[PS3] PlayStation 3 Discussion Thread

Well according to this site Kill Zone 2 (remember the fabled E3 trailer) is going to be released this year. It also looks like Heavenly sword will be released this year? http://www.the-magicbox.com/gaming.htm

It is from Magicbox so take it with a grain of salt

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

Heavenly sword is a concrete date for march, and the Killzone 2 date is a target, not a final.

Forsety: I don't bother with the progressive support hence why I didn't know. Mostly because only like 5 games have it and it's a pain in the ass to engage.

How ya doing, buddy?

heavenly sword got confirm this week to be release on March 6.

well I have a normal TV and in some game I can see that the graphic are not like on ps2 but it's not really noticeable to bother me(for now), but I'm pretty sure if I can see it on a normal TV that he can only be worst on an HDTV :\

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Yeah, I was referring to how they show up on HDTVs. There's massive scaling issues with any output from the PS3 causing things to look even jaggier than the best output on a PS2. I'll see if I can take some photos to show the difference.

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

Real quick question for you guys -- I've got a standard CRT monitor with both S-Video and Component inputs on it. Which is gonna be better? I would think obviously component but I don't know much about S-video or how either would look on a CRT monitor.

Btw I know next to nothing about the TV itself. It's a Philips.

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

HDMI > Component > S-video > Composite

is how it goes pretty much. So I'd go for component

I was speaking idiomatically.

Even on what would typically be considered a standard-definition TV?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Yeah. They are both analog inputs (HDMI is digital, and the standard for HD connections), so component will be your best bet of getting the best image your monitor can display.

FELIPE NO

If it accepts component then you should use that. It's a better analog signal than s-video and composite. If it's a standard-definition tv then it's probably low-end component at probably 480p and progressive scan but that's still better than s-video and composite. You'll just have to set your PS3's video settings accordingly.

How ya doing, buddy?

Cool. In that case, we've got a set of PS3 component cables at work. Think I'll go get 'em. Thanks!

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

If it accepts component then you should use that. It's a better analog signal than s-video and composite. If it's a standard-definition tv then it's probably low-end component at probably 480p and progressive scan but that's still better than s-video and composite. You'll just have to set your PS3's video settings accordingly.

If it was an SDTV, wouldn't it be limited to 480i, as progressive scan can only be enabled on digital sets. Unless there are SDTVs capable of accepting and displaying 480p signals?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Forsety

No, ps2 games which lack progressive scan look like shit on the PS3. Maybe it's a HDTV only issue, or maybe some people are just blind to the problem; but irregardless, it is there. I still have my PS2 slim out for use until they remedy this as well. It's more an issue with shelf space for me, too -- I don't have much room for the behemoth PS3 and it's even more irritating with a ps2 and gcn taking up space too.

It's even a problem on 480i TV sets, I played my ps2 games on the ps3 on our plasma and the games looked shit (didnt expect it to look better), I played it on my ps2 games on he ps3 on a 480i TV set and it still looks like shit.

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

Hmmmmm... I'm not sure. You could be right. It might just be 480i. That should still be better than s-video and composite though.

I kind of find the whole situation kind of amusing though since the PS3 should really be played on a better display anyway. That's just me though.

Most amazing jew boots

Well, right -- I agree with you entirely, Acer. And owning a PS3 is my primary reason for looking into getting an HDTV. I....just can't afford a good one at the moment. When I buy one, I wanna make sure it's something akin to top shelf.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Living: Of course it's going to look like shit, 480i is standard def, and you're running it on a plasma which doesn't help anything if you're just running in 480i.

I have my TV and settings at 720p and while I notice some extra jaggieness at times, it's limited to a few games it seems (or at least the major jaggies are) however the games look like shit compared to what's coming out now anyway so I don't really care. Once I beat FFXII and Tekken 5 comes out on the PSNetwork I probably won't be playing many other PS2 games other then Guilty Gear and KOF which I know run perfectly and look fine.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

Hmmmmm... I'm not sure. You could be right. It might just be 480i. That should still be better than s-video and composite though.

It'll be leaps and bounds better than composite. The difference between s-video and component, while noticeable, aren't as dramatic. You get improved color saturation and definition, and the picture often looks brighter and a tad sharper.

Quote:

I kind of find the whole situation kind of amusing though since the PS3 should really be played on a better display anyway. That's just me though.

Of course. Why would you buy a machine whose main strength lies in displaying high defintion images, without either owning an HDTV or getting one soon after?

Quote:

Well, right -- I agree with you entirely, Acer. And owning a PS3 is my primary reason for looking into getting an HDTV. I....just can't afford a good one at the moment. When I buy one, I wanna make sure it's something akin to top shelf.

You could get an HDTV that was top tier a year ago and save some money, and get something that's been proven to work well. Getting mine was a hassle, since I stuck it out for a long time looking for a set that was a champ with SD material, HD material and had no problem with gaming.

Edit: Slayer, ironic you pick plasma to illustrate the point that 480i looks terrible, when they're often the best HDTV class when handling standard definition feeds.

FELIPE NO

Metal Sphere, I'm curious. What HDTV set did you end up buying that's great for both SD and HD? I myself got a nice 32 inch Samsung.

This one to be specific...

http://www.samsung.com/Products/TV/L...S3296DXXAA.asp


It only goes up to 1080i but it does have HDMI in the back and does 720p most excellently. It also handles SD very well unlike most LCD TVs.

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

Metal: I actually didn't know that, however more my point is that anything run in 480i looks comparatively bad to higher resolutions with more lines. I didn't mean to say that SD looks bad on plasma, sorry for my misguided wording.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

Metal Sphere, I'm curious. What HDTV set did you end up buying that's great for both SD and HD? I myself got a nice 32 inch Samsung.

This one to be specific...

http://www.samsung.com/Products/TV/L...S3296DXXAA.asp

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-KDFE50A10-Rear-Projection-Television/dp/B000A2K3Y6

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-KDF-50E2000-Grand-Projection-Television/dp/B000G5WGYW

The KDF-E50A10, got it for $1500 about a year ago. There was a revision soon after I got it that replaced the RGB input (the one I use to display the PC on my monitor and TV) with a second HDMI input. Other than that, the E50A10 and 50E2000 are essentially the same set.

I had a Sammy DLP before, but it had some serious lag with anything that wasn't at its native resolution. So I sent it back and started trolling AVS for a well rounded set and came up with the above model. Served me me well, but I need to get a bulb for it soon. That's the downside.

Quote:

It only goes up to 1080i but it does have HDMI in the back and does 720p most excellently. It also handles SD very well unlike most LCD TVs.

Seems like we both ended up with LCDs with great SD performance. I like this sets zoom modes more than most of the others I've tried. The Wide Zoom is probably the least noticeable, so it really helps in those games that don't have 16:9 support or do it by cutting off the image.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Metal: I actually didn't know that, however more my point is that anything run in 480i looks comparatively bad to higher resolutions with more lines. I didn't mean to say that SD looks bad on plasma, sorry for my misguided wording.

Oh, yeah. Anything stretched to cover an image larger than the source is providing is going to look worse than it's not. It's just that it depends on the type of display device and the scalers in said TV to determine how bad it turns out on the screen.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Right, and that's why things like 720p and 1080p matter more with larger displays then smaller ones. When something is larger it of course looks worse then smaller, however when upping the source resolution and that of the TV (ie going from 480i -> 720p) you get more detail sharpness in the same space, while it doesn't put anything there that wasn't already there, it does however make what was already there look better. Hence why something like running 1080p on a 27" display looks pratically the same as 720p on the same display. However if you up the size to something like 62" then there's a noticible difference between resolutions. Not so much in comparitive quality, but in the quality of that same TV's picture. Hope that makes sense.

In short a 720p 27" display's picture quality is quite similar to that of a 62" in 1080p, it's just that now with HD you can make a picture larger without losing picture quality like it always used to be. While 1080p on a 27" display is technically a better picture, the screen is too small to notice that much detail in a small space, which is why 720p almost looks the same in quality.

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

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Right, and that's why things like 720p and 1080p matter more with larger displays then smaller ones. When something is larger it of course looks worse then smaller, however when upping the source resolution and that of the TV (ie going from 480i -> 720p) you get more detail sharpness in the same space, while it doesn't put anything there that wasn't already there, it does however make what was already there look better. Hence why something like running 1080p on a 27" display looks pratically the same as 720p on the same display. However if you up the size to something like 62" then there's a noticible difference between resolutions. Not so much in comparitive quality, but in the quality of that same TV's picture. Hope that makes sense.

The reason 1080p exists in the first place is twofold:

• 720p on a larger set, while still an HD resolution, doesn't look too hot.
• Because of this, a higher resolution is needed to provide a similar (actually, better) experience. This higher resolution is optimal for larger televisions because you have more screen present for your eyes to take in, along with those details that would've been lost to you.

Quote:

In short a 720p 27" display's picture quality is quite similar to that of a 62" in 1080p, it's just that now with HD you can make a picture larger without losing picture quality like it always used to be. While 1080p on a 27" display is technically a better picture, the screen is too small to notice that much detail in a small space, which is why 720p almost looks the same in quality.

Not really. 1080p on a larger set is superior to 720p on a smaller one. Pixel does not equal a higher quality image. A higher resolution on a larger television is simply that much more impressive than squinting at a small screen on a smaller HDTV. Making the picture smaller only makes the imperfections harder to see, it doesn't mean the IQ is better.

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

That's what I said man, you just said it differently and less complicated. lol At least we're on the same page.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Slayer X

That's what I said man, you just said it differently and less complicated. lol At least we're on the same page.

Oh...damn. Sorry, I'm out of it right now. It took me forever just to pick out the typos that I made while typing that up.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Slayer X

Living: Of course it's going to look like shit, 480i is standard def, and you're running it on a plasma which doesn't help anything if you're just running in 480i.

Yea I know that, I didnt expect the PS2 games to look great on an HDTV but it just looks worse than what it does on the PS2. I'm just hoping this is somet thing they can fix in a firmware upgrade. I wonder if Sony is even aware of this issue, cause I'm just bothered about the Square Enix games I have, I want to play them and see the same gfx the way it was.

FELIPE NO

Eh well, I tried hooking up the component cables, but I guess my TV's just not able to make it look right or whatever. When I adjusted the PS3's settings to component cables, it made the screen look squished. It asked me what resolution I wanted to display at, and I couldn't get anything above standard -- setting it to anything else (480i and up, although 480p wasn't an option for me for some reason) just made the screen black.

So I suppose I'm stuck with composite in, for now. I could try S-video though.

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