PS3 will outsell Wii, Xbox 360 handily, says firm

hmm, i really doubt that this but you never know.

Quote:

---

Report that says the Sony PlayStation 3 will eventually outsell the Xbox 360 and the Wii, on route to 127 million units sold.

---

Quote:

---

Overall, SACHD sees 103 million units sold for the Wii, and 127 million for the PS3. They did not offer a prediction for the Xbox 360.

---

Lolwut. How can they make that assumption then?

Since an analytics firm saids this, we should all do our part and go out and buy a PS3 to make this impossible goal come into fruition. /

/sarcasm

PS1 10 year sales = 100+ Million in sales
PS2 10 year sales = 140+ Million in sales (and STILL selling)
PSP 5 year sales = 60+ Million in sales
PS3 3 year sales = 35+ Million or 10+ Million each year with 2009 FY alone selling more than 13 Million out of a 10+ year plan as well.

These are facts people. Do the math.

I think they are definitely right about it eventually outselling the 360, but I'm skeptical about it outselling the Wii. Don't own either of the units, but the Wii has a pretty big lead.

I could see this happening in time.

I can see it out selling the Xbox, maybe NOT the Wii. With it's expandability (HDD and the like) and its versatility as a gaming system, web browser, media hub and online gaming community, which is FREE!!!, I could see it happening. I know that the Xbox has all this but I think that the PS3 is a much better and more powerful platform (this is just opinion).

Who cares if it outsells the Wii. If it lasts for 10+ years I hope it does. The fact is that the PS3 is finally making a few bucks for Sony and the Wii has been profitable since day 1. So "outsell" does not necessarily mean more profits for Sony. ---Chikn.

I cant say i dont believe it. PS3 will outsell xbox360, but not sure about the WII. The Wii had people buying it that dont even play videogames normally. Esecially for Wii fit.

It's all in how you look at it...if the Wii stays until at least the end of 2012 then it's estimated to be around 100 Million whereas the PS3 will be around longer thus making more eventual sales. I also don't see the 360 holding 2nd place much longer. End of this year I am estimating is where the PS3 either ties it WW or passes it slightly. BUT that can change if a price drop comes for the 360 before Christmas 2010 (which is highly likely).

Edited typo

In a couple of years the PS3 will probably be an UltraSlim selling for $100 like the PS2 is now...at that point, I can see it having a chance to outsell the total number of wII's sold.

Originally posted by Oner:

---

PS1 10 year sales = 100+ Million in sales
PS2 10 year sales = 140+ Million in sales (and STILL selling)
PSP 5 year sales = 60+ Million in sales
PS3 3 year sales = 35+ Million or 10+ Million each year with 2009 FY alone selling more than 13 Million out of a 10+ year plan as well.

These are facts people. Do the math.

---

Very true statement. Sony has implemented this "10 year plan" on all of their consoles. Even this far into the PS3's life, the PS2 is still supported. Microsoft and Nintendo quickly end most support for older systems when a new machine is released. Look at the xbox for example. The Xbox 360 came along and it started getting harder to get new games on the xbox. Nintendo quickly moved from the gamecube to the Wii as well. Face it these companies are not thinking long term. In my opinion, the PS2 is the most successful console in history. Almost 145 million units sold and still going strong. So, even when we get the PS4, the PS3 will still be supported until the end of the 10 year lifespan. I love Sony consoles. In my house we have 2 ps3s, 3 psps, and 2 ps2s. I like other consoles, but the Playstation brand has been in my house for over 15 years. My children have their own psps ps3 and ps2 (well their ps3 is still mine, it is a backwards compatible 80 gig unit that has had 3 YLoD repairs and a disc drive replacement). They got that one when the disc drive went out and I bought a slim. I understand all consoles appeal to certain people. I think all consoles are good in their own way (xbox live is way better than PSN),but a lot of people tha may have wanted a PS3 ended up buying a 360 or a Wii because they were cheaper. Now that the price is $300 that entire ps2 community is gradually making the switch to PS3. $600 for my first PS3 was ridiculous. When I bought it the guy tried to get me to buy a 360 and a Wii because it was only $50 more than a PS3 by itself. So imagine how many people if were told that line ended up not buying a PS3 at first. Well those days are over and the PS3 is now a powerhouse once again. I know I would rather play PS exclusives than any other consoles exclusive.

Originally posted by ChiknLitl:

---

Who cares if it outsells the Wii. If it lasts for 10+ years I hope it does. The fact is that the PS3 is finally making a few bucks for Sony and the Wii has been profitable since day 1. So "outsell" does not necessarily mean more profits for Sony. ---Chikn.

---

Also another very true statement

Sorry for double post.

Originally posted by Oner:

---

It's all in how you look at it...if the Wii stays until at least the end of 2011 then it's estimated to be around 100 Million whereas the PS3 will be around longer thus making more eventual sales. I also don't see the 360 holding 2nd place much longer. End of this year I am estimating is where the PS3 either ties it WW or passes it slightly. BUT that can change if a price drop comes for the 360 before Christmas 2010 (which is highly likely).

---

@ Oner....True. Very good points.

Originally posted by ChiknLitl:

---

Who cares if it outsells the Wii. If it lasts for 10+ years I hope it does. The fact is that the PS3 is finally making a few bucks for Sony and the Wii has been profitable since day 1. So "outsell" does not necessarily mean more profits for Sony. ---Chikn.

---

Sony consoles in the first 3-4 years always take a loss. Always have (though actually most console manufacturers have except for the Wii this gen). Sony makes their money on the back end of Games and such but now they have additional items like Digital Download Movies, Game Content and such to subjugate the hardware losses while they refine and do cost cutting measures to then start profiting on said hardware from the early middle to end of it's life cycle. So to say "does not necessarily mean more profits for Sony" is not really correct because again ~ it's all in how you look at it...especially when you look at it's previous proven track record of which is their business model. Basically the method to their madness that others see as a "problem" when there really isn't.

For 3 hundred dollars you would be an idiot not to buy one. I own an xbox but I'm sure I'll get one just to have a blueray player/online multimedia/etc in another room.

The reason why the PS3 will outsell the 360 is because the PS3's lineup is not dead, and if they run out of ideas, they can pay developers to bring a sequel to PS1/2 classics whilst MS will offer Halo, Halo and Halo.

The PS3 outselling the Wii.
It's possible but IMO, it's rather unlikely.

What will convince me that the PS3 will outsell the Wii is that the PS3 gets another price drop by the end of this year or Q1-Q2 next year.

Everyone, including "analyst" that think this is going to come true, is smoking the pole and paid to say such things. Analysts have been wrong comment after comment after comment and once in a great while they get em right.

The Wii is number 1 because it appeals (still does) to the mass audience, though it totally neglicts the adult audience.

From working at Gamestop for 9 years now, I can tell you, in this area (midwest north america) 360 outsells PS3 almost 7 to 1. No amount of puffing up your chest is going to change that.

It's not a matter of exclusives anymore because 360 outsold the "exclusives" on the PS3. The amount of time between really is meaningless. PS3 is also in trouble of alienating its fanbase EVEN MORE since 3D Tv's are coming into play which Sony will bring along with some 3D Games. Alienating everyone who just purchased a new 1080p HD-TV. Plus you fail to realize that the entertainment industry has already rapped and pillaged the money of the average consumer. HDTV was probably the worst iteration of new technology ever (DVD being probably the best). HD-TV started on TUBE's with COMPONENT. Then moved to Projectors w/ component at 720p (not even 1080i), then to DLP w/ dvi(at 1080i, not P), then to Plasma on DVI(1080p started to come into play), then plasma and lcd's with HDMI, which A LOT of people purchased the 720p versions (not 1080p) then a new version of HDMI w/ HDCP came out.

Now with every single new technology you've created, you've pissed off everyone else that purchased something, before. The lesson consumers have learned is, DONT EVER BUY ANYTHING NEW. (for a classic example of consumers learning this lesson, look at Blu-Ray (the movies, not the players, cause PS3 skews those numbers) sales. Blu-Ray is failing bad. You can cry and moan about this all you want, but on general titles, DVD outsells blu-ray 8 to 1. I believe batman was 3to1 in favor of DVD. In fact, I dont think there has been one single title that has outsold the DVD version, to date.

And now the entertainment industry wants to introduce 3D TV's? because they cant seem to understand why people arent adopting new technology (looking specifically at blu-ray). It's only going to get worse.

Anyways back on topic, if you know how the Cell processor works, you already know that the PS3 is INFERIOR for gaming. Sure if the PS3 was crunching mathematical small burst algorhtyms it could own, but games arent written in that way. I have yet to play a single PS3 title that doesn't slow down in FPS when there is a lot going on-screen. PS3 is doomed not because of developers and games or anything it. Its doomed because its hardware was never meant for gaming. No matter how much finger pointing you do, you cant change the heart and brain of the PS3.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

From working at Gamestop for 9 years now, I can tell you, in this area (midwest north america) 360 outsells PS3 almost 7 to 1. No amount of puffing up your chest is going to change that.

---

LoL! Please tell me you don't really think your "midwest north america" location = the world or is representative of it? Sorry but that is down right comical and I just have to laugh if so! The PS3 has been outselling the 360 for months now, is in short supply currently and is only about 5 Million behind the 360 after a 1 year head start, a huge installed base by then AND until recently always being about $100 more expensive!

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

It's not a matter of exclusives anymore because 360 outsold the "exclusives" on the PS3. The amount of time between really is meaningless.

---

I think you need to read this ~ http://www.gamesthirst.com/2010/01/05/wh...ll-thats-a-lie/ plus the 360 does not have a whole lot of variety (or anywhere near the amount the PS has) which is why SOME titles do better on the 360...because there really isn't much else. But there are even quite a few multiplatform titles that sell better on the PS than the 360 ~ Devil May Cry 4, Burnout Paradise, Tomb Raider, Street Fighter IV, Resident Evil 5, Tekken 6, Batman: Arkham Asylum to name a few and that also correlates to Game Devs making better profits on PlayStation platforms over MS ~ I think these are figures from 2009 if I am correct

Namco: 57% sold more on the PS3
EA: 17% total revenue on PS3 and 10% on 360
UbiSoft: 20% on PS3 and 10% on 360

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

PS3 is also in trouble of alienating its fanbase EVEN MORE since 3D Tv's are coming into play which Sony will bring along with some 3D Games. Alienating everyone who just purchased a new 1080p HD-TV.

---

What you seem to fail to realize, discuss or address is that 3D is absolutely and totally OPTIONAL so it cannot alienate ANYONE. Just like it won't for Movies on discs.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

Now with every single new technology you've created, you've pissed off everyone else that purchased something, before. The lesson consumers have learned is, DONT EVER BUY ANYTHING NEW. (for a classic example of consumers learning this lesson, look at Blu-Ray (the movies, not the players, cause PS3 skews those numbers) sales. Blu-Ray is failing bad. You can cry and moan about this all you want, but on general titles, DVD outsells blu-ray 8 to 1. I believe batman was 3to1 in favor of DVD. In fact, I dont think there has been one single title that has outsold the DVD version, to date.

And now the entertainment industry wants to introduce 3D TV's? because they cant seem to understand why people arent adopting new technology (looking specifically at blu-ray). It's only going to get worse.

---

Again more not so true information there buddy ~

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=4245

http://gizmodo.com/5433090/i-dont-think-...u+ray-really-is

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/1796169-post3940.html

http://hd.engadget.com/2009/01/06/blu-ra...-outpaces-dvds/

What you fail to see is the GROWTH and upswing that BD & HD in general has so far! Plus you can't just say "cause PS3 skews those numbers" for the sales of BD players...it's ALSO a BD player so you CAN'T choose to omit it as a valid option! I actually hope that Ryu77 sees this and drops some quality info about this since he's the resident BD guru around here.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

Anyways back on topic, if you know how the Cell processor works, you already know that the PS3 is INFERIOR for gaming. Sure if the PS3 was crunching mathematical small burst algorhtyms it could own, but games arent written in that way. I have yet to play a single PS3 title that doesn't slow down in FPS when there is a lot going on-screen. PS3 is doomed not because of developers and games or anything it. Its doomed because its hardware was never meant for gaming. No matter how much finger pointing you do, you cant change the heart and brain of the PS3.

---

Now I know you are misinformed and it's not even worth showing any number of links, valid & verifiable PROOF to show you how wrong you are. This must be a joke. It has to be. Because the old "Sony is doomed" is very 2007. But what I would really like to know is what do you have say about Microsoft's Dieing/Disappearing first party studios and continued sole reliance on 3rd party? Since you seem to be so in the know because of your 9 years of Gamestop Employment...

Microsoft has very few first party studios

Quote:

---

Rob Dyer, SCEA's senior VP of publisher relations has said that while Microsoft is more likely to attract third-party developed exclusives such as Mass Effect, it doesn't have enough first-party studios delivering the same level of content as Sony.

"They have very few first-party studios at Microsoft," Dyer said, in an interview with IndustryGamers. "Bungie's next Halo is the last one, Rare rarely puts out anything, you've got Peter Molyneux with his Fable stuff... but they don't have first-party development studios inside at Redmond or anywhere for that matter. We do.

"So rather than putting their money behind that, they've been going to Epic or Valve or BioWare to do what they did with Mass Effect, and that's where they throw their dollars."

"We're not going to compete with Microsoft on that front," he added. "But what we have is a global business here. Our global business is bigger than 360's and will continue to get bigger than 360, and people are seeing that. We passed them in Europe and they don't even exist in Japan, and we're going to catch them and pass them here in the US as well."

The PS3's $299 price point has "resonated", Dyer said, to the extent that many US stores are now seeing shortages. But the even better news, he added, is how the increase in the console's installed base has translated into software sales.

"They had a year's head start against us, so we've been playing catch-up ball," he said. "Before the price cut, they had a two-to-one advantage; if you were a third-party publisher looking at the index, you should have been selling twice the number of units on the 360 as you would on the PS3."

However, that hasn't been Sony's findings, and Dyer says the ratio is down to 1.6 to 1.0 - "What we've been finding is that outside of the shooter category we literally over-index every single category - sports, fighting, action/adventure, music, etc."

"We do better for our publishing community than 360 does," Dyer stated, drawing attention in particular to Madden, which he says had an index of 1.4 to 1.0.

"That's only going to get better and better as the installed base continues to grow."

"What is going to be the driving force is either exclusive ad campaigns, like the Madden campaign, or exclusive content like we had with Batman.

"The PS3 version outsold the 360 version, and what we've said to [developers] is, 'if you take advantage of what the PS3 can deliver – more content on the Blu-ray disc, better graphics, being able to get more of what the player wants onto the disc – you're going to see those sales translate'."

---

By no means do I claim that the one store (actually a few in the region) that I work at speaks for the whole country. Just saying how it sells around here. In the U.S. most the stats I have seen show 360 > PS3. however, overseas, PS3 > 360 and I think a lot of that has to do with where Sony's homeland is and they amount of money they've spent on advertising the PS3 (here in the u.s. i've historically seen more PS3 ad's touting blu-ray then gaming, now of course, its the "everything" machine).

The funny thing about stats and the links you provide is, people always have a way of proving your point. Am I saying the PS3 sucks? Nope not at all. What am I saying then? I am saying where it is now, is likely how it's going to stay. I dont see developers squeezing any more out of the CELL processor and for the record, I was not joking. I know A LOT about the CELL processor, probably too much. its an awesome piece of equipment, but it's never going to live up to the LONG TERM needs of video games. That's not me ripping on it, I actually think the CELL was a good idea, until Sony did their typical marketing with it. (puff up chest, give up big false numbers (ms does it too), etc etc etc). If you havent already you can read all you need to know bout the CELL here http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2379 (i believe they have a xenon article found in the 360 as well).

And on an even weirdo note, its been 5 years since the ps3 was first announced, they've had 2+ years to develop a wii alternative and instead you get Playstation Move, which is exactly like teh Wii w/ a depth field. Seriously?! that's their answer?

I take sources on the internet as just that sources on the internet. YOu are right in showing me what you are trying to say, and I can find you a bunch of reputable sources telling you teh same thing on DVD/360. So its a horse a piece. Until then, the dust has already settled and nothing has changed. It's still Wii, then 360, then PS3. Until that changes, we can just laugh at eachothers views.

Oh and I just say this on a PS website
----
Sony managed to push 360,100 PlayStation 3s in the US for February, according to the NPD Group. Those sales put Sony’s console in fourth place, behind the Nintendo DS, Xbox 360, and Wii. PS3 sales grew from 276,900 the month prior to 360,100.

The top spot went to the Nintendo DS with 613,200, followed by Xbox 360 with 422,000. Nintendo pushed 397,900 Wiis in February, marking the second time the Xbox 360 outsold the Wii. The Wii was the only console to see a sales drop.

Sony’s other product, The PSP and PlayStation 2 sold 133,400 and 101,900 units respectively. Hardware sales reached $426.4 million USD in February, down from last year where consumers spent $534.2 million.
----
360 outsells the Wii, for a 2nd month in a row. (in the u.s.)

here is the link
http://www.psu.com/NPD-Group--Sony-pushe...-a008727-p0.php

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

I dont see developers squeezing any more out of the CELL processor and for the record, I was not joking. I know A LOT about the CELL processor, probably too much. its an awesome piece of equipment, but it's never going to live up to the LONG TERM needs of video games. That's not me ripping on it, I actually think the CELL was a good idea, until Sony did their typical marketing with it. If you havent already you can read all you need to know bout the CELL here http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2379 (i believe they have a xenon article found in the 360 as well).

---

If going by the history of the PS1 & PS2 has shown us anything it is that Sony makes a console that grows, improves and gets better/more refined tools over the years which translates into a clear progression in graphics, environments, physics and such. To believe that you "dont see developers squeezing any more out of the CELL processor" is a bit short sighted. Especially when 2 very recent titles have implemented a certain adaptation of AA which rivals (actually surpasses) what even PC's can do! The Saboteur is the first title to utilize a 16-32x anti-aliasing technique which is very early on in it's development stage while the second game which is just a little known game called God of War 3 has also implemented the same technique to a much greater extent and looks to be a visually stunning power house! Every year the PS3 has proven to grow with the start of a title like Uncharted 1 (which for an early title STILL is hard to beat) then to GT5Prologue, on through to MGS4, Killzone 2 and very recently Uncharted 2 (150 awards plus numerous GOTY awards along with best graphics etc.).

And about reading up on the cell... I too can provide extensive links about the Cell, the PS3's Motherboard, XDR Ram, RSX and even an analysis about how cost effective and powerful it is if used for other purposes all day long. But specifications and stats (which are correct I do agree) are not the same as real world application or usage; and the real world shows us that the PS3's capabilities in ALL aspects (speed, power, throughput and more) is unrivaled for a console. Bar none. This cannot be denied nor just brushed off with a slighted opinion about the difficulties in programming/using the Cell's architecture. It is not 2007 anymore and the proof is clearly visible with each AAA exclusive title that seems to come out quite regularly as of late, just as previous gens have.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

and on an even weirdo note, its been 5 years since the ps3 was first announced, they've had 2+ years to develop a wii alternative and instead you get Playstation Move, which is exactly like teh Wii w/ a depth field. Seriously?! that's their answer?

---

Actually if you want to be accurate then you would have to cite that Sony actually began their Motion Controller Last Gen with the PS EyeToy and had started developing/using a Controller device with it a minimum of over 8 years ago (I have numerous videos, links & such but I think we can agree this is truthful information). So while Ninty definitely are currently the most successful, to omit that Sony hadn't pioneered their own viable platform accessory in this field (and probably influenced other companies) today and more specifically because Dr. Richard Marx did show games and discussed ideas VERY similar to what the Wii has done and absolutely what MS is doing with Natal (since the tech in Natal was actually used in early PS2 Motion Control/EyeToy development and is not exactly doing anything different from what it has already accomplished) again you can't just use a slighted opinion or fail to acknowledge the facts as a valid explanation, alternative or excuse. If anything it's the other way around and MS/Ninty are the alternatives because Sony is a vital key part to where they are at, or are going today!

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

Oh and I just say this on a PS website
----
Sony managed to push 360,100 PlayStation 3s in the US for February, according to the NPD Group. Those sales put Sony’s console in fourth place, behind the Nintendo DS, Xbox 360, and Wii. PS3 sales grew from 276,900 the month prior to 360,100.

The top spot went to the Nintendo DS with 613,200, followed by Xbox 360 with 422,000. Nintendo pushed 397,900 Wiis in February, marking the second time the Xbox 360 outsold the Wii. The Wii was the only console to see a sales drop.

Sony’s other product, The PSP and PlayStation 2 sold 133,400 and 101,900 units respectively. Hardware sales reached $426.4 million USD in February, down from last year where consumers spent $534.2 million.
----
360 outsells the Wii, for a 2nd month in a row. (in the u.s.)

here is the link
http://www.psu.com/NPD-Group--Sony-pushe...-p0.php

---

Again NPD does not equal the World Wide Stage and that is more important plus the shear amount of failed 360's & LIVE! bannings over the years have absolutely caused repurchases of which only inflates the 360's installed base. So the "5 Million" lead is a lot smaller than what most would like to admit or discuss properly. But is you want to discuss status this gen then yes your earlier comment of "It's still Wii, then 360, then PS3" is correct (currently) but when you look at the larger scope of things it's more like Sony (PSP, PS2, PS3) & Nintendo (Wii, DS) are neck and neck while Microsoft (360) is behind. Way behind.


Edit: I just came across this info that shows some estimations for 2010 so far ~

Quote:

---

PS3 Just Passes 360 In Worldwide February Results

February saw an outstanding number for the Xbox 360 in North America, surpassing even the Nintendo Wii and claiming the month as the best February in the 360's history. Although the PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii do seem to be experiencing major shortages in the US, it's still quite impressive to see such a big gap between Microsoft's console and every other one.

In America, The Xbox 360 sold approx. 422,000 units for the month of February, followed by the Wii at over 395,000 and the PlayStation 3 with just over 360,000 units. While it does seem to be a great year for the 360, Nintendo's DS managed to sell the most with a whopping 613,000+.

Europe and other countries (not counting Japan) see a different story. The PlayStation 3 continued making its mark by outselling the Xbox 360 weekly for the month of February. Countries including Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Australia and more saw a rather large gap between the PS3 and 360. Total sales for these countries including the UK stood at close to 200,000 units for the 360 and over 300,000 for PS3. The Wii stayed ahead with a solid 425,000.

Japan continues to sing the same song. The PlayStation 3 and Wii gave a strong showing with 108.5K and 133K respectively. The Xbox 360, although unsurprising, gave it's all with over 11,500 units sold the entire month.

In total, despite the shortages, all three systems showed a good number (approximation) <Mod edit ~ this is JUST for the month NOT all of 2010 that is below>:

Nintendo Wii - 1,154,918
PlayStation 3 - 742,358
Xbox 360 - 614,696

Total sales numbers for 2010 continue to look strong for all three systems. The PlayStation 3, even with the fantastic numbers on Microsoft's console, still gets the lead of almost half a million units with 1,837,997 (PS3) and 1,431,991 (360). Sales numbers for all three systems should get progressively more impressive later this year when shortages go away...

---

I have 5 xbox, 1 ps3, and 1 wii console. I use all 5 xbox systems all over the house, I use the PS3 once a month or once every 2 months.

The Wii... I haven't turned my on for around over a year. I hate it and it was mistake. I want HD graphics and can't stay playing n64 games in a new white console. I would love the Wii if it offered HD quality games at 1080p.

I fail you see what 2007 has to do with anything. The ps3 in 2007 is the still the same ps3 in 2010 (minus all the features that were removed from the ps3). I agree with you that developers found a way to pull out a lot of neat tricks from the non-AA PS2. But it was worth it to developers because there was such a large installed user base (paying customers) that developers could take their time and in the end, it would more than likely pay off.

As it sits right now, the only machine out there that is "crushing" the competition like the PS2 was, is the Wii and developers really cant seem to find much of a use for the Wiimotes besides the typical party games you see on the system now.

So while you can point that in the past the PS2 was unique (not more poweful, just unique, xbox 1 always looked better(though it came out much later and was a 3 billion dollar money loss PROJECT to see if they could make a dent into the video games business)) is actually meaningless. Its a different time, different economy and the past doesnt prove anything. Just look at the HD-DVD vs BLU-RAY "battle". Blu-ray was a loser in every aspect, but they promised more profits to the studios and claimed it to be uncopyable, so the studios bought in, even the Blu-ray had the EXACT same codec(same res MPEG 4) as the HD-DVD's and only offered a higher throughput on the audio channel, is generally meaningless to consumers.

I find it interesting that Sony has spent more money on Blu-Ray than anything else in the companies entire history. Sony wants the "standard" so they can make bank and kill the users right to back up their data. (sony hates piracy, which they should, but they have NO right to tell me what I can do and can not do with MY purchased product).

So the point I am making is (in case you didnt receive it, i get off track at times) regardless if its 2007 or 2010, the PS3 is STILL THE SAME MACHINE. Low on memory (as the 256MB is shared between system and RSX chip) and has a processor that developers can't actually take advantage off. The main SPE controls ALL the PPE's instruction sets, meaning that developer can only tell the SPE to do it the spe waits for the next available PPE and sends the task over.

the problem with this is, even if developers did find a way to write the code that would show how awesome the PS3 could be for gaming, Sony doesnt let them as the DIE on the processor is hard coded to not allow individual processor writes. (I know this because I wanted to write something in ASSEMBLY to show how awesome the PS3 could be, but was halted early on when I found out you can't write to invididual cores. I use the word CORE losely as its actually a very dumbed down core / a math-co processor)

So teh things the hurt the PS3 = MEMORY available to developers (which is why so many games have slow down and pop up/short field of view) and an overly controlling SPE w/ no individual write access to the 7 PPE's. Meaning that developers cant even take advantage of mutli-threading their code.

Now I admit, I am eager to see what developers can squeeze out of the CELL for gaming. But while I am eager I am less then hopeful to be blown away as I know the architecture is doomed in the long run.

But I am eager to see what developers can do with the NVidias new chipset w/ CUDA.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

I fail you see what 2007 has to do with anything. The ps3 in 2007 is the still the same ps3 in 2010.

---

It has to do with the old "Sony is doomed", "teh POS3 is too difficultz to progz 4" and the Cell and/or RSX is not good for gaming excuses. THAT is what is 2007. It just doesn't hold water or is truthful/valid anymore.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

As it sits right now, the only machine out there that is "crushing" the competition like the PS2 was, is the Wii and developers really cant seem to find much of a use for the Wiimotes besides the typical party games you see on the system now.

---

I absolutely agree on both points but you can't overlook or dismiss how the PS3 is the third fastest selling console of all time behind the Wii & PS2. That information is nothing to omit or play down. And as far as the typical party games that the Wii is riddled with that is also where it falls short and people are realizing now and since that is the MAIN aspect of the Wii it will be stuck in a catch 22 because of it and possibly stagnate itself pretty badly. Whereas the PS Move is still only an optional feature IF people want to support it, thus there is more lee way to cover more bases.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

<referencing the xbox>...though it came out much later and was a 3 billion dollar money loss PROJECT to see if they could make a dent into the video games business)) is actually meaningless. Its a different time, different economy and the past doesnt prove anything.

---

Last I read it was more like 7-10 Billion un-recouped combined losses between the Xbox & 360. But that is just a bullet point.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

Just look at the HD-DVD vs BLU-RAY "battle". Blu-ray was a loser in every aspect, but they promised more profits to the studios and claimed it to be uncopyable, so the studios bought in, even the Blu-ray had the EXACT same codec(same res MPEG 4) as the HD-DVD's and only offered a higher throughput on the audio channel, is generally meaningless to consumers.

---

First time I heard that bit of info. I guess the extra space, better quality disc scratching protection and more overall support from others within the BDA that helped it "win"

Apple Inc.
Dell Inc.
Hewlett-Packard
Hitachi, Ltd.
Intel Corporation
LG Electronics
Mitsubishi Electric
Panasonic Corporation
Pioneer Corporation
Royal Philips Electronics
Samsung Electronics
Sharp Corporation
Sony Corporation
Sun Microsystems
TDK Corporation
Thomson SA
20th Century Fox
Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group
Warner Bros. Entertainment

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

I find it interesting that Sony has spent more money on Blu-Ray than anything else in the companies entire history. Sony wants the "standard" so they can make bank and kill the users right to back up their data. (sony hates piracy, which they should, but they have NO right to tell me what I can do and can not do with MY purchased product).

---

Sorry but I don't agree. As I posted above Blu-ray is more than just "Sony" but somehow they are ALWAYS at the center of directed focus when it comes to it and that simply is not true and also very "2007". As far as standards, piracy and such now you are going off on other tangents that is a separate issue off of what this originated from but you get back to the topic below. So whatever.

Originally posted by autolycus:

---

So the point I am making is (in case you didnt receive it, i get off track at times) regardless if its 2007 or 2010, the PS3 is STILL THE SAME MACHINE. Low on memory (as the 256MB is shared between system and RSX chip) and has a processor that developers can't actually take advantage off. The main SPE controls ALL the PPE's instruction sets, meaning that developer can only tell the SPE to do it the spe waits for the next available PPE and sends the task over.

the problem with this is, even if developers did find a way to write the code that would show how awesome the PS3 could be for gaming, Sony doesnt let them as the DIE on the processor is hard coded to not allow individual processor writes. (I know this because I wanted to write something in ASSEMBLY to show how awesome the PS3 could be, but was halted early on when I found out you can't write to invididual cores. I use the word CORE losely as its actually a very dumbed down core / a math-co processor)

So teh things the hurt the PS3 = MEMORY available to developers (which is why so many games have slow down and pop up/short field of view) and an overly controlling SPE w/ no individual write access to the 7 PPE's. Meaning that developers cant even take advantage of mutli-threading their code.

---

I don't even know where to start with the inaccuracies within that so I will only state a few things.

1) People always seem to say "Teh PS3 only haz 256 megs of Ramz" ~ which is only in part true...just because it has split Ram does not equate to it not having 512 megs available. If you are as versed with the architecture as you come off to be then I cannot fathom how you cannot or fail to mention that between the speed and throughput of the motherboard, XDR Ram and it's pipelines in combination with how the Cell and SPU's work TOGETHER that the end product is a MUCH more capable product. I think you really need to read this link (at the very least) that I linked to earlier that explains the PS3's ram and RSX in pretty laymens terms

2) If you actually think that the Cell B.E. is a "processor that developers can't actually take advantage of" then I seriously doubt you have any real experience with the PS3 on either a programming aspect OR a gaming aspect. Killzone 2, GT5P & Uncharted 2 totally refute and contradict that opinion with impact and there is nothing more I would say after that because this must be a joke. Really.

I do admit, its been awhile since i've delved wayyyy too deep into the PS3 architecture, so I may have some spiderwebs there. I read you link and while its good that is has RAMBUS XDR ram, you need more than 256 MB of RAM, especially in today's games w/ the amount of textures that are loaded in at out (which are in 480p on both systems, for reference). The problem is, the compiler, writes textures in and out of the ram and if you try to share that 256MB SYSTEM RAM w/ the the 256MB of video ram, you run into latency issues along with now having to keep track of the used ram from the "system" cache. Yes the speed of loading the textures in and out and presenting them on screen will be faster, but it's still hindered by the loading and unloading of the textures into the pipelines from the video RAM.

I agree with you that it's nice that it has faster ram on the 16 (if i remember correctly) pipelines (there might be 8 pipelines sorry for being foggy this morning) but again, slower ram and more ram would've been the better option.

And regarding my statement about developers not being able to take advantage of, I think you are missing my point. If the developer could write to each core individually and have its own access, you'd see developers being able to squeeze the world out of it. But you can't on the PS3. You send audio to processor(which is the PPE), processor (PPE) sends to available SPE. Okay now you have to load textures to model(gpu) and fill textured model to screen(gpu), and all the computation to figure out which model should move to where and what the lighting should be, to send the instructions back to the GPU, etc etc etc all gets sent to the SAME PPE. (the PPE is the main controlling processor, i had them backwards in my previous posts, sorry i get em backwards sometimes). Okay collision detection, sent to the same PPE. User input, PPE. Algorithms now... PPE. Objects, PPE, etc etc etc.

Point being is, the developer never gets a chance to say, "take this code and have processor (spe) 2,4, 6 do this. Have processor 1,3,5 do this" (7th processor is the FULL core aka PPE that controls what the SPE's are doing)

That too me, SUCKS. If Sony really wanted to come up with something truly awesome, they'd give the developers the control instead of the PPE being the manager of it all.

Dude, someone told me today that Insomniac games is going multiplatform (maker of Resistance 2). Heard anything about this?

I also tried searching to see if the PS3 SDK allows developers to write to the individual SPE's yet so they can do better stream processing (which writing a game in this manner is hella difficult, but that is the only benefit of the multi cores these days) and i wasn't able to find anything that said they can. I remember reading about a year ago that Sony was going to release something that would allow developers but now I cant find anything on it... so who knows maybe its allowed now, but I doubt it as I have read some relatively recent articles that say otherwise.

Oh I just found some info from IBM's site ( http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-specode1/ )
---quote---
The biggest speed obstacle for the SPEs is code with a lot of branches. On the SPE, only one branch hint can be active at a time. The SPE has no hardware for branch prediction (it simply predicts, in the absence of a hint, that the branch will not be taken), and a mispredicted branch can cost 18 cycles. This means that code with lots of vtable lookups (like object-oriented code), lots of function calls, or lots of conditionals could in fact run slower on the SPE than on the PPE.
---end quote---

And here is where this is BAD for gaming (this article is about trying to access each individual SPE on a later version of the CELL processor that isn't available in the PS3 (that I know of)

A Branch would be considered (if this do that) a second branch would be (if that do this). So if you branch out and have any other if else statement, the SPE can't handle it ( as all tasks have to be in-order processing). Since video game are all object oriented, this is where the CELL was DIRECTLY not meant to be used for video games (performance wise). Because all games are heaving in branch writing/predictions and object oriented code., leaving us back to what i said originally, SHORT BURST algorithms is where the CELL owns...not in gaming. either way, its been a good conversation we've had and it'll be interesting to see where things end up on the system dual side of things. World wide, Sony is coming on hard strong (i agree with you on that), but in the U.S. Sony is still in trouble.

I've become more interested in actually purchasing a PS3 lately... but only for certain exclusives and the fact that it will round out my collection (can't be bothered with the Wii tho, even people I know who own one can't be).

However, an Australian (region locked) PS3 Slim costs >$365 USD here, coz we'll pay that apparently, so Sony will just have to wait longer for my filthy lucre.

But M$ may miss out too (in a way). I discovered the superlative Xpadder and made a kick-ass controller profile for Bioshock2 on my PC (with selective rumble, I might add)... I really can't go back to 720p gaming {in general} no matter how many times it's sinc filter anti-aliased.

It was sad but the difference was astounding... not just the resolution either. So the winner, for me, is a new dual GPU graphics card.

I won't be adding to those PS3 sale figures for a while yet still it seems.

@autolycus I really appreciated your efforts man, they've been very enjoyable and informative to read. But like "W" said you're just gonna be missunderestimated here, heh. Btw, gaming in 1080p on a 50" screen is really lovely, so I can't agree that HDTV is a total fail.

After going over and re-reading everything I wrote as well as what you did I noticed you really don't answer any of my questions or respond to the facts I have given so there is no point in wasting my time and effort of giving valid information with proof to back it up. Though I will just re-iterate one thing and quote myself as I have said more than enough already for anyone who wants to learn something ~

Quote:

---

Specifications and stats (which are correct I do agree) are not the same as real world application or usage; and the real world shows us that the PS3's capabilities in ALL aspects (speed, power, throughput and more) is unrivaled for a console. Bar none. This cannot be denied nor just brushed off with a slighted opinion about the difficulties in programming/using the Cell's architecture. It is not 2007 anymore and the proof is clearly visible with each AAA exclusive title that seems to come out quite regularly as of late, just as previous gens have.

---

@ below ~ I was just re-quoting myself as I didn't want to get into just another big discussion just to waste "breath". I gave out my info and so did he, anyone can take it which ever way they interpret it. But when you read between the lines in what is actually said in reference to my questions, explanations, links and proof it is a bit of a "round and round we go" with more opinion from auto than what is "real". So I just don't want to bother with it anymore and avoid an argument but can deal with the disagreement just fine. After all this time if people still want to "believe" what they want over what is proven or what they see ~ then fine. Time will tell. And all information shows what I link to as to the standings when looked at with more than just opinion to make claims.

autolycus had not "...denied nor just brushed off with a slighted opinion about the difficulties in programming/using the Cell's architecture". That is patently quite unfair.