PlayStation 3 to feature Blu-Ray disc - Official!
- Thread starter j^aws
- Start date
legendCNCD
Newcomer
For F**KS SAKE.
PC-Engine, because of you many people have lost faith on these boards.
Is there anyway I can ignore people ..
Stop bickering and confess that you can be _really_ wrong sometimes.
my 0.00000002 euros.
<sigh> This is getting tiring. I had started in on a point-by-point from your reply to my earlier post, but since that is futile I'll just go to your latest "epiphany."
First off, please provide the logical connect that makes an edit that removes some content to be inherently bad by nature, which is what you've been trying to assert and basically the rest of us rolling our eyes at the entire time?
You have no stance here, because what the vast majority of anyone in any way paying attention to this thread at this point realizes is that your personal definition of "hack" (and the process of defining things that way, which you apply at your own discretion as well) is misapplied and useless.
We identify the likes of Superbit by what it is: a remastering and reorganization of DVD material to reissue a new product to garner new sales. (With a fancy moniker to make it more recognizable and more appealing.) We realize what it does--and part of that indeed can remove content that was in an earlier release--but who the fuck cares? Is there a DVD Morality judge that has defined this Evil by nature? Every other detail having to do with it gets argued on its own merits, and the marketplace makes of it what it will.
Fact is, there are a number of people who like the new releases--obviously, since Superbit has been rolling out more rather than drying up as a failed concept, and there were enough complaints to exert the market influence for them to realize that cutting all additional content was frowned at, and it would be worth their while to make Deluxe packages available as well. They're getting sales--how much from new customers and how much from a re-buyer I don't know--and that is exactly why companies release new products. They're certainly not going to stop, considering how Special Editions sell more products, Limited Offers sell more products--hell, changing a marshmallow's color can sell more products, too!
If you honestly think this is unexpected, poor, or harming the industry, then I can only suggest you curse into the hurricane that is modern consumerism, as that's what has birthed, supports, and encourages more of exactly what we see here. (And so far, it's been thriving on it.)
As to Superbit itself, you can feel free to ignore it and judge it by your personal preferences (mine lead me to ignore it as well, since I have not the equipment nor the concern for incremental quality changes, the inclusion of DTS, or whatever), but the generalized comments you've been making thus far have been baseless and are utterly useless to lament in the DVD market--or in fact, in basically any market selling direct to the consumers.
Kindly get off your "try to prove it" high-horse and complain about actual aspects of it. (Such as some Superbit releases that don't even fill the DVD-9 anyway, at which point they could just as soon have kept some of the content [or should have remastered toward even more quality to make valid use of their space rather than settling on a lower point] which I imagine just comes from wanting to keep the format similar and not create expectations for the movies that are filled to the max.)
You stated that it's a "hack" first, true enough, but you simply used the word as an insult and now, after your points have been argued away bit by bit, seem to cling to it now as unassailable because they did indeed "hack away content." That was, of course, not your original use of the word (which was in fact capitalized to emphasize the generalized insulting nature), and since "hack" does not go anywhere near describing the actual product, why do you persist on defending the "because it has excised content (which no one can argue with) it is a hack and for merit of my calling it that it is wholly bad, harmful to the industry, and whatever other points I threw out and couldn't defend are appropriate as well."PC-Engine said:
First off, please provide the logical connect that makes an edit that removes some content to be inherently bad by nature, which is what you've been trying to assert and basically the rest of us rolling our eyes at the entire time?
You have no stance here, because what the vast majority of anyone in any way paying attention to this thread at this point realizes is that your personal definition of "hack" (and the process of defining things that way, which you apply at your own discretion as well) is misapplied and useless.
We identify the likes of Superbit by what it is: a remastering and reorganization of DVD material to reissue a new product to garner new sales. (With a fancy moniker to make it more recognizable and more appealing.) We realize what it does--and part of that indeed can remove content that was in an earlier release--but who the fuck cares? Is there a DVD Morality judge that has defined this Evil by nature? Every other detail having to do with it gets argued on its own merits, and the marketplace makes of it what it will.
Fact is, there are a number of people who like the new releases--obviously, since Superbit has been rolling out more rather than drying up as a failed concept, and there were enough complaints to exert the market influence for them to realize that cutting all additional content was frowned at, and it would be worth their while to make Deluxe packages available as well. They're getting sales--how much from new customers and how much from a re-buyer I don't know--and that is exactly why companies release new products. They're certainly not going to stop, considering how Special Editions sell more products, Limited Offers sell more products--hell, changing a marshmallow's color can sell more products, too!
If you honestly think this is unexpected, poor, or harming the industry, then I can only suggest you curse into the hurricane that is modern consumerism, as that's what has birthed, supports, and encourages more of exactly what we see here. (And so far, it's been thriving on it.)
As to Superbit itself, you can feel free to ignore it and judge it by your personal preferences (mine lead me to ignore it as well, since I have not the equipment nor the concern for incremental quality changes, the inclusion of DTS, or whatever), but the generalized comments you've been making thus far have been baseless and are utterly useless to lament in the DVD market--or in fact, in basically any market selling direct to the consumers.
Kindly get off your "try to prove it" high-horse and complain about actual aspects of it. (Such as some Superbit releases that don't even fill the DVD-9 anyway, at which point they could just as soon have kept some of the content [or should have remastered toward even more quality to make valid use of their space rather than settling on a lower point] which I imagine just comes from wanting to keep the format similar and not create expectations for the movies that are filled to the max.)
I think the fact SB was created by SONY caused certain people to rush in and defend it without much evidence to backup their claims. I can easily switch to VHS-HQ being a similar HACK and nobody would care let alone write essay length posts because it's not SONY related. As a matter of fact since it's a jab at VHS the fanbois would be giggling like little school girls wetting their panties because it was VHS that killed their BETA
(I can hear the excuses already BETA died because there was no PORN!)
The problem isn't me, it's the people who need to prove (relentlessly) that the unpopular opinion is wrong. SB is a stop gap HACK just like VHS-HQ sorry if you can't accept or prove otherwise. SB not being a HACK is just another opinion and until those individuals admit that, this discussion wouldn't end. Most of the fanbois can't admit it though, I wonder why. It's like UMD movies...dumb idea basically prerecorded MD with video.
(I can hear the excuses already BETA died because there was no PORN!)
legendCNCD said:
The problem isn't me, it's the people who need to prove (relentlessly) that the unpopular opinion is wrong. SB is a stop gap HACK just like VHS-HQ sorry if you can't accept or prove otherwise. SB not being a HACK is just another opinion and until those individuals admit that, this discussion wouldn't end. Most of the fanbois can't admit it though, I wonder why. It's like UMD movies...dumb idea basically prerecorded MD with video.
PC-Engine said:
And here is another quote from one of your posts:
SB was brought into this BLURAY discussion because BLURAY has more space and therefore should provide a better picture quality. This statement is based entirely on the assumption that the extra space is used to provide a higher bitrate be it in MPEG2 or MPEG4 or whatever.
SB is an example of what extra storage space could provice since "Crap" is left out and the extra storage is used for better sound and picture.
Your total lack of understanding of DVD but 100% Sony hate got you into this mess. And whatever you do the paint can't dry, you are stuck in your Sony hating corner. If you just had settled for calling SB a marketing stunt/ploy whatever then you might have had an argument since it's just another DVD release where emphasis is put on Picture and Sound Quality providing a target audience that is someone else than the people that buy incredible looking boxsets like the Startrek Borg Cube (yes i have that to)
But that wouldn't have helped you in trying to explain why BluRays superior Space is bad.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hack
Above is a definition of hack, there are many definitions in the link above, but I've picked one that's pertinent. It seems to me a 'hack' is something that is 'rushed' to produce 'satisfactory' results. We could all come up with our own definitions and so will manufacturers. This is all subjective and pointless.
Moving the thread forward on the topic of Blu-ray for PS3, and for what it provides in raw capacity, do people see this 'capacity' used wisely for games or are we gonna see a raft of FMV sequences filling up the space. Or is it all superfluous to requirements?
There is an argument for good 'quality FMV' used appropriatly to enhance ambience and from a dvelopers point of view, perhaps, show off what would be 'state of the art' in pre-rendered CG. This exercise alone would give developers and animators experience in what the limits are and perhaps use this experince to enhance real-time game engines?
Optware's Collinear Holography together with Sony's blue laser diode ignites Sony's Holographic Optical Data Storage Development.
http://www.optware.co.jp/english/what_040727.htm
1 Terabyte Sony Holo-Ray discs as a Blu-Ray successor?
http://www.optware.co.jp/english/what_040727.htm
1 Terabyte Sony Holo-Ray discs as a Blu-Ray successor?
Jaws said:
GTA:San Andreas uses a DL DVD now, 9GB data and they even claim they are pressed for space. Imagine GTA "6" on the PS3, way more data needed, i wouldn't be suprised if they would need 20GB for that game.
On another note, the game is looking good, looks like they concentrated on getting things a bit better looking and most importantly, the engine runs more smooth now and at a steady framerate (Solid 30FPS was mentioned.. i believe it when i see it)
http://63.236.94.187/satrailer/GTASAtrailer1_640x480.mov
Defently looks like its taken directly from a PS2
I never said Blu-ray is a hack as a matter of fact I said it was the complete opposite as it offers an order of magnitude higher resolution, storage capacity, picture quality without stripping out of bonus material just like HD-DVD. Same with S-VHS with regard to resolution and picture quality.
Anyway Jaws has found the pertinent definition for hack which describes SB quite nicely.
I think it will depend on the budget of the game. If it's a huge budget then it'll probably need the space because there will be more content whether it's HD FMV or higher resolution textures just more raw polygon data. However the high polygon data can be negated by using HOS, displacement mapping etc. so that might not be a factor at all.
Oh, you poor, poor man. I forgot the bullies were picking on you again, while you remain pure and unblemished. It must not be from taking overbearing, mindless offence at a completely inconsequential product! After all, since your bumped the thread to say "LOL looks Blu-Ray bad cuz this other technology better LOL" you couldn't possibly have any lingering attitude, could you?PC-Engine said:
Actually, it would just cause confusion as everyone struggles to figure out how it matters, and why one would honestly think this is some wholly bad maneuver that needs to be mentioned. "OMG, they picture quality better without increasing resolution? THE WHORES!!!" The only real complaint I'd have between them is that with VHS-HQ you couldn't easily tell if your VHS could take advantage of VHS-HQ advances, while any DVD player could take advantage of Superbit's quality increases. (It would just be one's innate player quality that affects how good the output looks, which applies for all similar products.) Creating hardware conflicts isn't "evil by nature" either in this business, but it does create problems with certain things succeeding on the market--which it obviously did with VHS-HQ (among other reasons of course) since I didn't even note its existance until this thread. Nor, btw, had I known really what Superbit was until this thread either, which kinda shows just what huge effect both have had on the marketplace.
You see, I'm quite content to defend things from stupid, while your tendency to take offence at anything attached to Sony is rather well known, and your inability to move one iota from your preconcieved notions in this thread is completely transparent. The concepts you're trying to evince so as to attack Superbit in this case (or even VHS-HQ if you feel like making it), if true, would have collapsed the movie industry, the tech industry, and a whole bunch of others for good measure. How on earth are moves like that "harmful" when so many industries have depended on them for years?
Throw 128MB of RAM on a cheap-to-produce chip that gains can't use it on any modern gaming and hope that consumers think they're getting a more powerful card at a bargain price while the OEM gleefully pockets more profit. Support any new standard the moment it comes along with new products--even if Generation #1 shows no benefit from the move--so that people keep looking at your company and buying from you, not the competition. Give Product 1 a slight upgrade to 1A, a fancy new moniker, and enough people want it instead--or again--to make it worth your while. If a concept strikes gold, hooray! If it sinks... hey, that's the way things go. And while the market is supporting or crushing it... on to OTHER new things! I saw someone looking to buy another guy's shiz!
But no, it is of course all about other things, while your "logic" has been unassailable and there's nothing anyone can say differently. Damn those rascally fanbois!
Just for shits and giggles, PC, do you think that there are NO people out there who wouldn't trade commentary tracks for enhanced video and audio quality? If you can't say "yes, I believe absolutely no one would" then how does it make a product designed to test and reach that audience (while doing that nifty "repackaging thing" that works quite well every other time too) is inherently dumb and harmful by nature? This IS all we're talking about here, after all, at the core level you've been defending tooth and nail.
PC-Engine said:
Except is not true, it's entirely your opinion, with the same argument you could say SVHS is a hack "a quick job that produces what is needed, but not well". Hell HDDVD could be in the same argument!
If you only would support the best standard. HD-DVD has less space, and as Superbit EDITIONS! so clearly have demonstrated we just can't get enough space!
Riiight. S-VHS offers almost DOUBLE the horizontal resolution of VHS. How is that producing what is needed but not well compared to regular VHS?? Does SB offer higher resolution than standard DVD resolution? I didn't think so. It offers marginal improvements in image quality without increasing resolution. How does HD-DVD produce what is needed but not well? Does it gain resolution and disc capacity by stripping features? Does it make the image worse by using a more efficient CODEC? Your words are of a delusional man. HD-DVD does everything better than DVD so it's not a hack. S-VHS does everything better than VHS so it's not a hack got it? Neither of which requires tradeoffs like SB which IS a hack.
<jargon> 1. Originally, a quick job that produces what is needed, but not well.
HD-DVD is win/win while SB is win/lose get it?
Heh this is getting too easy. I'm just going to quote myself from page 9.
Upgrading the hardware isn't a problem when you're getting something that's an order of magnitude better not to mention backwards compatible. It's an accepted technology jump. For example PS2 is not fragmenting the Playstation market because they are two different machines even though PS2 is backwards compatible with Playstation. It requires new hardware but it's delivering a lot more.
If HD-DVD is a hack to you then Blu-ray is also a hack since they're both HD upgrades to DVD. One technology being stronger than another in a specific category doesn't make one a hack and the other not.
PC-Engine said:
S-VHS fragmented the market, how many VHS players could play VHS?
Yeah exactly, thanks for playing.
720x576 is a resolution, how things look is something different, if you don't care for image quality then i can understand why you wouldn't see the difference. On a 14 inch television the difference isn't there, try it on a 110 inch projection screen instead.
40% more storage on a BluRay = Less compromise on the Image Quality for the same amount of extras and sound compared to HDDVD, it's a FACT you can't get around. It's the DVD story again, Today we have DL DVD releases with so many extras that the Image Quality is compromised.
Behave, i'm not the one in the Sony Hating corner waiting for the Hack Paint to dry
HDDVD is a compromise based on asumptions that turned out to be WRONG. BluRay is not super expensive and will not cost millions compared to HDDVD.
Good quote, that answers nothing?
Nope, you defined hack as something that is within DVD standards and is considered by the rest of the world a "Special Edition" release.
I just followed your lack of logic and called whatever i liked a hack.
Every S-VHS vcr can playback VHS tapes just like every PS2 can play PS1 games, while offering an order of magnitude higher performance without resorting to hacks. It's not the same as SB no matter which way you try to spin it.
Of course you understand this (I hope) but you just can't admit it...it's ok there's no shame. Heh I'd return the favor by thanking you for playing but you weren't even qualified to play in the first place. If you need a 110" front PJ to see the difference then it proves my point to a TEE. The image quality increase is marginal. My computer monitor is running in 1280x1024 resolution and my viewing distance is about 3'. What kind of difference will I see?
Really? A fact? How about the fact you can get around 7 hours of HD content using VC-9 on a HD-DVD? How many hours of HD content can you fit on a Blu-ray disc using MPEG2 at 36Mbps?
Why wait if the Hack was already written in stone?
How is HD-DVD a compromise compared to SB being a hack? Also how do you explain the $3000 BR units out on the market?
Well to a delusional person like yourself that's in denial it wouldn't matter if the answer hit you in the @ss.
Defined by the rest of the world? I guess when you can't prove SB isn't a hack you have no choice but to smoke that wacky sh*t again. Living in that fantasy world of yours must be nice.
Here's the final nail in your coffin.
"Well I don't have hard evidence that UFOs exist, but I have witnesses that support that assertion".
Maybe you should consider using it as your signature?
PC-Engine said:
Discussing anything with you is hopeless you always ignore facts never answers the ugly points instead you bring up stuff that have nothing to do with the discussion.
But as you have proved in many threads you are willing to make a fool of yourself and this forum no matter the costs. From the first post i gathered you didn't understand what SB actually was, and i was right it's clear from the following posts.
10Mbit is NOT enough, well maybe on your small screen.
Riight that's why you don't have answers to any of the points I brought up and until you do your incoherent rambling is just that rambling. I'd post the same points again, but you'd just make up another excuse.
Who mentioned 10Mbit? The only person who would mention 10Mbit is YOU because you'd rather not come up with real numbers which would reveal how dumb and hollow your argument is.
At 18Mbps VC-9 should be able to compete with MPEG2 at 36Mbps quite easily and even have room left over for bonus material that's also in HD.
Similar threads
