I'm not totally sure what you mean by that question. Could you clarify what you mean by "is the medium"? Do you mean that it will be common tech?
I'm not totally sure what you mean by that question. Could you clarify what you mean by "is the medium"? Do you mean that it will be common tech?
Isn't the architecture more tricky to work with on the PS3?
Money, development time, money, better knowledge of hardware due to links with Sony, and money.
That is why those games technically look and run better than 3rd party games (whether they are better games or not is opinion)

| MontanaHatchet said: Third parties usually have to make a profit, keep their budgets as low as possible, and meet deadlines. If they can't do that while providing games with great graphics and 60 FPS, they won't. The games you listed are not third party, and that is their advantage. |
This
Long Live SHIO!
Ssliasil said:
While thats a very good answer to the original question, how about the Second question?
What are they going to do Next Gen when PS3 style Tech is the medium? |
PS3 tech isn't going to be the medium, if by medium, you mean the standard. There's absolutely no evidence to support that Microsoft or Nintendo would pick this up. Microsoft has always lucked out developing consoles alongside PC tech so ports between the two are easy as pie. They will stay that course. Nintendo just has no reason to adopt the Cell architecture since it has to do with the overall graphics, seems to be a bit of a money sink, and neither of those two things mesh well with Nintendo's philosphy.
Hi everyone, new here. I have a ps3 and a wii. Will get an xbox360 later for the exclusives. I'm tired of people coming out with the same old line that the ps3's gpu can't access the cpus 256MB of xdram.
http://talkplaystation.com/ps3s-ram-and-rsx-explained/
"There has been a lot of talk about the Playstation 3’s Random Access Memory (RAM) vs Xbox 360’s RAM, saying that the 360 has more RAM to work with etc. Here’s an article to explain the situation of its RAM. Just so you know that the PS3 has 512MB of RAM (256 for video and 256 for system). The Cell chip has 256MB of completely sharable RAM, the GPU has 256MB of dedicated RAM."
Onyxmeth said:
PS3 tech isn't going to be the medium, if by medium, you mean the standard. There's absolutely no evidence to support that Microsoft or Nintendo would pick this up. Microsoft has always lucked out developing consoles alongside PC tech so ports between the two are easy as pie. They will stay that course. Nintendo just has no reason to adopt the Cell architecture since it has to do with the overall graphics, seems to be a bit of a money sink, and neither of those two things mesh well with Nintendo's philosphy. |
That's what I was going to say given that's what he meant. If he meant became more common to hardware (not necessarily used as a main CPU but for media - as in the Toshiba Qosmio G50 which will have a Core 2 Duo as well as a Cell chip mainly for multimedia processing) then the problem of it being a hard to develop for architecture will have already been overcome. As the cell architecture becomes more mainstream, more people will be using it, developing for it and generally learning how it works. If it goes mainstream (regardless of whether MS or Nintendo decide to use it for their game boxes) many more people around the world will know the ins and outs of the architecture. So it really won't be a problem at that point if it has become the "medium" in the sense that it's more mainstream.
It usually takes more effort for less reward on their part.