JayStorm 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2007 The European version may well be watered down somewhat but it's unlikely that i'd have used those extra features anyway. Although a slight price reduction might have been nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-Rafa- 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2007 The F1 game is ace Can't get online though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2007 I'm going to see if anyone is online for some races now.. IF you see Priddo on track, that'd be me Edit: Have either of you tried steering with the motion senors? It's damned hard. First try I took the wheels off my Aguri twice! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ecapdeville 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2007 I'm going to see if anyone is online for some races now.. IF you see Priddo on track, that'd be me Edit: Have either of you tried steering with the motion senors? It's damned hard. First try I took the wheels off my Aguri twice! How is the F1 game??? at last is better than Gp4????? If someday I buy the PS3 will be only because the F1 sim... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johndifo 0 Report post Posted March 24, 2007 PS3 is a superb piece of hardware, (9 core IBM Cell processor, and nvidia GPU) but because multi core programming is not an easy task, expect ~1 year before groundbreaking software arrive. Rumours are that Sony, backed by IBM, will suport Linux on PS3, and then we'll have the cheapest super computer on earth. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted March 24, 2007 Not everyone wants to use linux lol, and the Graphics chip is a modified nVidia 7600 GT which is hardly mind blowing. The 360 however has a DX10 powered ATI graphics chip Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Wow... DX10 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 That will be good for future development. Games developers will be able to create games using the power of DX10, whereas PS3 games will continue to look the same until the end of the console's shelf life, stuck on DX9 graphics. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Do you really think the PS3 uses DX9? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-Rafa- 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Anyone know the name of the song in the opening video of Formula 1 : Championship Edition? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Do you really think the PS3 uses DX9? No, I know that the PS3 uses DX9 it is a modified version of an nVidia GeForce 7800 series graphics chip (known as an nVidia RSX graphics processor), and if you ask anyone who actually KNOWS anything about computer hardware they will tell you the same thing. Now if you don't believe me read these: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=29579 http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/2...329/3dps309.htm And now, lets have some technical spec on the card that it is based on shall we? NVIDIA CineFX 4.0 Shading Architecture•_Vertex Shaders Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 I'm sorry did I miss the part where you proved PS3 games had to run using DX9? I HIGHLY doubt MS would just let their rivals use THEIR technology. Maybe you're right, but I sure as hell don't see where your proof was in your post, its all questionable. I remember reading sometime ago how sony was building they're own graphics libararys that were being compared to DX, and I'm not sure if thats what PS3 ended up having in anyway, but I know they won't be using DX9. Those things you posted are all about the graphics cards and what not, but none of it proves anything about PS3 games using DX9. I know Xbox uses DX8.1 and Xbox360 is on DX10, and I know PS2 doesn't use DX at all. I know this because I've spent plenty of time on Debug PS2s and Xboxs whilst working for a video game publisher. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 The graphics chip in the PS3 is only capable of rendering with Direct X and Open GL, and it is unlikely they will be using Open GL. The fact that I linked you to an article about the chip in the PS3 and the fact the quoted specification was Pixel Shader 3.0 which is Direct X only technology, then I think that proves quiet well that the PS3 is powered by DX technology. Another point to consider is that they don't have to have direct X on the console to make it run, they can build their own runtimes, but ultimately it is still using Direct X technology, and it is still using Old-Gen Direct X technology. The PS2 is built around a totally different archetecture to the PS3, and the reason that a lot of people are using DX based graphics API's is because a lot of game developers are using Direct X to make it a lot easier to port their game engines to other consoles without totally re-coding them. Sony may have developed their own 3D API's but the specification of the graphics chip suggests that they are using Direct X power in their games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Ah I'd like to edit my post, but I fear you'd miss it, I should have said Xb360 uses DirectX 9.0c. So that kinda takes away the point you originally brought up. DX10 is a Vista Exclusive, and wasn't even finished in time for Xbox360 release.\\ You're point about Dev's using DirectX to make it easier to build games for multiple platforms isn't really true, most build there own engines, or buy ones for Graphics and sound, like Renderware and Fmod. Just on a DX elated note - How stupd is it they got rid of DirectDraw, and then got rid of DirectShow to be on its own, but still need DX to compile! edit: I actually had PS3 documentation on libraries before it ws released, along with PS2 and Xbox360, and some stuff on Wii that was all leaked etc, but lost it when my laptops HDD died last year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 I dont think it is that expensive for what you get Well you can get a PC with better graphics for the same price, andthe PC can do heaps more. Sony are late to the party, PC's have caught up and gone past again. It's a big white elephant. , the PS2 was $750 when it was launched here years ago, so the PS3 is around $250 more than the PS2 was, but the PS3 is a Blu-ray player and blu-ray players go for $1500 over here. I just put together a PC for $1000 that can eat PS3s and XBox 360s for breakfast Wives don't let you play with consoles? I better not get married! Well I thought the whole point of getting married was you don't have to play with your Wii all the time How is the F1 game??? at last is better than Gp4?????If someday I buy the PS3 will be only because the F1 sim... I don't think it is better than GP4. And calling it an F1 sim is really extending the definition a bit too far. It's a console game, calling it a 'sim' is an oxymoron. Rumours are that Sony, backed by IBM, will suport Linux on PS3, and then we'll have the cheapest super computer on earth. No, you'll have a computer that is as good as something you could get for $50 on Ebay, with millions of compatibility issues. There is a reason consoles are cheap and small, a console running a PC operating system will be all show and no go like the Honda swamp car. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Cav you fail to miss the point of consoles, you really do. They are pure gaming machines, in the sense that when you bu ya game you know it will work, and you won't have to update, or edit, or take it back because it CTD's every time you run it. Also, your talk about PC's that can eat consoles for breakfast, whilst true in terms of hardware, is ultimately useless, because last time I checked PS3's didn't have to run windows whilst playing games Have you noticed how uch resource windows takes up, even whilst playing games? That brings it down a bit, doesn't it? Anyway I'm very happy with my consoles AND PC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ykickamoocow 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Also, your talk about PC's that can eat consoles for breakfast, whilst true in terms of hardware, is ultimately useless, because last time I checked PS3's didn't have to run windows whilst playing games Have you noticed how uch resource windows takes up, even whilst playing games? That brings it down a bit, doesn't it? Windows is a killer. The computer im currently using isnt powerful enough to even run the basic functions of Windows Vista. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 You must have a pretty poor PC, Ykick My desktop has a 3.2GHz Intel CPU with 1Gig DDR Ram and a 256MB NVidia graphics card (can't recall which one tbh), and I ran some microsoft tool that was to tell me which Vista I could and should buy. I remember it picked one of the lowest 2.... I know that desktop could use another gig of RAM, but other then that it's pretty good! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Cav you fail to miss the point of consoles, you really do. fail to miss They are pure gaming machines, in the sense that when you bu ya game you know it will work, and you won't have to update, or edit, or take it back because it CTD's every time you run it. That is why the PS3 is pretty bad, my PC can run Windows, and be faster than a bloody PS3, and costs the same Also, your talk about PC's that can eat consoles for breakfast, whilst true in terms of hardware, is ultimately useless, because last time I checked PS3's didn't have to run windows whilst playing games Have you noticed how uch resource windows takes up, even whilst playing games? That brings it down a bit, doesn't it? No, my current PC runs games better than any PS2. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cavallino 2 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Windows is a killer. The computer im currently using isnt powerful enough to even run the basic functions of Windows Vista. Vista is RAM hungry. Get 1-1.5 GB minimum. Then again, why would you want to run Vista right now? I have Vista, but I just use XP. Vista comes with all the annoyance of dealing with a new OS, with Microsoft sticking to their policy of moving everything around, whereas there isn't a single thing about Vista that makes me want to use it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane2 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2007 Ah I'd like to edit my post, but I fear you'd miss it, I should have said Xb360 uses DirectX 9.0c. So that kinda takes away the point you originally brought up. DX10 is a Vista Exclusive, and wasn't even finished in time for Xbox360 release.\\You're point about Dev's using DirectX to make it easier to build games for multiple platforms isn't really true, most build there own engines, or buy ones for Graphics and sound, like Renderware and Fmod. Just on a DX elated note - How stupd is it they got rid of DirectDraw, and then got rid of DirectShow to be on its own, but still need DX to compile! edit: I actually had PS3 documentation on libraries before it ws released, along with PS2 and Xbox360, and some stuff on Wii that was all leaked etc, but lost it when my laptops HDD died last year. No, my friend that is complete and utter rubbish. Windows vista is the first DESKTOP OS with a built in graphics engine that is capable of utilising DX10, the fact that it is the first OS to use the DX10 runtime libraries however does not mean that it is the only thing capable of utilising DX10. The runtimes for Direct X are merely a means of communication, for the OS to send orders to the graphics card. The actual processing is done by the Hardware and if you have hardware that is capable of processing DX10 instruction sets, it is quiet feasible to be able to build runtimes for another operating system, and another platform altogether. Direct X 10 was actually finished a while before Vista went gold, it was in all of the Release Candidate builds, and that is precisely why I said the console is compatible with SOME of the functions and not all of them (and hence the reason that it is shader model 3.5 and not 4.. It enables the use of some but not all of the advanced features of DX10). I was in the Vista tech beta so I know what I am talking about. Without being rude, you seem to lack a basic understanding of the way Graphics hardware and runtime libraries work, and without that knowledge you cannot make a cogent argument on what you assume is right, because the fact of the matter is that it is quiet possible to port functionality over to other platform. Vista is RAM hungry. Get 1-1.5 GB minimum. Then again, why would you want to run Vista right now? I have Vista, but I just use XP. Vista comes with all the annoyance of dealing with a new OS, with Microsoft sticking to their policy of moving everything around, whereas there isn't a single thing about Vista that makes me want to use it. That isn't really true at all I have run Vista quiet nicely on a gig before I upgraded myself to 3 gigs. Windows Vista has a technology called Superfetch, and the way it works is that it smartly tracks your application usage, and loads parts of your most frequently used applications into memory, the result being that they load and operate a lot faster and more smoothly. This gives the outward appearance that the OS is gobbling a lot more ram than it should, however the OS swaps things in and out of memory and it is set not to release memory if it is needed by other things. I also recently upgraded my sister's XP machine to Vista, and with the exception of the Sony Ericsson PC suite, all of her software works just as well in Vista as it did in XP. she also has 512 MB of ram, and although her machine boots rather slowly (due to the fact it has a very slow hard disk) the OS itself runs perfectly well. Obviously having more ram always helps, but it is quiet possible to run Vista on 512 MB Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sato 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2007 Ok, so after your post about DX10 Shane, I went and asked a mate of mine, who has 5 Xbox 360s (another on the way) 2 of which are debug machines, about what version of DX they used. Now it's important to note he spends his free time looking through these machines and opening them up to find what exactly is inside. So he quickly responded DX9, and then sent me this little quote ontop of it.... "DirectX 9.0 for Xbox 360 The Xbox 360TM features an implementation of Microsoft Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ykickamoocow 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2007 You must have a pretty poor PC, Ykick My desktop has a 3.2GHz Intel CPU with 1Gig DDR Ram and a 256MB NVidia graphics card (can't recall which one tbh), and I ran some microsoft tool that was to tell me which Vista I could and should buy. I remember it picked one of the lowest 2.... I know that desktop could use another gig of RAM, but other then that it's pretty good! My computer does have technology which would be instantly familar to any Aztec. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
admin 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2007 I'm going to see if anyone is online for some races now.. IF you see Priddo on track, that'd be me Edit: Have either of you tried steering with the motion senors? It's damned hard. First try I took the wheels off my Aguri twice! Look out for wezman online, that is me! Havent tried the motion sensing yet. I tried it in the Motorstorm demo and didnt like it. I would rather the SIXAXIS sticks had rumble over motion sensing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-Rafa- 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2007 Anyone know what the name of the song on the opening video of F1:CE is? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites