Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lasereth
Can you imagine booting up your PS2 for the first time on the launch day and seeing SSX look like a PS1 game? I'd puke.
|
You forget that there was an 7 or 8 year gap between the two systems. We're talking about about half of that. There haven't been that many breakthroughs in computer hardware since then. Refer to this handy chart for a comparison:
This chart isn't completely accurate (I probably didn't even get the release years right) but it's pretty damn close. By analyzing the chart (which is of course made of consumer-ready parts) we can see an increase of 6 times the processor power, 4 times the graphics power, 16 times the RAM capacity, and the addition of a DVD-ROM drive between 1994 and 2001 (There may have been 128 MB GPUs at PS2s release date). Between 2001 and now the increases are as follows: 3.5x CPU, 4x GPU, 4x RAM, 3.25x DVD-ROM. I'm not even counting in vital stuff like GPU speed, FSB speed, RAM transfer speed, processor cache size, and improvemens in overall component performance.
So, I think it's pretty safe to say that technology developed much more between PS1 and PS2 than Xbox and 360. Hardware performance will only increase slightly (about the difference between Xbox and PS2, which, based on sales, people don't care much about), so game makers can't rely as heavily on hardware to make games look better. They will have to invent new software abilities (think of bump mapping, real mode, normal mapping, and the like) to enhance graphics. I think gamers care more about a strong games library than anything else (think PS2 vs. Xbox). If Microsoft can promote their big franchises/exclusives (Halo, Forza, Elder Scrolls, Splinter Cell, Project Gotham, Unreal, Perfect Dark, Ninja Gaiden) and maybe grab some good new licenses (aquiring Sega licenses comes to mind) they can beat out Playstation.