so whatever happened to White Knight?

i remember the trailer releasing before the PS3, did it ever come out or is it still in development or what?

6/22/2007 8:09:19 AM

Yeah, it's annoying cuz most of the game sites are calling it Shirokishi Monogatari, so searching for White Knight gives you nothing. Basically, there has been no news since that trailer was released.

6/22/2007 8:53:10 AM

The PS2 av cables definitely work. I used them on a tv that didn't have hdmi and it was good.

I'm pumped about playing Motorstorm again once I get the patch. People exploiting the boost were really getting on my nerves. I freaking hate it when people cheat in video games. I mean, you really have to be a real freaking loser to cheat in an online game to win.

6/22/2007 8:57:18 AM

Anyone getting "The Darkness" this week? Its getting some pretty decent reviews apparently, and Mike Patton is voicing a lot of it, which is awesome. I might have to check this one out.

6/25/2007 10:56:09 AM

How many of you guys connect to PSN through wireless connection? I'm curious because since I have moved I'm using wireless and its been inconsistent for me. Over the weekend things played fine but last night it was just totally shot and I continuously got logged in and out. Maybe the network was down, I dunno. Let em know how its working for you guys.

6/27/2007 9:13:21 AM

There are known issues with the Linksys WRG54whatever router that most people use. Read up on the official playstation forums about it.

I had no problems with wifi, but when i moved i stuck the router out in the living room. The wired connection is a million times faster.

6/27/2007 12:03:31 PM

i use a shitty belkin wifi and i'm generally good

6/27/2007 12:38:09 PM

^^ I use a Linksys wireless router, so maybe that's the problem. I'm trying to find out more on this issue in the fourms but can't really find anything. Pisses me off.

6/27/2007 12:55:59 PM

I'm wondering if maybe the servers were just too busy last night because I was able to get an IP and search on the internet, it was just slow. I hope they can get this thing better.

6/27/2007 1:21:41 PM

ok, I've asked this in a few places but never got any halfway intelligent answers...

if I ONLY play NCAA and Madden 95% of the time, is there any reason to get the PS3 over the 360? any features in those games that aren't in both version?

6/27/2007 1:32:05 PM

same exact thing, i expect ncaa will be more polished overall on 360 since they had one out on 360 last year...

i dont have a ps3 but when ive played one, i just cant get into the controller after using the 360 controller, i like the heavier feeling, little rumble, and the thumbsticks better than the way the ps3 has it

6/27/2007 1:55:31 PM

If you're going to only play those ttwo games and you're not going to do blu-ray or you don't care about any games that will be exclusive, then get a 360 simply because its cheaper.

Keep in mind though that you will have to pay to play the games online on a monthly bases with the xbox.

As far as the controllers, its really just up to personal preference. I like the PS3 controllers a lot, but I have no problem with the 360s really either. I like that the 360 controllers have rumble, so if that's important to you, then another plus for the 360. Rumble should be coming to PS3 later this year though.

Again, depends on what you would do with the other 5% of your time, and how important that is to you.

* Oh, and the only difference between those games on different systems is that there are tilt controls on the PS3, but I'm not sure what they will do at this point or if it will even be cool or not. Just answering your question.

[Edited on June 27, 2007 at 2:07 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on June 27, 2007 at 2:08 PM. Reason : .]

6/27/2007 2:03:25 PM

Quote :

"Keep in mind though that you will have to pay to play the games online on a monthly bases with the xbox."

6/27/2007 2:14:43 PM

I have never used the XBOX controllers... do they JUST have the little thumbsticks and not the cross thing? I cant stand the thumbsticks, and I hate fat controllers

6/27/2007 3:02:22 PM

PS3 will have free internet play and some tilt functions

360 will maybe have slightly better graphics and slightly less bugs because they code it for that system and then recode it for the PS3 (or at least they did for the first ones out on PS3, they might both have dedicated teams now)

6/27/2007 3:24:57 PM

^^ 360 controllers are fatter. I think you should just go to Gamestop or something and just check them both out and decide what you want. Seriously.

6/28/2007 9:57:20 AM

so, what about the thumbsticks... if the 360 does not have the + controller thing (whatever thats called) then I definitely wont get it.

6/28/2007 10:16:56 AM

seriously, when did this topic turn into a "which system to buy" thread? Google images is your friend, JayBee:

Xbox:




PS3:





You need to go to Gamestop or something and just see how they feel in your hand and try them out.

Ok, so a new PS3 firmware update was pushed out apparently last night, 1.82. I'm not really sure what all it does, but just letting you know so maybe we can switch gears back to the topic at hand.

[Edited on June 28, 2007 at 11:07 AM. Reason : .]

6/28/2007 11:06:06 AM

I was shocked how light the ps3 controller felt in my hand. I guess removing the rumble hardware really lowered the weight. I am sure it is just perception, but it doesn't feel as sturdy as the 360 controller.

6/28/2007 11:23:16 AM

^it adds AVC "high profile" support. This was covered recently on the official PS3 blog (recently kicked off, btw):

http://blog.us.playstation.com/


Read this earlier today, sounds like they might be making some significant improvements to rumble when the SixAxis w/rumble is launched (expected to be premiered at E3 in July):


PSM france reveals new info on PS3 SIXAXIS rumble

This months edition of PSM France reportedly reveals lots of new information on the upcoming rumble enabled Official PS3 SIXAXIS controller. One of the interesting revelations is that the controller may contain 'touch sense' which will mean the vibrations do not emanate solely from the handles but various places of the Lever and developers should be able to create a multitude of effects.

Technical details
Details on the "touchsense":

New technology, named “Touchsense” is a mini-revolution. Indeed, from now on, the vibrations will not emanate solely any more from the handles of the pad (as on Dualshock) but will be perceptible in various places of the lever. It as should be specified as they will be more powerful, more intense and over short periods if the programmers wish it. Thus, the developers will be able to create a multitude of still new effects. If Sony chooses this technology, it will thus not act of a simple return of the vibrations, but well of a very new technology
- This technology will be able to reproduce the fast jolt and forces caused by a shot,
- Immersion promises that one will be able to feel the properties of the road in the plays of race (like Dirt), but also small shocks related on the shiftings of speed and even to accelerations or decelerations.

actually sounds kinda cool.

6/28/2007 11:25:42 AM

what cave did you live in that prevented you from ever holding a playstation controller?

6/28/2007 11:34:34 AM

well, of course I held a psone controller but that was like 10 years ago. in the meantime I have had access to the ps2 rumble, the original xbox massive controller, controller s for xbox, 360 controller, dreamcast controller and wii controller. I guess I forgot.

6/28/2007 11:41:11 AM

Honestly I like how the PS3 controller is pretty light. Its just a damn comfortable controller, which is why they've used the same one for over 10 years I think. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

That said, I'm pumped about that new information on the Sixaxis rumble controller. I will definitely get one of those bad boys.

6/28/2007 1:25:05 PM

i wish they'd make a bigger version of the sixaxis

my hands get cramped on this thing

6/28/2007 2:32:32 PM

w00t! just updated and went to the store...and what's sitting there to greet me?

warhawk public beta!

downloading it now

6/30/2007 3:23:11 AM

Quote :

"i wish they'd make a bigger version of the sixaxis my hands get cramped on this thing."

I completely agree. It's too small to acuratly modulate the L2 and R2 while still being able grip the controller with with my palms. It's not just 12 year olds playing this thing! I miss my wireless logitech PS2 controllers. I also like the size of the xbox 360 controller much better.

6/30/2007 6:24:16 AM

i think i just found what's going to open a whole world of games to me on the PS3...all the FPS games out there

i have fun playing warhawk and resistance, but am not nearly as good as on the PC

now there is this...the FragFX



http://www.splitfish.com

http://gear.ign.com/articles/799/799262p1.html

6/30/2007 5:48:57 PM

^ People that have that are going to have huge advantages over everyone else.

7/2/2007 9:11:56 AM

yeah i think i'm getting one

7/2/2007 12:07:04 PM

I already ordered mine. They're on back-order at gamestop online, the only place you can buy them right now.

7/2/2007 1:45:04 PM

I bought Super Stardust HD yesterday. It got good reviews so I figured I'd try it out. Its a pretty fun game, I just need to play it more to figure it out some. Not nearly as fun as CAC, but worth 8 bucks I'm sure.

7/2/2007 1:52:57 PM

Quote :

"It has been confirmed that Madden NFL 08 and NCAA Football 08 will run at 60 frames per second on the Microsoft Xbox 360 and only 30 frames per second on the Sony Playstation 3. This has to be very frustrating for loyal Playstation owners. The PS3 was supposed to be the better machine and the specs clearly pointed to that, however as of late the “specs” have not been enough to convince video game developers to not cut corners when developing games for the console. We have seen footage of many games side by side for both the 360 and PS3, and in nearly every one the 360 version appeared to be superior. We know that this is not because Sony’s Next Gen console is not capable of creating equally stunning graphics, because it is. All of this leaves us wondering when developers are going to start giving Playstation 3 games the resources they need in development to create the type of game experiences so many PS3 fans have been waiting for and deserve."

http://www.ripten.com/?p=332

7/2/2007 3:15:00 PM

Despite the ps3 having more processing power, the GPU in the 360 is far more advanced than the ps3 GPU. ^ makes sense. It's a myth that the ps3 has more gpu computing power than the 360.

7/2/2007 3:23:44 PM

^ What makes it a myth? On what bases do you make that statement?

That said, I think it does suck that the PS3 games have been getting the shaft from developers. Possibly its Sony's fault for making it hard to develop for. Either way it definitely pisses me off since i paid so much for the system.

I still love my PS3 and can't wait for the titles that are going to come out for it, and love the titles that I have right now. But I think things like this are really ridiculous and should not be happening. I'm not sure what Sony is thinking by allowing something like this to happen. I would think they would be doing something to give video game players a reason to spend 200 extra bones on their system in terms of graphics.

7/2/2007 3:34:22 PM

Quote :

"All of this leaves us wondering when developers are going to start giving Playstation 3 games the resources they need in development to create the type of game experiences so many PS3 fans have been waiting for and deserve.""

deserve? why do they deserve it?

7/2/2007 3:38:52 PM

^^Don't get me wrong the ps3 is a great console, but in terms of graphics power the 360 rivals it. If you do a little research the ps3 has a GPU based upon the NVIDIA G70 series (similar to a nvidia 6800 GPU). Whereas the 360 switched from nvidia (old xbox) to ati and currently uses a Radeon R600 type GPU.

A good explanation of it:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p3.html

Quote :

"When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has probably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment. However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3."

No biggie, just if you're picky and get down to it, the 360 has greater GPU processing power. Oh and i use both, so i don't have a specific "side", i enjoy various features of both. Although some of the newer or yet to be released higher end games will either be downgraded to run on the ps3 (like Moodys post) or not released at all, and only for the 360.

[Edited on July 2, 2007 at 3:54 PM. Reason : .]

7/2/2007 3:42:36 PM

^^ uhh cause we paid a lot of goddamn money for the promise of a system that was as powerful, if not moreso, than the 360.

I have both, and I prefer the PS3 because it never fucks up on me....but this shit pisses me off.

7/2/2007 3:57:46 PM

^Yeah i did realize that the PS3 fucks up a lot less than the 360. But if you have both, might as well buy the games for the 360 now, if you want the higher frame rate. 30 fps kinda looks choppy compared to 60.

7/2/2007 4:00:35 PM

i dont remember hearing anything about promises, but i dont really pay much attention to the video game world.

7/2/2007 4:03:41 PM

looks choppy? you do realize that nearly every game you ever played before 360 and PS3 runs at most 30 FPS, right? Hell, GTA:SA only ran at 25 FPS.

not that it should be used as an excuse for not having 60FPS, but come on man - 30 FPS has been a standard for years and years (and years)

7/2/2007 4:14:36 PM

^lol i'm comparing it to what i usually play pc games at. Which is almost always 60+. I started out playing pc games, and once i made the transition to console, everything looked choppy until 60fps games came out for 360.

7/2/2007 4:16:54 PM

Quote :

"Don't get me wrong the ps3 is a great console, but in terms of graphics power the 360 rivals it. If you do a little research the ps3 has a GPU based upon the NVIDIA G70 series (similar to a nvidia 6800 GPU). Whereas the 360 switched from nvidia (old xbox) to ati and currently uses a Radeon R600 type GPU."

Calling it an R600 is extremely misleading. While yes, it is indeed based on the R600 (actually, it's more accurate to say the R600 was based on it) and uses the Unified Shader Architecture, it is only clocked at 500mhz. Even the lowest end desktop R600 GPU is clocked at 525mhz, while the high end ones are clocked at 800mhz.

The RSX on the other hand, is clocked at 550mhz. The original high end G70 desktop GPU (7800GTX) was clocked at only 430mhz. It boils down to the 360 GPU being a gimped R600, while the RSX is an uber beefed up version of the G70.

With all that said, most comparisons have declared the GPU comparison between the 2 consoles to be a wash. Keep in mind though, the 360 isn't capable of rendering 1080p at all, while the PS3 is.

[Edited on July 2, 2007 at 4:27 PM. Reason : :]

7/2/2007 4:18:59 PM

i swear, every time i read your shit on consoles i want to vomit...now I know why

so is tv choppy to you? how about movies? because, believe it or not, they, they all use the industry standard of 60i, which is 30 FPS as well

I am guessing what you're really talking about is video lag, where the gPU can't process fast enough so the frame rate drops. older systems and shittly designed games have these problems, just as if you tried to play something like BF2 on a 9800 with everything on high resolution.

a constant 30 FPS on a game that doesn't have frame rate drop issues doesn't look bad at all...no chop

[Edited on July 2, 2007 at 6:14 PM. Reason : .]

7/2/2007 6:13:51 PM

^You guys are right in regard to consoles. It's not that big a difference. Although why did they make a deal outta what Moody posted then? If it's 60 vs 30 on the 360 vs ps3 then why would anyone really care?

ALL i'm saying is that from experience playing on a pc 60+ fps looks a lot better than 30-40 fps. Not to mention vertical syncing helps to reduce tearing and that sets it to 60 fps. In fact to some people there's a really big difference. If you read online PC game reviews, the reviewers always criticize the quality if it drops below 40 fps. And you can't really compare pre-rendered video to a scenario where the engine renders the image right away. Of course movies look fine at 60i or 35mm film at 24 fps. It's completely different in regard to games.

And no i'm not talking about frame drop. I can be playing a game at 30-35 frames per second and it'll appear "choppy" compared to a game at 60 fps. In regard to a console the effect is less so, but there's still a difference. If there wasn't a difference why would they decide to run Madden and NCAA at 60fps? It defin does look clearer and has more of a "crisp" action feel however you describe it.

Anyway if you do some research on the flicker fusion threshold (less so for lcds) then you'll realize that even though the fps are above this frequency, you can still have a "choppy" sensation from a game playing at 30fps. Anyway i don't need to argue this point myself, if you ask any PC gamer, they'd tell you they much prefer 50-60 fps over 30-40 fps. I'm new to the ps3 so i assumed this logic would carry through. It seems like it's less so, but still applicable. Again it's personal preference. If you guys don't care, then that's fine. All i'm saying is i physically enjoy 50-60fps more than 30fps because it appears clearer and more fluid. Again, personal preference, but I can tell a difference and know plenty of people who can also.

Another thing. Of course 30fps is going to look fine for a ps3 or 360. But guess what? 60 fps will look ever better! We have to realize Americans don't buy these things as a necessity, they buy them as a pleasure. So in turn, 60fps adds even more to the quality of the game.

For example the new standard for broadcasting is going to move up to 1080p50 or 1080p60.

"1080p50 and 1080p60 could only be sent over higher-bandwidth channels; to send these over normal-bandwidth channels, a more advanced codec such as the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC codec must be used. Higher frame rates such as 1080p50 and 1080p60 are foreseen as the future broadcasting standard for production" -wikipedia (sorry, quick search for 1080p60)

So yes, it obviously effects quality if we're moving towards higher fps in TV, movies and games.

Quote :

"a constant 30 FPS on a game that doesn't have frame rate drop issues doesn't look bad at all...no chop"

I never said it looked "bad" i'm just saying there's defin a difference in quality.

[Edited on July 2, 2007 at 8:16 PM. Reason : .]

7/2/2007 7:49:40 PM

wait

EA half-assed something?

no, i'll never believe that, not in a million years

7/2/2007 8:31:23 PM

im really pissed about this. I hate the xbox controls for madden...i love the ps3 controller. But i was looking forward to that 60 fps.


Maybe next year. I'll still pick it up for 360, but I was looking forward to building my ps3 collection. Maybe GTA 4

7/2/2007 8:40:50 PM

media making the PS3 a goddamn pariah + lazy fucking developers that won't learn how to program on the architecture = >.<

i like how errybody sucks the dick of a $500 cell phone but OH GOD FUCK NO a $600 game system/next-gen player

7/2/2007 8:54:51 PM

Quote :

"That said, I think it does suck that the PS3 games have been getting the shaft from developers. Possibly its Sony's fault for making it hard to develop for. Either way it definitely pisses me off since i paid so much for the system."

This has me curious. Perhaps the developers aren't giving it the shaft. Sony is notorious for making consoles that are death to program for. Maybe they are just giving the two consoles the same amount of development time, its just that the PS3 requires that much more work to make it work as well. Potential is nothing if it takes that much more to get the project there.

Sony depended on the PS3 to be an absolute smash. If it were, then the developers would spend the time on it. However, it did not take off as expected. Their current strategy is to wait it out until everyone buys into it (probably at a price drop?). Now tell me, with that marketing strategy, why would game companies spend so much time on those football games? They come out once a year. If Sony's plan is going to be to hope that people buy into their strategy eventually, companies won't spend so much time on this year's model. They will wait until next year to give it the full works.

7/2/2007 10:51:03 PM

^ I understand the point you are raising but I do not think it is one that actually occurs. In most of these multiplatform games that perform worse on the PS3 it is not because equal time is given to the PS3. It is because the 360 is the lead development platform and the multi-core setup of the PS3 is not taken into consideration. Then when teams try to port the 360 version to the PS3 they have to cut corners.

From what I have read on the issue it seems that in the future if teams start with a more modular approach to programming at the beginning they can write successful ports for both machines. Now whether or not that will ever happen or whether the PS3 will be doomed to poor 3rd party ports forever will be interesting to watch. If anything this just continues to support Sony's shift towards 1st party development this generation.

7/3/2007 12:06:19 AM

at least Sony has some quality in-house games

7/3/2007 7:44:37 AM