Playstation 3: Hardware Info and Price

[DemoCoder]

I thought you were arguing that they would simply allow BR playback over component? Wouldn't that make it pretty damn easy to capture? Or, is Sony only concerned about raw digital captures, and not HD analogue captures?

It's not Sony, it's AACS and Hollywood. Yes, they are most concerned with digital captures, not analog captures. This is not to say they aren't concerned with analog captures, but they are not as concerned. They will tentatively allow it to avoid pissing off consumers with old HDTVS.

BR playback is allowed over component unless the ICT is set, in which case it has to be downrezzed. But full resolution playback over DVI/HDMI with HDCP? NO way they are allowing it.

 

[DemoCoder]

I'm told none of the NVIDIA display is being used for digital output, this is all done via Silicon Image chips.

Oh really? Well, then the tard version probably doesn't have latent HDCP capability, and may not even be wired to use the RSX's internal TMDS. I said it was doubtful HDMI would be dongle-enabled. Leaving off the HDMI port and cable doesn't make sense from cost saving, but leaving off silicon image chips does.

It makes sense, since RSX's TMDS alone probably can't do HDMI 1.3.

 

[Fox5]

I'd like to see the source data frankly. I know only 22 million X-Box consoles were sold worldwide compared to 100 million PS/2, and that roughly 40million PS/2s were sold in NA, so there are far more PS/2s deployed in people's living rooms in NA, and I frankly don't think MS's brand image is that strong. Bungie has a strong image attached to HALO, but that's MS's one saving grace. Sony and Nintendo have a far larger portfolio of brand assets, and they are not trying to come from a bland or bad image like MS is.

I'd say has a stronger brand than their market prescence would indicate, solely due to the hype machine microsoft paid for and the success of Halo. Far more people think well of it than own Xbox, Halo as a multiplayer game is quite popular and many people have played it, and it has a brand image similar to Sony. It lacks the distinctive franchises of the PS2, but is thought of as an acceptable 2nd choice.
And I think Halo 2 sold around 8 million copies. In addition, Xbox is the 2nd strongest console brand in America, even if it hasn't sold that much more in America than the Dreamcast or Gamecube. Like an Apple computer, no one owns it, yet it's acceptably mainstream.

 

[BigGamer X]

By going with BluRay only games, I think Sony forced themselves into bundling a HD. Load times would be too long over 2x BluRay.

I wonder how long games will take to install on PS3?

I don't think they will "install", they'll just "cache" like on XBOX 360 (if you have an HDD and the game supports it) or XBOX 1. The BR disks themselves are 25GB, most XBOX 360 games are averaging, what, 6-7.4GBs? If you used the PC "installing" method, 2-3 games would fill up the 20GB hdd!

I've always felt we either need some revolution in speed from the main storage medium (40X DVD drives ain't happening so axe that) or to have large (160GB minimum) HDDs for next gen. machines. Now you have a REALLY slow optical drive (PS3) with a built in hdd,(which is kinda slow by hdd standards, 5400 rpm) or no standard hdd, but 50% faster main storage medium. (X360) I've played about 12 games on my 360, and I'd have to say loading SEEMS (I haven't actually timed them, that would require averaging it all out anyways) about the same as it ever was. We'll see how PS3 turns out. (probably similar or slightly better, but I doubt you'll notice the difference.) Sadly loading is here to stay for quite awhile, as consumers don't gripe enough about it.

 

[scooby_dooby]

lol, you won't be installing games on the PS3 hdd. Lets just say, game rentals would skyrocket!

I used to install games on my modded xbox HDD, and it cut load times by 2-3x's easily. Most of the time, I couldn't read the load screens it was so quick.

The HDD caching will help, but it's still probably gonna be pretty slow load times w/ a 2x BR.

 

[Bad_Boy]

lol, you won't be installing games on the PS3 hdd. Lets just say, game rentals would skyrocket!

Most definately.

Would it be possible to load the game on the hdd, but make the game only run when the specific game disc is in the drive? Similar to some pc games? I'm sure modders would be the first to find a way around that, but If executed right, sounds possible enough.

The HDD caching will help, but it's still probably gonna be pretty slow load times w/ a 2x BR.

GT:HD seemed pretty fast enough, going from 10-15 seconds to 2-3; then again it is just a boosted ps4 game. I guess we will have to wait and see.
I think the biggest plus out of all of this, is that every game that comes out of sony will make use of the hdd.

 

[scooby_dooby]

GT:HD seemed pretty fast enough, going from 10-15 seconds to 2-3; then again it is just a boosted ps4 game. I guess we will have to wait and see.
I think the biggest plus out of all of this, is that every game that comes out of sony will make use of the hdd.

IMO, gt:hd was obviously pre-installed on the hdd. People shouldn't take that as a sign they will be able to do the same

 

[fearsomepirate]

Microsoft has a fairly strong image in America (or at least Xbox does), and Halo is a pretty high selling franchise. I believe it's outsold the last two MGS games, outsold Mario Sunshine, outsold Wind Waker, and is probably on par with Gran Turismo.

Well, it's not like it had a whole lot of competition on Xbox. There were only few must-have games for the system, especially during the first 2 years. How many system sellers did the machine even have over its lifespan?

 

[scooby_dooby]

Well, it's not like it had a whole lot of competition on Xbox. There were only few must-have games for the system, especially during the first 2 years. How many system sellers did the machine even have over its lifespan?

Man Halo sold the xbox, not the other way around. If it wasn't for Halo, xbox would've been DOA.

 

[Bad_Boy]

IMO, gt:hd was obviously pre-installed on the hdd. People shouldn't take that as a sign they will be able to do the same

True, point taken. Unfortinately we will just have to wait and see about the final ps3 games.

 

[Fox5]

Well, it's not like it had a whole lot of competition on Xbox. There were only few must-have games for the system, especially during the first 2 years. How many system sellers did the machine even have over its lifespan?

Halo.
Halo 2.
I think that's about it.

 

[Phil]

Microsoft has a fairly strong image in America (or at least Xbox does), and Halo is a pretty high selling franchise. I believe it's outsold the last two MGS games, outsold Mario Sunshine, outsold Wind Waker, and is probably on par with Gran Turismo. Halo is the one recognizable name on Xbox, and it's almost as big a name as GTA

Keep in mind, neither of the games you listed except Gran Turismo were bundled with the system. The effort Microsoft went through to make Halo that best selling game speaks for itself - on the other hand, neither MGS nor GTA (I believe) had that advantage and that marketing force behind them. At the price for an Xbox + Halo 2, it's really not that surprising they reached their numbers. Overhere, you practically only payed for the console and got the game free with it!

The HDD caching will help, but it's still probably gonna be pretty slow load times w/ a 2x BR.

We've already argued this multiple times: Loading times are especially bound to seek times, especially when the medium you're using is close to its limits and data is scattered across the disk.

 

[Galduta]

http://uk.gear.ign.com/articles/702/702074p1.html


Though that situation has been somewhat ameliorated of late with Sony's announcement that their first generation of Blu-ray players and media would export full 1080p resolution over all connections (component, DVI, and HDMI

Pardon , but.. and the ps3?

 

[liolio]

Ok it's pretty clear now that MS will do very well in USA, winning or not.
It will do probably a lot better in europe idon't see a chance to win here anyway, but still very well.
The point is that Ps3 will face Wii in Japan, and this assumed by a lot easy win market can be a tought battle for sony.

Sorry I wanted to do a longer post but i've to go to my work. Good day

 

[rabidrabbit]

Of the price, maybe they'll lower it for the launch.
What if these announced prices are here just so the competitor(s) wouldn't be so much encouraged to plan a drastic price-cut to counter the PS3 launch...

Still, I think the situation will be $299/$399 vs. $499/$599 if indeed the PS3 prices hold.

 

[Brimstone]

I really want to like the PS3 more than XB360. Having the hard drive standard is great and 1080p HD movie playback via Blu-Ray is nice.

Lack of rumble on the controller totally blows. Recoil gun effects in games like Rainbow Six are a lot immersive with rumble. NCAA football is another game I enjoy rumble effects with. I have such a hard time understanding how the motion sensor is going to bring anything to the table, but I hope devlopers come up with something.

I wish the system had more video ram for the cost. No doubt developers would put this to great use. I'd be excited over the hardware see 512 MB of GDDR.

The $499 SKU is so dumb, it's moronic. I'm not going to buy it, so in that sense it's the poor schmuck that that decides to buy it problem, but what irks me is Sony could really demonstarte a strong vision by ditching it and upping the price points. Sony is doing such a disservice to mainstream video game consummers with the $499 SKU, it blows my mind.

This is how the PS3 SKU's should look.

$599 SKU
256 MB XDR, 512 GDDR, 20 Gig HDD, no WI-FI, no memory card slots, and 1x HDMI port.

$699 SKU 256 MB XDR, 512 GDDR, 60 Gig HDD, WI-FI built in, memory card slots, and 2X HDMI ports so you can have HDMI for both video output to your TV and HDMI audio output to your reciever.

Consumers buying these two sku's would be getting a great product, and Sony would be getting some very loyal customers. The premium would a best in class video game machine as well as a great home theater Blu-Ray player.

 

[London Geezer]

What if these announced prices are here just so the competitor(s) wouldn't be so much encouraged to plan a drastic price-cut to counter the PS3 launch...

Heh that would make a lot of sense in theory, but we both know we're subconsciously trying to believe that Sony will release at a lower price, because as it stands, PS3 is just ridiculously priced... I don't see that really happening, even though it would make sense, and it would be very nice for my pockets.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Yeah, that was just wishful thinking.
Even if Sony did lower the prices to $399/$499 I'm sure most shops would rip off $100 more during the launch period anyway.

 

[hey69]

Heh that would make a lot of sense in theory, but we both know we're subconsciously trying to believe that Sony will release at a lower price, because as it stands, PS3 is just ridiculously priced... I don't see that really happening, even though it would make sense, and it would be very nice for my pockets.

but if you just think about it.
TGS september: KEn Kutaragi on stage:
" hello 1 ps3 pack . price 349$ " they would have MS by the balls i think with that.
but yeah thats just wishfull thinking

 

[London Geezer]

but if you just think about it.
TGS september: KEn Kutaragi on stage:
" hello 1 ps3 pack . price 349$ " they would have MS by the balls i think with that.
but yeah thats just wishfull thinking

That's just silly. Lots of people might choose to buy an X360 knowing that PS3 will come out at $600, then it actually comes out at $350 (impossible), and they're f**ked. Really...