[PS3] PlayStation 3 Discussion Thread

Originally Posted by Cetra

DVD games come in standard DVD boxes...CD based games came in CD jewel cases....

The Blu-Ray packaging is actually pretty high quality.

But everyone is correct, the top Blu-Ray header thing is retarded.

It kind of reminds me of those 'Super-Bit' DVDs. While they may be higher quality, I wont touch the damn things because they put that lame metal frame around the original box art. The case may be of higher quality, but that header is still grossly idiotic.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I don't know exactly what xFire is, but PennyArcade was saying that suposedly it'll only be for one game (so far?).

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Fumbled??? Launches never go smooth, and to expect otherwise is unrealistic. As for the price, seeing how I am even today playing my PS2 about 3X the amount of my 360 I'm more then confident that the PS3 while a bit pricey, will be more then a worth while investment. But hey, if we didn't have opinions, or competition companies wouldn't have the motivation to do better and the price of things would be through the roof if the market were monopolized.

Its more than just the launch. PS3 following the same market strategy as PSP is a bad plan.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

What Omnislash said.

The only reason I'm interested in the PS3 is as a game player. However, I can't see paying 600$ for it. Same reason I didn't go for the PSP.

You are correct though, its not as bad of a strategy on a console. I'm still watching the PS3, even though I have no current plans of owning one. I lost all interest for the PSP when I first heard about all their plans for it.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by SOLDIER

Oblivion confirmed for launch.



Well, that's pretty much every 360 game I was interested in.

And here's how PS3 boxes will look.



Too bad they didn't go with the black border idea.

The blue top annoys me to no end.

Its all I can stare at.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Meh, I don't care for it, but I'm not going to let a little piece of blue plastic get the better of me. Look at it, make an opinion and move on I say.

Ya... I guess I could transfer them into normal boxes and use the blue-ray ones for stuff I don't use much. Otherwise... its going to bother me everytime...

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Vash

Question, I plan on using the PS3 solely for games and movies (since I hear it has other functions, none of which really interest me, personally), so is the 20GB version fine for that? Or is the 60GB version better just because it has more memory for games?

20gb is way more than enough.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Sepharite

He also mentioned that Blu-ray players are more than $1000; The PS3 is less, hence his assumption, I guess. Lol.

But anywho, thanks for clearing that out. Scared me =/

Humorously, I noticed a drastic increase in blu-ray prices just after the PS3s release. Although, the PS3 is still cheaper than the original prices, I found it interesting they further increased the prices to increase the 'good deal'.

Some of those new screenies look real impressive. Maybe when the PS4 comes out the PS3 will be affordable ;.; My friend is planning on getting one, so that should hold me over till a few price drops occur.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Essentually. It's basically equivelent to how the PS2 was in it's early days. (though DVD was a bit more established here at that point then Blu-Ray is now) The fast-forward and other features may be a bit more choppy then that of a normal BR player, but idealy it's a BR player stuck inside that baby. When they re-design the PS3 four years from now (if they do), it'll probably be more of a consumer level player... if the format takes off.

DVDs were destined to succeed, due to the cheaper manifacture cost and the higher quality. The PS2 drastically helped them become established, but it'd of happened sooner or later. The only disadvantage was the inability to record onto DVD at the time. Everything else was bigger, better, and cheaper.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

You from the future? Stock tips, NOW.

lol, left out a word or two. Right after the PS3 prices were released, all the prices round here for blue ray increased.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

:doh:

lol, good lord, im still leaving words out. I didn't check the actual blue ray disc prices, I meant the players themselves

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

It just either A) Costs buckets of money that I think Sony should use to pay off emmersion to get rumble back forst

qft.

'incompatible' with alignment sensoring, what a crap excuse >.>
With the price, they shouldn't be holding out on a now-standardized feature, specially since its in the ps2...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Avanent: I don't know if you know this or not, but judging from your post I'll assume not. That "not compatible" excuse was just a cover-up for the average gamer. The real reason is that the company that made the dual-motor vibration structure (which is Emmersion) sued both Microsoft and Sony for using their patent without consulting them first. Microsoft pulled a dirty trick and bought emmersion (therefore dropping the suite against M$) and then two weeks later sold all their shares of Emmersion. That left Sony with a $30,000,000 tab to pick up. Sony does not have the $$$ to pay Emmersion at the moment hence why the PS3 controller REALLY doesn't have vibration. Though Sony is still working with Emmersion to get the rumble back into their controllers. Even if it's not settled before launch, they're still going to keep on working on it for a possible revision of the controller down the road.

Is that how it happened? I heard MS just paid them off. Heard they tried to sue Nintendo as well, but Nintendo had proof of developing the technology prior to the plaintiff's patent. Good to know there working on getting it back in there.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

Aww, I thought they said it wasn't going to be that. I was hoping on seeing some sort of massive announcement about a surprise Grand Theft Auto game or something.

They did say that. They just can't make up their mind.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Lastly is the continuation of FULL mouse & keyboard support. Even though you'll more then likely be using your headset for messages to your friends, when it comes to the web browsing you can surf the web just as though you were on a computer. Unlike the Wii, where if you want to do ANYTHING on the net, you have to pick and poke with the damn Wiimote... also the PS3's browser is free unlike the Wii's.

Well that's my rant. Others can elaberate onto this in case there's other points that I have missed.

Oh, the web isn't free, your more than paying for it. Thats one of the things I DONT like about sony. I just want a damn game system. Stop selling me other crap ;.;

Wii browser will be free for the first 6 months or so, not that I'll be using it, just saying. While the Wii also seems to have alot of extra crap in it, I don't mind so much, because it doesn't feel like I'm really paying for it.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Huh? The web isn't free, period. Just because Nintendo is more adept than Sony at pulling the wool over your eyes by making you feel like you aren't paying for it, doesn't mean that's actually the case.

Yes, I'm aware of what I was saying.

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

And comparing the features of the two, it's painfully obvious which one is duping you. BTW, what resolution does the Wii's browser run at?

600 usd to play fun games, no game included
250 usd to play fun games, wii sports included

yep.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Slayer X

$550 (for the standard)is more then worth it to me. I paid $500 for the PS2 when it came out and I have 85 games for it now and have beaten 76 of them, and am still playing it 4X more then my 360 and NGC put together.

This is due to the fact that I like fighting, music and RPG games... as well as the odd shooter. Therefore the Wii's platformer and sports games have no appeal to me what so ever.

Also I don't feel that the Wii is worth $300. Seeing how the NGC launched at $200 and the Wii is just a NGC with some more RAM and an overpriced controller with it as well as a game that I'll never play, the Wii to me is just a total rip.

In the end it all comes down to what kind of games you play. And when it comes to the types of games that I like, there's no contest.

I waited for price drops on the PS2, not only due to not wanting to spend the money, but also not wanting to recieve a unit that'd be messing up within a year or two.

Hardwares nice and all, but really I just want games I'll enjoy. Which is the reason why I still buy old PS1 games when I run across one I want and dont have. A good game is a good game is a good game, and should remain a good game even with the graphics become pathetic in comparison to modern graphics. Amazing graphics are only a plus, not a requirement.

And since the Wiis graphics are pretty nice to start with, spending all that extra is very hard for me to justify for the graphical improvement which I really don't care about.

Seeing how the PS3 is just a fancy PS2, without rumble, but borrowing nintendo's newest idea, as well as a marketing ploy to try and force Blu-ray... The PS3 just seems like a total rip to me.

Most amazing jew boots

PS3 announced it at the same time? thats intresting, because no one knew about it till earlier this year. I knew about nintendo's developement in technology for I think nearing two years now, maybe longer, I can't even recall anymore when I first heard nintendo talk about it.

I really don't care that much about audio either...

Silent Hill 1 still creeps me alot, despite its archaic graphics. If you can't get into a game with lower specs, that due to your own limitations.

Also, there comes a point where you reach a threshold, where it costs significantly more to make minor improvements. We are rappidly approaching that threshold. Theres also a threshold, where the improvements are no longer worth the money required to improve the more minute ammounts. We are also nearing that threshold I believe.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I care about having fun first and foremost.

If I can have the same fun at 250, why pay 500-600 usd for it?

Dual Double Layered Capactiy DVDs can hold upto 17gig according to wiki. Yes, that would still require two discs though, as it is currently. Also, coding is small in comparison to the graphic aspects. The game is so big because of the graphics. Blu-ray is not required for making Resistance a great game (if it is turns out to be a great game).

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Unforunately, when you throw in the $500 unit into the mix, it just makes the Wii look that much worse. It's also the one to be used in comparisons given the barebones nature of the Wii.

You pay twice as much, gain over twice as many features present in the Wii, it's easily more a value. And if the rumors pan out, it may well include a PSP-like demo disc.

Paying _merely_ twice as much to have the same ammount of fun does not equate as making the Wii look bad. The feature that matters to me is enjoying playing games, have to pay twice as much for that does not sound like a good deal to me.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

It actually is required, because to make it fit on a DVD would mean removing current things in the game. Which could lead to gameplay changes. Which could totally change the game's experiance. Also if a launch game is just using 20GB, imagine what better looking and more interactive & feature filled games like MGS4 will be.

You wouldnt have to remove anything, you could tone down the graphics. A less pretty game should not make the game less fun.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Wanting better graphics is also a valid want. Its just not one I can see myself spending much money on... I focus more on value generally, and it can be hard for me to really rationalize spending so much for graphical improvements. Of course, then again, I don't play that many games, I'm just looking to have some fun between other things. If I was more serious about it, I could have a different outlook.

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Resistance, to be honest, is only 22GB because of the uncompressed 7.1 channel audio they have stored there. Its not high resolution textures because that would accomplish nothing, since the bandwidth would remain the same. The game, proper, is probably just a few gigs.

Wow, I didnt realize sound was that big... I know graphics are huge compared to coding, btu I had no idea where sound fit into that.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

May I ask a question?

What do you get with the Wii that couldn't have just been a new accessori and better online support for the NGC? So what if you lose the Wii channels, thoes arn't worth $300 either.

P.S.
For the record I play about 5 - 6 hours a day, so perhaps that's why I have, play and have come to liking more games on the PS1/2 then any other system. Also though, I want to note that I have every system from the NES to the 360 as well as some earlier machienes at my grandparents, I'm not bragging I'm just trying to convey that there are things that I like on EVERY console, I'm not just viewing this from a single viewpoint.

A new way to play games and hopefully a system with a large ammount of third party support that is actually willing to experiment a little and focus more on gameplay. I don't care at all about the Wii channels. I'll probably look at them the moment I take it out of the box, and never again.

I play consoles maybe only around 5-6 hours total a week. I think thats the fundamental difference in our perspectives. It makes it hard fo rme to consider that much money with my more limited usage.

Originally Posted by Omnislash124

Okay avanent, that's enough. Come back to Mario's Warp Room for that stuff. Your argument against the PS3 has no chance in hell working here.

As for the PS3, I find it funny that public attention has turned the opposite direction from the beginning. It seems as if public opinion just keeps getting thrown back and forth. It seems that everytime a huge announcement is made for one system, everybody rushes to the other one. Before PS3 and Wii were announced officially, the opinion originally sided with the PS3 because of it's brand name. The Revolution gets announced and everybody flocks to the Revolution, PS3's announcement of Blu-Ray and other stuff is announced, everybody runs back. Public opinion will always change depending on announcements. I personally had no interest in the PS3 whatsoever. But now, it's looking more and more enticing by the minute. Ironically, the opposite seems to be true for Nintendo, who, as long as they don't make any official announcements, they get tremendous support. With each successive announcement, PS3 is going up and Wii's dropping.

The $500 pricetag now becomes justifiable with all these extra features.....

Just because I support nintendo's new system doesn't mean I'm not interested in the PS3. I just happen to vehemently dislike Sony's current marketing strategy and the high price. I remember when 360 first came out, I laguhed and laughed. In a few months, sony will announce their more powerful system at a lower price the the 360. 360 is doomed, haha. Instead, Sony announced their system will actually cost more. All I could think is... Sony, where's your head? Instead, Sony has actually given the 360 a fighting chance. Instead of Sony dominating the market, they are allowing everyone to take large ammount of ground against them. I've actually considered buying a 360, something I never did with the original xbox.

I love my ps2. Because its an everybody system. Everyone owns the damn thing, and as such, it has tons of games because the potential market is huge. This was done by Sony providing a decent price and relatively low production costs. Which is not at all what I see them doing with the PS3. Instead they are following the PSP model, which makes me concerned for the PS3's future; not in whether it will do ok, but whether or not it will do great.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Lot of technical jargon going round I really don't understand... nor have time to look into. However, I do understand pictures

Liking all those production shots so far... except...

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Oh and the on/off button isn't even a button... it's a thermosensor.

Is that really needed? Seems kind of like a waste of technology, as well as a sort of 'cool' worthless ploy feature. And whats wrong with buttons >.>
I like buttons... I know they work good.

This is the sort of thing that bothers me... >.>

Everything else is looking pretty nice so far.

Loudness never seemed to bother me, but I guess if a system is too loud, it could ruin the feel in a more quiet subdued atmosphere.

Quote:

In a rather surprising, last-minute announcement, leading the BD-50 charge will be 'Click,' which streets next Tuesday, October 10. Though originally expected to be a BD-25, single-layer disc only, the release will in fact be dual-layer and come packed with all the same bonus features as its standard DVD.

Sony will follow that up with 'Talladega Nights,' which was announced last week for a December 12 release, as well as what the studio will be calling its "flagship" BD-50 title, 'Black Hawk Down,' due November 14.

Both 'Talladega Nights' and 'Black Hawk Down' will feature a wealth of bonus content shot exclusively in high-definition. 'Black Hawk Down' will also be the first Sony title to feature the Blu-ray format's proprietary "Blu-Wizard" authoring environment, which promises to deliver extensive interactive content new to the format.

Would it not be smarter to release a blu-ray movie with the system that is actually shot in High-Def; as most people dont bother with extras.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

P.S.S.
It's funny for me because I've been listening for the past year to the IGN podcasts, and they're always bitching about this and that about the PS3 and Sony. For me to read this glowing report on the system makes me feel even more excited because I never felt against the system like they did, and if they're minds have been changed so fast (at least a few of them probably) then man... it's got to be good.

Interesting. Was it the same exact people? Or just both from IGN?

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Well, wording it like that we could say we don't need:

• Vibration
• Progressive Scan
• HD Resolutions
• Analog Sticks
• Shoulder Buttons
• Wireless controllers

Not really... a thermosensor doesn't improve play in anyway. Even thoguh I don't care for the move to wirless controllers, at least it improves play as the wire can no longer be tripped over or be pulled at (affect the system, getting unplugged/yanking the system around). Likewise, while I don't think the mass public is ready for HD, it is an improvement upon the visuals which is beneficial overall.

Honestly, I dont know what progressive scan does... so... maybe its an accurate comparison.

A thermosensor majigger is just an expensive replacement for a button... it doesn't improve upon anything, and isn't likely cheaper than a standard button.

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

It plays movies, it has to be quiet or else it'll be a chore watching them.

Didn't think about that... then again the 360 is supose to be a movie player too :ashamed:

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Movies are often shot at resolutions far above that of standard HD resolutions. These are no exceptions. There's no reason to complain about a pack-in. Don't like it? Throw it away or boil it in molten plastic.

Well, as far as marketing strategies go... if your going to try and push a new format... wouldn't you want to do something which might actually be a noticable improvement over the current standard... especially if your asking 2-3x as much per disc.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Slayer X

God damn it people. Thermosensors are not that expensive. Products like the i-pod and many other things use these instead of a buttons all the time. There's nothing to argue. They cost $3 and are of no signifigance to anything other then the fact the PS3 has one. There's no reason to argue over this trivial point. If you want to argue over something then argue why the 360's HD-DVD player costs $250 CAD for a system that you already paid $500 for.

oh? Are they really that cheap?

I guess I'm just suspicious of something I can't push... I happen to like buttons

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Balcony Heckler

yeah, but the Wii apparently requires that you make larger movements, most hardcore gamers won't like that

Everything I've read states that mere flicks of the wrist are enough. They just don't look as fun.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?