Dr. D
03-09-2006, 06:54 AM
Due to this year being the chaos fest that is the release of 2 new gaming platforms, and the recent release of the XB 360, I thought it would be a good idea to brief you all on what to expect from each platform.
Xbox 360: Nov 22 was a day that many looked forward to for a long time. Microsoft had a successful launch of it's newest console: The Xbox 360. Powered by three custom IBM 3.2 ghz cpu's, it has a somewhat impressive graphic displaying capacity.
ATI has stepped in and produced a custom made gpu (graphics processing unit) that runs at a rather nice 500 mhz.
It has a somewhat disapointing amount of system memory though. Only 512 mb's of ram. That may not sound like a small amount, but when you consider that both the cpu's and the gpu both share those precious megs, it doesn't sound as impressive.
Unlike Sony, Microsoft has elected to use the soon to be extinct DVD format for games. While this means that it will be compatible with everything that you currently have in your house, it isn't quite the bleeding edge technology that we were led to believe by Microsoft. Simply put, current gen games ALREADY are pushing the limits of what you can store on a DVD. What does this mean? That for the Xbox 360, the games may not be as big as they will be on other systems. Or perhaps, you may be buying multi disc titles.
If you live out in the boonies, you may find that the Xbox 360 is not the console for you. The 360 makes EXTENSIVE use of broadband, not only for online gaming, but also for playing your old Xbox 1 games. When you put a current gen title in the next gen 360 it searches the hard drive (which you NEED to play Xbox 1 titles, this is not optional) for the drivers necessary to emulate the title on itself, if they are not present, it searches the internet for the drivers. Yes, you read right, EMULATE. Due to the Xbox 1 and the Xbox 360 using different gpu's, the 360 has to run software to run your game of Halo, Fable, KOTOR, etc...
Also worth noting is the fact that broadband is also a requirement for FUTURE games. Why, you ask? Patches. As in bug fixes. Think about the implications of that for a moment. Done? Okay, let me explain it for you further.
It used to be that when you purchased a console game, you never had to worry about bugs, crashes, and other unpleasantries (which were the plague of PC gamers everywhere), it just worked flawlessly for the most part. Not anymore. The problem is that next gen games will have more problems due to their increasing complexity. Microsoft has decided to fix your game AFTER you buy them, not before. Remind you of anything? How about Windows? Yep. Expect similar updates to not only your games but perhaps the 360 itself. If you live in an area where you cannot get broadband (dsl, cable, T1, etc) then you will be screwed. Picture it, you pop in that brand new Halo 3, boot up the console and BAM! Your game crashes. You have to download an update. Not a problem if you have high-speed internet, but those folks stuck with dial-up will be PISSED.
There are rumored plans to set up kiosk's in some major retail chains to address such problems, but no solid progress has yet been made. Perhaps it will be soon if not already.
On a positive note, it has what is by far the best online multiplayer service that has been developed. If you are an online gamer, you will be in paradise with Xbox Live.
There you have it. The major issues surrounding the Xbox 360. Here is a summary of the article:
Strengths:
Currently the only next-gen console available.
Good 3rd party support for future titles.
Backwards compatibility with some Xbox games.
Hands down the best multiplayer strategy and implementation of said strategy.
Weaknesses:
Being the first next-gen console out, it will be out powered by the competition.
Hardly a game worth playing on it right now.
Limited backwards compatibility with Xbox games
Confusing and costly purchase for some. The fact that there are two systems available for purchase (The $299 Core System and the $399 One You Should Get System) confuses many people on which of the two they need.
Doesn't have the best 3rd party title support (Compared with Sony).
Consumer reported bugs, crashes, and defects in the first batch sold.
A sometimes over-whelming menu system for some.
Still uses the DVD format.
Too much dependance on broadband internet connections.
Now, let's turn our attention to the Playstation 3.
With the release of the original Sony Playstation, the videogame market changed forever. It became the one of the most popular consoles of all time. Nearly everybody had one. It had high quality games, rather nice graphics (for the time), and the largest 3rd party support. It made videogaming popular and accessible.
The Playstation 2 only improved on Sony's record. It boasts one of the largest library's of games ever. It was not only a solid next gen system, but it immediately had a library of PS1 games due to the very smart move of backwards compatibility. It also played DVD's right out of it's box. For many people, including myself, it became the main avenue of entertainment in the home. Boasting impressive graphics and an even larger 3rd party support, it has gone down in history as the console that launched such titles as Grand Theft Auto, Ratchet & Clank, God of War, and countless others.
Now, Sony attempts to repeat it's success with the Playstation 3. Let's start with what's under the hood shall we?
Perhaps the most mentioned feature of the PS3 is the mysterious "Cell" processor. Designed in conjunction with IBM, the Cell processor boasts some impressive abilities. If it lives up to them, it will change the face of not only console gaming, but also PC gaming. It is said to be a powerhouse of processing and is said to be generations ahead of anything else in console gaming. However those claims have yet to be seen in full detail. But Sony and IBM stand firmly behind the power of the PS3 and they are not companies known for disappointing.
What about graphics? The PS3 has a RSX processor running the "looks" department.
The "Reality Synthesizer" as it is known, promises some rather nice looking titles that will blow you away. It is planned to run at 550 mhz, a bit faster than the Xbox 360. Faster means better.
The issue of memory raises it's ugly head again. The PS3 has a shockingly low amount of ram planned. A paltry 256 mb. Before you hold your head down and cry, remember that the Playstation in both of it's previous iterations has been the weakest console as far as resources go. And look at the success that they have enjoyed. There's no reason to think that it will affect the PS3 any worse. Although I would love to see a console with a gig or more of ram, it probably won't happen until the next next-gen consoles sometime around 2011.
What about the storage media? Sony has decided to try a rather promising bit of technology called Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray disc's are much like DVD's. Except that they can in theory hold as much as 200 GB. Read it again. 200 Gigabytes. While the first generation of Blu-Ray's will probably hold no more than 27 Gig on a single layer disc, it is nice to know that the technology certainly has room to grow. On a side note dual layer DVD's can only hold as much as 8.5 Gig on a single side. And yes, it will be compatible with most disc's (e.g. CD-ROM, CDR+W, DVD, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD+R)
Backwards compatibility checks in as a big YES. Expect it to play all of your PS2 games with out the need of software updates or patches, unlike the Xbox 360. However, it is still unknown if it will play your old PS1 games. While it seems likely, don't hold your breath. Perhaps instead of asking whether or not it will play your old PS1 games, a better question would be "Are there ANY old PS1 games still worth playing?".
Online gaming checks in as a big MAYBE. Sony still has not laid down a solid plan of an online gaming community. If they manage to even come close to Microsoft in this department, expect it to dominate the market.
Strengths:
A solid partnership between IBM and Sony makes for a solid console.
The best 3rd party support of all consoles.
Backwards compatibility.
Promising technology driving your gaming experience to new heights.
Ease of use, much like the PS2 and PS1.
Weaknesses:
Unproven technology.
No concrete multiplayer community plans.
Has lost the race to release the first next-gen console, and has some catching up to do.
And now, finally: The Nintendo Revolution.
Frankly, no specific details have been released about Nintendo's upcoming console.
However several interesting details have come from the innovative company.
-The Revolution will use DVD type storage media. It will play DVD's as well, but probably not out of the box. Imagine something like the kit you had to buy for the Xbox 1.
-It will be backwards compatible with Gamecube games.
-Probably the most exciting news is the fact that Nintendo is planning to release it's entire library of games through an online service for play on your Revolution. Whether this will be free or through a fee based service remains to be seen. Most likely it will be hitting your wallet some way or another.
-Perhaps the most confusing aspect of it is the controller. Resembling a TV remote, it is motion activated and is implemented into gameplay however the game designer wants. Imagine playing a first-person shooter and instead of moving a stick up to look up, you simply angle the controller up and the action on the screen reflects what you do. If that sounds too unorthodox for you (it does for me) then there are well-founded rumors that Nintendo is planning to release a shell controller that you slip the original Revolution into and use it like a typical game controller. Let us hope.
Since no specific tech info has been released, there really isn't any room for too much speculation. Sorry.
Now to summarize the upcoming year of gaming.
What console will win the war? Personally, I suspect that Sony will win because of a number of factors.
1-Name. The name alone will sell the console. Everybody and their cousin know what a Playstation is.
2-3rd Party Software. This makes or breaks a console. Simply put, more games are available for the PS2 than any other console on the market. And all of those developers have signed on to make games for the PS3. The numbers say that Sony will win this area of sales.
3-Hardware/Software Sony has poured a LOT of money into making the PS3 the system to own. They are very determined to win. They have done so in the past and there is no significant reason to doubt them. They are also leaving a lot of room for expansion with the Blu-Ray Technology. DVD's have gone as far as they can go in terms of storage and reliability. Blu-Ray is brand spankin' new and can only get better from here on out. If designers take advantage of this technology and take their games to the next level, Microsoft and Nintendo won't fade away, but they won't dominate the market. Also worth noting that RPG's make up a very large portion of Sony's software. RPGer's are not to be underestimated. Add a few First Person Shooters to that mix and you have yourself a solid contender.
But what about the Xbox 360? Does it stand a chance? Most certainly. They have a very good chance of winning the battle.
1-Proven technology. Unlike Sony, Microsoft has chosen to stick with what works. As such, their console has already shown a strong following.
2-Multiplayer. Everybody who has played Xbox Live knows that it is light years ahead of anything that Sony has done. Everybody loves playing against other people across the nation. Microsoft has established themselves as the company to bring that to you. In spades.
3-Software. One word sums up the reason to own a 360: Halo. Halo has come out of nowhere to be an undenialble success. The single player is very good, but it outshines anything else in multiplayer. Other notable titles include Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, for the RPG folks out there this is the reason to buy a 360. Paying $400 for a console to play Oblivion is a lot cheaper than spending upwards of $700 for a PC to play it decently.
And what about Nintendo? Nintendo has as of lately survived mainly because of their excellent 1st party software. They are very good innovators as well. This would be a good thing, except for one thing. They try too hard. Sometimes it works, like with the Gameboy. Sometimes it kinda works, like the Gamecube. Othertimes it just falls flat on its face, Virtual Boy anyone? The biggest thing standing in Nintendo's way is the controller for the Revolution. It is scaring a lot of developers away from the console. Nintendo would do a lot better if they tried to do the typical console thing. Trying to change the industry doesn't work well if the industry isn't ready for change. Perhaps the best thing going for them, aside from their in-house titles, is the library of old games the Revolution will be able to play. This may in fact be the one thing that keeps it alive.
What else is there to say? That a console being released first is by no means a declaration of victory. Remember the Dreamcast? It was revolutionary at the time. However despite it's online gaming community, solid library, and popularity, Sony shut it down. So badly in fact that Sega quit the hardware market and went solely to software development.
The 360 has the advantage for now. If they have a solid number of QUALITY titles available, then they will hold their own. But the road so far has been anything but smooth for Microsoft. Management changes, software delays, hardware problems, dissatisfaction, and other factors do not shine a favorable light upon their products. The fact that it will continue to be updated with patches makes me seriously consider not owning one.
They also have confused a LOT of people with which of the two systems they need. If you don't get the right one, you can spend a lot more than you want to. They also are using technology that while it works, is not as good as you might expect from a next gen system. And finally, the games for it don't look much better than really good Xbox 1 titles. You would think that they would look a lot better than they do.
Sony has all the numbers in their favor. Make no mistake, a few quality titles for a console will keep the system alive. But having a lot of them will make the system the one to own. Whether or not the same games are released for other systems doesn't change the fact that they are often out first on Sony's console. For the hardcore gamers out there, that makes all the difference in the world. And Sony's next gen games look a LOT better than anything out of Microsofts camp.
Also worth noting Sony has a lot more room on the Blu-Ray discs for more game content. What does that mean? That Sony will have a lot more exclusive titles. It's simple math really, you can make a huge game that can only fit on Sony's discs. How do you fit all that on a disc that is significantly smaller and outdated?
The argument that the PS2 has had a lot of games on it that are available on Gamecube and Xbox is true. For current gen consoles only, that is. Once the PS3 comes out, that argument will be no longer valid. Why? The Xbox 1 and PS2 both use DVD's which hold the same amount of stuff on them, regardless of which console they are released on. Let me prove my point further:
Take the Resident Evil 4 re-release for the PS2. Originally the game was only for Gamecube. Due to the larger disc size, Capcom was able to add a SIGNIFICANT amount of extra gameplay that could not have fit on the tiny discs that Nintendo uses. In fact the Gamecube had to split the game up into 2 discs, whereas the PS2 was able to fit the entire original game on 1 disc PLUS the bonus content. The same principle will apply to the PS3 and it's large storage media. The cross-console release of games will not be as prevalent as it once was.
Xbox 360: Nov 22 was a day that many looked forward to for a long time. Microsoft had a successful launch of it's newest console: The Xbox 360. Powered by three custom IBM 3.2 ghz cpu's, it has a somewhat impressive graphic displaying capacity.
ATI has stepped in and produced a custom made gpu (graphics processing unit) that runs at a rather nice 500 mhz.
It has a somewhat disapointing amount of system memory though. Only 512 mb's of ram. That may not sound like a small amount, but when you consider that both the cpu's and the gpu both share those precious megs, it doesn't sound as impressive.
Unlike Sony, Microsoft has elected to use the soon to be extinct DVD format for games. While this means that it will be compatible with everything that you currently have in your house, it isn't quite the bleeding edge technology that we were led to believe by Microsoft. Simply put, current gen games ALREADY are pushing the limits of what you can store on a DVD. What does this mean? That for the Xbox 360, the games may not be as big as they will be on other systems. Or perhaps, you may be buying multi disc titles.
If you live out in the boonies, you may find that the Xbox 360 is not the console for you. The 360 makes EXTENSIVE use of broadband, not only for online gaming, but also for playing your old Xbox 1 games. When you put a current gen title in the next gen 360 it searches the hard drive (which you NEED to play Xbox 1 titles, this is not optional) for the drivers necessary to emulate the title on itself, if they are not present, it searches the internet for the drivers. Yes, you read right, EMULATE. Due to the Xbox 1 and the Xbox 360 using different gpu's, the 360 has to run software to run your game of Halo, Fable, KOTOR, etc...
Also worth noting is the fact that broadband is also a requirement for FUTURE games. Why, you ask? Patches. As in bug fixes. Think about the implications of that for a moment. Done? Okay, let me explain it for you further.
It used to be that when you purchased a console game, you never had to worry about bugs, crashes, and other unpleasantries (which were the plague of PC gamers everywhere), it just worked flawlessly for the most part. Not anymore. The problem is that next gen games will have more problems due to their increasing complexity. Microsoft has decided to fix your game AFTER you buy them, not before. Remind you of anything? How about Windows? Yep. Expect similar updates to not only your games but perhaps the 360 itself. If you live in an area where you cannot get broadband (dsl, cable, T1, etc) then you will be screwed. Picture it, you pop in that brand new Halo 3, boot up the console and BAM! Your game crashes. You have to download an update. Not a problem if you have high-speed internet, but those folks stuck with dial-up will be PISSED.
There are rumored plans to set up kiosk's in some major retail chains to address such problems, but no solid progress has yet been made. Perhaps it will be soon if not already.
On a positive note, it has what is by far the best online multiplayer service that has been developed. If you are an online gamer, you will be in paradise with Xbox Live.
There you have it. The major issues surrounding the Xbox 360. Here is a summary of the article:
Strengths:
Currently the only next-gen console available.
Good 3rd party support for future titles.
Backwards compatibility with some Xbox games.
Hands down the best multiplayer strategy and implementation of said strategy.
Weaknesses:
Being the first next-gen console out, it will be out powered by the competition.
Hardly a game worth playing on it right now.
Limited backwards compatibility with Xbox games
Confusing and costly purchase for some. The fact that there are two systems available for purchase (The $299 Core System and the $399 One You Should Get System) confuses many people on which of the two they need.
Doesn't have the best 3rd party title support (Compared with Sony).
Consumer reported bugs, crashes, and defects in the first batch sold.
A sometimes over-whelming menu system for some.
Still uses the DVD format.
Too much dependance on broadband internet connections.
Now, let's turn our attention to the Playstation 3.
With the release of the original Sony Playstation, the videogame market changed forever. It became the one of the most popular consoles of all time. Nearly everybody had one. It had high quality games, rather nice graphics (for the time), and the largest 3rd party support. It made videogaming popular and accessible.
The Playstation 2 only improved on Sony's record. It boasts one of the largest library's of games ever. It was not only a solid next gen system, but it immediately had a library of PS1 games due to the very smart move of backwards compatibility. It also played DVD's right out of it's box. For many people, including myself, it became the main avenue of entertainment in the home. Boasting impressive graphics and an even larger 3rd party support, it has gone down in history as the console that launched such titles as Grand Theft Auto, Ratchet & Clank, God of War, and countless others.
Now, Sony attempts to repeat it's success with the Playstation 3. Let's start with what's under the hood shall we?
Perhaps the most mentioned feature of the PS3 is the mysterious "Cell" processor. Designed in conjunction with IBM, the Cell processor boasts some impressive abilities. If it lives up to them, it will change the face of not only console gaming, but also PC gaming. It is said to be a powerhouse of processing and is said to be generations ahead of anything else in console gaming. However those claims have yet to be seen in full detail. But Sony and IBM stand firmly behind the power of the PS3 and they are not companies known for disappointing.
What about graphics? The PS3 has a RSX processor running the "looks" department.
The "Reality Synthesizer" as it is known, promises some rather nice looking titles that will blow you away. It is planned to run at 550 mhz, a bit faster than the Xbox 360. Faster means better.
The issue of memory raises it's ugly head again. The PS3 has a shockingly low amount of ram planned. A paltry 256 mb. Before you hold your head down and cry, remember that the Playstation in both of it's previous iterations has been the weakest console as far as resources go. And look at the success that they have enjoyed. There's no reason to think that it will affect the PS3 any worse. Although I would love to see a console with a gig or more of ram, it probably won't happen until the next next-gen consoles sometime around 2011.
What about the storage media? Sony has decided to try a rather promising bit of technology called Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray disc's are much like DVD's. Except that they can in theory hold as much as 200 GB. Read it again. 200 Gigabytes. While the first generation of Blu-Ray's will probably hold no more than 27 Gig on a single layer disc, it is nice to know that the technology certainly has room to grow. On a side note dual layer DVD's can only hold as much as 8.5 Gig on a single side. And yes, it will be compatible with most disc's (e.g. CD-ROM, CDR+W, DVD, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD+R)
Backwards compatibility checks in as a big YES. Expect it to play all of your PS2 games with out the need of software updates or patches, unlike the Xbox 360. However, it is still unknown if it will play your old PS1 games. While it seems likely, don't hold your breath. Perhaps instead of asking whether or not it will play your old PS1 games, a better question would be "Are there ANY old PS1 games still worth playing?".
Online gaming checks in as a big MAYBE. Sony still has not laid down a solid plan of an online gaming community. If they manage to even come close to Microsoft in this department, expect it to dominate the market.
Strengths:
A solid partnership between IBM and Sony makes for a solid console.
The best 3rd party support of all consoles.
Backwards compatibility.
Promising technology driving your gaming experience to new heights.
Ease of use, much like the PS2 and PS1.
Weaknesses:
Unproven technology.
No concrete multiplayer community plans.
Has lost the race to release the first next-gen console, and has some catching up to do.
And now, finally: The Nintendo Revolution.
Frankly, no specific details have been released about Nintendo's upcoming console.
However several interesting details have come from the innovative company.
-The Revolution will use DVD type storage media. It will play DVD's as well, but probably not out of the box. Imagine something like the kit you had to buy for the Xbox 1.
-It will be backwards compatible with Gamecube games.
-Probably the most exciting news is the fact that Nintendo is planning to release it's entire library of games through an online service for play on your Revolution. Whether this will be free or through a fee based service remains to be seen. Most likely it will be hitting your wallet some way or another.
-Perhaps the most confusing aspect of it is the controller. Resembling a TV remote, it is motion activated and is implemented into gameplay however the game designer wants. Imagine playing a first-person shooter and instead of moving a stick up to look up, you simply angle the controller up and the action on the screen reflects what you do. If that sounds too unorthodox for you (it does for me) then there are well-founded rumors that Nintendo is planning to release a shell controller that you slip the original Revolution into and use it like a typical game controller. Let us hope.
Since no specific tech info has been released, there really isn't any room for too much speculation. Sorry.
Now to summarize the upcoming year of gaming.
What console will win the war? Personally, I suspect that Sony will win because of a number of factors.
1-Name. The name alone will sell the console. Everybody and their cousin know what a Playstation is.
2-3rd Party Software. This makes or breaks a console. Simply put, more games are available for the PS2 than any other console on the market. And all of those developers have signed on to make games for the PS3. The numbers say that Sony will win this area of sales.
3-Hardware/Software Sony has poured a LOT of money into making the PS3 the system to own. They are very determined to win. They have done so in the past and there is no significant reason to doubt them. They are also leaving a lot of room for expansion with the Blu-Ray Technology. DVD's have gone as far as they can go in terms of storage and reliability. Blu-Ray is brand spankin' new and can only get better from here on out. If designers take advantage of this technology and take their games to the next level, Microsoft and Nintendo won't fade away, but they won't dominate the market. Also worth noting that RPG's make up a very large portion of Sony's software. RPGer's are not to be underestimated. Add a few First Person Shooters to that mix and you have yourself a solid contender.
But what about the Xbox 360? Does it stand a chance? Most certainly. They have a very good chance of winning the battle.
1-Proven technology. Unlike Sony, Microsoft has chosen to stick with what works. As such, their console has already shown a strong following.
2-Multiplayer. Everybody who has played Xbox Live knows that it is light years ahead of anything that Sony has done. Everybody loves playing against other people across the nation. Microsoft has established themselves as the company to bring that to you. In spades.
3-Software. One word sums up the reason to own a 360: Halo. Halo has come out of nowhere to be an undenialble success. The single player is very good, but it outshines anything else in multiplayer. Other notable titles include Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, for the RPG folks out there this is the reason to buy a 360. Paying $400 for a console to play Oblivion is a lot cheaper than spending upwards of $700 for a PC to play it decently.
And what about Nintendo? Nintendo has as of lately survived mainly because of their excellent 1st party software. They are very good innovators as well. This would be a good thing, except for one thing. They try too hard. Sometimes it works, like with the Gameboy. Sometimes it kinda works, like the Gamecube. Othertimes it just falls flat on its face, Virtual Boy anyone? The biggest thing standing in Nintendo's way is the controller for the Revolution. It is scaring a lot of developers away from the console. Nintendo would do a lot better if they tried to do the typical console thing. Trying to change the industry doesn't work well if the industry isn't ready for change. Perhaps the best thing going for them, aside from their in-house titles, is the library of old games the Revolution will be able to play. This may in fact be the one thing that keeps it alive.
What else is there to say? That a console being released first is by no means a declaration of victory. Remember the Dreamcast? It was revolutionary at the time. However despite it's online gaming community, solid library, and popularity, Sony shut it down. So badly in fact that Sega quit the hardware market and went solely to software development.
The 360 has the advantage for now. If they have a solid number of QUALITY titles available, then they will hold their own. But the road so far has been anything but smooth for Microsoft. Management changes, software delays, hardware problems, dissatisfaction, and other factors do not shine a favorable light upon their products. The fact that it will continue to be updated with patches makes me seriously consider not owning one.
They also have confused a LOT of people with which of the two systems they need. If you don't get the right one, you can spend a lot more than you want to. They also are using technology that while it works, is not as good as you might expect from a next gen system. And finally, the games for it don't look much better than really good Xbox 1 titles. You would think that they would look a lot better than they do.
Sony has all the numbers in their favor. Make no mistake, a few quality titles for a console will keep the system alive. But having a lot of them will make the system the one to own. Whether or not the same games are released for other systems doesn't change the fact that they are often out first on Sony's console. For the hardcore gamers out there, that makes all the difference in the world. And Sony's next gen games look a LOT better than anything out of Microsofts camp.
Also worth noting Sony has a lot more room on the Blu-Ray discs for more game content. What does that mean? That Sony will have a lot more exclusive titles. It's simple math really, you can make a huge game that can only fit on Sony's discs. How do you fit all that on a disc that is significantly smaller and outdated?
The argument that the PS2 has had a lot of games on it that are available on Gamecube and Xbox is true. For current gen consoles only, that is. Once the PS3 comes out, that argument will be no longer valid. Why? The Xbox 1 and PS2 both use DVD's which hold the same amount of stuff on them, regardless of which console they are released on. Let me prove my point further:
Take the Resident Evil 4 re-release for the PS2. Originally the game was only for Gamecube. Due to the larger disc size, Capcom was able to add a SIGNIFICANT amount of extra gameplay that could not have fit on the tiny discs that Nintendo uses. In fact the Gamecube had to split the game up into 2 discs, whereas the PS2 was able to fit the entire original game on 1 disc PLUS the bonus content. The same principle will apply to the PS3 and it's large storage media. The cross-console release of games will not be as prevalent as it once was.