The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
Bill Gates on Gaming: Sony Doesn't Know What They're Doing
blogs.mercurynews.com — I had the chance to stand next to Bill Gates and interview him with a group of reporters after his keynote speech at the Consumer Electronics Show. Here is part one of the interview with all of the questions related to video games.
MrBabyMan- 1187 diggs
- digg it
- 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.
- 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." - alexp2ad, on 10/12/2007, -6/+45Well it kinda worked with Bungie... shame about Rare.
- GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -67/+13First time I've ever heard someone say that adding a GPU to a (primarily) game running machine was a mistake...it was only a mistake from Microsoft's point of view, as it made the PS3 run games better.
I wonder... - simplenation, on 10/12/2007, -77/+21Steve Jobs on MP3 players: Microsoft doesn't know what they're doing
- ButtholeSurfer, 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.
- 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. - EmmSee, on 10/12/2007, -8/+50Hmm, the Xbox people are dissing the PS people? Brilliant! Now that's a story!
- GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -27/+12Yea, but the cell processor's goal was to be a threaded processor, with cores that could be assigned to different tasks. Adding a dedicated GPU isn't taking away from that goal; it is just like adding another core and allowing the actual Cell processor to work on non-graphical computations. I don't see how that makes Sony "bad". They realized that a dedicated GPU would increase the power of the PS3, so they added one (I guess by that point a GPU was a rounding error in their over all R&D stage, if that is what Gates was saying).
Sony doesn't know what they are doing because they decided to increase performance? Sounds like a sound descision to me. - 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?
- 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. . - Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -24/+7@buttholesurfer:
From what I've seen of the zune so far? MS has no IDEA what they're up to. - 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. - 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. - deaper, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7Nintendo never owned rare. In addition rare is a different sort of company. Everyone credits them for goldeneye, except they didn't program or design goldeneye, they simply owned the licensing for that one game and published another, smaller company's game. They have since started to design most stuff in house and you have attrocities like Banjoo-Thirtyniney
- 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? - 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. - alx242, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8The GPU comment comes from a competitor. Nobody builds a machine and suddenly changes the design all over. A more proper way to describe it is they have multiple design all along and have of course tried a lot of routes to get where the machine is at now. True that they have tried to do all the graphics stuff pushed through the cell but obviously opted not to. This doesn't suddenly mean that they totally changed the hardware, that is not something you do over night. The different routes for the PS3 have been set long before the final design made it through, what they once thought would to be the optimal one was scraped in favor of another, but this route is not as of a sudden move as people might think...hardware design doesn't work that way people.
@daridave:
Wake up yourself. Both PS1 and PS2 where and still are both highly praised consoles and not compared to their competition but due to their own advancements in the industry. Even MS admits to this! - 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.
- 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. - daridave, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3^ I'm not saying the PS3 is dead or doomed -- heck no, I'm fixing to buy one, eventually... when it's worth something.
But right now, it is not worth the expensve, there are no games, and while some stuff like MGS4 is looking good, well... isn't this what Nintendo fanboys were screaming out loud with the N64? They had Mario64, Golden Eye, and then...
SONY has only one thing going for them -- brand recognition -- otherwise everything else is comparable to all the systems that failed miserably in the past.
- 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?
- 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- Phil246, on 10/12/2007, -24/+5Valid yes, Sony has repeatedly demonstrated that they need to be hit with the cluestick repeatedly, hard - but even if it were not he would still say something along these lines.
His loyalties are to microsoft, not to accuracy or impartiality. - 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. - 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... - 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! - zybch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Chewie, you and everyone else it seems, are forgetting the simple fact that Sony DID NOT make the PS3 as a games console.
Its their cute little trojan horse designed solely for getting bluray into as many homes as possible so they win the format war and rake in the licensing fees from everyone who wants to produce bluray content!
Thats it! It was never about games, it was never about on-line stuff, its was and IS all about bluray. Why don't people see this obvious play by sony?
If bluray becomes the HD standard, they can basically sit on their asses and do nothing, but the royalty and licensing payments will keep rolling in!
- Phil246, on 10/12/2007, -24/+5Valid yes, Sony has repeatedly demonstrated that they need to be hit with the cluestick repeatedly, hard - but even if it were not he would still say something along these lines.
- datagod, on 10/12/2007, -32/+9I think the last game Bill Gates played was Zork.
- fenixconnektion, on 10/12/2007, -5/+35he's supposed to be pretty decent at Project Gotham Racing 3
- 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...
- patw85, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I wonder what gates plays his games on TV/screen wise
- solemnraven, on 10/12/2007, -9/+41I bet he plays......MONOPOLY!
ohhh!
i'll be here all night folks. - tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -15/+8Bill Gates also plays WoW.
- tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -13/+6yes, digg me down for stating a fact (was over a year ago but it still happened)
http://digg.com/gaming_news/Bill_Gates_plays_World_of_Warcraft - thebaron2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I don't think it's that people don't believe you, tont0r...
We just don't care. - 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. - carbonetc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I wonder if he gets all "eat my skillz n00b bitchez! PWNED!!" while he plays.
I hope so. - datagod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Guys, I was just trying to be funny. Didn't have to digg me down so much....
But I bet the world's richest man doesn't have a whole lot of time to get into gaming...
- peregrine, on 10/12/2007, -26/+8Maybe they don't but when the PS2 sold more then the Xbox360 they must know SOMETHING about games. And hell anyone who could dethrown Nintendo the first time deserves credit. A little bigotry Bill Gates.....
- 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. - 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. - strotee, on 10/12/2007, -19/+15chris9902
- "it was up against the N64 and Dreamcast" and the Xbox and the GameCube............ and still sold more (fixed it for you).
- "not hard to see why it won out in the end" -- yes, we're aware why they won. Games, quality games, and lots of them. MGS, Final Fantasy (11 doesn't count lol), etc. - 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. - 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.
- staplez, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@edzieba
stotree is getting dug down because he says PS2 came out against the Xbox. This is so wrong it's laughable.
So we laugh at him and dig him down.
Heck even in the article Bill says we didn't want to come in a year late. You know a year late like they did with the original Xbox? So when PS2 came out, it came out I dunno a year earlier than the Xbox? So the PS2 didn't come out against the Xbox?
Now this is a hard concept, this means that stotree is wrong and deserves to be dug down?
Duh?
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -10/+32when the PS2 came out it was up against the N64 and Dreamcast.
- LightsOut06, on 10/12/2007, -39/+6seems like bill is getting a bit arrogant. Bill should get off his high horse, the only reason the 360 is and probably will win this generation is because it released earlier. If the PS3 released earlier it would be a repeat of last gen.
I have a prediction....this time next year or the year after their will be a hefty 360 backlash similar to the Sony backlash of today due to MS's arrogance and such.- InternetUser, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Think the average consumer cares about, or is even aware of, Microsofts "arrogance" ?
- 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?
- GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3Why should you care about the Wii or the Xbox 360 or anything for that matter?
HINT: they are fun. Until you've played a PS3, don't judge it. If you have, that is great. Just keep in mind not everyone thinks what you do. - 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.
- InternetUser, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Think the average consumer cares about, or is even aware of, Microsofts "arrogance" ?
- nairanvac, on 10/12/2007, -36/+4Uh-huh, right, because M$ has SO much more experience in the gaming industry than Sony does.
*points to sales charts for the PS1 and PS2*- InternetUser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Business is business, nairanvac.
- 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. - 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... - 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.
- wageslave1, 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. - nairanvac, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7All I'm saying is that, for one, Sony's been making consoles for longer, and for two, Sony trounced Microsoft in the last generation. I think they have some sort of idea of what they're doing.
Oh, well. I guess I've been shown wrong. - Edrick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Uh-huh, right, because Sony has SO much more experience in the gaming industry than Nintendo does.
*points to sales charts for the NES and SNES* - jacksons98, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@Edrick I personally like Nintendo and Sony and think MS is bad for gaming in general, but according to Gates Wii is a "novelty" not a real competitor.
- ImTheDarkcyde, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3um, it's not exactly that hard to look better than Halo 3 (honestly fanboys, compare screenshots)... the art direction is so crappy that they pretty much already have looking the best it could possibly looked with halo 2, of course, running at 60fps+ wouldn't hurt.
- slapout, on 10/12/2007, -16/+10I can see the response now:
Sony CEO on operating systems: Microsoft doesn't know what they're doing- Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Remind me again, the majority of Sony laptops come pre-installed with whose operating system?
- xtremesniper, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I honestly got frustrated reading that, as the interviewer seemed to have asked the same question at least 4 times, even though he knew that Gates was not going to let anything slip.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- bennybertow, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Q: Do you watch HD-DVD on your Xbox 360?
A: Absolutely. It’s good stuff. I love watching it. I download movies too.
He should raise the money TPB needs for buying sealand so he can download even more movies.- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The king isn't selling sealand to TPB, try to keep up with the important world news, bennybertow.
Sealand would've been like Cartman's sea people anyway.
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The king isn't selling sealand to TPB, try to keep up with the important world news, bennybertow.
- 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.
- joe573, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8That is like Larry Flint saying Hugh Hefner doesn't know what he is doing. Sony has been in the gaming game longer than Microsoft. Sony may have dropped the ball on the PS3 release but they are far from not knowing what they are doing.
- Hazardc, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Yeah but hef watches gay porn to keep himself erect enough to fark some of the hottest chicks in the world, getting completely desparate trying to prove he's still got what it takes to please his clients
so ya, kinda like ps3.. without all the gay porn and hot barely legal snatch - thund3rstruck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Sony has been making console games for a single generation longer but Microsoft has been making PC games a hell of a lot longer than Sony. I'd say Microsoft has the better experience.
- marvin69, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Sony has been in the gaming game longer than Microsoft"
I think Microsoft Game Studios was around before the PS1 and this generation of gaming consoles are more like PC than last generation console. Hell Sony said they are making a PC not a console and who knows more about PCs, the software that runs them, development tools, and the Internet? - apoc06, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3sony has been making games at least as far back as the genesis/ sega cd. sony was a major collaborator with sega in that day and age. not to imply that microsoft wasnt creating games for dos too, but both companies contain divisions that are no stranger to game development.
- Hazardc, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Yeah but hef watches gay porn to keep himself erect enough to fark some of the hottest chicks in the world, getting completely desparate trying to prove he's still got what it takes to please his clients
- ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"No one is going to go and get bits on an Xbox. "
Hackers, start your engines! - 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.
- alx242, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1They never have, actually. Stability and security is the major issue with MS, always...can't understand that people haven't valued this more as this is the number one reason at least I'm never gonna buy a MS product ever! (Also their technical designs are usually bloody stupid, check out the diagrams for making a simple request to their IIS web server).
- marvin69, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I just sent my PS3 in for the fourth time.
Anything is true on the internet. - tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2And I've never sent mine in, does that prove MS has perfect stability and reliability?
- emehrkay, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Good interview. Bill really seems to know what he knows
but why ask him this like three times?
Q: With IPTV, will you have to have a bigger hard drive on the Xbox?- Topher06, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0All signs point to a new large capacity hard drive being made available this year, probably just in time for IPTV and other streaming video goodness.
- ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Topher, TFA says IPTV will completely avoid local storage.
- Topher06, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Just like Microsoft and the original Xbox. Microsoft had no clue how to make the original Xbox a success.
- Jolva, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You can't argue the fact that the original Xbox got them into the market though could you?
- marvin69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Microsoft didn't have help like Sony. Lets remember Nintendo got Sony started but dropped the PS for their own hardware. If it wasn't for Nintendo making a huge mistake and Sony throwing something out there to see if would stick Sony might still be a quality electronics company.
- r3m1x, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, when it was the original XBOX versus PS2, it was all about Halo and prettier versions of PS2 games for them.
I'd say the one thing the original XBOX did right (aside from birthing XBOX Live) was lure PC developers to make console games.
- 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.- jacksons98, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree with you getaclue. It's getting ridiculous. I'd like a little less bias in these articles.
- GooMan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2The one thing MSFT does a great job at is giving developers what they need to develop for their systems. The MSFT developer tools are light years ahead of Sony's offerings. When the 360 is easier to develop for and most 3rd party developers/publishers feel exclusive titles are a thing of the past it makes sense to think games will be developed for the 360 and maybe, maybe ported to the PS3. That leaves no advantage for Sony in the 3rd party developed game world. Add to that the fact that XBL is years ahead of anything Sony is going to try and throw together and the cost difference and I think MSFT has a good thing going. It sure seems like Sony doesn't know what they are doing. I still can't believe they haven't copied most of the functionality of XBL. Including the Cell & BluRay were stupid decisions in my opinion but they may turn out to be brilliant.
DISCLAIMER: I do not own a 360, PS3 or Wii.- 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. - 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. - MrFlesh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I actually think Microsoft is has a good thing going with it's close relationship to PC games. It brings RTS games to the console which were few and far between on previous consoles. BFME and the upcomming C&C tiberium wars. If Supreme Commander and spore come out for the xbox I might have to think long and hard about buying a 360. The one thing I don't like though is that there is no modding. I'm still playing homeworld 7 years after it's release because of the mods. I haven't bought a new PC game since Dawn of War.
You can't copy XNA or Direct X for use on the PS3. It is not X86 based. It is a totally new platform. While the graphics chip may be based off a 7700 it is not limited to any directx compatibility issues. - alx242, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@MrFlesh:
Nobody wants to copy the XNA...please keep it to the 360...I would never wan't to touch anything connected with DirectX or such fugly API:s. OpenGL all the way!
- 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.
- 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.
- alx242, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1And that Windows 98 crashes!
- kettle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"That’s right, it means you can insert ads that are up to date. You can control how much ad skipping you allow. And you’re less vulnerable to getting at the bits. Xbox is a very protected environment."
Wonderful.
"No one is going to go and get bits on an Xbox."
I wonder about that. - gardnmi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Sony does realize you shouldn't have to pay a fee to play games online against other people. So does the computer game Industry. Suck it XBOX.
- Coffeedemon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1World of Warcraft?
- apoc06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2honestly? other than a persistent list of friends, i dont have many problems with the sony online service. to be perfectly honest as an owner of both, i prefer sony's. in my house they are running through the exact same connection, but my xbox live connections seem to drop and lag alot more. maybe its just gears of war mainly since thats what i play most, but i have connection problems with live in general.
playstation online also seems to have alot less kids and idiots. i havent heard one racist comment yet; thats pretty good. if MS could ever put some form of filtering / matchmaking system in place that /actually works/, live would be alot more tolerable.
store layout, the friendslist linking and a few messenging quirks; the problems i have with the playstation network seem like easy fixes. its definitely not there yet, but people fail to realize how close sony has come to matching alot of live's features, for free! - vashgunfighter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1er...yeah Sony didn't decide to let people play online for free. They made the game developers provide their own servers for all of their games. Xbox Live offered a server to use and charges people a very meager amount of cash to play online with many perks and a very refined online system. I gladly pay for Xbox Live because it's awesome. It was (and is) an online console in that regard. PS2 kinda threw it on the shoulders of the devs. Heck, even Nintendo did a better job that Playstation for online gaming. Look at Nintendo Wi-Fi. The DS's online capabilities are excellent. Wii will have online gaming too. It will be free and it already looks like Nintendo has a good idea as to how to pull this off. Sony is the one that can suck it on this one. "Pay $100 for our modem attachment for our PS2!"
- 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?- vashgunfighter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1They're not really old looking graphics. They're better than the original Xbox so they're slightly improved over last generation. Besides, it will have staying power because it's a fun gaming experience. That's something Sony lost sight of. They want to make a media center. Look at the DS. That thing is selling like hotcakes still. It's because it's fun. PSP...not so much. Granted it is selling but it's pretty much crap for games (save for a few exceptions). The new media on there (UMD Movies) floundered terribly as well. I know this argument has been said but it IS possible that we will see this mirrored in PS3 vs. Wii. Xbox 360 is and will continuing doing fine. However, don't discount the Wii just for its graphics. That "gimmicky" gameplay people are so rabid about on the competition sides is what will make it stay.
- rbanffy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5And so, the Microsoft Astroturf Unit gets another first page... Contrats, guys.
- Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"No one is going to go and get bits on an Xbox."
I know that this is a quote and that he actually said it, but I still am surprised he would say something like this, its basically the equivalent of saying "Nobody is going to hack our system."
(correct me if I'm wrong) but didn't Microsoft say something along the lines of "It might get hacked in a few years, nothing is hack proof, but we definitely made it extremely hard to crack this time" (not a direct quote) some time before the launch of the 360?
I though that by now almost every company/organization (with the exception of the RIAA/MPAA) have realized by now that no protection is 100% uncrackable and stopped trying to gloat as such. - hirschab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3These quotes some of you guys are pulling out are great
Steve Jobs "Microsoft doesn't know what they are doing with MP3 players"
Bill Gates "Sony PS3 has to get Nvidia to bail them out, hahaha"
What do you expect them to say about their competitors prodcuts... exactly? Think Steve is gonna pull a Zune out of his pocket and declare "they're grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat"? - santa7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What is with gates and dissing other people
he's worse than the mac/pc commercial - cg0def, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2just consider the source of the comment ... Sony might have a very tough time getting PS3 out and their market strategy is very different from the way MS does business but man MS REALLY has no idea what the console world is about. Actually when it comes to innovation MS is about the worst performer there is. It's only because people are willing to put up with mediocre performance in order to get the job done that MS has such a monopoly over the PC market. Only what Gates is forgetting is that the entertainment world is considerably different from the PC one and as a result even a weak performer like the Wii can make the Xbox360 look like an obsolete object. And as far as the the PS3 goes ... man wake up ... after all it still hasn't come out in half the world so it's way to early for bald statements like the ones Gates is making. Wait for about 6 months and I'm pretty sure that you will see the same old PS2 story. It was expensive and had glitches at first but after all it is still the most successful console of all times. Eat that uncle Bill ....
- jusgreat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Viva Pinata has been a huge success. In my household, everybody plays Viva Pinata."
Who would have thought... - rabidsquirrelOG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@people complaining about paying for M$ "Live" service...
"Live" infrastructure costs are probably enormous and quarterly, if not monthly. $400~500 a console isn't going to cover those kinds of costs over, even an optimistic estimate, say "2" year timeframe.
@apoc##
You've not heard rude comments, stupid kids, idiots, etc... on Sony's online service because Magnitudes of Order fewer people are playing PS3s online...
Live laggs occasionally. I'll Deal With It, because overall, the experience of bustin' caps outta a M1 Garand on CoD3 is freaking awesome! Clogged Intarweb tubes can impact Live when millions of peeps from logically diverse and widely separated networks are clammoring to sign on and play the same games at once.
On top of that, there's just Magnitudes of Order greater functionality that comes with Live vs Sony's online environment... Pound for Pound, and all issues weighing in, "Live" curb stomps all comers...
I use the VoIP just to jaw jack with my buds after work. Not to mention the video conferencing (Buy the camera), VM, SMS, etc... Downloadable videos, Demos, etc...
Maybe Sony will pull their collective heads out of their butts, the PS3 will get patched, and start to shine with new game titles that take advantage of their cell architecture, I hope so... But right now, its no contest, especially in the online services realm.
I'm not a technology evangilist for M$, nor Apple, nor Sony, nor Sun, for the matter. I use whatever has the best bang for the buck at that time. Microsoft has the games that I like to play, features that I want / use (Some that I didn't know I wanted, but now like), etc, etc...- apoc06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1-assuming a 50% xbox360 live tie in rate [i doubt MS math, but thats the last figure i remember] with ab 3 million actual american consumer use units, xbox live has about 1.5 million players.
-assuming a 33% tie in rate on the playstation network [sony announced 500,000 signups out of ~1.5 million consoles shipped by now] * 2/3 [american/ japanese console ratios] leaves about 333,333 US users on the playstation network.
yes, the number of live users is currently plus or minus four times the size of the current playstation network. if i played four times as many PSN games i should run into an equal amount of people that annoy me, right? not true. maybe the console isnt "mainstream" yet? not alot of 14 year old kids can afford a $500 console. im sure that sony will eventually run into a similar problem as they expand, but so far so good.
honestly i have my issues with live and im sure others do as well, but like i said elsewhere: its a great service. it would be even better if they actually developed a real system for matchmaking with like minded gamers. its most peoples' biggest xbox live wish. its been mine since the original xbox. their current 'zone' system is a joke and the 'feedback' system as well.
sony's system is going through its growing pains as was to be expected. the network crashed for an hour during the gran turismo release, but a few days later xbox live crashed too when all the kids who got gears of war started playing. so far there have not been too many major features that they haven't been able to duplicate yet. VOIP, video conferencing, voice chat during the game, lobby chat, text messaging, matchmaking, ranked matches, clans, etc... in general, im starting to notice a trend that PSN games are supporting more players per game than xbox live [ports aside]. their main problem is that its just not standard across the board. its more unfocused. each game is a hit and miss of features. xbox live was the same way, but its admittedly much more polished now [post halo2].
all im saying is that the playstation network is no where near as bad as people assume. the issue now is, do i feel that the difference between the QoS of the two networks is worth $50 per year? for me, no. i canceled my live account; if i feel the need to play, i use someone elses' live account or a free trial. if there were less idiots, racists and immature players on live, would i spend the extra money again? maybe. do i believe that sony can replicate the QoS of xbox live? i think they are well on their way. if i didnt want both of my consoles to be equally great, i wouldnt have them both. - apoc06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1brevity is not my strong point. maybe i couldve just summed it up to say:
if i run into players i dont want to play with. i have no problems leaving on a free service. just like the old days of arcades, you pick up your quarter and leave; its a free country.
on the other hand, if im paying extra for a "premium" service, i shouldnt have to tolerate half the madness thats found on live every three matches or so. especially when the money im paying is supposed to go towards maintaining a community that is supposed to section away from players like that.
the QoS and features on the PSN are so far comparable. lets table this discussion until there are more PSN users and sony releases their first major update.
- apoc06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1-assuming a 50% xbox360 live tie in rate [i doubt MS math, but thats the last figure i remember] with ab 3 million actual american consumer use units, xbox live has about 1.5 million players.
- bajasoprano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ok it is tooo early to say who will win this round of the console wars fact is that sony will not die microsft will not die and nintendo will not die. everyb ody has there favorite console and will talk trash about the other < dreamcast - best console ever> but at the end of the day it will come down to which console feels right to you. wether it be the wii or 360 < i love live> ps3 its all about entertainment people. i have to admit im a huge ps2. and ps2 was the king of the mountain for a while but like most things sony must step down as king for at least this generation and microsoft will be king and the next generation it'll be nintendo and then after that it'll be sony again.
by the way personally i dont consider the wii next gen i think its more of a proof of concept i wouldnt be surprised if 1 year from now we hear rumurs of nintendos new gen system- vashgunfighter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1well we've already heard when Sony wants to release their next console. We know its lifespan. It isn't a next gen by your definition (graphics). However, next gen doesn't mean "ooo BETTER graphics". Next gen means a system in a generation. Careful how you use that. Regardless, it is a new generation of playing games.
- Darph.Bobo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Bill Gates on Gaming: Sony Doesn't Know What They're Doing
=====================================
Ironically, Bill Gates is perhaps even more clueless about his own business. - Darph.Bobo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Famous Unknown Bill Gates Quotes:
1. Q.The Internet A. "What's that?"
2. Q. Web browser A. "What's that?"
3. Q. Search engine A. "What's that?"
4. Q. Instant messaging A. "What's that?"
5. Q. Free email A. "What's that?"
6. Q. New folder button on Windows Explorer A. "What's that?"
I could go on all night...
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is