Don't Believe the Hype Part 1

Let's get one thing straight. The first Xbox, was capable of displaying up to a resolution of 1920x1080. This is 1080i. The 'Next Generation' of xbox360, which will deliver us unto a new and exciting 'HD Gaming Era', is capable of displaying a resolution up to 1080i, which is 1920x1080.

So, I pose the question, what is so next generation about that, and how is this HD gaming when the previous xbox wasn’t? (Before you start, I am ignoring Europe, which was never 'offered' such a luxury in the previous xbox incarnation) I will tell you.

HD is the new dawn for electronics companies. It is the new 'DVD over Video', 'CD over Cassette and vinyl', 'MP3 over CD'. Without 'advances' in technology, there would be nothing to sell. My father has a Sony CRT for as long as I can remember, it still operates flawlessly and has done so for, I guess, 15 years. Still, as far as I can remember I never had a single problem seeing the action, making out the expressions of faces or enjoying the richness of a movie... but apparently it wasn't enough, I need High Definition. And why do I need it? Because the marketing bodies tell me I do, and how do they tell me I do? By giving everything deluxe sounding names, which fill me with shinny dreams of a future in the arms of technology.

All Microsoft have done, is marketed a product which now claims to be the Hub of an HD Era, for which the average Jo will need to buy (of course) a High Definition television, while probably running their old xbox through a standard TV. So now it easy to be impressed, plugging your 360 into your £3600 flat plasma TV, and your friends are all very impressed with you, so no one is really disappointed.

The benefits of the HD era, and the adoption of this term by the common man, for the technology manufactures are 3 fold.

1. They get to resell everyone who ever owned one, a new TV, thus recreating the market from scratch.
2. Shipping costs are slashed, as the real estate and physical weight of a 32" LCD or Plasma compared to that of a CRT are quite considerable less.
3. Larger profits can be made as technological 'advances' can be sold at a high premium to the savvy consumer, quick to adopt the new.

I would be surprised, given the fact that this past Christmas was a critical time for the marketing of HD television, if Microsoft (who's 'partner' for the launch of 360 is Samsung), did not take this in to consideration, and push to launch a product, which is frankly neither Next Generation, nor actually finished, on to the market, in order to benefit the sale of HD Televisions. HD gaming is much more likely to convince people to invest in an HD set, than watching "Will and Grace" in HD.

But I strongly believe this fact and will communicate it clearly in a manner that is easy to understand. Xbox360 is in no way, shape, or form, a ‘Next Generation’ console, and frankly I am not convinced it is any good at all. The graphics are not much better than they were before (by before I mean xbox), sure… there are advances in processes which facilitate a more natural feel, lighting effects and such, but they are not a huge leap.

The argument is that ‘these are first generation games’ only. Well, I remember seeing DOA (a launch fight game for original xbox) and thinking to myself “I HAVE to get an xbox”. DOA remains to this day, one of the smoothest, fastest, most graphically impressing games on the system. The new 360 version of the game offers ‘slightly’ better visuals, but no real and shocking advancement.

So, what does this all mean? Well, I found myself needing an Xbox360 this time, and went to great trouble to actually get my hands on it, but at the end of the day the question arises, “why?” As Microsoft has not really given me a product, which is, what it aspires to be, “Next Generation”. The only thing I am experiencing now is the “Next Generation” of marketing practices. Which are far more powerful than any 3-core processor. I can’t help but feel my 360 is a ‘stopover relationship’ as I just wait for Miss perfect who I will hopefully be introduced to next year. She looks pretty at first, but it’s all just make-up, and I can tell you… the next one whoever she is, knows the problems with this relationship, and she is damn sure she won’t make the same mistakes.

First Impressions.

I am not a power user, neither am I a computer geek, nor am I a complete layman. I am actually, more or less, the target group for the New Xbox360. 20 30 something’s with a gaming background and some spare cash in their pocket for things such as games consoles.

Historically, I have always liked to get my hands on a new console, as soon as humanly possible, though I have never been attracted by purchasing an import system, I have always been one of the first to own a PS2, a Gamecube, an Xbox, even going back to the acorn electron, the commodore64 and such. But in recent times, with my own income, it has become more interesting for me. So my joy was clear, when I heard 360 would gain a global launch. Yay!

So now I am one of the 'lucky' few, as Big M would have us believe... but am I really?

There are things that have been blown out of proportion regarding the 360.

1. Yes, it's quite loud, but do you people have no memory, it's no louder that the original, I suppose more people are placing it in a place of pride, instead of hiding the ugly black X under their TV somewhere. While Playing DVD's it is even a little quieter than the original.
2. Ok, so the power supply is huge, but as my father expressed holding the brick 'Fuck that gives out some power’ which I assume it does, which is why it is so large. Besides, it's on the floor and I never see it, so who cares? really?
3. Mine has not crashed once.

These are some things I don't think are so great about the 360

1. Wireless, big deal, I had it on my Gamecube.
2. HD, really... big deal.
3. On-line. Plugged it in to my Microwave Ethernet Connection. Doesn't work yet. (Can’t comment beyond that.. but I can download stuff on a pc or mac, so it’s not a next gen concept)
4. The styling. It's nice.. But it certainly doesn't feel 'powerful', and is far too 'middle of the road'
5. The Dashboard. Original xbox used to hum and vibrate when left alone, like a bored super computer. My 360 just looks like a badly designed orange web page. I don't feel the 'power'.
6. The Games.
7. The overall feeling of everything about the 360 lacks imagination and vision. It's nice; it's fine... but what?

When friends come round I don't really feel comfortable showing it to them.. Because I am always like "HEY! This is the next generation xbox..." and it is always received with an "and what is so great about that?" reception.

However, I like some of the integration aspects. I can plug my Canon 350D straight in to it. As I can my iPod. The 20GB Harddisk comes full of useless junk, such as a CD database that recognises my CD names, in much the same way as iTunes, even being off line (though only reasonably mainstream Albums).

But, I didn't buy this as a PC; I have a G5 Mac, for which I do all my 'media' things... I bought the 360 to play the new generation of games.. It’s a console, not a window for microsoft in to my home. And don’t let them fool you in to thinking otherwise, Given this criteria, the 360 is currently a bad investment. I am now sure that the PS3 will feature some jaw dropping innovation at launch, which will send MS (microsoft, not marks and spencer) running off with it's tail between it's legs. To use the comparison again, this is just like an Apple with single processor, upgraded to a dual processor with a new case, and a new display... but it still does the same. Just a little better.

Coming first, does not always mean you win.

PS3 Killzone Video is real. Exclusive.

It's my pleasure to exclusively announce to you all, that the PS3 video, which was released at the beginning of this year, is in fact real. It is a real video. But, whatever the origins of it's material... are still a mystery. What, for me, the footage demonstrates, is the fundamental difference between the PS3 and the xbox360, between Sony and Microsoft, between what the differences are, and will be, between the two systems.

My belief, is that a product should do what a product is good at. Integration is not always a good thing; while combining technologies, is a clever way to reduce the life span of any one single product (while of course trying to corner the market for your own company), "TV with PS3 BUILT IN, for the most perfect display. No loss of signal through bad connections. The PS3TV is the next generation of console entertainment integrated to a perfectly maching HD Display, one, in perfect harmony with the other. The future center of your world"... anyone care to place an order?

Now, I know my mobile phone does have a camera, to be honest I even use it from time to time. But only as a novelty, it is never going to BE my camera. If I need a camera, I'll use one. My phone is a point of contact most of the time. On the other hand, there is the fridge with a TV in it? I can't think of an idea that could be any more stupid. Yes people buy them, perhaps, but only because it is a Fridge with a TV in. What next? A TV I can use as a toilet. Probably.

So. Why? is the question then; do I need a GAME console, that is essentially a PC, with no real functionality, as it only has a small hard drive, no keyboard, and lives in the living room. No place to use a home computer. Does that excuse it for the fact that actually, as a games console on it's own it's not that good? "Ok, so the games aren't great, but I can download simple arcade games and trailers... oh oh, look... I can plug my MP3 walkman in to it, imagine that... I can plug a sony device in to my xbox ha ha" (*I don't need to know if sony walkmans really work when connected).

But, that is exactly what Microsoft is pushing. ‘The Media Hub’, concept. All we hear is "power of the xbox" in their marketing speak. We hear no talk of revolutionary controls, or games/game design, new emotions or ideas. Simple, power, and connectivity. It has been the same since the start of their marketing, till this day.

What the Killzone Video represents however, is something different. In the past, I have been disappointed by 'concept' videos, sure. Some time before Gamecube, there was a 'realtime' demonstration of a forest, with lush trees, lighting and fog.. With a deer, I believe... running free. Some distance from the reality of the Gamecubes prowess graphically. However, this was soon forgotten. Gamecube brought us some truely classic game experiences by the way.

I don't recall anything like that from Microsoft this time. And we could summise that they have learned their lesson. Nintendo realised long ago, I think, that their marketing route is now 'Innovation' and pure game design. Microsoft, learned about power. And Sony, hard to say, but maybe their reputation is being 'part of the game', which is interesting thinking out loud about it.

So, Nintendo have it covered, it's just now a matter of reminding people that games should be the strongest aspect of any console.

Microsoft are off and running with their power.

But where does this leave sony. Wide open. They know it is about power, but they realise what any amount of power should bring us, is 'experience', the feeling of 'being there' that no one ever realised before. It's about dust and grit, smooth and complex animations, fabrics that will flow naturally and winds that blow all things that move with perfect physical properties.
What the Killzone video shows us, that is real, are Sony's intentions; and this is the demonstration of it to us. That, whatever the PS3 games will be like... their (Sony) vision and their challenge to any developer willing to take the bet, is "make it as much like THIS as possible".

It is a killing move. That should, as they intended (I hope), inspire the developers, as this is their reference point. Many developers (for other systems hopefully) are making the fatal error of simply dismissing the footage as rendered, and therefore not possible and therefore not relevant. But to their credit, it IS hard to tell either way, and it displays a supreme amount of skill on the part of its actual creators.

Ironically it doesn't matter if the footage is real'time' or not. And even if developers fall short of this... it is the vision, the 'brief' from Sony, if you will. “Make GAMES like this!” they are saying.

Now go and watch the killzone footage again.

Is HD Pointilless?

In France in about 1880 Seurat developed the painting technique called "Divisionism" or what later became known as "Pointillism". Specifically what he discovered, was that the careful and almost mathematical placement of coloured dots of only primary colours, when viewed from a distance, would become a full colour image (best known example would be "Sunday afternoon on the island of La Gande Jatte")

This is the same principle, which is employed today in the process of 4-colour printing, and why television works. If you view a 'billboard' up close you will see quite large dots of Cyan Magenta Yellow and Black, and not image. But from a distance, it is a stunning, full colour, sharp image. TV is exactly the same, even though it is pretty low resolution.

What Seurat actually realised, is the brain is a capable device of interpreting data to create a 'full image' from relatively little.

Modern marketers will have us believe the HD is the future. That such higher resolutions will amaze us. But it is a recognised fact, that from a normal home viewing distance of lets say at least 4 meters, you will not be able to tell the difference between high definition and normal definition, certainly between 480p and 720p; or even 1080i I would argue.

Of course, viewed up close, or with a critical eye in a shop, the difference would be clear. However, my Apple cinema display is 1680x1050, because I am a designer, and I sit 40cm away from it, and I am grateful for it's beautiful sharpness.

At the same time they try to sell us the chance to watch a TV with '3.6billion colours', impressive considering the human eye can only distinguish between 30000 colours.

Another point to keep in mind, is that this 'ultra sharpness' means there is less 'smoothing, going on between the lines as it were. On a CRT tv the image is in someway 'blended' as Seurat would imagine, giving an overall smoother and therefore more complete image.

Let me describe it like this also. HD gaming output is just smoke and mirrors. Something which struck me watching Starwars III, revenge of the sith. The space fight sequences (although only 480p on my normal DVD) are rich, deep complex, smooth and detailed, in a way far beyond any 1080i Xbox 360 game. My proposal is that engineers should look at what makes this possible, than just upping the resolution. The true success of the 'Next Generation' Relies on re-understanding how our brain receives information, and not just trying to fool us with more resolution. Higher resolutions do not make aliasing go away, it just makes it smaller.

My proposal from a total layman point of view is that 480p is more than enough, and what a console needs to be able to do is process the output as an image, almost like 'rendering the scene, taking a photograph of it, and then aliasing this, then displaying it in the screen', surely this would create an image similar to watching a dvd, than watching a computer image.

What I believe game developers need to be doing in next generation however, is utilising the power to create new 'styles' and not 'photorealsim'. Using their imaginations to create things we have never seen before.