ask a question in here

BLT · 19-06-2006, 09:39 PM

ask questions about ps3 in here (ex. why do i have to pay $200 for a blu- ray player that i dont want) i assure you that the answers will not be biased in anyway and please do not start a flame war

Quiz · 19-06-2006, 10:29 PM

Having a blue ray in the PS3 is a good thing. For games only. Thats sonys way of getting you to buy the blue ray movies that can only work on there BD players. This BD marketing stradegy is a repeat cause they've done this before.

BLT · 20-06-2006, 06:22 AM

but blu-ray is important because a lot of the devs for ps3(maybe not 360) are saying they need or desire it. it adds potential.and ps3 games are location free and have every language for each country on that one disk. in the end if blu ray is y you dont want a ps3 because the extr space is not needed in you opinion then so be it,in your eyes it is a bad deal. but if you think having all languages, the ability for devs to have non repeated textures through games, more hd video, extras, less time spending on compressing and developing compression tools, among other things then it may not seem like a bad deal to you.

EDalienEN1 · 20-06-2006, 07:51 AM

Blu-Ray is just Betamax revisioned for the new centry. Sony tried this before with no such luck of winning. Betamax failed because the players and cartridges where very expensive compared to VHS that is why it lost. This time around the same thing might happen to them again. HD-DVD is cheaper to manufature and the players will be chearer to maker there for easier for consumers to grasp onto the Blu-ray. Sony is banking on the fanboys to purchase millions upon millions of PS3's to get a Blu-ray player out on the market at a very cheap price. I'm not saying this is a bad idea by sony it is, but honestly the BR player in the system will be very cheaply made compared to the $1,000- $1,200 stand alone player. I for one have no pull towards any system. I like all the systems they all have there unique games that are exclusive to each. I can't see myself paying for a new VIDEO GAME console at $600. Especially when the next market for home movies hasn't been finished yet. There still is no set standard for current DVD's. I don't use either my PS2 or Xbox or Xbox 360 for watching movies. why destroy my drive in a game sytem for movies when I can by a seperate player for a better price and better quality. sorry so long.

ChuckSteak0331 · 20-06-2006, 08:55 AM

Im confused about the cheaper ps3. Now I thought their whole argument for the ps3 is it is TRUE hdtv, 1080p. But I was reading on joystiq that you need HDMI to display images at 1080p. Also bluray requires HDMI cables to play movies. And Bluray at the current time doesnt go along with something that will be needed by law to play movies. Something about a standard in copy right protection. So I'm trying to figure out why Sony would even put this model on the show floor. I mean they are practically forcing people to buy the expensive one. The only reason I can think why they would put two models out is so the sticker shock of the 599 one is eased up a bit. Why would they do that? thats my question.

DMB14 · 20-06-2006, 10:12 AM

IMO the $499 version is good if you're just going to play games an in HD less than 1080p or on a standard TV. I think the $599 version is good if you want to use all of the PS3's multimedia capabilities and have a 1080p TV.

If I get a PS3 it will probably be the $499 version.

BLT · 20-06-2006, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EDalienEN1

Blu-Ray is just Betamax revisioned for the new centry. Sony tried this before with no such luck of winning. Betamax failed because the players and cartridges where very expensive compared to VHS that is why it lost. This time around the same thing might happen to them again. HD-DVD is cheaper to manufature and the players will be chearer to maker there for easier for consumers to grasp onto the Blu-ray. Sony is banking on the fanboys to purchase millions upon millions of PS3's to get a Blu-ray player out on the market at a very cheap price. I'm not saying this is a bad idea by sony it is, but honestly the BR player in the system will be very cheaply made compared to the $1,000- $1,200 stand alone player. I for one have no pull towards any system. I like all the systems they all have there unique games that are exclusive to each. I can't see myself paying for a new VIDEO GAME console at $600. Especially when the next market for home movies hasn't been finished yet. There still is no set standard for current DVD's. I don't use either my PS2 or Xbox or Xbox 360 for watching movies. why destroy my drive in a game sytem for movies when I can by a seperate player for a better price and better quality. sorry so long.

u have a valid point, but beta max didnt have a playstation to get most of its sales from.but cd and dvd did and they were extremely successful. dvds are becomming more and more useless because of the growing amount of hd tvs. so blu-ray or hd-dvd are needed because they both support hd. blu-ray looks to win this battle because it has a large support advantage(every hollywood studio except for one, as well as didsney) it also has ps3 wich in theory should make it the victor.

the price to manifacture blu-ray disks will decrease very quickly because they are manifatured using only one peice as opposed to having to bind two pieces like hd dvd and normal dvd.

the blu-ray player in ps3 will not be cheap because there is no blu-ray player in the ps3. it uses the hardware to run the disks and only requires a blu-ray lens.

the $600 is justified. the optimum pack is 200 more. but if you look at what the ps3 offeres then you will realize it is actually of equal or greater value than the 360. first of all there is bluetooth tech in the ps3, it is a computer it can browse the web, there is 1080p support, there is a 60 gb harddrive 3x the size of 360, it has capabilities with psp, it allows homebrew, it is a full media player,etc. when you add up everything it actually offeres features that seaperately would cost thousands literally. if these features are not desired then it is in your greatest interest not to purchase it.

BLT · 20-06-2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckSteak0331

Im confused about the cheaper ps3. Now I thought their whole argument for the ps3 is it is TRUE hdtv, 1080p. But I was reading on joystiq that you need HDMI to display images at 1080p. Also bluray requires HDMI cables to play movies. And Bluray at the current time doesnt go along with something that will be needed by law to play movies. Something about a standard in copy right protection. So I'm trying to figure out why Sony would even put this model on the show floor. I mean they are practically forcing people to buy the expensive one. The only reason I can think why they would put two models out is so the sticker shock of the 599 one is eased up a bit. Why would they do that? thats my question.

its simple i dont even have to go indepth, the 499 model is for people who do not think that 1080p, wifi, card reader, 60gb harddrive are important. if i enjoyed my ps2 and have and always will buy consoles to play games on and primarily to play games on then i will buy the 499 model. do a search and you will see that all of the things the 599 model offers the 499 one can aquire through addons.

kevinsanz · 20-06-2006, 06:03 PM

why dont people get this. we dont need a new pc to browse the web we need a gaming system, PS3 lacks gaming, because of the way they built all the chips the hardware can probably run 50% of the max capacity on games. that was said by a game dev. while the 360 is made for GAMES we DONT need another PC

Eazy_D · 21-06-2006, 06:39 AM

Q1. Name a Developer that has stated that the PS3 is easier to work with than the 360. All of the news I've read on the way Developers feel about the PS3 has been Negative to say the least.

Q2. What would posess someone to buy a PS3 when they could buy a 360 and a Wii for the same price.

Q3. What games do Sony have in Development that can compete with Halo3
Gears of War Dead Rising and Grand Theft Auto IV?.
At E3 Microsoft showcased some fantastic playable demos of future titles and announced 100 titles on shelves by Christmas. Whereas the 22 demos Sony showcased were dropping frames, Jerking around and looking rough. One demo was even running off 360 hardware.

Q4. You stated

Quote:

the blu-ray player in ps3 will not be cheap because there is no blu-ray player in the ps3. it uses the hardware to run the disks and only requires a blu-ray lens.

I'm confused, So the PS3 isnt even a True BR Player?

Q5. Sony lost the Rumble Pad feature because they stole the pattented design are they worried about losing other features they stole before they launch?

BLT · 25-06-2006, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinsanz

why dont people get this. we dont need a new pc to browse the web we need a gaming system, PS3 lacks gaming, because of the way they built all the chips the hardware can probably run 50% of the max capacity on games. that was said by a game dev. while the 360 is made for GAMES we DONT need another PC

first of all i dont know where you got the idea that ps3 can only run at 50% on games, cus i dont know where have of its processing power disapeared to. could you please give more info on that.

second of all im am a little confused that people keep feeling that the fact that ps3 can do more than just play games means that it's unable to play games. it almost seems that your are implying that if 360 were to have a web browser and and had say a windows os, and a blu-ray player then it would not be able to run games at the same level of quality that it currently is. but the point of the matter is that you get a bunch of things in one, not 1/3 of a gamesystem, 1/3 of a of a computer, and not one third of a pc. but instead all of these features compliment each other and basically make it so u can do say your homework on your ps3 as well as play games on it and then watch an hd movie all on one thing as opposed to having to buy or use each one individually. and they are offering that for 100 dollars more. if you dont want these features than you dont have to buy them. i don't see the point in buying a nicer new soffa for my living room. though it could be nice and be comfortable i dont need one. do i complain about the fact that there are soffas available to purchase...... no, you are doing just that.

BLT · 25-06-2006, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eazy_D

Q1. Name a Developer that has stated that the PS3 is easier to work with than the 360. All of the news I've read on the way Developers feel about the PS3 has been Negative to say the least.

Q2. What would posess someone to buy a PS3 when they could buy a 360 and a Wii for the same price.

Q3. What games do Sony have in Development that can compete with Halo3
Gears of War Dead Rising and Grand Theft Auto IV?.
At E3 Microsoft showcased some fantastic playable demos of future titles and announced 100 titles on shelves by Christmas. Whereas the 22 demos Sony showcased were dropping frames, Jerking around and looking rough. One demo was even running off 360 hardware.

Q4. You stated I'm confused, So the PS3 isnt even a True BR Player?

Q5. Sony lost the Rumble Pad feature because they stole the pattented design are they worried about losing other features they stole before they launch?

A1 though you are asking a question it is quite irrelevent because if you look at the volume and quality of titles for ps2 compared to xbox (the ladder being easier to develope for) then u will notice that this did not stop devs from making AAA titles on the system.

A2 first of all the ps3 is only 100 dollars more and only 65 more in canada where i live. but i havent checked so maybe the wii is only 65-100 bucks so i maybe wrong.but the ps3 offers more funtionallity than them combined. search the web for ps3 info because i am tired of typing all of the things ps3 can do.

A3 well i could name many titles that could compete. but it makes no sense because none of the titles you mentioned are out and none of ps3's are out so there is a possability all of them could suck or every one of them could also recieve 10/10s. but just for for fun here are a couple of games i could think of. heavenly sword, socom4, gran turismo 5, killzone 2, ratchet and clank, jak, the naughty dog project, resistance: fall of man, war hawk, metal gear 4, tekken, motor storm, god of war3, the getaway, and the list geos on. but like i said, none of these games are garenteed to be great, but neither are the 360 ones so your question is errelevent.

A4 oh it is as true a blu-ray player as xbox 360 is a dvd player and ps2 was a dvd player, and psone was a cd player. but like these systems it uses the already pressent hardware to run the disks as opposed to putting the entire player in the shell.

A5 sony has now been offered the option to include rumble in case you didn't read that on ign or any others sourses. and if they dont include it and you miss rumble then you can purchase third party controllers with rumble. and if by stolen features you mean motion sensing tech then you thats your opinion. the xbox stole dual analog sticks from ps1 and 2. they are also making an eyetoy like periphial. the concept of being able to play games was stollen form pong which i am pretty sure was the first video game ever. so understand that most everything is stollen so while you were trying to put sony down you also made yourself look stupid. but to further make you look stupid in this link you will read that sony did not steal the tech and it was patented in 99, but thats okay we all make mistakes http://www.gamingbits.com/content/view/655/2/

FordGTGuy · 25-06-2006, 11:31 PM

Why is the PS3 contradicting the definition of a console by making itself a PC?

Don_Rico · 26-06-2006, 05:06 AM

Yep. I buy consoles so I wont have to upgrade them, and right now with the PS3 Sony are brutally killing the biggest pro of a console.

char05 · 26-06-2006, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don_Rico

Yep. I buy consoles so I wont have to upgrade them, and right now with the PS3 Sony are brutally killing the biggest pro of a console.

i agree

BLT · 26-06-2006, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FordGTGuy

Why is the PS3 contradicting the definition of a console by making itself a PC?

its just also a pc on top of being a console.

BLT · 26-06-2006, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don_Rico

Yep. I buy consoles so I wont have to upgrade them, and right now with the PS3 Sony are brutally killing the biggest pro of a console.

i dont understand why you would have to upgrade. there are upgrades but they are not mandatory the same way 360 has upgrades

BLT · 26-06-2006, 06:50 AM

again this is a question thread not a battle for supremassy thread. 360 and ps3 are totally different and each is well worth their price and im just here to answer and justify my claim.

plexdk · 26-06-2006, 07:12 AM

Yeah, they stated that upgrades would never be required by games. They have included the ability for the users out there, who wants more than a gaming console from their PS3... That's pretty smart, i can for example skip my media center pc

NVR 20 · 26-06-2006, 11:05 AM

i have a easy questiion, wat color ps3 is the best? haha lets see how u guys fight that over. (personally i dont like any)