Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis
Page 39 of 144 « First 293738 39 40414989139 Last »
Show 1000 post(s) from this thread on one page

Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/index.php)
-   Video Gaming (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=27)
-   -   [PS3] PlayStation 3 Discussion Thread (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=121)

russ May 18, 2006 01:44 PM
I'm getting the impression that you don't know how connecting to the internet works. And you don't understand how the Xbox Live service works or what it even is, so it would of course be difficult for you to understand what Sony's rip-off of XBLive service is like or how it works. There is no such thing as "Sony's PS2 Online Service", because Sony does not own and run dedicated servers to host gamers during online gameplay. In case you were wondering, servers cost money. Bandwidth for all of these gamers to use while connected to your servers cost money. Do you think that Sony will be willing to eat these costs? The problem is that they do not have the infrastructure already in place to provide this, meaning they would have to build it up from scratch. Not cheap. NCSoft/ArenaNet or whatever the company is that is running Guild Wars DOES have an already existing infrastructure, what with having several other MMO games that they provide service for, so they could handle making Guild Wars free because of the pre-existing infrastructure.

Cetra May 18, 2006 01:54 PM
I have to agree that Sony is pretty much clueless when it comes to the online connectivity realm. You're going to get what you pay for with the Sony service. Unlike Microsoft, who uses the XBox Live fees to maintain, upgrade and add features to the Live network, Sony won't have this income. Don't expect anything but some sort of very basic connectivity features with the PS3.

RacinReaver May 18, 2006 04:14 PM
Maybe Sony will come out with some sort of two-tiered system for online gaming. A free one with absolute shit servers and one you pay $5 a month for in order to get better service.

Does anyone remember way back when Kali used to do a service like that? They were a pay to access battle.net style network that served an assload of games.

Technophile May 22, 2006 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RacinReaver
Maybe Sony will come out with some sort of two-tiered system for online gaming. A free one with absolute shit servers and one you pay $5 a month for in order to get better service.

Does anyone remember way back when Kali used to do a service like that? They were a pay to access battle.net style network that served an assload of games.
Honestly so long as whatever they set up allows you to actually play your games online versus other actual human players, I'll be fine. All that extra online community, e-shop, score rankings, video/voice chat, myspace-esque stuff seems like extra fluff. They're certainly nice to have but not really needed.

Anyway, seems like the backlash just keeps on rolling...

and rolling...

and...rolling?

...?

How the hell will analog A/V or Component cables be able to display a full, HD, 1080p picture? I'll only believe this, when I see it.

Omnislash124 May 22, 2006 04:37 PM
Here's Wiki....

Quote:
(Under Playstation 3)
Video

* Supported screen sizes: 480p, 480i, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
* S/PDIF optical output for digital audio
* Multiple AV outputs
o Composite
o S-Video
o Component video (output up to 1080p)
o HDMI port (Digital video output; 60 GB model only)
Quote:
(Under Component Video)
Component video is capable of producing signals such as 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p, but digital connections such as DVI (video only) and HDMI (which can also include up to 8 channels of audio) give better results at the higher resolutions (up to 1080p).
While 1080p is possible with the Component Video, You're still gettin ripped from Sony somewhat because the HDMI outdoes it at higher resolutions.....

Technophile May 22, 2006 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omnislash124




While 1080p is possible with the Component Video, You're still gettin ripped from Sony somewhat because the HDMI outdoes it at higher resolutions.....

Yeah all the "1080p" pictures that I've seen via Component cables have seemed kind of crippled when put right next TVs showing the same footage with DVI or HDMI cables...

Megalith May 22, 2006 04:51 PM
1080p is downscaled to 540p.

Cetra May 22, 2006 05:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technophile
Honestly so long as whatever they set up allows you to actually play your games online versus other actual human players, I'll be fine. All that extra online community, e-shop, score rankings, video/voice chat, myspace-esque stuff seems like extra fluff. They're certainly nice to have but not really needed.

Anyway, seems like the backlash just keeps on rolling...

and rolling...

and...rolling?

...?

How the hell will analog A/V or Component cables be able to display a full, HD, 1080p picture? I'll only believe this, when I see it.

Uh a 1080p picture does not offer enough bandwidth to saturate a analog connection. 1080p pictures are only downscaled though non-HDMI connections if there is some type of ACSS protection on the data stream. This encryption is employed though the software, though it looks like movie companies don't even plan on making use of ACSS protection until at least 2010, if ever due to many HDTVs being sold today without HDMI inputs.

This HDMI issue is blow way out of perspective by people that don't even understand what HDMI is. HDMI does not offer higher resolutions compared to analog connections and the picture quality difference between component and HDMI is minimal to non-existent unless you are using a TV with really shit Digital-Analog converter circuitry.

BurningRanger May 22, 2006 05:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cetra
This HDMI issue is blow way out of perspective by people that don't even understand what HDMI is.
Good thing that happens to be about 60-70% of the Sony's target market, or else that would be crippling!

Soldier May 22, 2006 06:15 PM
I just read an artcile about HDCP compliance in DVD/Blu Ray players. Did they mention yet whether the PS3 will have HDCP compliance? If it does, and my HDTV doesn't, then I'll get screwed out of the full resolution.

Technophile May 22, 2006 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cetra
Uh a 1080p picture does not offer enough bandwidth to saturate a analog connection. 1080p pictures are only downscaled though non-HDMI connections if there is some type of ACSS protection on the data stream. This encryption is employed though the software, though it looks like movie companies don't even plan on making use of ACSS protection until at least 2010, if ever due to many HDTVs being sold today without HDMI inputs.

This HDMI issue is blow way out of perspective by people that don't even understand what HDMI is. HDMI does not offer higher resolutions compared to analog connections and the picture quality difference between component and HDMI is minimal to non-existent unless you are using a TV with really shit Digital-Analog converter circuitry.
Are you saying that, sans the ACSS/HDCP issue, both Component and HDMI cables will be able to truly display an identical 1080p picture? Because working at BestBuy, I've seen plenty of side by side comparisons on both high-end LCD and plasma TVs where that wasn't the case.

P.S.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic here or challanging your statements. I'm genuinly asking because I've never seen an "HD" picture running through Component that truly looked as good as one off of HDMI.

Omnislash124 May 22, 2006 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDIER
I just read an artcile about HDCP compliance in DVD/Blu Ray players. Did they mention yet whether the PS3 will have HDCP compliance? If it does, and my HDTV doesn't, then I'll get screwed out of the full resolution.
I love using Wiki as a source....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Type A HDMI is backward-compatible with the single-link Digital Visual Interface (DVI) used on modern computer monitors and graphics cards. This means that a DVI source can drive an HDMI monitor, or vice versa, by means of a suitable adapter or cable, but the audio and remote control features of HDMI will not be available. Additionally, without support for HDCP, the video quality and resolution may be artificially downgraded by the signal source to prevent the end user from viewing or especially copying restricted content. Type B HDMI is similarly backward-compatible with dual-link DVI.
Yeah, that might be it....so yeah, looks like you might be screwed....

EDIT: Additionally, Check out the Difference between the HDMI and the Component Below in the attachment. You can see how the Component input gives a range of colors from only light grey to dark grey as opposed to the greater contrast in the HDMI. So there is somewhat of a difference between the two, winner being the HDMI input...

Soldier May 22, 2006 08:35 PM
I also read that if your HDTV has an HDMI input, your TV is automatically HDCP certified, so it looks like I'm in the clear. Of course, HDMI is also the sole reason why I'll be forking an extra $100 for the $600 system, but that's the price I pay for true hi-def.

Cetra May 23, 2006 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technophile
Are you saying that, sans the ACSS/HDCP issue, both Component and HDMI cables will be able to truly display an identical 1080p picture? Because working at BestBuy, I've seen plenty of side by side comparisons on both high-end LCD and plasma TVs where that wasn't the case.

P.S.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic here or challanging your statements. I'm genuinly asking because I've never seen an "HD" picture running through Component that truly looked as good as one off of HDMI.
With a decent DA converter, there would be minimal difference. HDMI will offer a sharper picture, but nothing as drastic as being described around here. The jump in quality between component to HDMI is actually less than the jump between S-video and component.

And this is all assuming Sony doesn't offer a DVI solution for the multi-out which is entirely possible and would result in picture quality identical to HDMI output. It would just lack the ability to decrypt a ACSS stream.

Metal Sphere May 23, 2006 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cetra
With a decent DA converter, there would be minimal difference. HDMI will offer a sharper picture, but nothing as drastic as being described around here. The jump in quality between component to HDMI is actually less than the jump between S-video and component.
And that's a small jump indeed, given how I've run through quite a few HDMI/Component DVD players (including the Zenith model that allowed up-conversion via component before the firmware was fixed) on my TV. It's definitely something only the most anal audio/videophiles would whine about.

Quote:
And this is all assuming Sony doesn't offer a DVI solution for the multi-out which is entirely possible and would result in picture quality identical to HDMI output. It would just lack the ability to decrypt a ACSS stream.
Not that it would matter with games, and as you mentioned earlier, the studios aren't planning on using the ICT flags to downrez until 2010.

I'd definitely take a wait and see approach on this machine, looking at sales and industry support for it before buying it.

Omnislash124 May 25, 2006 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal Sphere
And that's a small jump indeed, given how I've run through quite a few HDMI/Component DVD players (including the Zenith model that allowed up-conversion via component before the firmware was fixed) on my TV. It's definitely something only the most anal audio/videophiles would whine about.
I dunno about everybody else, but if I'm paying $500/$600 for a system, it damn well better be worth every penny. Especially a system that has been boasting this feature for a long time now.

Lord Jaroh May 25, 2006 03:42 PM
Apparently I just read an interesting piece of hearsay. I'm not sure if it's true or not, but if there is truth in this rumor, it is a bad path to be following for Sony.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Cundy from Games Radar
[PS3] Sony makes moves to stamp out lucrative second-hand market
Words: Matt Cundy


Wednesday 24 May 2006
High street games shops have been told by Sony that there will be no PS3 pre-owned sections in their stores as it will be illegal for customers to sell any next-gen PlayStation games that they've bought, retail sources have revealed to GamesRadar.

It seems that Sony is planning to adopt a licensing system that will mean gamers won't own the PS3 titles that they've paid money for. Instead, they will only be purchasing the licence to play the game and that the software itself will still be Sony property - meaning that the disc won't be the customer's to sell.

We assume that the thinking behind this move will ultimately be to stop PS3 games being resold several times - which currently snatches potential sales away from Sony - and to counter the impression in consumers' minds that games are only really worth their pre-owned price and are not worth buying new.

When we contacted Sony, it issued us with the following statement: "We have made all of the official announcements at E3 and cannot make any further comments at this time. We will be announcing more news running up to PlayStation 3's launch."
If this is true, Sony is going to be shooting themselves in the foot with a bazooka. I can't even fathom the thinking behind this move if it turns out to be true.

I was a Playstation 3 supporter until I heard this, and if this turns out to be true, then I am definately going to be rethinking my position. I mean, I want to like the PS3, price not-withstanding, but not being able to buy used copies of games from stores...I'm sorry. At the prices that most of these games come out with (going by PS2 rates here), I will not be purchasing many of them at all, especially when they most likely won't be dropping much to compete with used games sales. Thus, more than likely no greatest hits versions either.

Nothing like greed to motivate a truely assinine decision like this. I sincerely hope that it is not true at all.

JazzFlight May 25, 2006 07:56 PM
http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/s...ic_id=23921409
Quote:
Originally Posted by From the article
While US Sony reps think the best way to deal with gossip is silence, Sony Europe spokespersons have apparently decided to put this particular rumor to rest.

According to the London Guardian's
tech blog, SCEE PR manger Jennie Kong blasted the rumor as " false speculation." "PlayStation 3 software will not be copy protected to a single machine but will be playable on any PlayStation 3 console," she told the Guardian.
I doubt Sony would go as far as to repeat the mistakes of the Divx DVD machines (where the machine would have to call in everytime you played a disc). EB and Gamestop would probably refuse to sell the system if they weren't able to profit off of the used games.

RacinReaver May 25, 2006 09:10 PM
Not to mention it's almost the same as the rumor as the systems locking games to only work on a single console.

Cetra May 26, 2006 11:24 AM
It's a false rumor which shouldn't be a surprise to most. Direct response to the latest rumor:

Quote:
We reported yesterday about a rumored message from Sony to retailers to warn them that selling used PS3 titles is "illegal." Sony has come out today and denied the rumor, telling GamesIndustry.biz "It's false speculation. We don't have any further knowledge about this topic - either officially or unofficially, to be frank."
Source

Shonos May 27, 2006 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairyFeet
Yeah I found this other source which described that basically, a gamer buying a PS3 game would buy a license to play the software, which would remain Sony property. Which I think is BS, and this particular bit of news hasn't been denied by Sony.


http://www.gamesradar.com/gb/ps3/gam...sectionId=1006
Why is it bullshit? You do realize that's basicly how it has been on computers for the longest time? You do not own the games and software you use. You merely purchased a license to use the software. The creators own the software, they're just letting you use it.

It may not be the best way to go about it but it's nothing new. If you're sitting here reading this post on any windows software then you're showing you have no problem with that kind of thing.

Cetra May 27, 2006 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shonos
Why is it bullshit? You do realize that's basicly how it has been on computers for the longest time? You do not own the games and software you use. You merely purchased a license to use the software. The creators own the software, they're just letting you use it.

It may not be the best way to go about it but it's nothing new. If you're sitting here reading this post on any windows software then you're showing you have no problem with that kind of thing.
No it's not the same. It's completely legal to box up and resell PC software if you uninstall the software from the previous machine. PC license software only prevents you from installing the software over the specified amount of PCs at once. It in no way makes reselling illegal.

Shonos May 27, 2006 04:23 PM
Oh, I guess I'm mistaken then. I thought it was the same though. It certainly sounds similiar.

Andrew Evenstar Jun 13, 2006 01:43 AM
Sorry I haven't caught up on all the ps3 news, but it will have hdmi output and it comes out before the end of this year right?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 AM.
Page 39 of 144 « First 293738 39 40414989139 Last »
Show 1000 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.