Smoke and mirrors in the next gen- interesting article.


mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
Thanks for that, a very funny article.

I don't doubt that these features being touted today (and at the last batch of releases for PS2 and XBox) will eventually be available, it's just a matter of time. I wonder how many of them will actually be in these consoles though...
 

cr2sh

macrumors 68030
May 28, 2002
2,554
1
downtown
I have to believe that if the graphics improve as much as the raw computing power has (between the 733 chip and the tri-3.2GHz chips) that a lot of this won't just be smoke a mirrors.

Great article... thanks for the read.
 

rosalindavenue

macrumors 6502a
Dec 13, 2003
837
213
Virginia, USA
That's a great article. I recall Sony saying the PS2 was going to have Pixar-Like "Toy Story" quality graphics. Didn'r happen. And Toy Story came out 10 years ago.
 

kuyu

macrumors 6502a
Sep 16, 2003
694
0
Louisville
Great article. He hit the nail on the head. Only time will tell how much of the hype actually comes to fruition.
 

kwajo.com

macrumors 6502a
Jul 17, 2002
895
0
Bay of Fundy
rosalindavenue said:
That's a great article. I recall Sony saying the PS2 was going to have Pixar-Like "Toy Story" quality graphics. Didn'r happen. And Toy Story came out 10 years ago.
yeah I remember that promise, i think of it everytime I hear a spec from one of the new consoles
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,559
628
Cork, Ireland.
I really like the understated approach Nintendo is taking with the Revolution. Ok, it could be because they're going to be hopelessly outgunned by both Sony and Microsoft, but it's nice to see someone just taking a 'wait and see' approach.
 

Powerbook G5

macrumors 68040
Jun 23, 2003
3,974
0
St Augustine, FL
Now if Nintendo were to strike a deal with Pixar to provide some gaming development on the Revolution, I am quite sure we could finally see these "Pixar" level graphics taking shape...even if the hardware may not be as beefy as the PS3 or XBox 360. A lot of it has to do with being able to code properly and not just having the most insane hardware capability.
 

Fukui

macrumors 68000
Jul 19, 2002
1,615
6
Powerbook G5 said:
...even if the hardware may not be as beefy as the PS3 or XBox 360. A lot of it has to do with being able to code properly and not just having the most insane hardware capability.
Its pretty funny if you think about it.
PS2 had huge numbers yet a gamecube that was supposed to be 8x less powerfull (60mill vs. 12mill polys per sec) in almost all cases had better graphics...

In if you look at history, PS2 has outsold everyone by a HUGE margin this time... and they have the worst graphics. What does that say?
 

calyxman

macrumors 6502a
Apr 17, 2005
610
0
Fukui said:
In if you look at history, PS2 has outsold everyone by a HUGE margin this time... and they have the worst graphics. What does that say?
Better yet, it rocked Nintendo from the top spot in the console wars, the company which everybody around here for some reason or another equivocally compares to Apple computer. Now what does that say?
 

Fukui

macrumors 68000
Jul 19, 2002
1,615
6
calyxman said:
Better yet, it rocked Nintendo from the top spot in the console wars, the company which everybody around here for some reason or another equivocally compares to Apple computer. Now what does that say?
It says, that smart companies can make one simple mistake and ruin thier futures for a long time. Thats definitely something they have in common.

Its really interesting when you think about the past history.
Super Famicom had much better graphics than the Genesis/Mega Drive, but in the US, Sega kicked em until only the last couple of years, then Nintendo's games got really really good. N64 had far far supperior graphics capabilities than the PS1, but PS1 had way more games, though N64 was pretty innovative... PS2 had so-so graphics yet GC and XBX did quite worse than sony.... so I really think its a combination of factors, graphics (or at least raw-power) not necessarily being one of them.
 

sjpetry

macrumors 65816
Oct 28, 2004
1,195
0
Tamarindo, Costa Rica
We can only wait and see if history once again repeats itself.

And when they introduce the PS3 and XBox 360 I bet they will be able not to "make enough". And they will be selling for $1200 on eBay. :rolleyes:
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,553
2,886
i think i may have cracked it. and funnily enough its thanks to a documentary i watched about the BBC, and Channel 4. although everyone really knows this i just want to sound smart.

but yea... the BBC have programs that appeal to everyone. mass market. you may not just watch that channel along but it does get a lot of viewers.
now Channel 4. thats specialized. thats for people with fine tastes (fine as in acute/precise, not of higher class :p). its for people who know what they want and won't compromise. if its not on, the TV gets turned off.

now i was going to say Nintendo are like the BBC. they have a massive age range for games. from 3-whatever. and they're proud of that too. whereas Sony and Microsoft are Channel 4. for the scallies who just want to play racing-sim games and wannabe-gangsta sims... but i dont know now. because the PS2 is more popular than the cube, with gives it the BBC slot. but meh, i suppose its open topic. im not working with absolutes.

one thing i am absolute on is that big numbers dont impress me. look at PC's with thier 3Ghz Pentium 4's... where my 1.5Ghz G4 can easily match up too.

numbers mean crap. and the way Sony are announcing that what, the PS3 will be 40x faster than the PS2? ok. seriously even with HDTV support becoming popular (although looking at sales figures for them and word of mouth; nobody has them) 40x is intense to a pointless degree. its like sticking a NOS canister to a GBA. it CAN be done, hell it might make it a little more interesting... but whats the point in super speeds when its going to be hitting about 10% of its maximum power? i work it out like this;

Doom 3 on the Xbox is very good. now... assuming the Xbox is 2x faster/powerful than the PS2 then to get near photorealistic graphics; id say double the polygons and textures in Doom 3. so thats 2x for the console gap and 2x for the graphics boost. 4x. where the hell is that extra 36x power going?

cheerio.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
whooleytoo said:
I really like the understated approach Nintendo is taking with the Revolution. Ok, it could be because they're going to be hopelessly outgunned by both Sony and Microsoft, but it's nice to see someone just taking a 'wait and see' approach.

Interesting quote:
Shigeru Miyamoto said:
if you look at the numbers that they're throwing out, are those numbers going to be used in-game? I mean, those are just numbers that somebody just crunched up on a calculator. We could throw out a bunch of numbers, too, but what we're going to do is wait until our chips are done and we're going to find out how everything in the game is running, what its peak performance is, and those are the numbers that we're going to release because those are the numbers that really count.

I do think it's very irresponsible for people to say, "This is what we're running on. This is the power of our machine," when they're not even running on final boards. I think the professional's job is to not believe those numbers.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
raggedjimmi said:
Doom 3 on the Xbox is very good. now... assuming the Xbox is 2x faster/powerful than the PS2 then to get near photorealistic graphics; id say double the polygons and textures in Doom 3. so thats 2x for the console gap and 2x for the graphics boost. 4x. where the hell is that extra 36x power going?

cheerio.
XBox is running Doom 3 at 640x480 with most settings on low.

We're talking about running Doom 3 at 1920x1080 (at 30 FPS on the XBox 360 and 60 FPS on PS3 because PS3 has 1080p support), with all settings max like shadows, particle effects, details, etc.

Doom 3, honestly, is nowhere near next gen level. Honestly, I don't think its overblown power, though I doubt it will all be used. That's why I think Nintendo is being smart by still having on par with the competition, but getting slightly less powerful hardware in exchange for much smaller, cooler, portable form factor. Who really cares if the X360 is 20x faster than the XBox and the Revolution is 18x faster than the XBox?

Then again since the Revolution is launching around half a year later there is no guarantee it will be slower than the XBox 360 even.
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,553
2,886
GFLPraxis said:
XBox is running Doom 3 at 640x480 with most settings on low.

We're talking about running Doom 3 at 1920x1080 (at 30 FPS on the XBox 360 and 60 FPS on PS3 because PS3 has 1080p support), with all settings max like shadows, particle effects, details, etc.

Doom 3, honestly, is nowhere near next gen level. Honestly, I don't think its overblown power, though I doubt it will all be used. That's why I think Nintendo is being smart by still having on par with the competition, but getting slightly less powerful hardware in exchange for much smaller, cooler, portable form factor. Who really cares if the X360 is 20x faster than the XBox and the Revolution is 18x faster than the XBox?

Then again since the Revolution is launching around half a year later there is no guarantee it will be slower than the XBox 360 even.
wow :eek: i wish my PC made Doom 3 look that good on Low Quality! to me it looks like high quality, maybe ultra at a pinch, but without dynamic shadows.

anyone remember back when Sony announced the power of what the PS2 could do and everyone laughed at the cube because it could do less triangles than the PS2? and on paper it seemed like the PS2 would be producing beautiful visuals. again going back to the emotion engine and all that hype. even though theory means bugger all, just look at the games on the PS2 compared to the Cube.
i am surprised and quite pleased at how well the Xbox is doing but after seeing the Xbox 360's intro show thing at E3... well... :D money grabbing leprechauns.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
raggedjimmi said:
wow :eek: i wish my PC made Doom 3 look that good on Low Quality! to me it looks like high quality, maybe ultra at a pinch, but without dynamic shadows.

anyone remember back when Sony announced the power of what the PS2 could do and everyone laughed at the cube because it could do less triangles than the PS2? and on paper it seemed like the PS2 would be producing beautiful visuals. again going back to the emotion engine and all that hype. even though theory means bugger all, just look at the games on the PS2 compared to the Cube.
i am surprised and quite pleased at how well the Xbox is doing but after seeing the Xbox 360's intro show thing at E3... well... :D money grabbing leprechauns.

Doom 3, however, isn't much compared to Unreal 3. Have you seen the Unreal 3 engine? The next gen consoles have LAUNCH GAMES running that at HD resolution.




Ain't it purdy?

XBox 360's intro show was on the 12th. How well the XBox is doing? If you mean the 360...huh? Practically every single person on G4TechTV was disappointed with it.

On the subject of PS2 vs Cube, yeah, basicly Nintendo quoted real world performance numbers that they measured while Sony quoted maximum theoretical numbers that the system couldn't come close to. Also, Sony's numbers were for raw polygons, while Nintendo's were for textured polygons.
 

Fukui

macrumors 68000
Jul 19, 2002
1,615
6
GFLPraxis said:
Ain't it purdy?
I must be crazy but, I'll wait until its actually shipping to beleive it.

Does anybody remember those Ultra 64 pics that were supposed to be "SGI Quality"?? Or the Ridge Racer girl on the PS2? I think those are probably the same.. though who knows for sure.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
Fukui said:
I must be crazy but, I'll wait until its actually shipping to beleive it.

Does anybody remember those Ultra 64 pics that were supposed to be "SGI Quality"?? Or the Ridge Racer girl on the PS2? I think those are probably the same.. though who knows for sure.
Those screenshots ARE in game. It was being run in realtime at E3. The first shot is a model used in Gears of War, you can find ingame shots from E3 at IGN. It ran at about 10 FPS at the MTV showing though. On Alpha hardware of course. The second and third shots are from UT2k7, which was demoed in real time at E3 on the PS3, with no lag at all and two characters blasting each other. Remember the robot demo? And the Sony dude could rotate the camera with the controller.
 

calyxman

macrumors 6502a
Apr 17, 2005
610
0
Why is it so many of you, when it comes to mentioning the Xbox 360, have to dismiss the console as "garbage" or lackluster compared to Sony's PS3, but when someone brings up the specs--or lack thereof--for the Nintendo Revolution, everybody gets offended because supposedly Nintendo is all about the games and not the graphics...

I smell hypocrisy, and it stinks. :rolleyes:

Now going back to the issue of which console--Xbox 360 and PS3--had better specs and graphics.... There no question that PS3 has phenomenal processing power and high definition graphics. But where were the demoes? Where were the gaming booths?

MS was already demoing games, and although they weren't using the actual hardware on the 360, they were using 2 G5 Powermacs, supposedly at 1/3 the actual power.

So who's talking mostly smoke and mirrors? Nintendo hasn't divulged much about their hardware so they're out. Even though Microsoft has been touting many specs, at least they had some game booths running prototypes of 360's games. What did Sony have to offer? Some demonstration videos? A rubber duck demonstration akin the one they used for flaunting the PS2?

I'm not taking sides here, but I think it's getting kind of ridiculous listening to all this pap about how the 360 was a "dissappointment" and that the PS3 owns all.

Bottom line is, wait until all the consoles hit the market and check out the library of next generation games, and then decide.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
calyxman said:
Why is it so many of you, when it comes to mentioning the Xbox 360, have to dismiss the console as "garbage" or lackluster compared to Sony's PS3, but when someone brings up the specs--or lack thereof--for the Nintendo Revolution, everybody gets offended because supposedly Nintendo is all about the games and not the graphics...

I smell hypocrisy, and it stinks. :rolleyes:

A few reasons.

1) We don't KNOW the specs of the Revolution. You can't make a judgement off that.
2) There is NOTHING NEW. If the primary feature is "better graphics" and it is pwned in the graphics department, and the rest of it is basicly just slight improvements on the first one, I consider it garbage.
3) If the Revolution turns out to be a little slower (which we don't know yet), the reason is that Nintendo is (as they have said) taking a tradeoff. They're making the system quiet, efficient, cool, and compact. You can beat a small child with the XBox 360.


Now going back to the issue of which console--Xbox 360 and PS3--had better specs and graphics.... There no question that PS3 has phenomenal processing power and high definition graphics. But where were the demoes? Where were the gaming booths?

MS was already demoing games, and although they weren't using the actual hardware on the 360, they were using 2 G5 Powermacs, supposedly at 1/3 the actual power.

So who's talking mostly smoke and mirrors? Nintendo hasn't divulged much about their hardware so they're out. Even though Microsoft has been touting many specs, at least they had some game booths running prototypes of 360's games. What did Sony have to offer? Some demonstration videos? A rubber duck demonstration akin the one they used for flaunting the PS2?

I'm not taking sides here, but I think it's getting kind of ridiculous listening to all this pap about how the 360 was a "dissappointment" and that the PS3 owns all.

Bottom line is, wait until all the consoles hit the market and check out the library of next generation games, and then decide.
Did you skip the realtime videos where he used a controller to rotate the camera in Unreal Tournament 2007 on the PS3?
Nintendo hasn't divulged much information but they've been totally honest. They actually commented on the smoke and mirrors and how they felt Microsoft and Sony were being unprofessional by screaming wild numbers that are theoretical maximums, and that they intend to wait and give out actual performance numbers measured in game.

Microsoft had PDZ playable, and it had horrible graphics. Then they show gameplay videos of everything else and hype a bunch of features.

Sony had a bunch of ingame demos.

I wouldn't say Microsoft has the least smoke and mirrors at all.