Sony's Phil Harrison lies in Gamepro interview

R

Ruined

CAGiversary!
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
[quote name='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?[/QUOTE]

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='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[/QUOTE]

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.
 
[quote name='dpatel']ah ok, makes sense. Guess they want to ensure the success of blu-ray before they screw everyone over, huh. :roll:[/QUOTE]

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 fucking 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.
 
[quote name='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.[/quote]

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.
Click to expand...

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 fucked 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).
 
[quote name='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.[/QUOTE]

This is exactly the reason why a video game console should be for playing video games and nothing else.
 
[quote name='jkam']This is exactly the reason why a video game console should be for playing video games and nothing else.[/quote]

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.
 
[quote name='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.[/QUOTE]

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.
 
[quote name='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.[/QUOTE]

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.
 
It's all fuck. 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.
 
I haven't made the jump to widescreen or HD, and probably won't for years. My regular TV and DVDs are more than sufficient for my uses. That's why I love the idea of the Wii so much. Simple, and positioned to do well the one thing it focuses on. I like that.
 
I'm also wondering about some other areas Sony has yet to offer definitive ansers about on the $499 PS3 SKU. While it shouldn't be a problem to upgrade the hard drive, especially if they don't use custome firmware as they did on the PS2 HDD, what about the other components?

Will there be a card reader plug-in for the PS3? Remove the blank panel on the PS3 and in it goes? This would be much neater than having to plug in a USB device for the purtpose.

And will there be an upgrade option for HDMI addable to the machine if the buyer should decide they want that feature later on? It isn't a problem if it cost more to buy it as an upgrade, much like the hard drive added to an Xbox 360 Core System. The issue is whether the option will exist at all?

Everything the the Xbox 360 Core System lacks can be added later. It just cost more. It would really behoove Sony to follow that precedent.
 
hehe, arguing and worrying gets you nowhere.

If you were smart, like me, you would just not care.

Hell, it is better than DVD no matter what, and I don't have a 60 inch plasma tv...
 
what would this be like lie #3 from sony compared to like 10 from microsoft.

There both after money at the end of the day . But I guess its important for people with hdtv that care about using the ps3 as a blue ray player.
 
The protection won't be implemented for quite a while. I guarntee Sony knows what they are doing because they've never once let me down with their consoles/handhelds. I'm still getting a PS3 regardless to anything, since it has the games I want most.
 
Everybody keeps saying this is such a great bargain because Blu-Ray players will be $1000. Exactly how long do you think they will stay at $1000? If its any longer than a couple months HD-DVD will win by default.

Also, if the past is any indicator, anybody who buys a PS3 simply as a "cost effective method of obtaining a Blu-Ray player" will probably be disappointed. My PS2 was by far the worst DVD player I have ever owned, even the off-brand DVD players most stores give away do a better job.
 
[quote name='gofishn']Everybody keeps saying this is such a great bargain because Blu-Ray players will be $1000. Exactly how long do you think they will stay at $1000?[/quote]Not for too long. But as long as the price drops, the price of PS3 will drop also, meaning blu-ray players are cheaper to manufacturer.

If its any longer than a couple months HD-DVD will win by default.
Click to expand...
Blu-ray still has the massive support. It will be out by the time PS3 is out, which isn't much longer.

Also, if the past is any indicator, anybody who buys a PS3 simply as a "cost effective method of obtaining a Blu-Ray player" will probably be disappointed.
Click to expand...
How do you know, when no one knows yet how a PS3 blu-ray disc player may be.
My PS2 was by far the worst DVD player I have ever owned, even the off-brand DVD players most stores give away do a better job.
Click to expand...
It definitely isn't the best DVD player, but it does a decent job, and yes, I've tried multiple brand DVD players. Although, I did notice a 1st generation PS2 DVD player to not be as good as a newer PS2 (such as one released 2 years later).
[quote name='Vinny']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.[/QUOTE]If you have that sig/avatar up by next semester at Purdue (since I go there too), I'm coming by your place and removing it.:p

Sorry, I am a big Playstation supporter (although I buy and support all consoles) because Sony has been very nice to me as a G.A.P. member and even before (since I got my PS1 in 1995). I've come across more first party franchises that I love by them, compared to Nintendo and MS combined (like Ratchet & Clank, Jak, Parappa, etc.). Microsoft and Nintendo never gave me wonderful stuff. Also, if there wasn't a PS1, I probably wouldn't be gaming much at all right now, since he got me into gaming much more than ever, compared to the SNES/Genesis era. Although the Sony conference was a bit disappointing, there was still plenty of games coming to PS3 to make me happy and want one. So, there's no changing my mind unless Sony is gone for good.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. I've owned a PS1 and PS2. The PS1 has been very good to me and still works great to this day, but load times drive me crazy. I really have nothing against the PS1 since I've had a lot of fun with it over the years.

My PS2 on the other hand was a major piece of crap. First I got the DRE's (along with a ton of other people). I had that fixed and it worked good for a while then refused to read movie DVD's and later it started with the DRE's again for DVD based games. The damn thing then refused to work with the network adapter meaning no more SOCOM for me. It's had a ton of good games but I've just been incredibly disappointed with the hardware quality.

Before you label me an "anti-Sony fanboy" please keep in mind I've never owned an Xbox and while I do have a Gamecube, it has sat in my closet since I only own 1 game for it.
 
I'll also add that what should Sony should have done, stick with DVD discs? There's no denying if Sony would have stuck with DVD disc, it would have been just $400. Most may think DVD disc are just fine and all, but there were decent number of PS2 games that filled up two DVDs or a dual-layered DVD. How are their sequels on PS3 going to be done using a DVD? Also, CG Cinemas will be done in HD, that take up even more space. The only way to get around it is to make games 3-4 disc, greatly reduce the quality of the game by using CPU power to compress greatly, or just cut tons of corners on the game leaving out content. For an RPG, multiple disc might not be a bad thing, but for a racing game, wide open game, etc., it would be a problem. I know space to be a problem since many Japanese developers, like the developers of Enchanted Arms on Xbox 360, already complained that they had to use 2-3 DVDs for the game. Many PS3 games will be in a similar situation, since many Japanese games use a lot of CG cinemas. For Xbox 360, massive space might not be too big of a problem, since many western games don't use CG much and don't use any pre-rendered backgrounds like Japanese developers. The last thing Sony wants to do is have limited disc space, because that's part of what's helped them be successful for years, using a CD format on PS1 (causing them to get the Final Fantasy series since it couldn't fit on a cartridge), using a DVD for PS2 (many thought it was a bad idea for Sony to use at first, but many games filled it up), and now they are using a blu-ray for PS3. If Sony could have waited to release PS3, they definitely would have, because they knew the technology still needs time to come down on the price.

The other thing is that at least Sony doesn't do what Microsoft and Nintendo do for next generation consoles, where they release a new console and stop supporting their previous one, right away. Basically, they're telling people "Upgrade now, or be left in the dust". Sony will still be supporting PS2 for another 4-5 years (there are still many great games being announced for it now), so big Sony fans won't be in trouble if they choose to wait for a PS3. Sony did a simialr thing with PS2 (although it wasn't as expensive oh course) where they continued supporting PS1 for a few years, so people didn't have to upgrade to a PS2 until it was resonably priced.
[quote name='gofishn']My PS2 on the other hand was a major piece of crap. First I got the DRE's (along with a ton of other people). I had that fixed and it worked good for a while then refused to read movie DVD's and later it started with the DRE's again for DVD based games. The damn thing then refused to work with the network adapter meaning no more SOCOM for me. It's had a ton of good games but I've just been incredibly disappointed with the hardware quality.[/QUOTE]Actually, that's a small problem right there. Some PS2 consoles will only ready DVD or CD based games being the voltage being applied to one of the formats is insufficient. Basically, the laser just has to be slightly adjusted (or use potentiometers) and they problem is solved. That's why, I try to handle my PS2 with care, by moving it carefully, for my laser doesn't adjust. Have not had any problems, except for not reading dual-layered DVD games. However, all I had to do was blow into my PS2 (this was a while ago) and didn't have a problem since, because dust was obstructing the laser. I rarely have console problems though, exceot with my Xbox, that had to be repaired two times (still giving me problems), because of the Thompson drive in it.
 
[quote name='Samurai T']
Actually, that's a small problem right there. Some PS2 consoles will only read DVD or CD based games being the voltage being applied to one of the formats is insufficient. Basically, the laser just has to be slightly adjusted (or use potentiometers) and they problem is solved. That's why, I try to handle my PS2 with care, by moving it carefully, for my laser doesn't adjust. Have not had any problems, except for not reading dual-layered DVD games. However, all I had to do was blow into my PS2 (this was a while ago) and didn't have a problem since, because dust was obstructing the laser. I rarely have console problems though, exceot with my Xbox, that had to be repaired two times (still giving me problems), because of the Thompson drive in it.[/QUOTE]

The real problem is that you should not have to take apart your system to get your games to work. That's called faulty hardware. I have had more problems with sony's systems(ps1 overheated,ps2 DRE's) more than any other system's I've ever owned.

The ps2 is the most played system(home system, DS gets more play overall) I just hope sony get the hardware bugs work out this time around.
 
[quote name='Vinny']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.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I mean, really people. How many of you actually CARE about gaming in 1080p? I sure as hell don't. Phil Harrison is the only one that does. Since when has Phil become the foremost authority on gaming? Last time I checked Phil has NEVER shipped a game to market...

Component gaming suits me just fine.
 
[quote name='daphatty']Agreed. I mean, really people. How many of you actually CARE about gaming in 1080p? I sure as hell don't. Phil Harrison is the only one that does. Since when has Phil become the foremost authority on gaming? Last time I checked Phil has NEVER shipped a game to market...

Component gaming suits me just fine.[/QUOTE]

I care when its going to add that much to the price and then you can't use it anyway.

If you can't display in 1080p, then why not just get the 360 because all 360 games are 720p anyway? Yet its $100 more than the premium $360 model.
 
They are just even more of a resolution/tech whore than you guys are. I think it silly that people care about gaming in any HD resolutions at all, but Sony just takes it to the extreme.
 
[quote name='Samurai T']I'll also add that what should Sony should have done, stick with DVD discs? There's no denying if Sony would have stuck with DVD disc, it would have been just $400. Most may think DVD disc are just fine and all, but there were decent number of PS2 games that filled up two DVDs or a dual-layered DVD. How are their sequels on PS3 going to be done using a DVD? Also, CG Cinemas will be done in HD, that take up even more space. The only way to get around it is to make games 3-4 disc, greatly reduce the quality of the game by using CPU power to compress greatly, or just cut tons of corners on the game leaving out content. For an RPG, multiple disc might not be a bad thing, but for a racing game, wide open game, etc., it would be a problem. I know space to be a problem since many Japanese developers, like the developers of Enchanted Arms on Xbox 360, already complained that they had to use 2-3 DVDs for the game. Many PS3 games will be in a similar situation, since many Japanese games use a lot of CG cinemas. For Xbox 360, massive space might not be too big of a problem, since many western games don't use CG much and don't use any pre-rendered backgrounds like Japanese developers. The last thing Sony wants to do is have limited disc space, because that's part of what's helped them be successful for years, using a CD format on PS1 (causing them to get the Final Fantasy series since it couldn't fit on a cartridge), using a DVD for PS2 (many thought it was a bad idea for Sony to use at first, but many games filled it up), and now they are using a blu-ray for PS3. If Sony could have waited to release PS3, they definitely would have, because they knew the technology still needs time to come down on the price.

The other thing is that at least Sony doesn't do what Microsoft and Nintendo do for next generation consoles, where they release a new console and stop supporting their previous one, right away. Basically, they're telling people "Upgrade now, or be left in the dust". Sony will still be supporting PS2 for another 4-5 years (there are still many great games being announced for it now), so big Sony fans won't be in trouble if they choose to wait for a PS3. Sony did a simialr thing with PS2 (although it wasn't as expensive oh course) where they continued supporting PS1 for a few years, so people didn't have to upgrade to a PS2 until it was resonably priced.
[/QUOTE]

You seem to be forgetting a few things. FF 7,8, and 9 all used multiple CDs on the PS1 but sold millions. Apparently people didn't care all that much if they had to change disc occasionally. If a PS2 Final Fantasy title exceeds a single DVD-9, are there really going to be people complaining and expected to be taken seriously?

The list of PS2 games that use dual layer for capacity and not copy protection is quite short compared to the overall library. A number of dual layer PS2 games have been revealed to be well under the capacity needed for single layer and only shipped on a dual layer disc because apps that potentially allowed piracy like HD Loader couldn't deal with dual layer games.

Perhaps you haven't noticed but enChant Arms shipped on a single DVD-9 several months ago. People made a big deal about the developer's speculations but itutrned out to be much ado about nothing.

Yes, HD cinematics up the ante for data volume but the new machines also offer far more efficient codecs in which to store that data. Microsoft has long demonstrated that a substantial amount of 720p and 1080i video can be put on a single DVD 5 using their VC-1. The same applies for H.264 and other modern codecs that are fully supported on the new high-end consoles.

Would an epic RPG on a DVD-based PS3 have required more than one disc? Probably, depending on the choice between prerendered video and game engine animation. But it would matter far less for an RPG than a feature film for HDTV viewing. Except for bathroom breaks or other optional interruptions, we expect to watch a movie from start to finish in one sitting. Seeing all of the FMV in an RPG takes many hours of gameplay between sequences. We expect to spend dozens of hours in the game before we've seen it all. Having to change a disc at some point in that lengthy duration hardly seems an terrible imposition. Especially if it means the platform is accessible sooner rather than later.


I call shenanigans on your second point. Neither Nintendo or Microsoft stopped supporting their consoles. Nintendo lost most third party support so there was a drought o f new titles. Microsoft didn't have a choice in the matter because Nvidia wanted to cease producing the chipset. Xbox hardware production has ceased but a steady stream of new games has continued with more to come.

You must be remembering a different universe than me. As I recall it, once the PS2 was well established, less than a year from launch, the remaining PS1 releases were almost entirely bargain titles or long unreleased Japanese games that finally got localized after the license value dropped to nil. If all you had was a PS1, the choices for new games ended quite soon after PS2 became Sony's focus.

Which isn't to say the PS1 became worthless, just as the GameCube and Xbox have not. Unless you have excessive amounts of free time and disposable income, chances are any of these platforms still had much to offer after their successors appeared. Nintendo and Microsoft are hoping to bring their customer base to the new platforms as soon as possible but they can only entice , not force.
 
Man ive been posting crap about SONY and how they lie so bad back before all this E3 crap this year, just take any rubber ducky E3 demo from the past IT NEVER STANDS UP or looks that good...people just thought I was hating on SONY

The fact is I really dont think there is a "fanboy" when it comes to videogames...you want good games...no lag...and all the other stuff a gamer wants...SONY is evil when it comes to games, not that MS isnt evil but at least its a system built by gamers and for gamers...I feel the same way about Nintendo they are cool in my book....if you have kids its a great company too. When they showed that $ 499 system I died laughing knowing full well about this...I even posted about how you NEVER EVER buy combo items like a DVD/GAME console...when your PS3 breaks (even the $600 model) you then cant play games or watch movies....no tech/home theater person buys combo electronics for this exact reason. I would not be surprised if they change something else AGAIN on the PS3 from all this negitive feedback wether its add-ons or take something else out or drop the price by 50 bucks on each model
 
Hey, not everyone can have PR gurus like Reggie and Perrin. Well thats what SONY boardmembers get for hiring 2 UK bigwigs with no substantive track record. Its all about the decisions you make
 
fuck both Sony and Microsoft for using their GAME consoles to wage a next gen movie format war that I could care less about.

Sony should not have included blueray on the PS3. Stick with regular dvd like Microsoft did. So a couple of cg cutscene intensive games may require more than one disc? So what? What does an extra disc cost a manufacturer? 5 cents? I'd rather pay that than pay $600, for a $400 console because it contains some shit new format that no one is ready for.

The PS3 will also include lasers to play regular dvd and cd right? Cos its gonna be backwards compatible.

How much do you want to bet that many of the launch games and early games for the PS3 come on regular old dvds, and dont even make use of the blueray?

Thanks for the kick in the nuts Sony... :roll:
 
[quote name='Puffa469']
How much do you want to bet that many of the launch games and early games for the PS3 come on regular old dvds, and dont even make use of the blueray?

Thanks for the kick in the nuts Sony... :roll:[/QUOTE]


Oh totally thats gonna be the best part...gonna laugh my arse off...plus when they do go to Blu-ray games I bet they sell them for $70 or more not even gonna ask how much LE games will cost...whats that FF13 Limited Edition Blu ray game is 80-85 bucks bahbahbha, DIE SONY DIE
 
[quote name='Daddy']Oh totally thats gonna be the best part...gonna laugh my arse off...plus when they do go to Blu-ray games I bet they sell them for $70 or more not even gonna ask how much LE games will cost...whats that FF13 Limited Edition Blu ray game is 80-85 bucks bahbahbha, DIE SONY DIE[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'm guessing you just happened to miss the important piece of info that all PS3 games will be on Blu-Ray. It might be something you want to jot down in your notes.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Yeah, I'm guessing you just happened to miss the important piece of info that all PS3 games will be on Blu-Ray. It might be something you want to jot down in your notes.[/quote]

I'll write that down right next to where I wrote down that all PS3's will have TWO hdmi slots, and a built in router/hub. Sony lies, deal with it.
 
What this all boils down to, is you vote with your money.

You talk shit now, but in a year from today you'll have one. Why? Because your a slave.

If you dont have one, and you're one of the ones who've been talking shit this whole time... I commend your honor...

Otherwise, you're just a consumer, who will buy whatever is put in front of them. $200 is one thing, hell $400 is pushing the envelope, but if you pay $600 for gaming hardware, you need to get a life, or get laid. ITS JUST VIDEO GAMES. Its a useless hobby that unless you're a pro gamer, you'll get nothing from.

Read a book, learn to tango, get your penis enlarged for all I care... but playing video games makes you nothing but fat and socially inept. Paying $600 for a game system is like buying into a life you really wont want in the end. Let it go.
 
Well price point is subjective. If I make a million dollars a year (which I do not), then why would I mind buying a $700 system? Some women spend more than that for their pocketbooks.


[quote name='Mookyjooky']What this all boils down to, is you vote with your money.

You talk shit now, but in a year from today you'll have one. Why? Because your a slave.

If you dont have one, and you're one of the ones who've been talking shit this whole time... I commend your honor...

Otherwise, you're just a consumer, who will buy whatever is put in front of them. $200 is one thing, hell $400 is pushing the envelope, but if you pay $600 for gaming hardware, you need to get a life, or get laid. ITS JUST VIDEO GAMES. Its a useless hobby that unless you're a pro gamer, you'll get nothing from.

Read a book, learn to tango, get your penis enlarged for all I care... but playing video games makes you nothing but fat and socially inept. Paying $600 for a game system is like buying into a life you really wont want in the end. Let it go.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Puffa469']Sony should not have included blueray on the PS3. Stick with regular dvd like Microsoft did. So a couple of cg cutscene intensive games may require more than one disc? So what? What does an extra disc cost a manufacturer? 5 cents? I'd rather pay that than pay $600, for a $400 console because it contains some shit new format that no one is ready for.[/quote]

The inclusion of Blu-ray on Sony's part was inevitable and necessary for at least two reasons: 1) Sony's movie studios (includes MGM, Columbia & TriStar), collectively, own one of the largest library of films, and re-issuing them in an HD format would ensure a consistent revenue stream for the parent company, and 2) the Blu-ray format has the requisite capacity to store everything developers could hope for on a single disc. "....yeah, but Bethesda Softworks managed to fit Oblivion onto a single DVD just fine." That may be fine for first-generation software, but a day will come in a console's life cycle where 8.5GB on a dual-layer DVD is inadequate and multiple discs will be needed. This is already true for at least two Japanese developers working on RPGs for the 360, where multiple discs are required. Japanese developers have a preference for CG cutscenes rather than utilizing the in-game engine to accomplish the same task; doing them in HD means that much more space is needed. Remember: as time passes and developers familiarize themselves with the hardware, and as some of the projects become more ambitious, the extra space will be a requirement. Why not use multiple DVDs? Publishers are trying to minimize costs wherever possible. You ask: what's one extra disc? When you consider that a game's print run is in tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, those nickels and dimes do add up, as it translates to reduced profits. When Blu-ray disc production ramps up to a projected 10 million per month (which Sony estimates), the cost of producing a BR disc would be the same as a dual-layer DVD disc. If a single BR disc can hold the equivalent of 3 dual-layer DVDs, why not go in the BR direction? The cost savings during production can easily be tens of thousands of dollars for the publisher. Also, who enjoys swapping discs between stages/levels during an intense gaming sequence? You may not care, but I know a few people who do.

The PS3 will also include lasers to play regular dvd and cd right? Cos its gonna be backwards compatible.
Click to expand...

Yes. Regular DVDs and CDs will be played by a red laser mechanism; Blu-ray discs will be handled by a blue laser (hence the name).

How much do you want to bet that many of the launch games and early games for the PS3 come on regular old dvds, and dont even make use of the blueray?
Click to expand...

I'll take that bet. :D It's not about utilizing the full capacity of the disc; Sony is intent on pushing the BR format and publishers will likely comply with Sony's wishes.
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']Sony lying to try to create excitement for their upcoming console? Who would have thought that?

* Says the disgruntled Dreamcast gamer[/quote]
I hear that brotha! I remember the disheartened PS2 owners complaining about the dreaded jaggies. Directed them to Soul Calibur on the DC kiosk ;)
 
[quote name='Puffa469']fuck both Sony and Microsoft for using their GAME consoles to wage a next gen movie format war that I could care less about....[/quote]
MS is not forcing the HD-DVD format down your throat. If they were, it wouldn't really qualify as an addon device ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top