Sony claims no one will use 100 percent of PS3

Yeah Yeah Yeah, Blah Blah Blah, WHATEVER. Shut up and go make me some flapjacks Phil. I am sick of the spin on all the things SONY does. I am sure this is a great system, but it is only a machine and way overpriced at that. I will but one in three years and by then a ton of games will be 2nd hand cheap. I have a 360 that I dearly love and Im glad I went with that at the current time, and games should be in a place that makes us think about better things and not drug use and the like. Just because we can do a thing doesn't mean we should do it. This type of thinking on developers part is what is going wrong with this industry. Just my two cents- "remember when jumping on a mushroom was all the rage"

True hell with next gen-tech like Blu-ray anything is possible.

lets see here bad launch titles no rumble support bad online issues 4 firmware upgrades in less then a month yep sony is really doing good NOOOOOOOOOOOOT this has to be the worst console ever first sony has decided to allow a new version of gran turismo where every time you unlock a new car or track you have to pay for it and it will cost you 275 dollers to unlock everything sucks on top of that they said and advertise the console as 100% backwards compatible which it isn't also sony stop recycling failed operating systems for consoles they just recycled the operating system for the ps3 because it is the same operating system as the psx playstation 2 dvd burner combo that was released in japan only so yep sonys doing really good NOOOOOT

Overpriced? You have flipped wayyyy too many burgers there bubba. Go get Best Buys sale paper and look at the price for the SONY Blu-ray player.. Never mind I will just tell you , its $999.00 on sale Just in case you missed the brand name , its SONY. The same stuff in that movie player is the same as the PS3 and it PLAYS GAMES. It sounds to me like a BARGIN. Its only overpriced for the peeps with no money. If you had the cash you would have it also. My PS3 sits right next to my X360 next to the PS2 next to the XBOX next to the game cube.......too many choices. You should go get yourself the very cheap WII Just my 2 cent also

frim history, we already know that no one can use console 100% ability no one can utilize 100% PS1 power no one can utilize 100% PS2 power no one can utilize 100% XBOX power no one can utilize 100% XBOX360 power no one can utilize 100% GC power no one can utilize 100% Wii power no one can utilize 100% PC potential.... :D

I don't understand why people say the PS3 is overpriced. If you compare it to the xbox360 they's price is the same $600. PS3 is $600 whith everything that it brings so is the xbox360 hello the hddvd dive is $199. So stop saying its overpriced and by the way it is the most powerful system outthere. SO shut up and bow down to sony's ultimate creation.

Ya what he said I love the X360 and the PS3 I just have so much love to give Think about this: Not all games come out on all systems...so do like I do and just buy all of them...all bases covered here

I think there are very few good programmers out there who would be able to use the full potential of any machine(whatever full potential means anyway!?) from 'viv ribbon' - 'Gran turismo','panzer front ausf.b' - soul caliber 3',halo - gears of war,golden eye - sonic the hedgehog etc etc - they all used their particular machines potential to some point, but its the ideas behind these games that are full of potential not the machine it plays on, Gears of war - looks good plays well, yet its a still a shootem up,halo series - a shootem up and online frag fest, both these games sell buy th bucket load but there is no innovation behind it- just good graphics ,massive guns, explosions etc - dull after awhile but still looks good. there are hundreds of great innovative games out there that dont sell that dont well because they dont have great graphics or arent multiplayer(dont get me started on that topic grrrr) but are great nonetheless.I think true potential would be to invent a game that if you crash(racing)you actually get whiplash or bleed for real in shootem ups or your machine either shuts down for 24hrs. that'll be true innovation to start with lol

What a load. Spin spin spin.....and a real lame and conservative middle-aged (mentality if not actually in age) little attempt at controversey tagged right on the tail end there.
Ooooooh edgy.
Not.

Love the viral marketeers too.
Not.
Pathetic (but quite indicative of what is going wrong at Sony at the mo).

The really funny thing in all of this is the fanboy element's tedious claims there is a difference between the so-called 'power!' or 'capability!' of the PS3 and XBox 360.
What a joke.
The truth is they're actually very evenly matched, one is slightly better at one thing and the other another.
So little in it between them.

The years delay was not spent making the PS3 'more powerful!' it was just a years delay.

In Europe we might not even be seeing it until next autumn/fall (sept 2007).
Naturally Sony deny this - but then they were denying the PSP would be delayed right up until 2 weeks before it was supposed to launch.

Blu-ray?
Pfffhhhhh.
The movie sales just aren't happening.
So much for that so-called Trojan horse (and the really funny thing is that if people were to start using the PS3 just for movies then Sony really lose big stylee - as they're taking a hit on every PS3 sold and they don't get the same rake-off on movies as they do with games to counter-balance this).

blue-ray is a DUD! HD-DVD won this war before it even started. the only time youll see a blue ray disk is for a ps3 game in 2 years. and yes the ps3 is waaaaaay overpriced no matter how you slice it. even when the price comes down im not so sure id buy one.... i have played both 360 and ps3, gears of war is literaly 5 times the game that resistance is. the graphics and gameplay blow resistance away. wait a year, in a year if the games for ps3 dont look as good as gears of war well know whos better. the one thing that could tip this scale is if they figure out how to boot ripped ps3 games soon. also the free online just kills it, microsoft realy dropped the ball on that one. i refuse to pay to play a game online when i can do it for free with my pc.

The Biggest Question he didn't answer, WHY ? Why not use the full Potential, and show what its made off.. Why tell us Why ???

Quote:

---

blue-ray is a DUD! HD-DVD won this war before it even started. the only time youll see a blue ray disk is for a ps3 game in 2 years. and yes the ps3 is waaaaaay overpriced no matter how you slice it. even when the price comes down im not so sure id buy one

---

Seven of the eight major movie studios also back Blu-ray only, including Lion's Gate, MGM, Paramount, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Twentieth Century Fox, Walt Disney Studios, and Warner Brothers. Of those studios, only Paramount and Warner are actively supporting both Blu-ray Disc and competitor HD DVD. (Also in HD DVD's camp: Universal Studios, the lone major not part of the Blu-ray camp.)

I dont know where you got you figures but Blu-ray alive and doing real good.That list didnt inclued The porn movie biz that back Blu-ray also.So you can pretty much count HD-DVD D.O.A.

did you say porn ????????? Thats enough for me Thats why I have both x360 and PS3 its win win no matter how its sliced

The movement with movie supply is towards greater neutrality, not more exclusivity (in favour of one or the other).

HD-DVD currently has Universal (yeah that's right, only Universal) , Paramount, Pathe, Warner, Studio Canal, 2Entertain/BBC, DVD International, Weinstein, EIV, Genius, Image Entertainment, New Line (TBC).

You'll also find that some films which appear to be Blu-ray exclusive are only exclusives in the USA and are available on HD-DVD in Europe and vis versa
(and the same applies in regard of other territories)


.....and being the canny business people they are you'll also find porno released on HD-DVD discs too.

The idea that Blu-ray has it all sewn up is laughable.

A count was done over on AVS.forums and the results were something akin to 48,000 movies for BD and 40,000 for HD DVD.

Fox and Disney. Woooooooooh big loss. Not.

(In any event for the handful of Fox movies I might be interested in I can always go either for SD DVD or get them in HD capped from, er, shall we say 'other sources'? ;) )

The real question some folks ought to be asking is if the PS£, sorry I mean PS3, has unusable capacity then why should I pay for this supposed capability when it can never be used?

I am not going to show my side here as I have read the comments have seen many fanboys sitting around (that is on all four sides 360, PS3, Blu-ray, and HD-DVD) but its funny what people will say to boost sales. People do not buy a PS3 to watch Blu-ray movies and they don't buy a 360 to watch HD-DVD movies. They buy them to play video games, simple fact. In regards to Mr. Harrison's comment, a firmware upgrade doesn't make the console more powerful. It fixes bugs, which the PS3 (and the 360) has lots of. The Sixaxis controller is nothing new, game developers are already using it with the Wii. Of course no one will use the full potential of a console, obviously he is not a computer gamer. If you use 100% of a computers resources the game lags, glitches etc. so this is why no one ever creates a game that uses 100% of a consoles power. The computer gaming industry creates games that use 100% of your computer's resources quite often however, because for the most part, computers are easy to upgrade. The PC gaming industry also knows that gamers will, most of the time, gladly build themselves a new machine to get the most out of a "Next gen" game. However, you can't upgrade your console to play games and that is why game creators don't make a game that uses 100% (The most advanced game probably uses ~80%) of a consoles resources.

Originally posted by Pop_Smith:

---

People do not buy a PS3 to watch Blu-ray movies

---

- it would appear that this is true; Blu-ray movie sales aren't showing any discernible rise following the PS3 US launch.
That can only be a bad thing for Blu-ray.

Quote:

---

and they don't buy a 360 to watch HD-DVD movies.

---

- That's true as well.......but they do buy the XBox 360 HD-DVD add-on specifically for watching HD movies.

The fact that the XBox 360 HD-DVD add-on is sold out just about everywhere can only be a good thing for HD-DVD.

my three cents: nothing works 100% efficiently, in anythng of the universe. the ps3 is not overpriced, it is high priced. there is no definatie winner yet in hd formats, consumers prefer HD-DVD because of its price, and bluray for its choises

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

my three cents:
consumers prefer HD-DVD because of its price, and bluray for its choises

---

- Actually the vast majority of consumers are perfectly happy with their SD DVD's right now as sales prove
(SD DVD massively outsells either high def format).

Of the few buying into the high def formats HD-DVD is outselling Blu-ray by anything between 3:1 and 10:1 depending on who you read.

The 'choice' arguement is bogus and is either a complete misunderstanding of the facts as they now are or propaganda.

This is the current truth -

HD-DVD currently has Universal (yeah that's right, only Universal) , Paramount, Pathe, Warner, Studio Canal, 2Entertain/BBC, DVD International, Weinstein, EIV, Genius, Image Entertainment, New Line (TBC).
A count was done over on AVS.forums and the results were something akin to 48,000 movies for BD and 40,000 for HD DVD.

A slight edge for Blu-ray, basically Fox and Disney.
Big deal.

The movement in the market is towards greater neutrality. not more exclusive deals.

Quote:

---

- Actually the vast majority of customers prefer their SD DVD right now.

---

i said hd formats, and dvd's do not fit this catagory.

Ok obviously everyone agrees this news isnt really news, no one expects any developer of any game to fully utilize the consoles power, its just not worth it on the developers side, and also, I disagree with Mr. Harrison because games should be for enjoyment, I could care less about the message. And seeing as how this has developed into a mini format war conversation, I still don't see a reason why we need "higher definition" then what we already have,I believe that other than video games, movies should just stick to SD DVD because seriously this is just a money making scheme by the movie/electronics industry to make money on something we really don't need. I really don't want to see Lindsey Lohan's every freckle or Jack Nicholsons wrinkled skin.

Personally I like HD combo. That means I can watch HD at home but if I go out for the day I can still take my HD DVD flip the disc and stick it in my normal dvd player. Cant do that with blu ray.

Well I know one thing all the systems I have played back too the NES, have improved in the graphics so I know they were pushing it too the limit when I saw some graphics of early games of some sytems and you look at the later games there is a significent difference.

Quote:

---

nothing works 100% efficiently, in anythng of the universe.

---

Harrison claims that the current generation of PS3 games use barely half of the consoles potential. People bought the PS3 because its a Nex Gen console and people expect it to be good(Especially since it was overpriced) Yes I said overpriced because when people buy systems they want it to work to full or almost to its full potential. "Barely Half" to its full potential doesn't cut it. If only half of its potential is invovled than then why pay for the other 50% potential if your not going to use. Get what im saying?

I just love how many of you are awed by the Blu-ray Drive. It is going to be a good laugh when it ends up failing like past propietary formats developed by Sony. Remember Mini-Disc or more recently UMD just to name a couple. They tried pushing music on MiniDisc and where did that go? Movies on UMD, yeah thats been real successful. Much of what is read states you should not commit yourself to one format (Blu-Ray or HD-DVD) right now. Even if Sony starts putting games on Blu-ray it is going to be a format that could have been done cheaper. So like many smart people I will wait until the price comes down and for Sony to get all the problems out of their system before I invest in one.

wow i look at all the comments and all that comes to mind is most people belive what they read. lets get the facts straight games focus on 25% to 50% of what any game or pc system can do any thing higher slows down the system because of resources get all used up and you f up the game play or freeze the system who in there right mind would buy an add-on HD-DVD drive for $200 just to play movies only the only way xbox360 will pull way ahead is if the games are put on a HD-DVD disc to be played on the HD-DVD drive and even then the drive would have to be inside the xbox360 so the system resources are not trying to support the usb or what ever cable that is connecting the drive to the game system and the core unit at the same time if the HD-DVD drives are sold out its not beacuse every one bought them they made the same mistake sony did and did not make enough of them because they scared of what most people like me think ($200 on an add-on drive that i cant use alone just with the xbox no way if i like the HD-DVD format i would have just bought an HD-DVD player for 399 to 400 and not buy a HD-DVD drive for $200 that needs a $399 core unit to use) and lets not forget this is ms that is selling us the stuff they knew before the release of the xbox 360 of the HD-DVD format why didnt they make the standard dvd drive removabel so you could place the HD-DVD drive inside??? i can tell you why the add-on HD-DVD drive is on the market for a short time because they are planning to repak the xbox 360 with the HD-DVD drive built in and sell that as a better system so they milk the pulblic twice as for me i got the ps3 for a movie player first and a game system 2nd that way i saved $300-$400 by not getting a Blu-ray dvd player that runs $1000- $1300

(I just love how many of you are awed by the Blu-ray Drive. It is going to be a good laugh when it ends up failing like past propietary formats developed by Sony. Remember Mini-Disc or more recently UMD just to name a couple. They tried pushing music on MiniDisc and where did that go? Movies on UMD, yeah thats been real successful. Much of what is read states you should not commit yourself to one format (Blu-Ray or HD-DVD) right now. Even if Sony starts putting games on Blu-ray it is going to be a format that could have been done cheaper. So like many smart people I will wait until the price comes down and for Sony to get all the problems out of their system before I invest in one.) what the heck the media failed because theY tried to fully control it the hardware only supports what media is being used on the market. it all comes down to what media is out there for the pulbic to buy that will tell what hardware will rule the market

In a sense, it seems that Harrison makes the claim that video games on the PS3 will never get old, almost seeming like video games will incorporate even more movie attributes, which will eventually make movies less popular than games. At least, that's how I see it, but laugh if that's his intention. No way on earth will video games over play cinema; it's possible that they could merge in some aspect, but never over compass the other. With his claim that in technical aspect that the PS3 will be used to full capacity, I can say no duh! No one in their right mind would do something rash like that to something non customizable. And of course, I doubt they could bring it out with this generation; I mean, the Cell chip is still very new, and even it's uses as a console CPU are still debatable. In regards to that mini-format... "thing", I say this. It doesn't really matter what people buy, because it's more or less their choice on which product they buy, knowledgeable of it or not, because they are buying it, thereby becoming beta testers for the rest of us. That way, we learn first-hand if a product is good or not from consumers, which helps the rest of us in our choices, when in fact the prices drop :P. So, in about 2 or 3 years (depending on how lazy the companies are), we should see some actual final releases of these formats and consoles, thereby fully testing the full capacities of each. As for me, that's a good thing, 'cuz now that I see all the problems these consoles and formats have, I'm glad I waited (plus I'm strapped for cash :D).

Quote:

---

I still don't see a reason why we need "higher definition" then what we already have,I believe that other than video games, movies should just stick to SD DVD because seriously this is just a money making scheme by the movie/electronics industry to make money on something we really don't need.

---

well, lets just live in the old days, with no progress what-so-ever. no change, no new consoles. you from old-world rome, if something issnt broke dont fix it?

Quote:

---

People bought the PS3 because its a Nex Gen console and people expect it to be good(Especially since it was overpriced) Yes I said overpriced because when people buy systems they want it to work to full or almost to its full potential. "Barely Half" to its full potential doesn't cut it. If only half of its potential is invovled than then why pay for the other 50% potential if your not going to use. Get what im saying?

---

florecent lighting is only 50% efficient, so why use is? your paying for 50% of wasted electricity. hell normal bulbs are only 10% efficient, more energy is wasted in heat than light. so lets all use candles why dont we?

I've already seen a couple personal comments made and don't want to have to bring out the hammer so let's keep it civil people.

Nice point Anubis :)

i think not buying a ps3 wen it came out was good for me as i relized now.. cuz i was always a SONY fan always saying ' XBOX 360 IS NOT BETTER THAN PS3 CUZ ITS FROM SONY ' or 'XBOX 360 IS OLDER SO THINGS ARE GONNA BE NEWER AND BETTER FOR THE PS3' but now i got my sources.. if u cannot use 100% of the ps3's potential then wats the point? if it had a potential that wat is it? cuz if the potential cannot be reached then there is no potential besides wats already there. so i think i made my desicision to go with the xbox 360.

lol @ muccione! I allso have a PS3, that sits by my 360, by my WII, by the xbox and PS2! I havent been able to play it yet, with work and my hubby always playing it! But the graphics are awesome. I didnt even care that I dropped a little over $700 on the system and 1 game. The smile on the hubbies face when he saw his "early X-Mas" gift was all worth it. I was going to get him a Blu Ray player, but like you said, they are 999.00 on sale! So the PS3 is a real deal

Originally posted by bobiroc:

---

I just love how many of you are awed by the Blu-ray Drive. It is going to be a good laugh when it ends up failing like past propietary formats developed by Sony. Remember Mini-Disc or more recently UMD just to name a couple. They tried pushing music on MiniDisc and where did that go? Movies on UMD, yeah thats been real successful. Much of what is read states you should not commit yourself to one format (Blu-ray or HD-DVD) right now. Even if Sony starts putting games on Blu-ray it is going to be a format that could have been done cheaper. So like many smart people I will wait until the price comes down and for Sony to get all the problems out of their system before I invest in one.

---

UMD failed as a movie format because there was only one device that supported it, yet its still used for games. Even if Bluray fails as a movie format like UMD it will still be used for games (like Sony have a choice) thus it doesnt really lose. These systems are for GAMES as everyone else is saying not for high-def movies, although a few people will be getting as a "cheap" Bluray player.

Quote:

---

Harrison claims that the current generation of PS3 games use barely half of the consoles potential.

People bought the PS3 because its a Nex Gen console and people expect it to be good(Especially since it was overpriced) Yes I said overpriced because when people buy systems they want it to work to full or almost to its full potential. "Barely Half" to its full potential doesn't cut it. If only half of its potential is involved than then why pay for the other 50% potential if your not going to use. Get what im saying?

---

CURRENT gen of PS3 games are using "barely half of the consoles potential". Why pay for that other 50% of the system? because in a year or 2 it wont be enough for games thus making you need a whole new system, sounds like fun rebuying a system 1-2 years after you just bought a less powerful one. Sounds more like an upgradeable PC than a games system.
Also HD-DVD addon uses over 90% of the 360's resources(cant remember where i read that). Anyone know how much of the PS3 is needed for BD movies?

Well now this is BS Res:fall of man is pushing the PS3 to its limits show me a game that has no glitches and runs at full frame rate all the time and that has 2006+ computer graphics and then maybe I will re think it being total and complete BS...

I find it funny how some people can called the system overpriced but dont have one.These statments i dont take serious its just hate towards Sony.I would be curious to hear from someone that own the system to say this which i haven't heard yet in any forum.

Quote:

---

lol @ muccione! I allso have a PS3, that sits by my 360, by my WII, by the xbox and PS2! I havent been able to play it yet, with work and my hubby always playing it! But the graphics are awesome. I didnt even care that I dropped a little over $700 on the system and 1 game. The smile on the hubbies face when he saw his "early X-Mas" gift was all worth it. I was going to get him a Blu Ray player, but like you said, they are 999.00 on sale! So the PS3 is a real deal

---

Thank you xidezgurl that backs up my statment.

Quote:

---

t would appear that this is true; Blu-ray movie sales aren't showing any discernible rise following the PS3 US launch. That can only be a bad thing for Blu-ray

---

Its comments like these that i find funny.How can it be possible to have a sell boost thats noticeable with under a million console sold.LOL i would say that statment is to premature dont you think.

DamonDash
the PS3 is overpriced,at least 150-200 than whats reasonable for a console,sony in its arrogance made a over the top media machine that can play games,the trouble is if gameplay dose not evolve any their are more like movies than games or at worst crappy games with great graphics,the 360 is just now starting to get a bit better,the PS3 has a long way to go,the WII is the best of the lot so far,but I tell you the only that sees the need of the gamers and make a customizable control system that lets you maps buttons to where you need them would be a instant win in my book,at long as the games are not to sucky.

*rolls eyes*
blue ray only takes certain limits off space and load times other than that it dose not add anything to gaming the PS3 is no more powerful than the 360 in all the PS3 is overpriced and over hyped maybe in 2 years with a 100$ price drop it would b worth mulling over but as it is now its a POS.

Quote:

---

the PS3 is overpriced,at least 150-200 than whats reasonable for a console

---

Whats reasonable to me is i got a system that i feel i got more than my money worth.Thats reasonable,see you worry about money cost when you should worry about does the system justify the cost....I say it does by leap and bounds.I'm not going to turn this into a 360 VS PS3 tread but i happen to own both systems and i can tell you that i feel like i have a complete system with the PS3 than the 360 & its add-on.Stack the two up and you will find that the PS3 give you more to offer for your money at 600 dollars than the 360 does with the add-ons.

Quote:

---

[quote]the PS3 is overpriced,at least 150-200 than whats reasonable for a console

Whats reasonable to me is i got a system that i feel i got more than my money worth.Thats reasonable,see you worry about money cost when you should worry about does the system justify the cost....I say it does by leap and bounds.I'm not going to turn this into a 360 VS PS3 tread but i happen to own both systems and i can tell you that i feel like i have a complete system with the PS3 than the 360 & its add-on.Stack the two up and you will find that the PS3 give you more to offer for your money at 600 dollars than the 360 does with the add-ons.

---

I look at the system and the games and luagh its 300 more than what I am willing to pay for it the 360 is getting better but still 200ish more than what I am willing to pay for petty pretty games.....
I am sorry but I simply wont put up with their BS anymore.
if you are happy with it thats fine to...but I wish more people would hold off and make them notice that pooping out stuff is not what gamers want...

HDVD and BR:still to early to tell but I do know this BR is lagging behind HDVD.

UDM and other Sony formats:BR is not sonys ALONE,UDM failed because they wanted more than half the price of a DVD for a mini movie ,in order for UDM movies to make a good come back sony needs to halve the price and maybe make a 100$ UDM player do something with what you got wheres the fing innovation with out innovation and innovation in pricing you will fail why do you think the PSP is hurting so.


PS3 and the 360 anti hype : so much for the PS3 being all that the only real thing it has over the 360 besides the diffrent games is a media flash card reader,HDMI and BR,BR alone dose not make it a "better" BR will only help load times some and take some restrictions off the size of the game in the long it makes little diffrance,I once said that BR made a diffrance thats when the PS3 was 30%-50% more powerful than the 360 since the PS3 dose not live up to the hype the price is even more aguress.

Pricing :
Wii:250 (200 is more what I am willing to pay but 250 is ok)
360:300-400 (300 is a bit step without the HD)
PS3:500-600 (500+ is ludicrous)

the PS3 is 50-100% more than the others and frankly its not worth it yet gameplay has not evolved and because of that currently all you get is pretty petty shallow games,the PS3 is coming from another planet dose even want to admit it might be a bit "over the top" and sadly gamers are "happy" with it and thus games will not evolve much when the corporations can feed BS to the gamer horde...

In the end sony should have waited until they could have filled 2 or 3 times the orders they did,on top of that knocked the price down to 400-500 right on the sport,if they did that even I would be less annoyed with them.

Okay why should anyone get mad because Sony went out on a limb use new tech(i agree its early)also giving the system more room to make real time games because this has been the biggest issue with gaming period on any console ,realtime gaming.And people bash them.When you got MS using old tech calling it Nex-Gen,also selling you parts to a console,which was a tact-tick Sony used on the PS2 and people ripped them for it and i was one of them.The point is being missed PS3 is not a gaming console it a entertainment console.Sony stated this two year ago that this system was going to be like this.They didn't wait til midnight to add Blu-ray...

BD is going too win of coarse I wish they would make up there mind on the -/+ disk hopfully only one type this time does anyone know.

DamonDash the 360 is a hodge podge of a system yes,but the PS3 is not much better in the end I don't see a effort in either the 360 or PS3 to evolve gameplay any its all about begin the shiniest,Nintendo is trying but I don't seem them doing much more with the Wii mote. So you are sayign the PS3 is not a gaming machine its a media center no wonder the up in price and the down in games >>,my point is sonys arrogance makes them miss the point of gaming altogether MS is just plain old LOST and nintendo is scraping by and it seems the slow N'turtle is the only one see see games as games not mini movies or shiney things to sell to people. really if they put any thought into the PS3 at all they would have sold it in parts so that the core 20HD system would be about 350 with basic wired networking,HDMI would be 150,BR movie add on could be 80,WI fi 50,flash card reader 50 ect,ect give the people a choice,but not would rather sale it as a media computer thingy for for twice the price of a console and you wonder why some dislike the price..... MS had the foresight to make the HDVD an add on but lacked foresight with the HD and lost foresight on other things in all they are limping along well now Sony will be limping along well in a year or 2 but as it is now its as bad as the 360 after its lukewarm launch,and just to let you know most everyone thinks of it as a console and not a "media center" sonys arrogance is biting off more than it can chew...

ZIppyDSM YOU SOUND LIKE YOUR NOT A GAMER MS only added the HD drive as an attempt to run with the big boy. Sony could not have just add BR, its the CORE of the system, it gives game developers more room to add content to the game,50gb of space. Right now dvd can only hold 8.5gb of space. HD disc hold 30gb of info....but the games for x360 are dvd...not HD....the add-on HD drive is ONLY for movie playback...not games So as I said before just but both of them and enjoy Even if the PS3 was $1000 (I still would have it) it would still sell like hotcakes...its a games system and the games love it and its capability.

Just to illustrate just how clueless Sony have become......Sony's answer to their 'console without a gaming focus' and a bloated price-point' problem?

Even less focus and an even higher price tag.

You couldn't make it up.

It's the ridiculous PSX all over again.

Quote:

---

This just in from our Tokyo bureau: according to an interview conducted by Japan's Impress, Sony's Ken Kutaragi has gone on record with a "promise" for what he's calling an AV-centric PS3. In other words, audio and video capabilities first, gaming second (if at all), in a device built around the Cell-processor platform. Ken says that the device would certainly be more expensive, reflecting the prices and margins expected on high-end consumer electronic devices such as TVs, Blu-ray personal video recorders, etc. -- not the relatively cheap, but powerful gaming rigs sold at a loss under Sony's Computer Entertainment division. Impress speculates that the device could cost as much as ¥300,000 or about $2,500. The new Sony-branded living room box would, in Ken's (translated) words, "be a standard AV component sized box with a more powerful, power supply unit, anti-shake insulator, twice the main memory, and 2x HDMI to split sound and video output."

---

http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/20/ken-k...av-centric-ps3/

look, you are using your own definition for games. games to you is probably anything for fun. his idea is probably small little things to keep you busy. hes saying he wants fear and all that involved to make it more than just a game, but an immersement. hes speak of storyline, something all of you cry for so much.

[quote=DamonDash]I find it funny how some people can called the system overpriced but dont have one.

---

- How is this one meant to work? Are you saying that only those who have shelled out paid cash money can understand just how much of a rip-off it is!? Well if you say so (in your world). Naaaaaa, anyone looking at the CE market can see just how unnecessarily over-priced PS3 is. No wonder they're now talking about a "glut" of them in the USA - unsold.

Quote:

---

The high price of the PlayStation 3, along with the retail practice of bundling the console with software, has lead to a glut of stock online, claims tracking firm NotifyWire. The company believes the fervour greeting the console launch has already slowed, with consumers put off by forced software and hardware bundles which in some cases can see the retail price doubled. "I think we're already at the point where people won't pay a premium for the console or be forced into buying bundles," said Ian Drake, president of NotifyWire.

---

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=21856

no wonder they are talking about it? maybe because bundles are lame. you get suckered into paying for several games you dont want. people dont take up on thoe offeres, and if the only way to get a ps3 is to drop 1500, no one will do it. those ones arnt selling for obvious reasons. they fly off the shelves, and online stock of the ps3 is depleats in mere minutes.

and the reason the xbox 360 bundles were selling is because it was the only next gen console on the market and people wanted the newest thing. now there is choice.

muccione I am a gamer that has been watching the death of games by corperate interference the last 8ish years,the gray death tend to dislike fixing games that are out(patches),dislike letting a game be finished(polish,fix of glitches,ect,ect,ect),dislike games in general they prefer to make movies out of them all put little effort and polish into it then release forget repeat..... hughjars nicely said Sony is a agorant mess,sure MS is lost and all but sheesh... anubis66 well the 360 bundles were saleing because of 2 reasons 1 they were "first" and 2 they were cheap compared to the new computer price of the PS3.

Quote:

---

cheap compared to the new computer price of the PS3.

---

- Precisely.

I have the idea of maybe buying a PS3 a few years in as a cheap way into Blu-ray (if it's still around and holding any exclusive attraction in 2008/9) but what on earth would I put my new build PC on hold and distract myself buying into one now?

A E6600/6700 Core 2 Duo and associated kit (Nvidia 8800 GPU) and a couple of 500gb HDDs have a hell of a lot more interest to me than a games console.

That's it's problem, neither one thing nor the other and with a gaming performance no better than XBox 360 and a PC performance far below a half decent new build PC it's waaaaaaaaaaaay to much money for what you actually get in the end.

Like I said, maybe in a couple of years when it's around £200 - £150 ($390 - $280)...... and only then if there's any point to buying into Blu-ray at that stage.

(cos Blu-ray's future is far from guaranteed)

hughjars I dunno I look at the PS3 the price and where Sony wants to go and I get sick...I am tried of spending alot of money on acouple B class games and a ton of crappy ones,the PS3 is just more of the same from the PS2 days add sonys evilness I can wait. the 360 is looking up tho I could stomach getting a 360 in a year or so. A wii is a must get :P

ZIppyDSM Would you buy the PS3 and the X360 if money was not a issue? Lets say someone gave you a gift card to Best Buy for $1000 Or buy other things?

It gets even more stupid and tragic.

They really are losing the plot.

Quote:

---

Ken Kutaragi sez: I "promise" an AV-centric PS3
Posted Dec 20th 2006 3:59AM by Thomas Ricker
Filed under: Gaming, Home Entertainment

This just in from our Tokyo bureau: according to an interview conducted by Japan's Impress, Sony's Ken Kutaragi has gone on record with a "promise" for what he's calling an AV-centric PS3.
In other words, audio and video capabilities first, gaming second (if at all), in a device built around the Cell-processor platform.
Ken says that the device would certainly be more expensive, reflecting the prices and margins expected on high-end consumer electronic devices such as TVs, Blu-ray personal video recorders, etc. -- not the relatively cheap, but powerful gaming rigs sold at a loss under Sony's Computer Entertainment division. Impress speculates that the device could cost as much as ¥300,000 or about $2,500.
The new Sony-branded living room box would, in Ken's (translated) words, "be a standard AV component sized box with a more powerful, power supply unit, anti-shake insulator, twice the main memory, and 2x HDMI to split sound and video output."

---

http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/20/ken-k...av-centric-ps3/

So that's $2500 (approx £1300) for a rehashed PS3 version of the ridiculous PSX (another over-priced Sony product that no-one actually wanted and which stayed bolted to the shop shelves).

Talk about the first time as tragedy the second time as farce!

They never used the PS2 100% either. Finally, people wrote their own software for using the hard drive, memory card, etc. Yeah I'm not impressed at the lack of support the PS3 hardware with get. I'll wait until it gets hacked up good until I buy one.

No system has ever used 100% potential of its capabilty EVER so this not a shocker to me a ps3 owner adn not a hater of the 360 in fact the 360 is good for iits price but i have $$$ so the ps3 is for me plus the ps3 has a lot more potential than the 90% maxed 360 compared to the less than 50% ps3

See thats the problem some of you get wraped up in what Sony say or what a gaming site say.I dont care what they say i want to hear it from people that own the system.MS & Sony say alot of stuff but thats just marketing talk if you trust anything either of the two say then you really need your head checked.Sony has earn the right to say whatever that want ,why? because they are the top dawg no one over throwed them or has even came close so give them that respect.MS has not even came a close second to Sony so i wish people stop putting them up there with Sony, look at the sales that say it all.

Oh please near the end of the consoles life span they max it out like crazy the GC was first to hit its roof since it was the weastest one the Xbox next because it was made around power and alot of tis game come near slowign it down same for the PS2 if game has a large drop in frames guess whats its nearly maxed out its power. As for potential soemthign like this Saturn no because sega was console happy PSX yes DC no,died before its time N64 no Nintendo did not support is enough PS2 NO the HD and net was underused GC yes (could have a better line up but in all its not bad) Xbox yes (the only thing that hurt it is game line up) It depends on the who,what and where Sony can not stay focused on anything then changes plans in mid game (slim line PS2) Sega was as bad as sony being "unfocused" and could not sustain the losses. MS is focused but has bad foresight(hard drive comes to mind) Nintendo knows where they are going and what they are ding but their foresight is alittle blind. you are a PS3 fan boy aren't you.....the only reason MS is 2nd to sony is because their euro/usa sales beat out Nintendo world wide sales,the main reason for this is lack of devs and games. In the 7th generation of gamedom I see a 3 way tie sadly....

Originally posted by Pop_Smith:

---

In regards to Mr. Harrison's comment, a firmware upgrade doesn't make the console more powerful. It fixes bugs, which the PS3 (and the 360) has lots of. The Sixaxis controller is nothing new, game developers are already using it with the Wii.

---

A firmware upgrade may not make it more powerful but they can fix bugs that can stop developers accessing some of the power that they do have.

Originally posted by Pop_Smith:

---

Of course no one will use the full potential of a console, obviously he is not a computer gamer. If you use 100% of a computers resources the game lags, glitches etc. so this is why no one ever creates a game that uses 100% of a consoles power.

---

Using 100% of the resources does not mean that the full power\potential of the console is being used, it all depends upon how well the games are coded and how they use the hardware as to how close they come to reaching the console's full potential. Using 100% of the resources wouldn't really result in game lag or glitches, again this would really depend upon how they are coded and their use of the hardware. I agree no one will be able to make full use of a consoles power, at least in the regard of its theoratical power, its real world power is another matter. This would also apply for computers too.

Originally posted by Pop_Smith:

---

The computer gaming industry creates games that use 100% of your computer's resources quite often however, because for the most part, computers are easy to upgrade.

---

They create games on consoles that use 100% of the available resources too, to believe otherwise is foolish. Consoles are actually better suited for this as their OSes aren't as bloated with processes taking up resources as those found on computers.

Originally posted by pspjunior:

---

if u cannot use 100% of the ps3's potential then wats the point? if it had a potential that wat is it? cuz if the potential cannot be reached then there is no potential besides wats already there. so i think i made my desicision to go with the xbox 360.

---

And do you believe the 360 will be used to its full power? The 360 is in the same boat as the PS3, niether console will have its full power utlized. So let me ask you this, if the full power of the 360 cannot be used what is the point? Your reasoning behind choosing the 360 is flawed. Please note this is talking about its theoratical power\potential here, the real world power\potential of both consoles are an entirely different matter and both could be reached.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

PS3 and the 360 anti hype : so much for the PS3 being all that the only real thing it has over the 360 besides the diffrent games is a media flash card reader,HDMI and BR,BR alone dose not make it a "better" BR will only help load times some and take some restrictions off the size of the game in the long it makes little diffrance,I once said that BR made a diffrance thats when the PS3 was 30%-50% more powerful than the 360 since the PS3 dose not live up to the hype the price is even more aguress.

---

I don't see how BR could help load times. The PS3 has a 2x BD-ROM drive, which from what I know has a peak of around 9 MB\s. The 360 on the other hand has a 12x DVD-ROM which has a peak of around 16 MB\s, though it varies depending on the disc location(between 8-16 MB\s I have read). As you can see the load times on PS3 really won't be any faster then those on the 360, if anything the 360 will be a bit faster. The space from BR may help in the long run, I doubt it would be much though as the 360 games could always be multi-disc and make use of the HDD to store needed data to help cut down on the amount of disc swapping and there is nothing really wrong with a game being on multiple discs.

Quote:

---

I don't see how BR could help load times. The PS3 has a 2x BD-ROM drive, which from what I know has a peak of around 9 MB\s. The 360 on the other hand has a 12x DVD-ROM which has a peak of around 16 MB\s, though it varies depending on the disc location(between 8-16 MB\s I have read). As you can see the load times on PS3 really won't be any faster then those on the 360, if anything the 360 will be a bit faster. The space from BR may help in the long run, I doubt it would be much though as the 360 games could always be multi-disc and make use of the HDD to store needed data to help cut down on the amount of disc swapping and there is nothing really wrong with a game being on multiple discs.

---

BD read/write speeds are far superior to DVD as DVD is far superior to CD. 1x BD is 36mbps so 2x is 72mbps, the main reason it even has 2x is because BD movie specs require about around 46mbps (not 100% sure on the exact %)
And for multiple discs the 360's Blue Dragon is going to be on 3 DVD-DL's when it gets released (if it hasnt already).

EDIT: BD movie specs require 40mbps(max).

Andrew691
thats what I thought BR is a better format but looking at everything from afar BR only helps gmaeing in 2 ways size of game and load times(even tho I been told texturing it "pasasay" you still need large textures for better looking games thus no compression better load times)

the PS3 is more a complete system compared to the 360 but its price is insanity coming from a console/gaming standpoint.

ProtosX5

Quote:

---

In regards to Mr. Harrison's comment, a firmware upgrade doesn't make the console more powerful. It fixes bugs, which the PS3 (and the 360) has lots of. The Sixaxis controller is nothing new, game developers are already using it with the Wii.

A firmware upgrade may not make it more powerful but they can fix bugs that can stop developers accessing some of the power that they do have.

----------------------------


The computer gaming industry creates games that use 100% of your computer's resources quite often however, because for the most part, computers are easy to upgrade.

They create games on consoles that use 100% of the available resources too, to believe otherwise is foolish. Consoles are actually better suited for this as their OSes aren't as bloated with processes taking up resources as those found on computers.

-------------------------------------
Originally posted by pspjunior:if u cannot use 100% of the ps3's potential then wats the point? if it had a potential that wat is it? cuz if the potential cannot be reached then there is no potential besides wats already there. so i think i made my desicision to go with the xbox 360.

And do you believe the 360 will be used to its full power? The 360 is in the same boat as the PS3, niether console will have its full power utlized. So let me ask you this, if the full power of the 360 cannot be used what is the point? Your reasoning behind choosing the 360 is flawed. Please note this is talking about its theoratical power\potential here, the real world power\potential of both consoles are an entirely different matter and both could be reached.

---

Resources: what devs have on hand to build the game with
Power: the "limit" of the system
Potential:what the system should or could do within reason.

Resources and power are the almost the same potential is a bit diffrent,Resources and power show how well a game can run look at res:fall of man is runs ok but not without issues these issues are mostly coding ones it uses the power the PS3 offers but fails to use all the Resources available and without using all the Resources it cant use all its power.

Now look at Quake 4 for the 360 it uses alot of resources and power and runs poorly sometimes the main reason for this its not multi threaded the game was not built for the 360 and was poorly ported over they could patch it but ID,raven and activation have cut their losses and ran from it this makes patching fickle at best since only the flagship games or games that make money will get patched the others might have 1 patch in their budget before they stick their heads in the sand.

Patching firmware can help patching can help but in the end its not better than making the things right in the first place.

if I had money I would have a WII and a 360 ,I like nintedos plans for gaming so far as bad as the 360 is it has shown signs of improvement but I would not buy the console new,if you buy a item new from a 1-3rd tear retailer that means you fully support them in what they do I'd be happy to pay extra for another "WII" (wii jokes never get old they are like poo jokes :P) the 360 I have no trust or real love for but tis still worthy to play,the PS3 is almost every thats wrong with gaming today......

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:PS3 and the 360 anti hype : so much for the PS3 being all that the only real thing it has over the 360 besides the diffrent games is a media flash card reader,HDMI and BR,BR alone dose not make it a "better" BR will only help load times some and take some restrictions off the size of the game in the long it makes little diffrance,I once said that BR made a diffrance thats when the PS3 was 30%-50% more powerful than the 360 since the PS3 dose not live up to the hype the price is even more aguress.

I don't see how BR could help load times. The PS3 has a 2x BD-ROM drive, which from what I know has a peak of around 9 MB\s. The 360 on the other hand has a 12x DVD-ROM which has a peak of around 16 MB\s, though it varies depending on the disc location(between 8-16 MB\s I have read). As you can see the load times on PS3 really won't be any faster then those on the 360, if anything the 360 will be a bit faster. The space from BR may help in the long run, I doubt it would be much though as the 360 games could always be multi-disc and make use of the HDD to store needed data to help cut down on the amount of disc swapping and there is nothing really wrong with a game being on multiple discs.

---

Answered above for the most part.

you are right about multi discs I been mulling over the PS3 and the 360 and when it coems down to it theres really not alot of diffreance in the 7th gen its pretty much the same as the 6th gen 0-o
games and brands win the day again and kept any one system from being left out.

Quote:

---

you are a PS3 fan boy aren't you.....the only reason MS is 2nd to sony is because their euro/usa sales beat out Nintendo world wide sales,the main reason for this is lack of devs and games. In the 7th generation of gamedom I see a 3 way tie sadly....

---

My comments might sound fan boyish but i own both consoles.Tell me where did i lie about what i said? MS isn't a close second i think that Sony going to win again but this time its going to be Nintendo that pushing Sony not MS.Why i say this is look at the Japan sales of 360.Japan & the U.S. Is the two biggest gaming markets.If your going to win you got to have a major impact in both those markets.360 has not nintendo has so far but Sony we dont know because of system shortage.Over 8 or 9 million consoles sold in a year time is not going to get the job done and really not a lead at all.Wii is already at 2 million in a months time.

Originally posted by Andrew691:

---

BD read/write speeds are far superior to DVD as DVD is far superior to CD. 1x BD is 36mbps so 2x is 72mbps, the main reason it even has 2x is because BD movie specs require about around 46mbps (not 100% sure on the exact %)
And for multiple discs the 360's Blue Dragon is going to be on 3 DVD-DL's when it gets released (if it hasnt already).

EDIT: BD movie specs require 40mbps(max).

---

Yes BD read speeds are superior to DVD, I actually never said they weren't. What I said was that the 12x DVD-ROM in the 360 has a higher peak speed then the 2x BD-ROM in the PS3. A 1x DVD-ROM is around 11.08 Mb\s(megabits per second), so a 12x DVD-ROM would be 132.96 Mb\s. Below is a comparsion of the speeds of both formats -

Megabits\s | Megabytes\s
1x BD-ROM: 36 Mb\s | 4.5 MB\s
2x BD-ROM: 72 Mb\s | 9 MB\s

1x DVD-ROM: 11.08 Mb\s | 1.385 MB\s
12x DVD-ROM: 132.96 Mb\s | 16.62 MB\s


As you can see a 12x DVD-ROM has a higher speed then a 2x BD-ROM, and the 360 has a 12x DVD-ROM. As said in my previous post though the speed varies depending upon the location of the data on the disc, and has been said to vary between 8-16 MB\s(found this on Wikipedia at the 360 page). Given all this information we can only assume the 360 would have faster load times. The HDD adds more to the mix though and with intelligent use of it the difference between load times on both systems could be very little.

As for that Blue Dragon game, my guess is there will be a fair amount of high-def video clips in that game which take up most of the space and gives the need for the 3 DVDs. I don't really think it will be that bad having it come out on 3 DVDs, in my opinion RPGs is the one genre that works best on multiple discs and are really the main games to watch out for to go multi-disc.

Off-topic, I just had to tell ya I love the saying in your sig Andrew, funny stuff :D.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

Resources: what devs have on hand to build the game with
Power: the "limit" of the system
Potential:what the system should or could do within reason.

---

By resources I was talking about the resources available to the programs on the console, such as the amount of memory and CPU time and things like that. Power is simply that, the power the system has to offer. Potential can be defined as the total overall power the system can ever offer, be it theoratical or real world power.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

Resources and power are the almost the same potential is a bit diffrent,Resources and power show how well a game can run look at res:fall of man is runs ok but not without issues these issues are mostly coding ones it uses the power the PS3 offers but fails to use all the Resources available and without using all the Resources it cant use all its power.

---

Resources and power would help define the potential of the system but I wouldn't call them almost the same thing, but I guess it really depends on how you look at potential being defined. As I said before a game could use all the resources the console has yet still not use all of its power, it all depends on how good of use it makes of the hardware.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

Now look at Quake 4 for the 360 it uses alot of resources and power and runs poorly sometimes the main reason for this its not multi threaded the game was not built for the 360 and was poorly ported over they could patch it but ID,raven and activation have cut their losses and ran from it this makes patching fickle at best since only the flagship games or games that make money will get patched the others might have 1 patch in their budget before they stick their heads in the sand.

---

Thats one big problem right now, ports. They port something over from one system to another and it doesn't perform as good as it does on its original system. If they really want to port something they should spend more time making sure it runs good before releasing it, actually that could be said for any game really, port or not.

Originally posted by ZIppyDSM:

---

Patching firmware can help patching can help but in the end its not better than making the things right in the first place.[/quote=]

I agree that it would be better making things right in the first place but sadly there will always be problems with new technology\software. Its not always easy finding bugs in something like software, especially if it contains 1000s of code. I speak from my personal experience with programming and tracking down bugs in my code, a few times I've released what I believe is a bug-free program only to find out later on there was a bug or two I missed.


[quote=ZIppyDSM]if I had money I would have a WII and a 360 ,I like nintedos plans for gaming so far as bad as the 360 is it has shown signs of improvement but I would not buy the console new,if you buy a item new from a 1-3rd tear retailer that means you fully support them in what they do I'd be happy to pay extra for another "WII" (wii jokes never get old they are like poo jokes :P) the 360 I have no trust or real love for but tis still worthy to play,the PS3 is almost every thats wrong with gaming today......

---

If I had the money I would get all 3 as they all have some exclusive games I wish to play, though I honestly don't see myself with any of them for a long time to come. Like you I like Nintendo's plans for gaming, and their philosphiphy of putting gameplay before graphics.

Quote:

---

My comments might sound fan boyish but i own both consoles.Tell me where did i lie about what i said? MS isn't a close second i think that Sony going to win again but this time its going to be Nintendo that pushing Sony not MS.Why i say this is look at the Japan sales of 360.Japan & the U.S. Is the two biggest gaming markets.If your going to win you got to have a major impact in both those markets.360 has not nintendo has so far but Sony we dont know because of system shortage.Over 8 or 9 million consoles sold in a year time is not going to get the job done and really not a lead at all.Wii is already at 2 million in a months time.

---

I will agree with most of that,however MS did make 2nd place a close 2nd maybe not but 2nd place yes with the GC being almsot even with it.

the 360 dosent have alot of focus on gaming add the hardware issues had a bad start plus they lack the jap devs all this adds to hurt them they would have done better to wait 6 months get the hardware issues dealt with and let the launch titles be polished more plus they should have changed their HD scheme as of now I see them adding a new DRM'd HD of 60-120GB just to try and meet the bluster of the PS3.

BTW in your exp how many graphical glitches and oddiests have you run across is res fall of man?


ProtosX5

I still see resources as what the game uses and power as how the game and system cope with other.
In any case it comes down to coding and the polish they put into it Quake 4 is the best example of this it can perfectly run on the 360 but they simply did not code it for the 360 its a poor port of a rushed to death mediocre game.


rephrase if I had a grand I would have gotten a wii and a 360 :P *L*

I hate Sony right now and the PS3 is fickle at best right now but like the 360 it will improve however....I don't see devs improving gaming much its like hollywood its all about flash and short term and it annoys me to no end....thus I have come to a problem the PS3 is never goign to be worth more than 400 with acouple games to me 0-o

the only glitches i saw in resistance was when i killdd a chimara, it kep stnading like it couldnt load the information to creat a death. you could walk thru it, and shoot thru it.

anubis66 I read there were alot of lighting glitches here and there and the cinmatics looked better than the game itself kind alike halo 2.

(Megabitss | Megabytess 1x BD-ROM: 36 Mbs | 4.5 MBs 2x BD-ROM: 72 Mbs | 9 MBs 1x DVD-ROM: 11.08 Mbs | 1.385 MBs 12x DVD-ROM: 132.96 Mbs | 16.62 MBs) but the speed spec is based on 2 differnt media types ... hell you might as well say a 52x cd-rom has a higher speed peak or am i wrong in thinking this way about that ?.. wouldnt you have to take into the spec claim the ammount of data the media can hold ?

Am I missing something? Nero says 24x DVD read is only like 4mbps

thats dvd ram, i believe they are different a bit.

anubis66
thats his drive,soem are RAM,I dout thats the media it looks like the drive ID and name.

HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA
thats a LG drive or one of its knck offs mine ends with
4040b a3304
Generation 1 pre DL multi DVD/CD format drive +/- (not DL).
my main drive is now a lite on shw 160p6s.


RAMs are the precursor to RW a different format type true but the frist with RW capabilities.

Yeah thats just my new laptops DVD drive, was really hoping for it to have lightscribe or at least booktyping but was unlucky. @ZippyDSM I recommend you have a look at the reviews for the PS3 as a BD player Blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=3460" class="korostus" target="_blank">http://forum.Blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=3460 and as a gaming system as well. Granted it is the official BD site so is a bit biased but still...

Andrew691 I hate the ad filter/filler it kills some links dead and theres not a thing you can do to it. Meh the PS3 is luke warm,its a overpriced game system,in fact tis not a game system at all but a "media center" and a incompetent one at that no HDMI cables no remote I can nit pick it to death but the price alone annoys me to know end. end rant *L* the PS3 was to be more then the 360 and its not so meh next,I am getting tired of the graphics worshiping media center lot *L*.

Looks like Afterdawn still doesnt like Bluray, links to their site have never worked properly. But the link is still there. Also anyone else having problems getting AD to load properly, i keep having to refresh the page.

Andrew691 RIAA dosent work half the time either *L* its the fliter/filler program that links keywords to stuff. I hte sony more than the PS3,the PS3 is "ok" if it was 400-500 not 500-600 its not much more than the 360 the hype has failed thus I hate them more *L* ah well I will get one in a year or 3 right now I want to do 600 worth of comps upgrades and that wil take most of the year to do. after I get the comp new game ready it should last 2-3 years for gaming and basic newer game gaming *L* I am uping my PC mostly for 1 game BIoshock *drools* why because its best on the PC where I can customize my controls unlike the stupid cookie cutter crap consoles get.

Dunno much about all this,accept I will buy a ps3 for the simple reason the internet isn't fun anymore.Sold my pc because I was tired of hackers,viruses,adware,spamware,you name it,not to mention constant need for faster processor,more memory,bigger hard drive....boys just wanna have fun...a console is made for that.

Sony and the PS3 suck

game consoles r not just for guyz, us girls wanna hav fun 2 ya no i want a ps3 only for mgs4 guns of the patriots. (how sad am i) lol

twinkel WOW I have a wanted a gamer-girl I have almost All the systems (no Wii) And I have a full time job

who cares just pick a system and play it. who cares about the specs.

if no game in the future will take advantage of PS3 specs than what is the point of making a system that powerful ????? ^_^

the ps3 is like a child embarresed by its drunken father in public. sony says the most idotically worded things, they mean one thing that if you think hard enought makes complete sense, but it comes of differently to everyone else because of the spin we take on it after the spin the news puts on it. the ps3 is great, but its just a child and it needs time to grow. dont expect a baby to be able to ride a bike out of the womb. give it time and it will definatly be the best. also, why are people dissing the updates? i dont like now long they take expecially 15 minutes for a .01 upgrade. but its reassureing to know changes are made all the time and its alway up to its optimum every day. unlike the 360, where you get seasonal updates instead of littles one that could be nicer sooner.

"Nobody will ever use 100 percent of its capability," said Phil Harrison.... Prove it by providing the games not with some show-off interview

Of course they won't, Xbox360 is a lot easier to code for and the Cell is a nightmare. Let's not forget the bandwidth issues with the BD player at 2X. I've read in many articles that spreading game code across the 7 co-processors will take years to see to its full potential. And by then the Xbox360-and it's more powerful GPU-with its 3 general purpose CPUs will be hitting its full potential, hell Microsoft might even bring out the next Xbox by that time.

so much misinformation in your post, apathy0.. the bandwidth in everything inside the the ps3 multifolds anything inside the 360 minus the bd rom. the bd can be read at all times, even when its not needed, so 5 mb/s less is insignificant for games that store information on the sata hdd. the dram is somewhere near 4-6x better depending on the information being stored (the gddr3 in the 360 is slow for storing alot of little code, but great at storing large code. the xdr is just insanely fast like you wouldnt believe, and its ment to handle computer related tasks efficiently). I would also love for you to back up where you found the 360 gpu is more powerful, because there is nothing to show that. the cell is no nightmare to program for, but its no walk in the park. unless your saying the ps2 was the most god awful machine to code for in the history of the world, then this is no way credible, because developers find the ps3 easier. all it takes is more code because the spe's work from constant instruction. but that can be great once they are all going at once. and the the 360's macintosh processor (ahaha ms steal everything from apple.. vista, halo, and the xenon to name some) is general purpose, but what maay i ask does the 360 do that is really general purpose? nothing but the os, and it hardly uses anything. no browser, nothing. it rots its potential like everything else from ms (windows, zune). general processing is for computer related tasks, and that does not include gaming. game use little general purpose because thats not the kind of coding it runs off. you will see less in-game benefits from the 3 cores as you would from the cell.

anubis66 more like the PS3 evens out to a 3 or 4 core CPU 360. all in all the extra stuff is currently not greater than a "normal" CPU/GPU/ect,ect system. the PS3 might have some power hidden within it once they get the coding down...but I doubt it it would make it 30%+ greater than the 360. the PS3 is still at dock shes afloat but far from sea the 360 almsot sank once now is abit off center and top heavy but is floating along well enough once I see them fixing the Hard drive issues I will bitch at them less. MS still has a game gap they need to sway more devs to teh dark side. the PS3 has shown it works and is reaviltiy stable compared to the 360 it needs more games and more time for the hardware to mature(nothing like 10hours a day use to make it stop working)*sigh* I guess the lack of great well polished titles is what is keeping a loser from being made if you have alot of mediocre and crappy games you will have to get them all system wise.

excuse me sir but I guess All sony staff has gone mad. your Ridge Racer 7 is uuuuukkkkkkk compared frame by frame and model by model to XBOX360 Ridge Racer 6. do you want to see some of the compares we've made. I do have the two consoles and I wish someone to buy my PS3 so please help. or you could buy it for your kids. but I think they'll like the XBOX capability instead.

now here is where you defense begins to fall apart. the 360 devs kits have been out a solid year longer, and most if not all ported games right now came from a 360 base code. rr7 is nothing but rr6 with some new twists, its the same engine and mostly the smae maps and all that. rr6 was completely optimized for 360, while the upgraded version was for ps3. same goes for the madden 07 snow, snow on the ps3 is done with different coding than already existant, so EA goes their normal easy road to just make it a picture in the ps3 version. the only real way to compare games inter-console is to compare games that are not the same, but have the same sort of things. like compare two games and their sidewalk cement, or their debris, or maybe their water or wood. but ports 95% of the time look worse on the console the code has not been optimized for.

anubis66 I look at it and think bah the only thing sepreateing the PS3 and 360 are acouple games other wise its all the same unpolished corperate game crap.

This is the first time i've ever owned someone hard: http://www.itvidya.com/playstation_3_vs_xbox_360 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=758390 http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1 Do you work for Sony? Fission Mailed.

Apathy0 meh some of thos are slightly bias,but from what I have read the PS3 can do as "well" as the 360 they both go about power distro differently the coding is what makes them tick better or worse all in all the PS3 is still a monster in price and design it seems they have not had any true coding issues yet unlike quake 4 on the 360 and acouple other 360 games,sony kinda has their head a bit more but tis one bloated pompous head... all in all theres little diffreacne in the PS3/360.

@ZIppyDSM yeah, the ps3 and 360 are basically the same in the graphics depot, it just depends on how hard the devs are willing to work to get a game to run its best. the ps3 graphics are shinier and shadows look better. thats one of the differences i can see. nvidias were always good for shine and shaddows. @apathy0 alot of those smell of bias like zippy said. they explain how the cell would perform better if the spe's we accually programmed for, but then they say the xenon is because by like 965368x because its easier and ms pwns. imagine if everyone took the easy route? we'd be less developed thats for sure, and the easy way issnt often the best.

anubis66 http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=1 is a good read and is more balanced than I first thought,basically they are right the 360 is easier to code for but not simple look at (Q4) the PS3 dose have the 10-30% advantage in "power" but tis going to take them 3+ years to get there and the 360 will mature as well so in all there is no diffrance *L* the games will only separate them.

that, fanbase, loyalty, and overal personal preference is what separates them.

anubis66
there are fanboys everywhere to annoy the sane so meh.

Thats the dumbest statement I've heard about the PS3 to date. Anyone who knows anything about video game hardware (CPU / GPU) is well aware that there are games on the market right now that could max out a PS3 if their display quality settings are turned up to the maximum. Just more hype. "It will be so expensive that most people won't be able to afford it". but, "Nobody will ever use 100 percent of its capability". So that means you'll never have to buy another game console ever again right? LOL Upgrade the firmware all you want, its not going to last forever. We already have quad-core chips on the market. next year 8-core. how many cores on a cell 8-9? and they are not all active in a PS3 anyways lol and they aren't even full cores. Intel says 80 core CPU by 2010, thats only 3 years from now. So in 3 years the processor in your PC will have 10 times more cores than a cell processor (PS3). Combine that with a dual or quad core GPU graphics card. It will make PS3 look like a NES. Not that I have anything against PS3, I want one kinda, but theres other things I'd rather spend my money on at the moment maybe later this year I'll pick one up. But that statement was just ridiculous. However, people will believe it.

turning up the juice is not all that effects it. you can only do that so effectively. but you cant get past that point by writing the code better and better and it takes alot of time to figure out what works best on a new system. yes they would use all of the ps3 power, but its because alot is wasted in unefficient code. between a game juiced up like they are now and a game that was written with all the best code and algorithm at heart, the latter one would dominate. look at ps2 launch games to the ones now. both use around the same power of the ps2, but the newer ones looks quite a good deal better.

CPU The Xbox 360 processor was designed to give game developers the power that they actually need, in an easy to use form. The Cell processor has impressive streaming floating-point power that is of limited use for games. The majority of game code is a mixture of integer, floating-point, and vector math, with lots of branches and random memory accesses. This code is best handled by a general purpose CPU with a cache, branch predictor, and vector unit. The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming. Xbox 360 has three general purpose CPU cores. The Cell processor has only one. Xbox 360's CPUs has vector processing power on each CPU core. Each Xbox 360 core has 128 vector registers per hardware thread, with a dot product instruction, and a shared 1-MB L2 cache. The Cell processor's vector processing power is mostly on the seven DSPs. Dot products are critical to games because they are used in 3D math to calculate vector lengths, projections, transformations, and more. The Xbox 360 CPU has a dot product instruction, where other CPUs such as Cell must emulate dot product using multiple instructions. Cell's streaming floating-point work is done on its seven DSP processors. Since geometry processing is moved to the GPU, the need for streaming floating-point work and other DSP style programming in games has dropped dramatically. Just like with the PS2's Emotion Engine, with its missing L2 cache, the Cell is designed for a type of game programming that accounts for a minor percentage of processing time. Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements. A relatively small percentage of instructions are actually floating point. Of those instructions which are floating-point, very few involve processing continuous streams of numbers. Instead they are used in tasks like AI and path-finding, which require random access to memory and frequent branches, which the DSPs are ill-suited to. Based on measurements of running next generation games, only ~10-30% of the instructions executed are floating point. The remainders of the instructions are load, store, integer, branch, etc. Even fewer of the instructions executed are streaming floating point—probably ~5-10%. Cell is optimized for streaming floating-point, with 87.5% of its cores good for streaming floating-point and nothing else. Game programmers do not want to spread their code over eight processors, especially when seven of the processors are poorly suited for general purpose programming. Evenly distributing game code across eight processors is extremely difficult. Game programmers do not want to spread their code over eight processors, especially when seven of the processors are poorly suited for general purpose programming. Evenly distributing game code across eight processors is extremely difficult. GPU Even ignoring the bandwidth limitations the PS3's GPU is not as powerful as the Xbox 360's GPU. Below are the specs from Sony's press release regarding the PS3's GPU. RSX GPU 550 MHz Independent vertex/pixel shaders 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance) 300M transistors 136 "shader operations" per clock The interesting ALU performance numbers are 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance), 300M transistors, and more than twice as powerful as the 6800 Ultra. The 51 billions dot products per cycle were listed on a summary slide of total graphics system performance and are assumed to include the Cell processor. Sony's calculations seem to assume that the Cell can do a dot product per cycle per DSP, despite not having a dot product instruction. However, using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock. It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8 GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS. With the number of transistors being slightly larger on the Xbox 360 GPU (330M) it's not surprising that the total programmable GFLOPs number is very close. The PS3 does have the additional 7 DSPs on the Cell to add more floating point ops for graphics rendering, but the Xbox 360's three general purpose cores with custom D3D and dot product instructions are more customized for true graphics related calculations. The 6800 Ultra has 16 pixel pipes, 6 vertex pipes, and runs at 400 MHz. Given the RSX's 2x better than a 6800 Ultra number and the higher frequency of the RSX, one can roughly estimate that it will have 24 pixel shading pipes and 4 vertex shading pipes (fewer vertex shading pipes since the Cell DSPs will do some vertex shading). If the PS3 GPU keeps the 6800 pixel shader pipe co-issue architecture which is hinted at in Sony's press release, this again gives it 24 pixel pipes* 2 issued per pipe + 4 vertex pipes = 52 dot products per clock in the GPU. If the RSX follows the 6800 Ultra route, it will have 24 texture samplers, but when in use they take up an ALU slot, making the PS3 GPU in practice even less impressive. Even if it does manage to decouple texture fetching from ALU co-issue, it won't have enough bandwidth to fetch the textures anyways. For shader operations per clock, Sony is most likely counting each pixel pipe as four ALU operations (co-issued vector+scalar) and a texture operation per pixel pipe and 4 scalar operations for each vector pipe, for a total of 24 * (4 + 1) + (4*4) = 136 operations per cycle or 136 * 550 = 74.8 GOps per second. Given the Xbox 360 GPU's multithreading and balanced design, you really can't compare the two systems in terms of shading operations per clock. However, the Xbox 360's GPU can do 48 ALU operations (each can do a vector4 and scalar op per clock), 16 texture fetches, 32 control flow operations, and 16 programmable vertex fetch operations with tessellation per clock for a total of 48*2 + 16 + 32 + 16 = 160 operations per cycle or 160 * 500 = 80 GOps per second. Overall, the automatic shader load balancing, memory export features, programmable vertex fetching, programmable triangle tesselator, full rate texture fetching in the vertex shader, and other "well beyond shader model 3.0" features of the Xbox 360 GPU should also contribute to overall rendering performance. Bandwidth The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s. The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth. Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth? Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches. The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes. HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices. CONCLUSION When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment. However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3.

the same bias junk we've read months ago. that article is beyond old, and doesnt even factor in all the angles. even if one has more clocks for gaming related issues, it may not have more being done at one time anyway. plus, with the stream processing good from wireframing and building worlds efficiently, useing it co-existantly with the rsx could improve graphics by a decent percent.

jnk2004 sadly MS dose not haev the devs backing them sony dose thus sony "wins".

IF they can use the Cells SPEs to their full potential, then i can see the PS3 being equal to the X360. But you can't say the GPUs are equal because it's just not true, the R500 is a unified architecture and X360 will be superior in that department. Anyway...i think we'll be owning all 3 consoles this gen (already have a Wii)and they will all get great games. Plus i can turn off my PCs while the Cell does Folding for me :D As for blu-ray/hd-dvd i don't really care.

uummmmmm ok heres the deal the PS3 is as equal to the 360,why? look at GOW and R:FOM in any case the PS3 didn't take a year to get to get the level of GOW like the 360 did. The PS3 will will level off quickly tho after they get lighting and such to run full time it and the 360 will be perfectly matched. The main difference in the 360 and PS3 is this the PS3 can or will do more physics on screen than the 360 can 30-80% more this is the up side of the SPE's the down side being its noting going to bring other effects and poly count or what not the 360 should be cablple of once they get it fully running. So all in all they are the "same" in 3ish years the PS3 might be doing more with physics and AI and such the "back bone" of a game if you will the 360 can only improve on everythign a bit at a time while the PS3 is simi handicaped till they simi master codeing for it but it looks as good as the 360 and has a larger potinail for physics.

I can't see anyone but the Sony zealot claiming or believing that there is any serious appreciable difference between PS3 and XBox 360's capabilities.

Ignorance abound on this - even all that (now redundant) cr@p about 1080p we were 'treated' to a little while back is so heavily dependent on display screen size and distance viewed from - which laughably almost all of Sony zealots to a boy were so obviously utterly ignorant of.

The truth is the PS3 was delayed a year, that's all.
It was not a year spent making it 'better' or 'more powerful', just a year delayed.

It's a year late and all thanks to it being crammed with a high def DVD play-back system no-one asked for or needed
(I am so looking forward to the mulit-format games proving PS3 Blu-ray is all about tedious VFM filler and very very little else).

'Course their fan-club will buy anything with their preferred logo and claim it's next to divinity itself, suckers.

hughjars
the only real diffrance in the PS3 and 360 is that the PS3 should be able to handle more physics on screen once they get the codeing down right,until then the PS3 will have more games because thats where the devs will go....however I so no change in the wasteland effect both the Xbox and PS2 had.....theres some hope for the Wii...but I doubt.

What is the most popular console on earth? PS2. Then XBOX came out, and I bought my first console, why, because Xbox took the console industry and advanced it in a HUGE way, previous consoles lacked hard drives, descent horsepower for graphics, etc. Now we are looking at the next gen, PS3, and Xbox 360. Which is a better bang for the buck. PS3 if you look at everything it comes with. BOTH systems have crappy games right now, BUT 360 has been out a full year longer. (Exception, Gears of War - thats awesome, but thats it for 360). Resistance is very good for PS3, but thats it for PS3. 360 has Halo3, PS3 has Motorstorm (can't wait) and War Hawk. News flash, Blue Ray WILL be fully utilized, game programmers WILL use all of the processors on the CELL, and by next Christmas, all the PS3 nay-sayers will have been quieted, 2 years from now, Xbox #3 will be having its release date slated, and PS3 will be going very strong and will pretty much own the market AGAIN. I loved the original Xbox, still have it hooked up and play, but when it came to the choice of PS3 or Xbox 360, I WANTED and LIKE the fact that it supports 1080p, that it plays blue ray discs, that it plays SACD's, that it plays just about everything you can throw in it. Yes is has bugs, but guess what so did the 360, had to buy a cooling fan to prevent the darn thing from overheating after 20 minutes of PGR3. The PS3 is not even two months old. Seems like the in thing is to bash Sony right now, but I solute them, I don't mind spending $600 dollars on a game console as its FAR CHEAPER then building a pimped out Gaming PC, and when you add the $200 HD DVD to the 360, your at the same price, so ones not cheaper then the other. And Blue Ray is Bigger and thus better then HD DVD. To say no one will ever use the space on a Blue Ray DVD is also ignorant. The big thing that will hurt both the 360 and PS3 in general is the amount of money it costs to create a good video game these days, you will see much less console exclusive games, and more ports. And when you write something to work on both consoles, you create a core game, and add a couple of tweaks for each console, and wow, no one see's a great difference, can't imagine why? To me, it's console exclusive games that should be compared. Take out all the stops, and you get Gears of War for 360, an incredible example. We had to wait over a year to get that though, IT WASN'T AVAILABLE ON 360's release was it? There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that PS3 will be producing some incredible games in the future as well. Motorstorm will be a good start. I own a Xbox, a GameCube(for my kids) and a PS3. I am happy with my choices, I will miss Halo 3, and will probably go play it at my brothers house when it comes out, but that would be my only regret. And a year from now when PS3 has released more games, I fully expect to finally see these blogs quieted, and everyone drooling over the new Metal Gear Solid, or Grand Turismo 5, or KillZone (if it ever gets released). It sucks that more cool games aren't out yet, but they are coming.

i agree with ssg,

i was always a sony fan..go sony all the way... but when this article came to after dawn i read it and believe it or not i wasnt such a sony fan no more... cuz all the stuff i heard bout ps3 was making me say ' it cant be that bad.....' then this came and i said.. ' thats it.. it xbox 360 time' later that week i bought an xbox 360. loved it. and when i compare the fun and how enjoable the games were between the xbox and the ps2.. i gotta say that xbox did have more fun games.i bever owned an xbox but played at my cousins lots of times.halo and those other games. in my opinion i just like xbox and xbox 360 games more cuz they have lots and lots and LOTS of very good shooter type games. and those are my personal favourite. i want to hear more about the ps3 ( good stuff). cuz just give it a chance.. the xbox 360 didnt go all that well either in its first few months. but i think im sticking to my 360.. love the games!

and i was thinking about it also..look at the ps3 graphics compared to the xbox 360.. its only been two months and when u compare the same game su can see that the 360 has a LIL difference in it loooking better. but thats just the 'early days of the ps3'. lets see whta the sytem becomes and looks in a 1 year time

blah none currently show the will or leadership to return to "gaming" ,Nintendo is staying on the path however I feel that it has become blind and its games merely shadows of greater days....gaming is becoming like the movie industry where they make crap for sheeple and not gamers....

You barely noticed? That's been happening for years and will continue to happen. It takes a lot longer to develop an HD game, so less time will be dedicated to the actual gameplay. This is why many devs love the Wii and apparently Nintendos strategy is working as i've seen a lot of excitement over the Wii from "non-gamers". As far as the PS3 being "equal", take a closer look at the games and you'll see the backgrounds on PS3 games look worse than X360 games. Just one of the tactics need to use to make the PS3 appear "equal" to the 360 graphically, not to mention the blurring. The PS3 was delayed so i see R:FOM have about the same development time as GOW, don't say it looks just as good as GOW either. Nothing looks as good as GOW, even on PC.

im tired of this "return to gaming" crap i keep hearing about here and in other threads. i want more than games. if i just wanted a game i wouldnt buy a console, its not worth sinking the cash. if you can have more, why not? if the ps3 were games only you think it would do well? no. it wouldnt be as fun either. linux is a thrill, bluray is nice, the cell rapes any compressing in linux, the music pictures and video on the system are nice. remote play is the coolest, and web browser is nice to have. without more than just games, you play games too much and they get older faster.

anubis66 and I am tried of hooking my game pad up and playing "movie" in a shallow games clothing... you want an all in one player fine but at least understand it means they don't have to work harder or better on "games" anymore. Oh please the PS3 barely runs better than the 360,why? because they had some time to polish up the system before launch unlike the 360 witch was just launched fell back to the ground and then bee trying get it fuly off the ground since, in other year you wont be able to tell them apart on normal TVs. now in 010 thats when coding should be simi mastered then we wil see the real diffrance in them but even then tis only going to be a bit of graphics no where near the diff in PS2 and Xbx so in the end they are the same but different,the PS3 should out shine them all because of the dev support for the PS2,its easy math whoever has the most games wins everythign else comes 2nd.

and you remember, just because there is more doesnt mean they will pay any less attention to a certain catagory, especially games.

I actually don't have any problem with the statement that no one will use 100% of PSX3. It will freeze up before that 100%.

anubis66 I try,but looking at current games that are low on qaultiy and game control,looking at the future....I see a bleak and bland gaming future thats to the hollywood style of gaming everyone is gunning after. but it seems I am the only one to doubt where things are headed....

well i for one am loving blazing angels, the sixaxis owns. the ps3 is like a st bernard, it will grow slow be be a great being in time.

Well sorry for just wanting a-even though the corporations will force formats down our throats to make more money-GAME CONSOLE. I have a separate computer for linux and as for Blu-ray, sure it's nice, but it won't be necessary for gaming once they get new compression techniques down. If it wins, then good for you, but Sony has brought us the likes of Mini-disc, UMD, Betamax.....Will you pay $1000 for the PS4 because it cooks your breakfast, washed your car and walks the dog for you? :P

Quote:

---

Well sorry for just wanting a-even though the corporations will force formats down our throats to make more money-GAME CONSOLE. I have a separate computer for linux and as for Blu-ray, sure it's nice, but it won't be necessary for gaming once they get new compression techniques down. If it wins, then good for you, but Sony has brought us the likes of Mini-disc, UMD, Betamax.....Will you pay $1000 for the PS4 because it cooks your breakfast, washed your car and walks the dog for you? :P

---

betamax was 92835 times better than vhs (random number). it was smaller and more durable, but vhs had more money behind it. minidisc is definatly not a bad tech, but it was limited in its universal use. umd same thing as md. and yes i would pay a grand for something to do all that for me and play games and movies aswell as browse the net. consoles are getting to the point the are bargain 'roids machines, so all you need is the latest console to have a pc.

Originally posted by Apathy0:

---

Will you pay $1000 for the PS4 because it cooks your breakfast, washed your car and walks the dog for you? :P

---

HELLLLL yes, but only if it picks up the dog's poooop. otherwise "NO...DEAL"

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Apathy0:

---

Will you pay $1000 for the PS4 because it cooks your breakfast, washed your car and walks the dog for you? :P

---

HELLLLL yes, but only if it picks up the dog's poooop. otherwise "NO...DEAL"

---

So we wil have persacomps by then to "dress" and "play" with,altho its about time they made "usable" androids :3

you idiots really do not have a shadow of a clue about the ps3 and its true power don't you find it sort of embarassing that the weak60 is already maxed out after only a year yes it has i really honestly feel so sorry for you wanna be tech specialists you dont understand the hardware design of the ps3 in any way but you keep using your last gen knowledge to try to decipher a truely next gen system you minds are only subpar at most you have no idea what your talking about first of weak60 is nowhere near the ps3 in any way wanna know why because the ps3 is a supercomputer and do you wanna know what supercomputers do they are the machines behind these movies such as the incredibles, madagascar, toy story, final fantasy, cars and even those movies that will have those computer generated dragons, and creatures that dont really exist but look incredibly close to real they also render movies such as the day after tomorrow i know your minds are to weak just as weak as weak180 in comparison to the sheer unparalleled magnitude of the sony playstation 3 super computer and i know even after this post of the truth someone else will try to come up with their lame explanation of why your little miniscule minds believe that the weak180 is even at the shadow of the bondary of the sony ps3 and its true power many of you are saying that the ps3 had shown some fake trailers at e3 05 yes you may be right but then again maybe not those games shown were tech demoes done to the ps3 spec and wonna know one more bumber the graphic chip wasn't even complete at the time of e3 05 and one more bumber even with the incomplete system they were only harnessing 70% of the ps3's power that is extremely scary considering no one will ever use 100% of the ps3's power thats if there is a 100% now many of you poor idiots are so bent on just judging these launch titles as oppossed to the full power of the system you idiots dont even understand that whereas the weak180 is very very close to its limit if not exceeded its limit ps3 is doing its warm-up excercise ill show you idiots just how foolish you are why do you think that microsoft released gears of war right around the time of the ps3 launch gate ill tell you why gears of war was microsofts graphical trump card oh its very much common sense micrfosoft planned this release for a long while they knew the game exceeded what the weak60 was capable of but they knew the ps3 is 2X + powerful as the weak180 and they were doomed if they didnt try to battle the ps3's starting graphics with there best graphics you see microsoft is sort of smart and sort of stupid kinda like you people they released the game at the launch of the ps3 because they knew developers werent going to be able to make that level of graphics at the launch of the ps3 so that was microsofts opportunity to release this gears of war but you boys didnt notice that im no tech but yet i figured that out reason 2 why bill gates even stated,"this game is what the system is built for" in other words thats all the system is able to withstand you know the weak180 may be able to match the ps3 if you had 2 weak180's + something else and here is another scary fact sony said the finalized ps3 hardware was more powerful than expected another bummer guerilla games confirmed killzone 2 is already in developement and some elements already exceed the trailer and you that say that the weak60's current games look better than on the ps3 your far from correct because develpopes say that every game done for the ps3 is only possible on the ps3 because its a supercomputer developers could easily at this point and time stop what they are doing with the ps3 just trying to get the physic power out of the system not so much as to scratch the graphic power im so tired of you idiots saying that the graphic processor in the weak180 being superior to the ps3's your so far from right that im sorry for you you see the ps3's graphic chip had to be compatible supercomputer hardware in order for the system to be able to render the true photrealistic graphics that you will be seeing in the very near future plus do youo really beleive that aftr all the trash talk last time about the graphics and the inferiority i would highly doubt that sony would make the same mistake this time around thats why there was 6 years of planning and testing that the ps3 had to go through to insure the ps3 would succeed geniouses are the ones that made this gaming console/supercomputer which weak180 unforunately the weak180 is not not by a long shot when you say that the ps3 and weak180 is equal you must mean the 360 that is comming out in 2010 yeah thats right not the weak180 thats currently out 2005-2010 i said all that to say this stop dreaming that the weak180 is magically more powerfull or equally as powerfull or almost as powerfull because in all reality its leaps and bounds behind the ps3 microsoft knows it they've already sucked it up why cant you all just suck it up as well wake up from this dream the 180 is so last year its not next gen its sorta middle gen and wii is post gen ps3 will be the only one to endure the entire 2006-2010 + believe that no doubt about it 180 is alread all washed up don't expect any improvements over gears of war you'll surely be highly dissapointed enough said but i still know after this post some 100 or 1000's more weak180 fans will come and post on the same subject with more trash and one question why do all you 180 fans come visit ps3 sites so much anyway is your system really that washed up if so please do enjoy 180's little shine time cause it will be small because i guarantee you won't be comming over once sonys system warps past the 180 we will see less and less of you and you wont have anything to say now here is the last part of my post you microsoft fans are the source of the foreshadowed weak180's defeat you post so many comments and talk a whole lot of trash that microsoft will not be able to follow through with on the 180 you see people are surely visiting these sites and reading your posts and you have set a very high bar for the 180 which is maxed out and some more and saying so much that the ps3 cant do but when the time comes and the 180 cant deliver what you said it could and i know microsoft is shaking in its boots because they know that none of what you are saying is anywhere near a reality it may sorta seem like it now but its only been what 2 months please ill give it at the most 5 more months and watch you'll be regretting what you have stated guaranteed and when sony comes through and tells you i told you so that the ps3 will deliver you will be crying because the graphics will even exceed way past even killzone 2 on the ps3 there will be nothing else left for you to say end of discussion at that time i think it would only be fair to pay 180 sites a visit and tell you why the next gen doesn't start until sony said and we will get on your nerves just as you have done to us but it will be the truth not guesses or your wanna be tech analysis you really believe you know everything last gen things dont serve the same as the true next gen youd do well to remember that i will be the first to say i told you so. thanks for your time oh and wait why do you weak180 fans keep still insisting that the ps3 and the weak180 are anywhere near equal let me show you PS3 supercomputer 218 tflops movie making past photrealistic grapic capabilities>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>weakbox180 1 tflop gears of war and thats the max no further git a clue the first release games on the ps3 look either as good or better than the current games and games to come on the weakbox180 ps3 is going to ball the weakbox180 up and throw it in storage. love you and no hard feelings oh and what developers have you heard say that the ps3 and the weakbox180 are equal either thats just something to get in our heads that thats true or thats just paid people that were told to tell you that to suck you outta gettin that good old ps3 let me ask you if the ps3 and weakbox180 are equal then why are the graphics as good as weakbox180 and developers say that they do not even understand the hardware its very much impossible and secondly why do ports that come from the weakbox180 look either as good or better than the original ill tell you why ps3 is like Goku ss4 and weakbox180 is like bebi without vegeta and EA games is only using well under half of the ps3's power if EA really wanted to they could release a whole noter type of football game for the ps3 that would be completely real life mud, dirt, blood, bones breaking, individual hairs, facial hair, muscle definition, every aspect of the eyes, true facial expressions, breathing, every aspect of the face such as moles, bumps, wrinkles, sleepy stuf, tears, real sweat not like the sortta real sweat being rendered now, veins, nuckle definition, stains, fingerprints, pores, wounds, damage to any part of the body as in real life and so much more because the ps3 is a supercomputer and this is not just for football games its for every genre while you all are saying killzone isnt possible it is very possible but you had better get ready because for the ps3 thats just the tip of the ice burg. BE AFRAID BE VERY AFRAID. this is the truth yes the truth that these puny weakbox180 fans are trying to mask by giving you little subpar understanding of last gen standards of tech specs to try to make you truely think that these to consoles well at least one of them are consoles are really on the same level if your all dumb enough to believe them and any dumb developer that would like to follow behind them and anyone else go ahead but the true knowledge and understanding can only be done by real next gen minds not americans the japanese there the geniouses so they know dont let you faith be wavered by these would be trash talkers they are making claims that will never come to past. just believe.

thats gotta be the biggest sentence/piece of BS I've ever seen.

I seriously look forward to all the replies that it will get, who will be the first to crap on this noobs stupid statements? Or which lucky mod will have the pleasure of banning him?

norfolk
I dont even know why I am bothering...but the PS3 is not faster or more powerful than the 360,if it was the lunix benchmarks would have already shown it,the short of it is the PS3 is about the same as the 360 you might have "better" loading times on the PS3 and the PS3 "might" have more processing power for physic's when they get coding down,the 360 is built for brute power despite begin built "oddly" and the PS3 is built oddly around speed all in all its a even match in terms of power,it wil remain "even" for at least 3 years while codeing matures for each system. even in 5 years time I see the PS3 only being able to do more with physics graphically they will look the same to the common no HDTV gamer.

Sonys hype has failed frankly so has MS's reality bites and so do both systems,move on already...

Andrew691
I know...just when I think no one can be worse than me....

someone needs to make a console that just does not care about cost. one where the gpu diserves the name geforce 8950, the ram is 1 gig, the gpu ram is 1 gig, and processor is dual core amd 3.4ghz 45nm. price it at 1400 and im sure it would sell great amonst those with money. it could be the highest of high end consoles. the ps3 is positioning itself there, but in n such way this system i describe could do. nintendo aims low, far low, so why doesnt someone aim far high?

Originally posted by anubis66:

---

someone needs to make a console that just does not care about cost. one where the gpu diserves the name geforce 8950, the ram is 1 gig, the gpu ram is 1 gig, and processor is dual core amd 3.4ghz 45nm. price it at 1400 and im sure it would sell great amonst those with money. it could be the highest of high end consoles. the ps3 is positioning itself there, but in n such way this system i describe could do. nintendo aims low, far low, so why doesnt someone aim far high?

---

Heck why not chuck one of them new Intel Quad Core processors in it (laptop ones run at about 2.3ghz not sure about desktops), it would still sell very quickly. They need to build a gaming system that follows the same kind of architecture that a PC has but make it more gaming oriented without hardware updates so it keeps with the whole console theme, kindof what the PS3 is getting at but to a larger scale. Then i would be more inclined to buy it, even if it had a huge price tag.

norfolk, lightning struck!!!

everybody else, do you want dumdum's post left as is or edit out?

norfolk, you are a r3tard

you dont need to type a super long sentence about things that arent even true
I think the PS3 is the worst console EVER!!!!!
The PS2 is even better than the PS3 ,,even though I hate all the Playstations

ps2 is better than ps3, wot a noob

ps3 for me simply because ive had the 1st xbox and noticed loads of great games what came out for the ps2 not available for the xbox.
The shops had almost double the amount of ps2 titles over the xbox having also the eyetoy with lots of games for the kids.
formula 1 for the ps3 is the best f1 game i've ever played on which isnt available on the xbox360. I know there will be some games for the 360 not available for the ps3 but f1 is a top title which should be made on all consoles. The ps3 will without doubt again have a bigger and better choice over games like it did with the ps2 over the xbox.. We all have our own reasons for which we like the best which is good and should stick with that, but don't slag the ps3 off as many are who have already bought the 360 and are just doing it simply for that reason not having a clue how good the ps3 actually is, ya just have to look in all ya local ad-mags to see just how many people are trying to sell there xbox360's to get there hands on a ps3... Ya know it makes sense lol.... End of day ps3 or 360 are both good consoles and both have good points about them, i've simply gone for ps3 cos of titles like formula 1 and other titles im looking forward to which i know arnt coming out on the 360, which are the games i like to play.......

leeman71
maybe because the PS2 has I dunno 4X as many games for it than the Xbox?
the PS3 is to costly and has not games I know people selling off their PS3 most of the time at a 100$ loss,the PS3 dose have the better hardware but the games are far from catching up to it.

I say get a WII MS cant seem to fix the 360 right :P
*L*
come on MS fix the 360 already >>

oh well I will have all the systems in acouple years lower prices and allot of games :3

Yeah i agree that the ps3 is costly if ya only wanting it for just gaming, it's like anything else ya buy after a couple of months the prices soon drop. I bought a SLI geforce 7950 nvidia 1gb memory graphics card for my pc costing over £500... i did this so i could play all the up coming pc games in top spec. I've had the card about 7 months now and the only games that i play on it are cod3, bf 2142,test drive unlimited and now stalker, hardly any games have come out for the pc to show this cards power,and to top it of they have now got the 8800 directx 10 cards out which is more money to pay out when the dx10 games start to come out. So the ps3 doesnt look to expensive to me when ya look at how much it costs to keep upgrading ya pc to play the latest games which only bring out so many good games before you have to upgrade again lol.

leeman71
I do allot on the computer so I want to keep it simi up to date would rather spend 600 on it now and then get a PS3 for 400 in acouple years :P

I am glad I put off the 360.....wont be till fall before they fix the SOB >>