Idealty's Domain: Let's Talk Tech

Top 5 Reasons Next Gen Gaming is Taking So Long

2011-07-19T18:34:00.000-07:00

     Now that Nintendo has jumped the gun and announced their next generation game console called the Wii U, there is a ton of speculation as to when Sony and Microsoft will follow with their next gen systems. In past console generations, the average time of a console cycle was about 4-5 years. This does not mean that in 4-5 years a system would stop being manufactured and disappear. Rather this means that there was typically a gap of 4-5 years between new consoles from the same company even if they would sell concurrently for some time (i.e PS1 -> PS2, SNES -> N64). This fall, the Xbox 360 and PS3 will be 6 and 5 years old respectively which is well past that established life cycle. Yet, both the PS3 and Xbox360 are still enjoying healthy worldwide sales, have plenty of games coming in the next 12-18 months, and still have not reached the magical price point of $199 (max price for all Skus) which is traditionally when most systems see their largest sales. How is it that these systems are able to be relevant for so much longer than their predecessors?

Here are my top 5 reasons the next generation of game consoles is taking so long:

5. TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING TOO FAST
     Tablets, 4G, wireless display, motion controls, 3D, networking, digital downloads, APUs (GPU integrated with CPU), and cloud computing. These are just some of the significant technologies that have become common in the 5-6 years since the Xbox360 and PS3 were released. All of these technologies can have profound impacts on video gaming. The hardware has to be made in such a way to enable some or all of these technologies in the next generation. The difficult question for Microsoft and Sony is which ones are the ones to bet the future on? Should the next Xbox use physical media or be all digital downloads for game distribution? Should an updated Kinect be the primary user interface to the system saying goodbye to the physical controller for good? Should Microsoft or Sony follow Nintendo's innovation and leverage a tablet-like controller interface to expand the ways users can interact with the console? Should the PS4 use Blu-ray again? Will 1080p full 3D graphics be the target for next gen? How can the next gen consoles expand on social networking and media sharing? Is OnLive really the future of video games? These are all very difficult questions that both Sony and Microsoft must answer before committing another 8-10 years and hundreds of millions of dollars in a new system. If they bet wrong, there will be a steep price to pay.
     In previous generations, updating a system to the next generation was pretty straightforward. Simply update the processing power of both the CPU and GPU to enable new uses of technology and you were pretty much done. However, today the expectations for a game console has grown immensely and simply increasing the processing power is not enough. With so many variables, what-ifs, and volatile technologies in the mix, it's reasonable that Sony and Microsoft need more time weigh them all, observe their impact on the audience, and work to fine tune some of the less polished ones.

4. HARDWARE ISN'T AS IMPORTANT AS IT USED TO BE
     How many readers are old enough to remember the old "Genesis Does" or "U R NOT E" gaming commercials from the 90s? If you can think back to those days, all you heard or saw in ads was how many "bits" the hardware had, how many polygons it can push, or how advanced the system is (remember those "It's Thinking" ads for Dreamcast). Kids argued in school how much better the Genesis was with its 16-bits compared to the NES with only 8-bits. Or how awesome the PlayStation was because it was 32-bit and used shiny new CD-ROMs for games. For gamers then, the most exciting thing was seeing the leaps in technology with each new system adding things like full-motion video, voice, and 3D graphics. Oh the good ole days.
   In 2011, consumers are much less interested in the nuts and bolts of a system and more concerned with what kind of experience it gives them. This is true not only in the video game space, but across the board in consumer electronics and technology. If nothing else, the Wii proved that people are less interested in technology and graphics than they are fun and accessible experiences. Xbox Live is a phenomenal success and is the primary reason why Xbox360 has such a large sales lead over the PS3 in the US. Xbox Live offers an "experience" that just cannot be found on the other consoles and many gamers are still buying 360s to be a part of that community. The rise of the MP3 and digital downloads again proves that consumers care more about accessibility and convenience than quality alone. No doubt Cd's, SACDs, DVD-Audio, and Blu-Ray offer superior experiences than anything you can download today, but consumers are much more interested in having the content come to them and travel with them wherever they go. The IPhone and IPAD set the world on fire not because it offered a cutting edge CPU or GPU under the hood, but because it provided a innovative, easy to use, and unique user interface that appealed to a large audience.
    The changing times would have certainly made Sony and Microsoft at least hesitate before approaching the next generation. Now they have to invest a lot more resources that used to be used to increase processing power to delivering a powerful and innovative user experience. They must invest not so much in hardware but in software in order to be successful next gen. This is a fundamentally different paradigm for the hardware manufacturers to work in and there is likely a time overhead with figuring out the new approach.

3. GRAPHICS APPROACHING DIMINISHING RETURNS
    I know that of all of my reasons on this list, this is likely to be most controversial and flame worthy. However, I think it is still a valid point if you can hear me out. There are two main ideas embedded in this statement:
A) That the graphics of current generation hardware is good enough to be relevant longer
B) That the difference in graphical fidelity in going to next generation is not going to be as large as before.

     With the arrival of the Xbox360 and thus the advent of the HD era, the jump in visual fidelity from the previous generation was striking. Not only did geometry complexity and texture quality increase dramatically, but the change finally addressed one of the largest gaps between PC gaming and console gaming: resolution. The first time seeing Gears Of War, Project Gotham Racing, Edler Scrolls Oblivion, or Uncharted on a large HDTV in full 720p was a defining moment for most gamers. Almost 6 years later, many gamers are still more than satisfied with their HD graphics on current HD consoles. Games like Killzone 3, Uncharted 3, Forza 4, and Gears of War 3 (all 2011 titles) prove that the current HD consoles can still deliver amazing graphics on par with anything out there. When you combine this argument with the de-emphasis on graphics and technology in general (as mentioned in item #4 above), it makes sense that the current generation quality would be sufficient for most gamers for a longer period than in previous generations.
    The other part of this argument is looking to the future, how much further can we go. Even though Moore's Law is still mostly in affect and raw processing power has increased dramatically since the Xbox360 and PS3 came out, the delta that is seen from the increase is much lower than in the past. We've already heard many Sony executives make statements in recent months essentially saying that the next generation is not coming anytime soon because there is not a large enough jump in quality that can be obtained with the latest and greatest technology (Jack Trenton says PS4 not coming for some time). While on paper it would seem like the latest graphics tech like an Nvidia GTX 500 or AMD 6900 series GPU would offer a massive leap over current generation systems, the practical use of all that power in the latest most advanced titles does NOT provide quite as large of a leap. I work with the latest and greatest PC tech everyday for a living and have seen it all: DX11 Ultra Crysis 2 upgrade, Metro 2033 DX11 maxed, Witcher 2 maxed, Unigine, 3DMark 11, Stone Giant, Dirt2/3, Hawx 2, Starcraft II and much more. To my eyes, the best overall visual experience I have had with any title is still God of War III on the PS3. Even smaller titles like Super Stardust HD and Limbo impress me just as much as those DX11 titles. Now, I'm not suggesting that GOW III or Uncharted 2 are better on a technical level than Crysis 2 or Witcher 2 on PC. That would be silly. But my argument is that the consumer does not care about the technical details under the hood in terms of how many polygons a game is pushing, whether it is using tessellation, what shadow algorithm is being used, what type of AA is in use, or what is the resolution of the textures on screen. They just care about what the end result looks like on the screen. I personally have yet to be amazed by anything I've seen using DX11 and think that tessellation in its current state offers a minor visual improvement at best for a significant hit on a performance that does not justify its use. So would I be willing to pay for a new system to match the current state of the art in PC games? Absolutely not. Here is another way of thinking about it: is the leap from Killzone 2/3 PS3 to Crysis 2 PC as fundamentally large as the leap of Killzone PS2 to Killzone 2/3 PS3? Or Metal Gear Solid PS to Metal Gear Solid 2 PS2?

Crysis 2 DX9

Crysis 2 DX11 - Is this a generational leap?

2. CURRENT SYSTEMS EXPAND/GROW VIA SOFTWARE
This console generation is the first where we have network connections as a standard. This single feature brought about a ton of advancements to gaming: Xbox live and PSN, PlayStation home, patching of games, digital downloads, and media sharing just to name a few. However, perhaps the most significant advancement was firmware updates. This allowed Sony and Microsoft to update the firmware on the device via the Internet thus changing and expanding the feature sets for their respective systems. The result: neither the Xbox 360 nor the PS3 is anywhere close to being the same system they were at launch. Through firmware updates the Xbox has seen Dashboard updates, the advent of avatars, Kinect integration, movie and music download services, a digital marketplace, and a host of apps such as Netflix, Facebook, Twitter, Last FM, and ESPN. Similarly, the PS3 has seen dramatic changes since its launch four and a half years ago. Features such as PlayStation home, revamped PlayStation store, apps such as Netflix, Vudu, and Folding @Home, expanded Blu-ray playback features (i.e profile 2.0 support), support for 3D movies and games, remote play with PSP and media sharing are all features that did not exist at launch.

Xbox360 Dashboard in 2005

Xbox360 Dashboard in 2011

When you really look at the list of improvements, it is not a stretch to say that both the Xbox360 and PS3 have almost transformed into new systems over the course of there respective life cycles. In fact, one can argue that the 2011 Xbox360 and PS3 systems are "next generation" systems compared to their 2006 counterparts much in the same way that Wii is the "next generation" system to the GameCube (Wii uses essentially the same CPU and GPU as GameCube). These new features keep the system feeling fresh and new and thus makes the desire for an upgrade to a new system significantly less.

1. COST OF MAKING GAMES STILL TOO HIGH
Despite the previous 4 items on the list, there is not doubt that Microsoft or Sony could still move forward with a new system and gaming enthusiasts (including myself) would be salivating at the idea of a new cutting edge game machine. However, I suggest that the number one thing holding back the next generation is simply one word: COST. This item is not addressing consumers, but rather the developers and the hardware manufacturers themselves. Even though the Xbox360 and PS3 technology has aged, the cost to makes games for them has NOT gone done significantly. In fact, over the past 10 years, the average cost of making a game went from around $2 million in 2000 to over $20 million in 2010 including marketing and licensing (see Video Game Costs). This is a serious problem and is causing a divide in games where we see AAA blockbusters from large studios on one side and small indie games on PSN, Xbox Live marketplace, Internet, and app stores on the other. Moreover, the vast majority of studios cannot afford to invest $20 million to make a game and this generation has seen more studios shut their doors for good than ever before. Also, with the high cost comes high expectations for sales. In today's industry if you don't sell millions and at least break even, you may not be survive.

This is one of the gaming industry's biggest banes right now for developers and publishers and a new generation of more powerful consoles would do nothing but compound this problem. With some worst case budgets being upwards of $50-$60million (yeah looking at you Killzone 2 and Gran Turismo 5), a new generation could see that become the norm with worst case approaching $100 million. An industry where games cost that much to make would cause suffering to all involved including the hardware manufacturers, publishers, and consumers. Not to mention that the expense of manufacturing, distributing, and maintaining systems of the complexity of a PS3 and Xbox360 is tremendous. It is telling that it took nearly 4 years for the PS3 to be profitable for Sony but issues such as the Xbox 360's red ring of death and the PSN breach cost each company millions. A new more sophisticated system would incur even more costs. Indeed Sony in particular seems most concerned not with how to make a powerful and sophisticated system, but rather how to make an efficient and cost effective system for next generation while still meeting the expectation of a new PlayStation system. That is a fine line to walk and one that will likely cause both companies to spend more time in developing their strategies for next gen.

Well, that's my top 5 reasons why next gen is taking so long. Current rumors suggests that Microsoft will unveil the next Xbox system at next year's E3 and Sony will also introduce the PS4 sometime next year. Neither system will see release to market until 2013 at the earliest giving us a full 2 years to enjoy this revolutionary console generation. Game On!

Comments and feedback welcome.

PS Vita: The Future of Handheld Gaming

2011-07-07T16:17:00.000-07:00

After several months of speculation, Sony finally confirmed the successor to the PSP (PlayStation Portable) codenamed NGP (Next Generation Portable) in January 2011. Later at E3 2011, Sony confirmed that the final name of the device will be PS Vita ("Vita" is Latin for "life"). The new handheld will be a powerful one, featuring a Quad-core ARM CPU and PowerVR graphics processor generating near PS3 quality graphics. It also features a camera, 6-axis motion controls, front multi-touch screen with a rear touch pad, dual analog sticks, Wi-Fi and 3G all for the amazingly price of only $249/$299 (non 3G/3G model). That is the same price as the recently released Nintendo 3DS but with much better technology and some intriguing games in the initial lineup. Could the PS Vita be the slam dunk Sony hoped for with the PSP and finally dethrone Nintendo's lock on the handheld market?

Like the PSP But Better

While Nintendo has taken the approach of creating unique handheld experiences that are distinct from their home console counterparts, Sony has generally viewed the PSP as an extension of the console experience. Many of the top games found on the PS2/PS3 were also ported to the PSP for better and for worst with the idea being you can take your PS console experiences on the go. However the original PSP had several significant shortcomings that made that plan backfire for Sony. With the PS Vita, Sony is determined to correct its earlier mistakes while still staying true to the original vision.

First and foremost, the PSP's single analog nub was problematic and could not faithfully replicate the dual-analog experience found on the PlayStation consoles. Thus, many first person shooters and third person action titles suffered with limited or awkward camera and character control. As as a result, one of the most highlighted features of the PS Vita is its dual analog sticks able to accurately mimic the controls featured on the dualshock controllers. This opens the door for big titles like Uncharted and Call of Duty to get quality ports on the handheld. In addition, the PS Vita includes every button found on the PS3's dual shock 3 controller, including the PS home button, four face buttons, and 4 shoulder buttons.

Another major issue with the PSP was that the experience was too similar to the PS2 console. Many people questioned why should they spend extra money for a handheld that plays the same games as the console but looks and controls worse? There were very few "unique" experiences and way too many console ports. Sony is already aiming to correct this shortcoming by adding a number of hardware features into the PS Vita that are not found on any console. This will also entice developers to invest in the PS Vita where they can create a new market with unique games to a new audience.

Looking over the expanded feature set, there appears to be ample opportunity for creating quality and unique experiences. The improved 5-in OLED screen will make images pop off the screen with great detail and clarity. The front multi-touch screen will allow for new and more accessible ways to control games. For example, in the Uncharted game, the user can drag a line across the screen telling Drake with path to climb. The rear touch pad is a feature not found on any other device and may become either a great innovative gameplay enhancer or a useless gimmick depending on how developers use it. The built-in 6-axis motion controls also adds new ways to interact with games where the user can shake, tilt, or move the system to change the game (similar to most smartphones and tablets today). Finally, the camera allows for augmented reality games integrating the real world to the virtual world.

Perhaps the most significant issue with the original PSP was its identity crisis. Sony initially marketed the PSP as a super all-in-one device that can provide all your entertainment needs on the go including music, movies, networking, and games. Of course, spreading itself so thin preventing Sony from focusing on what is the core of any PlayStation device: games. For the PS Vita Sony has made it extremely clear that the focus is solely on games. In fact, they have said very little on any multimedia functionality with the device while showing off over 30 game titles nearly a year before its release. This should also help PS Vita succeed with core gamers and isolate it from the cluttered and competitive markets shared with other do-it-all devices such as smartphones and tablets.

For the complete story and feature set of PS Vita visit the official PSVita website.

Is PS Vita Delivering the Games?

A gaming platform is nothing without quality titles and this is probably the most exciting part of the PS Vita so far. Sony looks to have games for everyone in all genres. Are you a PlayStation fan who likes the Sony 1st party games? Then you can play Killzone, Uncharted, Resistance, LittleBigPlanet, Super Stardust, Wipeout, and Modnation Racers on your PS Vita. Want big AAA games from 3rd party? Then you may want to play the new Call of Duty or Bioshock titles coming on it. Fighters? Try Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter X Tekken. Original titles that utilize the new capabilities of the PS Vita? Try Sound shapes and Little Deviants. This is only scratching the surface as Sony is sure to announce more titles at the Tokyo Game Show and as the end of year approaches.

So What's the Outlook for the PS Vita?

From what we know now, I would have to say the outlook for the PS Vita looks extremely promising. I am not personally big on handheld gaming and did not own a PSP. Yet, I can see how Sony has improved both the strategy and the hardware to appeal to a larger audience of developers and consumers. They have taken the biggest complaints of the PSP and improved on each of them with the largest being the price. At $249, the PS Vita looks to have a value that far eclipses its main competition in the Nintendo 3DS. In a world where millions of people regularly spend $200+ on a cell phone, $500+ on an Ipad etc, the PS Vita looks to be affordable to gamers and non-gamers alike. Sony is also aware of how competitive the portable landscape is and is keen to not overlap with smartphones or tablets both in terms of features and price. By focusing on what PlayStation does best with powerful and compelling hardware, Sony may be poised to take the number 1 spot in handheld gaming from Nintendo. At the very least, I believe it will be a much closer battle this go round.

Thoughts?

Nintendo's Wii U: Revolution or Dreamcast 2?

2011-06-28T17:55:00.000-07:00

At E3 2011 a few weeks ago, Nintendo finally unveiled their successor to the Wii called the Wii U. Interestingly enough, the actual unveil did not show the actual hardware or any live demos of software which was disappointing. All Nintendo showed was a few marketing video to illustrate what the system and it's new tablet controller can do.

What is the Wii U?
Well, for all intent and purposes it is aWii with better HD quality graphics and a new tablet like controller with its own screen. While actual hardware specs have not been confirmed by Nintendo, we do know that it is capable of displaying full 1080P HD graphics (finally), that it is fully backward compatible with standard Wii games and accessories, and that the tablet controller combines traditional buttons with motion controls and the new screen. In a sense, you can think of the system as bring the DS experience into the living room but with more flexibility in how the two displays interact with one another. Definitely watch the video below to get a real sense of what it is and what it is capable of.

Why the Wii U?
In its 4.5 year life span, the original Wii will go down in history as the fastest selling video game system ever. Despite coming out in 2006 with technology from 2001, sub-HD graphics, and a flood of lackluster third party games, one can argue that the Wii revolutionized how we play games with the introduction of the Wii Remote. A simple controller that was easy to grasp by everyone meant huge sales and "Wii parties" all over the world. It made gaming much more social and made people who would have never picked up an Xbox360 or PS3 controller want to pick up a Wii Remote to play games. The result is nearly 90million units sold to date while each the PS3 and Xbox360 are hovering around 50 and 55 million units sold respectively. In addition, some of the best selling titles in this generation of game consoles were sold on the Wii including Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Mario Kart Wii (each sold over 20 million). So what's the problem?

The problem is that what makes the Wii a great system in the short term also makes it a lackluster system in the long term. The outdated and simple technology meant huge profits and low price but also means that the Wii ran out of steam to power modern games really fast. Developers are not able to develop games across the PS3, Xbox360, and Wii equally due to the technology gap. This means that developers have to invest more resources into making a Wii specific version of a title, a difficult proposition when a modern top-tier game already costs more than 20 million dollars to make. This would be fine if the Wii version sold a lot allowing the developer to recoup much of that investment. Unfortunately that was not the case for many third party titles due to other fundamental flaw of the Wii...it's audience.

The Wii's primary audience was the "non-gamer": mom and dad, grandparents, girlfriends, and families. However, these people traditionally do not play games and thus are not likely to save up and buy new games regularly. The larger problem with the game industry is that a very small portion of games (around 10% or less) make roughly 80% of annual revenue for the industry. These titles by and large cater to the "hardcore gamer". This is the guy who reads the gaming blogs, knows the release schedule, camps out at the store to buy a new system or game, saves his $50-$60 to buy that hot new game the day it comes out, and cares enough to complain on gaming forums regularly. Again, this is the guy that spends the money and keep the gaming industry going as a business. The Wii does not cater to this guy. In fact, most hardcore gamers only played their Wii for a few months when it first came out and then left it to collect dust for 3-4 years. Wii Sports is not the kind of deep engaging experience that a hardcore gamer enjoys. Neither is WiiPlay, Just Dance, or WiiFit. Thus, the hardcore audience largely abandoned the Wii and left many developers yearning for that revenue stream that audience brings.

Why should Nintendo care about this situation? Afterall, they are still selling a ton of hardware right? True, but the problem this siutaiton creates is with Nintendo's most critical customer: the game developers and publishers. As I mentioned earlier, the Wii has a surplus of titles that have just languished on the store shelves. Moreover, multi-platform titles that typically sell a lot on other consoles did not sell well on the Wii. So no revenue means no business. Thus, many developers either ceased creating games or greatly reduced the amount of games they were making for the Wii. Their cries to Nintendo over several years has been clear...they NEED a new platform. One with HD graphics so that they can make ONE game and spread it across all consoles to reduce costs and increase sales. In a sentence, the Wii U is Nintendo's necessary and desperate response to losing a great deal of developer support over the life of the Wii.

So is the Wii U the Right Solution?
It's still too early to tell just what the reaction to the Wii U will be when it is finally released next year but my take from what has been shown thus far is lukewarm at best. On the plus side, the new tablet controller does have some potential for cool and unique gameplay experiences. Using it as a "window" to see part of the game world that is not in view on the big TV screen is interesting. Being able to play full games, browse the web, and video chat on it without the main TV being ON or while being occupied with other content is also a plus. But is it a revolution? A fundamentally different approach to gaming that enhances the overall experience? My answer at this point would be No. In fact, in a lot of ways it is a step backwards. While the Wii did fundamentally change the game (literally), the Wii U reverts back to a controller filled with buttons modelled after the traditional PS3 and Xbox360 controller while adding the new screen, camera, gyroscope, and accelerometer.

Another negative is that the hardware power in the Wii appears to be just good enough to play at the same or slightly higher quality than the PS3/Xbox360, which are now 6 years old. Thus, the Wii U could end up being another Dreamcast, a stop-gap solution before the true next generation of game consoles releases. While the Dreamcast had superior tech to the N64 and PS1 by far and had cool innovations like a built-in Modem and memory cards with a screen (VMUs), the brute power of the PS2 and Xbox was simply too much for it. With the Wii U not coming out until 2012, the next Xbox and PlayStation will not be far behind and will almost certainly be a larger technological leap than the Wii U is offering. Again, technology isn't everything but it is a big deal to those hardcore gamers and developers Nintendo is desperately trying to get back.

So what do you think of Nintendo's future with the Wii U? Rosy or Bleak?

Idealdomain now featured on Alltop.com

2011-06-24T15:17:00.000-07:00

I'm happy to announce that Idealdomain will now be featured under the gaming topic on Alltop.com. For those that do not know, Alltop is a sort of online library of websites and blogs for a wide variety of topics. Please visit the site to check it out (Click the banner on top). Also, you can view my personal library of news feeds for various topics at http://my.alltop.com/idealty.

PS3 in 2011: Huge Games = Low Sales?

2011-06-22T19:38:00.000-07:00

(This discussion is purposely excluding the PSN hack which is irrelevant to main issue in this article)

In 2010, the game industry was buzzing about what was shaping up to be a monstrous 2011 for the PS3. With a huge lineup of quality games that dwarfed the competition, many of which were sequels to critically and commercially successful titles, it looked like 2011 would be a year of dominance for Sony. With Playstation exclusive games like LittleBigPlanet 2, Killzone 3, MLB'11, Motorstorm Apocalypse, Socom 4, Infamous 2, Resistance 3, Uncharted 3, and the return of Twisted Metal just to name a few it appeared that Sony was going to be delivering hard hitting games throughout the entire year and finally regain its dominance. However, taking a deeper look reveals that things may not be going according to plan.

The presumed success of many of the titles I named was largely based on success of their predecessors. The much hyped Killzone 2 delivered a quality, cinematic, and beautiful FPS experience that showed what the PS3 could do in capable hands. The first Infamous was a surprise hit that offered a unique sandbox experience that was sheer fun to play. Socom is one of the most successful series on the Playstation with a large dedicated fanbase who has been hungry for a sequel for quite a while. Motorstorm was one of the highest quality PS3 launch titles and has since established itself as a quality and unique racing experience that seemed to cater to the Playstation audience. With developers having more time on the hardware and a wider audience as the install base grows, it seemed reasonable to expect the follow up titles to at least match if not exceed the success (both commercial and financial) of their predecessors.

The first sign of trouble was lower than expected review scores, but lower in many cases than their predecessors. According to the metacritic aggregate scores, LBP 2, Killzone 3, Motorstorm: Apoc, and Infamous 2 all scored lower than their predecessors. In fact, only LBP2 was able to achieve greater than a 90 rating. The much anticipated Socom 4 proved to be a let down to fans, averaging a mediocre 67 rating. So, the quality did not appear to be the step forward most people had hoped for.

Looking at the sales of the games, the picture becomes clearer on the true impact of these titles (or lack thereof). Below is a table of worldwide sales figures compared to their predecessor and including the latest trend from the previous week. Note that all figures are from VGchartz and thus are unofficial:

Title	Lifetime (million)	Last Week (thousand)	Previous title (million)
LittleBigPlanet 2	1.34	20,000	4.41
Killzone 3	1.63	20,000	2.66
MLB 11	0.30	8,000	0.65
Socom 4	0.46	17,000	1.08
Motorstorm:Apocalypse	0.13	4,200	1.07

The key data point here is the last week figure, giving an indication on current health of the title. Killzone 3 and LBP2 are the 2 oldest and healthiest titles on the list, yet will problably not match sales of their respective predecessors. Moreover, I would like to call special attention to the Socom 4 figure. The previous title was the online only spin off Socom:Confrontation intended to tide fans over until the real Socom game came. It still managed to do over 1 million units, which is respectable. Yet, looking at the current figures and trend, Socom 4 will barely pass 500,000 units. This has to be incredibly disappointing for Zipper and Sony for one of Playstation's biggest franchises expected to sell in the millions. Also, the numbers for Motorstorm: Apocalypse are just anemic. It's been out for nearly 2 months and only managed 130,000 units worldwide. On top of the that, Evolution had to cancel the game in Japan due to the earthquake there a few months back. On a more positive note, it looks like Infamous 2 is likely to surpass it's predecessor in week 1 sales with VGchartz reporting 320,000 units sold.

By now many of you are crying foul at my using VGchartz as a source given that they are unofficial figures. However, the point here is not to debate over absolute sale figures. The point is to examine the trends and history. Many of the large PS3 titles in 2011 are not selling in a manner to reflect the huge amount of anticipation these titles have generated and are selling at a rate less than their predecessors. Ironically, the previous titles by and large did not sell well compared to other big franchises on competitor consoles (i.e Halo, Gears of War, Mario Kart, etc). PS3 games have always had trouble selling in bulk but instead of improving it seems that trend is getting worse. Again, with 50 million PS3 out there, how can it be that only 2% of PS3 owners purchased LBP2 (in 6 months) and only 0.2% purchased motorstorm: apocalypse? What are people doing with that game machine they've invested in called PS3 if not playing games sometimes? Why aren't PS3 games selling at even a 5%-10% attach rate? Would this trend continue for Resistance 3 and Uncharted 3? Discuss...

Hacking Game Companies: Who is to Blame?

2011-06-20T15:34:00.000-07:00

Game Companies Attacked

Hackers declare war on world

April 17th 2011, a day that will live in infamy in gaming history. Of course, this is the date that the Sony Playstation Netowrk (PSN) was first taken down due to unauthorized intrusion on the PSN servers from hackers. This event had two significant consequences: first it prevented nearly 50 million PS3 and 70 million PSP owners from accessing any of the network features of their respective systems (i.e online play, playstation e-store, trophy syncing, etc), and second it exposed over 100 millions user accounts to hackers including emails, passwords, usernames, download history, and credit card credentials. Naturally, panic insued more so because hardcore fans could not fathom life without being able to sync their trophies to watch their trophy level increase or get online with their buddies for nearly a full month. In all seriousness, it was one of the largest hacker events in the internet age and something that has cost Sony dearly in terms of customer confidence, money, time, and momentum.

As unfortunate as all this was for fans, developers, and Sony what really struck me was that most people seemed to actually put the blame for all of this on Sony for not doing enough to protect the confidential information of the users and for taking too long to inform the users on the breach. While browsing numerous game sites and forums during the network outage, it wasn't uncommon to see talk like "I'm never buying a Sony product ever again!", "I'm not going to buy the new PSP when it comes out because it will still be on PSN", "I've sold my PS3 and moved to Xbox", "I will never trust Sony again", "Sony screwed up big time" etc. In my opinion, to draw conclusions like that sound naive, immature, and ignorant of the real issue. The real issue of course is that the Internet is not secure in any sense and you should never blindly trust Sony or any other company with your confidential information on any network.

I've always contended that to blame Sony (or any other victim of a hacking attack) for allowing themselves to be hacked is analogous to blaming a robbery victim for letting the burglar get into the house. The key point is the same in both scenarios: there is no such thing as complete 100% protection against intrusion. Throughout history, people have been victims to robbery whether they had a wooden door with no locks or a 10 ton safe protecting their assets. The reason for this is simple: if the person(s) committing the robbery is dedicated enough to the task and given adequate resources, there is always a way of working around any security measure. Security mechanisms are intrinsically made to be broken because there is always at least one party who should have access to the protected content. Thus for every lock out there, there is a key somewhere. For every encryption algorithm, there is an encryption key. The best thing the victim can do is not make it easy for them. Use a metal door with deadbolts instead of a wooden door without locks. Invest in an alarm to accelerate notification and potential recovery. But there is no guaranteed security for anything.

So did Sony make it easy for the hackers to access the personal information of over 100 millions customers? Well it couldn't have been too easy given that PSN debuted back in 2006 when the PS3 was released and was not hacked for over 4 years. In fact, among gaming companies and hardware, Sony's PS3 was the only system to not have been hacked as of end of 2010. Then of course, the PS3 master key was finally broken opening the flood gates for hackers in December 2010. By that time, both the Xbox360 and Wii hardware had long been hacked and Xbox live has been victim to intrusion on more than one occasion. Let's not even put the words "security" and ipod, ipad, or PC in the same sentence. So I would argue that Sony has been relatively secure for quite some time and has arguably increased the target on themselves with some questionable decisions (i.e removing otherOS). But at the end of the day, let's not confuse what this is: this was not a high school student playing around who happened to stumble upon the database of the PSN and its users accidentally (that would be making it easy). This was a concentrated, sophisticated, and deliberate attack on Sony that could have honestly happened to any of the large gaming or tech companies out there. Think of this attack as more like the Ocean series or the Italian Job instead of the apartment robbery seen on your local news.

If I was being rash with my thinking that this attack could have happened to anyone, the last few weeks have proven me correct. The list of just gaming companies that have been victims to cyber attacks in just the past few weeks since the PSN attack include (but not limited to)

Codemasters (DIRT series)
Bethesada (Brink, Fallout)
Eidos (Tomb Raider)
Epic (Unreal engine, Gears of War)
Sega (Sonic)
Nintendo (Mario)
Mircosoft (Xbox)
Square Enix (Final Fantasy)
Bioware (Mass Effect)

So again nobody is safe from these coordinated and determined attacks. So tell me, are each of these companies to blame just as Sony was for the PSN hack?

Technology in 2011: A Changing World

2011-06-20T12:42:00.000-07:00

So I'm going to resurrect this blog in order to get a couple of things of my chest. Looking back at where the world was when I started this blog, it's amazing to me just how much has changed. Personal cell phones are now the standard and manadatory even for children as opposed to a luxury. Elementary schools around the country has traded in their textbooks for Ipads. The desktop PC is quickly becoming a niche "legacy" product relagated to mostly students and professionals. And the world is going smartphone and tablet crazy.

With so much going on, I wanted to express some of my ideas on several issues and see where it goes. I'll be posting several topics over the next few days and look forward to seeing what some folks think.

I'm Still Here! The Return of Idealty

2010-01-14T02:09:00.000-08:00

Boy I sure am a great blogger. My apologies for leaving this blog alone. There has been so many interesting things to happen in the past year in terms of gaming and technology, but you weren't reading about them here. Well, that's about to change. I'm going to revitalize Idealty's domain and keep my ideas flowing which should help provide some escape from the crazy work world. Until the next post...

GTA IV: Best Game Ever??

2008-05-24T09:38:00.000-07:00

Easily one of the biggest games to come out this generation, GTA IV is finally out in solid form and spinning in over 8 million PS3s and Xbox360s worldwide after less than a month on the market. Reviews had initially placed its average score at over 99% which made it the highest rated game of all time! Over the past two weeks, it had dropped slightly to 97.6 on Xbo360 (#1 all time) and 97.4 on PS3 (#3 all time). Needless to say, it had lived up to the hype in terms of sales and critical acclaim.

But does the game warrant all of this acclaim? Is it really the best game ever made? After only 6 hours of playing the game myself, I would have to say that it is a great game but not necessarily the best of all time. The game is definitely the best GTA game ever released. I admire the shear size and attention to detail the game exudes. Things like stopping to pay a toll to go across and bridge and the cops chasing you if you don't is one of those touches. The ability to call a cab from any point while walking the streets and take a realistic virtual cab ride while admiring the city is another. Being able to to actually attend a comedy show and watch a show in real time by the likes of Katt Williams and other big time comedians is yet another. The game world is absolutely phenomenal and completely engrossing. The story is also the best of any GTA game and better than most other games of its type. Voice acting is top-notch and the animation is much improved over previous games. However, I do have several complaints that take away from the experience. One is that the driving is pretty difficult, much more so than previous versions. It is pretty hard for me to drive straight without crashing all over the place and it can get kind of frustrating at times. My other complaint is with the overall graphics. The graphics have many moments of just seeming like a HD version of the previous games. The frame rate suffices but does dip below 30fps often enough to notice it (PS3 version). Also, I'm not a huge fan of the extensive filters applied to the image on the PS3. Overall, its not enough take away from the enjoyment of the game, but I was hoping for a little more.

These are just some of my initial thoughts and impressions after spending a few hours with the game. I'm interested in knowing what some of yours are?

PS3 Secrets Revealed: The PS3 Harddrive Can be Upgraded to Any Size

2008-04-17T23:08:00.000-07:00

Today is more confusing than any other time to be a game console buyer. Since their respective launches, there have been more than 5 different SKUs of the Xbox360 and 4 different SKUs of the PS3. It is annoying, but one of the main criteria that both Sony and Microsoft use to differentiate the SKUs are their HDD sizes. For example, the 360 currently has the Core w/o a HDD, the premium with a 20GB HDD, and the elite with a 120GB HDD. Meanwhile, the PS3 has had a 20GB, 60GB, 40GB, and an 80GB SKU, of which only the 40GB remains on store shelves. So it would seem that the 360 is a better deal since ultimately, it comes with a largest HDD in the 120GB SKU. But there is a fundamental difference between Sony and Microsoft's HDD strategy.

The Xbox360 is a "closed" platform, meaning that only Microsoft designed HDDs built specifically for the Xbox360 can be used in the system. However, the PS3 is an "open" platform meaning (in this context) that the HDD which comes with the system can be swapped out with ANY off-the-shelf 2.5" SATA HDD (the same HDD used in almost all laptops). That's right! So if you feel that 40GB is too small, then you can go to amazon.com, newegg.com, best buy, circuit city or wherever and purchase that 500GB HDD you've been dying for. I purchased a 60GB launch PS3 but now have it outfitted with a 230GB HDD!

Now you may be saying, "but wait how much would a HDD larger than say the 120GB HDD in the 360 cost"? Here is where it gets interesting. As a reference, I purchased a Toshiba 230GB HDD online for a mere $100. Why do I say mere? Well compared to the prices on the Xbox360 it is mere. With the 360, you are limited to using only the Microsoft certified HDDs built for the 360. Currently, there are only 2 options: 20GB and 120GB. But how much is Microsoft charging? Are you sitting down? The 20GB HDD off the shelf has an MSRP of....$99!!! The 120GB HDD costs....$179!!! So yes, I got an 230GB HDD for the same price as the 20GB 360 HDD. Remember that Microsoft charges these crazy prices because they know you have no other choice and if you want a harddrive you have to pick 1 of the 2.

So yeah. Advantage Sony on this one. Keep in mind that the HDD swap would easily take less than 10 minutes for an average person to perform. Please read the PS3 manual for instructions on how to perform the swap. The only tool you will need is a small screw driver. Also, make sure you backup whatever data you want to save to an external device (USB drive, Memory stick, external HDD etc) since the new HDD will have to be formatted by the PS3 and all data will be lost. If anyone has any other questions or want more information about this, feel free to let me know.

PS3 Secrets Revealed: Introduction

2008-04-17T22:56:00.001-07:00

I will start a new series a post called "Ps3 Secrets Revealed" that primarily serve to educate current and future PS3 owners on some of the neat and unprecedented features present in the hardware that they may not know about. The PS3 is easily the most complicated piece of gaming hardware ever released and the amount of things that it can do is staggering. Sony has done a poor job promoting and educating many on its features primarily because there are just too many to manage and discuss. So, that's what I'm here for.

In case you're wondering, No I am not doing this feature because I'm just some biased ignorant Sony lover that wants to brag about the PS3. I can say that I've owned all three of the current generation hardware and currently still own a PS3 and Wii. I waited in the rain for 5 hours on a work day to get a Xbox360 only to be denied! I then purchased it off of ebay for over $200 above the MSRP. Not to mention I thought the PS2 hardware was horrible overall. So, no i'm no fanboy. I'm just a fan of all gaming.

The reasons I'm doing this now for the PS3 are:

Education of the PS3 hardware is an ongoing challenge. The PS3 is complicated and there are so many features and options that most consumers will never even realize what the system can do.
I actually own a PS3 and am familiar with most (if not all) of its many secrets
It is indeed my personal opinion that the PS3 is the best piece of gaming hardware ever released and I think it is cool to share why I think that to be the case. Just my thoughts.

Hopefully, some of you will find the information helpful and interesting!

Nintendo Wii: Fastest Selling System Ever?!?!

2008-04-17T22:23:00.000-07:00

You have to commend Nintendo and what they are achieving this generation with both the Wii and the DS. Here is a company that once dominated the market but spent much of the 90s and 2000s languishing in the shadows of their competitors, including Sony, Sega, and Microsoft. Most thought that Nintendo would fall the way Sega did and drop out of the hardware business after the GameCube. Instead, After over 10 years of playing 2nd and 3rd fiddle, Nintendo is once again dominating the market and the Wii has achieve unprecedented success. Not only is the Wii alone outselling the PS3 and 360 combined on a month-month basis in every major territory around the world, but their brilliant business strategy allows them to be the only hardware company to actually make a profit on every single Wii system sold (chalk it up to the relatively simple and old technology powering the machine). It is one of the greatest comeback stories ever! If there ever was a doubt, just take a look at the official hardware sales numbers from NPD for the month of March:

Hardware Mar-08
Wii 721,000
Nintendo DS 698,000
PlayStation Portable 297,000
Xbox 360 262K,000
PlayStation 3 257,000
PlayStation 2 216,000

Well, it's official! According to vgchartz.com, the Wii has become the fastest console ever in America to sell 10 million units. It achieved this in a mere 70 weeks! To put that in perspective, the current highest selling system of all time, the PS2, took 84 weeks. Note that these numbers are for consoles and do not include handhelds like the GameBoy or DS.

So, the Wii is a bona fide phenomenon. The interesting thing is that it is doing this without much marketing and with no huge games that appeal to the core Nintendo fan. In fact, it is no secret that the biggest complaint against Nintendo continues to be lackluster software. While the quantity of releases for the Wii has been high, only a fraction are deemed playable by most gamers. It is still true that most gamers who brought a Wii rarely play it outside of family or friend events. So who are the people that continue to wait outside for Toys R US and other stores to open every Sunday to buy the system well after a year from launch? And what are they buying it for? To play Wii Sports still? Can't be. I honestly still don't get it. Sure the price point is great and don't get me wrong I expect the Wii to be selling great, perhaps even outselling the PS3 and 360. But to achieve the numbers its achieving every single week since day 1 and not a single hint of slowing down? It is on pace to truly become the fastest and highest selling console of ALL TIME! Everyone in the industry has been saying since mid 07 that "the Wii is just a fad" but that statement is proving not to be true at all. How can this be? What do you guys think?

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue Preview

2008-03-24T22:16:00.000-07:00

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue
Platform: PS3
Develepor: Polyphony Digital
Release Data: 4/15/08
Price: $39.99
Screens:

The next installment of the critically acclaimed Gran Turismo series, which has sold nearly 50 million units to date, is on its way to the PS3 next month. However, there is a catch. The prologue in the title indicates that this is not the final and complete version of GT5. In fact, it's more of a progress report as Polyphony is breaking down the release of GT5 into increments to tide fans over since the scope and development time for the full game would have too long of a wait. Indeed, the existence of this game is smart marketing by Sony to milk one of its biggest franchise on its still young PS3 which has been starved for big games. The first installment came out in December 06 titled Gran Turismo HD concept which was a free demo featuring a single new location to race about 20 cars around with new HD graphics. It looked great and was a great free tease of what GT5 could be on the PS3. Well GT5:Prologue takes us deeper into GT5 for the not so free price of $39.99. So is it worth it?

GT5:Prologue demonstrates many of the new features that has been discussed for Gt5 for a while including an in car view with full interior modeling of individual cars, live guages, and working mirrors (1st in the series), the addition of high end European manufacturers such as Ferrari and Lamborgini (1st for the series), and an online mode complete with online racing, stat tracking, and a TV spectator mode. Prologue will release in North America this April (Japan had it since Oct 07 with less features) with 6 tracks, over 70 cars, 16 player online, and a brand new drift mode which the Japanese version did not feature (see full details here). In typical GT fashion, GT5:prologue will be an absolute showcase for the technical prowess of the Ps3 with 1920x1080p high definition graphics running at 60fps. The car models consist of over 200,000 polygons each and the environments are accurately modeled after real-world locations with glorious HDR lighting. Up to 20 cars with the increased detail can be driving in a single race (previous GTs never had double digit number of cars on screen at once). The physics engine has been overhauled making for even more realistic and accurate handling of each car and the audio has been upgraded in both quantity and fidelity featuring uncompressed 7.1 PCM surround sound.

GT5:prologue looks to be a great treat for fans of cars and previous GT games. Its even better to think that this is not even the finished version of GT5 and almost every aspect of the game will be enhanced by the time its released. Polyphony already promised damage and hinted at weather as additions to the final game. $40 is cheaper than the normal $60 game but is pretty expensive for a "glorified demo". But with online play, 6 courses, 70 cars, and some of the best graphics in gaming today, it may just be worth it.

PS3 1st Year A Failure?

2008-03-24T20:22:00.000-07:00

Never have I seen a gaming system be as widely criticized and hated on as the PS3 between it unveiling back in May 2005 and the end of 2007, a year after it's November 2006 release. Hardcore gamers and gaming press would bad mouth it as if they were paid too, consistently pointing to lack of features compared to the competition, high price, and "No games" as reasons to not buy the system. The criticism went much farther than simply recommending its competitors as the PS3 literally was the laughing stock of the industry and Sony simply could do no right. Many times I've heard of casual people walking into a game store and asking "What about the PS3?" and the clerk responding with a chuckle saying "Nobody's buying it! It's too expensive and has no games. Xbox360 is much better". The impression most had was that the PS3 had a horrible 1st year, with a launch that resulted in its limited hardware not even selling out weeks after release, limited software released, limited online network (compared to Xbox live). and not a single "big" game that could come close to the software released on the Xbox360 like as Gears of War and Halo 3.

No doubt it was a tough 2006-2007 for Sony and things are already looking way up for 2008 (more on this in a future post). But was 2007 really that bad for Sony and the PS3? Should the launch of the PS3 go down in the gaming books as one to remember and laugh at or cry about (depending on which side you're on)? To answer this, we'll look at the hard facts and evaluate this by the most important criteria for gaming hardware: SALES.

Here is a chart showing a comparison between the worldwide sales of the PS3 and Xbox360 in their respective 1st years of availability:

Note:Wii=blue, Xbox360 = green, PS3=red
The origin is the aligned launch dates of each system and the X-axis is month (1 month increments)

Calender Year 2007 Worldwide Totals
PS3 = 7,628,951
Xbox360 = 8,162,707

Both pieces of data are from vgchartz.com and are not official numbers but good approximations.

So what can we gather from these two pieces of data? Let's start with the graph. I'm not including the Wii in this discussion A) because there's no doubt that the Wii is outselling both of its competitors by a sizeable margin and B) given the nature of the hardware systems and their intended audiences, the Wii is not considered a direct competitor to the Xbox360 or Ps3. But it's clear to see that the PS3 sales within its 1st year is virtually identical to that of the Xbox360 for the same duration. In fact, the PS3 is currently selling at a faster pace than the Xbox360 did at the same point as discussed in this article. The 2007 numerical totals are approximations and cannot be taken literally, but we can conclude that the numbers for the PS3 and Xbox360 are very close and virtually equal.

So what does this mean and why is it significant? Well, for one it shows that the PS3 did not have a bad 1st year at all compared its primary competition. In fact, the PS3 is selling on par with the PS2 which 8 years after its release is still selling strong (how strong? How about outselling the Xbox360 for the month of Feb 2008). The PS2 is the highest selling non-handheld system of all time, surpassing the original Nintendo and PS1, so that is a very nice path for the PS3 to be on thus far.

But come on, what's significant about how close these numbers are? Well let's think about this. 2007 was apparently a horrible year for the PS3. The facts are that it was ridiculed by the press and fans alike, its price was way higher than the competition, and there was precious little software to play. All of that was true. Meanwhile, 2007 was arguably the best year for the Xbox360 to date and it was so good that many debate whether any future year for the system will be able to top it. In terms of the number of A quality games released on the system in 2007, the Xbox360 arguably had one of the best years in gaming for any system period. Dozens of games sold more than a million units and rated higher than 90% on the system last year than any other system in recent memory. Blockbusters like Gears of War, Bioshock, Forza 2, Halo 3, Assassin's Creed, and Call of Duty 4 are just a few of the juggernauts the Xbox360 enjoyed last year. If there ever was a time for the Xbox360 to distance itself from the PS3, that would have been it. But....it didn't! Despite favoritism from the press, retailers, and fans, tons of marketing from Microsoft, and a "weak" launch from the PS3, the PS3 still remained about even with it through the year?! What? How?!

Well the key that most people don't take into consideration is that simply, videogames aren't only played in America. While Microsoft (an American company) has enjoyed a pretty sizeable advantage in terms of sales over Sony in America, Sony enjoys a sales advantage is just about every other major territory in the world, including Europe and Japan. Here's some numbers to illustrate the point:

2007 North America:
Xbox360 = 5.2 million
PS3 = 2.7 million

2007 Europe, Australia, and Other
Xbox360 = 2.7 million
PS3 = 3.7 million (PS3 wasn't released in Europe until March 07)

2007 Japan
Xbox360 = 0.2 million
PS3 = 1.2 million

So is the PS3 a failure? Not at all. Is it doing poorly? Not compared to its main competitor and predecessor. Did it meet expectations out the gate? Probably not! The PS3 was a victim of its own hype more than anything else. Was the Xbox360 the better buy for a gamer in 2007? Definitely! But Sony hasn't been #1 for the past 10 years for no reason. After releasing firmware updates monthly to upgrade the system capabilities, dropping the price twice within the 1st year, and releasing some great games towards the end of 2007 the PS3 is riding a steady stream of momentum currently and it looks like its worst days are far behind it. In fact, it outsold the Xbox360 in North America in January and February of 2008. The war is far from over!

Great Time to be a PC Gamer!

2008-03-24T19:28:00.000-07:00

PC gaming has traditionally been a difficult and expensive hobby due to constantly evolving hardware and high cost components (particularly graphic cards). However, the last year or so has seen a nice selection of graphic cards released by both Nvidia and ATI that are not only great performing cards, but present an unprecedented value to the costumer with very low prices.

Nvidia GeForce 8800GT
Released: October 2007
Price: ~$250 (512MB)
Specifications: 8800GT Details

Upon its release, the 8800GT literally changed the PC graphics market overnight. Delivering performance virtually equal to the 8800GTX (Nvidia's second card from the top) but for half the price, you could not find these cards online or at stores for months after its release. Despite its numbering as an 8000 series, this is actually the first card to use Nvidia's G90 cores (all of the other 8000 cards use the G80 core) which features several improvement such as 65nm manufacturing resulting in less heat output and power consumption, and additional video processing logic to enhance Blu-Ray and HD-DVD video playback. This card remains arguably the best overall buy even today and two of these in SLI will outperform any single graphics card on the market for less than the cost of the new nvidia 9800GX2 flagship.

ATI Radeon HD 3870
Released: November 2007
Price: ~$220
Specifications: 3870 Details

Essentially ATI's response to the 8800GT, the HD 3870 is one of the best cards ATI has released in years. While not quite as fast as the 8800GT, it is slightly cheaper and until recently much easier to find than the 8800GT making it quite compelling to consumers wanting quality gaming on a budget. In fact, the HD 3870 become quite popular with gamers and pretty much destroyed Nvidia's then midrange card the 8600GT and 8600GTS. Innovations include 55nm manufacturing process, support for directX 10.1 and PCIe 2.0, and higher CPU and shader clocks speeds than any Nvidia cards close to its price range. The Radeon HD 3870 is still a great buy and for $200 offers performance rivaling cards in the $400-$500 price range.

Nvidia GeForce 9600GT
Released: February 2008
Price: ~$180
Specifications: 9600GT Details

Due to the success of the Radeon HD 3870 and 3850 cards, Nvidia was forced to the respond with a card that can offering compelling performance for less than $200. Their answer was the new GeForce 9600GT, the first 9000 series card released by Nvidia. The fact that the first card in this new series was a budget card and not a flagship as has traditionally been the case for the past few generations illustrates how much the market has changed. With SLI and Crossfire leveraging multiple GPU to increase performance, single monolithic cards are much less attractive today than they once were. The 9600GT is an excellent value with a price well below $200 offering performance within 10-20% of the 8800GT and about equal to the Radeon HD 3870. An SLI configuration with 9600GTs can give any single card a run for its money while still costly much less than the Nvidia and ATI flagships. To give you an idea of the performance this card is delivering at this price, I just added it to my 3 year old Dell desktop featuring a Pentium D processor (yeah that old. We're talking Pentium 4!!) which is obviously going to be a bottleneck with any modern graphics card. Yet, I'm able to run Bioshock (high-end game about 8 months old) at max settings and 1680 x 1050 resolution with well over 40fps! Gaming on a budget? You'll do well with this one.

The HD Format War Is Officially Over: The Winner is Blu-Ray!!

2008-02-26T21:41:00.001-08:00

2008 was not the year for HD-DVD. After only 2 months into the year and a total of only 22 months in the market place, competing format Blu-Ray has claimed a fast and decisive victory. Even though many in the industry believed that the battle was looking to stalemate judging from status of the battle as of the end of 2007, the press releases came steadily beginning in January 2008. Each one delivered one more nail in the coffin of HD-DVD and by mid-February all of the backers of HD-DVD had raised the white flag.

First a bit of review. For those not familiar with the two competing HD formats HD-DVD, backed primarily by Toshiba and Universal Pictures, and Blu-Ray Disc, backed primarily by Sony, Pioneer, and Disney, have been competing for the hearts and minds of consumers to be the legitimate successor to the DVD format. The main advantage of both formats include the upgrade to high definition video and audio with several times more resolution and fidelity than a DVD can ever offer. Since the April 2006 when HD-DVD debuted (followed shortly after by Blu-Ray in June 2006), the two have been engaged in a format war not unlike the VHS vs Betamax war of the 1980s. As some of you may remember, Sony's betamax format lost that war to a technologically inferior product in JVC's VHS. But could history repeat itself? Let's see how the two formats compared in some key areas (Note that this was the state as of the end of 2007):

HD-DVD

Release Date: April 2006
Storage Capacity (SL/DL): 15GB/30GB
Maximum Resolution: 1920 x 1080p
Primary Backer: Toshiba
Consumer Electronics Support: Toshiba, LG, Microsoft
Movie Studio Support: Universal, Warner Bros, Paramount
Pros: Cheaper hardware prices than Blu-Ray, demonstrated more advanced features and interactivity on software releases from day 1.
Cons: Less storage capacity and bandwidth than Blu-Ray, fewer support from both consumer electronic companies and movie studios.

Blu-Ray

Release Date: June 2006
Storage Capacity (SL/DL): 25GB/50GB
Maximum Resolution: 1920 x 1080p
Primary Backer: Sony
Consumer Electronics Support: Sony, Samsung, Pioneer, Sharp, LG, Phillips, Panasonic, Dell
Movie Studio Support: Sony/Columbia, Fox, Disney, MGM, Warner Bros, New Line, Paramount
Pros: Highest storage capacity and bandwidth, more move studio and consumer electronic support, included as standard in Playstation 3, blockbuster video exclusive supporter
Cons: hardware costs more than HD-DVD, software was of subpar quality first few months after release, non-standard features harder and longer to implement available while HD-DVD has all features standard across all hardware and software.

A quick glance shows the rather lopsided support in favor of Blu-Ray, not to mention that while both formats are virtually identical Blu-Ray does have the technological advantage as well. The reality is however that in practice both formats performed virtually identical and co-existence of both on the market ironically did nothing but to stall the jump to HD for most consumers due to confusion. Hollywood and consumers agreed that a single format was in the best interest for all. Well, it seems like we got our wish. Let's recap the announcements and events that led to HD-DVD's "death" in the short time period from Jan08-Feb 08.

The tide started to turn almost overnight when unexpectedly Warner Bros, who had been supporting both formats since the beginning, announced that they would drop HD-DVD support after May 2008. The timing of this event contributed to its impact, coming in early Jan 08, only days before CES 2008(Consumer Electronics Show).
National Geographic announces they will support Blu-Ray exclusively
Netflix announces that it will stop renting HD-DVDs
Best Buy announces that it will begin to "push" Blu-Ray over HD-DVDs to its consumers as the format of choice (while still supporting HD-DVD)
Wal-Mart announces that they will stop selling HD-DVD and support Blu-Ray exlusively
Toshiba announces that they will no longer develop HD-DVD players
Universal studio (finally) announces that they will drop HD-DVD begin supporting Blu-Ray
Paramount (after dropping Blu-Ray only last August) announces that it will drop HD-DVD and support Blu-Ray
Microsoft announces that it will discontinue its HD-DVD add-on for the Xbox360.

Phew! All of that in only a matter of weeks. Surely a quick and uneasy death for HD-DVD. So why did Blu-Ray win so quickly and decisively? Well, I personally always believed that this victory was inevitable for a couple of primary reasons:

SUPPORT! Technology doesn't matter to the average consumer and neither does how cool the box art looks. The bottom line is Blu-Ray has had the vast majority of consumer electronic and movie studio support since before the formats were even released. Surely, Universal and Toshiba cannot take on the world and win alone. This is also the reason why the technologically superior Betamax lost to the inferior VHS.
The Playstation 3. Consider this, to date there are approximately 10 millions PS3 in homes worldwide. That's 10 million blu-ray players. Hardware drives software so once those new PS3 owners with those shiny HDTVs realize that their game console can play hi-def movies, they will look to buy content. Thus Blu-Ray software has been outselling HD-DVD by about a 2:1 factor for the majority of 2007. In comparison, combined sales of all HD-DVD players and the Xbox360 HD-DVD add-on totaled only 750,000 as of Nov 2007.

Seems pretty clear cut to me. What do you guys think?

Idealdomain Rejuvenated !!!!

2008-02-26T21:28:00.000-08:00

Wow! Well it's been nearly 7 months since I've updated this blog and that time has finally come. Grad school and life in general has definitely kept me busy, but starting now I will be posting much more regularly about the numerous topics that have risen in the interim period. Of course, I will also talk about newer topics as they come along. Hope you enjoy the read, find out something useful, and have fun!!

SHOCKER: Paramount to drop Blu-Ray Support!!!

2007-08-21T10:01:00.000-07:00

In a surprise announcement yesterday, Paramount (including Dreamworks and other subsidiaries) announced that they will be supporting HD-DVD exclusively effective immediately. At a time when Blu-Ray has been consistently outselling HD-DVD 2:1 throughout 2007 and many people thought that the war was drawing to a close with Blu-Ray pulling away, this announcement has puzzled both fans and industry folks alike. Many fans are upset because this assures that the format war will be prolonged and newer consumers will be even more confused about the HD formats.

Here's the news report from HighDefDigest.com:

According to a just-issued AP report, Paramount Pictures has announced it will exclusively support HD DVD, dropping its support of the Blu-ray format.
It's a move few predicted, and it's a particular surprise given the Blu-ray format's 2-to-1 lead over HD DVD in disc sales over the first half of 2007.

According to the AP article, beginning with 'Shrek the Third,' Paramount and all of its subsidiaries (including DreamWorks Pictures, Paramount Vantage, Nickelodeon Movies and MTV Films) will release its next-gen releases on HD DVD only.
"Part of our vision is to aggressively extend our movies beyond the theater, and deliver the quality and features that appeal to our audience," said Brad Grey, chairman and chief executive of Paramount Pictures. "I believe HD DVD is not only the affordable high quality choice for consumers, but also the smart choice for Paramount."

Here's is the response from the Blu-Ray camp:

In its statement, the BDA expresses what can only be described as bewilderment at why Paramount and sister studio DreamWorks would choose to exclusively support HD DVD at a time when the sales gulf between the two formats seems to be so clearly in Blu-ray's favor.

"The decision seems oddly timed given Blu-ray's tremendous momentum both with consumers and with retail," said Andy Parsons, Chairman, Blu-ray Disc Association US Promotions Committee. "Blu-ray title sales continue to outpaceHD-DVD sales by nearly a 2 to 1 margin, and major retailers have expressed a strong preference for Blu-ray.

"Moreover, the price delta between HD DVD and Blu-ray players has been greatly reduced in the past few months, a trend that is on its way to eliminating any perceived cost advantage the HD DVD format has claimed to have. Under these circumstances, we can only imagine what could have enticed Paramount to walk away from a format that is clearly selling significantly more software than the HD-DVD format."

There are however a few interesting catches. Later today it was revealed that the HD-DVD group apparently paid Paramount $150 million dollars to secure exclusivity and that the deal will only last 18 months at most. In addition, Steven Spielberg's films are excluded from the deal since he does not approve of the deal and is a supporter of the Blu-Ray format (Spielberg is technically under the Dreamworks umbrella which he co-founded). In fact, the 1st and only Spielberg movie to release on an HD format in 2007 will be Close Encounters of the Third Kind which is being distributed by Sony exclusively for Blu-Ray. Confused Yet??

For more information, check with

Current State of Video Game War: Nintendo Reclaims Its Glory Days?

2007-08-02T21:32:00.000-07:00

From both a business as well as a technology perspective, the video game industry is treading in unprecedented waters. For the first time in its short history, the industry has 3 viable systems competing against each other and each one different enough from the others to carve its own audience. Since 1995 with the release of the Playstation, aka PSX, Sony has been the dominant force in the industry. Up until that point, Nintendo had been the prominent company in gaming with the successes of the Nintendo, Super Nintendo, and Game Boy. However, Nintendo clearly lost its luster in the Playstation era with neither the N64 nor the Gamecube able to compete with the Sony platforms. It may have taken 12 years, but Nintendo is finally back on top dominating the hardware and software sales charts across the globe. The DS is shaping up to be the fastest selling video game system of all time (absolutely dominating Japan where it is perceived similar to a cell phone in America...you just have to have one) and the Wii is unquestionably a bona fide success. Let's examine the situation; below is the latest sales (approximation) for all platforms in the U.S and Japan:

Japan
Hardware - This Week | Last Week | YTD | LTD
1. NDS - 150,584 | 154,504 | 4,557,874 | 18,563,553
2. WII - 77,169 | 86,786 | 2,303,940 | 3,223,583
3. PSP - 35,068 | 32,894 | 1,221,633 | 5,753,762
4. PS3 - 28,829 | 12,187 | 560,131 | 1,017,689
5. PS2 - 11,757 | 14,059 | 476,086 | 20,630,945
6. 360 - 3,872 | 2,664 | 130,431 | 395,133
7. GBA - 532 | 461 | 42,830 | 15,340,909
8. NGC - 102 | 131 | 8,932 | 4,178,400

North America
Hardware Weekly Total
DS 140,151 (-4%) 13,730,938
Wii 95,171 (-3%) 3,974,505
PSP 59,483 (-9%) 8,864,934
PS2 54,701 (-10%) 44,524,847
PS3 43,498 (-4%) 1,738,147
X360 34,174 (+5%) 6,607,403
GBA 23,725 (-0%) 40,768,173
GC 1,656 (-2%) 12,697,057
XBOX 11 (-58%) 15,933,106

Global Totals:
X360 = 10.27 million
Wii = 9.88 million
PS3 = 4.01 million
PSP = 22.66 million
DS = 46.45 million

So what do we have here? Well, in short NINTENDO OWNS JAPAN. Nintendo hardware accounts for more than 75% of all hardware sold in the past week in the Japan. In addition, if you were to look at the top 50 selling games in Japan for last week, you will see that over 40 of them were either on the DS or Wii (only 8 were Wii games and nearly 35 were for the DS). The DS is a social phenomenon in Japan. Its not a kid's toy there in the least. Professionals can be seen playing it on their bus or train ride to work, parents may bring it out while they wait to pick up their kids from schools, and a high school student without a DS may be expelled for being "too different". It's simply unbelievable and most in the industry would agree that for the next few years, Nintendo will remain untouched in Japan.

That's not to say that no other systems are doing well in their own right. The PS2 is clearly past its prime there but has had a great run with nearly 20 million units sold since 2000. The PSP is also doing fairly well with a healthy 35000 units last week alone. The PS3 has been suffering since its release averaging less than 10000 units a week. The primary reason being that there was no software for the system that the Japanese gamers were really interested in to help justify its high cost. However, that all changed this past week with the release of Hot Shots Golf 5, an extremely popular franchise in Japan. The PS3 sales spiked significantly the past two weeks as a result, with a nice 30000 units sold last week. The situation should only get better as there is a host of excellent software slated to be released by the end of the year. The Xbox360 continues to be a non-issue, performing even more poorly than the 1st Xbox did in Japan (It's been suggested that the X360 still has not sold its initial shipment launched back in November 2005). Apparently, the Japanese do not like game systems from American companies. Go figure!

In America, while not quite as lopsided, the story is very much the same. The interesting thing to note is that the PSP and DS battle is much closer. But the real story with these numbers is that the PS3 has handily outsold the X360 last week. In fact, following the $100 price drop to $499 earlier in July, the PS3 sales have nearly doubled in the US and it has outsold the X360 every week in July except the first week (This represents the 1st time that the PS3 has outsold the X360 in the US since its release). With the successful E3 that Sony had not to mention the flood of games coming to the system this Fall, expect the PS3 sales to really ramp up as the year moves on. The X360 has been steady for most of 2007 with slight decreases in recent weeks. Can this indicate that the X360 has indeed reached its apex in sales?

In summary, with its 1 year head start the X360 is technically still the leader in terms of next-generation hardware (X360, PS3, Wii) sales globally. The PS3 is on the rise and has probably seen its worst days. While its interesting to see a Sony system actually lag behind the competition, its important to remember that the PS3 is not selling poorly by any previous standard, including that of the highest selling system to date (PS2). The Wii is STILL sold out everywhere in the U.S. I have STILL yet to see a Wii box on a store shelf. In fact, with only 8 months on the market, the Wii is a mere several hundred thousands units away from surpassing the X360 in global sales (the X360 has been out for 20 months). This is BIG! That will likely happen in the next few weeks making the Wii the #1 next-generation system. WOW! Meanwhile, at this rate you can expect the PS3 to surpass the X360 before the end of the 2007 fiscal year (ending March 2008). Mark my words!

First BIOSHOCK Reviews: Looking Amazing

2007-08-01T07:58:00.001-07:00

Here are the first scores that Bioshock is getting from the gaming press:

5/5 Stars in Alternative Press

95% in PC Gamer UK

98% in Gamers

10/10 in OXM.

It looks like Bioshock could seriously be a contender for Game of the Year. In a year where Halo 3, Crysis, Mass Effect, Super Mario Galaxy, and Grand Theft Auto IV are coming out, that will be quite an accomplishment. I will definitely try to get this game, for the PC of course.

My "1408" Review: Best Psychological Horror Movie in Years?

2007-08-01T07:10:00.001-07:00

I won't even try to hide it...I really enjoyed 1408. No, it's not a terribly original movie and no it isn't the best produced movie I've seen. Yet, the sheer premise and acting make the movie entertaining and probably one of the best horror films I've seen in recent years.

The film starts out simple enough. John Cusack plays a horror book author whose popularity is one the decline. Ironically, his inspiration for this stories are from real life haunted house visits which he does in hopes of actually encountering a real-life paranormal phenomenon. However, he is disappointed by the fact that in his many years of trying, he has yet to experience anything resembling a real ghost or an actual hunted house. Later, he hears word of yet another haunted location at a NY hotel in room 1408. After demanding to stay in the room despite being warned not to many times, he will soon realize that 1408 was the real haunting story he has been searching for all those years.

What makes this film work is that it doesn't take itself too seriously nor does it put on any airs. John Cusack's character is one to which many in the audience can actually relate. People want to believe that ghosts are real as the thought is exciting, but the reality is that most people feel indifferent with horror movies as a result of their unbelievable stories. But in 1408, Cusack is an extension of the audience where he (like you usually) spends most of the movie attempting to disprove the "hauntings" going on around him. His acting is great combining realism, sheer fright, and undeniable humor (there are many laugh at loud moments in the film). When the weird things starts happening in the room, you (like Cusack) will be wracking your brain to figure out if it is real or not. By the end of the movie, you WILL be very uneasy. The psychological horror in this film is among the highest I've experienced. The experiences that Cusack goes through are tangible and seemingly grounded in reality, which is what makes the horror in this film grab you. This was the only time I can remember me praying that I will never have to experience anything like that in my life as I was leaving the theater. If you ever wondered what HELL could be like, check this film out.

Overall, this film is a sleeper hit for 2007. Samuel L. Jackson was OK in this film but an actor with his credits is definitely not needed for this role. Cusack really made the film work and the visual style adds much to the realism of the environment. If you like mind games and psychological horror films from the likes of Hitchcock, you will enjoy this film.

Highly Recommended!

Movie Ratings & Box Office Earning From Rottentomatoes.com

2007-07-03T15:16:00.000-07:00

Here are the latest ratings and box office performances from www.rottentomatoes.com:

Theaters-New Releases

95% Ratatouille
$47.0M
77% Live Free or Die Hard
$33.4M
23% Evan Almighty
$15.1M
77% 1408
$10.7M
36% The Fantastic Four:...
$9.1M

Theaters-Opening This Week

61% Transformers
11% License To Wed
83% Rescue Dawn
64% Joshua
64% Introducing The Dwights

Theaters-Coming Soon

86% Harry Potter and the O...
7/11
13% Captivity
7/13
The Strangers
7/13
90% Sunshine
7/20
I Now Pronounce You Ch...
7/20

It looks like Pixar has once again struck gold with this year's Ratatouille. It's not making a tremendous amount of money, but with reviews that good it's sure to have longevity at the box office. Also, it looks like Transformers isn't horrible after all!

Gamespot's 2007 GPU roundup

2007-07-03T15:12:00.000-07:00

www.gamespot.com has posted their annual comprehensive GPU roundup. It gives a great overview of all relevant graphics cards available today seperated into four categories: high-end, performance, mainstream, and budget. The article is located at the following link:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6173135/index.html?tag=topslot;title;2&om_act=convert&om_clk=topslot

I'm going to go and start saving up for that Geforce 8800 Ultra SLI system for $1350. Actually, the real savings is going to be for the 900W power supply that I'll need to power them!