By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Your technical opinion on Blu-Ray and the Cell as found in the PS3

 

Your technical opinion on Blu-Ray and the Cell as found in the PS3

Both Cell and Blu-Ray hav... 359 64.80%
 
The Cell has been beneficial, but Blu-Ray not 13 2.35%
 
Blu-Ray has been beneficial, but not the Cell 100 18.05%
 
Neither Blu-Ray nor the Cell are beneficial 36 6.50%
 
PS3 "a waste of everybody's time" 19 3.43%
 
Blu-Ray and Cell are useless for gaming 27 4.87%
 
Total:554
dahuman on 30 December 2009
Rainbird said:
@ KBG29

You know, the PS3 may be stronger on paper and has certainly shown its worth in a handful of exclusives. But in terms of multiplat games, they are at best on par between the PS3 and 360, with the PS3 version usually being slightly worse than the 360 version. And when comparing exclusives, games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 do settle at the top, but there is not a huge difference between them and 360 exclusives.

That is why I believe that neither the cell or blu-ray have shown real benefits to gaming this generation. If the 360 hadn't been leading the way for HD consoles, things might have been different, but they are not. In the current state of affairs, saying that the benefits to the cell and blu-ray in the PS3 do not outweigh the drawbacks is perfectly reasonable.

to be fair, multiplats on the PS3 has been pretty damn good in the past year or so at this point(a few even look better) so that's not exactly much of an issue at this point other than the BS that's SEGA with Bayonetta, and it's really sad when you think on how far SEGA has fallen on the dev side, sigh....



Around the Network
kaneada on 30 December 2009
nordlead said:
Blu-Ray has been beneficial as proven by 7.1 sound, multiple languages, and more. A faster Blu-Ray drive would be even better, but that would have just jacked prices higher during launch. Obviously it's downside of being slower (than needed) has caused devs to duplicate data, or install to HDD, but it's benefits have clearly outweighed the downsides.

As for the Cell, I feel it is a wash. They could have made a system just as powerful using a simpler architecture, which might have prevented some of the really sad ports and large number of complaints from developers. So while they have had some technically impressive games with the Cell, it wasn't necessary. Maybe in the future my opinion may change, but who knows.

I think if the Cell is to survive it had to start somewhere. The gaming industry is perhaps the best place, because it really will really put the processor through its paces. With these first party devs continuing to work on new ways to develop for this processor, it is inevitable that its full potential will be exploited which means it will be further refined for next go around.



-- Nothing is nicer than seeing your PS3 on an HDTV through an HDMI cable for the first time.

Rainbird on 30 December 2009
dahuman said:
Rainbird said:
@ KBG29

You know, the PS3 may be stronger on paper and has certainly shown its worth in a handful of exclusives. But in terms of multiplat games, they are at best on par between the PS3 and 360, with the PS3 version usually being slightly worse than the 360 version. And when comparing exclusives, games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 do settle at the top, but there is not a huge difference between them and 360 exclusives.

That is why I believe that neither the cell or blu-ray have shown real benefits to gaming this generation. If the 360 hadn't been leading the way for HD consoles, things might have been different, but they are not. In the current state of affairs, saying that the benefits to the cell and blu-ray in the PS3 do not outweigh the drawbacks is perfectly reasonable.

to be fair, multiplats on the PS3 has been pretty damn good in the past year or so at this point(a few even look better) so that's not exactly much of an issue at this point other than the BS that's SEGA with Bayonetta, and it's really sad when you think on how far SEGA has fallen on the dev side, sigh....

They have been good, but when the 360 still has the upper hand in some form or the other, it gets hard to see the benefits of the cell or blu-ray.



MikeB on 30 December 2009

@ mibuokami

So bottom line is, by sticking with a more traditional architecture for the PS3, consumer would have enjoyed significantly better early ports, eliminate horror story such as Bayonetta


Is the port really that bad?

I played the demos, the game seemed to run just fine. Either way, it game-wise did not appeal to me at all. I am looking so much more forward to God of War 3.

Judging from the videos both versions look rather similar, if the PS3 version is really horrible in comparison, I wonder what any HD console to Wii port would be viewed as.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

gurglesletch on 30 December 2009

KZ2 the best game i have ever seen would not be possible without both.




Get your Portable ID!

Around the Network
dahuman on 30 December 2009
Rainbird said:
dahuman said:
Rainbird said:
@ KBG29

You know, the PS3 may be stronger on paper and has certainly shown its worth in a handful of exclusives. But in terms of multiplat games, they are at best on par between the PS3 and 360, with the PS3 version usually being slightly worse than the 360 version. And when comparing exclusives, games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 do settle at the top, but there is not a huge difference between them and 360 exclusives.

That is why I believe that neither the cell or blu-ray have shown real benefits to gaming this generation. If the 360 hadn't been leading the way for HD consoles, things might have been different, but they are not. In the current state of affairs, saying that the benefits to the cell and blu-ray in the PS3 do not outweigh the drawbacks is perfectly reasonable.

to be fair, multiplats on the PS3 has been pretty damn good in the past year or so at this point(a few even look better) so that's not exactly much of an issue at this point other than the BS that's SEGA with Bayonetta, and it's really sad when you think on how far SEGA has fallen on the dev side, sigh....

They have been good, but when the 360 still has the upper hand in some form or the other, it gets hard to see the benefits of the cell or blu-ray.

cell, not as much on the game dev part, yet, blu ray however, the benefit is pretty large imo, more storage doesn't hurt dev for the most part, the jump from cartridge to cd to dvd to blu ray have all been needed jumps imo and it's always helped.



dahuman on 30 December 2009
MikeB said:

@ mibuokami

So bottom line is, by sticking with a more traditional architecture for the PS3, consumer would have enjoyed significantly better early ports, eliminate horror story such as Bayonetta


Is the port really that bad?

I played the demos, the game seemed to run just fine. Either way, it game-wise did not appeal to me at all. I am looking so much more forward to God of War 3.

Judging from the videos both versions look rather similar, if the PS3 version is really horrible in comparison, I wonder what any HD console to Wii port would be viewed as.

I don't mind the visuals as much as the frame rate and loading that it will suffer in certain areas, as long as they put out a patch that increases performance, I'd be OK with Bayonetta on PS3 since I don't hold console graphics in such high standards in general vs gameplay. I'm too used to PC gaming for that FPS drop lagging bullshit and constant loads that I've been watching on videos at certain parts of the game on the PS3 version.



Rainbird on 30 December 2009
dahuman said:
Rainbird said:
dahuman said:
Rainbird said:
@ KBG29

You know, the PS3 may be stronger on paper and has certainly shown its worth in a handful of exclusives. But in terms of multiplat games, they are at best on par between the PS3 and 360, with the PS3 version usually being slightly worse than the 360 version. And when comparing exclusives, games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 do settle at the top, but there is not a huge difference between them and 360 exclusives.

That is why I believe that neither the cell or blu-ray have shown real benefits to gaming this generation. If the 360 hadn't been leading the way for HD consoles, things might have been different, but they are not. In the current state of affairs, saying that the benefits to the cell and blu-ray in the PS3 do not outweigh the drawbacks is perfectly reasonable.

to be fair, multiplats on the PS3 has been pretty damn good in the past year or so at this point(a few even look better) so that's not exactly much of an issue at this point other than the BS that's SEGA with Bayonetta, and it's really sad when you think on how far SEGA has fallen on the dev side, sigh....

They have been good, but when the 360 still has the upper hand in some form or the other, it gets hard to see the benefits of the cell or blu-ray.

cell, not as much on the game dev part, yet, blu ray however, the benefit is pretty large imo, more storage doesn't hurt dev for the most part, the jump from cartridge to cd to dvd to blu ray have all been needed jumps imo and it's always helped.

Oh really? The effect is barely noticable as far as I can tell, with the only real upside being fewer discs for really large games. For most games though, the DVD seems to do just fine.



Cypher1980 on 30 December 2009
MikeB said:

@ mibuokami

So bottom line is, by sticking with a more traditional architecture for the PS3, consumer would have enjoyed significantly better early ports, eliminate horror story such as Bayonetta


Is the port really that bad?

I played the demos, the game seemed to run just fine. Either way, it game-wise did not appeal to me at all. I am looking so much more forward to God of War 3.

Judging from the videos both versions look rather similar, if the PS3 version is really horrible in comparison, I wonder what any HD console to Wii port would be viewed as.

From all the reviews I think the slightly inferior performance on the PS3 would have been fine and only noticeable if played next to the Xbox version. To all intents and purposes no problem.

The real problem appears to be the frequent loading. Apparently its everywhere and comments have ranged from annoyance to total derision.

I have yet to see how bad the additional loads are, but I do wonder why they are even required. It seems darn odd to me.



dahuman on 30 December 2009
Rainbird said:
dahuman said:
Rainbird said:
dahuman said:
Rainbird said:
@ KBG29

You know, the PS3 may be stronger on paper and has certainly shown its worth in a handful of exclusives. But in terms of multiplat games, they are at best on par between the PS3 and 360, with the PS3 version usually being slightly worse than the 360 version. And when comparing exclusives, games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2 do settle at the top, but there is not a huge difference between them and 360 exclusives.

That is why I believe that neither the cell or blu-ray have shown real benefits to gaming this generation. If the 360 hadn't been leading the way for HD consoles, things might have been different, but they are not. In the current state of affairs, saying that the benefits to the cell and blu-ray in the PS3 do not outweigh the drawbacks is perfectly reasonable.

to be fair, multiplats on the PS3 has been pretty damn good in the past year or so at this point(a few even look better) so that's not exactly much of an issue at this point other than the BS that's SEGA with Bayonetta, and it's really sad when you think on how far SEGA has fallen on the dev side, sigh....

They have been good, but when the 360 still has the upper hand in some form or the other, it gets hard to see the benefits of the cell or blu-ray.

cell, not as much on the game dev part, yet, blu ray however, the benefit is pretty large imo, more storage doesn't hurt dev for the most part, the jump from cartridge to cd to dvd to blu ray have all been needed jumps imo and it's always helped.

Oh really? The effect is barely noticable as far as I can tell, with the only real upside being fewer discs for really large games. For most games though, the DVD seems to do just fine.

There is a reason why some 360 games don't have the textures of their PC or PS3 counter parts or even assets.