PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => PS3 Discussion => Topic started by: clips on May 17, 2006, 10:48:23 PM
-
i found this at gaming age...it does a decent job of breakin\' down both versions of ps3\'s...of course most of you nerds and tech heads probably already know this stuff, but for those of us that don\'t have a clue about what the real diffrence is between the two, i think this article can come in handy...:fro:
http://www.gaming-age.com/cgi-bin/specials/special.pl?spec=ps3_breakdown&pagenum=1
-
good find
-
After reading this, am I wrong in thinking the cheaper version is just as good?
HDMI seems pointless?
-
HDMI is completely pointless if the movie studio does not enable HDCP.
and two price points is stupid.
-
HDMI is completely pointless if the movie studio does not enable HDCP.
and two price points is stupid.
HDMI gives you a digital signal though, I don\'t think Multi-AV does that?
I\'m leaning towards the 60GB model, but I\'m a lot more positive towards the 20GB model now than before, mainly because movie studios aren\'t using ICT. :)
-
Looks like I just saved a hundred bucks on a PS3 then...
One store I found was accepting pre-orders, though.. and they sold them out. FYE.
Heh, I asked her about Wii and she kinda looked at me. I said, "Never heard of it?" Ok then.
-Dan
-
After reading this, I\'m guessing most of their production capacity is going to be devoted to the cheaper $499.00 model. It seems there will be a more limited market for the added features of the $599 model. Perhaps that\'s the way it should be.
Instead of a "normal" model and a "crippled" model ala Microsoft, they will have a "normal" model and a more advanced model for those who don\'t care about the price tag.
-
The 20GB version doesn\'t have Wi-Fi or memory card slots. WTF?
"Sony has since confirmed that they will also release a wireless WiFi adapter for Core owners who wish to upgrade."
Or I could just buy it built-in and not worry about it.
-
...
Core version.
\'Tard pack.
Helllllllllooooooooooooo...........Microsoft...err...Sony
-
it\'s still over priced.
there is no crippled 360.
-
it\'s still over priced.
I think its time we seperate overpriced and expensive.
The PS3 is expensive, not overpriced.
HDMI gives you a digital signal though, I don\'t think Multi-AV does that?
HDMI is a pure digital signal. Multi-AV component cables are not pure digital so
HDMI > AV-component
-
I think its time we seperate overpriced and expensive.
The PS3 is expensive, not overpriced.
I think it\'s time we establish "opinion".
In my opinion, it\'s over priced. Anything extra, Blu-Ray playback, wi-fi and what not, it\'s not needed. What is needed is a simple console, which lowers price.
-
i wouldnt say its overpriced. Their losing like 200-300 dollars a console. I think they went about the extremely expensive production all wrong, which obviously leads to having to release a more expensive console to the public. Which is the same thing LIC said but..i dont think overpriced is the right word. For whats in it, its a great deal..but this is a console.
-
there is no crippled 360.
bet on that?
and it\'s not "overpriced", it\'s expensive
no need to argue semantics.
-
As an audio/video enthusiast, I prefer the $600 version that have HDMI. The 60 GB, and other stuffs wouldn\'t hurt either.
-
It\'s not only over priced, but now that I want the WiFi thing I\'m back up to the stupidly high priced model.
PS3 = teh suck
I already hate it.
-
have fun wii-ing
ps3 looks great but i cant pay for it. I did just get a job so ill see how much money i get from it after a while. Then ill wait for my birthday in march to help pay for it.
also..you sound like a bitch. Im just saying it like it is. Just because its got a lot of crap in it that raises the price you hate it? madden ALREADY got shit reviews on ur fantastical wii. I mean..madden usually takes a week after it\'s released to get people bitching about it. Look at the games it\'s previewing and the lineup like GTA and god of war for the future. Im not saying that the PS3 will be the best thing since sliced bread..but its going to be a great console if you can pay for it.
im still skeptical of how far the pointing sensor thing will go. Warhawk is the only thing iv seen it use and it looks like it could work with THAT game. But where will it come into play with baseball, god of war, MGS, etc. The controller thing for the wii made me hate the direction that was going in..not that iv liked nintendo since snes.
-
i only care about 1st party nintendo wii titles
just saying...
-
i only care about first party wii titles!
-
The 20GB version doesn\'t have Wi-Fi or memory card slots. WTF?
"Sony has since confirmed that they will also release a wireless WiFi adapter for Core owners who wish to upgrade."
Or I could just buy it built-in and not worry about it.
Ditto. I\'m sure the attachments and the hassle of buying and installing them is itself worth just spending the extra hundred bucks. What if I run out of space on a 20 gig hard drive? I spend over a hundred to upgrade. I want the WiFi which is why I\'m leaning towards the premium. I was thinking aobut just getting a core but since it doesn\'t have WiFi, screw it. I\'ll pay the extra hundred for it so I don\'t buy attachments for the same shit and may save only 10 bucks in the end. And forget it if I run out of space on the hard drive. Nah, better play it safe and get the premium.
-
I\'m guessing the chances of filling up 20GB is slim and whats the big deal with wifi? Am I missing something? 499 is still too much though.....
-
I\'m guessing the chances of filling up 20GB is slim and whats the big deal with wifi? Am I missing something? 499 is still too much though.....
Well I need the WiFi in my house because its impossible to run Cat5 or Cat6 wires throughout my house. I do have wireless and that\'s a help. Plus in my apartment next year, we\'re going wireless so we dont\' have wires going throughout the place. There are enough as it is. Plus if I use it to store stuff (and who knows what fun stuff Sony or third parties will come out with like Linux or something or a neat program) on it, that could fill up fast. I mean, I filled up an 80 gig on my computer with por.....i mean videos and music. 20 just doesn\'t seem that big anymore. Hell, 80 filled up fast for me. I\'m gonna try and get an external this summer to just throw all my crap on there so my computer only has programs on it.
-
i was generally worried about space on the hd myself...i\'m so used to usin mem. cards that i\'m worrying that i\'ll use up the 20g on the cheaper model,.. plus the more expensive model will have slots for memory sticks?..i\'m assuming that will be the "new" memory cards for ps3?
-
20gb is a TON of storage space for games saves. Heck half a gig is still an insane amount.
That extra storage space is for downloads. Either add-ons, patches, or maybe even movie trailers like MS does with Live.
-
The 20GB version doesn\'t have Wi-Fi or memory card slots. WTF?
"Sony has since confirmed that they will also release a wireless WiFi adapter for Core owners who wish to upgrade."
Or I could just buy it built-in and not worry about it.
I think it sais in the article that you can use USB compatible memory sticks/SD/Flash memory on the cheaper version
I think it\'s time we establish "opinion".
In my opinion, it\'s over priced. Anything extra, Blu-Ray playback, wi-fi and what not, it\'s not needed. What is needed is a simple console, which lowers price.
That doesnt equal overprice. It would have equaled overpriced if it didnt have these and still costed 500 and above
-
it\'s still over priced.
there is no crippled 360.
I agree with mm, it\'s not over priced, just expensive.
and the core 360 without a Harddrive included is crippled IMO. At least Sony is ensuring HD\'s in all PS3\'s.
and the wireless adapters are ok if included but you still get a better more reliable connection through an ethernet connnection.
-
have fun wii-ing
ps3 looks great but i cant pay for it. I did just get a job so ill see how much money i get from it after a while. Then ill wait for my birthday in march to help pay for it.
also..you sound like a bitch. Im just saying it like it is. Just because its got a lot of crap in it that raises the price you hate it? madden ALREADY got shit reviews on ur fantastical wii. I mean..madden usually takes a week after it\'s released to get people bitching about it. Look at the games it\'s previewing and the lineup like GTA and god of war for the future. Im not saying that the PS3 will be the best thing since sliced bread..but its going to be a great console if you can pay for it.
im still skeptical of how far the pointing sensor thing will go. Warhawk is the only thing iv seen it use and it looks like it could work with THAT game. But where will it come into play with baseball, god of war, MGS, etc. The controller thing for the wii made me hate the direction that was going in..not that iv liked nintendo since snes.
Take the Wii out of the equation.
For me, PS2 is the system I played the least last generation. And now if I want to pick up its sequel I need to fork over some ungodly amount of cash that I don\'t feel like blowing on something I\'ll barely use - and that\'s before I pick up one of the $60 titles - just one!
PS3 for me is tipping right at the edge of cost-prohibitive.
And that pisses me off. I\'m looking for games, not an all-in-one family media center. And to that end, Sony is ripping the consumer off.
I already have a thing against them for their shoddy hardware last gen and the hassle that caused.
Whether or not Wii is good doesn\'t weigh into this at all. I have an Xbox 360, too. I\'m one to pick up all the consoles, but I\'m really struggling to justify the trouble here. Even with Xbox 360 the stuff is overpriced. I have been buying DS games that are priced reasonably and old used games that I missed ($3 for PGR).
I\'m considering waiting until PS3 is cheaper and getting budget games with it... I\'m not sure.
(And I haven\'t been interested in Madden since 1996... though actually throwing the ball is kinda interesting, if they pull it off well)
-Dan
-
I will buy PS3 for sure, but of course not at launch date. This time around, I will wait till the price drop and more library of games and more library of blu ray movies too.
-
i didnt know ps2 was ur least played console. We have a few people here that dont like ps2\'s,lol. Guess we just have a bunch of irresistible people on this board.
Im greatly considering waiting for a price drop for the ps3 and im looking forward to it the most. But i think ill be able to hold off since i have an above average computer. I really only play sports games on consoles..with random other games like GTA, GoW, and shadow of the collusus. so theres no point for me to pay this much for a console.
and i was just taking my Wii shots whenever i could,lol. Nintendo kind of annoys me with its marketing ploys
-
Nintendo kind of annoys me with its marketing ploys
I can relate. Only for me, I\'m tired of "look how big my graphics are"
I love what Nintendo is doing/trying to do lately.
-
not crippled.
As of right now, there is only one game that requires the HDD, Final Fantasy XI. Soon there will be two, Football Manager (or whatever). Every other game plays fine without the HDD. Good thing is that you can easily buy a HDD and there\'s your premium 360.
Thing with the PS3 is IF movie studios start to make ICT mandatory then all those who bought the $499 version are fucked as far as watching blu-ray movies go. Same thing goes for Microsoft\'s HD-DVD drive, but at least you\'re not having to pay for it up front AND MS isn\'t touting it as a standard feature.
-
Hah
Anyone who buys the PS3 specifically for it\'s Blu-Ray capabilities should realize that $600 is a fucking steal.
As another plus, hopefully it\'ll aid in lowering the price of initial standalone Blu-Ray players to compete with it.
-
I\'m in the same boat as Eik, the PS2 is my least played console, hell it\'s the only console I have ever given away. I gave my launch console away to my father when I moved out.. I will be rebuying one, but only for Guitar Hero. I just cannot imagine forking over that amount of money for the PS3, when I thought the PS2 was subpar in general.
-
Ok, but THAT is the whole problem...
A large (majority...?) of the world population isn\'t willing to buy a
Blu Ray player yet. Worldwide, a Blu Ray player @ € 500 would sell
nil.
That is the one thinking error which Sony is now making.
-
I\'m in the same boat as Eik, the PS2 is my least played console, hell it\'s the only console I have ever given away. I gave my launch console away to my father when I moved out.. I will be rebuying one, but only for Guitar Hero. I just cannot imagine forking over that amount of money for the PS3, when I thought the PS2 was subpar in general.
well, maybe when you get HDTV, and when ps3 gets a couple hundred bucks cheaper, then you should appreciate what HD picture quality have to offer in both games and movies.
-
No !!!! you guys only see the USA situation.
The majority of the PAL regions are NOT... i repeat NOT.. gonna get a HDTV for the next 2 or 3 years. The VAT on such electronics, make the consumer price simply waaaaaay to high.
-
I\'m in the same boat as Eik, the PS2 is my least played console, hell it\'s the only console I have ever given away. I gave my launch console away to my father when I moved out.. I will be rebuying one, but only for Guitar Hero. I just cannot imagine forking over that amount of money for the PS3, when I thought the PS2 was subpar in general.
I think all the consoles were fairly sub-par.
I guess by default, that made them... par.
-
No !!!! you guys only see the USA situation.
The majority of the PAL regions are NOT... i repeat NOT.. gonna get a HDTV for the next 2 or 3 years. The VAT on such electronics, make the consumer price simply waaaaaay to high.
I dont know how the situation is in the rest of Europe, but in Sweden HDTVs are selling a whole lot more compared to just a year ago, when they were pretty hard to find (the inventory of avalible HDTV models have exploded).
You can get a pretty nice HDTV for about the same price as a good CRT SDTV television. One huge plus is that most new HDTVs are "HD Ready", meaning they have HDMI with HDCP (for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD etc).
IIRC it is expected that most televisions sold within the coming years will be HDTVs. :)
I would say that the average customer is pretty aware of HDTV now, it has been hyped by the media (newspapers and Sonys cool Bravia ad) for a while now. I just hope the national television channels hurry up with the HDTV broadcasts (they will be test-broadcasting via terrestrial signals during the World Championship in Football, you can already get HDTV via a sat-dish though). :/
-
well, maybe when you get HDTV, and when ps3 gets a couple hundred bucks cheaper, then you should appreciate what HD picture quality have to offer in both games and movies.
....I have an HDTV, I\'ve had one for awhile now.. Thank\'s tho! I love the argument that if you own an HDTV, then get a PS3. I own an HDTV, I didn\'t rush out to buy an Xbox 360, did I?
I think all the consoles were fairly sub-par.
Minus the DC, yes, they all sucked.
-
I own an HDTV, I didn\'t rush out to buy an Xbox 360, did I?
Because you were waiting for PS3? :p
-
Because you were waiting for PS3? :p
..Uhm, no.
Because it is also over-priced (but thanks to Sony, it is now the cheaper of the two) and the launch was botched.
-
Why is it over priced?
-
Ok, but THAT is the whole problem...
A large (majority...?) of the world population isn\'t willing to buy a
Blu Ray player yet. Worldwide, a Blu Ray player @ € 500 would sell
nil.
That is the one thinking error which Sony is now making.
So I\'m going to ask a question to everyone
Would you rather have Sony put last generation technology (DVD) inside the PS3 just to make it cheaper? Remember the benefits bluray can have for games as well as the PS3 is suppose to have a lifespan of 7+ years.
Why do you want to cripple the PS3? In a couple of years, when all the good games are out it will be $400 in the US. So why complain about the price of bluray now? There won\'t be any good games for a year and Sony will eventually drop the price around the time they start appearing.
Including bluray, even at a high price is Sony looking forward to the future. Sure the sells of the console may slow after the initial rush, but when the price starts dropping and MGS4, FFXIII and others start appearing the PS3 will fly off the shelves. So after 2-3 years you will have a current generation bluray player and all the top games. Meanwhile MS will be busy building their new xbox with HD-DVD or something. I see MS releasing their new console when the PS3 still has 2-3 years left on it\'s lifespan.
The point of all this? Most of you guys not liking the price etc will buy one a year or two from now when the bugs are worked out and the price is lower and all the games are out. You will then realize that Sony made the right choice in including nextgen bluray to make the console future proof.
Is there really good reason to buy PS3 on launch at it\'s high price tag? No. But, you know as well as I do, some of us are videophiles etc, so we need the latest and greatest technology. Madden 07, GranTurismo HD and some of my other favorites that will appear soon after launch won\'t hurt either...
-
Why do you want to cripple the PS3? In a couple of years, when all the good games are out it will be $400 in the US. So why complain about the price of bluray now? There won\'t be any good games for a year and Sony will eventually drop the price around the time they start appearing.
I love this quote. You are saying right now, that the price tag is warranted even though there will not be " any good games for a year " . So, in reality, you are saying, that you want to pay $600 dollars for a dust collector for a year?
The rest of your post is pure nonsense because all it does is reference to "in a year from now" , "when the price drops" and things that can\'t be accounted for because they simply have not happened.
Oh and Uni, any videogame system above $350 is over priced in my opinion. Game systems are meant for games. At least MS knew this much, but they still missed the target price.
P.S - I\'m sick and tired of hearing about this 7 - 10 year lifespan. Will the PS3 be around for that long ? Yes, hell they just now stopped producing the friggin\' Psone, but let\'s not kid ourselves, the PS4 will be out in four to five years and provided this board is still around, the same damn subject will be up and goin\', yet again.
-
Oh and Uni, any videogame system above $350 is over priced in my opinion. Game systems are meant for games. At least MS knew this much, but they still missed the target price.
That doesnt mean its overpriced.
You dont belong to the consumer kind that the product targets. Simple. Its price is more expensive in regards to what, specifically you, seek from it.
-
....I have an HDTV, I\'ve had one for awhile now.. Thank\'s tho! I love the argument that if you own an HDTV, then get a PS3. I own an HDTV, I didn\'t rush out to buy an Xbox 360, did I?
Well, if you already own HDTV, you can use the ps3 to play blu ray movies in high def. Some blu ray movies are starting to come out in June and by Nov, I am pretty sure there will be a decent library of movies to select. I am just saying...compare to other blu ray players that are soon to come out, ps3 is a steal. Not only does it play blu ray movies, it\'s also a videogame console, and it also included a 60 Gbytes HDD. All for $600. Look at stand alone blu ray players, they don\'t have any hard disk drive, nor do they play videogames, but they cost $400 - $500 aor more than PS3.
-
I love this quote. You are saying right now, that the price tag is warranted even though there will not be " any good games for a year " . So, in reality, you are saying, that you want to pay $600 dollars for a dust collector for a year?
The rest of your post is pure nonsense because all it does is reference to "in a year from now" , "when the price drops" and things that can\'t be accounted for because they simply have not happened.
You missed this in my post
Is there really good reason to buy PS3 on launch at it\'s high price tag? No.
There isn\'t much reason for mainstream gamers to get a PS3 on launch. Guys like me who want the latest and best technology will get it on launch.
It won\'t be collecting dust for a year. I will be watching high-def movies, playing nextgen madden and GT with a xbox live type service I\'ve never experienced, and I can play all my old PS2 and PS1 games upscaled to Highdef. Right now on my bigscreen Clow(u)d\'s head is made of 10 pixels. PS2 games look just as good as on small TVs but I\'m sure they will look better.
All I was saying is that including bluray was not a mistake because it shoots the price tag up. Making equipment future proof is expensive. Ask everyone who got 1080p televisions. They will be set for a very long time. Don\'t think you need a 1080p TV now because not enough programming supports it? Fine, wait a couple of years until the price goes down. Same with PS3.
P.S - I\'m sick and tired of hearing about this 7 - 10 year lifespan. Will the PS3 be around for that long ? Yes, hell they just now stopped producing the friggin\' Psone, but let\'s not kid ourselves, the PS4 will be out in four to five years and provided this board is still around, the same damn subject will be up and goin\', yet again.
I dont see how that is so hard to believe. The PS3 will be released 6 years after the PS2. And with the PS3 having such new technology, I see no reason why Sony couldn\'t make it\'s lifespan 1-2 years longer then the PS2\'s. I don\'t expect to see the PS4 released until 2013 at the earliest.
-
It won\'t be collecting dust for a year. I will be watching high-def movies, playing nextgen madden and GT with a xbox live type service I\'ve never experienced, and I can play all my old PS2 and PS1 games upscaled to Highdef.
Buying a console to watch movies....Gay.
Playing "Next Gen Madden" and "GT"....Yes, play more sequels with better graphics..
Enjoy an Xbox Live like service - or just go ahead and sign up for what MS has been doing two generations now.
-
Buying a console that has the added extra feature of playing HD movies, something you would otherwise spend twice as much doing for your HD setup.
Playing truly next gen games both sequels and originals on your new HDTV setup.
Enjoying an Xbox Live like (except that it\'s free) service that MS has been delivering for a price for two years.
Want to go through the negatives for every system? XBox flaws are much more obvious, and don\'t require any \'opinions\' like \'watching movies on a console is gay\', which is just about the worst PoV ever.
-
you\'re attacking playstation\'s choice of games?? we dont even know all the games ps3 will offer besides the obvious ones. Xbox is the console with ONLY halo to get people to buy it. Other than that, the games you get on the 360 are mostly going to be ones available on ps3. add that with GTA, GoW, GT, etc.
And iv never had a problem with sony\'s stripped down online service. It was the first time a console went online and it was free. Now it\'s free but they\'ve learned from past experiences and xbox.
-
And iv never had a problem with sony\'s stripped down online service. It was the first time a console went online and it was free. Now it\'s free but they\'ve learned from past experiences and xbox.
I\'m looking forward to see how PNP turns out. One good thing about PNP is that it could force Microsoft to stop with the monthly fee, at least letting people play online for free. Charging for whats basically a P2P network (user hosted games) should be criminal. Right now MS makes money off the monthly fee PLUS "micro transactions". :moon:
-
Wait, isn\'t Sony\'s new online "service" the same thing as what\'s on PS2? Didn\'t they comment about developers being allowed to set up their own servers and charge if they wanted to?
Oh, and PS2 was not the first console to go online, Viper Fujax.
-
Buying a console to watch movies....Gay.
Playing "Next Gen Madden" and "GT"....Yes, play more sequels with better graphics..
Enjoy an Xbox Live like service - or just go ahead and sign up for what MS has been doing two generations now.
You seem to be hating video games lately. You should take up another hobby.
Oh, and PS2 was not the first console to go online, Viper Fujax.
No, it definitely wasn\'t.
-
the first one that i used or cared about. And im not sure if you googled it, but im the center of the universe.
-
P.S - I\'m sick and tired of hearing about this 7 - 10 year lifespan. Will the PS3 be around for that long ? Yes, hell they just now stopped producing the friggin\' Psone, but let\'s not kid ourselves, the PS4 will be out in four to five years and provided this board is still around, the same damn subject will be up and goin\', yet again.
Bookmark this thread and we\'ll test your theory in a few years ;)
-
You seem to be hating video games lately. You should take up another hobby.
You need to quit posting that every five threads.. Yeah, I hate games so much. That\'s why I am buying a DS, a Wii, rebuying a PS2 (Guitar Hero) and have logged almost two hundred hours in CoV. Yeah, I hate games so much..
:rolleyes:
-
You need to quit posting that every five threads.
I think that\'s probably the first or second time I\'ve said that. Someone else suggested it first. But thanks for the exaggeration.
That\'s why I am buying a DS, a Wii, rebuying a PS2 (Guitar Hero) and have logged almost two hundred hours in CoV. Yeah, I hate games so much..
Well good for you.
-
I think that\'s probably the first or second time I\'ve said that. Someone else suggested it first. But thanks for the exaggeration.
Well good for you.
The point is the same, you sit here and make these stupid comments. I am sorry I\'m not Pro-Sony and am pointing out negative things, how about I just point out just the great pro Sony things? Come on, give me a fu**in\' break.
If you have something of actual content to add to the thread, then fine, go ahead, but quit posting dumbshit like this all because my opinion obviously does not agree with yours.
-
Wow, you can cut the tension in this thread with a butter knife.
-
If you have something of actual content to add to the thread, then fine, go ahead, but quit posting dumbshit like this all because my opinion obviously does not agree with yours.
Again...you complaining isn\'t "adding" to the thread. I\'m not pro-Sony and this isn\'t about differeing opinions. I have a Dreamcast (still rocks in my book), PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube from this generation. Just chill out, bro.
-
Maybe LIC is worry the ps3 might dominate the console war again this generation. I still not sure why he doesn\'t have any interest in Blu Ray since he had HDTV. I guess maybe he prefers watching DVD quality movies on his HDTV or something.:shy:
-
The point is the same, you sit here and make these stupid comments. I am sorry I\'m not Pro-Sony and am pointing out negative things, how about I just point out just the great pro Sony things? Come on, give me a fu**in\' break.
If you have something of actual content to add to the thread, then fine, go ahead, but quit posting dumbshit like this all because my opinion obviously does not agree with yours.
You post negative comments (often unrelated to the original topic) in virtually every PS3 thread on the boards. If you are such an anti-sony guy, just make new threads to get out any new negative info. Quit hijacking the threads that actual fans make when they get excited about some new feature or game.
-
Maybe LIC is worry the ps3 might dominate the console war again this generation. I still not sure why he doesn\'t have any interest in Blu Ray since he had HDTV. I guess maybe he prefers watching DVD quality movies on his HDTV or something.
I\'m a little iffy on the Blu-ray thing myself. The 1x Blu-ray is equivalent to what...an 8x DVD reader? That\'s not much faster transfer speeds than the PS2\'s DVD reader. :/ The larger disc capacity is needed for the HD content, though I suppose. I think the Xbox 360 wins in the load time department. If Blu-ray wins the format war, then maybe it\'ll make a little more sense, but we won\'t know the outcome of that for years to come.
-
The larger disc capacity is needed for the HD content, though I suppose. I think the Xbox 360 wins in the load time department. If Blu-ray wins the format war, then maybe it\'ll make a little more sense, but we won\'t know the outcome of that for years to come.
I\'ve never cared much about load times, I\'ve never been bothered by them. I don\'t mind waiting 10 seconds. I don\'t have ADD
In terms of importance,
disc capacity > load time
Think of N64 cartridges and PS discs. Which would you rather have?
-
In terms of importance,
disc capacity > load time
Yeah, I agree with ya there.
I\'ve never cared much about load times, I\'ve never been bothered by them. I don\'t mind waiting 10 seconds. I don\'t have ADD
Well, I suppose twice as fast is decent. But I heard so much praise about Blu-ray\'s better transfer speeds and Sony only included a 1x Blu-ray reader in the PS3. I guess this was due to cost and the new technology. What I think will be cool is the nearly scratch-proof coating on the BR discs.
Think of N64 cartridges and PS discs. Which would you rather have?
The latter.
-
Speeds are such a misnomer for these things. You just need sufficient bitrate to transfer enough data.
CD @ 1X = 150 kb/s = sufficient for CD playback realtime. Faster is great for data transfer though.
DVD @ 1X = 1350 kb/s = sufficient for DVD video playback in realtime. 9x faster than a single speed CD. Faster is better for data transfer.
BluRay @ 1X = 4500 kb/s = sufficient for High Definition playback in realtime. Even 2X drives would have a great transfer rate... as in a 60X CD drive.... Better for data, and important to make faster ones too, since it\'ll take a while to fill a 50 GB disk at even 4.5 megs a second.
CD #
The PS2 is only a 4X DVD drive, and the PS3 is supposed to be a 2X BluRay drive, so much faster data transfer rate.
-
The n64 was an excellent system with some amazing games.
Disc capacity and loading times are such non-issues when it comes to the consoles we have. If a developer can\'t make a good game with what\'s available then they\'re crap, plain and simple.
-
the PS3 is supposed to be a 2X BluRay drive, so much faster data transfer rate.
That\'s what I thought too, that the ps3 have at least 2x speed Blu Ray Drive.
Like you said, 1x = 4.5 Mbytes, and 2x = 9 Mbytes per sec of data rate.
As the case of XBOX360 12x dvd drive...
1x = 1.35 Mbytes....12x =...16.2 Mbytes per second of data rate...
interesting, but the dvd drive 12x speed isn\'t as linear as the 2x speed from blu ray...so that means, the load time between the two should be similiar, with XBOX360 being a bit faster...
-
The n64 was an excellent system with some amazing games.
Disc capacity and loading times are such non-issues when it comes to the consoles we have. If a developer can\'t make a good game with what\'s available then they\'re crap, plain and simple.
lol this is true, but...sometimes choice of what format your going to put your software on can cost you. N64 lost FF7 because it used cartridges. Who knows how many games went to PS because they werent possible on N64 cartridges? Will this be the same with DVD and bluray? Who knows
OK FatalXception said PS3 has 2x bluray and Evi says 1x...which is it?
-
lol this is true, but...sometimes choice of what format your going to put your software on can cost you. N64 lost FF7 because it used cartridges. Who knows how many games went to PS because they werent possible on N64 cartridges? Will this be the same with DVD and bluray? Who knows
OK FatalXception said PS3 has 2x bluray and Evi says 1x...which is it?
Do you remember all the factors behind some developers shunning the cartridge? It wasn\'t only capacity, cost had a lot to do with it, too. CD\'s cost pennies to manufacter while cartridges cost many times more. That cost ate into the publishers\' profit.
blu-ray expense >>> dvd expense
When exactly did Sony sell you on the idea that blu-ray was necessary for this generation of games?
-
Do you remember all the factors behind some developers shunning the cartridge? It wasn\'t only capacity, cost had a lot to do with it, too. CD\'s cost pennies to manufacter while cartridges cost many times more. That cost ate into the publishers\' profit.
OK, you have a point
When exactly did Sony sell you on the idea that blu-ray was necessary for this generation of games?
First, I\'m not saying bluray is necessary, I\'m just saying it makes the PS3 future proof and was a smart move on Sony\'s part to include it. Kutargi and co is not the type to keep last generation technology (DVD) in a new system.
Oh and when develeopers start making games only possible on bluray I\'ll be sure to let you know. Heck, they have dual-layered DVDs on low resolution PS2 games. Why would they not need more space?
Yeah, and bluray has 5 times the storage capacity of DVD. Are you saying developers will not try and tap into that extra storage for games? I\'m sure when CD first came out people thought they had all the space they would ever need. Then soon games started appearing on multiple CDs. Then we got DVD. I was one who thought we would never need anything else, for DVD could hold 7 CDs. Then now develeopers are saying they may need more then DVD. Sony is upping it\'s technology with each new system. CD on PS, DVD on PS2 and bluray on PS3.
-
The n64 was an excellent system with some amazing games.
Disc capacity and loading times are such non-issues when it comes to the consoles we have. If a developer can\'t make a good game with what\'s available then they\'re crap, plain and simple.
True but not absolutely. There is still a limit
-
OK FatalXception said PS3 has 2x bluray and Evi says 1x...which is it?
I may have gotten my numbers wrong, but I\'m going to go with FX\'s claim. He seems to be more sure of himself.
BluRay @ 1X = 4500 kb/s = sufficient for High Definition playback in realtime.
I thought it was much higher than that.
Here\'s an FAQ:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg127.imageshack.us%2Fimg127%2F1362%2Fbluray7rr.jpg&hash=4adc1d8b56217ce58956c0914048b0a86aa4d3ba)
Taken from http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/
-
I may have gotten my numbers wrong, but I\'m going to go with FX\'s claim. He seems to be more sure of himself.
I am pretty sure PS3 is at least 2x speed and the table picture sort of prove it. It said 1.5x speed = 54 mbps, and it said blu ray movies can run up to 1.5x to get 54 mbps to the maximum video bitrate and audio bitrate. If PS3 runs only at 1x speed max, then it won\'t be able to play movies that uses the maximum 54 mbps bitrate...
I thought it was much higher than that.
Here\'s an FAQ:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg127.imageshack.us%2Fimg127%2F1362%2Fbluray7rr.jpg&hash=4adc1d8b56217ce58956c0914048b0a86aa4d3ba)
Taken from http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/
that table picture write them in "bit" rate length.
1x = 36 mbps, and 1.5x = 54 mbps
FatalXception writes them in "byte" rate.
this remind me of the time where you called me crack fiend about converting bits to bytes situation over a year ago...:p
-
OK, you have a point
First, I\'m not saying bluray is necessary, I\'m just saying it makes the PS3 future proof and was a smart move on Sony\'s part to include it. Kutargi and co is not the type to keep last generation technology (DVD) in a new system.
Oh and when develeopers start making games only possible on bluray I\'ll be sure to let you know. Heck, they have dual-layered DVDs on low resolution PS2 games. Why would they not need more space?
Yeah, and bluray has 5 times the storage capacity of DVD. Are you saying developers will not try and tap into that extra storage for games? I\'m sure when CD first came out people thought they had all the space they would ever need. Then soon games started appearing on multiple CDs. Then we got DVD. I was one who thought we would never need anything else, for DVD could hold 7 CDs. Then now develeopers are saying they may need more then DVD. Sony is upping it\'s technology with each new system. CD on PS, DVD on PS2 and bluray on PS3.
Compression techniques get better all the time, and Microsoft says that DVD9\'s are adequate for this generation. Thus far, all the 360 games are on one DVD. Oblivion, has some 200+ hours of gameplay available and it\'s on one DVD...with hi-def graphics, all the NPC\'s have voice overs, and there\'s an orchestral soundtrack. Encant Arms is a 40+ hour RPG with FMV...and it\'s on one disc. IF a game does require multiple DVD\'s then they would probably be in the minority, and I\'m not so lazy that I can\'t change out a disc. What\'s funny is that it\'s probably still cheaper to make a multiple dvd game than to manufacture one blu-ray game (at this point in time anyway).
I have a question now, what is that capacity going to allow? From what I\'ve read, perhaps more varied textures and what not. If that\'s all it offers then all I have to say is I\'ve seen Gears of War, Oblivion, and Kameo...the 360 will be fine.
I\'ve read a few developer interviews with their concerns on space, two actually. Epic and Team Ninja. I\'m not sure what Epic is concerned about, but I can live without the all the FMV in the next Dead or Alive game. I\'ll be curious to hear the first PR from a Sony first party proclaiming they are doing something that would otherwise be impossible without blu-ray. You can tell me when that comes up.
Uni, developers managed to make amazing games up to this point without blu-ray. Even with blu-ray, there are limitations. There were always limitations, and there always be limitations. They won\'t all of a sudden be creatively, innovatively, or otherwise stumped.
-
I HATE the bit rating for cds, disks, bandwidth, etc. I always convert everything to bytes, and my 4500 kb/s is = to 36 mbps. In any event, load times like this aren\'t going to effect games much, they have HDDs, and lots of RAM for caching any necessary data. Load times should be almost a thing of the past in this generation, at least once you are in game.
As for needing \'more\' than 36 mbps/4500kbps necessary for HDTV, you have to remember that they are compressing such signals these days. The max of 5000kbps video rate is rarely reached, and every blue-ray player and unit will be able to read at higher than 1x for at least short times, or have sufficient cache to catch up after such a burst.
----
Besides the obvious reason for having larger capacity (easy uncompressed high res cutscenes, intros, FMV), you can also put on high-res textures, larger and more numerous areas and worlds. If there\'s one thing that seems true it\'s that information expands to fill whatever media is cheaply available. I have no doubt there will be a lot of 70% empty disks coming out for a while, especially in games with no FMV functions, but I can see the fact that they can tell companies that this will (for a time at least) eliminate piracy, and cost them only slightly more than DVD disks (not like cartridges which cost dollars vs cents) will be a selling feature..
-
I HATE the bit rating for cds, disks, bandwidth, etc. I always convert everything to bytes, and my 4500 kb/s is = to 36 mbps.
Yeah...I always get them confused. Sorry about that.
-
Regarding loading times on BR vs. DVD, I nabbed this from a virgin at AVS. Take from it what you will:
54Mbps is the minimum requirement in the BD-ROM standard for movies playback, which is what the Crutchfield link addresses. However, BD-ROM base throughput (1x) is 36Mbps, and BD-ROM 2x is 72Mbps, which is just slightly faster than 6x DVD-ROM\'s maximum throughput. A 2x drive is what\'s supposed to be on the PS3. The 11Mbps you quote is the maximum for 1x DVD-ROM speed. A 6x DVD-ROM drive operates at maximum speed of 66Mbps, and the current drive in the 360 is a 12xDVD-ROM drive, so 12 * 11Mbps = 132Mbps. But that\'s maximum speed. The actual spec calls for speed between 66-132Mbps. So, the 12xDVD-ROM (66-132Mbps) drive in the 360 is capable of being faster than the 2x BD-ROM drive in the PS3.
Of course, you also have to take into account that DVD-ROM drives are Constant Angular Velocity and BD-ROM discs are Constant Linear Velocity. That means that on a DVD-ROM, the data on the inside tracks is read at roughly half the maximum speed and closer to the maximum speed on the outside tracks. It also means that it never experiences top throughput unless the disc is full. BD-ROM, on the other hand, has constant throughput, regardless of where the data lies on the tracks. Of course, this also assumes no read errors, which will slow down throughput. So, the BD-ROM drive would outperform the DVD-ROM drive on reading from the inside tracks. The bottom line is, it matters where the data is on the tracks.
However, as pointed out, if the data is on the hard drive, it\'ll move faster than the optical drives without a problem.
-
THX,
that\'s a very good summary and nice detail information there.