What is Digg?117 Comments
- AmishRefugee, on 10/12/2007, -15/+87I think i might -for once- agree with what Bill Gates is saying
that doesn't necessarily mean that HE DOES know what he's doing, but i think his criticism of Sony is pretty valid - cannibaljp, on 10/12/2007, -9/+76i NEVER find myself saying, "you know - that bill gates fellow is right."
but lately... his charity work and the fact that he has pegged it dead on that sony is a ship without a captain...
it's hard to argue with that.
i feel dirty. - laplacian, on 10/12/2007, -10/+76"Q: Do you think that with this generation of games, Sony is going to have anything that looks better than the Xbox 360’s Halo 3 for the PlayStation 3?
A: No. They were going to have the Cell be the video processor. But they didn’t know what they were doing. They said the Cell is the video processor. But they turned to Nvidia at the last minute, but Nvidia can’t do embedded DRAM. Go look at the bandwidth problems. Go ask the guys running … now. They took their year and burned it by not having a decent CPU strategy and then turning to Nvidia at the last minute. It’s a very unusual thing." - EmmSee, on 10/12/2007, -8/+50Hmm, the Xbox people are dissing the PS people? Brilliant! Now that's a story!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -21/+61simplenation... from what i've seen on the zune so far... they do have an idea of what they're doing.
- alexp2ad, on 10/12/2007, -6/+45Well it kinda worked with Bungie... shame about Rare.
- InternetUser, on 10/12/2007, -4/+41@GawtMilk:
I think the point he was making was that attempting to use Cell as the video processor was a mistake and they had to, at the last minute, fudge a dedicated chip in there from nVidia. - WhereAmI, on 10/12/2007, -22/+57Yes, as opposed to Microsofts plan to buy all the game companies they can, so they can have exclusives.
- solemnraven, on 10/12/2007, -9/+41I bet he plays......MONOPOLY!
ohhh!
i'll be here all night folks. - fenixconnektion, on 10/12/2007, -5/+35he's supposed to be pretty decent at Project Gotham Racing 3
- daridave, on 10/12/2007, -7/+37Fanboy comment.
Just wake up. He's right. SONY has been using the same strategy, "make big machine, let others do games, uh uh uh *drool*" since the PS1.
PS1 -- It worked like crazy, because Nintendo was on crack.
PS2 -- It worked like crazy, because Nintendo was still on rehab.
PSP -- It's not working, because Nintendo woke up.
PS3 -- It's not working, serious again (no more lunchboxes) and Microsoft is dead serious, too.
Bottom line -- it's true, SONY doesn't know wtf they're doing, their market philosophy was disruptive back in the ol' days, because Nintendo had this insane monopoly and were cocky bastards, but now... it's actually SONY that is annoying developers.
Take the red pill, man. We all did. - Chewie67, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32I have to agree.
I'm a huge PS2 fan. I was psyched about the prospects of the PS3 2 years ago. Since then, Sony has just tripped all over itself though. The price gets all the red ink, but it really is too high. At $299 this thing would be selling like blockbusters. At $599, you're cutting out a lot of potential customers.
Maybe this thing will drop in price, and will be huge in Christmas 2007. If not, this may be the last Sony game console... - austindkelly, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26Yeah I heard he was a damn good video game player... I mean as much as I hate the guy, he did kinda start Microsoft and all, so I sure he has some computer skills...
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -10/+32when the PS2 came out it was up against the N64 and Dreamcast.
It's not hard to see why it won out in the end. Even I bought a PS2 (got GTA3). But now you look at the 360 and it's a powerhouse. It looks better than the PS3 and has much better functionality. Plus the games are miles ahead in terms of graphics. After months of Sony telling us how great the graphics would be Microsoft made them look like a joke with Gears of War. - betterth, on 10/12/2007, -7/+26It was Sony's intention to have their "amazing" cell processor do just about everything in the box that a processor could. The RSX had to be there regardless of Cell's plans, because while the Cell may be capable of video, it's not capable of video output and post-processing that you find on dedicated graphics cards.
What Bill is saying is that Sony had to switch from the Cell doing the brunt of the graphics work to the RSX having to. You say "including the chip helps Sony", but not allowing their "super chip" to run the graphics hurts them a lot. The RSX runs already outdated nvidia architecture. It's the equivalent of a 7800 series card but is clocked much lower. . - All4not, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20I would say Microsoft understands architecture, software development, and business skill way better than Sony. Experience counts, but it doesn't make up for everything. Microsoft has one generation of experience in console gaming and that's all they usually need to figure out a market or buy it.
- All4not, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Yes, the graphics difference between the last generation and this current generation is a big difference, but not between the PS3 or 360.
Sony got complacent, because they easily won with the PlayStation and PS2 in their generation. They probably figured this generation would be the same. Microsoft never gets it right on the first try. They learn from their mistakes, use their business sense, and adapt. They just don't move as quick as they used to when they were a small company. - pathy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22Microsoft have a lot more knowledge of creating games than Sony - and hardware specific to it.
Sony might have had huge sales with the PS1 and the PS2, but those machines were NOT that great. They got the job done, and had huge sales, but they were not at all extremely well designed consoles.
Sony should have talked with nVidia from the start, like Microsoft did with ATi, and developed their system to be a unified machine - Not different parts bolted together. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17I dont know if you realize, but the PC (think 25 years) is an excellent gaming platform.
Putting a dedicated Games Machine in the living room, and extending it to be all things Entertainment (IPTV, Music, Video, Internet etc etc etc) *IS* exactly what Microsoft is good at.
MS knows as much about gaming software and hardware as Sony. Now that people are looking to the Internet experience and connectivity, you'll see Microsoft's server-side shine through. Sony hasnt a clue in this arena.
how much experience does Sony have in the datacenter? Thats where Consoles are going. Im very Bullish on Microsoft right now because of what is happening in the Console arena.
I expect MS to dominate this generation, and remove all doubt next-gen. - iNaya, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16And Google has sooo much more experience in the search industry than the companies that were doing it 20 years before them.
If your product is better then it doesn't matter what experience you have. Experience helps you make a better product, but if you don't... - borchard76, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16This is all wrong. If this is true, then Bill is right. Sony DOESN'T have a clue. The PS3 is an interesting machine that costs far too much and is nothing more than, "bigger, faster, stronger". It isn't innovative, it doesn't make me excited about getting one. Yes, it is pretty, but I still don't have HDTV. Why would I care about the PS3?
- edzieba, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20I'm a little confused about how the GPU was added at 'the last minute'. The inclusion of RSX was announced a year or two ago (at E3), no?
- aegis9975, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13>>Polyphonic Digital, Team Ico, Incognito, Insomniac, SOE, and their various studio entitled "Sony Computer Entertainment "
Many of those were Sony first-party to begin with and others were no-name studios that had good ideas but had no budget before Sony. None of those can be compared to the purchase of studios like Rare from Nintendo. - scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -11/+20There's tripping over yourself and there's shooting yourself in the feet. Both of them. Over and over and over. Then shooting everyone else's feet. Then back to shooting your own feet some more. Feet.
- Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Truth is, it wasn't a general statement. He said [Sony] didn't know what they were doing when they tried to use the Cell as a video processor, as a result burning up a year and coming out with a more expensive and technically equivalent system.
I hate to say it. Dear LORD, I hate to say it - 'cos there's a couple of classic series coming out on the PS3 (like MGS4) - but I'm not buying a PS3; the costs far outweigh the benefits. And, seriously, I don't buy Sony's attempt to position themselves as the porsche of gaming rigs. Sony got huge by creating consumer electronics that people could afford (ne Walkman), not by creating overhyped credit liabilities.
Me? I'll get a Wii. Halo just fails to interest me, no matter how many times I sit down and try to play it.
Zelda FTW! - InternetUser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Business is business, nairanvac.
- betterth, on 10/12/2007, -9/+17@WhereAmI
As opposed to Sony? Or does their owning of Polyphonic Digital, Team Ico, Incognito, Insomniac, SOE, and their various studio entitled "Sony Computer Entertainment "
Microsoft buys up companies to get exclusives away from Sony, since half of Sony's good games are made by companies run by Sony. - edzieba, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13Why is strotee being dugg down? It WAS the games that launched the PS2 into first place. Yes, the xbox had superior graphics (though the latest few games for the PS2 look damn good. FF XII for instance), and one or two really good exclusive games (well, it had Halo and Halo 2 at least), but the PS2 had far more. Same goes for the Gamecube (sans the graphics arguament).
The same goes for the current generation of consoles. Whichever one has more and better games will come out on top. - EnjoyTheFact, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@tont0r
I'm not going to digg you down for stating a fact. I'm going to digg you down for stating that a snippet from a clearly satirical piece is a fact. - patw85, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I wonder what gates plays his games on TV/screen wise
- getaclue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Ohhh I see how you got the front page here. He also said:
"Sony has always been our most direct competitor. Nintendo of course is a competitor. But look at the resolution you get with a controlled experience like that. Say to yourself, how in terms of using a game for a long period of time, what kind of accuracy and capability do you want? Look at the classic Nintendo positioning. Look at the graphics. Look at Nintendo’s execution in terms of online capability."
but the description only mentions the part of the story where he says something bad about Sony. Good job. - InternetUser, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Think the average consumer cares about, or is even aware of, Microsofts "arrogance" ?
- Jarett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9If everything Gates said was true, then I would be playing halo 3 right now instead of making this comment on digg.
- carbonetc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I wonder if he gets all "eat my skillz n00b bitchez! PWNED!!" while he plays.
I hope so. - Gunsmith, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Pissing matches aside i think its too early to say that the ps3 will have no great games. Whilst gates has a year head start I think its too soon to simply write the PS3 off, ok Sony fubarred its development somewhat but im more interested in seeing what people will release on it in the near future.
- staticneuron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"They said the Cell is the video processor. But they turned to Nvidia at the last minute, but Nvidia can’t do embedded DRAM. Go look at the bandwidth problems"
Was this because they were showing off the graphical capabilities of the Cell at E3 05? The RSX was announced at the end of the year 2004. Was the RSX a last minute addition? - staticneuron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"It sure seems like Sony doesn't know what they are doing. "
Seems like it when people are misinformed. Sony never was a software company. They hired another company to develop thier dev kits, libraries and support and before you go of on a tangent trying to claim how bad that company must be, keep in mind this company has done the same job for both the gamecube and now the Wii. With the PS3 it is based on completely open Api's this time around. Sony may not know how to make good tools and or software but it is a sign that they know what they are doing by hiring another company that "does" know what they are doing. Bill is having fun with the crowd. - thebaron2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I don't think it's that people don't believe you, tont0r...
We just don't care. - ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"No one is going to go and get bits on an Xbox. "
Hackers, start your engines! - Neoisamu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I agree, I think bashing and saying the PS3 is not worthwhile is too premature... as Nintendo has proved, it's not always about graphics, it's about gameplay. But mainly in my opinion, it's about sales... the more sales of consoles the more game programmers will produce games for that system which means more of a selection to choose from and more chances of a fun game. Sure, the RSX isn't a Unified Arc., but that didn't stop Nvidia's 7900 from being a ball buster and who's to say that the programmers can't take an SPE and dedicate it to doing number crunching coupled with the RSX? I'm sure it's possible, isn't it? Look at FFXIII and tell me that game doesn't look awesome graphically... and it's only using 4 out of it's 6 SPE's. The PS3 is still a contender no matter which way you slice things... at least my $599 hopes so.
- apoc06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5microsoft makes it easier for developers that are familiar with working on PC games to create console games. microsoft makes it easier to tie in game development tools created to be used on their OS platform to run in a native environment similar to the PC.
i give microsoft alot of credit for leveraging their PC dominance in the console world, but with the exception of titles like gears of war i think that microsoft pulling the console world closer to the PC is going to be an overall negative impact on gaming in general. microsoft seems to be doing better with the xbox360, but one of my biggest gripes with my original xbox was that alot of the games i had to choose from felt like PC game stepchildren or straight ports. microsoft needs to keep hammering at developers for original IPs if they plan to keep their lead once sony starts releasing their heavyweight franchises. - MaynardJK, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@Neoisamu
Is that the same gameplay over graphics argument that Nintendo fans have been getting ***** for from Sony fanboys since the Revolution was announced? Hilarious. - thund3rstruck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"the only reason the 360 is and probably will win this generation is because it released earlier"
by that idiotic logic then the Dreamcast should have beaten the PS2 but it didn't.... and why is that? Do us a favor and not comment on topics for which you have no understanding of. - Muzz27, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5If South Park has taught us anything, it'd that many of life's choices come down to a giant douche or a turd sandwich.
- staticneuron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@daridave
Nintendo has always dominated the handheld market. There is no comparison for consoles because Sony has dominated this time around. There is no question that the sony will lose arguement is premature because alot of this is based off of "supposed" exclusives that went multiplatform .... even though multiplatform games are planned. And this anti sony vibe on digg is enhanced by the sheer fact that the news of 360 games going multiplatform are glossed over and exclusive titles are used as a banner.
This is just a beginning and the PS3's announced lineup looks good. - charlescheese, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Shock, Bill Gates dissing his competitors!! Why who'd have guessed the CEO of one of the biggest corporations in the world would talk trash about a competitor?? It's never been done!! So you believe everything Gates tells you now? Goodness, open your eyes.
- MrFlesh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I think it's to early for any projections on Sony or Nintendo. Yes the Wii took off but it was the cheapest console out and had a cool controller idea, but does it have staying power. Is the motion sensing still going to be intresting two years down the road? Are people going to still be okay with the really old looking graphics. Granted graphics are not everything but they do count. I loved UO I thought it was the best MMO but I can't play it anymore because it just looks bad. Same goes with Oregon Trail.......you can't tell me that game wasn't sick but look at it...uggg. The PS3 yes they were trying to use just the cell proccessor as a catch all, but Sony stated that while the CELL was really good at physics, they couldn't get that to translate over to graphics at the level they wanted to. Gates is plain making up the bandwidth issue. The PS3 was designed around having lots of bandwidth.
P.S. Whatever happened to the sequel for Psy-ops? - MouseCircus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Chris is talking about the PS2's launch. At the time of launch, the PS2 had no competition other than previous generation consoles and the Dreamcast. There's many, many factors that helped boost Sony to the top with the PS2, yet again. The fact that they had little, to no competition for almost a year is part of that.
- Jolva, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You can't argue the fact that the original Xbox got them into the market though could you?
- jshadow, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I just sent in my 360 for the third time. I think MS's hardware vendors don't know what they're doing.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 116 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is