Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

http://www.gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=3238

...On Whether the 20-GB PS3 Will Fully Support Blu-Ray The $599 60 GB PS3 (top) looks different from the $499 20 GB PS3 (bottom) "That seems to be a misunderstanding and I'm happy to clear that up. Both machines have Blue Ray disc as standard. Both machines play Blue Ray disc movies as standard. Both machines will play Blue Ray disc movies as HD. The only difference is that the high end machine uses a more convenient digital interconnect called HDMI which is a digital standard and the 20 gig unit uses HD component which is an analog standard. The picture quality is fantastic." "The end user will not notice any quality difference. Perhaps if you were projecting onto a gi-normous screen you might notice some difference, but also not every HD display has HDMI. So we're providing a choice to the consumer." "Both versions will support 1080p.

Sorry Phil, but that is an outright lie. While users might not be able to tell the difference between Component and HDMI on HD material, when studios begin to enable the Image Constraint Token digital copy protection for Blu-Ray you will only be able to get a measly 960x540 resolution out of component instead of high definition 1920x1080 with HDMI. That is a massive difference - when movie studios start to turn on ICT if you don't have HDMI or DVI w/HDCP you might as well just watch standard DVD because you won't be able to get high definition with Blu-Ray over component. While launch Blu-Ray titles don't have ICT enabled, it likely won't be long before studios start to turn on the digital copy protection flag.

It's really sad that Sony is trying to take advantage of the fact that many game players do not closely follow home theater and might not know that if they buy the $499 PS3 they are essentially locking themselves out from watching Blu-Ray in high definition in the near future. I realize that it is Phil's job to convince people that the $499 PS3 is not crippled as a Blu-Ray player, but in reality it is in a big way! If you want to watch Blu-Ray movies without buying yet another Blu-Ray player once ICT protection is enabled in movies, it is a must that you buy the $599 model.

Well, but if we're going to be pissed off about this, can we be pissed off with movie studios instead for implementing something dumb like ICT?

Originally Posted by seanw Well, but if we're going to be pissed off about this, can we be pissed off with movie studios instead for implementing something dumb like ICT?

No, because Sony makes Blu-Ray. Sony was the one who included ICT in the Blu-Ray format, that was Sony's decision. Now Sony is trying to pretend ICT doesn't exist, yet they were the ones who put it in there!

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Telling lies to sell a product because your buying consumers won't know what's wrong until its too late is pretty messed up.

All Sony has left is lies.

I wouldn't really call it a lie. Besides, Sony has already said they will not enable ICT as well as other major movie companies like Universal, Paramount, Disney, and 20th centruty Fox. This may not even be a problem at all.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060327-6473.html

Following on the heels of Sony, Universal has confirmed that they will not be using such capabilities to downgrade video on their offerings, at least for now. This marks what looks to be a major studio to turn away from the so-called image constraint token—the name given to the AACS software functionality that allows for downsampling video to 960x540 (approximately NTSC). Paramount, Disney and Twentieth Century Fox have all backed off of using the ICT, leaving Warner Brothers as the only major studio saying that they will use the it. According to BusinessWeek, sources say that Warner will use the ICT on "at least some" of their initial titles.

Originally Posted by dpatel I wouldn't really call it a lie. Besides, Sony has already said they will not enable ICT as well as other major movie companies like Universal, Paramount, Disney, and 20th centruty Fox. This may not even be a problem at all. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060327-6473.html

They will not enable them for launch titles as I wrote in my original post and as is quoted in your article (note the "at least for now" bolded in your quote). Once ICT is turned on, $499 PS3 turns from a Blu-Ray player into a standard DVD player in terms of resolution. It will be turned on, too - there would be no point in including it in the format otherwise and Sony has no control of whether its turned on outside of their own studio. They are leaving it off at first until more HDMI HDTV sets saturate the market and to make these highdef formats more attractive for early adopters - but the fact is, it will be turned on and Sony put it in there as a mandatory Blu-Ray CP feature, and therefore have no control if say Fox were to turn it on for all their movies 6 months from now.

ah ok, makes sense. Guess they want to ensure the success of blu-ray before they screw everyone over, huh.

Originally Posted by dpatel ah ok, makes sense. Guess they want to ensure the success of blu-ray before they screw everyone over, huh.

Exactly. Don't worry HD-DVD is attempting to do the same thing by leaving ICT off in initial titles but incorporating the ICT CP mandatory in all players, it's classic bait and switch.

Yet another reason to wait until all this shit is sorted out and not to even factor in the PS3s Blu-Ray capabilities when deciding on a console. I just feel sorry for the poor saps that aren't well informed enough to know about this kind of stuff that may end up buying a PS3 for $500 thinking they are getting a deal and will have to eventually buy another player to play Blu-Ray movies in true 1080p. This is really ing shady of Sony if all the studios switch later (well, I guess I should say 'when' and not 'if'), but it's equally shady of MS to be releasing their HD-DVD add on without HDMI too and acting like it's not gimped as well. At least with MS though you have the option.

Originally Posted by Stuka I just feel sorry for the poor saps that aren't well informed enough to know about this kind of stuff that may end up buying a PS3 for $500 thinking they are getting a deal and will have to eventually buy another player to play Blu-Ray movies in true 1080p.

It really is lame, and nevermind true 1080p you will be watching in something more like 540p with the $499 PS3 over component when studios start to turn on ICT.

MS to be releasing their HD-DVD add on without HDMI too and acting like it's not gimped as well. At least with MS though you have the option.

MS will likely also release an HDMI cable for the 360 to go along with the HD-DVD drive as MS has said this in the past (Lik Sang is already taking preorders for it). The ATI GPU has the internals to transmit HDMI and the IBM CPU could likely do the scaling necessary. And if they don't, yeah it will be just as useless in the future but it is an option as you stated.

That's pretty ed up right there. I hope some major journalists get wind of this and confront Sony with the issue directly (maybe EGM can go for another "hard-hitting" interview, this time with Sony).

Originally Posted by Ruined http://www.gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=3238 Sorry Phil, but that is an outright lie. While users might not be able to tell the difference between Component and HDMI on HD material, when studios begin to enable the Image Constraint Token digital copy protection for Blu-Ray you will only be able to get a measly 960x540 resolution out of component instead of high definition 1920x1080 with HDMI. That is a massive difference - when movie studios start to turn on ICT if you don't have HDMI or DVI w/HDCP you might as well just watch standard DVD because you won't be able to get high definition with Blu-Ray over component. While launch Blu-Ray titles don't have ICT enabled, it likely won't be long before studios start to turn on the digital copy protection flag. It's really sad that Sony is trying to take advantage of the fact that many game players do not closely follow home theater and might not know that if they buy the $499 PS3 they are essentially locking themselves out from watching Blu-Ray in high definition in the near future. I realize that it is Phil's job to convince people that the $499 PS3 is not crippled as a Blu-Ray player, but in reality it is in a big way! If you want to watch Blu-Ray movies without buying yet another Blu-Ray player once ICT protection is enabled in movies, it is a must that you buy the $599 model.

This is exactly the reason why a video game console should be for playing video games and nothing else.

Originally Posted by jkam This is exactly the reason why a video game console should be for playing video games and nothing else.

Agreed.

I applaud Nintendo for staying the course with gaming, and not branching out unneccesarily. I buy a console to game, not to watch movies and all that other stuff.

Originally Posted by the ender Agreed. I applaud Nintendo for staying the course with gaming, and not branching out unneccesarily. I buy a console to game, not to watch movies and all that other stuff.

Well, in addition to Nintendo, Microsoft isn't forcing you to pay for highdef movies either - you can pickup a 360 for $299 and use it just for games.

Sony is the only company forcing you to pay extra for highdef movies.

Originally Posted by Ruined Well, in addition to Nintendo, Microsoft isn't forcing you to pay for highdef movies either - you can pickup a 360 for $299 and use it just for games. Sony is the only company forcing you to pay extra for highdef movies.

QFT. Although I'm still not a fan of the two SKUs plan, Microsoft's makes a hell of a lot more sense than Sony's.

Even when Sony copies the BAD things Microsoft does, they can't get it right.

I'm not buying the MS HD-DVD OR a PS3 until we know which one is the format to go with. The way things are going now, I don't think it's as cut and dried as it was a few months ago (with Blu-Ray being the overwhelming favorite). I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they both flop and are put into "laserdisc status" - only the hardcore cinemaphiles will give a damn. Heck, I actually do kind of care about that stuff but even I'm not that impressed. Yes, it looks better than DVD, but it's nowhere near the leap we got with VHS-to-DVD.

I wouldn't count on EGM to get a "hard-hitting interview" with Sony, but I guess I could be wrong. EGM being "hard-hitting" seems pretty flimsy at best. I wasn't nearly as impressed with their Peter Moore interview as a lot of people....sure, they'd ask tougher questions, but when he just gave a PR-spin reply, they'd let it go and move on to the next issue.

Wow, I really give a shit.

It's all . hd tv's are still shipping without hdcp compliancy.
so your hidef tv might not even work full resolution.

I think a more important issue is the one about there not being any (or many) HDTVs that support 1080p with a componant analog signal. This issue also affects games and not just movies. You won't be getting a 1080p picture in your games on the gimp $499 pack.

That's true. First of all, most 1080p HDTVs out right now aren't true 1080p, but instead they take a 1080i signal (over HDMI only BTW) and make it progressive scan. And all the true 1080p TVs I've seen so far only accept 1080p over HDMI or HDCP'd DVI.

It doesn't really matter though because I don't see PS3 doing many games, if any at all, in 1080p. The SINGLE 1080p game they showed at E3 was Gran Turismo HD and it looked like shit because the PS3, just like the 360, doesn't have the processing power to do 1080p AND high-res textures or advanced graphic techniques implemented (HDR, Volumetric clouds, advanced shaders, ect.)

My head hurts... Oh well, nobody in this household cares for anything over 1080i. Our TV does a fantastic job of handling 1080i, so we could care less for Sony's awesome 1080p capabilities.