Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

Best Buy, Netflix join Blu-ray camp

  • By Erica Ogg, News.com
  • Posted Feb 12, 2008 9:23 am PT

Electronics retailer announces it will begin promoting the PlayStation 3's high-definition video format as online rental house ditches its rival altogether.

From News.com

Already starting the week off on a bad note, HD DVD's day just keeps getting worse. Starting next month, Best Buy says it will prominently display Blu-ray players and discs in its stores and recommend the format over rival HD DVD, according to a Reuters report. The support for Sony-backed Blu-ray, which the PlayStation 3 supports via an internal drive, comes at a precarious time for Toshiba-backed HD DVD, which is playable on the Xbox 360 via a $130 external drive.

"Because we believe that Blu-ray is fast emerging as that single format, we have decided to focus on Blu-ray products," Brian Dunn, Best Buy's president and chief operating officer, said in a statement Monday.

It's not an exclusive arrangement because Best Buy says it will still continue to offer HD DVD. But having Best Buy's valuable endorsement in the form of Sunday circulars, front-and-center store kiosks, and staff recommendation seems to be the icing on the cake for a Blu-ray victory in the format war--and potentially the death rattle for HD DVD.

Earlier Monday, online movie rental service Netflix announced it would phase out its offering of HD DVD discs by the end of the year. Netflix's position likely will have less of an immediate impact on the format battle because its business depends on people who have already made a decision on which format they support.

The HD DVD Promotional Group responded with a statement that's strikingly similar to the one issued earlier in the day: "We have long held the belief that HD DVD is the best format for consumers based on quality and value, and with more than 1 million HD DVD players on the market, it's unfortunate to see Netflix make the decision to only stock Blu-ray titles going forward. While the Best Buy announcement says they will recommend Blu-ray, at least they will continue to carry HD DVD and offer consumers a choice at retail."

278 Comments

  • R0bstradamus

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 10:08 am GMT

    Angel Cage: What you fail to realize is that out of those 41 8.0 and better games that you mention 32 are also on the 360, so you ps3 fanboys have a total of 9 quality games that 360 owners dont have. WoW thats amazing. And darkride66 if people are not buying ps3's because of the blu-ray then why aren't their game sales higher?

  • zombey1333

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 6:12 pm GMT

    Why are they still even bothering? o.0 Seriously, it's over. Blue Ray's got this in the bag.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 2:12 pm GMT

    That's funny. I like how people are trying to explain away the surge in PS3 sales by saying "They're just buying them as Blu-Ray players." These are probably the same people that criticised the PS3 for including Blu-Ray in the first place. Hey, if I wanted a Blu-Ray player, I'd pay the extra $100 bucks for a PS3 rather than the cheapest Blu-Ray I could get. And that's were the argument starts falling apart. If people just wanted a Blu-Ray player, why wouldn't they just buy one of the $300 dollar players? It's because they want PS3's. End of the day HD-DVD is dead and the PS3 outsold the 360 in 2007 and looks set to do the same thing in 2008 (according to the analysts). Not bad for a lowly Blu-Ray player.

  • AngelCage

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 1:40 pm GMT

    R0bstradamus

    Sammojo according to gamespot the 360 has 81 games that scored a 8.0 and above compared to 41 for the ps3.

    ---------------------

    Yeah 81 vs 41 But Only in 2007-2008 (let's talk face to face, shall wee?) The PS3 has 33 of those 41 GS-Above 8 Scored-games. In 2007-2008 the X360 have 39-40 (i lost the count for a sec X_x ) games scored above 8. it's not a big difference after all... only 8-9 games, not 40; and the 360 have some of these 40 games in development some time before the release of DEV KITS of the PS3...

    X360 have games scored above 8 from even the year 2005 when there was nothing to compare off so all released games was 'next gen'... The graphics of Perfect Dark Zero are just sligthy better than last gen B.L.A.C.K. , nothing spectacular for a trully next gen... sometimes it just looks like a Upscaled-Antialized-Sligthy touched ORIGINAL Xbox game... if the game was released in 2007 GS could give it a 6.5 easy.

    The PS3 have 41 80++ Scored games in ONE year... The X360 have 81 In two years... i think that the PS3 is doing really good. Of course the x360 have more games, cause was released first, a whole year ahead.

    Even the launch titles of the PS3 was in fact a lot better than the launch games in X360... Just compare Resistance with Perfect dark zero... it's a shame that PDZ have a perfect 9 from GS (even in graphics???? what the hell!!!!) and resistance a 8.6

    "Gamespot about Perfect Dark Zero: Awesome presentation, featuring cutting-edge graphics and sound... " Sure.

    If someone of you think that compare a 2005 game with a 2006 one is stupid, then compare the quantity of released games between 360 and (a year later) PS3 is even more stupid for me.

    In comparisson, the Wii in 2007-2008 ONLY have 30 games scored above 8 and some of them (15-19... more than 15, less than 20 games) are just VC games... What system has no games in reality????

    Just to add to the facts and to feed the flame wars.

  • R0bstradamus

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 1:03 pm GMT

    Sammojo according to gamespot the 360 has 81 games that scored a 8.0 and above compared to 41 for the ps3. What exactly is your point? The xbox360 does not depend on hd-dvd to succeed. Do you really think that people are buying ps3's for the games? Most people are buying it because they can play blue-ray movies on it not because of the games.

  • Sammojo

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 1:01 am GMT

    PumpkinBoogie i explained below. The Formats directly involve the Consoles because PS3 relies on Blu-ray and 360 relies on DVD and has optional HD-DVD. That is how so read posts before asking already answered questions.

  • PumpkinBoogie

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:29 am GMT

    Random question I suppose, but how the hell in a couple day span since news dropped about the VIDEO FORMAT war between Blu-Ray and HD DVD turning again--all of a sudden morph into a incidious "debate" about which GAMING FORMAT/CONSOLE--PS3 vs. 360--is the best??

    WTF??.....leave it to some ADD-riddled fanboys to turn something so unrelated gamingto , AT ALL, to championing for the greatness of their beloved 360 (and this is in no way aimed at the civilized 360 owners--just the crazed fanboys).....real winners, you are guys, real winners....

    I'm I the only one puzzled by this??

  • Sammojo

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:19 am GMT

    wingnut99:

    360 does not have more games. It has a larger number of games, but that means nothing if it doesn't have a higher number of High scoring games. For example, Hyper MAgazine give a history of their reviews for 360, PS3 and Wii games. PS3 has 27 games which scored above 80 and the 360 has 26. Some are multiplats and some aren't. Wee can see form this that the "Better Games' or "More Games" arguments are both a matter of opinion, and a gross generalization respectively. The PS3 has just as many "Games which matter". Also, unless you are into buying more than 15 games in a year, you probably are not going to notice a difference in the amount of games anyway. The more games argument is useless.

    The reason this is important for 360 VS PS3 is simple. PS3 has Blu-ray and 360 has HD-DVD. Blu-ray is currently winning, which is important for PS3. If Blu-ray had lost the results would have been quite bad for PS3, but if Blu-ray had won, then it would mean a lot to the value of the PS3. Having its Games on Blu-ray was a gamble by sony, and it is now paying off. That is the significance and why people are talking about that.

  • fibitosan

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 6:12 pm GMT

    wingnut99, is right your afirmation that the burnout goes around 50 fps, but your wrong saying that 360 has more pawer, because is now confirmed that ps3 have more power, is time what programers need to show that, now activision, EA and capcom have made games for both platforms and they see identical, knowing that 360 has the easiest system to program a game, and that programers now dont now how to use all the extra speed of the ps3, is just time to show that.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 5:54 pm GMT

    AngelCage. It started with a legitimate question regarding the format that the next Xbox would use. Apparently even something as benign as this somehow threatens the security of 360 fans. There shall be no talk of other systems, Microsoft based or otherwise, unless it's a fight you want.

  • AngelCage

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 2:54 pm GMT

    How in the world a BluRay-HDDVD news, simply and trully about the VIDEO FORMAT WARS can convert in a PS3-x360 figth???

    A Fanboy fight with hi-tech claims about RSx vs X360 VCard, and memory bandwidths/efficiency/bottlenecks and CELL vs X360 procesors and about physics in both systems...

    All of you now are EVEN talking about ASSEMBLY and even wee have a Game developer who knows the inner systems of Ps3 and 360 and cause that he can say: "the PS3 sux and the 360 rox"


    You guys really knows how transform magically just rocks in gold, peaches in apples and bluray-hdDVD into Ps3-X360

    Only in GameSpot message boards i guess.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 1:58 pm GMT

    @Autolycus. You have done home work. 1080p textures on PS3 and 360 would give you 10 FPS. You wont see full HD on PS3 or 360. Now the 360 has one game that is one step up from Low HD. But the out come was not good. the game ran at 40-50 FPS. The new Burnout game. Did you even see a big jump in video? no. It just played slower. Now next gen we will see full HD gaming. So just have fun with what we have now. The only thing the 360 has over the PS3 is a small edge in power and games. Games will come in time. But for this gen, the 360 will always have more games. Thats just the way it is. When you have a head start, you will always have more of something.

  • Autolycus

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 1:44 pm GMT

    darkride66 --- again the xbox was a project. MS didnt plan to make money and thats why they ended it earlier, so using their support on OS's and the original Xbox doesnt really hold up. In fact everything I have read, and I am not saying this to start more debating, because I am sure you and I could do it all day long, has pointed to PS3 making a new system before the next XBOX. DVD is far from outdated. Blu-Ray for video games, hasnt been needed yet because the textures are still in "low def". The PS3 would slow down big time if they started using 1080p textures (and yes that would probably not fit on a DVD), but it simply isnt a feasible option on either side for anyone.

    Anything we read from here out is purely speculation and has more merried towards fanboyism sites then anything else.

  • Rocker1044

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:58 pm GMT

    At least they tried right. that's about all you can say for HD DVDs. I've seen the two and its obvious which is the better format. Blu Ray has it better. Though the prices are too steep for me to fork over any money for it. But the moment a price drop comes along, as it will cause look at the history of everything else electronic, I am definitely gonna pick up a blu ray player.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:56 pm GMT

    darkride66. Ah, you dont get it. Why has there been more games for the 360? That is going to change. there will be more games for the PS3. There is not any cash in it like the 360. there are more 360's out there. when PS3 hit's the right numbers they will start making more and more games. @Autolycus. Yes both have physics HARDWARE processing. but its still more software. Now if you took that Ati card and the nvidia card out of the 360 and PS3. Put them in a computer for a head to head. The ATi card would bench better. I love nvidia. I only use them in my computers at home. I do need to upgrade.... I have a old BFG 6600 gt oc. DONT MAKE FUN OF ME FOR IT!!!! it's old. I know. darkride66. I never did say no one is not working on games for the PS3. They are working harder to make games for PS3. Also. the next gen will war will start in 2012. Autolycus. As for games that are not out. It was a joke. I frist gave games that were out, and some one run the hole about it. So as a joke I gave out some games that are not out.

  • Autolycus

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:56 pm GMT

    its not easy to port all your money into 360 development and then having to start over from SCRATCH for the PS3 development (yes they are that different). So, if a company has to spend a crap ton of money one system, make the most difficult to develop for ( ps3 ) and they take whats left and port it over the other systems. unforunately, it wont be taking advantage of the 360 or the Wii processors. And i have to hear, anywhere that developers are magically switching from 360 to ps3. They are just deciding to develop for the ps3 because they actually have a userbase worth selling to now.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:49 pm GMT

    Autolycus. Bear in mind, that it is just speculation at this point, but we're not talking just one year left on the 360 and that's it. We're talking late 2009/early 2010, and even then hopefully they won't yank their support for the 360 like they did the Xbox. Have a search for some of the articles on why we'll see a new 360 soon. They make a lot of sense, and it's very much in line with MS's behaviour in the past.

  • razu_gamer

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:46 pm GMT

    LOL HD DVD for trying to beat Blu-ray. LOL for BLu-ray being ridiculously priced. LOL 360 with its last gen optical storage. LOL for Microsoft for backing HD DVD.

  • mtofu

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:42 pm GMT

    To anyone who thinks getting an XB360 was a bad decision because HD-DVD might/will lose the format war is crazy. Sure this might entice more people to buy a PS3 at some point but it isn't going to change the games that are made for XB360... well, i guess consoles sold eventually impact where developers are going to put their development dollars, but all the same, good games will be made for XB360. The biggest impact this will have is that people won't buy the HD-DVD add-on.

    (disclaimer: I own all consoles except for the XB360).

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:39 pm GMT

    Wingnut. There's no link to the new 360 info because there is no info yet. This is just analyst speculation at this point, but their reasoning certainly makes sense. MS won't release this info until they're good and ready. And yes, developers are switching to the PS3 for lead (EA is the big one.) You saying they're not doesn't make it so. Again, do some research. For being trained as a game dev, you seem to be a little behind in your industry knowledge. What on earth made you think the 360 was designed for a 7 year lifespan?

  • Dj_Lizz

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:38 pm GMT

    as they said many company and dev team are now making the game first for the PS3 after that the box .cuz of the hard to develop dev kit , so when the time come they can master the newest system and mostly ,why many developers made games first to 360 in the past cuz of the eazy to make dev of the traditional but ,from what i can say hard to develop and unknow code programing dev kit of a ps3 is the real next gen to me bcuz if learning new things is what programers need to do every years . unlike the good old DX9 programing of 360 cuz from what i know DX9 has been around for 5-7years from now...

  • Autolycus

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:35 pm GMT

    I read that long developer thing because I've followed the cell processor from the architecture up. Reading page after page after page of the most boring stuff you can possibly get into if you don't like the "how-to's" of processors.

    And to Wingnuts99, both the ps3 and the xbox360 have physics HARDWARE processing in them (to relieve processor power from the cpu). Also something the developer wrote in his commentary, isnt exactly true. The PS3 used a prototype 7900 Nvidia GPU, which at the time was the best on the market. NVIDIA makes amazing GPU's but they ask for a large amount of royalty, which is why MS didnt want to work them any longer. ATi takes what is already out there and puts more of everything in their chipsets. To compare the GPU of the 360 to the GPU of PS3, actually isnt feasible because the XB0X 360 GPU is a one off. No tests out there would accurately portray its real world results.

    Now you have to understand my background before you call me a fan boy, which im not, despite what you WANT to believe. Assembly is the most "hardcore" programming language your can write in. YOu have direct access to every single piece of hardware and it takes ages to become a "Master" of it(which i am nowhere even close to amateur on anymore). POint being is, you have to learn how things work to write that language. One of the reasons developers were able to squeeze out so much of the PS2, despite it being vastly INFERIOR in technology was because programmers were foreced to write their code in Assembly. Most of all developers write in C/C++ and let the compiler do the rest. But again, with these new technologies the only wa you can truely take advantage of the hardware, on any system is to write in Assembly. There has to be a programmer out there reading this that can confirm this for me, so the fanboys dont think I am making this up(not that it really matters if they do).

    Comparing games that arent out yet is a waste. All you can do is compare the hardware and if you dont know the hardware, you are taking an educated guess as to what the future holds. TO say the next 360 will be out by 2009 is a joke. Original XBOX was a TEST from MS to see if they could make a dent. They lost 3+BILLION dollars and then went for the 360, which they are doing well on. Keep you guesses and lack of facts out of your points you are trying to make. Because the spread of bad information is what is really screwing everytihng up.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:20 pm GMT

    Independent... Part time. I do to much to do full time. From wrestling to music, wife kids, Ghost hunting. I'm on down time. My leg is broke. Thats what I get for wrestling. I do most of my wrestling to help make cash for schools, or anything that will help people in need. I do Some ECW stuff. I'll really into video fx's and thing that have something to do with video. I think I do to much.

  • carljohnson3456

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:12 pm GMT

    "wingnut99 developers switching to the PS3???? no. They are working harder on the PS3. Sony is pushing for games. Dev's need to do there part for the PS3 like they should have been. Like us, we have a deal with Sony. Alot of dev's are not really doing there part of the deal. So it's now or never. Sony could pull there kit's from us or any one and every one could pay a big fine. As for the new 360 thing. it's all talk. So wheres the link to back that any ways?"

    So your claiming to be a dev?

  • huskerman34

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:10 pm GMT

    It really doesnt matter for microsoft because they will still have hd movies available for download. It sucks for toshiba. I agree i wish they would end this war. Lets start moving forward. Its sensless to buy a hd dvd player when i can download hd. So Microsoft wins either way.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 12:08 pm GMT

    developers switching to the PS3???? no. They are working harder on the PS3. Sony is pushing for games. Dev's need to do there part for the PS3 like they should have been. Like us, we have a deal with Sony. Alot of dev's are not really doing there part of the deal. So it's now or never. Sony could pull there kit's from us or any one and every one could pay a big fine. As for the new 360 thing. it's all talk. So wheres the link to back that any ways?

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:51 am GMT

    wingnut99. Did you not hear me say that I neither understand nor care about the inner workings of the systems? You're right. I don't pretend to understand that, but I see the end result which is developers switching to the PS3. Now you tell me why that is. As for MS, they talked about the 360 possibly having a longer lifespan than the typical 5 years, but never committed to that, and given the physical limitations of the 360 hardware to even last that long it's almost certain we'll see the new 360 when the 3 year warranties start to expire en masse. Once again, this has nothing to do with the future lineup of 360 titles, it's just the way it goes. Read a couple of forecasts for 2008/2009, get edumacated on the subject and then get back to us. The reasons why we'll see the new 360 sooner rather than later are pretty compelling.

  • Kravyn81

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:51 am GMT

    The quicker this is over the better. Now it's just becoming embarrassing for MS and Toshiba.

  • carljohnson3456

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:51 am GMT

    "wingnut99 @darkride66. I'm a teck guy. Ok gears 2 and bioshock 2 are going to look better than MGS4. Is that better? The 360's CPU will run vegetation simulation and physics. Both systems run physics from the CPU. the physics system is software. I own a PS3. I want to play MGS4 just as bad as any one. I hate it when people run there hole about things thay dont know, or dont work with. Thats like me tell you about stock. I dont know anything about it. So why would I run my hole about it. The next gen X box and PS4 are do 2011-12. Sony will try to have something out before MS. I can say that I do hear that Sony is now making hardware as we type. MS is at that point to. Now PS3 will have a long life after PS4. Just like the PS2. A lot of people think Sony wont come out with the PS4 for 8-10 years. Not true. game systems come every 5-7 years. the 360 will live the full 7 to 8 years. Let me also say that Gears of war 3 will go next gen. Hay, it's a system mover."

    First of all, you forget that the original Xbox only lasted a whopping 4 years, and after the 360 came out? MS dropped all support for Xbox. That's the Microsoft way, release a new product leaving the others behind. Look at Vista. No improvements, but everyone will eventually have to get one, because their old format is hardly supported. Just look at all the "Vista only" games and accessories there are out there. The 360 probably wont last past 5 years, if not 4. The PS3 will probably last a good 7-8 years, just like the PS1 and PS2. I'm not calling it "future proof" - but it really is well suited to last the next 5-6 years, way moreso than the 360. And no disrespect, but I agree with Darkride, no one reads those super long posts.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:35 am GMT

    @darkride66. I'm a teck guy. Ok gears 2 and bioshock 2 are going to look better than MGS4. Is that better? The 360's CPU will run vegetation simulation and physics. Both systems run physics from the CPU. the physics system is software. I own a PS3. I want to play MGS4 just as bad as any one. I hate it when people run there hole about things thay dont know, or dont work with. Thats like me tell you about stock. I dont know anything about it. So why would I run my hole about it. The next gen X box and PS4 are do 2011-12. Sony will try to have something out before MS. I can say that I do hear that Sony is now making hardware as we type. MS is at that point to. Now PS3 will have a long life after PS4. Just like the PS2. A lot of people think Sony wont come out with the PS4 for 8-10 years. Not true. game systems come every 5-7 years. the 360 will live the full 7 to 8 years. Let me also say that Gears of war 3 will go next gen. Hay, it's a system mover.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:34 am GMT

    Wingnut. Man, no one reads those huge posts. Try to keep your quotes to a min. Anyway, at the end of the day the 360 isn't increasing it's lead anymore in worldwide sales, so that's one strike against whoever that guy was. Secondly, developers are switching to the PS3. EA said in two months the PS3 would be their lead platform, and they aren't the only ones. His little "THIS IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE" quote at the end is funny, because it already has changed.
    Really what does any of that have to do with whether or not the new Xbox in 2009/2010 will have Blu-Ray or something else?

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:17 am GMT

    Here's a little quote just for Wingnut. From Far Cry 2's Tech Director Dominic Guay "We were positively surprised by how efficient the SPUs (the Cell processing units) were to do such things as run our vegetation simulation, our animations or our physics systems." Sorry if I was mistaken about the multiple processor things. I'm a stock broker, not a tech guy, and frankly I really don't care how the internal components of my consoles play nice with each other. Now, are you really comparing Bioshock and Gears to a game that hasn't been released yet? *cough*fanboy*cough* Anyway, I went out of my way to state I thought the 360 would still have a good couple of years. I believe that, but you need to pull your head out of the sand and look around if you think the 360's lineup for 2008 is nearly as impressive as what 2007 offered, and even with that lineup sales growth slowed for the 360. Seriously, how long of a lifespan did you think the 360 would have?

  • ParisSun

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:07 am GMT

    Game over man, game over.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 11:00 am GMT

    Kim Naroz left a really long comment on the post about the amount of power the developers are using form the Xbox 360 and Sony Playstation 3, he pointed out that the Sony PS3 display’s 275,000,000 polygons per second, compared to the 500,000,000 polygons per second of the Xbox 360.

    My question is does this really matter?

    Here is Kim Naroz’s Comment:
    Someone needs to point out that the Playstation 3 can only display 275,000,000 polygons per second, compared to the 500,000,000 polygons per second of the Xbox 360.

    That is the reason why games like John Madden Football 2008, NCAA Football 2008, All-Pro Football 2008, and many other games from EA Sports, 2K Sports, and so many others all run at 60 frames per second on the Xbox 360, but only 30 frames per second on the Playstation 3.

    Gamespot specifically said in the review of those sports games: “The Xbox 360 versions run smoothly at 60 frames per second at 1080p resolution, while the Playstation 3 versions struggle to run at 30 frames per second at 720p resolution.”

    It isn’t just sports games with that problem. Look at all the Tony Hawk Skating games, Tom Clancy Splinter Cell: Double Agent, and F.E.A.R. They have frame rates that drop below 20 frames per second on the PS3 and go into slow motion it is so bad…even though the Xbox 360 versions have very smooth framerates.

    Oblivion is NOW BETTER on the Xbox 360!!!

    When Oblivion was released a year later on the PS3, it used a new shader design…that had NOTHING to do with hardware technology; it was just something put into the new version of the game as a software program. The download was released for the Xbox 360 later on, but the PS3 fanboys always pointed out, “But when you compare the actual discs, the PS3 one has some advantages (although the Xbox 360 version also has advantages, and was ALWAYS rated higher).

    Oblivion: Game of the Year Edition is now available for the Xbox 360, and when you now compare Oblivion on the Xbox 360 to Oblivion on the PS3, there is NO DOUBT that the Xbox 360 version is significantly better; that is why it is rated higher!

    The Playstation 3 version of Oblivon is a perfect example that what this man is saying about the Hard Drive of the PS3 being used to help out with memory limitations is NOT true. Consider the FACT that the Playstation 3 version of Oblivion does NOT allow the entire world to exist in the game at the same time, like the Xbox 360 version does. This is because of the Memory Bandwidth hardware bottleneck of the Playstation 3.

    Also, when it comes to RAM, the Xbox 360 certainly DOES have fundamental advantages over the Playstation 3!

    For example, the CPU of the PS3 can NEVER access more than 256MB of RAM at any point. The Xbox 360 CPU is free to access up to 512MB of RAM if there was a need. With the PS3, there are plenty of times when the CPU needs more than 256MB of RAM, and the Video-RAM of the PS3 is actually using less than 256MB of RAM, which means that if the PS3 had a Unified RAM environment"like the Xbox 360’s"then that unused Video-RAM could help the CPU, like it does on the Xbox 360. OBVIOUSLY, the Xbox 360 RAM design is much more flexible; it helps developers in ways that they enjoy working with.

    Plus, it’s important to remember that the original design of the Playstation 3 called for the used of TWO Cell CPU processors"each with two Threads that could Send signals to the SPE subprocessors.

    However, when Sony saw the design of the Xbox 360, and they saw how much better the Xbox 360 was, then Sony was forced to redesign the Playstation 3 very quickly in a way that hurt the PS3 system. This is nearly identical to what happened with Sega and the Saturn. Sega saw how much better the original PS1 was, and they were forced to quickly redesign the Saturn in a way that used parallel processing that was difficult to work with and was more expensive. This is EXACTLY what happened with the Playstation 3.

    The original design of the PS3 was not even supposed to used a GPU, because it was going to have two of the Cell CPU processors. But when Sony saw the revolutionary ATI GPU in the Xbox 360 that was Custom designed for the Xbox 360, and was 1.5 years ahead of its time (since the PC didn’t see similar Unified Shader technology until January 30, 2007), then Sony was forced to removed one of the Cell CPUs in the PS3, and instead add a Nvidia GPU. But there was NOT time to custom design the GPU, so Sony was forced to included a four-year old generic GPU in the PS3. That is why people often point out the vast superiority of the Xbox 360 GPU.

    Now that the PS3 only has one 3.2Ghz Cell CPU, it means that the PS3 has only two Threads capable of Sending signals to the six SPE sub-processors running parallel. Each of those six SPE processors is capable of Receiving a Threaded signal; however, the PS3 CPU is only capable of Sending two Threaded signals. This is where the hardware “bottleneck” of the PS3 reveals itself. Programmers often say that the PS3 has two arms (CPU Threads) that are trying to juggle six balls (SPE sub-processors). Obviously, that is NOT possible, and that is why the Playstation 3 hardware is such a BIG disappointment.

    With the Xbox 360, Microsoft used a much newer and better form of technology. PCs often brag about their “dual-core” CPU design. The Xbox 360 actually takes that to the next level and used a “tri-core” CPU design, with each CPU using the most developer-favored videogame processor available"the PowerPC.

    The Xbox 360 is literally the exact opposite when compared to the Playstation 3 in terms of hardware design and efficiency. The Xbox 360 has three 3.2Ghz CPUs, each with two Threads capable of Sending instructions. But the Xbox 360 doesn’t the outdated parallel processing environment of the PS3. There are no “sub-processors” to worry about with the Xbox 360. The signals can be focused on CPU and GPU commands. This literally means the Xbox 360 has six arms (CPU Threads) that are being asked to juggle only two balls (GPU and CPU functions).

    THAT is why the developers absolutely LOVE the Xbox 360 and can design games so much more efficiently for the Xbox 360.

    THAT is why games are released so much earlier for the Xbox 360.

    THAT is why the overwhelming majority of Xbox 360 games offer better graphic and online performance on the Xbox 360.

    THAT is NOT going to change!

    It may be easier to port a PS3 game to the Xbox 360 than it is to port an Xbox 360 to the PS3 (since the Xbox 360 is more powerful in terms of videogame performance"500,000,000 polygons for the Xbox 360 is more than the 275,000,000 for the PS3), but the Xbox 360 will continue to be the Lead Platform this generation for two reasons:

    (1) Because the Xbox 360 is so much easier for developers to develop games for and experiment with new types of gameplay.

    (2) Because the Xbox 360 has sold over Eight-Million more systems than the Playstation 3, and that lead continues grow by hundreds of thousands of systems each month, in terms of Worldwide Sales.

    http://www.ps3vault.com/sony-ps3-275000000-polygons-per-second-vs-xbox-360%E2%80%99s-500000000-2382

    This is not a 360 or a Sony page.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:57 am GMT

    Autolycus also went on about "for reference, the ps4, next xbox, and next wii are ALREADY BEING DESIGNED"
    Of course they are. No one said otherwise. It's just we should start to see details about the next 360 revealed late this year as they start looking at a 2009/2010 launch. I'm sure the old Xbox wasn't close to living up to it's potential but it still had a set lifespan. What makes you think the 360 is any different? If anything the continued hardware problems, even on the new 360's beg for a total redesign. Read some articles about the future of the 360. There are quite a few reasons why we'll see the new 360 sooner rather than later. Despite your insistence that the PS3 is too hard to develop for, those of us who follow the industry who are not blinded by console faith see the shift happening in the industry to the PS3 as the lead platform. This combined with slowing 360 sales and lack of acceptance outside of North America alone insures that it's back to the drawing board for a system that has hopefully learned from past mistakes, and capitalizes on what the 360 did right. I'm not suggesting that the 360 isn't still going to have a decent couple of years, but the writing has always been on the wall. Industry analysts predicited this quite some time ago and it shouldn't surprise anyone that it's happening now.

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:55 am GMT

    Lets see what games are coming out for the 360 this year and next year so far. NG2, gears of war 2, bioshock 2, halo wars, dead rising 2. I could go on. But I dont feel like writing a book right now. PS3 had so called big games that were crap. Bioshock and gears look better than MGS4. If you would have gone to the links that I put up and read it. You would know the true. Even if you did you would just say its a lie just to make your self feel better.

  • jfrdricks63

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:44 am GMT

    You guys go take your betamax....I mean hd dvd players to the trash
    --- reply : so on your theory, the Saturn should've outsoild the ps2, along with the dreamcast because they were both far superior then ps2 as far as technology goes.>>

    Actually your comparison is not valid since EVERYONE knows that Beta had a far superior picture quality than VHS. It is still being used in news orginizations today. VHS only won because its backers had the capital and the studios were backing it. VHS was far inferior to beta it wasn't even funny.

  • carljohnson3456

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:42 am GMT

    "Autolycus the Saturn should've outsoild the ps2, along with the dreamcast because they were both far superior then ps2 as far as technology goes"

    Man, what are you smoking?!?

  • wingnut99

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:42 am GMT

    darkride66@. LMAF. This year is going to be a big year with games for the 360. (multiple processors being perfect for Far Cry 2 because of the way they allow the programmers to split up specific tasks?) ya ON THE 360!!! How can a 1 core CPU have multiple processors??? Stupid. Wheres the link, or did you get that out of a Playstation mag. The only game system that has multiple processors is the 360 and back in the day the Sega Saturn had 8.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:41 am GMT

    Autolycus mentioned "Honestly, if I were to purchase a technology based soley on technology, i would like blu-ray. But all the politics tied to it will prevent ME."
    Politics? So, you don't buy products that are aggressively marketed or gain market share through negotiations with other corporations out of principal? I guess that would mean you wouldn't be able to buy ANYTHING! Everything is politics and marketing. That's how the world works. You know that. You work in video game retail sales.

  • Autolycus

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:39 am GMT

    omigod, this is funny to read. you guys are so full of crap, its not even funny.

    for reference, the ps4, next xbox, and next wii are ALREADY BEING DESIGNED. They usually wait a couple months after a lunch of a system and start to think ( on paper ) of the next ones. Expect PS4 to be cheaper, easier to make games for, but still be proprietary. could tell ya about the wii and i couldnt tell ya about the next xbox and i wont make it up either, like most of you posters would.

  • Autolycus

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:35 am GMT

    darkride66

    Rod110184. MS knew the 360 would have a limited lifespan when they rushed it to market with old tech and no harddrive. The goal was to beat the PS3 to market. They succeeded. Last year was the best lineup we'll see from the 360 and even then growth slowed, with no signs of picking up. If the new system is launched 2009/2010, that's a 4-5 year lifespan on the 360 and that's about right. Given they announced work on the 360 in 2003 and it was released in 2005, 2008 announcement and 2009/10 release, again, sounds just about right. Why do you think they extended the warranty to 3 years? Those warranties will run out now right around when the new systems are launched. More and more analysts are expecting the new 360 announcement late in 2008.
    ---reply--- dude, wake up , that is probably the most loaded p.o.s. statement you've ever given. The technology in the 360 isnt even closed to tapped. Hell developers are still finding things IN THE PS2. The entire history of video games (saturn excluded) has been single core processors. To write a game or engine completely based on multiprocessors will take MANY YEARS TO COME. On top of that, because the CPU logic of the XBOX AND the Wii is so different then the proprietary "cell" technology( which is only overly effective in burst data crunching ) that an engine written to multicore processing(like today's computers) simply wont work on the ps3. it requires its own unique compiler to take advantage of it, which is a real head ache to developers. (hence the lack of noteworth (keyword) exclusives)

  • Autolycus

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:29 am GMT

    Rod110184

    What kind of idiot buys hd dvd anyway it was inferior tech from the start of course bluray won 25gigs vs 50 gigs Bluray not even all that expensive anymore either!!! 250-350 bux chump change!!!!!!!!!!!! You guys go take your betamax....I mean hd dvd players to the trash
    --- reply : so on your theory, the Saturn should've outsoild the ps2, along with the dreamcast because they were both far superior then ps2 as far as technology goes. Honestly, if I were to purchase a technology based soley on technology, i would like blu-ray. But all the politics tied to it will prevent ME, an educated consumer, not a fanboy like everyone wishes i was will stop me. Yes I dislike sony, but I give them credit where credit is do. They do have some pretty good digital camera's and their tv's are just as good as everyone elses. But I wont by into Sony's vision of having a Sony home w/ sony TV, sony stereo, sony computer, sony digital camera, sony blu-ray player, all so they can milk it. They try to do that with every product they release. I wouldnt be suprised if sony next tries to have a proprietary HDMI hookup.

    I go more then what's on paper. I look @ the overall cost, overall technology, overall company stance, overall enviromental impact, the whole nine.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:28 am GMT

    carljohnson3456 mentioned "By then the PS3 will be much cheaper, and there wont be too much a new 360 could do that the PS3 doesnt already."
    That could be. Perhaps total 360 redesign ala PS2 slim might help stem some of their hardware woes. Still, I see a total redesign using new tech more likely as the 360 is ultimately set adrift on an ice flow and we all wave a fond farewell from the shore. It had a good run but we knew this day would come.

  • Get_Shorty

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 10:24 am GMT

    Well the Blu-Ray discs are a superior format so they deserve to win. They have a much larger storage capacity than HD-DVDs.... and that's without multi-layering like HD-DVDs would have to do to catch up to Blu-Ray discs; until Blu-Ray does the same... HD-DVD can't win

  • komet999

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 9:53 am GMT

    Its a wrap for HD-DVD

  • carljohnson3456

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 9:52 am GMT

    darkride66, and I'm not sure that MS wont be shooting themselves in the foot by then. For one, graphics might improve a bit, but I cant imagine a whole lot, and second, if the graphics do improve, it's going to cost so freaking much to make a game for it. People are complaining how much it costs to make games for PS3 and 360 now, imagine in 2-3 years. I think it will make or break the new 360, launching so soon. By then the PS3 will be much cheaper, and there wont be too much a new 360 could do that the PS3 doesnt already... unless they change up much like the Wii did. Oh well, I havent a clue.

  • darkride66

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 9:32 am GMT

    Rod110184. MS knew the 360 would have a limited lifespan when they rushed it to market with old tech and no harddrive. The goal was to beat the PS3 to market. They succeeded. Last year was the best lineup we'll see from the 360 and even then growth slowed, with no signs of picking up. If the new system is launched 2009/2010, that's a 4-5 year lifespan on the 360 and that's about right. Given they announced work on the 360 in 2003 and it was released in 2005, 2008 announcement and 2009/10 release, again, sounds just about right. Why do you think they extended the warranty to 3 years? Those warranties will run out now right around when the new systems are launched. More and more analysts are expecting the new 360 announcement late in 2008.

  • 02sfraser

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 9:26 am GMT

    cant say im shocked. Blu-ray has won this war. its only a matter of time before HD-DVD is completely dead

  • Rod110184

    Posted Feb 13, 2008 9:21 am GMT

    Darkride are you serious?!?!?! 360 has just hit its sweet spot dont look for a replacement any time soon at least 2 or three years from now there is no need to replace it or ps3 right now...they are both still quite capable of running today and tomorrows game...we've only just begun!

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Tags

best buy   blu-ray   netflix

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!