Posted by GMAN on 09/28/05 07:31

In article <Z5h_e.371376$_o.352328@attbi_s71>, "Quantum Leaper" <leaper@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Jay G. wrote:
>> elrous0@pop.uky.edu wrote:
>>> Jay G. wrote:
>>>> With it incorporated into PS3, what's going to happen is that a lot
>>>> of consumers are going to have a Blu-Ray player in the house almost
>>>> by default, while getting a HD-DVD player would be a seperate
>>>> decision. The PS2 was for a lot of people their first DVD player
>>>> as well.
>>>
>>> Yep, this gives blu-ray a major advantage, particularly if the PS3
>>> really takes off in sales and will play blu-ray movies right out of
>>> the
>>> box (I'm not sure if they've confirmed that yet).
>>>
>>> MS, on the other hand, is taking a considerable risk by rushing the
>>> Xbox 360 to market with just a standard DVD drive (and multiple
>>> configurations, one without even a hard drive).
>>
>> Yeah, multiple X-box 360 configurations is going to be problematical.
>> Consumers are use to being able to play any game for a system
>> in their machine. With multiple configurations, gamers are going
>> to have to check the "system requirements" of a game to see
>> if it'll work on their 360. Of course, PS2 had something like this
>> with the network connector and harddrive, but those were considered
>> more optional then than they are now.
>>
>The games will be programmed most likely for no Hard drive and a standard
>DVD which is more than big enough for todays games, most don't even come
>close to using the whole disk, unless their is a lot of FMV on the disk.
>If game companies do support the Hard drive, it will be because MS
>requirement for the license for the game.


Dejavu!, Didnt Bill gates claim the same thing about not ever needing more
than 640k of ram?


>Also some companies are worried about what the Next Generation system will
>require, since the game Sony, MS and Nintendo might want, may require alot
>more man power to produce. The bigger and fancier the games are the more
>it take to develop them in the first place.
>

[Back to original message]