Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

rumor: Rare working with Bungie on Halo 3 for the past 2 y..

Tags:
  • Games
  • Microsoft
  • Xbox
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 12:46:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

I take this with a grain of salt, but this is a pretty big thread on
teamxbox,
so i felt it had to be posted on usenet also :) 



_______________________________________________________
Rare working with Bungie on Halo 3 for the past 2 years


The **** is going to hit the fan when IGN reports on this on 11/22/04

PS: Its going to be unveiled on Febuary 9th 2005.

I got this info from one of the most respected sources out there.
_______________________________________________________

http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=309333&page=...


I personally can't believe it. yet. but who knows. far more strangeness has
occured in this industry.

it is entirely plausable that this is happening. Bungie and Rare are
Microsoft's most important game programming assests. Halo is MS's and Xbox's
biggest franchise. the closest thing to a killer app MS has. the
Playstation3 is going to put massive pressure on MS. PS3 will surly be more
powerful than Xbox2. MS needs a weapon. it would be too much for Bungie
alone to get Halo 3 ready in time for fall 2006 when PS3 arrives on U.S.
shores. but Rare and Bungie working together, and more importantly,
supposedly for a long time, could make Halo 3 in 2006 a good bet.
no reason it couldn't happen.

I'll be waiting to hear some official word on this. until then, concider it
a decent rumor.

More about : rumor rare working bungie halo past

Anonymous
November 16, 2004 2:30:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Told ya so!


"Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
news:AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> I take this with a grain of salt, but this is a pretty big thread on
> teamxbox,
> so i felt it had to be posted on usenet also :) 
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Rare working with Bungie on Halo 3 for the past 2 years
>
>
> The **** is going to hit the fan when IGN reports on this on 11/22/04
>
> PS: Its going to be unveiled on Febuary 9th 2005.
>
> I got this info from one of the most respected sources out there.
> _______________________________________________________
>
> http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=309333&page=...
>
>
> I personally can't believe it. yet. but who knows. far more strangeness
has
> occured in this industry.
>
> it is entirely plausable that this is happening. Bungie and Rare are
> Microsoft's most important game programming assests. Halo is MS's and
Xbox's
> biggest franchise. the closest thing to a killer app MS has. the
> Playstation3 is going to put massive pressure on MS. PS3 will surly be
more
> powerful than Xbox2. MS needs a weapon. it would be too much for Bungie
> alone to get Halo 3 ready in time for fall 2006 when PS3 arrives on U.S.
> shores. but Rare and Bungie working together, and more importantly,
> supposedly for a long time, could make Halo 3 in 2006 a good bet.
> no reason it couldn't happen.
>
> I'll be waiting to hear some official word on this. until then, concider
it
> a decent rumor.
>
>
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 4:41:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Xenon wrote:

> it is entirely plausable that this is happening.

Actually it's not even remotely plausible.

> will
> surly be more powerful than Xbox2.

The PS2 is "surly" more powerful than the Xbox on paper, and yet virtually
every single Xbox game looks better than its PS2 counterpart. You of all
people should be familiar with the Xbox 2's specs. It's a formidable piece
of hardware.

> but Rare and Bungie working
> together, and more importantly, supposedly for a long time, could
> make Halo 3 in 2006 a good bet.

And monkeys will fly out of my crack. Halo isn't just a MS property, it's a
Bungie property, and one they are very protective of. They don't need Rare's
help with story, characters or even the technology, and I can't see those
two development houses meshing well at all. Anything Rare could do to "help"
could likely be done by any group of talented codemonkeys hired en masse to
help beef up the Halo 3 dev team. Rare is more valuable to MS if they're
working on their own stuff for Xbox 2, ie. Perfect Dark Zero.

But aiming a Halo 3 release to coincide with the release of the PS3 in North
America would definitely be a wise move. Trouble is, Bungie has said their
next game won't be Halo 3, have they not? I don't see it happening.

-Z-
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
November 16, 2004 4:49:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

I haven't kept up with this stuff, so let me ask a possibly foolish
question: why would PS3 necessarily be more powerful than Xbox 2? If
they are coming out at about the same time, you'd think they'd be
roughly equal; if anything, the Xbox may have market pressures to
one-up Sony, more than Sony needs to one-up MS.
November 16, 2004 7:26:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:46:18 -0600, "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com>
wrote:

>I take this with a grain of salt, but this is a pretty big thread on
>teamxbox,
>so i felt it had to be posted on usenet also :) 
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________
>Rare working with Bungie on Halo 3 for the past 2 years
>
>
>The **** is going to hit the fan when IGN reports on this on 11/22/04
>
>PS: Its going to be unveiled on Febuary 9th 2005.
>
>I got this info from one of the most respected sources out there.
>_______________________________________________________
>
>http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=309333&page=...
>
>
>I personally can't believe it. yet. but who knows. far more strangeness has
>occured in this industry.
>
>it is entirely plausable that this is happening. Bungie and Rare are
>Microsoft's most important game programming assests. Halo is MS's and Xbox's
>biggest franchise. the closest thing to a killer app MS has. the
>Playstation3 is going to put massive pressure on MS. PS3 will surly be more
>powerful than Xbox2. MS needs a weapon. it would be too much for Bungie
>alone to get Halo 3 ready in time for fall 2006 when PS3 arrives on U.S.
>shores. but Rare and Bungie working together, and more importantly,
>supposedly for a long time, could make Halo 3 in 2006 a good bet.
>no reason it couldn't happen.
>
>I'll be waiting to hear some official word on this. until then, concider it
>a decent rumor.
>

I don't know, the story seems kinda fishy to me. What kind of help is
rare offering? It would be more beliveable to me to say that Bungie
is helping Rare with the Perfect Dark sequel, given rare's record of
overly long game devlopment.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 10:33:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message news:<AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com>...
> I take this with a grain of salt, but this is a pretty big thread on
> teamxbox,
> so i felt it had to be posted on usenet also :) 

They had huge threads saying that Halo 2 was going to be out on the
24th of August too...

Although it would explain why Rare has been producing jack since the
MS buyout.

- Jordan
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 11:12:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
news:AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> PS3 will surly be more
> powerful than Xbox2.

What makes you say that?
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 11:12:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Andrew Stirling wrote:
> "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
> news:AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
>> PS3 will surly be more
>> powerful than Xbox2.
>
> What makes you say that?

Because it's coming out later? While it might not make it more surly
than the Xbox, it will probably be more powerful. While it's not
always the case (the N64 was weaker than the original PS1, though it
did have more effects), it's usually the case.
November 16, 2004 12:13:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

kjordan1@gmail.com (Keith) wrote in message news:<82de20b3.0411160149.172222a@posting.google.com>...
> I haven't kept up with this stuff, so let me ask a possibly foolish
> question: why would PS3 necessarily be more powerful than Xbox 2? If
> they are coming out at about the same time, you'd think they'd be
> roughly equal; if anything, the Xbox may have market pressures to
> one-up Sony, more than Sony needs to one-up MS.

I use Google Groups, so I'm on a bit of a time delay. My question had
been answered before it appeared.

Here's another comment, though:

"The PS2 is "surly" more powerful than the Xbox on paper, and yet
virtually
every single Xbox game looks better than its PS2 counterpart."

No, it isn't. The Xbox is more powerful in every or almost every
respect - CPU, memory, video memory, and the fact that it has a hard
drive (depending how you define "powerful"). It also has built-in
ethernet and four controller (USB) ports. The CPU, memory, video
memory would explain why games look better on it. Additionally, the
Xbox has better sound capabilities. It's just newer/better technology
- though PS2 fans may consider their machine more elegant in some way,
nobody would seriously argue that the PS2 is more powerful than the
Xbox in any meaningful way.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 12:28:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

IF this is true (and that's a big 'if'), I wonder how this will affect
the future of Perfect Dark 2. Last I heard, they delayed it so as not
to compete with Halo 2.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 12:58:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Andrew Stirling wrote:
> "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
> news:AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
>
>>PS3 will surly be more
>>powerful than Xbox2.
>
>
> What makes you say that?
>
>
Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony
are definetly putting it in the PS3.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 1:21:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
> Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony are
> definetly putting it in the PS3.

Blu-Ray is a Sony technology, it makes sense for them to put it in the PS3.
It doesn't make as much sense but it's still plausible for MS to put one in
the Xbox 2.

Seb
--
Sebastian Kinnaird
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 2:03:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Sebastian Kinnaird wrote:
> "tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
>
>>Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony are
>>definetly putting it in the PS3.
>
>
> Blu-Ray is a Sony technology, it makes sense for them to put it in the PS3.
> It doesn't make as much sense but it's still plausible for MS to put one in
> the Xbox 2.
>
> Seb

Blu-Ray is a joint developed technology according to this site.

http://www.blu-ray.com/info/
November 16, 2004 2:26:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Sebastian Kinnaird" <essdeekay.nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2vu271F2p0n7fU1@uni-berlin.de...
> "tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
>> Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony are
>> definetly putting it in the PS3.
>
> Blu-Ray is a Sony technology, it makes sense for them to put it in the
> PS3. It doesn't make as much sense but it's still plausible for MS to put
> one in the Xbox 2.
>

Except that are MS not supporting the HD dvd format?

Scott
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 2:56:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Scott wrote:
> "Sebastian Kinnaird" <essdeekay.nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2vu271F2p0n7fU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>>"tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
>>
>>>Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony are
>>>definetly putting it in the PS3.
>>
>>Blu-Ray is a Sony technology, it makes sense for them to put it in the
>>PS3. It doesn't make as much sense but it's still plausible for MS to put
>>one in the Xbox 2.
>>
>
>
> Except that are MS not supporting the HD dvd format?
>
> Scott
>
>

Blu-Ray is the HD DVD format, is that what you meant?
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 3:11:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
> Blu-Ray is a joint developed technology according to this site.
>
> http://www.blu-ray.com/info/

I didn't mean to imply otherwise, but as Sony are one of the principal
partners in the joint-venture, it does make sense for them to use Blu-Ray as
opposed to the rival HD-DVD format.

Seb
--
Sebastian Kinnaird
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 3:19:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Scott" <pawsandclawsremovethis@btconnect.com> wrote
> Except that are MS not supporting the HD dvd format?
>
> Scott

No idea on the official line, but both Blu-ray and HD-DVD utilise
Microsoft's VC-9 video codec for their movie disc formats so there's no
reason why MS shouldn't support the HD-DVD format IMO. I don't think
Blu-Ray is backwards compatible with standard DVDs either - whereas AFAIA
HD-DVD is, so things like that could have an effect on MS's ultimate choice
for the Xbox 2.

Seb
--
Sebastian Kinnaird
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 4:04:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote in message
news:tVlmd.23756$P7.7399@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Scott wrote:
>> "Sebastian Kinnaird" <essdeekay.nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:2vu271F2p0n7fU1@uni-berlin.de...
>>
>>>"tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
>>>
>>>>Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony
>>>>are definetly putting it in the PS3.
>>>
>>>Blu-Ray is a Sony technology, it makes sense for them to put it in the
>>>PS3. It doesn't make as much sense but it's still plausible for MS to put
>>>one in the Xbox 2.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Except that are MS not supporting the HD dvd format?
>>
>> Scott
>
> Blu-Ray is the HD DVD format, is that what you meant?

No, he means that MS are supporting the HD-DVD format, which is different to
Blu-Ray.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 5:47:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Keith" <kjordan1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:82de20b3.0411160149.172222a@posting.google.com...
> I haven't kept up with this stuff, so let me ask a possibly foolish
> question: why would PS3 necessarily be more powerful than Xbox 2? If
> they are coming out at about the same time, you'd think they'd be
> roughly equal;

<snip>

that's *probably* true. if Xbox 2 is coming out fall 2005 and PS3 coming
out late winter or early spring 2006 in Japan, then there might not be much
of a difference hardware-wise. although, PS3 has been in development for a
few more years than Xbox 2. PS3 entered development around 2000. whereas
Xbox 2 entered development around 2002. plus, Sony will be using the 65 nm
process whereas MS will probably get a 90 nm process. (for GPU). basicly the
smaller the number, the smaller the chip process and the more you can cram
into a chip. the more you cram into a chip, the more powerful it can be. so
we might see PS3 significantly more powerful than Xbox2, best case. but
then, they could also end up being nearly equal. most likely much closer
than PS2 and Xbox are.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 6:02:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

tizer001 wrote:
> Andrew Stirling wrote:
>> "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
>> news:AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
>>
>>> PS3 will surly be more
>>> powerful than Xbox2.
>>
>>
>> What makes you say that?
>>
>>
> Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony
> are definetly putting it in the PS3.

Can someone tell me what gameplay advantages Blu-Ray will have over a
standard 4GB DVD? Games today struggle to fill even a fifth or less of the
capacity on DVD with the actual game instead of endless cutscenes and
movies.

What's the point of a 100 Terabyte game disc (or whatever bloody size it
is)? Maybe we'll see a return to the early 90's phenomenon of interactive
movies.

Wheee, great.

--

Burning Ranger

aziz@aziz1removethisbit.fsnet.co.uk
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 6:06:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

Sebastian Kinnaird wrote:
> "Scott" <pawsandclawsremovethis@btconnect.com> wrote
>
>>Except that are MS not supporting the HD dvd format?
>>
>>Scott
>
>
> No idea on the official line, but both Blu-ray and HD-DVD utilise
> Microsoft's VC-9 video codec for their movie disc formats so there's no
> reason why MS shouldn't support the HD-DVD format IMO. I don't think
> Blu-Ray is backwards compatible with standard DVDs either - whereas AFAIA
> HD-DVD is, so things like that could have an effect on MS's ultimate choice
> for the Xbox 2.
>
> Seb
I think Blu-ray is backwards compatible with DVD. Also seems to be
higher capacity too. I'd never even heard of HD DVD until today.

It's not going to be another Betamax vs VHS type senario is it?
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 7:58:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Keith" <kjordan1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:82de20b3.0411160913.383961ed@posting.google.com...
> kjordan1@gmail.com (Keith) wrote in message
news:<82de20b3.0411160149.172222a@posting.google.com>...
> > I haven't kept up with this stuff, so let me ask a possibly foolish
> > question: why would PS3 necessarily be more powerful than Xbox 2? If
> > they are coming out at about the same time, you'd think they'd be
> > roughly equal; if anything, the Xbox may have market pressures to
> > one-up Sony, more than Sony needs to one-up MS.
>
> I use Google Groups, so I'm on a bit of a time delay. My question had
> been answered before it appeared.
>
> Here's another comment, though:
>
> "The PS2 is "surly" more powerful than the Xbox on paper, and yet
> virtually
> every single Xbox game looks better than its PS2 counterpart."
>
> No, it isn't. The Xbox is more powerful in every or almost every
> respect - CPU, memory, video memory, and the fact that it has a hard
> drive (depending how you define "powerful"). It also has built-in
> ethernet and four controller (USB) ports. The CPU, memory, video
> memory would explain why games look better on it. Additionally, the
> Xbox has better sound capabilities. It's just newer/better technology
> - though PS2 fans may consider their machine more elegant in some way,
> nobody would seriously argue that the PS2 is more powerful than the
> Xbox in any meaningful way.


No, not entirely true. the Xbox is more powerful than PS2 in many areas,
yeah,
but not in almost every respect. PS2 has some important advantages over
Xbox,
especially graphics memory bandwidth and fillrate, not to mention
flexibility
with more CPU power. yeah, the Xbox makes up for lack of CPU power by having
T&L / vertex shaders on the GPU unlike PS2's GS. I am not denying that
Xbox destroys PS2 in many areas.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 7:58:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:58:18 -0600, "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com>
wrote in message <HaGdnelmh5aUGwfcRVn-pQ@comcast.com>:

>No, not entirely true. the Xbox is more powerful than PS2 in many areas,
>yeah,
>but not in almost every respect. PS2 has some important advantages over
>Xbox,
>especially graphics memory bandwidth and fillrate, not to mention
>flexibility
>with more CPU power. yeah, the Xbox makes up for lack of CPU power by having
>T&L / vertex shaders on the GPU unlike PS2's GS. I am not denying that
>Xbox destroys PS2 in many areas.

"Many areas?" I don't need specs on fillrate numbers and memory
bandwidth to use my eyes and ears in judging framerate, graphical
quality, load times, and sound quality. In terms of overall performance,
the Xbox destroys the PS2 in most areas when you look at the vast
majority of comparable titles.


--
A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of a message.
Q: Why is top posting a sloppy form of writing?
November 16, 2004 8:20:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"CGA" <neil@nospam.here.thanks> wrote in message
news:cnctt8$irl$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
> "tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote in message
> news:tVlmd.23756$P7.7399@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> Scott wrote:
>>> "Sebastian Kinnaird" <essdeekay.nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2vu271F2p0n7fU1@uni-berlin.de...
>>>
>>>>"tizer001" <tizer001@invalid.domain.com> wrote
>>>>
>>>>>Lets just hope that MS decide to put a Blu-Ray drive in Xbox2 as Sony
>>>>>are definetly putting it in the PS3.
>>>>
>>>>Blu-Ray is a Sony technology, it makes sense for them to put it in the
>>>>PS3. It doesn't make as much sense but it's still plausible for MS to
>>>>put one in the Xbox 2.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Except that are MS not supporting the HD dvd format?
>>>
>>> Scott
>>
>> Blu-Ray is the HD DVD format, is that what you meant?
>
> No, he means that MS are supporting the HD-DVD format, which is different
> to Blu-Ray.
>

Cheers!

Scott
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 8:29:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

In article <82de20b3.0411160913.383961ed@posting.google.com>,
kjordan1@gmail.com (Keith) wrote:

> kjordan1@gmail.com (Keith) wrote in message
> news:<82de20b3.0411160149.172222a@posting.google.com>...
> > I haven't kept up with this stuff, so let me ask a possibly foolish
> > question: why would PS3 necessarily be more powerful than Xbox 2? If
> > they are coming out at about the same time, you'd think they'd be
> > roughly equal; if anything, the Xbox may have market pressures to
> > one-up Sony, more than Sony needs to one-up MS.
>
> I use Google Groups, so I'm on a bit of a time delay. My question had
> been answered before it appeared.
>
> Here's another comment, though:
>
> "The PS2 is "surly" more powerful than the Xbox on paper, and yet
> virtually
> every single Xbox game looks better than its PS2 counterpart."
>
> No, it isn't. The Xbox is more powerful in every or almost every
> respect - CPU, memory, video memory, and the fact that it has a hard
> drive (depending how you define "powerful"). It also has built-in
> ethernet and four controller (USB) ports. The CPU, memory, video
> memory would explain why games look better on it. Additionally, the
> Xbox has better sound capabilities. It's just newer/better technology
> - though PS2 fans may consider their machine more elegant in some way,
> nobody would seriously argue that the PS2 is more powerful than the
> Xbox in any meaningful way.

Bzzt!

The ps2 utterly destroys the xbox in raw floating point power and
fillrate. That was painfully clear on the last ps2/xbox/gc title I
worked on trying to get stuff that screams on the ps2 to run at an
acceptable level on the xbox. There are lots of areas that the ps2
easily outperforms the xbox having to do with geometry throughput.
Likewise there are areas the gc outperforms the others.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 8:29:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Railgunner" <none@none.org> wrote in message
news:none-179C86.09291316112004@newssvr21-ext.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <82de20b3.0411160913.383961ed@posting.google.com>,
> kjordan1@gmail.com (Keith) wrote:
>
> > kjordan1@gmail.com (Keith) wrote in message
> > news:<82de20b3.0411160149.172222a@posting.google.com>...
> > > I haven't kept up with this stuff, so let me ask a possibly foolish
> > > question: why would PS3 necessarily be more powerful than Xbox 2? If
> > > they are coming out at about the same time, you'd think they'd be
> > > roughly equal; if anything, the Xbox may have market pressures to
> > > one-up Sony, more than Sony needs to one-up MS.
> >
> > I use Google Groups, so I'm on a bit of a time delay. My question had
> > been answered before it appeared.
> >
> > Here's another comment, though:
> >
> > "The PS2 is "surly" more powerful than the Xbox on paper, and yet
> > virtually
> > every single Xbox game looks better than its PS2 counterpart."
> >
> > No, it isn't. The Xbox is more powerful in every or almost every
> > respect - CPU, memory, video memory, and the fact that it has a hard
> > drive (depending how you define "powerful"). It also has built-in
> > ethernet and four controller (USB) ports. The CPU, memory, video
> > memory would explain why games look better on it. Additionally, the
> > Xbox has better sound capabilities. It's just newer/better technology
> > - though PS2 fans may consider their machine more elegant in some way,
> > nobody would seriously argue that the PS2 is more powerful than the
> > Xbox in any meaningful way.
>
> Bzzt!
>
> The ps2 utterly destroys the xbox in raw floating point power and
> fillrate. That was painfully clear on the last ps2/xbox/gc title I
> worked on trying to get stuff that screams on the ps2 to run at an
> acceptable level on the xbox. There are lots of areas that the ps2
> easily outperforms the xbox having to do with geometry throughput.
> Likewise there are areas the gc outperforms the others.

I absolutely agree Railgunner. there ARE areas where PS2 is superior to
Xbox. although Xbox produces generally higher quality graphics than PS2, and
there are areas were Xbox just destroys PS2, like texture quality and audio.
the PS2 has far higher *graphics* memory bandwidth than Xbox. 48 GB/sec
dedicated vs 6.4 GB/sec shared.

In some game comparisons it looks like Xbox is far more powerful than PS2,
but also, vice versa.

PS2 has higher pixel fillrate (2400M plain, 1200M textured) but Xbox has
higher texel rate or multi textured fillrate:
932M with 2 texture per pixel vs PS2's 600M with 2 textures per pixel).

Xbox has more RAM memory and a HDD. 64 MB vs 40 MB. the PS2 has more raw
floating point performance that is more flexible. i.e. PS2's VU units in the
Emotion Engine are more flexible and clocked higher than the 2 Vertex Shader
units in Xbox's NV2A GPU.

the comparisons could go on forever. I will end by saying this: each of the
three current consoles have various strengths *and* weaknesses compared to
the other two. Gamecube beats Xbox and PS2 in some areas. PS2 beats GC and
Xbox in some areas. Xbox beats GC and PS2 in some areas. no console totally
outshines the other 2 in all areas.

whereas Dreamcast was totally superior to PS1 and N64 in every area.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 8:57:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Railgunner" <none@none.org> wrote in message
news:none-179C86.09291316112004@newssvr21-ext.news.prodigy.com...

>
> The ps2 utterly destroys the xbox in raw floating point power and
> fillrate. That was painfully clear on the last ps2/xbox/gc title I
> worked on trying to get stuff that screams on the ps2 to run at an
> acceptable level on the xbox. There are lots of areas that the ps2
> easily outperforms the xbox having to do with geometry throughput.
> Likewise there are areas the gc outperforms the others.

Well I hope you're not working on any more x-box games them.
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 9:20:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

In article <QMidnR2T2_oNogfcRVnygQ@pipex.net>,
"Andrew Stirling" <andrewstirling@clara.co.uk> wrote:

> "Railgunner" <none@none.org> wrote in message
> news:none-179C86.09291316112004@newssvr21-ext.news.prodigy.com...
>
> >
> > The ps2 utterly destroys the xbox in raw floating point power and
> > fillrate. That was painfully clear on the last ps2/xbox/gc title I
> > worked on trying to get stuff that screams on the ps2 to run at an
> > acceptable level on the xbox. There are lots of areas that the ps2
> > easily outperforms the xbox having to do with geometry throughput.
> > Likewise there are areas the gc outperforms the others.
>
> Well I hope you're not working on any more x-box games them.

Let me guess, you believe the xbox is teh most powerful!

Dumbshit.
November 16, 2004 9:32:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

they would want to get their arses in gear since they fruited up badly, time
wise, with halo2



"Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
news:AfCdndp5uu6U5QTcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
> I take this with a grain of salt, but this is a pretty big thread on
> teamxbox,
> so i felt it had to be posted on usenet also :) 
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Rare working with Bungie on Halo 3 for the past 2 years
>
>
> The **** is going to hit the fan when IGN reports on this on 11/22/04
>
> PS: Its going to be unveiled on Febuary 9th 2005.
>
> I got this info from one of the most respected sources out there.
> _______________________________________________________
>
> http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=309333&page=...
>
>
> I personally can't believe it. yet. but who knows. far more strangeness
has
> occured in this industry.
>
> it is entirely plausable that this is happening. Bungie and Rare are
> Microsoft's most important game programming assests. Halo is MS's and
Xbox's
> biggest franchise. the closest thing to a killer app MS has. the
> Playstation3 is going to put massive pressure on MS. PS3 will surly be
more
> powerful than Xbox2. MS needs a weapon. it would be too much for Bungie
> alone to get Halo 3 ready in time for fall 2006 when PS3 arrives on U.S.
> shores. but Rare and Bungie working together, and more importantly,
> supposedly for a long time, could make Halo 3 in 2006 a good bet.
> no reason it couldn't happen.
>
> I'll be waiting to hear some official word on this. until then, concider
it
> a decent rumor.
>
>
Anonymous
November 16, 2004 9:40:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.halo,microsoft.public.xbox.halo,uk.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.xbox,microsoft.public.xbox (More info?)

"Railgunner" <none@none.org> wrote in message
news:none-07BFA7.10205616112004@newssvr21-ext.news.prodigy.com...

> Let me guess, you believe the xbox is teh most powerful!
>
> Dumbshit.

It is. And it's the easiest to develop for. So that's two knock downs in a
row. Those kinds of remarks coming from a "developer" is certainly
"strange", clearly you've no experience with Microsoft platforms compared to
others.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
http://www.halflifeportal.com/ All things Half-Life.
http://www.xbox2portal.com/ Xbox 2 news.

*Replace nospam with smirnov to reply by e-mail*
!