Playstation 3: Hardware Info and Price

[NavNucST3]

From the PS3 + HD price speculation thread I started back in March:

$299  =  0%
$349  =  2%
$399  = 22%
$449  = 31%
$499  = 27%
$549  =  7%
$599  =  7%
$599+ =  1%

150 voters in total

Perhaps to put some perspective from an ex PC gamer that has turned me into a PlayStation supporter after 2 generations of console gaming:

I, among others, predicted $449 and so I must say I am quite surprised (a little shocked) to see Sony charging $150 more for the full PS3 experience. IMO, as much as the price hurts, it doesn't really make the Xbox360 (or Wii for that matter) any better or more attractive to me and so I will probably end up dishing out the price for one anyway. I'm sure there are many other PlayStation supporters out there that think the same, even though they are bitter about the price. Can't blame them, I am too. Since the console is initially bought by loyal platform supporters and hardcore gamers, I think it is clear they will get away with that price tag. I would expect them to lower the price after a year of release though once the numbers start falling and they may want to make things more attractive for the average consumer outthere. I think come November and the following months, we'll all see how important mindshare and brand-recognition is. PlayStation is synonymous with gaming for many people that don't play games already and despite the price tag, I'm confident that will also show in sales.

Thats just it, it really doesn't matter what they would have announced for someone in your scenario, you (plural) would rationalize it anyway. We had months of 360 users rationalizing the two sku and HDD options that MSFT chose. I expect the same for the PS3.

I chose $599 in your thread, because it was only $200 less than what the cheapest BD-ROM player was going to come out at, and only $100 more than the low-end HD-DVD, which gives CE mfrs. some hope of the high-end user bypassing the PS3 for their models.

Looking at it two ways, it sucks as pricing for a console, OR its fabulous as pricing for a BDR.

Looking at who voted for what, some of the devs were way off...and thats when it had more "features" (none of which I cared about, save the rumble).

The price in my scenario just means I won't be a launch day buyer, not even for ebay (damn I hate that crap!), I want to see what Sonys price cuts are going to look like first before I take the dive.

 

[inefficient]

The $500 SKU of the PS3 will be limited to 1080i for both games and movies. Apparently a different video output chipset or maybe just impaired. Also audio will be 5.1 lossy whereas HDMI has the capability to use 7.1 lossless formats (whether game developers and studios use them remain to be seen -- assuming the PS3 will decode them).

The $499 SKU can do 1080p just fine over component out.

People who own 7.1 systems don't care about having to pay $599 for a ps3.

 

[onanie]

The $500 SKU of the PS3 will be limited to 1080i for both games and movies. Apparently a different video output chipset or maybe just impaired. Also audio will be 5.1 lossy whereas HDMI has the capability to use 7.1 lossless formats (whether game developers and studios use them remain to be seen -- assuming the PS3 will decode them).

I might try to clarify by adding that the 1080i comment on AVS was in relation to AACS movie output requirements that all analog output be limited to 1080i, regardless of the ICT flag. Being "analog output" in no way limits the output resolution to 1080i, and as such, games will be displayed in 1080p on the game SKU if it is supported. As intended by Sony, the "game" SKU is stripped down to just the necessary components as to allow a gaming experience that is identical to the more expensive "entertainment" SKU.

 

[wco81]

Forget where I read it but it's not that component can't carry 1080p.

It's that the output chips on the $500 SKU has been limited to a 1080i part.

 

[breez]

Is only 1080i output with movies such a big deal? Properly deinterlaced 1080i60 should get you the full resolution (@30 fps), no? Games should be able to output 1080p through component, the restriction to 1080i is just in the AACS specs which consern Bluray playback only.

 

[MrWibble]

I'd love to know how many people own a 1080p capable TV and yet would balk at spending the extra on their PS3 system to take advantage of it (for unspecified numbers of titles - most we've heard about are targetting 720p anyway). Hell, if your TV supports 1080p over component then you can still have the resolution, it's just the quality of the signal you have to worry about... and if you're that worried about high-end signal quality, you're probably not the sort of person that skimps on purchases.

If any of the features of the premium edition are essential to you, as an individual, then there's no point complaining about the budget version - you might as well pretend the premium version is the only one that exists. The only thing you need to worry about is the price (which I'm not going to defend!) - there's no point in being annoyed by some people getting a PS3 cheaper than you if they're not getting as many features.

As much as I disagree with having 2 skus, and as much as I'd also rather the whole package was just plain cheaper, I actually think that they've made reasonable compromises to offer a cheaper version.

Nothing they've taken out will make any difference to developers. We can rely on the presence of an HDD for example. It's got USB ports so peripherals for pretty much all functionality can be added later if necessary.

In other words, all the games will work on all the systems, and none of them need to make compromises that mean your premium system features have gone to waste. You get what you pay for, and no-one actually loses.

The only thing that cannot be upgraded is the HDMI. That's not great, but it's probably a reasonable assumption that anyone who actually *cares* about HDMI right now can justify the premium package.

The only possible impact that I've yet to hear any details about is whether or not BR movies will require content protection, and whether that restricts output to the HDMI version or if analog is allowed (with or without some form of protection). I've heard indirectly that analog will work fine and that whatever copy protection BR offers is not actually planned to be enforced for a while.

PS2 DVD playback was crippled over here (not sure what the impact was elsewhere) by the fact that the machine only played back DVDs in component video - if you needed RGB output, as most people did, you got a green screen for movies. The only work around was to do something naughty to your machine or use a composite or s-video cable instead. I understand this was something to do with licensing and copy-protection, and I hope we're not seeing a repeat of that fiasco.

Unlike DVD, where I already owned a player when the PS2 arrived, I'm holding off buying any of the next-gen formats until the dust settles. The PS3 could be very important for BR, and I hope for their sake that they don't cripple it.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

On Whether the 20 GB PS3 Will Fully Support Blu-Ray .....

"That seems to be a misunderstanding and I'm happy to clear that up. Both machines have Blue Ray disc as standard. Both machines play Blue Ray disc movies as standard. Both machines will play Blue Ray disc movies as HD. The only difference is that the high end machine uses a more convenient digital interconnect called HDMI which is a digital standard and the 20 GB unit uses HD component which is an analog standard. The picture quality is fantastic."

"The end user will not notice any quality difference. Perhaps if you were projecting onto a gi-normous screen you might notice some difference, but also not every HD display has HDMI. So we're providing a choice to the consumer."

"Both versions will support 1080p."

...On Backwards Compatibility

"If the developer wrote the game according to our technical requirements checklist, we will have what we believe will be almost perfect backwards compatibility. There will be some exceptions, there always are, but we believe those will be very few and far between. Even less so than we saw from PSOne to PS2."

Great News about Backwards compat

Link : http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=55089

 

[Sis]

Quote: "Both machines will play Blue Ray disc movies as HD."

With regards to the $500 SKU: this is not up to Sony. This is up to the studios.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

With regards to the $500 SKU: this is not up to Sony. This is up to the studios.

We shall see.

 

[A176]

the 360 HDDVD addon attaches via USB, and utilizes the console's output; ergo, the 360 has no HDMI out thus "no HDMI out for HDDVD".

Now, I have some questions for all of you to think about for a second.

How many of you have a TV set capable of accepting 1080p?
How many of you have a TV set capable of displaying 1080p (ie, native resolution of around 1080 lines) ?
How many of you have a TV set with an HDMI port?

and lastly, how many people do you know that answer yes to the above questions?



I personally have a Sharp that accepts HDMI, but is only capable of 720p. Quality wise, I couldn't care less about the difference between 720/1080, but having one HDMI cable is alot better than three component cables.

 

[ElStupido]

Good News!
Spiegel.de - the online Version of weekly Spiegel (ger. equivalent to TIME) - reports that:
Sony und Microsoft unterlaufen Kopierschutz -> "Sony and Microsoft avoid CP"

Hinter den Kulissen jedoch hat man sich geeinigt: Bis mindestens 2010, wenn nicht gar 2012, sollen nun doch Signale - zwar analog - aber in voller Auflösung ausgegeben werden können - auch ohne HDMI und HDCP

->
"Behind closed doors an agreement has been reached. At least till 2010, if not even 2012 signals shall be put through analog, but in full resolution without HDMI and HDCP."

 

[RobertR1]

the 360 HDDVD addon attaches via USB, and utilizes the console's output; ergo, the 360 has no HDMI out thus "no HDMI out for HDDVD".

Now, I have some questions for all of you to think about for a second.

How many of you have a TV set capable of accepting 1080p?
How many of you have a TV set capable of displaying 1080p (ie, native resolution of around 1080 lines) ?
How many of you have a TV set with an HDMI port?

and lastly, how many people do you know that answer yes to the above questions?



I personally have a Sharp that accepts HDMI, but is only capable of 720p. Quality wise, I couldn't care less about the difference between 720/1080, but having one HDMI cable is alot better than three component cables.

Go on avs forum and read reviews of people who've seen the Sony Blu Ray player and how they compare it with the Toshiba HD DVD player. The visual difference in minimal, at best. Couple that with the higher prices (2x +) and a VERY small percentage actually owning true 1080P sets and you're hard pressed to convince Joe Consumer to spend more for the same quality. Later on down the road HD DVD will also support 1080p. Blu Ray, in my opinion is way too early. It should have came in steps, 720p/1080i first at a CHEAP price to flood the market and make another gen later on that supports 1080p as true 1080p sets starts becoming more common and the HDMI/DRM/ICT mess is sorted out.

 

[DemoCoder]

I disagree. Generations last a long time in optical formats. If you settle in a spec today that is not agressive enough, you are stuck with it for 15-20 years. Should we wait until 2020-2025 before we go with 1080p? Digital cinema is settling on 2K resolution. We should strive to make our optical formats match film formats as much as technically feasible.

The optical discs should carry forward-compatible information. That means, video encoded at 1080p (or HIGHER), that is downrezzed depending on what TV you have (all the way to 480p if you only have EDTV)

I'd rather not have a standard designed for the future based on least common denominator today.

Also, stop confusing HDMI support with 1080p support. HDMI is just a mechanism of transport (with DRM). And don't confuse 1080p at film speeds with 1080p/60. 1080i/60 and 1080p/30 are essentially identical for all practical purposes today.

 

[Sis]

We shall see.

We shall see what? The AACS allows for the ICT to be set by the studio. Regardless whether there's a gentleman's agreement to not set this, Sony is only telling half the truth when they say that this player will play Blu-ray movies in HD.

That said, I don't want to give the impression that it's an "evil" lie or something. Just a half-truth. Also, the more I think about it, the more I like the $500 dollar version, since it does indeed come with all the capabilities that I would need, aside from wireless. But that doesn't matter since the built-in wireless on the higher end version doesn't include 802.11a...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How many of you have a TV set capable of accepting 1080p?
How many of you have a TV set capable of displaying 1080p (ie, native resolution of around 1080 lines) ?
How many of you have a TV set with an HDMI port?

and lastly, how many people do you know that answer yes to the above questions?

I think the question is more how many people will own 1080p sets? Now they've been released, how many people upgrading to HDTV will go for the 'in between' 720p or go for the 'full and likely not to be superceded for a long time' 1080p? 1080p sets have only just become available but in the following years, it could well be 1080p becomes the standard. Either 1080p sets are going to be dropped as nothing supports them, or they'll be supported in which case surely they're what people will be buying long-term.

 

[wco81]

Who cares about 802.11a? How many people have 802.11a routers? MS is touting 802.11a because 802.11a has less interference in the consumer space for streaming vide to the MCE PC. Sony has little interest in streaming content from a PC.

If they wanted to future-proof, they'd support 802.11n (based on a draft standard and able to firmware upgrade to the standard once ratified).

As for 1080p, you can see 1080p being marketed in store ads. Even though most of the 1080p rpoducts are right now higher-priced so the market isn't as big as say sets under $2500 or even $3000.

Look at the uptake of higher megapixel digital cameras. If there's a demonstrable superiority, even people already owning HDTVs will upgrade. One of the keys is a source of 1080p content and that will come from these players (but people are buying 1080p displays before these players are even widely available). Imagine what a popular product like the next Playstation should be would do to stimulate some incremental 1080p HDTV sales.

 

[Sis]

Who cares about 802.11a?

What an odd question, since it should be obvious that I care about it, given that I said that I wanted it.

How many people have 802.11a routers?

At least one.

MS is touting 802.11a because 802.11a has less interference in the consumer space for streaming vide to the MCE PC.

I agree up until the bold part. Less interference in general is a good thing, no?

Sony has little interest in streaming content from a PC.

Then they've no option but to duplicate PVR and media center functionality. Good luck with that.

If they wanted to future-proof, they'd support 802.11n (based on a draft standard and able to firmware upgrade to the standard once ratified).

This gets me nothing today. It seems adding yet another unproven tech into the console should be avoided at all costs.

As for 1080p, you can see 1080p being marketed in store ads. Even though most of the 1080p rpoducts are right now higher-priced so the market isn't as big as say sets under $2500 or even $3000.

Look at the uptake of higher megapixel digital cameras. If there's a demonstrable superiority, even people already owning HDTVs will upgrade. One of the keys is a source of 1080p content and that will come from these players (but people are buying 1080p displays before these players are even widely available). Imagine what a popular product like the next Playstation should be would do to stimulate some incremental 1080p HDTV sales.

I don't think you can extrapolate consumer action based on what they do with $200 cameras. I'm sure the PS3 will spur HDTV sales, in the same way Xbox 360 did (to what degree I don't know). But I have a hard time thinking someone who plunked down $2500 on a TV 3 years ago will justify another $3000 just because a brochure says it's better.

Honestly, there's enough debate around whether consumers can tell the difference between standard def widescreen DVDs and the high-def DVDs. I can't imagine consumers will discern any difference between 720p and 1080p. Consumers likely will upgrade to 1080p as part of their normal act of retiring their existing set, be it a standard def one or a high def one.

 

[wco81]

MS is interested in selling more copies of Windows. Hence they make it seem like a big deal to stream video from an MCE PC to a console.

Sony is interested in selling shiny discs with high-def movies. Hence they make the Blu-Ray drive seem like a big deal.

See the difference?

I guess the market will determine whether getting movies from shiny discs and putting them directly in a player is better or whether buying a PC as well as a console (and an 802.11a router) to play those discs is preferable.

As for 1080p, some people who've seen the difference between 1080p and current diplays said the former made the latter look like VHS. We will see. My point is that retailers are going to the trouble of marketing the advantages of 1080p (a Circuit City ad I saw called it "Full HD") even though the potential market is smaller at this point because of the high price.

That combined with the fact that prices of flat panels are falling by double-digits every year with heavy competition to sell these panels makes it likely that manufacturers are going to race each other to migrate to 1080p as soon as they can rather than be left behind.

 

[Sis]

MS is interested in selling more copies of Windows. Hence they make it seem like a big deal to stream video from an MCE PC to a console.

Sony is interested in selling shiny discs with high-def movies. Hence they make the Blu-Ray drive seem like a big deal.

See the difference?

I guess the market will determine whether getting movies from shiny discs and putting them directly in a player is better or whether buying a PC as well as a console (and an 802.11a router) to play those discs is preferable.

Fair enough--I guess I was thinking of the other media capabilities that have been hinted to, especially with regards to the PSP. I know playing SD content streamed over my media center PC to the Xbox is choppy with 802.11g, which is why I swapped it out with a. So I'm curious what Sony will do if they ever do want to stream content that's greater than about 500kps (such as using the PSP as a side mirror).

Anyway, it's a small point but if what you are saying is true, then Sony is trying to make the PS3 the "center" of the living in all ways. At first glance, I think I agree with Microsoft's view, that there is no true center, just extensions of existing components...

As for 1080p, some people who've seen the difference between 1080p and current diplays said the former made the latter look like VHS. We will see. My point is that retailers are going to the trouble of marketing the advantages of 1080p (a Circuit City ad I saw called it "Full HD") even though the potential market is smaller at this point because of the high price.

That combined with the fact that prices of flat panels are falling by double-digits every year with heavy competition to sell these panels makes it likely that manufacturers are going to race each other to migrate to 1080p as soon as they can rather than be left behind.

I agree that 1080p sales will overtake 720p/1080i native sets, primarily because the price will continue to fall. I was disagreeing with the idea that current HDTV owners would trade their set in for one, because of something related to PS3 or Blu-ray output. In fact, I would be stunned if most owners of HDTV even know what their TV's native resolution is.

 

[Diamond.G]

Found this while surfing the internet:
Wireless Controller not available

Well after reading Sony's press release and seeing the stuff posted here I wanted to know if there is any truth to this nugget of info?