DF Retro: What was actually real in PS3's E3 2005 reveal?

Richard Leadbetter: "The stakes were high. 2005 would kick-start a console generation that would offer a stratospheric leap in processing power and gaming capabilities compared to the ruling PlayStation 2 and its Xbox and GameCube competitors. Just prior to E3 2005, Microsoft had already announced Xbox 360 - bizarrely via an MTV special - but gamers weren't exactly amazed by the preproduction wares revealed therein. All eyes were on Sony for its E3 2005 reveal for PlayStation 3 and when it did eventually kick off, gamers were presented with an unbelievable array of cutting-edge tech showcases. Unbelievable, as in literally unbelievable."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
FallenAngel1984260d ago

Although I’m grateful they used the familiar DualShock esque SixAxis controller and later an actual DualShock 3, just once I’d like to wield that boomerang prototype controller

Rude-ro259d ago

They had an aftermarket controller that looked a lot like this for ps1 and I loved it.
The design allows that player to grip the controller per their hand size.
I really wished it would have released or been an option.

scofios259d ago

Would have loved to be given the option for the bomerang controller , but the crybaby 's \ haters didn't let us .

Gaming_1st259d ago


Cry baby haters? You mean hardcore gamers that love the controller the way it is. Its called voice of reasoning. Maybe they could have sold it separately. But it was probably a wise business decision.

Fragnum259d ago


"just once I’d like to wield that boomerang prototype controller"

Haha, Yes!!

Thanks for confirming that I'm not the only person in the world that would have liked to rock the "Boomerang" controller at least once in my lifetime!

259d ago
Dragonscale259d ago

You'd have to be careful when you rage quit and throw it lol.

rainslacker259d ago

People really put it down and it got a lot of hate and criticism, but I don't think anyone actually used it. Not even those in the media that I'm aware. Never understood why it got so much hate. It's not like Sony to actually not do testing on their controllers to see if they're comfortable for the players.

At one point the Dualshock(or dual analog as it was originally released) design was new too....and never recall people freaking out about the design. It went on to win awards. Xbox's Duke controller took after the Dreamcast controller, and no one complained about the DC controller when it was shown.

I think the Boomerang should have been given a chance.

iN_4G_form258d ago

I would’ve liked to have put my palms on it too. But at least some of it’s curved and sculpted surfaces made it onto the DualShock 4:

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 258d ago
Fragnum260d ago

Very interesting video.

Still watching as its over an hour long, but so far a really entertaining insight into Sony's 2005 PS3 reveal.

Loving Ken kutaragi's Yakuza style clothing, What a character!

WilliamSheridan259d ago

Such deception. They almost committed suicide that gen

Dragonscale259d ago

Bit like xbox this gen eh. The whole of it has been deception from ms.

Septic260d ago

"And perhaps that's what rankles most about the PS3 reveal - the fact that Sony staff must have surely known what their hardware was capable of and that the target renders in particular weren't couched in the reality of the console's spec, and yet they were still shown to millions."

We should always remember that all companies can mislead others. I remember that E3 and how Sony did not say anything regarding the CGI Killzone trailer for AGES.

The downright ludicrous comments I read saying that the actual game exceeded that, well there's nothing to say and just let people carry on with that delusion.

However, despite Sony's deception I agree with this:

"But while those target renders may have been woefully misleading, it was still the first party output that delivered some of the greatest gaming moments of the generation"

And that's why Sony ended it's gen on a high note. All was forgiven because Sony delivered on the games. Not just the best looking ones but some real classics courtesy of ND and Kojima.


I agree. Sony hasn't released anything that topped that 2005 trailer in terms of spectacle. I was really impressed with that gameplay trailer for TLOU 2 though. Detroit impresses me every time I see any gameplay for it.

DialgaMarine259d ago

Strongly disagree. Horizon is far more impressive than that tech demo, with the exception of maybe facial animations. That looked great back in 2005, but it’s pretty dated these days after games like Uncharted 4 and HZD.

CobraKai259d ago

Those tech demos, while impressive at the time, are ridiculously out dated looking. I think by the time MGS 4, Killzone 3, and The Last of Us arrived, those bullshot demos faded from memory and were surpassed by actual games.

Gaming_1st259d ago

I totally disagree. Maybe you need to go back and watch it and refresh that brain.

DialgaMarine259d ago

I wouldn’t call the comments ludicrous. In some ways, the final product did in fact look better. The demo clearly had the advantage in facial animations, physics, and particle effects, but the final product had better clothing/ environment details and textures, better lighting, and much better fire effects. I don’t think the real KZ2 was even in development yet when that tech video was made, considering they’re almost 4 years apart.

I see this as more of a case like BotW and the Link vs Spider tech demo from E3 2012. Both looked great, but had completely different styles.

Majin-vegeta259d ago

Except that tech demo was nor suppose to have left GG office.Somehow someone from sony marketing team got a hold of it.
Starts at 5:30

iN_4G_form258d ago (Edited 258d ago )

That someone was Jack Tretton. And what’s worse (and most unfortunate), Tretton said that it was gameplay (from 3:46 - 4:16 of this video ) which is what Angie Smets recounts from 6:43 - 7:12 of the documentary you linked to.

Three years after the controversy a Guerilla Games dev took to the PSblog and said:

"The E3 2005 trailer was not false. One confused Sony rep claimed it was a movie from the game engine - one guy blitzed out of his mind on fatigue, jet-lag and the madness that is E3. One guy not at all affiliated with Guerrilla Games - probably with a head full of 30 different titles.”

But to Phil Harrison’s credit, he told Eurogamer in his post-E3 interview that none of the footage was real-time because it was "running off video" and that the video was “done to PS3 spec".

Unfortunately Harrison’s words weren’t broadcast live nationwide -- Tretton’s were; and they gave PS detractors, disenchanted PS fanboys and an agenda driven media another salvo of grievance and negative press to fire at “crazy” Ken and “arrogant” Sony.

generic-user-name259d ago

It's good that we have to go back to over 10 years ago for an example of Sony being shady, wish we could say the same for all companies.

Septic259d ago

Agreed. Sony have been mostly great this gen. Microsoft have been the opposite, almost adopting Sony's attitude last gen, minus that massive turnaround, which might come at the end...but who knows.

Neonridr259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

when have Nintendo been shady? Genuinely curious to see what your definition of shady is..

Gaming_1st259d ago

"Microsoft have been the opposite, almost adopting Sony's attitude last gen,"

You mean other then putting out great games?

259d ago
IamTylerDurden1259d ago

What i don't understand is DF going back 13 years when in fact this problem is very relevant and very prevalent right now. This gen has seen habitual offenders via the likes of Microsoft and Ubisoft, among others. Whether it's Microsoft using super computers tucked away in cabinets to run demos at conferences or Ubisoft announcing games like Watchdogs and R6S with completely unrealistic gameplay footage. We also have Microsoft using its Windows 10 link to an extreme advantage by showing all game trailers on powerful PCs at shows while playing it off as if they were being show on an XB1 X. Deception is alive and well this generation and the media would be doing a better service to cover the afflictions that are actually affecting games and gamers today.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 258d ago
Apocalypse Shadow260d ago

Still watching this myself.10min to go. But DF does have a negative tone. Even the video asks and is titled "what is real and what is fake?" When it should be "what is real-time, what is cg video and what is the potential of future games?

Sony showed in the beginning what was real-time from the unreal tech demo, the eyetoy demo, fight night with EA,etc and the physics potential. Since most games weren't ready, they went with cg videos of some games instead of real-time.

Maybe I'm one of the few and I'm not a tech expert. But I know since the beginning of gaming with Pong and Atari, what is real-time and what is cg. Why? Because up to that point of last generation, lots of console companies showed cg trailers of their games and not the actual game. Some still do today.

Case in point :Onimusha
When this video came out, I knew this wasn't the game and not running real-time. It's like some had amnesia with console gaming after Sony's presentation.

And Microsoft funneling money and advertising to the media, giving away free laptops and $800 halo swag bags to write negatively about Sony didn't help. Game trailers fake video comparisons they got caught on, deleted comment sections, EGM mag with PS3 and tomatoes. GameSpot and their infamous "too much variety" and Edge and game industry biz giving Sony lower scores but neglecting other companies was an interesting time. Saying Sony was arrogant. And some were like Ken K. But Microsoft took arrogance to another level. Then lied themselves with PC and not real-time on Xbox one.

But in the end, Sony put out *real* games that mattered on PS3 and continue to put out *real* games that matter on PS4. Showing their competitors what's important. Not their *presentations.* But their *actions* since PS1.

OTaylor259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

I think the title and video as a whole are centered around Sony knowingly being deceptive, and I dont think there is any question that they were. It wasnt just at E3 either, but throughout the time frame leading up to the launch of the PS3. Im more interested in what motivated Digital Foundry to put together this video. Is it simply an interest piece? A flame piece for hits? Or even a forewarning about Sony for a possible PS5 announcement at E3 2018? It is odd that we are seeing a piece about this 13 years after the covered subject.

morganfell259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

Maybe its a preemptive piece because someone is about to torpedo another game...and I do not mean Sony. It is a common tactic for some to paint an opponent in a bad light right before the authors do something less than stellar themselves.

After all, how many questionable videos has each major studio shown? Are they going to do an entire piece on Kinect presentations? Milo? Star Wars? And that's just for starters. What about PCs under a box being presented as Xbox versions?

Apocalypse Shadow259d ago

When games aren't ready, what do most companies show? CG trailers to fill in the gaps. Like I said, maybe I've gamed for too long and can tell the difference between real-time and cg. And most gamers who have played as long as me could tell the difference.

And, not once did **any** executive onstage say that those videos about to be presented are actual gameplay. Kaz, Phil and Ken not once said "all content you see is gameplay.

When Microsoft launched 360 people got used to what is expected for real-time. And Sony launching later, some gamers expected another jump in graphics when at that time, graphics were going to be about the same.

What digital foundry should be doing, is interviewing Sony executives on the potential graphics the Cell would have produced with **all 8 SPEs** running instead of 6 with 1 tasked to do features and the other 1 being redundant. You don't see redundant chips or cores in PS4.

So I would like to know what the RSX,Cell and 8 SPEs could do. Also, most might miss the part in the video on how microsoft benefited from Sony and the Cell creation through leaked tech.

Concertoine259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

its honestly funny seeing how angry people get with Digital Foundry no matter what they do. I've seen them called anti-xbox and anti-playstation and payed off by both companies.

This isn't a flame piece for hits, i think you overestimate the number of rabid fanboys who are still invested in this company's actions from 13 years ago. This segment on their channel is called DF Retro - they look at old games and consoles and the like, and now this presser is nearly 13 years old. It's one of the most infamous E3's of all time and its totally worth looking at to determine what's what and compare it to retail products. Very interesting video.

Morpheuzpr259d ago

DF have always been bias towards Microsoft. It may sometimes seem like thats not the case when they praise some sony games, but that's cause it'll be too obvious if they didn't. When they do comparisons between base xbox and base ps4 games they always downplay clear differences while in the case of one x and the pro they exaggerate them.

The fact that they made a 1 hour documentary bashing sony is telling enough. Then there was that video they released about how Microsoft invited them to see how the one x worked exactly hardware wise. Anyway that's how i see it since the ps3 and 360 days. Eurogamer ans df have been bias since then imo.

Concertoine259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

Im so glad im not this paranoid and emotionally invested to believe everyone's out to get poor sony :(. What do they exaggerate - what do they downplay. They talk about differences in resolution and framerate - how do you spin this? Give EXAMPLES

Bashing sony how? They're looking at a presser that Sony made, uncut with running commentary on the technical aspects of it. Also they're a tech analysis channel - why would Microsoft not invite them to look at a piece of tech that they're confident with. Digital foundry is a big part of the gaming media now because they are the best and most popular at what they do.

In the 7th gen they typically talked about the 360's advantages over PS3 in multiplats because 9/10 times that was the case. Now they talk about the PS4's advantages over Xbox One because 9/10 times (probably more like 10/10) that's the case. Now the One X is the more powerful console, naturally it will usually have an advantage. Im so tired of seeing fanboys act like Digital Foundry is their favorite company's sworn enemy because the tech isn't in their favor all the time!

IamTylerDurden1259d ago

It was a bit disturbing just how cynical the DF guys were. They even said that Kaz looked "shifty" and implied that he was untrustworthy based purely on the fact that he was moving his eyes in order to read the prompter. They were also very smug while continuously taking shots at the PS3 hardware. They made multiple jokes about the Cell processor and even about the PS2 which was a bit bewildering. I suppose all of this is to be expected for a video that takes a decidedly negative stance from the headline, but everything i described transpired in the first ten minutes alone.

The funny thing about them ragging on the Cell, Ram, Bandwith, and really every aspect of the PS3 is that a few years into the gen the hardware and more specifically the Cell processor started to show its true capabilities. By 2009 Motorstorm, Uncharted, Uncharted 2, and Killzone 2 had been released and all were technically brilliant with best in class visuals. 2010 God of War 3, 2011 Uncharted 3, then Heavy Rain, Killzone 3, TLoU ect. PS3 and the cell processor ended up having the last laugh by producing the generations best and best looking games.

Apocalypse Shadow259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

I saw the same thing in the video Tyler. They were reading ken and Kaz as shady executives and the "here it comes..." they kept using as if something infamous was about to happen.

They were talking about tech yes. But the way they talked about them was telling.

I saw the same thing. Some here are now saying Digital foundry are psychologists now and can read people and their eyes.

It's a shady video they made with questionable intentions.

rainslacker259d ago

For all of their criticism of the CELL, they maybe don't realize that modern GPU's use a lot of the things that were established in the CELL itself. The CELL may have been a bitch to program for last gen because of it's unique architecture, but everything that made it difficult to program for is now used in GPU compute principals and quite a few standard routine GPU functions.

CELL is still around, despite what the haters want to believe, and no matter how much people want to bash it as a thing Sony did horribly wrong last gen.

bolimekurac259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

becuase he was shifty, they where lying about everything. they show you one thing and deliver something close to it, but they where arrogant at that time so they lied alot, showed trailers like killzone and others and the games didnt look like what was shown, they told you that you would work 2 jobs to get one and then had the balls to charge you 599 for it and then removed bc from it to further show you how much they are for the gamers

the same way hackers can get ps2 games working on a ps4 but sony wont allow bc, because they are for the gamers right??

iN_4G_form258d ago (Edited 258d ago )

@Apocalypse Shadow

The Cell’s tech wasn’t leaked. That’s a fallacy, which has been spun and sensationalized (as usual) by “journalists”:

"Shippy doesn't believe that Microsoft yet knew that Sony had the PlayStation 3 in the works -- but liked what it saw in the PowerPC technology that was now possible thanks to design principles partly researched for Cell. "The initial tech that we built -- yes, it was paid for through the Sony-Toshiba-IBM Design Center, and was developed for the Cell chip," says Shippy.

"All three companies… legally all had rights to go and put any of that technology, any of those processor cores into other spaces. All of them talked about doing that… so it was every bit IBM's right to sell any of that tech to other design spaces," Shippy explains. "It is very common to develop an interesting, leading-edge new technology and then utilize that technology across multiple platforms."

"I guess what everyone didn't anticipate was -- before we even got done with the Cell chip and PS3 product -- we weren't anticipating that we'd be showing this off specifically to a competitor."

Does that mean Microsoft got a look at the Cell itself? "No, we didn't show them the Cell chip," Shippy clarifies. "The Cell itself and the fundamental architecture that went into that, actually not -- that was all proprietary for PS3. What was shown to Microsoft was just a technology road map that said, 'hey, we can go do these high-performance PowerPC cores at very high frequency and low power'."

"In no way did IBM say anything about the fundamental architecture of the Cell chip; it was more about introducing Microsoft to the circuit design technology that enabled us to create these really fast processors."” -- Leigh Alexander, 2009

Apocalypse Shadow258d ago (Edited 258d ago )

Point was, Microsoft benefited from Sony design legally yes. But how many times had that ever happened in gaming before Microsoft entered console gaming? Yup. Zero. And in the same building and sometimes in the next cubicle. Ridiculous.

Yeah. It's as much IBM's fault too. Allowing a competitor to benefit from another company's design theory.

iN_4G_form257d ago (Edited 257d ago )

You’ve moved the goalpost. Saying that “microsoft benefited from Sony design legally yes”, isn’t the same as saying “microsoft benefited from Sony and the Cell creation through leaked tech.”

The latter carries a different connotation, and suggests that there was an effort on the part of Sony to conceal tech that Cell makes use of from becoming known to Microsoft; and that it became known to Microsoft through nefarious or illegal means despite Sony’s efforts to keep it under wraps -- which is incorrect. That’s the point.

Yes, Microsoft benefited (marginally); but it wasn’t from a Sony design. The PowerPC-based core (designed by David Shippy’s team) that Cell makes use of was a Sony-Toshiba-IBM design which could be sold as a standalone CPU core(s) by any of those 3 companies to any buyer in the market:

"I had to get over it pretty quick. While I was upset about it, I had to put on my PS3 hat or my Xbox 360 hat and basically just tell my team, 'Hey guys, this is no different than when Intel and AMD create a microprocessor and it goes into a Dell PC and an HP PC. Just get over it, and let's move on."

"At the end of the day it didn't matter," he says. "At the end of the day, I had these awesome engineers and they just wanted to create the best leading-edge technology that they could, and it didn't matter whose box it was going into." -- (from the article I linked to)

So, your question of “how many times had that ever happened in gaming before Microsoft entered console gaming?” and your issue with engineers from Microsoft sitting in cubicles next to engineers from Sony are of no importance.

Now, what wasn’t up for sell as a standalone CPU core or design was the SPE (designed by a different team headed up by Brian Flachs), as it is proprietary and fundamental to the Cell architecture -- unlike the Shippy team’s PPC-based core. The SPE is what makes the Cell the “Cell”, and it was never shown to Microsoft.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 257d ago
Avengerz43259d ago

I remember seeing that Killzone footage and I knew it was BS. Still ended up being a great game though.


Yup. KZ2, as a package factoring in both SP and MP, is still the best thing Guerilla Games has ever created. Best online shooter I've ever played next to Bad Company 2.

starchild259d ago

For me Killzone 2 was easily the best in the series, but I still like Horizon more. I do have great memories of playing Killzone 2 online though.

Minute Man 721259d ago

The last stage was harder that a Spanish test

Jon_Targaryen259d ago (Edited 259d ago )

Really? The last stage not to mention the last boss took me one try to beat.


^^Lies. Especially not on Elite.