mysticwhip
Banned
killzone trailer still has better character models,physics(hair,clothing) and animations than anything from this gen
I don't want 4-6 times 360, won't that be a little difficult to put clear blue water between it and the 360? And in that case why are we 'upgrading' if there isn't much 'up'?
all that media stuff sounds interesting but ATSC tuners etc seems overkill. You can stream online services with a cheap appleTV or roku box. That should be a hygiene factor hardware wise, not something you build a box around. (of course software wise you can emphasise media in the OS)
killzone trailer still has better character models,physics(hair,clothing) and animations than anything from this gen
There's been posts here on GAF showing that Killzone 2 and specially Killzone 3 surpassed that pre rendered trailer on various points.
And there are PC games that surpassed it altogether quite awhile ago.
killzone trailer still has better character models,physics(hair,clothing) and animations than anything from this gen
IN SCREENSHOTS.
In motion, that pre-render is better than anything on the market.
If you truly believe that trailer is still unsurpassed today you're delusional my friend.
The asset quality has been surpassed, but no game I have ever seen has anything even approaching the level of dynamicism and individuality of animation as in that prerender.
Because it's a prerender.You would never expect to see that level in something genuinely interactive.
The asset quality has been surpassed, but no game I have ever seen has anything even approaching the level of dynamicism and individuality of animation as in that prerender.
Because it's a prerender.You would never expect to see that level in something genuinely interactive.
There's been posts here on GAF showing that Killzone 2 and specially Killzone 3 surpassed that pre rendered trailer on various points.
And there are PC games that surpassed it altogether quite awhile ago.
IN SCREENSHOTS.
In motion, that pre-render is better than anything on the market.
Yes there must be a lower priced PS3 and it must support a HDMI pass-thru for XTV. Same for Microsoft, there must be a lower price Xbox361 with HDMI pass-thru. Both will be SOC based to reduce cost. Since stacked Ram is faster and cheaper than XDR and the Cell would have to be redesigned to be shrunk further (28nm) there could be large changes to the hardware that would require a major rewrite to the PS3 OS.So, do you think we'll see a slimmer PS3 this year?
Yes there must be a lower priced PS3 and it must support a HDMI pass-thru for XTV. Same for Microsoft, there must be a lower price Xbox361 with HDMI pass-thru. Both will be SOC based to reduce cost. Since stacked Ram is faster and cheaper than XDR and the Cell would have to be redesigned to be shrunk further (28nm) there could be large changes to the hardware that would require a major rewrite to the PS3 OS.
I expect both will be SOCs built with AMD building blocks (cheaper) and for the PS3.5 the RSX emulated. Building a GPU for a PS3.5 or Xbox 361 in 2012 is going to require a custom massively down scaled GPU that could be used by both. Since economy of scale (AMD building blocks) would have USB3 being cheaper than a custom older USB2, wireless N chip cheaper than G ....you get the point, the PS3.5 and Xbox 361 would be massively advanced over "standard" consoles and cheaper.
A cheaper Slimmer slim could not be produced until the AMD SOC building blocks and processes were ready and that is this year.
Given the above it's a small stretch to believe the redesigned PS3 Cell to fit in a AMD SOC and using building blocks that should be similar to some of the PS4 building blocks with OS emulating RSX that the same redesigned Cell could be in a PS4 for BC. Also with one more PPC in the PS3 SOC and PS4 SOC, Xbox 360 could be emulated in both
It did work out well for PS2 though, in terms of PS1 compatibility. Also, you'd probably only need Cell, RSX should be possible to emulate unless some games used very low level access.I also doubt that there will be a "small" PS3 in the PS4 for BC - that didn't work out with the PS2, was very expensive and for development ease it does exactly the opposite. If the current PS4 rumors are true I don't see a BC Cell/RSX combo fitting into them without seriously compromising TDP, cost and complexity.
A Cell/RSX would not work, would be too expensive, could not be scaled to 28nm could not use PS4 memory, yes you are correct there.So instead of showing a new Xbox360 (PS3) with enhanced features at the E3 that you presume launches this holiday season (less than 6 months) to "battle" the Wii-U launch both "only" showed a few games ready for 2013? I am sorry I understand that your speculation makes sense and is actually feasible but I don't see that happening for 2012.
I also doubt that there will be a "small" PS3 in the PS4 for BC - that didn't work out with the PS2, was very expensive and for development ease it does exactly the opposite. If the current PS4 rumors are true I don't see a BC Cell/RSX combo fitting into them without seriously compromising TDP, cost and complexity.
It did work out well for PS2 though, in terms of PS1 compatibility. Also, you'd probably only need Cell, RSX should be possible to emulate unless some games used very low level access.
If they have the possibility of including Cell on their SoC then it would be worth it IMHO, BC is huge especially for PSN and the SPEs would still be a really good deal performance/power wise for PS4 software that uses them (eg. exclusives or middleware).
How do you know those things? It means you know that there is already a smaller PS3 ready and put to the wafers (with unknown yield rates so far) and the Sony developmen team is close to finishing a software product/integrationA Cell/RSX would not work, would be too expensive, could not be scaled to 28nm could not use PS4 memory, yes you are correct there.
Sony and Microsoft can not announce 361 and PS3.5 until they know the Yield stats for the SOC and Sony can not release a PS3.5 until GTKwebkit2 with Gstreamer 1.0 is ready to support XTV and that won't happen till about Sept.
Any announcement of a 361 or PS3.5 will kill sales of Xbox360 and PS3. They will not be announced until stocks of older generation machines are lower and stocks of 361 and PS3.5 are high enough for this season. .
So in the worst case Sony has to announce something at TGS in september to make a holiday launch or the whole project will be canned because at some point a PS 3.5 might not be interesting when there is a PS4 on the horizon.I have no way to prove this speculation but arguments against it have no validity until after November 2012.
Sony owns the RSX IP to make a RSX so I expect emulating a RSX is less of a IP Copyright issue.Of course it would be a nice to have feature in my eyes - especially during the first 12 months after launch when there is often a lack of AAA games. I just fear that true PS3 BC would be too complex to achieve.
I am not an expert but who owns the RSX design? Is Sony even allowed to emulate the RSX with a AMD GPU without violating patents and other agreements with Nvidia because they have to open up the design vault of the RSX for AMD.
PPC and SPUs in a PS4 can be substituted for FPUs by the OS and OpenCL allows treating a PPC-SPU combination as a universal compute unit with easier to use structure than a GPU using OpenCL.Even a low power Cell + APU + AMD GPU sounds pretty expensive and complex and I doubt that the Cell would be used much by developers when even now people complain about the complexity. Just to use Cell for the OS, always-on, PSN/PS3 games seems a bold and unneccessary move in my eyes.
That won't work.In my opinion the best solution would be partial BC achieved with the new APU + GPU at least for less demanding PSN games and every other game that will work is considered a bonus - like with the PS2/PS3 situation.
PS3 and Xbox sales are taking a dive as predicted in the 2010 Microsoft Xbox720 Draft-1 paper I linked to. Another price cut is needed for the PS3 so a refresh from 40 to 28nm is needed. That can not happen without a major redesign for the PS3 and RSX. XTV needs to be supported so HDMI Pass-thru is needed. Back to my previous posts!Sony is struggling and their entertainment business is what keeps them above the water (at least it is not doing that bad) and I fear they can't risk another PS3 launch. They need the right hardware, games, services and if that means to (partially) cut BC I am fine with it. Of course some/a lot gamers will cry but in the end such things will be forgotten aswell if your new consoles plays Uncharted 4 with 1080p@60fps instead of a sluggish Uncharted 3 BC version ;-)
Microsoft knew in 2010 that Xbox360 sales would tank in 2013 and so must Sony about PS3 sales. It's what I would do. Also I have been following the browser development on the PS3 and have read the Sony whitepapers describing XTV and what h.265 means to both TVs and IPTV.How do you know those things? It means you know that there is already a smaller PS3 ready and put to the wafers (with unknown yield rates so far) and the Sony developmen team is close to finishing a software product/integration
Yes, exactly!So in the worst case Sony has to announce something at TGS in september to make a holiday launch or the whole project will be canned because at some point a PS 3.5 might not be interesting when there is a PS4 on the horizon.
Google TV is first generation XTV. The ability to open a window while watching TV and access the internet. This requires in an external box like a game console to have a HDMI-pass-thru and window overlay ability. The ability to (without having to turn on and wait for boot) access Netflix or TV guide or have comments or advertising overlay a movie. To open a window in your TV to see a security camera feed of the front door or to video chat in one window while another window has a video of the baby's room. This is X-tended TV and the idea of the Xbox project 10. 10 in roman numerals is a X see pic which is supposed to come this year Xbox361=Xbox10:iamshadowlark said:What is xtv? Google just returns porn.
Yes I tend to agree and I don't think either Sony or Microsoft will announce that they are using the same hardware (if my speculation turns out to be true) but someone a few weeks or months after launch is going to notice and leak this.So microsoft will reveal the 361 on a event they organize themselves?
Wasn't that the big reason to stop with CES.
Wouldn't be surprised if it was revealed at a win 8 event just to show the integration of all the platforms(pc,tablet,console,mobile).
So instead of showing a new Xbox360 (PS3) with enhanced features at the E3 that you presume launches this holiday season (less than 6 months) to "battle" the Wii-U launch both "only" showed a few games ready for 2013? I am sorry I understand that your speculation makes sense and is actually feasible but I don't see that happening for 2012.
Exactly but probably understated as it's not just cheaper, it will probably have current hardware specs in AMD building blocks like:Microsoft previously announced and began selling the 360 Slim the same week. If they are targeting a holiday release of a redesigned, cost reduced version they wouldn't announce it 6 months early. People would stop buying the current model.
True enough. I'm just looking at all the ancillary services that Microsoft wants to pack in and their version of 'future-proofing' makes a little more sense to me.Not really. The onlive console is cheap and has little ram but does all that. Cloud gaming and media playback can all be done with a few megs of ram and a $2 SoC
My feeling is if the PS4 does feature BC, it would be through an accessory rather than built in. As per Sony's patent from a couple of years ago:
http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2010/09/14/sony-patent-backwards-compatibility-device/
My feeling is if the PS4 does feature BC, it would be through an accessory rather than built in. As per Sony's patent from a couple of years ago:
http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2010/09/14/sony-patent-backwards-compatibility-device/
The character models alone were over 1 million polygons each in the trailer. On a techical level the KillZone cgi is still unmatched.No need to use caps to try to make a point. I'm pretty sure they were talking about the game in motion, who would argue which one looks better in pictures??? That's ridiculous.
Besides if you look at that trailer the overall animation is not even that good. BF3 on the PS3 alone has better animation.
The gun and gun handling animation is kinda nice, but all the other ones feel mostly clunky. Look at bullet hit animation and tell me I'm wrong. KZ2 is better than that.
God Of War has better models than that. WAY better.
Alice has better hair and cloth on PC, can't say about consoles because I haven't played it there.
On the trailer shots lack punch, they don't "connect" or feel powerful. It may have looked good (then) but it sure as hell didn't look like it played well. It was just fluid.
If that's were FPSs are headed I don't want to be there. The proper Killzone games looked and specially played miles better than that.
If you truly believe that trailer is still unsurpassed today you're delusional my friend.
If Sony are aiming to have a cost efficient and affordable PS4 I really don't see how it's possible at all to engineer BC into the hardware. From my very limited understanding, it seems that there are only two semi-feasible options for PS3 BC in the PS4.
1. A streaming service like Gaikai/Onlive where disc check or hdd check is used to validate that the customer owns the game and gives them access to it on the streaming library. This would probably be extremely challenging because they would need to add every PS3 game ever to the streaming library for full BC. Not to mention internet speed problems.
2. Develop some sort of emulation software which would probably be next to impossible given the nature of the cell.
Neither one seems likely.
My uneducated guess: No BC at all for the PS4 at launch. The cost of finding a way to put it in would be more than the payoff.
What about the possibility that the entire software stack of the PS4/720
will be based on (software) binary translation (BT), i. e. non-native code
execution, with all the JIT techniques and so on for the main developers?
While abstracting the hardware architecture, i. e. the instruction set
architecture (ISA), Sony and/or MS will have full control of software
development with respect to the hardware, a major leap from just
virtualizing the hardware via the hypervisor within the PS3. Going BT would
also allow these companies to become independent from hardware vendors for
future releases and has the advantage of making backward compatibility a
trivial task.
The march of Sony PlayStation Suite SDK gives just a hint on all of this.
This SDK is based on C#, a binary translated language. But one doesn't has
to use C# or Java to gain independents from hardware. What about a virtual
machines like Dalvik or a derivative of it running on the PS4/720?
Personally, I'm on the hardware-side, programming in C/C++ and Assembler,
but the things mentioned above may have some advantages for the bulk of,
well, game programmer?
Wait ... why would Sony support XTV, especially at launch?
That's just completely wrong and shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the process of emulation. A calculation like that might make sense when manually porting software from one platform to the other, though it's suspect even then. In general purpose emulation you can't just compare FLOPs and say that "M processing units of B have X FLOPS, while N processing units of A also have X FLOPS, so B can emulate A". It just doesn't work that way, especially if M > N.The SPEs can be emulated using a cluster of shaders in the GPU (which if necessary could be slightly optimized for SPEs emulation at a hardware level with a joint design work by Sony&AMD). SPEs are used mainly for graphics and post-processing purposes to compensate for RSX weaknesses, they are floating point units, basically shaders.
Based on the PS4 GPU rumors it would take 112 shaders simply to match the computational power of the 7 SPEs, since they are emulated let's say that 200-250 shaders are needed. The RSX could take an other 300 shaders. The GPU is supposed to have 1100+ shaders.
What about the possibility that the entire software stack of the PS4/720
will be based on (software) binary translation (BT), i. e. non-native code
execution, with all the JIT techniques and so on for the main developers?
While abstracting the hardware architecture, i. e. the instruction set
architecture (ISA), Sony and/or MS will have full control of software
development with respect to the hardware, a major leap from just
virtualizing the hardware via the hypervisor within the PS3. Going BT would
also allow these companies to become independent from hardware vendors for
future releases and has the advantage of making backward compatibility a
trivial task.
The march of Sony PlayStation Suite SDK gives just a hint on all of this.
This SDK is based on C#, a binary translated language. But one doesn't has
to use C# or Java to gain independents from hardware. What about a virtual
machines like Dalvik or a derivative of it running on the PS4/720?
Personally, I'm on the hardware-side, programming in C/C++ and Assembler,
but the things mentioned above may have some advantages for the bulk of,
well, game programmer?
I am afraid that new slimmer versions of the current gen will only confuse ppl. It makes sense from money making perspective but from gaming one, many will scratch their heads imo. Also i think at leasr one of the big two will announce next gen pre e3 , my money is on sony
I believe you are describing OpenCL and AMD's HSAIL JIT virtual engine. AMD went one step further and made it an open standard as well as created the HSA Foundation which several Handheld chip makers joined.What about the possibility that the entire software stack of the PS4/720
will be based on (software) binary translation (BT), i. e. non-native code
execution, with all the JIT techniques and so on for the main developers?
While abstracting the hardware architecture, i. e. the instruction set
architecture (ISA), Sony and/or MS will have full control of software
development with respect to the hardware, a major leap from just
virtualizing the hardware via the hypervisor within the PS3. Going BT would
also allow these companies to become independent from hardware vendors for
future releases and has the advantage of making backward compatibility a
trivial task.
The march of Sony PlayStation Suite SDK gives just a hint on all of this.
This SDK is based on C#, a binary translated language. But one doesn't has
to use C# or Java to gain independents from hardware. What about a virtual
machines like Dalvik or a derivative of it running on the PS4/720?
Personally, I'm on the hardware-side, programming in C/C++ and Assembler,
but the things mentioned above may have some advantages for the bulk of,
well, game programmer?
What about the possibility that the entire software stack of the PS4/720
will be based on (software) binary translation (BT), i. e. non-native code
execution, with all the JIT techniques and so on for the main developers?
While abstracting the hardware architecture, i. e. the instruction set
architecture (ISA), Sony and/or MS will have full control of software
development with respect to the hardware, a major leap from just
virtualizing the hardware via the hypervisor within the PS3. Going BT would
also allow these companies to become independent from hardware vendors for
future releases and has the advantage of making backward compatibility a
trivial task.
The march of Sony PlayStation Suite SDK gives just a hint on all of this.
This SDK is based on C#, a binary translated language. But one doesn't has
to use C# or Java to gain independents from hardware. What about a virtual
machines like Dalvik or a derivative of it running on the PS4/720?
Personally, I'm on the hardware-side, programming in C/C++ and Assembler,
but the things mentioned above may have some advantages for the bulk of,
well, game programmer?
From past conversations I'm pretty sure you are being sarcastic but SteveP I think took it as a literal statement.Wait ... why would Sony support XTV, especially at launch?