And your source/reasoning for that claim is?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ballistix Man
Printable View
And your source/reasoning for that claim is?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ballistix Man
max 500? i wishQuote:
Originally Posted by Pure Quin14
The technology and services this will ahve are way too big for them to sell this for anything lower than 400 dollars.
But Sony have classically sold their consoles at a loss. Meaning that it costs them more to actually make the console than they sell it for.
The idea is that they get that money back selling licensing to developers.
Sony did this with the PS1 and PS2 and SCEI is one of the two highest earning deivisions of the Sony corporation.
It will be priced competitivly.
$550-$600:tonberry: I'll get it no matter what *smiles* the more it costs, the more chances I have of getting one:D
y?
Honestly they are at a loss at 500 dollars.
It doesn't matter, since they'll take whatever loss they need to in order to price the PS3 competitively. They will take a $300+ hit per unit sold.
If it means selling more and making a lot of money back from licensing fees for all the games released on the console, Sony will most certainly take the initial loss.
Just about every game console manufacturer takes a loss initially when releasing a console.
Not Nintendo.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
THE JACKEL
Who cares about the price, nobody is going to be able to get hold of one before the price drops anyway.
I'm not sure if someone asked before, but I don't really feel like reading ALL the posts. I was wondering if you can plug your ps2 controller in the ps3. Not because I don't like the ps3 controller but because I want to know if I can still uses my DDR Dancemat on the ps3. I don't want to trade my ps2 and not be able to play DDR.
Hmmm, probably. The PS2 can use PSX controllers.
New info. Dunno if its been posted yet. PS3 will feature 60 GB Harddrive and a service to download PS1 games. This will be the same service planned to be used on the PSP.
I still want to see a side by side comparison of MS & Sonys chip sets in action (this constant debate about graphics gets realy anoying so I just want to try and clear it now.)
Old news! but I'm HAPPY! that the HDD drive will come with ALL PlayStation3's and not SOME or Separate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ballistix Man
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyri
PlayStation3's controller will have the same buttons as PlayStation2's controller, so you don't HAVE to use PlayStation2's controllers. And no, the PS3 WILL NOT have controller ports which means that you can't plug PS2 controllers.:tonberry: :tonberry: :tonberry:
I AM! *grins*:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Old Manus
The less people who can buy thet PS3, the more chances of PS3 NOT being sold out everywhere. So it gives me a chance to buy one:D :up: But I better be careful to get home SAFELY! lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Tifa's Real Lover(really
You should know by now that you don't post twice in a row, much less four times. Don't do it again.
~Void
They'll never sell it to a price that can't compete with the XB360.
360's barely doing well, I mean it's not like it can compete with SONY and Nintendo. 360 is the death of Microsoft(video games) and its crappy systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
That's what excitable nerds said about Xbox, several years ago.
Yeah....but this time it's different. Microsoft CANNOT Pwn SONY and Nintendo is bringing back the classics, new controller, and ONLINE PLAY! Microsoft is going DOWN:D :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by MecaKane
On the contrary, while I don't specifically support any of the console manufacturers in particular, Microsoft has their game figured out better this time around.
With the exception of the systems completely crashing to the point you can't play them, some systems that even if they are set up straight it won't read the disks. True new systems usually have a few bugs to work out, but the 360 got to the point it was a joke.
Unfortunately stuff like that happens. :( Similar hardware design flaws affected the PS2 as well for the first model iterations.
Nintendo seems to have faired the best with hardware reliability and durability out of the 3 main console developers.
The 360 is only half of what MS were trying to achieve. I expect in the next year the 360 could do so much more than what we expected, it could easily rival the PS3 or Rev.
How???? *looks around* Halo???........what else???? Halo?....what? what else? Halo...is the only thing we remember and know 'bout Microsoft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
Not really, if you think 'bout it, XBOX survived because of its graphcis Now with PS3 having better graphics it won't survive AT ALL! and Let's not talk 'bout Nintendo(brining the classics back, Online Play, Zelda, Mario, and all of that). Microsoft has no chance.
I'm not referring simply to games. When I said "their game", it referred to their strategy and objectives, their gameplan, if you will.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathKnight
When Xbox first released, it did have the most powerful hardware, but developer support was slow, Xbox Live was nearly nothing, and Microsoft spent a lot of money on expensive hardware licensing and advertizing to get their first console off the ground.
This time around, they not only have a rich developer base already in place and a more efficient hardware supply line, but also an Xbox Live network with multi million subscribers already in place as well as a well-known name (even amoung people who prefer other consoles).
I'm not stating any opinions here, these are just simple facts. Starting a console for the first time takes a lot more resources than continuing a console lineup on an existing basis. Thus, Xbox360 has a better chance of surpassing the Xbox and a better chance of strongly contending in the console market.
I'm goin off word of mouf. But from what Ive heard PS3 is harder to develop for than the 360.
Well, it took only two months getting the Unreal Engine 3 up and running on the PS3 development kit, so I dunno.
Source: http://games.kikizo.com/news/200512/083.asp (watch the video named "Unreal Demo Realtime")
From what I've heard, it's not as hard as some reports made it out to be. Besides, this time Sony has utilized a number of well-known software libraries in their software development kit, which should give game developers a more familiar basis for writing software.
Facts which were twisted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
We all KNOW XBOX is the next Dreamcast (Microsoft's going on the same path Sega went on):tonberry: C'mon, just because they survived the 1st time means NOTHING.
And you say they have a strong developer base???? pfttt, with which games? just because they have SquareEnix, Capcom, etc. doesn't mean anything, in the end, they won't get FFXIII or Devil May Cry:chuckle:
So no, Microsoft MAY survive this 2nd time around, but just barely hanging on, by the 3rd time, they'll loose all appeal:tonberry:
Xbox still has a strong fanbase. What, they might not get Devil May Cry or FFXIII, but they will get Halo 4, Shenmue III, PG4 etc
So software isnt a problem. The 360 is going down the right path this time. Its the first next gen console. And the reason why it isnt selling amazingly is due to its price. But by the time the PS3 comes out, the price will drop. And then comparing it to the PS3's price. It will seem like the obvious choice to go for.
Im not an Xbox owner. And dont have any plans on getting one. But I do think the 360 could turn into a success. And so what if it fails, MS wont quit with all the money they have.
They'll quit when they stop getting support from developers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
Funny, I used to hear "Dreamcast will do well because it's the first 128bit system and Sega's an appealing company and it has a BIG FANBASE" Man it just sounds so SIMILAR to what you just said:D ANYWAY, 360 will NEVER dominate SONY, and Revolution being the cheapest one leaves 360 out there wondering in the air. It's easy my friend:
Think 'bout it, who the hell really cares 'bout Halo?(which is the only CRAP Microsfot has going for them) and Shenmue??? pfffttt it was BARELY noticeable on XBOX, PG4???? don't know that game.
Now you think 'bout Final Fantasy! and Devil May Cry, Gran Turismo, God Of War, Metal Gear Solid, Dragon Quest now those are games people want.
Well a lot of people love Halo, it was one of the Largest Games on the consols, so yes, many people cared about Halo. They had quite a few other huge title games also, such as KOTR 1 and 2, Morrowind, and a few others I can't think of right now. In addition this time around they are getting support from Square with FF XI added to their games, also other companies from japan are gaining more interest and releasing 360 games now, so as far as games go the number the 360 will have will most likely go up in value. And to say people won't care about a 360 isn't right, look how much people wanted them during the holiday season, people were paying over a thousand dollars for them off ebay. So this system is definately a desired one which a much better standing than some like Sega HAd.
Grow up guy, Xbox 360 is going to be inferrior to PS3 yes. But it's not going anywhere.
Well, my guess is that you dont own an Xbox. So you have never played any of those games I mentioned. So you cant say there none noticable games, cause in the Xbox world, there massive. PG4 is Project Gothem 4 by the way. And they are getting lots of decent games. Oblivian being the recent hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathKnight
Im not saying that the 360 is going to be the best, I still reckon Nintendo will beat the 360. and the PS3 beat both of them, its just you cant say the 360 isnt getting any games and is getting no intrest as it most definately is. The 360 is an American console, so it will take time for Japanese developers to give the console more attention.
Oh, and one more thing. Dreamcast > GC, Xbox, PS2
In what ways are the facts twisted?Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathKnight
No we don't all know. That is simply a statement of your opinion. There's a big difference between opinion and fact. I stated facts, simple unbiased facts. I honestly couldn't care less if any of the consoles lived or died.Quote:
We all KNOW XBOX...
They do in fact:Quote:
And you say they have a strong developer base???? pfttt, with which games?
http://developers.teamxbox.com/
I'm not sure where you are getting these ideas. :greenie:
The truth of everything is, you could be right. The Xbox360 (or its successor) could fail, but regardless, it doesn't behoove you to bash it without doing any research. You have yet to state any compelling and accurate evidence for it failing.
Man, I don't know how you can HONESTLY say I haven't stated accurate evidence for it failing, you can either read my posts again or just watch how BADLY it's gonna do in 2007:) . Those are my last words or sentences or whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
You posted evidence for one of your claims that isnt the bias you continually tell people there opinion is made of? Alert the freakin media.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathKnight
I just reread your posts, and basically all you used as 'evidence' was a list of specific games you obviously don't like, which you assumed that no one else likes either simply because you don't like them. Reasoning in that manner really doesn't prove anything besides establishing your personal opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathKnight
Well I DID bring up Microsoft similarities with Sega and how huge of games they both have/had.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
Pretty much everything Microsoft's doing resembles what Sega did with its systems. I mean, not everything. But you'll see, in 2007, it'll all be clear. I'm not stating facts, I know that, but I've seen how it all goes, and it won't look pretty for Microsoft in the long run.
Yes, we've all seen that ytmnd.
But really, Microsoft hasn't been acting like sega for the most part. Perhaps if sega hadn't blown so much money on 32x/sega CD/Saturn, it not only would've had a better market presence but a lot more money to cope with the losses of of Dreamcast. Sega came to Dreamcast from Saturn, Microsoft came to the 360 from the huge hit of the original Xbox.
Even if they do walk the same path as Sega, they have a [img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img]load of money, so they can pull it through anyway.
-edit-
OH NO THE SCARY CURSE-WORD. HURRY, REPLACE IT WITH THE SKULLS OF DEAD HUMANS!
Gates said in an interview if this system fails he will make another
That bastard!:irked:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ballistix Man
The difference between Sega and Microsoft is that Sega actually makes good games. And since when was this a thread about Microsoft?
I see nothing wrong with Gates making more consoles. Why should we care, were not being forced to buy them.
XBOX more like SUXBOX hahahahah
ok that wasn't funny.
Sony and Microsoft will both be around for a very long time regardless of there success in the console war. Becuase they many other profitable products they can take money from to recover from there losses, unlike sega, and the soon to be dead Nintindo.
Nitendo will NEVER be gone. Microsoft doing so BADLY in Japan makes me believe that Microsoft's the one who will end up "dead."Quote:
Originally Posted by dirkdirden
*points to DS sales* :chuckle:
Soon, Wii will be selling in the same way.
pfft! Nitendo gone, give ma a break.
The old days were awesome, when SONY and Nintendo went at it. It was magical
Metal Gear VS Zelda
Mario VS Crash
ect.
Nintendo wont be gone, but dont get the impression they will rule the market like they once did. Due to the massive popularity of the PS2, its likely, no, common sense that the PS3 will rule the market again.
Nintendo are more likely to die than MS and Sony because
1. Gaming consoles are the only things they make.
2. They arent kings of gaming anymore, look at sales, they got beaten my MS, and pwned by Sony.
In the United States. *points to Japan* and it's a BIG difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
My friend, think 'bout it, Zelda: Wind Waker wasn't great, Mario Sunshine wasn't great, but they still managed to do very well.
You THINK that games like Halo and War games will beat Metroid, Zelda, Super Smah Brox., Mario Kart, etc???????????????? and now that they have their online connectivity service (Wi-Fi)????
You must be joking:chuckle:
Just you wait and see, with Wii's cheap price tag, great games, great control, and online connectivity (wireless) There's NO way in HELL Nintendo will loose to Microsoft. They may NOT beat SONY, but Microsoft won't get in their way anymore.
It'll be like the PlayStation-N64 days, but even better:tonberry:
Nintendo will never die.
They might, unfortunately, stop making their own consoles and start making their first-party games third-party for Sony or Microsoft in two or three gaming generations, but I think they will always make new handheld systems. The DS is selling better than the crap PSP, afterall.
Nintendo will never, ever close up shop and die. If they stop making consoles, Mario games, Zelda, etc., etc., will just go to another console but they'll still be made by Nintendo.
Ninteno has sait it before MANY times "they will NEVER be a third party company and would rather run out of business before doing son."Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakenbelle
Besides: Wii+Controller+Zelda+Super Smash Brox.(online)=Sucess
And people said I was being a fanboy :rolleyes2
I have to let you know, I love SONY to death! But I just hate Microsoft to death.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
Oh, remember people, Nintendo makes a profit on their consoles. At $100 in stores, the GameCube makes them a small profit. The PS2 is at like, what, $140? Doesn't score Sony a profit. Microsoft loses something like $130 per 360.
Nintendo will lose profit over each WII though, they gained profit with the GC because it only played games, only. The PS2 has a DVD player, and so did the Xbox. Thats why they lost money. Now, this is the reason why Nintendo wasnt so successful with the GC, so they will have to include a DVD player ths time around. Thus, they wont be gaining anything with each console made. This means that the the WII has to do well, MS lost what, 4 Billon pounds off the Xbox. Now, that isnt much for MS, but if Nintendo lost that much, it would become a serious problem. And seeing as Nintendo arent doing as well MS in America, they could lose quite alot with the Wii. Now, ths is when they start to fall down the path Sega went down. If the Wii doesnt sell as much as Nintendo hope, then I reckon Nintendo could have the same fate as Sega did.
MS and Sony lost money per console due to overall hardware costs of each console, not due simply to DVD playback.
But wouldnt the Wii suffer from this as well ?
It's a possibility, but I honestly don't know for sure as of yet.
Crap name+crap 'OMG! Push the polygons hard3|_!=dead wii.
Gods amercians are so easy to predict. Maybe in Europe. Maybe. Hell.. pigs may fly and Spore can be sold on the Wii.
Whatever, amercians for a reason hated minicompact discs. They have too much room and not enough to fill it. So nothing small works unless the exception. (See: Ipod mini)
You need to cool it on your eurotrash american hating, because the only thing I understood about that post was about the ipod.
I don't know how to reply to that except "I resent that comment!".Quote:
Originally Posted by Tainted Angel
Guess Ill have to save up 409.301 GBP for my 60GB PS3 come November 17th.
EDIT - Ł90 more than the US, little S.O.B's
I don't think they'd ever make them for another company either, if anything it'd be portable exclusive titles as well. But honestly, do you people really think Nintendo is going to fold? They're doing extremely well, and the Wii will do extremely well too, just wait and see!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakenbelle
THE JACKEL
Wii doesn't seem like it will do well with the casual gamer or parents who want to get their children a household name.
"Honey I bought Tommy a Wii for his birthday "
I keep hearing from microsft fanboys about how PS3 dosn't have HDR(high dinamic range) lighting and how anything sony comes up with will suck...fanboys...espesialy MC fanboys are scum!
More like severely retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yu-Yevon
The damn thing only supports what? 10 normal Xbox games? that's pathetic. Oh wow, neat CGI graphics, whoopdee doo, a game with kickass awesome graphic isn't always good. LOok at the controller! The buttons are tiny and there's all sorts of stuff on it. Useless stuff.
At least the PS3 controller is easier to hold and isn't biased to midgets! (no offense) or kids! Come on what good has Bill Gates done? It aint even his own work, hardly anything MS makes is BG's work.
The Wii is a crap name, the controller for it is terrible and small, the thing looks plain and unfancy.
Yeah, the RSX (the PS3 GPU) does support HDR, however, using it requires an excessive amount of memory bandwidth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yu-Yevon
Actually, it supports far more than 10.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._with_Xbox_360
Hmm... the controller senses tilting motion? o.o Interesting, but I wonder how well a regular controller and a tilt-motion sensor work together. o_o
Actually, I doubt the name will have much effect on that at all. Besides, with parents buying their children a console... its $500 VS $200... thats not a hard choice, especially when parents will look at Nintendo as being more for their kids than Sony.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ya Boy Alex
Anyway, I realise people must be saying "Sony stole that motion thing from Nintendo"... but Its somewhat known that Sony's been thinking about it a lot for a long time... what actually made them use it, was how well the Wii was testing.
And even though its not as good as the Wii's motion sensing, its still good enough... (although I've heard from some people that there is a half second lagg between when u move, and when the game pics it up.)
On the bright side, this is what Nintendo was hopping for... their Wii is impacting the industry, and is being copied. (copying something is a form of flattery) Wont be long till MS puts this more officially into their console too!
:chuckle:Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Manus
proof that 360 is crap:)
Yes, one guy's opinion on a new system that doesn't really have the creme of the crop games out yet is totally proof beyond all reasonable doubt. Lock it up and throw away the key.
All of you are acting as if youve NEVER seen the consol beofre. I mean theres been pictures EVERYHERE for the past 3 months. Oh and about the controller thing there was an aritcle ont his in the psm magazine and it said that the controllers look weird but are very confy.. :D
O_o the controller does't look weird... cause its exactly the same as the PS2 controller... at least thats a good thing... Cause I like the PS2 controller. And I'm sure its comfortable. ^_^;Quote:
Originally Posted by tidus_rox
But the extra's in the controller; like the extra 'xbox rippoff' button in the middle, and 'nintendo rippoff' tilt detection... are both kind of silly...XD
So yah, I just read something talking about the ps3 controller... it had a big part about the No More Rumble issue... and in interviews, it seems Sony completely denies knollege of that court case that they lost, which keeps them from using Rumble anymore. XD They claim 'rumble interfers with the tilt detection' which is complete BS, since the Nintendo Wiimote has Rumble and even more tilt and motion detection, and its not effected at all. Sony just didn't want to admit their loss... XD
Personally I think in a flying game, having rumble and tilt detection would be awesome, because every time you got shot by an enemy, the rumble (if it did effect tilt detection) could make it harder to fly. Thus being more realistic... well at least as realistic as the PS3 tilt detection gets... with its horrible lag. >_>
They modified the game to utilize the motion detectors in a hurry, and the controller is probably still in beta too. I think we can expect less lag in the final versions.
PS3 is TOO CHEAP??!! O_o
Ken must be crazy... >_>
PS3 is a bargin, people who disagree should do there homework.
PS3 is a bargain, yes, but I'm not going to buy it for all the extra features that ramp the price up. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
Bargin, maybe... but cheap no. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
There is a lot of stuff that raises the price up... that we just don't need.
I don't have an HDTV... I don't need one yet, I can't afford one yet... and frankly, I don't even want one yet.
Without the HD in the PS3, the price goes down... and also, BluRay becomes pointless, as the games could still fit on DVDs... which gets rid of a HUGE part of the price... BTW the 360 is currently doing HD fine on normal DVDs... so even then, I can't see the point in having BluRay... except for the fact that Sony is trying their hardest to control the next media format, by pushing out BluRay, before its time, before the market can afford it or even need it... and when cheaper alternatives are available. This is going to hurt them, but maybe they are too high on their own egos to see that.
The only reason the DVD features of the PS2 made it a good thing, was because the market was actually ready for the new format, and it was needed. People were already buying DVDs, and stores were already selling them. Plus DVD didn't have any competing format. Sony is an electronic entertainment company, so it was only logical for them to put a DVD player into the PS2. (Where as Nintendo didn't, because that feature had nothing to do with gamming back then.)
But, you see, the situation is far different with BluRay at this time... Tell me, who is selling Bluray movies already? actually... who is even making them yet?
Don't get me wrong, I like BluRay... but I wont need it for at least another 5 years... and I think the market wont need it either. Sadly, pushing it out like this, will only lead to the cheaper HD-DVD format coming out... which will kill BluRay before its time... just as Beta.
But back to my point. Sony's PS3 is NOT cheap.
Maybe in a few years, it could be considered a bargen way to get a good BluRay player... when the majority of the market is finally in need of a cheap HD movie player... But right now, Sony is trying to shove expensive features we don't need yet, down our throats... They call it future-proofing, but will the market see it that way? At $600 for a system that can only 'currently' play games (and only in SD, for most people at this time) I think people will choose cheaper alternatives.
EDIT/ADDED: Another reason Sony could very well kill off BluRay by accident, making it pointless and expensive to have in a PS3: "Lets say you're a manufacture of entertainment equipment and are choosing which player to make. The HD-DVD player is easier to build and cheaper, while the Bluray player is more expensive but has more storage and possibly better quality video. Now, when you look at your bottom line you can sell an HD-DVD player for $500-$700 but your Bluray player will have to sell around $800-$1000. Now, here comes Sony with their BluRay equipped $500-$600 PS3. You know that you'll be selling your Bluray player at a loss if you sell it for any less than $800(possibly more), and you know anyone that wants a Bluray player will just get a PS3 since it's cheaper. You also know you that while you can't compete with Bluray, you can easily compete with an HD-DVD player, because even the XBOX 360 plus HD-DVD will be in that $500-$700 competitive range your player will be in. And as a manufacture looking out for your Shareholders, what are you going to build?"
See what I mean?
I also want to add this, even if its not the best point... back 8 years ago or so, VHS was king, and people had barely mentioned DVD. But VHS had been in use for well over 10 years... more, cause I'm unsure when exactly that became a mainstream media format. Lots of people were reluctant to change to DVDs, and at this point, what makes anyone think people are ready to get rid of DVDs? the DVD format hasn't even had a full life yet... And until HDTV and which ever next gen format comes out, are prepared to drop in price dramatically, the market, and this economy, just wont want to be forced.
You haven't seen HD picture then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tidus Andronicus
Xbox 360 can't play high definition DVDs, it can either upscale standard DVDs, or just display them in progressive scan, which isn't as good higher resolutions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tidus Andronicus
Everything is [img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img] expensive when it first comes out. Am I the only one who can remember that DVD player didn't always cost $50? When you release a new technology there's still going to be a big group of people, who buy everything that's new, the people who paid a grand for DVD players that didn't even have progressive scan. Also I'm pretty sure bluray players and movies will be released sometime before november.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tidus Andronicus
The market doesn't need anything, they're putting these new formats out because they need to make more sales on hardware since DVD players are so cheap now. But putting bluray into ps3s will throw it into a lot of homes, whether or not they even have HDTVs, which will put them to a great advantage, as well as being able to to display 1080p.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tidus Andronicus
O_o... I have seen HD many times... and I'm not impressed... at least, not until its much much cheaper.
Its not in my character to say something like this, but i'm tired of this... it seems lately, no one is even putting any thought into my points, if it goes against what they want.
So I point back to my last post...:rolleyes2
Besides... this shouldn't be changing into a format war thread... all I wanted to show was how I feel Bluray is an unnessisary feature to FORCE on us for that horrid $600 price tag... and I explained my point thurally.
Blu-Ray isnt just about HD, the capacity of the Disc is alot larger than a standard DVD, up to 50GB's of data. A DVD can only hold 10GB, that is a huge difference, and Im not surprised Sony are trying to push Blu-ray forward. And its not just Sony, nearly all companies in the buisness are trying to push Blu-Ray. This constant support will keep blu-ray an on-going thing.
What Tidus said earlier though has a lot of merit. HD-DVD is already out, Blu-ray isn't yet. HD-DVD players are already around $300 less than the preorder prices of most Blu-Ray players.
From a technical standpoint, Blu-ray is definitely a superior format, and certainly has more motion picture studio support at the moment. However, there is a chance it will go the same route as Sony Beta.
I personally hope it doesn't.
Oh good god, PS3 might be Ł425 in the UK, and there might only be the 60GB available. Thats Ł100 more than the US, and Ł110 more than the rest of the EU. Smurfing lame, why should I have to pay more because I live in the UK, gets me so smurfing angry.
Because there's not as many people in the uk as the us so they need to make more/lose less money on the consoles to send them there.
Or they just like screwing you around because no one really cares. <3
True, it is a better format, and in all honesty I wish it would win, because I'd love to have discs with that huge storage size... (backing up my computer would be sooo easy! XD)Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
But from what I've heard, HD-DVD had more studio support... mainly because it was cheaper... >_> that... and the p0rn industry has choosen HD-DVD... XD which that alone is going to steal a lot of people from BluRay...:cry:
But, hey, if I'm wrong, thats good too. XD
I was really hoping for a combined format... too bad those talks failed...
I was thinking earlier about this situation though... Considering that IF Sony's PS3 is a success, which it very well could be... And if BluRay gains dominance as the next movie format... This big push for HD entertainment electronics, could be good for the electronics market... Because with HD games, more people will want HDTVs... which could eventually lead to price drops in all HD equiptment! And that would be a happy day for everyone! I'm all for cheaper HD stuff. XD
Then again... if it all remains expensive... then well, it would be very bad for the market... =/
We both stand corrected:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray...porate_support
Quote:
HD DVD initially received more support than Blu-ray from film studios and distributors. This early lead, however, has now faded. The two formats are now neck to neck with the amount of support they hold in the industry.
ooooooOh! Thank you for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
It seems Sony is now banning preowned games
http://www.gamesradar.com/gb/ps3/gam...sectionId=1006
Quote:
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."
That would be the single stupidest move sony has ever made. May game Radar be full of crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossblades
I hope so, too. It would be one of the dumbest ideas ever.
Of course, theoretically, Sony would get more money off of it if people can only get the games brand-spanking-new and not from a friend. On the other hand, there's no gauruntee that an unsaid amount of people will want a PS3 after that. >=O
Gamers have never owned any games. When you "buy a game" you simply purchase a single license from the company to use it. (read the fine print :rolleyes2) Although, Sony's move seems like an overly strict enforcement of that legal stipulation in this case.Quote:
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.
That rumor's been going around for months. They just denied it again.
Yah, I just read an article about all this recently... And although Sony hasn't officially said they are banning preplayed games... they are officially trying to ban it. I doubt they will ever 'officially' announce it, as that would give them bad PR.
The sad part is, this also has the potential to loose a lot of sales, and I would think Sony knows this... even if they are trying to push more direct sales with this technique... O_o... is it just me, or is Sony getting really arrogent?
I have some friends, that have never bought a 'new' game in their lives... they always just wait until they can get the games used, since its so much cheaper. And of course, if u can deal with scratched discs, its the smart way to go. But this is going to make it very hard on resale stores, and game stores alike.
Imagine the word of mouth that could be generated, if 360 and Wii were the only systems you could buy used games for?
They only denied announcing it, notice they never said they weren't, and them having the patant gets me worried. If thats official I really dought I'll be getting a PS3 until the announcement of the Generation after it to come out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azar
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.
That's enough for me. Sure, Sony could implement this anyway and make a liar out of her; we all know that companies change their positions on things and do their best to pretend they've never denied whatever it is they're doing. But given the user backlash such a system would incur, it's extremely unlikely that Sony would go forth with this program.
I saw this a few days ago, but forgot to post it until now.
From: http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl.../06/05/0933239
http://www.theinquirer.net/images/ar...bandwidths.jpgQuote:
"Charlie Demerijian at the Inquirer got a look at some insider specs on the PS3, and says, Sony screwed up big time with the Cell processor; the memory read speed on the current Devkits is something like 3 orders of magnitude slower than the write speed; and is unlikely to improve much before the ship date. The slide from Sony pictured in the article is priceless: 'Local Memory Read Speed ~16Mbps, No this isn't a Typo.' Demerjian says when the PS3 comes out a full year after the XBox360, it's still going to be inferior: 'Someone screwed up so badly it looks like it will relegate the console to second place behind the 360.'" This is the Inquirer, so take with a grain of salt. Just the same, doesn't sound too good for Sony or IBM.
Hopefully Sony can do something about this. From a hardware standpoint, this is just ludicrous. Someone would have had to try to make local memory read bandwidth that low. Hopefully, this is just an issue that Sony can resolve because if they don't, it will affect the performance of the PS3 console.
Holy shi---
Sucks to be Sony.:greenie:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
Looking at MGS4, that thing can't be too much of an issue :p.
I know next to nothing about processing, but that doesn't look good.
Well the good news is that the memory speed for the graphics processor is at full speed and operating as expected, so at least nVidia and the Sony guys in the video department did their job. It's just going to suck if Sony and IBM cannot do anything about the main CPU and SPE's memory read speed before the PS3 launches.
What exactly does this mean though? I'm not a very technical guy, so I'm just assuming from the reactions surrounding it that it's very bad. Does it mean that, essentially, the PS3 would have framerate issues/lag due to it not being able to read the information off the disc fast enough, or am I way off in this?
Ok, apparently it would have helped if the chart had labeled things more correctly. It looked as if the chart was referring to speed at which Cell accessed it's own local memory (register files, cache, etc...) which looked just terribly wrong.
In truth, the second figure is really the speed at which the Cell CPU communicates with the GPU's local memory directly across the memory bus. This actually isn't as bad as it seems because the GPU and CPU can already communicate via main memory at near to the full expected bandwidth (22GB/sec).
Just found this which is an interesting response to the first article:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=17547
Summary: the PS2 couldn't even access it at all, and still did fine. PS3 developers can just think of a few rare occations where you might want to use it, but it could be done in a different and much faster way anyway.
So it's nearly irrelevant.
Yes, thankfully. :) The image and presentation in the first article were very misleading. (It didn't seem right in the first place)
YAY!Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
A recent Q&A was leaked onto the net, a good read.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sony Q&A
I know how expensive the system is going to be, but I still want it. With quality games like Final Fantasy 12 on their way and Metal Gear Solid 4, you can't go wrong.
Why does everyone still think that the licence one console a game system is still on it's way? Sony have denied it many times, I'm getting one once FFXIII and DMC4 are out, plenty of time to wait.
(SPOILER)LIE LIE LIEQuote:
Have you been forced into this "six-axis" approach by losing the "DualShock Vibration" court case against Immersion ?
Not at all. The technology used for the DualShock is now almost 10 years old. Whilst it was revolutionary when PS One launched, technology has moved on, and SCE is always at the forefront of the technology wave. For the PS3 controller, we are using breakthrough technology, right at the cutting edge of what is possible today.
Final Fantasy 12 is for the Ps2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven-X
Kaz's stated reason for having no vibration function was that it would interfere with the tilt sensors. Amusingly, though, Immersion recently contacted Sony and pretty confidently said they could help them put non-interfering vibration into the PS3 controller.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
Vibration isnt the end of the world as many so put :eep:
I know they said that, but I'm not sure that's the full truth. I still hope for ruble in the PS3 pad though, but it will probably decrease the battery life even more. That isn't too big of a deal because you can still play while it is charging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryűkishi
Nice article with Kojima talking about the PS3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kojima
Considering what Kojima normally says about the Wii... thats almost hypocritical... XDQuote:
Originally Posted by Dreddz
But, I will say, when actually talking about 'functions' PS3 might deliver the most seen in a game machine to date. Although I don't quite get how supplying many features that only entertainment tech fanatics want, VS supplying a fun & affordable, game only machine, can make the latter a machine with 'past concepts'... O_o or maybe Kojima was starting to show too much of a liking for Wii, and Sony told him to tone it down? XD
Meh, personally, I still have a disliking for Sony, quality of product and business... and all that other stuff I complain about with Sony these days... lol But I'm still not gonna tell someone not to get a PS3, if they have the money for it, and they want all those features. Heck, those features are heaven for a lot of people. lol I just think the Wii is gonna be a lot better for those that just want some fun games. (plus the more hardcore possibilities make me drool) XD
On another topic... @_@ man I've been seeing a LOT of bad news articles on Digg.com lately, all about Sony... and a lot of good articles on Wii. ^_^;
Sony had a racist ad, people complained, and it was taken down... Sony's having problems with BlueRay... might be delaying it... the Cell is having problems and they can't produce a high enough successful %... @_@ I'm half expecting the next article to say "Sony: PS3 in 2007"... c_c Dono whether to be saddened... or overjoyed for Nintendo... xD I think I'll just feel happy Wii is getting so much support, I like bein a Nfanboy a lot better anyway. XD
For 600$... I don't care if Sony delays it... they just better make it seriously worth it... not for my sake... but for all those poor souls that are going to buy it... XD Seems like they just keep quietly removing features they were praising a year ago... and keep pushing features of a living room computer, that no one really wants... their arrogance keeps rising and their press image keeps declining...
Wow I'm tired... can't think... XD
has anyone seen the tonyhalk game their makeing for PS3?
I feel so awesome for owning those shoes....
I feel so awesome for owning those pants...
Im so glad they dumped those stupid-ass controllersand went with the original design. The orig. is so useful, easy-to-use, and simple. I lOvE itz!
You do own a PS2, dont you ?Quote:
Originally Posted by DoaJ
It's not really the original, since the original controller to be used with the PSX, if memory serves correctly, didn't have 2 Analog Sticks. :choc2: But I agree. The Ps2 controller is grand! :D The boomerang, while I would have given it a chance, was a bit risky to me. It was hit or miss. I wonder what it would have felt like...Quote:
Originally Posted by DoaJ
WHOA!.......................................................:eek: that's a game? I was looking at that pic saying "what does this have to do with the PlayStation3 then I read your post and went "Oh hell no!":eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Yu-Yevon
PlayStation3 is gonna kick some serious ass! thank god I'm buying it in Nov!:D
http://img351.imageshack.us/img351/7626/ps3gi6.jpg
I thought this was pretty funny, look directly at the center of the PS3, anyone spot the Apple logo ?
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=65958
Wtf. My best guess would be that it's a reflection from somewhere.
Its from a flash for the PS3. How can anything reflect onto it ?
The picture used in the flash could have had a reflection in it.
Whoa...
Thats impossible as the Apple Logo diappears in the same screenshot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
I think Eurogamer had a good guess
Quote:
According to Top Men we know, the Apple logo is part of a video playing in the background with a PlayStation 3 overlaid.
"I'd imagine whoever made that flash is the same agency that did something for Apple," our Top Man suggested, "and they haven't reworked the video effect properly."
Talk about old news.
An iPod box was used to disperse the smoke when they were filming. The Apple logo from the box shows through as the PS3 didn't completely cover the logo in a few frames.
Actually, I just did a bit of research and the reason is because Sony used Apples program Shake to make the flash. There was obviously some mistake made whilst making the flash. They've gotten rid of that flash as far as I know.
PS3 the best!
Spoken like a true fanboy! :)
I'm not sure weather it'll be worth getting or not. I mean, it'll have some really great games (FF XIII namely), but dear Lord is it expensive!
It's really not that expensive when you take a closer look at it. I mean, what they're putting into the system aside from BluRay makes it a heavy tech system capable of a lot of things. I've seen cameras that are more expensive.
For a game system, it certainly is more expensive than what we've been seeing normally. For a mainstream media entertainment device though, it is surely out of its 'proce bracket'. People who buy thousand dollar cameras are not 'mainstream', they know what they're getting for the price. Sony is trying to market this thing as a high-end device (which it is), and even told people to 'save your money' so you could afford one.
I'm certainly going to get one, but most likely not this year. Once more games that I actually want for it come out (mostly established franchises) then I'll consider it, otherwise i'll be happy with my currently owned systems and the Wii.
Conversely, if Zone of the Enders 3 happens to show its face, I WILL be all over that. In a heartbeat.
Its a bargin for what your getting, but its too expensive for what people want.
Dreddz knows it. They're pushing technology only a minority wants onto everyone. I know I don't care about 1080p :p. Maybe I would in 5 years, but then there's a new console out anyway.
What gave the consoles an edge earlier was the much lower resolution needed for TV screens. Now that they need to push almost as high resolutions as PCs, the price increases too.
And blu-ray. They say game developers want more space, use dual-layer discs. SO3 came on two single-layer DVDs after all, not two dual layer DVDs (though that's because two single layer discs are cheaper than one dual layer).
that controller.. OoO0o0OoO00OOoHHHHhhHH! i just wanna grab it and start playing.. lol!
its 6,000 kroners in denmark.. thank god im gonna get a job and 4,500 of my mother heheheheh ps3 here i come!
A dual layer disk has slightly less storage space than two DVDs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
Could have been that the game could be stored on two single layer disks, but not a dual layer one.
I'm still trying to save for a PS3 (with a $12/hr, 8r job its no sweat) but I went to a Bungie forum site...and you would beleave the hatred toward Sony :(
I'm hoping to wait for PS3 but should I get my hands on a 360 aswell? afterall I got an xbox now and have a few games for it.
HD Quality E3 videos
You may have seen the videos before, perhaps even in high quality. I know I haven't seen any clean HD videos from E3. All the ones I've seen have had 'gamevideos.com' or 'ign' or whatever site's watermarks. No watermarks on these!
In two years, or there abouts, every tv station in the US will have to switch to HD, so for 3 years people would be playing 640i games on their 1080i or 1080p TVs they bought to not get left behind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
I wouldn't call that an edge, I'd rather play a PC port with a higher resolution than a low res console version of the same game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
a dual layer disk = 8.7GB? Or something like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
a single layer blu-ray = 25GB
Not exactly the same thing.
They won't need to use all that space at first, just like the first PS2 games didn't use all the DVD space, but now like you said there's games with 2 disks.
Roughly $1200 down here in NZ, it's quite a bit but it's not super expensive i'm gonna be getting on Nov 17
It's $999 here in Australia. How much are Xbox 360 games in New Zealand?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aurons_Desciple
MGS4 Trailer from Leipzig
http://38.99.15.82/do/newsStory?cId=3153076
Meh, neither Nintendo nor Sony pulled out anything amazing. And that was Europes Biggest Gaming Convention. Shows how much they care about Europe....
EDIT - PS3 isnt important anymore :(
Sony is going to have 27 playable PS3 titles at TGS, one of them being Devil May Cry 4. Hopefully I can actually get to play 'em. The only thing that would stop me is if the Wii was launched in Japan that day...then I'd be waiting in line for that instead.
I know it's a good deal for all the features it has but I can't afford $600. Being a married man with a kid it is out of my price range. And I bet that there are a lot of other married guys out there like me who are going to have to give up a large part of our favorite pasttime, which is playing games. :(
2 things you need to buy: A DS and some Chloroform. DS because it's cheap and has some awesome games, and Chloroform to get the kids to sleep in a snap (and the wife if need be).
Why was the important mark removed? Was it released? >_>...
<_<...
They are roughly $130 (for new releases) which isn't that bad either considering that PS2 games were $120 for about 3 yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by The Shoeless Hobo
This isn't stickied any more?
*unsticks*
sorry, I don't really see the need to make this "important."
Yeah, it is kind of bloated and useless at this point.