Support NeoGAF

lostinblue · Apr 17, 2011

szaromir said:
Yeah, but this was done by a Microsoft team.

Was it?

-> How Sony's Development of the Cell Processor Benefited Microsoft

Microsoft is a very poor hardware builder, proof of that being the RROD that plagued them for half a generation, they subcontract every part and then meshed it up at some chinese factory without running stress tests and verifying all parts worked well amongst them without a high failure rate; when microsoft is building hardware there's usually not a vision or some sort of end goal to it, Sony goes all out and is very proprietary (against themselves) with the chips/architectures they use, nintendo looks for paralelism and balancing effectively often downclocking the maximum clockrate de CPU, RAM or GPU would give in order to make the architecture more parallel (they also believe in price/quality balancing rather than using high end parts for everything) but invest in RAM, and Microsoft Well, microsoft asks manufacturers what do they have on the shelf, basically; with Xbox it was a celeron 733 a nvidia nforce as a northbridge and a geforce 3 and with Xbox 360 it was a custom R500 (custom because ATi was still playing with it) and Cell's PPE trippled.

If it was done IBM and AMD did it, on their own, by Microsoft's request.

Anyway I'd like to see link's, the information of previous communication like that and in what terms is interesting.

brain_stew · Apr 17, 2011

Skenzin said:
That may be the dumbest thing I've ever read on neogaf outside the office MGS4 thread.

Im reposting in some engineering forums for laughs. AMD Trinity is CPU+GPU you just can't swap out cores after lunch. There's months of design, simulator, and process testing. After all that it is no longer Trinity.

I'm not suggesting just "swapping out some cores after launch."

Whatever Nintendo gets is going to be a custom design, its going to go through the same validation process as any chip on the market, no matter what the design. You can debate whether or not adapting the design to support PowerPC cores would still be classed as "Trinity" or "Trinity derived" but its ultimately semantics, the existence of the 360's CGPU proves that such a design and collaboration is possible.

brain_stew · Apr 17, 2011

szaromir said:
Yeah, but this was done by a Microsoft team.

Microsoft and IBM, and it would be foolish to think that it didn't require the input of AMD engineers.

1-D_FTW · Apr 17, 2011

brain_stew said:
I'm not suggesting just "swapping out some cores after launch."

Whatever Nintendo gets is going to be a custom design, its going to go through the same validation process as any chip on the market, no matter what the design. You can debate whether or not adapting the design to support PowerPC cores would still be classed as "Trinity" or "Trinity derived" but its ultimately semantics, the existence of the 360's CGPU proves that such a design and collaboration is possible.

But at that point you're just splitting hairs. So you've got both cores on one chip. It doesn't mean it's going to be anywhere near the performance of the Fusion APUs.

Heck, you just proved the point. MS currently has this combo in their 360. And it has the performance of a 360 (ie what Nintendo is purportedly aiming for). Only difference is likely to be Nintendo's runs at a fraction of the wattage of what MS has.

antonz · Apr 17, 2011

1-D_FTW said:
But at that point you're just splitting hairs. So you've got both cores on one chip. It doesn't mean it's going to be anywhere near the performance of the Fusion APUs.

Heck, you just proved the point. MS currently has this combo in their 360. And it has the performance of a 360 (ie what Nintendo is purportedly aiming for). Only difference is likely to be Nintendo's runs at a fraction of the wattage of what MS has.

Even if we take everything The french Speculate on as Gospel Truth. Nintendo would still be putting out a device that has much greater performance than the 360/PS3.

1-D_FTW · Apr 17, 2011

antonz said:
Even if we take everything The french Speculate on as Gospel Truth. Nintendo would still be putting out a device that has much greater performance than the 360/PS3.

I don't take anything they say as gospel. I put weight into what GI said because I could hear the guy's voice in the podcast and could tell by how he said it that there was conflict as to what was more powerful (Nintendo or 360). His sources clearly weren't able to say definitively. Which means in those developer's opinion, it's a toss up.

brain_stew · Apr 17, 2011

1-D_FTW said:
But at that point you're just splitting hairs. So you've got both cores on one chip. It doesn't mean it's going to be anywhere near the performance of the Fusion APUs.

Heck, you just proved the point. MS currently has this combo in their 360. And it has the performance of a 360 (ie what Nintendo is purportedly aiming for).

A console doesn't need CPU cores as wide as Bulldozer though, personally I'd have thought Bobcat cores would be a nice fit but if Nintendo wants to stick with PowerPC cores then so be it, I don't think the performance of each individual CPU core is that big a deal. Whatever they choose will wipe the floor with Xenon anyway.

A closed box environment is the only real place where the tight integration of a chip like this can really be exploited. If you've read a lot of development whitepapers then you'd see a lot of people are calling for this level of integration as it simplifies a whole load of things.

The 360 comparison is worthless, it has dedicated hardware built into it in order to slow down how fast it runs and developers are unable to exploit the tight integration of the CPU and GPU in any way at all as it would break compatibility with previous 360s.

1-D_FTW · Apr 17, 2011

brain_stew said:
A console doesn't need CPU cores as wide as Bulldozer though, personally I'd have thought Bobcat cores would be a nice fit but if Nintendo wants to stick with PowerPC cores then so be it, I don't think the performance of each individual CPU core is that big a deal. Whatever they choose will wipe the floor with Xenon anyway.

A closed box environment is the only real place where the tight integration of a chip like this can really be exploited. If you've read a lot of development whitepapers then you'd see a lot of people are calling for this level of integration as it simplifies a whole load of things.

The 360 comparison is worthless, it has dedicated hardware built into it in order to slow down how fast it runs and developers are unable to exploit the tight integration of the CPU and GPU in any way at all as it would break compatibility with previous 360s.

Look, I hope you're right. I want you to be right. I just don't think Nintendo is going to have a very big wattage allowance and I can see them issuing the orders of "Match 360 performance at the lowest possible wattage you can go." This is why I find the rumors believable. There's a twisted logic that I can believe.

lostinblue · Apr 17, 2011

1-D_FTW said:
MS currently has this combo in their 360. And it has the performance of a 360 (ie what Nintendo is purportedly aiming for). Only difference is likely to be Nintendo's runs at a fraction of the wattage of what MS has.

Reports are conflicting when it comes to that.

But the GPU's proposed likely leave X360 in the dust, and if this console is gonna push 1080p the right way, it should. X360 wasn't even a homerun in design/architecture, it's just what every guy in the industry throws any hardware around against. a few months ago they were saying 3DS was PS3/X360 level because of the shaders; now the difference between high end PC chips and X360 is big now, but still comparable because of how powerful hardware has gotten, suddenly X360 is not the equivalent of a calculator, it does shaders, it does HDR, it can cope with most stuff Right now it just can't cope with doing some of them all at once, but it's still not the diferential we had last gen were PS2 could even be considered an ancient architecture system considering most of the systems fillrate came from the CPU, not the way modern hardware works.

X360 works like modern hardware, no way around it, didn't change that much (specs/realworld performance did, sure).

szaromir · Apr 17, 2011

lostinblue said:
Was it?

-> How Sony's Development of the Cell Processor Benefited Microsoft

Microsoft is a very poor hardware builder, proof of that being the RROD that plagued them for half a generation, they subcontract every part and then meshed it up at some chinese factory without running stress tests and verifying all parts worked well amongst them without a high failure rate; when microsoft is building hardware there's usually not a vision or some sort of end goal to it, Sony goes all out and is very proprietary (against themselves) with the chips/architectures they use, nintendo looks for paralelism and balancing effectively often downclocking the maximum clockrate de CPU, RAM or GPU would give in order to make the architecture more parallel (they also believe in price/quality balancing rather than using high end parts for everything) but invest in RAM, and Microsoft Well, microsoft asks manufacturers what do they have on the shelf, basically; with Xbox it was a celeron 733 a nvidia nforce as a northbridge and a geforce 3 and with Xbox 360 it was a custom R500 (custom because ATi was still playing with it) and Cell's PPE trippled.

If it was done IBM and AMD did it, on their own, by Microsoft's request.

Anyway I'd like to see link's, the information of previous communication like that and in what terms is interesting.

WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about?
First of all, early 360's shoddy quality wasn't a result of MS engineers' incomptence, but of MS execs' decision to go as cheap as possible.
Second, Microsoft is not a hardware company, so of course they requested third parties for the chips' designs. That doesn't mean that they are not involved in the design process, in fact they are on the GPU front much more involved than either Sony or Nintendo as they are the DirectX company (ie the one that sets standards for future generations of graphics hardware).

Finally, back to the original point - I remember J Allard or Todd Holmdahl stating it back in 2005 that they already had internally people working on 65nm revision as well as future revisions beyond that, though sadly the links are dead (Dean Tahakashi's blog at Mercury News). Perhaps it was done with external help though, we'll never know.

Pyrokai · Apr 17, 2011

So since I don't know a lot of the jargon going on within this thread, I'm going to cut right to my rather shallow question:

Is the Cafe going to be more powerful than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles, or will it be more similar/just a notch above them in tech? And, if you had to do a break down, ratio style, would you say this chance is 50/50 (more capable vs. same capabilities/negligible upgrade)? Or 60/40, 30/70, so on?

Just trying to get an idea of what to expect

AceBandage · Apr 17, 2011

Pyrokai said:
So since I don't know a lot of the jargon going on within this thread, I'm going to cut right to my rather shallow question:

Is the Cafe going to be more powerful than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles, or will it be more similar/just a notch above them in tech? And, if you had to do a break down, ratio style, would you say this chance is 50/50 (more capable vs. same capabilities/negligible upgrade)? Or 60/40, 30/70, so on?

Just trying to get an idea of what to expect

Well, the rumored R700 card for the Cafe would run most, if not all, 360 games at 1080p with AA at 60FPS.
So, it's more than a notch. Not a full generational leap, though.

antonz · Apr 17, 2011

Pyrokai said:
So since I don't know a lot of the jargon going on within this thread, I'm going to cut right to my rather shallow question:

Is the Cafe going to be more powerful than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles, or will it be more similar/just a notch above them in tech? And, if you had to do a break down, ratio style, would you say this chance is 50/50 (more capable vs. same capabilities/negligible upgrade)? Or 60/40, 30/70, so on?

Just trying to get an idea of what to expect

At the worst Case speculation seems to indicate it would at least be twice as powerful as the 360. To the Die hard have to have a 50x jump it would be pretty awful but for Nintendo going from 480P to 1080P it would be considerable though have the potential to backfire for them long term all over again.

As for the Media Reports are conflicting. Multiple Sites have reported its a significant jump in power. 1 Site says they dont know what it really is and 1 site says a notch.

Plinko · Apr 17, 2011

Pyrokai said:
So since I don't know a lot of the jargon going on within this thread, I'm going to cut right to my rather shallow question:

Is the Cafe going to be more powerful than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles, or will it be more similar/just a notch above them in tech? And, if you had to do a break down, ratio style, would you say this chance is 50/50 (more capable vs. same capabilities/negligible upgrade)? Or 60/40, 30/70, so on?

Just trying to get an idea of what to expect

We have no clue. There is no verification of what tech is being used. Reports are "a notch above."

1-D_FTW · Apr 17, 2011

Pyrokai said:
So since I don't know a lot of the jargon going on within this thread, I'm going to cut right to my rather shallow question:

Is the Cafe going to be more powerful than the current Sony and Microsoft consoles, or will it be more similar/just a notch above them in tech? And, if you had to do a break down, ratio style, would you say this chance is 50/50 (more capable vs. same capabilities/negligible upgrade)? Or 60/40, 30/70, so on?

Just trying to get an idea of what to expect

Clearly gaf is divided. I say it's 90/10 to expect 360 level graphics capability. If this is going to bother you, start getting used to the idea right now. Then by the time E3 rolls around, you'll have acceptance and you'll just care about the games shown and WTF the controller is. And if they announce a significant bump in performance, it'll just be extra ice cream on top.

Pyrokai · Apr 17, 2011

Hmm. Thanks guys. Very interesting. I wonder what they're planning. I really wonder how it will hold up among people who already own of those two consoles. I would worry that the system would just become an enhanced-port-fest-of-PS360-titles-but-with-Cafe-enhancements. The Cafe can have as many or as little unique, revolutionary features that it wants, but I know far too many people won't care if it's only just a notch above current consoles, especially after how most of the "hardcore" market views the Wii. They won't see the reason to get it, imo.

Of course, I guess this is speculation best reserved for the other thread

lostinblue · Apr 17, 2011

szaromir said:
WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about?
First of all, early 360's shoddy quality wasn't a result of MS engineers' incomptence, but of MS execs' decision to go as cheap as possible.
Second, Microsoft is not a hardware company, so of course they requested third parties for the chips' designs. That doesn't mean that they are not involved in the design process, in fact they are on the GPU front much more involved than either Sony or Nintendo as they are the DirectX company (ie the one that sets standards for future generations of graphics hardware).

Finally, back to the original point - I remember J Allard or Todd Holmdahl stating it back in 2005 that they already had internally people working on 65nm revision as well as future revisions beyond that, though sadly the links are dead (Dean Tahakashi's blog at Mercury News). Perhaps it was done with external help though, we'll never know.

I'm saying Microsoft is not a hardware company but a software company with all the strings that has attached. like you said, on the software API side they're DirectX and they created the first Xbox originally as a Direct X Box (meant to be called that). Their platform from an hardware standpoint though ended up loosing money throughout the whole generation and have lots of bottlenecks that would have been avoidable if they had done more than just buying parts and assembled them, that's their advantage, if you will.

Sony and Nintendo for the better and worse are very linked to the hardware part and do a lot of testing and R&D in-house when it comes to stress tests and durability, Microsoft just doesn't they outsource everything; hell, the original X360's design was outsourced and the slim one just crapped all over it (the back of it looks like the first tape-out of it that someone decided was good enough seeing the new optical audio out hole is rounded when the port is square) there's no coherence there; Sony and Nintendo keeps those things closer to their core R&D teams.

Even if it was the execs fault to go "cheap" then again Nintendo has gone cheap often and when they do, if they go for instance for passive cooling when *insert clocks* required fans they'll downclock it, it's because there's no such mechanism/team on Microsoft that they didn't predict it and ended up loosing millions. Because they couldn't balance their hardware enough with the hardware decisions they made, because they subcontracted everything and expected it to just "come together".

I believe they have a few guys on their company overseeing stuff, but it's just not enough; otherwise the RROD thing is on them, not the executives, if they went cheap 3x3.2 GHz wouldn't be an option, full stop; simple math too.

I thought my original point was self-explainative.

szaromir · Apr 17, 2011

360 was a massively rushed project, with executives wanted to have the device out as much before PS3 as possible for as cheap as possible. Mistakes were bound to happen. That doesn't mean that the engineering team is at fault, especially since they designed many excellent products afterwards (numerous Zune iterations, 360 slim, Kinect).I think you should just drop it, really.

lostinblue · Apr 18, 2011

szaromir said:
360 was a massively rushed project, with executives wanted to have the device out as much before PS3 as possible for as cheap as possible. Mistakes were bound to happen.

I won't (drop it). It's my opinion and you're not even disagreeing with it that much, you're instead insisting on semantics. Something went wrong, most platforms are rushed out of the door, but they don't have chronicle problems attached to them that couldn't have gone unseen with testing, RROD became apparent once the console launched; why? because Microsoft's hardware teams didn't do their job testing and balancing it thoughtfully (perhaps it wasn't even a concern, some proxy would somewhere down the chain). the "go cheaper" argument doesn't save their face, but the thing is perhaps the problem wasn't really on their part, the problem was how disconjugated the development was, IBM was to come up with said part, as was ATi and it would just come together. And coming back to the original point, I doubt Microsoft would have a need to be throughfully involved with a core shrink that envolved putting both chips on the same silicon. "Hey, as long as it works!"

Plus, it was a "rushed project" that took 3 hardware revisions to get past the chronicle failure point. If the problem was overheating and they did the balancing right they would have clocked it at 2.8 or 3GHz, or at least tried to redesign the way the air flowed inside the box asap, they didn't perhaps because they didn't have the means in-house. Like I said the X360 design was done by an external company (that wasn't re-contracted for the slim console redesign)

szaromir said:
That doesn't mean that the engineering team is at fault, especially since they designed many excellent products afterwards (numerous Zune iterations, 360 slim, Kinect).I think you should just drop it, really.

You forgot Microsoft Kin

Any Zune being excelent is questionable (or rather, subjective).

ombz · Apr 18, 2011

I'd rather developers use the power to run games in 1080p to add more detail at 720p.

lostinblue · Apr 18, 2011

ombz said:
I'd rather developers use the power to run games in 720p to add more detail at 480p.

That's how sub-HD was born this gen.

A.KU.MU · Apr 18, 2011

720p60 over 1080p30.

Log4Girlz · Apr 18, 2011

1-D_FTW said:
Clearly gaf is divided. I say it's 90/10 to expect 360 level graphics capability. If this is going to bother you, start getting used to the idea right now. Then by the time E3 rolls around, you'll have acceptance and you'll just care about the games shown and WTF the controller is. And if they announce a significant bump in performance, it'll just be extra ice cream on top.

Sigh, and I'm apart of the 90/10 split expecting 360 level graphics. I know with the 3DS Nintendo apparently wants to have better 3rd party relations, but this generation is tired already. Developers are desperate for a new generation. So I hope in reality, they took a look at their options and set a goal to reach the bare minimum specs needed to have all the new fancy effects and performance to appease developers wanting new engines. A 360 level Cafe would only be able to handle antiquated engines.

szaromir · Apr 18, 2011

lostinblue said:
I won't. It's my opinion and you're not even disagreeing with it that much, you're instead insisting on semantics. Something went wrong, most platforms are rushed out of the door, but they don't have chronicle problems attached to them that couldn't have gone unseen with testing, RROD became apparent once the console launched; why? because hardware teams did they job and tested and balanced it thoughtfully. the "go cheaper" argument doesn't save their face, but the thing is perhaps the problem wasn't really on their part, the problem was how disconjugated the development was, IBM was to come up with said part, as was ATi. And coming back to the original point, I doubt Microsoft would have a need to be throughfully involved with a core shrink that envolved putting both chips on the same silicon. "Hey, as long as it works!"

Plus, it was a "rushed project" that took 3 hardware revisions to get past the chronicle failure point. If the problem was overheating and they did the balancing right they would have clocked it at 2.8 or 3GHz, or at least tried to redesign the way the air flowed inside asap, they didn't perhaps because they didn't have the means in-house. Like I said the X360 design was done by an external company (that wasn't re-contracted for the slim console)You forgot Microsoft Kin

Zune being excelent is questionable.

360 was much more rushed than your standard piece of electronics. In fact, its GPU was finished only in May 2006 which is unusually late. They should have done something sooner about it, but keep in mind how long it even took them to acknowledge the problem.

And of course Microsoft would be interested in doing a lot of the design in-house (including new hardware revisions and chip shrinks). They have to keep people to design the next-gen console and it would be kinda reasonable to keep them active working on current products, too, rather than let them be idle.

Sipowicz · Apr 18, 2011

just think. at some point next year nintendo will have the most powerful console on the market and sony will have the most innovative, forward-thinking handheld on the market

the world has gone mad

1-D_FTW · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
Sigh, and I'm apart of the 90/10 split expecting 360 level graphics. I know with the 3DS Nintendo apparently wants to have better 3rd party relations, but this generation is tired already. Developers are desperate for a new generation. So I hope in reality, they took a look at their options and set a goal to reach the bare minimum specs needed to have all the new fancy effects and performance to appease developers wanting new engines. A 360 level Cafe would only be able to handle antiquated engines.

LOL

I don't think it's a 90/10 split among gaf. I'm just saying that's my personal opinion of what to expect based on the limited info we have. My odds so to speak.

lostinblue · Apr 18, 2011

szaromir said:
360 was much more rushed than your standard piece of electronics. In fact, its GPU was finished only in May 2006 which is unusually late. They should have done something sooner about it, but keep in mind how long it even took them to acknowledge the problem.

And of course Microsoft would be interested in doing a lot of the design in-house (including new hardware revisions and chip shrinks). They have to keep people to design the next-gen console and it would be kinda reasonable to keep them active working on current products, too, rather than let them be idle.

I really don't know if they're had that degree of involvement tbh; but I'll be happy to agree to disagree while conceding you raise reasonable doubt even if it doesn't convince me.

That's late for a GPU alright, but they had them built and working before launch, it wouldn't be the first time something is downclocked in the final dash before launch; even by software; and taking 3 hardware revisions to really address it is quite a bit, I don't imagine Sony or Nintendo going through it.

As for the hardware team they have and what it oversees, I don't imagine someone getting fired, like you said R&D for the next should start the moment the console is launched, my doubt is really on how involved they really are/were with the core architecture of the console other than picking parts and manufacturers.

Anyway, I don't see why they would have to be really that involved in a Xenos+Xenon unification other than throwing the ball themselves and calling both parts to ask wether it was possible or not, which was my original point. I don't believe it was done by "microsoft team" as the first post in this page implies, would make no sense.

Log4Girlz · Apr 18, 2011

1-D_FTW said:
LOL

I don't think it's a 90/10 split among gaf. I'm just saying that's my personal opinion of what to expect based on the limited info we have. My odds so to speak.

Just read the Project Cafe thread and you see it seems that most gaffers expect the same.

Kevin · Apr 18, 2011

Stephen Colbert said:
Reserved for speculation:

Also... 6" 1080p screen for a controller!?

What are the odds that the Wii 2 is a VR headset (Virtua Boy 2). It's the only explanation that makes sense as to why a controller would need a whopping 6" 1080p screen.

It would certainly explain where Nintendo's massive multibillion dollar annual R&D budget has been going towards for the past half a decade.

Maybe Nintendo really has been secretly developing Nintendo ON and the old leaked video was indeed a concept video to gauge the public's reaction.

OK before anyone jumps on me, I am just joking here. I've always saw a ton of potential in virtual reality when not many others have but I don't see virtual reality as something Nintendo is aiming for.

I think the screen will likely be exactly what it's said to be. A screen either built into the modern waggle or an attachment. My guess would be that Nintendo would use it for various things. Perhaps an inventory system for Zelda, a stat system for Mario, etc. Could also function as a portable virtual console controller that you could take around the house. Just ideas. The screen has said to only be SD resolutions and NOT HD. At least that's what I read over in the other thread a day or two back.

We do know that there is suppose to be another huge secret unveiled at E3 and it's assumed that it's hardware related and not software related. This one has completely gotten me. We know Nintendo isn't doing 3D with Wii 2 and if they do it will just be a normal function as it is on PS3/360. Obviously motion controls and touch screen controls are also industry standards. Personally I don't have any ideas as to what Nintendo could be cooking up that will be a major hardware related surprise. Would love to see a "Good" VR attachment similar to the "ON" design but I just don't see it happening. This being said, Sony has a VR set in development that was shown at CES back in January. It's a prototype but I'm hoping some variation of that will come to the market at some point.

sony_oled_vr_goggles_make_you_look_like_geordi_la_forge_from_star_trek.jpg

Another thing worth mentioning is that no 1080p visors exist outside of the sub-1000 range. Hell the sub-10,000 dollar range so I doubt Nintendo will be unveiling one for that reason alone.

Plinko · Apr 18, 2011

Stephen Colbert said:
Also... 6" 1080p screen for a controller!?

That's not the rumor.

ombz · Apr 18, 2011

Plinko said:
That's not the rumor.

Isn't the rumor sub-HD now?

Plinko · Apr 18, 2011

ombz said:
Isn't the rumor sub-HD now?

Yes, which makes WAY more sense.

Crazed Alien · Apr 18, 2011

lostinblue said:
Was it?

-> How Sony's Development of the Cell Processor Benefited Microsoft

Microsoft is a very poor hardware builder, proof of that being the RROD that plagued them for half a generation, they subcontract every part and then meshed it up at some chinese factory without running stress tests and verifying all parts worked well amongst them without a high failure rate; when microsoft is building hardware there's usually not a vision or some sort of end goal to it, Sony goes all out and is very proprietary (against themselves) with the chips/architectures they use, nintendo looks for paralelism and balancing effectively often downclocking the maximum clockrate de CPU, RAM or GPU would give in order to make the architecture more parallel (they also believe in price/quality balancing rather than using high end parts for everything) but invest in RAM, and Microsoft Well, microsoft asks manufacturers what do they have on the shelf, basically; with Xbox it was a celeron 733 a nvidia nforce as a northbridge and a geforce 3 and with Xbox 360 it was a custom R500 (custom because ATi was still playing with it) and Cell's PPE trippled.

If it was done IBM and AMD did it, on their own, by Microsoft's request.

Anyway I'd like to see link's, the information of previous communication like that and in what terms is interesting.

The Xbox 360 architecture was extremely well designed and is a huge reason why they were able to eat so much of the market this generation. You say Microsoft asked manufacturers what they had on the shelf but they're not the ones that had to select a vastly inferior GPU at the last minute because the original cell only design turned out to be inadequate.

Time has proven which was the better designed system. And RROD has nothing to do with architecture design. It's a manufacturing issue.

ksamedi · Apr 18, 2011

Hi guys, just came to post what I basically said in the Wii 2 thread.

I believe that the controller will use some form of Virtual retinal display technology.

See here for a video about the technology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I0hF0cbw8E

It basically confirms the recent rumor from a Ubisoft employee saying:

According to an Ubisoft employee -who wished to stay anonymous-, the publisher pushes all their development teams to cash in with a bunch of 360 ports to match the march 2012 launch. "Even with the extra horse power, in especially the graphical department, we aren't allowed to put extra textures or revise bugged physics that occurred in the original." He also stated that the 3D features the system offers are revolutionairy and stunning, because you don´t need any glasses or 3DTV to experience it! The controller with build in screen and camera plays a huge part of that hologram like 3D effect. "With the optional motion control and the right horse power the only thing I can say is, Nintendo did it right this time!"

What makes me believe this is true is that:
1) VRD tech needs a camera and LCD screen to operate, which the rumors point to
2) VRD tech needs games to be able to be streamed to the controller so that it can be projected into the eye which the rumors point to as well
3) Nintendo suggesting that the restriction of a console is that you have to play it in front of a TV. Well, VRD tech pretty much eliminates this because the image is directly beamed to your eye!

See here for Iwata's quote on the restriction of consoles

With this as an example, even such a distinction that "home console machines provide rich experiences but handheld devices cannot" will change as time goes by, and I believe that there will always be unique experiences that only home consoles can realize. Nintendo has to make efforts to offer the public something only our home console systems can achieve. There are also a number of restrictions with home consoles such as you have to be in front of a TV set, all the players must get together in one place and you cannot play if someone else is watching a TV program. I feel that an increasing number of people, who are playing with a variety of games, are saying, "I used to be able to start home console games rather casually, just whenever I felt like playing with them, but nowadays, because I am used to the easy-to-start handheld game devices, I have to have a rather strong determination to start playing with home console games." I understand that the situation surrounding home consoles is changing. Home consoles have to provide something unique to users that is only possible on home consoles in addition to the "rich experiences." For example, we must focus on what kinds of unique entertainment can be created when a home console can reproduce its images on a large monitor screen which can be viewed by several people at the same time. I think that in the mid and long term, the mission of home console machines will change in this fashion.

All this makes me believe that this controller will use some for of VRD tech. Everything adds up. What do you guys think?

lostinblue · Apr 18, 2011

Crazed Alien said:
The Xbox 360 architecture was extremely well designed and is a huge reason why they were able to eat so much of the market this generation. You say Microsoft asked manufacturers what they had on the shelf but they're not the ones that had to select a vastly inferior GPU at the last minute because the original cell only design turned out to be inadequate.

I said they depended on what others had to offer, I didn't say they were megalomaniacaly stupid, which was what Sony was being with the 2-Cell-no-gpu thing.

X360 architecture is not particularly good or bad, it just works, and Sony with an extra year just managed to do worse in a spectacular way too; doing better with an extra year wouldn't be dificult hadn't they been stuck up to their butts on the rabbit hole they digged.

Crazed Alien said:
And RROD has nothing to do with architecture design. It's a manufacturing issue.

Overheating problems on a console aren't just "manufacturing problems" they could have decreased the clockrate a little for instance, or used better cooling systems, and the box design wasn't the best to dissipate heat as well.

All in all, it's something they should have done way better.

Log4Girlz · Apr 18, 2011

Ok, so Detective Gaf, what power level do you expect for this thing? (no over 9k jokes)

Scenario 1: Xbox 360 level (not much more or less)

Scenario 2: Notch above 360 (running current gen games, regardless of complexity at 1080p)

Scenario 3: Significantly above 360 (running any current game games at 1080p, 60fps with improves textures and IQ)

Scenario 4: Next-gen .5 (Runs current-gen games as listed above, but in addition has just enough horsepower to create innovative new engines to provide graphics and performance never before seen at home, but below expectations for the next Xbox and Playstation)

Scenario 5: True Next-Gen (Xbox 720 or PS4 level, or just a hair or two below)

I'm expecting scenario 2. You will have developers who may want to show graphics beyond what the 360 can do by just lowering the resolution.

CoffeeJanitor · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
Ok, so Detective Gaf, what power level do you expect for this thing? (no over 9k jokes)

Scenario 1: Xbox 360 level (not much more or less)

Scenario 2: Notch above 360 (running current gen games, regardless of complexity at 1080p)

Scenario 3: Significantly above 360 (running any current game games at 1080p, 60fps with improves textures and IQ)

Scenario 4: Next-gen .5 (Runs current-gen games as listed above, but in addition has just enough horsepower to create innovative new engines to provide graphics and performance never before seen at home, but below expectations for the next Xbox and Playstation)

Scenario 5: True Next-Gen (Xbox 720 or PS4 level, or just a hair or two below)

I'm expecting scenario 2. You will have developers who may want to show graphics beyond what the 360 can do by just lowering the resolution.

Want 4, would be happy with 3, 2 or 3 will prolly happen.

Log4Girlz · Apr 18, 2011

CoffeeJanitor said:
Want 4, would be happy with 3, 2 or 3 will prolly happen.

I'm with you. Sure 5 would be best but not at all realistic.

Grampa Simpson · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
Ok, so Detective Gaf, what power level do you expect for this thing? (no over 9k jokes)

Scenario 1: Xbox 360 level (not much more or less)

Scenario 2: Notch above 360 (running current gen games, regardless of complexity at 1080p)

Scenario 3: Significantly above 360 (running any current game games at 1080p, 60fps with improves textures and IQ)

Scenario 4: Next-gen .5 (Runs current-gen games as listed above, but in addition has just enough horsepower to create innovative new engines to provide graphics and performance never before seen at home, but below expectations for the next Xbox and Playstation)

Scenario 5: True Next-Gen (Xbox 720 or PS4 level, or just a hair or two below)

I'm expecting scenario 2. You will have developers who may want to show graphics beyond what the 360 can do by just lowering the resolution.

Expecting Scenario 3 or 4.

antonz · Apr 18, 2011

BMF said:
Expecting Scenario 3 or 4.

3 is the likely one but 3 could turn into 4 all depending really what next generation turns out to be

Grampa Simpson · Apr 18, 2011

antonz said:
3 is the likely one but 3 could turn into 4 all depending really what next generation turns out to be

I think it will be 4 because I don't think Sony or MS will make it a huge jump. My gut says that Sony and MS will put out a Scenario 2 in response to whatever Nintendo comes up with.

Log4Girlz · Apr 18, 2011

I would pay $299 tops for scenario 2 or 3, but have no problem pay $349 for scenario 4 and $399 for scenario 5. What worries me is that an expensive controller in the box effectively uses up their budget for the internals of the console. Ugh. Nintendo, just price it at a reasonable $349 and make that console sing!

Kevin · Apr 18, 2011

Scenario 2 seems most likely based on the information leaked. Anybody expecting more will likely end up being disappointed.

Grampa Simpson · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
I would pay $299 tops for scenario 2 or 3, but have no problem pay $349 for scenario 4 and $399 for scenario 5. What worries me is that an expensive controller in the box effectively uses up their budget for the internals of the console. Ugh. Nintendo, just price it at a reasonable $349 and make that console sing!

$399 with Hard Drive, $299 without.

Krev · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
I would pay $299 tops for scenario 2 or 3, but have no problem pay $349 for scenario 4 and $399 for scenario 5. What worries me is that an expensive controller in the box effectively uses up their budget for the internals of the console. Ugh. Nintendo, just price it at a reasonable $349 and make that console sing!

Would you pay $349 for scenario 3 with a crazy cool controller/feature/gimmick?

Log4Girlz · Apr 18, 2011

Krev said:
Would you pay $349 for scenario 3 with a crazy cool controller/feature/gimmick?

Shit man good question. I would have to say no, as much as I like a nicely implemented gimmick. Now, that doesn't mean others wouldn't, but I would wait for a price drop.

MasterShotgun · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
Ok, so Detective Gaf, what power level do you expect for this thing? (no over 9k jokes)

Scenario 1: Xbox 360 level (not much more or less)

Scenario 2: Notch above 360 (running current gen games, regardless of complexity at 1080p)

Scenario 3: Significantly above 360 (running any current game games at 1080p, 60fps with improves textures and IQ)

Scenario 4: Next-gen .5 (Runs current-gen games as listed above, but in addition has just enough horsepower to create innovative new engines to provide graphics and performance never before seen at home, but below expectations for the next Xbox and Playstation)

Scenario 5: True Next-Gen (Xbox 720 or PS4 level, or just a hair or two below)

I'm expecting scenario 2. You will have developers who may want to show graphics beyond what the 360 can do by just lowering the resolution.

If Nintendo decided to charge $399 for Scenario 4, I would gladly suck it up and save up. I have a feeling that Scenario 3 is the most likely, which I will be perfectly fine with. I hope they avoid Scenario 2, but HD Zelda is still HD Zelda.

Pocks · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
Ok, so Detective Gaf, what power level do you expect for this thing? (no over 9k jokes)

Scenario 1: Xbox 360 level (not much more or less)

Scenario 2: Notch above 360 (running current gen games, regardless of complexity at 1080p)

Scenario 3: Significantly above 360 (running any current game games at 1080p, 60fps with improves textures and IQ)

Scenario 4: Next-gen .5 (Runs current-gen games as listed above, but in addition has just enough horsepower to create innovative new engines to provide graphics and performance never before seen at home, but below expectations for the next Xbox and Playstation)

Scenario 5: True Next-Gen (Xbox 720 or PS4 level, or just a hair or two below)

I'm expecting scenario 2. You will have developers who may want to show graphics beyond what the 360 can do by just lowering the resolution.

I'm expecting Scenario 2, but hoping for 3 at $349 / $299 (HDD / no HDD).

Zeal · Apr 18, 2011

it is powered by the souls of casual gamers.

Bloodwake · Apr 18, 2011

Log4Girlz said:
Ok, so Detective Gaf, what power level do you expect for this thing? (no over 9k jokes)

Scenario 1: Xbox 360 level (not much more or less)

Scenario 2: Notch above 360 (running current gen games, regardless of complexity at 1080p)

Scenario 3: Significantly above 360 (running any current game games at 1080p, 60fps with improves textures and IQ)

Scenario 4: Next-gen .5 (Runs current-gen games as listed above, but in addition has just enough horsepower to create innovative new engines to provide graphics and performance never before seen at home, but below expectations for the next Xbox and Playstation)

Scenario 5: True Next-Gen (Xbox 720 or PS4 level, or just a hair or two below)

I'm expecting scenario 2. You will have developers who may want to show graphics beyond what the 360 can do by just lowering the resolution.

This is Nintendo. We are getting Scenario 2. We would be lucky if we didn't get scenario 1.

Support NeoGAF

What's powering the Wii 2? Detective-gaf to the rescue...

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage

Member

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Unconfirmed Member

Member

brazen editing lynx

Member

Banned

Member

Similar threads