Sony's Cell: "programming nightmare" or "far less complicated"?

by Vladimir Cole on Feb 7th 2006 1:00AM

In a 2641-word article that is two parts hype, one part balance, Forbes Asia author Daniel Lyons writes of the promise of the cell chip that will power the PlayStation 3 console to be launched by Sony later this year. Here's a quick summary of the article.

Believe the hype? The Cell is called a "supercomputer for the living room," a "mind-boggling" performer of "2 trillion calculations per second," the kind of power that enables programmers to "create videogames that look as realistic as film." (Where have we heard that promise before?) Cell will run "at least" 10 times faster than the very fastest Intel Pentium chip and will usher in "the next microchip revolution" including "mind-blowing," "fast and seductively immersive games, virtual-reality romps, wireless downloads, real-time video chat, interactive TV shows with multiple endings and a panoply of new services yet to be dreamed up."

It's hard not to get excited about the possibilities of this chip given such a stirring cavalcade of next-gen imagery, and the excitement builds as Lyons trots out James Kahle, the IBM chip engineer who oversaw the design of the processor, who tells Forbes that Cell will "spawn the next generation of growth in the industry."

To insert just a smidge of credulity into the article, the author does manage to mention a few drawbacks. Chief among the drawbacks is the danger that Cell will be difficult to program for. Lyons quotes Marc Tremblay, chief architect of IBM rival Sun Microsystems, who says that "The programming model is a nightmare."

Finally, of course, there are the obligatory quotes from developers, including Jeremy Gordon, head honcho at San Francisco-based Secret Level, who told Forbes: "Anyone who worked on the PlayStation 2 is jumping for joy" because the PS3 is much easier to develop for.

Whether the PS3 is a joy or nightmare to develop for won't be clear until developers have had a chance to play with it for a couple years. It's not fair to expect the first raft of PS3 titles to take advantage of a paradigm-shift in processor architecture. It may also be unrealistic to expect developers to spend oodles more time and money retooling multi-platform titles to take advantage of the PS3's unique architecture. Chances are that third-party developers will be content to develop once and port thrice when it comes to next-gen development. First-party developers and exclusive content is another story, however, and this is where the PS3 may shine.

[Thanks, Andrew!]

Source

Tags: PS3, Wii, Xbox-360

Reader Comments (52)

Sounds like he's been eating the magic mushrooms! But I would agree that we won't see the real fruits of this tree until the 2nd to 3rd year of the product cycle.

What a complete load of crap. They fooled me once with their Emotion Engine hype, they're not fooling me again.

Here you go:

http://www.forbes.com/global/2006/0213/070A.html

All hype aside, there is no doubt that the Cell processor design is a hint of the future. Is it hard to program for? Ofcourse, as it should be - that's a lot of potential power for a very LOW price. It's a sophisticated design that requires sophisticated software to push it. We will see game ports that will look comparable to the other next-gen hardware, but we will see some amazing stuff coming from software that is designed specifically for the PS3. I am very curious to see...

This isnt coing from sony ou noobs, this is a run down of what an journalist and IBM scientist mentioned to forbes magazine. No one in that article works for sony. cell is backed by toshiba and IBM so what ever is said about it im going to believe it. especially if its coming from IBM engineers mouth that worked on numerous cpu's.

I'm a graphics whore first xbox fanboy second. I'm just curious about the cell. I mean is it really that revoultionary? I hope so. I hope it surpasses the hype, I hope if sony dominates the industry its by tech and not blind loyalism or hype. Even better if it ushers in a giant tech leap for other non entertainment applactions.

and @4 you'r the noob now dog. an IBM person talking about the cell is like mcdonald's rep telling you how great a mcgriddle tastes first thing in the mourning.
Maybe true, but biased non the less.

"[The PS3 will will enable programmers to] create videogames that look as realistic as film."
^
*cough* Emotion Engine *cough*

Carry on.

I don't know too much about microprocessor technology or engineering, but if anyone has a degree in the field..here is a paper that maybe worth looking at

http://cag.csail.mit.edu/crg/papers/eichenberger05cell.pdf

@6 Guerilla games were also the the ones who answered, when egm asked why there were not any games as good as Halo on ps2,"People just dont know how to tap into the raw power of ps2,Its a very capable system."

No one blames a company to be biased, but at the same time i'm sure joystiq and guerilla both know where their piroities lay.

The Killzone 2 developers have stated that they are having a much easier time with the PS3 then with the PS2. (Not sure how that was never posted on Joystiq.)

But the "rumor" that the PS3 is insanely difficult to program for is just that...a "rumor."

FYI, James Kahle is an IBM Fellow and a respected figure in the industry. See http://www.cs.arizona.edu/~gupta/JimKahleBio04.html
for more information before you start talking sh*t about something you know nothing about.

I'll believe him before I'll listen to you. In fact I wouldn't even bother giving you the time of day.

It remains to be seen if CELL will be a major force in the computer world. However, the technology is incredible: practically a network cluster on a chip. Its seriously impressive stuff.

As for the cynics citing Emotion Engine, i think its worth noting that PS2 has achieved what it has without a proper GPU as found on Xbox and Gamecube. If PS2 had a "real" GPU (which PS3 will), many of you would be singing a different tune about it.

Finally, its interesting that the article says Sony's first party may shine next-gen. I've noticed a major shift in Playstation overall towards first party. On PSone, Sony's 3rd party support was its trump card. But today, many of the major properties (Socom, God of war, Shadow of Colossus, Jak, Ratchet, Gran Tourismo, and more) are first party games. Despite a continuing reputation as just a hardware company, a shift has been made with few people taking notice.

The PS3 is going to be a supercomputer, a Blu-ray player and a gaming machine all at the same time? Sounds interesting, but what if all we really want is a great game machine? I mean, having all the other features is great if intend to buy them or have a specific use for each function, but isn�t the Playstation 3 suppose to be all about gaming? For example, I think that the fact that DVR functionality is awesome because of the ability to record TV shows. It�s like Tivo, right? Does that mean that there will be a coaxial input to record cable on the PS3? I don�t have Tivo yet, but if the PS3 will have the same features, I wouldn�t mind holding off on Tivo a little longer. But what about people who already have Tivo? I also heard that the PS3 is going to have LocationFree support for the PSP. Does that mean that I�ll be able to watch recorded shows from the DVR functions on the PS3 on my PSP as well? It sounds gimmicky, but if it�s already included, I guess another feature wouldn�t hurt. That functionality would be awesome, however, if the PS3 allowed you to transfer TV shows on to the PSP to watch on the go. The PS3 is said to also have an online system that is better than Xbox Live, supposedly. This along with the fact that it�s coming out this Spring in Japan, I hope someone imports this machine soon so that we can get a review all its functions and how well they work before we all decide to purchase it this Fall. I would like to see if all of the extra functionality that comes with the system is actually worth the money invested in its convergence of technology. If not, I�d rather have a stripped down PS3 that is cheaper and specifically made for gaming, because when it comes down to it, I�m more of a gamer rather than a gadget junky.

What ever the cell processor is, it is not the graphics power house that people here somehow mistake it to be. Otherwise why have the Nvidia chip? It was more then likely brought in to handle all the extra crap that has nothing to do with gaming.

Looking at the current PS2 games I think developers are sure able to get the max out of the PS2 hardware. Still, Sony would be stupid to make programming for the PS3 harder. Small developers with tight budgets should develop for the Revolution and maybe Xbox Live Arcade. The big boys can then focus on truly next-gen gameplay (graphics/AI/physics).

"This along with the fact that it�s coming out this Spring in Japan, I hope someone imports this machine soon so that we can get a review all its functions and how well they work before we all decide to purchase it this Fall."

You forgot to add a couple "supposidly"'s in there b/c no REAL "official" date has been announced yet.

"The big boys can then focus on truly next-gen gameplay (graphics/AI/physics)."

Funny...you forgot the most important aspect of a video game...the "GAMEPLAY"!!!

Hate to break it to you but you can have all the state-of-the-art graphics, AI & physics in the world and the gameplay could be complete crap.

The "Proof is in the pudding", right now I can't comment on what the cell can or can't do inside a PS3 because Sony hasn't shown me anything. So all I can do is type meaningless conjecture which is just a waste of time. But one thing is for certain, these types of post on game forums is a form of hype, if the cell processor was inside a new gun we wouldn't be talking about it on Joystiq. The emotion engine didn't live up to expectations, whose fault is that? Well since sony developed the system you have to point the finger to them. The reason why people doubt the Cell processor is this, If sony has all this power and can utilize it why isn't it throwing it in the face of its competitors. See is doesn't matter how amazing a weapon is if you can't utilize it's full potential. At the price of 400-500 dollars which is expected at launch I can't believe people are will to wait years to see this system amaze them. If you buy the system with no proof of greatness, what is the insentive for the games to get better? The emotion engine maybe have been great but nobody felt the need to make it shine, and I see the same pattern happening again.

Funny...AI and physics are, you know...integral components of gameplay...

Games that have good gameplay are those that have appealing characters, balanced characters, intelligent level design, balanced weapons (if applicable.)

If you had none of those and focused on only having smart AI, state-of-the-art physics and pretty graphics then your game would be crap.

A prime example of a game that had incredible graphics, great AI, great physics AND all the things I listed above (characters, level design, etc.) is Half-Life 2.

@zsavior good point. I never looked at it that way.

"The emotion engine maybe have been great but nobody felt the need to make it shine, and I see the same pattern happening again."

Not true,you have no idea what your talking about there are developers doing things on the ps2 that are pushing it to the limit. The lastest Gran Turismo running in 1080i, the real time cut scenes in Metal Gear, Final Fantasy and Jak & Daxter games etc.

http://www.star-reef.com/images/ps2demo.jpg

I think the ps2 matched what it promissed in the tech demos. From ps1 to ps2 sony definitely deliverd with the games I don't expect the ps3 to be any diferent. Before you call me a sony fan boy I own a 360 I think its a great system and plan buying a ps3. I hate fan boys.

I really hope the PS3 delivers everything thats being touted, if it does, it will be an incredible multimedia device and I'll scrape together every penny to buy one. Sadly Sony have got a nasty habit of not knowing when the keep their mouths shut resulting in hugely exagerated claims and unnessesary abuse in the direction of the incredibly balanced Xbox360.

Saying that though, if they hype it beyond belief and it falls well short of expectations every person in Japan will still run out and buy three each. A spare one for when the first one breaks (probably the blue ray drive right?) and the third one for the dog.

At the end of the day though I'll hold off and wait for the results to come in once it hits the streets(probably NEXT year in the UK), meanwhile I'll be playing next gen games on my Xbox360. Hell Ive been doing that since LAST year ;)

I looked at those technical specs and the processor does seem to hold a lot of promise. Processing instructions concurrently is definitely becoming a standard in the PC world because no matter how you slice it, sequential processing is a lag on performance. It only makes sense that the chip makers like IBM would try and use the same technology for other devices.

What I wonder is how long it will take developers to understand how to program for this processor and what its impact will be on creating cross-platform games. The current generation of games are all using the same basic architecture. Most developers are probably 'tweaking' their main engine to conform to the instruction set and power of the console they are written for. When you drastically change the CPU's architecture, you can't simply re-write the instructions but usually have to rethink the whole design. I think that having such dynamically different CPU's it will be another factor driving up the retail price we pay for the major franchises. Single-platform games shouldn't have the same problem.

The only unit that looks like it could be much easier to develop for is the Revolution and I only say that because they have not drastically changed their architecture; it more so seems they are just using better hardware this run and their ace in the hole is their unique input device. Technically Nintendo is already giving developers a crutch by allowing them to use a more standard gaming device if they want to, so my main point is that a developer can use the same technical programming model that they did with the GCN.

All that said, I don't think that major developers will fully understand how to optimize their code for a good year, two or maybe even three years. Developers get smarter and smarter about how to utilize a console as its life cycle gets longer. Usually, they've just about maxed out a system's potential by the time the next generation is out. I have a feeling that we'll see a dramatic improvement in the graphics and AI of games made for the PS3 initially, but I think that the Oh-my-god-I-didn't-think-a-game-could-look-and-play-this-good titles won't be out until at least end of the year 2007.

Until we demand more as gamers and until we stop buying countless sequels and Madden "roster update", the industry is going to keep giving us the same games with new levels and updated graphics.

Gaming has fallen into a rut, with the cost of developing a game now too expensive to try something new and innovative. We're going to see worse sequelitis on the PS3 and 360 than we did last-gen.

Better graphics, physics and AI are nice, but I'm losing interest in playing first-person shooters, racing games and sports titles.

Give us something new, rather than putting a new coat of paint on the same games we've been playing for ten years now.

"Give us something new, rather than putting a new coat of paint on the same games we've been playing for ten years now."

I totally agree, I mean, how many different games with Mario or Link do we have to play. When will companies like Nintendo come up with something actually new instead of rehashed gameplay with Mario as the main character? Replacing the main character with Mario does not make a new game.

Isn't the cell in the PS3 a dumbed down version of the Cell?

1 SPE (Or DPE - Whatever you want to call it) doesn't function at all and the whole thing runs at 3.2Ghz.

Well anyway, i'm not buying it.

As for new innovative titles... Sequels sell better. Majesco made several high concept new games but nobody bought them. Why bother coming up with a new game when it is easier to just take an existing title and add a few new bells and whistles and it will sell better than a new property? Is that the fault of the developer or the consumer? If innovative titles topped the charts, you can bet the farm that's what the developers would make since they want to sell the most games.

PS2 developers have not tapped into that "Emotion Engine", and MGS3 isn't even close. Sure, it looks good for a PS2 game and might fool strict PS2 players into thinking the unit has reached its claimed potential, but when comparing MGS3 to the original Halo, an Xbox launch game that came out years before, you start to notice that MGS3 isn't all that hot.

Anyway, the fortunate thing about this whole processor technology split is developers are really going to have to chose a console of choice this round. With any luck, we won't be seeing many ported titles as it very well may prove to be just as expensive to port a title as it would be to develop a whole new one from scratch. It would give a decent reason to own all of them, as opposed to this particular generation where most of the games were ports, and folks like me with all three units would play the ported game on the most capable console (Xbox) and occationally hit the other two (PS2, GC) for their exclusives.

It's nice that the processor will be able to take on many tasks, and provide more than enough power. But, doesn't that just mean that on the way to a more immersive realistic experience, that the system will just bottle-neck somewhere else. Like perhaps at the video card, or the amount of ram, etc.? When I build my gaming pc's, a fast processor is great, but it isn't what makes or breaks the system. There are a lot of different components, so if you have a bottleneck somewhere else, then it doesn't matter how fast your processor is. I'm not saying that the other components are weak (I'm sure nVidia has a great GPU for this system), I'm just saying that it doesn't really matter how fast the processor is if something else in the system can't keep up. Until I can see all of the parts working together in perfect harmony, I remain skeptical that the "gaming" experience will be much higher than the 360's.

One other small little thing. This isn't a bash on Sony, but... Sega Dreamcast came out a year ahead of PS2. Soul Caliber was a LAUNCH title. I still haven't seen many games on the PS2 that beat Soul Caliber on the Dreamcast (as far as graphics, etc go). I remember getting my PS2 and being very happy with it on launch day, but I've never felt it was "more system" than the Dreamcast before it. I think I will feel very similar on PS3 launch day. I will feel very happy with it, but I won't feel like it is that much better (if better at all) than my Xbox 360. Just my opinion...so bash away...

"As for the cynics citing Emotion Engine, i think its worth noting that PS2 has achieved what it has without a proper GPU as found on Xbox and Gamecube. If PS2 had a "real" GPU (which PS3 will), many of you would be singing a different tune about it."

Not really, it is still the slowest and weakest of the 3 consoles. 300Mhz and 32MB RAM is pretty dated (of course it's been 5 years). They have to push the hell out of the PS2 just to keep up. What pisses me off is when it is obvious that a game was developed for the PS2 first. Then the game suffers when it is put on a system that actually handle a solid game without a 1000 unexpected loading screens.

We can only hope that Sony is "less" full of s$&t in this console iteration. The cell is a nice idea, but whether the implementation will be worthwhile has yet to be seen. From some research on the architecture though, it sounds like the cell will be more useful for servers and networking equipment rather than a games console.

What may be bad for Sony is that they are releasing several of their most popular first party games early on, and the developers may not be able to get the super-impressive claims realized for the system in time.

Daniel Lyons is a major FUDster. I'd double check if he told me the sky was blue.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/22/cell_mecury_army/
So, youngsters can now blast away at their enemies on Sony gear and then graduate to an actual Cell-powered tank.

"The Cell BE processor was originally designed for the volume home entertainment market, but its architecture of nine heterogeneous on-chip cores is well-suited to the type of distributed, real-time processing that will power tomorrow's digital battlefield," said Craig Lund, CTO at Mercury. "At 200 GFLOPS, the Cell BE processor is an order-of-magnitude higher in performance than other processors. In defense computing, the availability of the Cell BE processor is an industry milestone akin to the introduction of AltiVec into the PowerPC architecture."

Mercury estimates that a single PowerBlock 200 box will deliver as much horsepower as 20 PowerPC processors or 45 of Intel's Pentium 4 chips. It will perform at this level despite taking up only as much space as a toaster.

http://www.mc.com/PowerBlock200/

I am already learning how to program this chip. IBM disclosed a lot of info for free for all developers who wish to test the chip. u can find and download it here:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/power/cell/

http://www.mc.com/PowerBlock200/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/22/cell_mecury_army/

To those who said this couldn't possibly have a Sony bias, you're fooling yourself.

Sony HIRED IBM to design this chip. There will always be a bias. It may be the future, but it only really makes a diffrence to me if it makes my games look better.

If not, then it's smoke and mirrors.

"and of course this isn't NEWS (thank you joystiq for yet another rehashed story you bums)"

um. last time i checked joystiq wasn't a 'news' site. i think you're looking for gamespot.

this is a blog. it's about 'opinion' on the news. not posting the news itself. if you're looking for rewritten (or flat-out plagerized) press releases, you might want to hang out on a 'news' site.

m3mnoch.

Due to the past crap of Sony, I will wait on the PS3. I bought a launch PS2 and the stupid DVD player couldn't play a movie without freezing. Since I own a HDTV and would love a blu-ray player, I will probally pick up a PS3 down the line. I will just let Sony put a second or third gen Blu-ray in it first.

New technology always has something wrong with it. DLP technology when it was first released had tons of problems (rainbow effects were horrible, breakage, etc.) DLP is great and one of the best gaming HDTV techs out now.

The PS3 has too much new technology. The Blu-Ray and Cell are great and will be huge in the future. I just don't want the first waves of them which will probally be junk.

Why does every future 360-only owner complains about PS3? Or better yet, why do the majority of non-PS2 owners say they were gullible enough to let their minds fly when they heard "emotion engine"? So the in-game graphics in FFX were disappointing, eh? For fuck's sake, get a PC.

The funniest thing is that some of these are Dreamcast fans of old, but believe that the PS2 was graphically inferior; you know, because that has always mattered. I guess that is why PS1 and PS2 won the last two rounds.

Don't worry Xbots. Microsoft won't overpromise just as Sony did. They do seem to have a man's word when it comes to pleasing their fans, that's why it had the best library of games in the world; too bad PS2 won, not because of the games, but because of the power... well, at least you say that's what matters, right?

I can't wait to hear from the fans of Microsoft:

"I DON'T WANNA BUY BLU-RAY BECAUSE SONY WILL HAVE A MONOPOLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

All I can say is that to anyone that believes Cell will be "at least 10 times faster than the very fastest Intel processor", I have a bridge to sell you.

There is no chance that REAL WORLD performance will be anywhere near that.

Stuka, u should get informed before doubting. Intel will not be found in any game console... IBM is providing the chips for Nintendo, Sony and MS-Xbox 360. I t will also be used by advanced electronics for medical and military use.
"An IBM demo shows the contrast. A terrain rendering program lets you fly over Mount Rainier at 1,300mph. Cell crunches through millions of lines of topographical and photographic data per second to paint topographically accurate, photo-quality pictures at a movie-quality 30 frames per second. On a similar program a Pentium takes more than two minutes to sketch a single frame.
�It�s just amazing to go meet with people who have been in the industry for 25 years and just see their jaws drop,� Kahle says. When a famous chip designer, a veteran of Motorola and Apple, visited Austin for a demo in 2004, Kahle showed him images from the Mount Rainier flyover, eliciting stunned silence. �He just got really quiet,� as he realized �what this is going to do to the industry,� Kahle says.

Stuka, Sun and IBM already have plenty of processors for high end servers that Intel can't even come close to matching. IBM wants to make sure Intel remains in the LOW end.

"tuka, u should get informed before doubting. Intel will not be found in any game console"

Ummm...last time I checked the original Xbox was an Intel chip.

elvis is alive, pigs can fly ive seen santa and the easter bunny eat my eggs its true because i say it is.......haha(nelson)

Some people here have NO VISION! Intel may be inside the old boxes but it wont be in any of new game consoles... go figure why?
The reason why games have not evolved much lately is that developers are limited by current technology, but now a whole new world of interactive entertainment will come of age ($$$)... man did not reach the speed of sound with piston engines, they had to make jet engines. Once you have the power you can go farther and do more. I'm sure some people said jet engines were more dangerous, harder to produce and maintain than the old engines but I'm glad nobody listened to them.
Old people have a hard time imagining a world different from what they know... that's why they still go down to the video store to rent movies.

Cell is part PowerPC and part marketing.

If IBM were doing such a great job, why did Apple turn to Intel for "faster" performance for new Macs?

And why all the comparisons to Pentium? Isn't Pentium on the way out? Xeon anyone? VIIV? Any other multicore technology?

#47 - they wanted compatability with applications desiged for intell chips.

Captain Obvious. When Cell came out Steve Jobs was interested and still is (remember he likes to surprise)... He is using Intel now so he can sell more great Apple software on Intel/windows platforms (which wont be hard to do anymore)... but for the future he may surprise us with a super interactive voice controlled Multimedia Home supercomputer based on Cell. Apple and Sony compete in the Mp3 market and I hope Sony wont restrict Apple from using the chip.

7. "[The PS3 will will enable programmers to] create videogames that look as realistic as film."
^
*cough* Emotion Engine *cough*

Carry on.

Posted at 2:17AM on Feb 7th 2006 by Arachneya 0 stars

*Cough* Metal Gear Solid 4 *Cough*Carry on.

#41 Westinghouse makes TVs and also runs nuclear power plants. That doesn't mean the tech from one goes into another. Just because IBM is making the CPUs for all the consoles, but also making tech for the military doesn't mean one has anything to do with the other. Just because consoles are sold at a loss doesn't mean they'll be sold at a loss of thousands of dollars.

#42 Yeah, server CPUs. AMD also has server chips that are faster than Pentiums. And guess what, even Intel has server chips faster than Pentium 4s. The difference is these server CPUs cost about $1000+ each at least. If you think the PS3 is going to have a $1000+ CPU or one as powerful as a $1000+ CPU, you are deluding yourself. I'm not saying the Cell CPU won't be impressive, but I think people are getting lost in the hype of Cell.

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 50 Comments

Sony's Cell: "programming nightmare" or "far less complicated"?

Reader Comments (52)

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 1:23AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 1:24AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 1:25AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 1:40AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 1:44AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:04AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:17AM Arachneya said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:18AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:22AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:33AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:37AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:40AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:12AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:17AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:42AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:46AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:50AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 4:09AM zsavior said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 4:15AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 4:23AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 4:47AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 5:13AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 6:23AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 8:31AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 9:48AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 10:01AM pr0cs said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 10:03AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 10:24AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 10:25AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 11:05AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 11:16AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 11:30AM sqlrob said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 12:01PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 12:09PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 12:11PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 12:23PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 12:23PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 12:39PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:03PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 2:07PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:06PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:09PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 3:57PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 6:27PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 8:28PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 7th 2006 9:12PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 8th 2006 1:07AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 8th 2006 9:23AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 9th 2006 11:59AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Feb 10th 2006 11:00AM (Unverified) said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

38 Studios, Schilling ask Rhode Island for more money; state officials freeze

Featured Stories

I can never play Diablo 3

Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode 2 review: Running in place

Bringing a Chinese shooter to the west with Mercenary Ops

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW