Quantcast Rumored Improvements to the PS3 Online Experience - Ozymandias

Rumored Improvements to the PS3 Online Experience

There's an interesting series of articles over at innerbits discussing rumored improvements to the PS3 online interface - aka the 1.60 firmware upgrade. It's a good read, and if real, will help the PS3 quite a bit toward being a gaming system capable of supporting an online community. That said (and you knew this was coming), it should also be pretty obvious that Sony made a fundamental mistake when designing the PS3 that is going to impact their plans this entire generation.

Simply put, the mistake is that Sony did not chose to reserve sufficient resources of both memory and CPU time to run their XMB bar (aka community interface) over any application. Instead, it appears Sony permanently reserved some memory (64 MB if I recall correctly), and 1 SPU. In addition, they notified developers that they could take over another SPU at any time if needed.

What this effectively does is cause developers to have to make decisions whether or not to support a feature (and allocate memory to it). And unfortunately, memory is pretty tight on consoles (all consoles) in the first place. Add to that the fact that memory requirements for some of these features are pretty high, and I struggle to believe we'll see some of these features in many games at all, much less consistently across the platform. Here are some examples (with comments on each):

Background Downloading:

On the PS3, when you enter a game, your downloads will be paused and queued up, to be restarted later when you exit back to the XMB. The reason for this is that the PS3 needs extra system resources (primarily memory) to do background downloading, and as such could affect game play.

New APIs were discussed which allow background downloading during less resource intensive sections of a game (such as the front end menu), but such functionality will only be considered once the 1.60 update is out the door. Even so, games would have to allocate extra memory need to be able to support this.

[The Xbox is able to do this because we can use reserved memory/CPU time. From the game's perspective, it never existed in the first place, so it's never lost.]

In-game Purchases:

This new API will offer developers a greater flexibility for marketing their own downloadable content from within their own game. The only downside to this new API is that it will require approximately an extra 60 MB of memory to be made available to the OS. The memory requirement seems quite hefty, but we should also remember that such an interface would be integrated into the front-end menus of a game, which should use up less memory anyways and therefore pose less of a challenge to developers.

[60 MB is pretty brutal. Remember, the PS3 has 256 MB of main system RAM. It's true this shouldn't be a problem to find at a game menu, but if you want to enable any sort of interesting in-game, instant gratification purchases developers will need to figure out what, if anything, you can temporarily dump out of memory. I expect we'll see a lot of main menu stores.]

In-game Friends List:

In other good news, which might mean increased adoption of this feature from developers, the extra memory needed to support the friends list system utility has been cut down from 16 MB to a more manageable 9 MB.

Unfortunately, cross-game invites will still not work as of 1.60. While players will be able to message each other from within games from 1.60 (in the games that support it), the issue of booting up a different game and then passing on the invitation has not not been resolved. Sony will essentially need to create a new TRC guideline for games to support this. Sony is working on several potential solutions, but in the meantime, this new feature is unlikely to show up for quite a while, and certainly not in the 1.60 update.

[The size reduction is good news - it means some games may support the Friends List in games. What will be interesting to see is if Sony mandates this via their TRCs (or Technical Requirements for Certification). If they do, every PS3 game going forward just lost almost 10 MB of system RAM that can't be used for game purposes. For what it's worth, I think the cross-game invite problem is solvable, even with their current architecture.]

Cross-game Voice Chat:

Cross-game voice chat (or game-agnostic voice chat) is another feature now in jeopardy due to lack of planning. As of now, there isn’t even a scheduled time plan for implementation, meaning this feature is unlikely to appear before the summer, and potentially never. The issue again is that it places significant requirements on both processor and memory, which would have to be requisitioned from the game currently being played.

[I'm not surprised as universal voice chat was one of our bigger challenges to fit into reserved system resources. Not having planned ahead makes it that much harder - I don't expect we'll ever see this unless Sony mandates another TRC... which will also impact every game hard.]

This quote summarizes the issues listed quite well:

The only way such functionality is going to get implemented is if Sony puts their foot down, provides the functionality and makes it a requirement for each game to support these features. Sony needs to do this because developers have no vested interest in creating a uniform experience for the end user across all the games on the platform. Sony would be the only one primarily profiting from this as the users would be sure to welcome a consistent interface of fundamental OS features across all games.

Another rock and a hard spot to be in. And yes, I still see a price cut coming this year.

<rant>

You want to know the absolutely most frustrating thing about this? This could have all been avoided had the PS3 not been rushed to market. I can tell you from personal experience all of these traps were things the Live and Platform teams thought about and planned ahead for... which is why we're able to deliver the experience we are now. There's no reason Sony could not have done the same - and as a gamer (and not a Microsoft employee), it frustrates the living hell out of me. Right... enough said.

</rant>

Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | live it!
Posted: Mar 13 2007, 04:25 PM by Ozymandias | 22 comments |
Filed under: , , ,

Comments

shufflemoomin said:

I completely understand your opinions on this. Sony has  years and years of experience of designing and launching electronics and entertainment devices. They shouldn't be making an error like rushing to market with such a complicated piece of hardware and then having to mop up afterwards. It makes for a poor user experience and poor reputation of the company involved.

If a next Playstation system is launched, let's hope they learn from the harsh experiences they've had with this revision.

# March 13, 2007 4:34 PM

Jason said:

Well, its really surprising, but I guess thats what happens when you become complacent. They have been "on top" for so long that they forgot what its like to have to think ahead and plan for competiton. Meanwhile, Xbox has been doing everything and anything they could think of to, simply put, make it a better console. Meanwhile, Sony has done nothing to make a better console except increase hardware capabilities across the board and not really any other improvements. Tis a shame really, like you said, we are all in the end just gamers and want to game the best ways possible. To have such a potentially kick ass piece of hardware like the PS3 exist and have it suffer because of lack of common sense, or even lack of just listening to gamers, or better yet actually paying attention to what your competition is doing/planning is a real shame. Meanwhile, I love my 360 for pretty much all of the reasons you pointed out above. Its not just the games, its the whole experience. I feel like I personally had a say in how the 360 works when Im using it, as everything works and makes sense.
# March 13, 2007 4:57 PM

sportsunit said:

Microsoft has done well with their online service.  They thought ahead and planned and excellent service that experiences only minor hiccups.  On the other hand, they need (probably are) to start looking forward to the threat that Home poses.  Home might not be directly comparable to XBL but it has the potential to be extremely disruptive.  If Home takes off and becomes a hit a al myspace, MS will be in a weird position.  

Copying Home would be a big mistake.  But, I think MS should concentrate on elevating an already stellar service now instead of waiting for their next console to be released to do this.  The time is now to continue adding features and options to put SONY in a position where they will never catch up.

# March 13, 2007 5:36 PM

SHNuKMS said:

I don't think MS has to worry about HOME. LIVE has been an established online service through constant improvements through XBOX, then XBOX 360, and potentially PC. We have to assume that HOME will take a couple of "firmware updates" and/or "trial and error" for it to surpass the 2 year-old LIVE service. That feat probably would be determined by year/s. And that's just it, we're already on the 2nd year for the 360. How can we ask MS to improve their service (aside for asking it to be FREE) when we all read from OZY about how they meticulously planned the current service around the current console. Before we know it, the 360 will be on the last leg of it's cycle giving way to an improved LIVE service on an improved console.
# March 13, 2007 10:09 PM

Daniel said:

The good thing about Sony finally getting their stuff together is that there's a certain pressure for the XBox360 to bring new features. Live was quite something new at the XBox360 launch but hasn't developed much in the last year or so. (Except the video marketplace which is only available in one region!)

# March 14, 2007 12:56 AM

imaginedbug said:

So Sony is looking at fixing things in the console's software that might/will impact the gaming experience, and that's due to them not having planned ahead... But with the 360's dashboard being a less than 10MB OS (can't think of better word to name it) it's still freakishly sluggish and prone to freezing, especially while playing games. Microsoft might've though ahead, but hasn't improved enough of the software since its launch. All this aside, I'm "worried" the PS3 might actually gain up on the 360. Every tidbit of news has lately been about the PS3, with the 360 only mentioned as competition. Bring new features and improvements to the 360, and bring them soon or people still having to "upgrade" won't remember it's even available.
# March 14, 2007 2:02 AM

Trellium said:

There is little doubt in my mind that MS was more on the ball. For whatever reason, I think that Sony tends to think in terms of "hardware phase" and then "software phase". They appear to design "the best hardware (tm)", and then leave the software as an after launch effort. Partly that might be because they are more comfortable in the hardware devices realm, but possibly also that they see software as malleable and upgradeable. It is those things, but it also has restrictions and performs best when the entirety of the design reflects input from both engineering teams simultaneously. Sony seems to do this sequentially. From personal experience, its a frustrating position to be in since software dev's don't have much input until it is too late, and then the hardware group becomes defensive and goes into a "we supplied you with everything! Use it!" attitude, when the design itself prevents you from using the glories they provided. Personally, I like the products most that have had the hardware, software, and marketing teams working closely together throughout the cycle; and in which it is a massive team effort rather than "hardware is first stage", "Ok, software ... do your thing!", and then "marketing ... sell it!". It starts to feel like a fragmented product, which is what the PS3 feels like to me. Internally, how much does MS do of this? Was marketing a part of the early 360 design, as well as the software group? Heh, MS being so solidly a software entity I don't need to guess much that the software people were part of the entire process. As far as Home goes, I still think Sony is over-reaching and under-reaching all at once. Huge scale; huge potential, small lobbies (64 people in public areas maximum), small rooms (16 to a room instance), and issues with copyright within your rooms when Sony is also a member of the RIAA. I see a conflict of interest there. For MS, they could focus on key points such as a 3d room instance system in which people can embark on gaming sessions. Not even sure it needs a public area. Just a place to set up chat, putz about before gaming or while waiting for others to log in; go game, and have a place to come back to as a group. Also, I like the idea of a 3d games room in which you can have an avatar, and play simpler games together. The reason for this is that people still play Monopoly (we do, when we have family reunions), and those old board games are friendlier when the oldest people want to play with the youngest. The 3d games instance would remain, but you could change the game on the table being played, and maybe the artwork of the room (ie where it exists, on an island, in a nebula ...). Then let it evolve over time.
# March 14, 2007 6:47 AM

Backscatter said:

I'm not sure I agree with and on this one. It is universally agreed upon that Microsoft shouldn't become complacent, but I think people have forgotten that it really wasn’t all that long ago that none of the current online multiplayer goodness, which is taken for granted today, existed in a tangible form on consoles prior to the launch of Xbox Live with Microsoft’s original box. The service has most certainly evolved considerably since then. Is Sony’s HOME really in the same category? I certainly wasn’t at GDC to see the demonstration, but what I gather of the service from what I’ve read suggests it’s a mash-up of MySpace and The SIMS. Comparing this to Xbox Live seems a bit like comparing MySpace to NetFlix – They’re both online providing a service, but those services are entirely different. While I’ve certainly never been into this online avatar community thing, I’m sure there are folks who are – And for those people I’m sure HOME is an interesting concept. Both services offer the promise of online community – However Microsoft’s is about getting together to game and I think that’s a very important difference. I have to side with Ozzy on this one, though – Sony had lots of time to break down what it was about Xbox Live that was so attractive to people long before the PS3 ever launched – Which makes their disjointed online multiplayer implementation all the more perplexing. It will certainly be interesting to see how the space evolves in the next year.
# March 14, 2007 7:04 AM

Trellium said:

My comments might still be getting caught in the spam filter.

# March 14, 2007 7:19 AM

Tom said:

Awesome thread, and very interesting. A while back there was a long article comparing the specs of 360 and ps3, and mentioned the computing power left aside to manage the OS of each system. What was interesting was the 360 uses way less resources, and retains far more functionality than ps3, which was attributed to Microsofts expertise in OS creation (Hey Windows!). I am still not sold on the XMB anyway, the dash is by far the most comfortable place i can spend as a gamer, and i look forward to the spring update!

# March 14, 2007 7:34 AM

Ozymandias said:

Yup - looks like a few posts got caught in the Spam filter. Fixed - thanks!

# March 14, 2007 8:22 AM

platinumbatto said:

i don't think it's exactly fair to say that the ps3 was a rushed product. Granted i willsay they did a few stuff wrong but you can't blame them for all the hype the machine got. It is almost exactly as the xbox 360. when the 360 came out there was no background downloading, and the dashboard was realtively slow. microsoft heard the community and they responded by fixing issue. Granted we are spoiled at the moment with the 360's features but the ps3 is using the exact same process that microsoft did minus the community part. even though i dislike sony's gaming division policies i am actually impressed with what they have been able to accomplish so far. Sony is a hardware company yet still they are making some decent software to run their hardware. microsoft is a software company so for them to make the greatest use of a system should be second nature to them. i think we should stop comparing sony to microsoft and start thinking as to what is different b/n them and what the advantages are to the gamers. sony has developed an incredible machine and microsoft also. now lets put those aside and lets get down with the games. if it looks good and plays well then the mission is accomplished. i don't care about bluray,hd-dvd proceessors or even the vdieo card all i care about is me geting to play my games . if a social network is brought into the network then so be it but don't let it interfer with the primary objective GAMES. batto
# March 14, 2007 8:40 AM

Maynard said:

I think what must sting the most for Sony fans is that they were promised a "Live killer" years ago. If Sony thinks 'Home' is their "killer" then they've obviously missed the point of what online "gaming" is all about. Home seems to have little to do with gaming and more to do with advertising - with gaming as a 2nd priority. But when Sony describes Home, they have a glint in their eye when they talk about all of the advertising and other money-making opportunities. And, oh yeah, you can also join a game. But I digress... it's almost scary to see what lengths a company will go to, to prevent the competition from getting a sale. Just think back to when the 360 was getting ready to launch. Think of ALL of the promises Sony was making about what the PS3 would be capable of... especially online wise. Did they really have any intentions of presenting us with a Live killer? I think in the back of their minds it was there, but nothing was in the works at that moment. They completely missed the boat when it came to configuring a hardware setup capable of supporting their "killer." So what we're basically left with is a ton of lies and gross exaggerations of the truth. Sony knew we weren't getting any killer of anything, but would have probably gone as far as to say you'd get a million dollars, if it would have delayed people from buying a 360. So... now what are we left with? Sony trying to catch up and tack on a bunch of features that should have been there and should have been supported by the hardware. They've, once again, shot themselves in the foot - over-promised while under-delivering, which seems to be a recurring theme from Sony these days. Of what Sony said the PS3 would be capable of over the 360, what are we left with? A blu-ray player? Companies need to be held accountable for what they tell the public and I'm glad to see that Sony is this time around. In the past, Sony might have just left the PS3 as it came out of the box. I also believe these issues speak volumes to how Sony is a broken company. SCEA wants one thing, while SCE(J?) wants something else.
# March 14, 2007 9:16 AM

Trellium said:

It's too bad that the spam filter also removes the paragraphing. It makes posts harder to read.

# March 14, 2007 10:04 AM

Jason Cross said:

You know, the ironic thing is that the PS3 wasn't "rushed to market." Kutaragi held one up at E3 in May of 2005 with a huge slide behind him saying "Spring 2006!" That was the same E3, by the way, where you guys were showing off the blades interface and describing in detail - and demoing live - all the Live features of the 360.

The PS3 was delayed coming to market by half a year. They had plenty of time to work on these issues - even if they didn't have time to write system software for many features by launch, they had ample time to plan their system software architecture around an expected list of future features.

It's just another example of how Sony is struggling in an era where electronics are defined more and more by software. They're just not a software company.

# March 14, 2007 11:14 AM

dozenz said:

The PS3 wasn't rushed. They're just cramming 5 years worth of infrastrucutre and experience in their first launchb year. Yes the PS2 had online capabilities but Sony treated it like it was a gimmicky fad and wouldn't catch on while MS was content to continuously dump money into developing it. Sony realized their mistake when seeing how a decently supported online service could work. Live still had annoying issues when the 360 was released that took almost the first year to correct (background downloading required a patch). And thats with the infrastructure and experience from the X-box. What I think is amazing is how fast Sony has responded to their online issues, especially when compared to the competition (the 360) and I'm glad that they're getting all this positive feedback lately. With the PS3 launch we've seen what happens when one company dominates completely. Do you really want to see MS go the way of Sony? I hope PS3 sales improve enough where the 360 will have just a small advantage in numbers. Maybe its not in MSs best interest, but it is for us gamers.
# March 14, 2007 1:40 PM

islandkiwi said:

Agreed.  The PS3 itself was not rushed to market...but online has never been a focus for Sony, so once again we see a roughshod system being hastily implemented.  The biggest problem is that it requires too much from the developers, when developers have different consoles they can work on.

# March 14, 2007 4:02 PM

Xwar said:

>Kutaragi held one up at E3 in May of 2005 with a huge slide behind him saying "Spring 2006!" Yeah, but that was a reaction to Microsoft's Winter 2005 announcement. The PS3 was and still is lagging very far behind; for example, they had to cut corners and use a beta version of the Cell processor (which won't have the full interconnecting features promised, among other things). The Sony bigwigs even mentioned, in passing, that if the 360 wasn't successfull they would have delayed the PS3 to 2007 - i.e., right about now. It's rushed.
# March 14, 2007 6:08 PM

Ozymandias said:

Re: "You know, the ironic thing is that the PS3 wasn't "rushed to market." Kutaragi held one up at E3 in May of 2005 with a huge slide behind him saying "Spring 2006!" That was the same E3, by the way, where you guys were showing off the blades interface and describing in detail - and demoing live - all the Live features of the 360." The fact that a model of a PS3 was held up doesn't mean the components, manufacturing, OS, business model, etc was baked. Talk to the industry - it's quite well known that the promise of "Spring" was complete FUD, and an attempt to slow down the momentum of competitors. (And why not? It helped in the Dreamcast case.) Believe me, even with the delay, there was still a rush to market. Why launch with so few games? So many system updates? And so many seams in online thinking?
# March 15, 2007 8:40 AM

Opticon said:

Sony are panicking about what MS XBOX360 brings out cos they know that the 360 has thought about things more before they release them. At least more games will be on the 360 because of Sony's shoddy workmanship.

# March 16, 2007 6:50 AM

yoda said:

can u check your ebay account or sports scores on the 360?....lol

# March 19, 2007 9:54 PM

Ozymandias said:

I wrote earlier about some of the improvements the 1.6 firmware update was supposedly going to bring

# March 22, 2007 8:43 AM