:
if (glGetString(GL_SHADING_LANGUAGE_VERSION) == "shiny happy version") {
  enableBlinkyBlinky();
}

or what-not. But I think what you were trying to hit on is the question of supporting change. Which is the advantage of consoles. Me, personally, I do other stuff than games so I try to put my money into my PC. However, very rarely have I seen this so-called upgradability. I put in a new video card and then fork-lift the whole thing:

- Changing CPU vendors for the best-of-breed CPU means a new PC-stack (mb,memory)
- Going from PCI to PCI-E means a new PC-stack (mb,memory,maybe cpu)
- Going from integrated intel 945 to something that runs Vista's Aero might mean any of the above.

As usual, there are trade-offs. But simply saying "upgradability of PC" doesn't always work out in practice. The way it's worked for me and my friends:

- New PC
- One new videocard upgrade that fits in XYZ slot
- Completely new PC because majority of old parts need to be replaced completely.

And to further illustrate the real point is, PCs are more iterative.
- New Console
- New PC
- One new videocard upgrade that fits in XYZ slot
- Completely new PC because majority of old parts need to be replaced completely.
- New Console ... If you were to keep up with the technology. Ah whatever, time will tell. Enthusiasts don't run anything. Dreamcast was a better system and the PS2 won (much to the anger of many). The Wii might be a better system, who knows what will happen. Certainly, the "Emotion Engine" was overhyped. But in reality, it delivered more than the PC did (for a while).

Re:What "launch window titles" really means

[Ender Ryan]

1600 * 1200 pixels == 1,920,000 pixels

1920 * 1080 pixels == 2,073,600 pixels

Almost the same number of pixels.

Why would it be scaled? How many games produce graphics in a target resolution and then scale? The only considerable difference here is the aspect ratio. That's it.

Re:What "launch window titles" really means

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you aren't the original propagator of this FUD, but...

"1. The unit draws 2X the current of the 360. The means the unit has to dissipate 2X the heat of the 360, so don't tell me Sony isn't going to have overheating issues. And since they (proudly) display that they don't use a brick (ever get the feeling the PS3 is just Sony trying to knock-off the Xbox1?), the heat sources are concentrated inside the unit. It is appropriate that the thing looks like a George Forman Grill."

This FUD just refuses to go away, doesn't it? The actual unit has a power supply rated at 3.2A*120V [dreamwiz.com], so 384W is the absolute upper limit on power consumption. There is usually a safety margin in these things, so the actual average consumption should be significantly less than that. For comparison, I understand the 360 draws 205W from a power supply rated at 600W, so 2x is just plain hyperbole.

"2. The controllers have non-removable rechargable batteries in them. Once they go, the controller has to be thrown away. I guess Sony found a place to dump their exploding lithium ion batteries..."

Again, this was a misunderstanding by a game journalist in Japan that has been corrected [impress.co.jp] (sorry, Japanese link)--the battery is in fact removable, but will not be sold publicly for now. Which brings us to the next point....

"3. Because of the non-removable batteries, you don't have the convenience of swapping batteries mid-game and continuing to play wireless. This is one of those features that isn't flashy, but once you've used it, you can't live without it. On the 360, if your batteries die mid-game you can quickly swap in another battery pack. Microsoft also gave you the option of using standard batteries or rechargable packs."

...which is the same as how Nintendo DS's battery works, and I've never heard anyone complaining about that. (And if you own one, you know its battery lasts long enough that it really is not a problem in real life.) If non-removable batteries for a handheld is a non-issue, how bad can it be for a living game controller? It is an issue for the 360 only because the controller battery is rated to last a measly 7 hours. Meanwhile, the battery in the PS3 controller is rated to last 30 hours per charge, and if your gaming session lasts longer than that you really need to go get some sleep instead.

By the way, you don't have to throw away the controller if the battery dies; you can have the battery replaced by a technician, just like with compact MP3 players. I don't know how much that will cost, but hopefully it will be significantly less than ~$45, which is the cost of a new controller.