PS3 and Xbox 360

[Ghostman]

Has anyone seen the specs for the PS3 and Xbox 360?? I think the specs are unbeliveable. The PS3 is supposed to have a cell processor with 8 cores running 3.2 Ghz!! The Xbox is supposed to have 3 cores running 3.2 Ghz! Are these consoles going to be liquid cooled or cooled by a frig????

I wont believe the specs until they release the unit.

[ZokesPro]

No kidding eh!

Makes you wonder if Nintendo is still a contender in all this or if it's a battle between Sony and MS. Or even if Nintendo will rule the portable market, although Sony has a pretty good start there too.

Either way, if both companies can live up to their claims, the gamer is the sure fire winner here.

Gotta love competition.

Edit: I hope those consoles are affordable, they sound hella expensive.

[Nowhere]

...
Either way, if both companies can live up to their claims, the gamer is the sure fire winner here.

Gotta love competition.

Edit: I hope those consoles are affordable, they sound hella expensive.

Oh I don't know...give me great games on not so great hardware (so cheaper also...) anytime.

[schmosef]

Are these consoles going to be liquid cooled or cooled by a frig????

In the xbox 360 video on our colony one of the engineers said it's going to be liquid cooled.

[Ghostman]

Nintendo has never been a contender on console market. They havent opened up there system in the past to companies like Sony has. I love Nintendo for Zelda (the older series). The newer Zelda's havent been very good. Nintendo doesnt look to be very powerful at all but it is very compact.

I heard MS was trying to price the Xbox at $399, maybe $299
I havent heard pricing on PS3

I agree with Nowhere to a point, make great games but also make hardware to support the games. I dont play much on console cos of the controls. I find the pc much better platform for games, Especally FPS!! Nothing can beat a keyboard and mouse for FPS.

I dont think normal ppl are ready for liquid cooled console systems. I would work if its a closed system but I havent seen any closed liquid cooling systems. I have always seen them with a tank to fill.

[Nowhere]

...
I agree with Nowhere to a point, make great games but also make hardware to support the games. I dont play much on console cos of the controls. I find the pc much better platform for games, Especally FPS!! Nothing can beat a keyboard and mouse for FPS.
...

Uhmm...only for FPS, I'd say (that's correct, only - I've seen few strategies/RTS that work great with a pad; the designers only have to free their mind from the concept that UI of strategy can be only controlled by pointer)

[Gurm]

Nintendo has never been a contender on console market. They havent opened up there system in the past to companies like Sony has.

Nintendo rigidly controls which games get released. This ensures high quality games. Let's face it - Sony works on QUANTITY over quality. The N64 was a STRONG contender against the PSX and beat the Saturn outright. The GameCube was hurt ONLY by the decision to go with MiniDVD's, but then again Nintendo has ALWAYS bucked format changes, they simply underestimated how many people wanted to watch DVD's on their console.

I love Nintendo for Zelda (the older series). The newer Zelda's havent been very good.

Really? Ocarina of Time was AMAZING, well executed and a wonderful successor to the SNES Zelda (Link to the Past). Really, let's list the worthwhile Zeldas here, shall we:

Legend of Zelda (8-bit NES)
Zelda: A Link to the Past (SNES)
Zelda: Ocarina of Time (N64)
Zelda: Majora's Mask (N64)
Zelda: Wind Waker (GC)

and upcoming...

Zelda: <name not yet released> (GC)
Zelda: Wind Waker 2 (GC)

One could argue that Majora's Mask was just "chapter 2" of Ocarina, and that's ok. The new unnamed game will feature Ocarina-esque graphics (as opposed to flat-character cell-shading on Wind Waker) and be AMAZING.

I didn't count any of the one-offs for the Neo Geo or Philips CDI, nor any of the Gameboy games, since they're all... eh. Also Zelda 2 was TEH MADD GHEY!!!1one

Nintendo doesnt look to be very powerful at all but it is very compact.

GameCube is actually the MOST powerful of the three systems. No question. The PS2 uses a piddly-ass graphics chip coupled with a 233Mhz RISC chip. The XBox uses a GeForce2 on steroids, coupled with a 700Mhz Celeron. The GC uses the equivalent of a Radeon 9800 or X800, and I forget the chip specs but they're impressive.

I heard MS was trying to price the Xbox at $399, maybe $299

It would need to be $299 or less to really sell, and let's face it - their LAST console lost them money, I don't know if they've EVER broken even on games but I have to assume that they have. $399 would be better for the company, but nobody would buy it.

I dont think normal ppl are ready for liquid cooled console systems. I would work if its a closed system but I havent seen any closed liquid cooling systems. I have always seen them with a tank to fill.

The Dreamcast in Japan was liquid cooled. I owned an imported Japanese model that was chipped to run games from all regions, and it had a nice liquid cooling system that was closed, worked on convection, and had a nifty little fan to shunt the heat out the side near the front.

[Ghostman]

Nintendo rigidly controls which games get released. This ensures high quality games. Let's face it - Sony works on QUANTITY over quality. The N64 was a STRONG contender against the PSX and beat the Saturn outright. The GameCube was hurt ONLY by the decision to go with MiniDVD's, but then again Nintendo has ALWAYS bucked format changes, they simply underestimated how many people wanted to watch DVD's on their console.

That has been a problem I have always had with Nintendo. They could still keep quality and let other companys make games for their systems.
I would have loved to see Need for Speed make it to the N64 or Gamecube. And I dont mean Need for speed Underground.

[Nowhere]

Gurm, but given enough quantity, number of quality games will be bigger...
Also, I don't agree about DVD - they were so cheap for some time (not to mention it's often impractical to use console as DVD)

And you forgot Zelda Classic for PC

Also about hardware:
Xbox has full Pentium3, with the little detail that it has the same amount of cache as Celeron (there is much more to Celeron than smaller cache). Graphics is somewhere between Gf3 & 4, not just little upped 2. And GC uses something similar to 8500. I'd say they're about equal, it depends mostly on game programming where games look better. Also don't be so harsh about PS2 - it was simply sooner, and is not so weak as clockspeed suggest, in comparison. Besided it has some "weird" architecture...

btw, would it be possible for anti-monopoly org to interest in Xbox? I mean...they're pushing Xbox to market at all cost to gain dominance.

[Wombat]

Gurm, but given enough quantity, number of quality games will be bigger...

There's no guarantee of that at all.

[Nowhere]

It more or less happened in case of Sony though...

[Gurm]

Gurm, but given enough quantity, number of quality games will be bigger...
Also, I don't agree about DVD - they were so cheap for some time (not to mention it's often impractical to use console as DVD)

Really? XBox and PS2 have based a HUGE amount of their marketing on the DVD capabilities. At least here in the USA they have.

Also about hardware:
Xbox has full Pentium3, with the little detail that it has the same amount of cache as Celeron (there is much more to Celeron than smaller cache). Graphics is somewhere between Gf3 & 4, not just little upped 2.

Oh? I doubt that. The XBox can push 16million polys on a routine basis, which is ROUGHLY the same as the GC (14 million is one number i've seen for the GC, Nintendo claims up to 25million depending on application). That puts it squarely in line with the Radeon 8500, which makes it a GF2 GTS equivalent. Like I said, GF2 on 'roids.

And GC uses something similar to 8500. I'd say they're about equal, it depends mostly on game programming where games look better.

The chip runs at 200Mhz, but it's much more than an 8500. It uses embedded RAM for one thing, and it can do an awful lot more than an 8500 can without taking a hit in FPS.

[Nowhere]

Well, as for DVD - not here. I wouldn't be surpised if not in Japan either (and don't you have impression than Nintendo serves primarily Japanese market?)
Uhmm...Xbox has something between GF3&4, period. Why argue based on these "number of polys" numbers - you can't possibly know how much each of them differs from reality (and they ALL differ). And by saying similar to 8500 I've meant more something like "from the same period", comparable in features (and btw, 162MHz & 1MB of ram, 3 if you count frame buffer; PS2 has 4 embedded, does that make it something special? ); yeah, maybe little faster, yeah it was precursor to R300 line, but so what - why argue about that, the end result matters: games. And they are very on par graphically between GV & X. Besides I don't care about that, I mostly play PS1 games still...

[schmosef]

I got a PS2 to use with my Gamebike. Before that I had an XBox, Dreamcast, N64, SNES, TG16, Vic20.

I use the PS2 and Gamebike for racing games but I wanted to see what all the hype was about so I picked up a few PS2 games like the Jak & Daxter series and the Ratchet and Clank series. I have to say that the games are well designed and a lot of fun to play but the XBox has way better graphics. The PS2 is not even close to being "on par".

As for the GC not supporting DVD, I think it's a mixed bag. AFAIK, Nintendo managed to avoid piracy completely on this round. That must have saved them a fortune. I know a few people who bought a Dreamcast but didn't pay for even a single game. I'm sure they weren't that uncommon. There was lots or piracy on the N64 and SNES too. From what I know, Nintendo might have lost out in unit sales but won in profit margins.

There's a few GC games I want to try so I might get a revolution or I might pick up a GC later this year when the price drops again.

[Nowhere]

"on par" was about GC & X