[Isleofdoom]

Found this on Octo Twitter site....

Aleksey Kulayev Aleksey Kulayev ‏ @FLA t_z

ps2_netemu (config, .enc, virtual memory cards cryptography) pwned

[MRDOTB]

Originally Posted by Isleofdoom ps2_netemu (config, .enc, virtual memory cards cryptography) pwned

vmc cryptography? PS2 vmc are 1:1 raw ps2mc image with ECC. They are not encrypted nor signed.

And this has nothing to do with rumours about PS4/Orbis. :P

[stevorkz]

I love these news articles about next gen consoles I really do, but for the love of me I cant stand reading the comments of them any more due to these mindless sheep who KEEP...COMPARING...CONSOLE...SPECS...TO...HOME...COMPUTERS...then running the consoles down when they are not as powerful as their elite i5/i7. You guys need to read up about what you are talking about...BEFORE...opening your mouth. Consoles work differently to home computers and do not require the horse power that computers have to run next gen games.

[theghost11]

^^^PREACH.

[pirbakhsh]

Originally Posted by stevorkz I love these news articles about next gen consoles I really do, but for the love of me I cant stand reading the comments of them any more due to these mindless sheep who KEEP...COMPARING...CONSOLE...SPECS...TO...HOME...COMPUTERS...then running the consoles down when they are not as powerful as their elite i5/i7. You guys need to read up about what you are talking about...BEFORE...opening your mouth. Consoles work differently to home computers and do not require the horse power that computers have to run next gen games.

Howa to someone with Common Sense...

[Annelies]

Originally Posted by stevorkz Consoles work differently to home computers and do not require the horse power that computers have to run next gen games.

It all depends. If developers are satisfied with rendering console ports at sub HD resolutions (again... lucky if 720P is achieved) and don't mind targeting 30 FPS (something that should immediately be improved on) then I suppose the next-gen consoles don't require the horse power needed.

[mrBear]

PCs have bloated operating systems that have lots of intrusive "services" constantly running, each fighting for dominance of your precious processing power. On consoles that OS is built and optimized just for the games, and doesnt require all that much juice to run.

Think about it, the PS3 with 256+256MB of ram and GPU manages to run similar games running on PCs without a hitch. Yes, it lacks newer features like tesselation etc, but the graphics is far from ugly, but it requires less resources to run than a PC for example on the same quality. Imagine what twice or three times the PS3 spec will be able to achieve.

I do play more games on PC these days, but it wasnt a cheap setup (mentioned my monster laptop here before which is in the excess of 5k). A console is a couple of hundred dollars for graphics a PC with the same price just cannot offer, even today.

[Annelies]

Originally Posted by mrBear PCs have bloated operating systems that have lots of intrusive "services" constantly running, each fighting for dominance of your precious processing power. On consoles that OS is built and optimized just for the games, and doesnt require all that much juice to run.

Consoles have services running in the background just like PCs do, and the entire operating system is not built and optimized "just for the games," because if it were, the PlayStation 3 would not have useless features like Facebook integration. This application also uses precious resources and is primarily used whenever you make a purchase on the PlayStation Store or unlock trophies in your PlayStation 3 video games. It then takes the time to connect to Facebook and share this news with your friends. However, it can be shut down and/or disabled, just like PC applications that use your resources can, so is this really much of an argument?

Originally Posted by mrBear Think about it, the PS3 with 256+256MB of ram and GPU manages to run similar games running on PCs without a hitch. Yes, it lacks newer features like tesselation etc, but the graphics is far from ugly, but it requires less resources to run than a PC for example on the same quality. Imagine what twice or three times the PS3 spec will be able to achieve.

It manages to run games at sub HD resolutions and can barely manage to keep and maintain 30 FPS. If that's without a hitch, I guess PC is just... I'm at a loss for words. The graphics are horrid. Consoles have NO AA, NO AF, NO tesselation, NO SSAO/HBAO, etc... Basically, consoles are running games at the lowest possible settings. It requires less resources because it's made SO MANY sacrifices all ready, it doesn't need them. There is a big difference between a game running at max settings with DX11 (Batman Arkham City on PC for example) and a game running on the lowest settings, sub HD resolutions and barely getting 30 FPS (Batman Arkham City on PS3).

Originally Posted by mrBear I do play more games on PC these days, but it wasnt a cheap setup (mentioned my monster laptop here before which is in the excess of 5k). A console is a couple of hundred dollars for graphics a PC with the same price just cannot offer, even today.

PC is cheaper in the long run. Sure consoles are cheaper initially but think about it... when a brand new console game comes out... you either pay $65 for it (or $55 if you are getting it second-hand) or you don't play it. I could have gotten Hitman Absolution for $37 brand new on the PC. Hell, I got Arkham City for $5 and it was the freaking Game of the Year Edition. I got Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas TOGETHER (with ALL DLC!) for $16. I swear, I have never seen deals like these on the PS3...

Look at all of the games on my Steam library and ask yourself how much you'd have spent if you wanted these for your console:

http://steamcommunity.com/id/annelies/games?tab=all

You might as well have gotten a PC.

[mrBear]

Originally Posted by Annelies Consoles have services running in the background just like PCs do, ... You might as well have gotten a PC.

Like i said, i have a PC. A proper gaming one due to Batman running like crap on an older setup.

On the services, the ones running on the PS3 cannot be compared to what is running on Win 7 with peoples crap installed. If you have 4GB you will notice barely 1GB is available (not to mention swap file space being used). Now install other tools and the performance drop as well. Also, the OS for the console is built for the hw, or at least they try to. With Win 7 and 8 it need to cater for a variaty of potential hw hybrids.

Games without a hitch - im talking about lower to mid range PCs. For example GT540 etc. If you played Bats Arkam on that for example you need to drop the resolution to lowest. Sure it doesnt look that bad but you cannot experience DX11 with tesselation etc in that price class to its full potential. Plus, if you run it on a mid range laptop it stutters like hell. Thats actually that spawned me to buy the upgrade with twin GTX680s. With a console you just pop it in and play, no need to worry about freeing resources, mess around with settings until its playable.

And lastly, my point is that for the absolute limited memory and hardware on the PS3 it still produced decent games, else you wouldn't have bought it in the first place. Even the latest MGS (even though i hate the title and think Raidens voice sounds like a 70s Z class action wannabe) looks quite good on the older hw (unless they cheated and used PC vids like they did with GTA).

[GregoryRasputin]

@Annelies 720p and above is HD, most games run at 720p, an odd game runs at 1080i or p, so ALL games run in HD resolution.