[PS3] PlayStation 3 Discussion Thread

Maybe not all of us are piss poor like you'd have us believe.

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

As far as price goes...

http://www.gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=3108

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Terran Gell

As far as price goes...

http://www.gametrailers.com/viewnews.php?id=3108

Definitely sounds more plausible than what we were getting earlier. Standalone BR players are over $1000, while the value of the player in the PS3 ranks far lower (and therefore is priced lower). As I said earlier, the CPU and GPU will be taking care of what would normally be done via hardware in a standlaone, compromising performance but also reducing costs.

Kind of like the mediocre DVD playback capabilities of the PS2. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see the same happen to all these other bulletpoints. Barebones interface, chat, interactivity, downloads, etc.

And then the upgrades come around to unlock the full features of the console. For a price.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Metal Sphere

Kind of like the mediocre DVD playback capabilities of the PS2

That better not be true of the PS3, I don't want to pay X amount of money for a so called 'blu-ray player' if its gonna have shitty play back.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Stealth

Maybe not all of us are piss poor like you'd have us believe.

Not having close to 600 or even 700 dollars to spend on a game console is not what I'd call piss poor, though.



This latest news sounds a bit iffy to me. They basically said "we don't have a price estimate". This neither means the price will be below the rumored estimate, nor over it. Overly optimistic people will sadly think this means the console will launch at $299 or something, which is simply impossible.

And the blu-ray features would have to be pretty god damn shitty if the value of the combined features in the console rank around $750 and a stand-alone player (early models not being very good quality either) is around $1000 instead.

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

Originally Posted by Qwarky

Not having close to 600 or even 700 dollars to spend on a game console is not what I'd call piss poor, though.

Exactly. Toss in a couple $60 games and you're looking at over $800 to start.

How ya doing, buddy?

Frankly, I don't understand why you guys are so concerned about the price of the PS3 at launch, especially the members of a forum called GAMING FORCE, after all those who want a PS3 bad enough will figure out a way to get the money, and in most cases someone who wants a console as soon as it’s launch wants it bad enough...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by El Ray Fernando

That better not be true of the PS3, I don't want to pay X amount of money for a so called 'blu-ray player' if its gonna have shitty play back.

It probably is when you look at the PS2 and how even cheap DVD players trump it in quality and features. The BR drive in the PS3 is basically the only thing that makes it similar to other Blu-Ray players. If you notice, his $600-$700 value statement (of the drive alone) and compare that with the $1500 machines from other companies.

$400 is a good price point to launch, given the apperance of a premium product alongside a recently price-dropped 360 as well as giving them an ample range over which to drop prices.

How ya doing, buddy?

Not sure why everyone is claiming it'll be $600-700. If in Euros, the price was 500, then in the US it'll probably be $500 as well. Euros get the shaft.

And $500 isn't a huge deal, just takes an extra month or so of saving.

Quote:

Exactly. Toss in a couple $60 games and you're looking at over $800 to start.

You know what would be great? If Sony only charged $50 for games. The prices haven't really been announced. Of course EA is gonna charge $60 anyway (Take the PSP for example).

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Stealth

You know what would be great? If Sony only charged $50 for games. The prices haven't really been announced. Of course EA is gonna charge $60 anyway (Take the PSP for example).

Their saving grace there might be the greatest hits program. There are really some great PS2 GH titles. But there again, the PS3 would have to be priced mainstream to push that many consoles in order to push that many copies. Perhaps they would consider lowering the threshold for GH status?

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Stealth

Not sure why everyone is claiming it'll be $600-700. If in Euros, the price was 500, then in the US it'll probably be $500 as well. Euros get the shaft.

And $500 isn't a huge deal, just takes an extra month or so of saving.


You know what would be great? If Sony only charged $50 for games. The prices haven't really been announced. Of course EA is gonna charge $60 anyway (Take the PSP for example).

Then again, a PSP game's production values are nearly as high as PS2 games, hence the price tag for the games. I suppose, regarding the PS3, it'll come down how much developers actually use the BR discs. If they fill an entire disc with graphics and content, sure it'll be a pretty penny. But if they keep it average, who knows?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Most PSP games are $40, all EA PSP games are $50. That's what I was getting at.

FELIPE NO

Quote:

That better not be true of the PS3, I don't want to pay X amount of money for a so called 'blu-ray player' if its gonna have shitty play back.

I don't know why everyone is so certain the Blu Ray player in the PS3 is going to suck. It has an HDMI output, so it's a given that the picture quality would be about the same. Oh, so I can't zoom in 5 times or have super slow motion. Big deal. Not worth shelling out the extra cash if the movies will look the same when played.

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

Even if the PS3 BD player sucks, it will at least play BD movies at 1080p, which will be far superior to the best DVD players available, don't you think guys?

Most amazing jew boots

Yeah, HDMI makes everything look good.

Pixel-perfect VCD is fantastic, let me tell you.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Mercury

Even if the PS3 BD player sucks, it will at least play BD movies at 1080p, which will be far superior to the best DVD players available, don't you think guys?

Yes, but when Blu-Ray goes full spec, some studios might decide to put in analog protection, which scales the video to a "small" 540p (which is 960x540, when resized, there'll be hardly a difference). And unless you hook your PS3 up to a computer LCD, you'll have to shell out gobs of cash to even view 1080p.

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

Originally Posted by Kaiten

Yes, but when Blu-Ray goes full spec, some studios might decide to put in analog protection, which scales the video to a "small" 540p (which is 960x540, when resized, there'll be hardly a difference). And unless you hook your PS3 up to a computer LCD, you'll have to shell out gobs of cash to even view 1080p.

Well that's true, and if you don't have an HDTV that isn't HDCP compatible over digital signal, well then you shouldn't have to worry about if the PS3 BD player will be good or not, since you won’t use it as a BD player anyway.

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

Originally Posted by Mercury

Well that's true, and if you don't have an HDTV that isn't HDCP compatible over digital signal, well then you shouldn't have to worry about if the PS3 BD player will be good or not, since you won’t use it as a BD player anyway.

Yes, most people are still content with DVD as it is. Since DVDs are still easily rippable and have great quality (even on my 1440x900 monitor, DVDs still look good, even though they have been resized to 200%), Blu-Ray would only gain traction after many people buy the players. Which won't happen until most of them reach $100 or below, which is still above the price of cheap DVD players.

I was speaking idiomatically.

If the Blu-Ray drive is 1x speed, does that mean it also plays DVDs at that speed?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Taterdemalion

If the Blu-Ray drive is 1x speed, does that mean it also plays DVDs at that speed?

Most likely, no and yes. It'll probably read PS2 DVD-ROM discs at 4x (the default speed for the PS2's DVD reading) and 1x for DVD-Video, why would someone need to play DVDs beyond 1x anyways (unless you are seeking)?

FELIPE NO

AFAIK, the BRD have 1.5x DVD = 1x BR. I could be wrong, but this was what it was last time I checked. Kaiten, the resizing to a lower resolution if a HDCP compliant connection is lacking has to be noted on the box. Many of the studios have said they won't have this security feature, though WB is the only one that has considered using them.

Basically, if they do so, they have to note it somewhere on the case. If they don't, you get HD video over component or whatnot with HDCP.

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

I remember hearing some form of conrete disc protection will be put into PS3 game discs. Could someone find me some more info on this?
My guess is it'll resemble the encrypted file system DVD-Video has, not letting you copy unless the program you use is authorized to do so (or capable of cracking it).

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Kaiten

I remember hearing some form of conrete disc protection will be put into PS3 game discs. Could someone find me some more info on this?
My guess is it'll resemble the encrypted file system DVD-Video has, not letting you copy unless the program you use is authorized to do so (or capable of cracking it).

You mean managed copy? That's for Blu-Ray. There was a rumor about games locking themselves to a particular machine so only new games would work, not used ones. This rurmor was shot down pretty much the same day by Sony themselves. =P

PS3 games are just games on BRD, that's all.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Inside the PS3's Operating System

Quote:

We just reported that the PS3 "might" be delayed. Not in a good mood? Well, sorry guys, but there might be another problem. This time, it's something to do with the PS3's Operating System. You know, those things which take care of the hardware and software. For example, Windows XP for the PC.

First, let me give you a little background info about the Xbox 360's OS :

The OS runs continually in the background. It doesn't matter if you're playing a game or watching a movie. The operating system stays in the background continuously interfacing with the hardware and software.

While it might suck-up a bit of the resources (more on that later), it helps immensely. It's easier to make online play. The whole interface becomes solid and one.
Features like Voice Chat, Custom Music, Alerts in all games, regardless whether the game-devs decide to put it or not.
Now, about the processing power which it uses to do this :

32mb of the 512mb of available GDDR3 RAM3% CPU time on Core1 and Core2 (nothing is reserved on Core0)In the case of the Xbox360, this cost is approximately 2% of total CPU time and 6.25% of the Xbox360's total available RAM. Balancing these out, one could argue that MS has removed a total of 4% of the Xbox360's total available system power in order to provide these features and more which were not mentioned. They also left room, CPU and RAM wise, for future features. In other words, they are not entirely using all of the CPU Time and RAM that they have reserved to date.

It is well known that the PS3 will be having 7 SPEs on the Cell Processor. And the PS3 will also be having a continuous running OS like the Xbox 360. Its features will be pretty similar to the Xbox 360's OS too.

Now for some bad news, the PS3's OS will be using resources in the following manner :

32mb of the 256mb of available GDDR3 memory off the RSX chip.64mb of the 256mb of available XDR memory off the Cell CPU1 SPE of 7 constantly reserved.1 SPE of 7 able to be "taken" by the OS at a moments notice (games have to give it up if requested)Now if we use the Xbox 360's example, then the PS3's OS is using 25% of the available Cores on the CPU and 18.75% of the available RAM in the system. Balancing these out, one could argue that Sony has removed a total of 23% of the available system power in the PS3 for these features as well as others that are not mentioned here or will be added in future updates to the PS3 Operation System.

So what does that mean for the PS3 ? Well, for starters, the Operating System will be using more resources when compared the 360's. This means that even though the PS3 might be more powerful than the 360, it's using more resources for processing things other than the game itself. While it is certain that you

WTF!!! 25% for OS and 75% for games.and they call PS3 is power pc.:juggler:

http://www.ps3portal.com/ps3/article/352.html

How ya doing, buddy?

"Reports"=Rumors.

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