Discussion:
3D limited to 720P
(too old to reply)
Jim
2010-07-20 08:56:59 UTC
Permalink
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/07/16/sony-limiting-use-of-1080p-3d-in-ps3-games
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
The dog from that film you saw
2010-07-20 16:29:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/07/16/sony-limiting-use-of-1080p-3d-in-ps3-games
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
most games won't run 1080p in 2d so why you'd expect otherwise.....
--
Gareth.

that fly...... is your magic wand....
http://dsbdsb.mybrute.com
you fight better when you have a bear!
khee mao
2010-07-21 02:16:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/07/16/sony-limiting-use-of-1080p-3d-in-ps3-games
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
Jim
2010-07-21 07:17:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser,
so crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
I mean no disrespect to the guy but his comments up to the launch of the PS3
were pretty crazy. He was a great engineer (60GB PS3 still going strong)
marketer not so much. I still can't believe they picked Stringer over him
for CEO.
http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-unlocks-120fps-ken-kutaragi-laughs-1992
I'll admit as this article points out 120FPS at 720P is still pretty
impressive so it says "Who's crazy now?".
The alMIGHTY N
2010-07-21 15:32:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim
Post by khee mao
system ever brought into being.  so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser,
so crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays.  get that guy some crazy pills.
I mean no disrespect to the guy but his comments up to the launch of the PS3
were pretty crazy.  He was a great engineer (60GB PS3 still going strong)
marketer not so much.  I still can't believe they picked Stringer over him
for CEO.http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-unlocks-120fps-ken-kutaragi-...
I'll admit as this article points out 120FPS at 720P is still pretty
impressive so it says "Who's crazy now?".
Reading "120 fps at 720p" certainly seems impressive at first, but
ultimately when the visual gets to the gamer it's just 60 fps
(granted, that's in 3D).

I'm still wondering how well something like this can work, though. I
just watched Toy Story 3 in 3D the other day at the theater, and I had
to adjust the glasses so many times sometimes because of how they
clashed with my "real" glasses and sometimes just for how they fit on
my head.

Aren't the ones for the television sets actually heavier than those
dark plastic ones in the theaters?
Bill Cable
2010-07-21 17:52:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Aren't the ones for the television sets actually heavier than those
dark plastic ones in the theaters?
The ones for televisions are electronic. Shutters interrupt the image
to alternate eyes in sync with the TV projecting two different
images. It's a lot better than movie theater 3D, which is passive
with polarized lenses. But I don't know how well they'll work for
people who need glasses to see.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
President - Pennsylvania Star Wars Collecting Society - http://www.pswcs.com
Executive Editor - http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
Artist & Writer - http://Collector-Z.com
Doug Jacobs
2010-08-05 18:40:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Cable
The ones for televisions are electronic. Shutters interrupt the image
to alternate eyes in sync with the TV projecting two different
images. It's a lot better than movie theater 3D, which is passive
with polarized lenses. But I don't know how well they'll work for
people who need glasses to see.
I can just see LensCrafters offering perscription 3DTV glasses now...

With my perscription, I should be able to get a pair for, oh, $500 or so.
--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
khee mao
2010-07-22 00:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser,
so crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
I mean no disrespect to the guy but his comments up to the launch of the PS3
were pretty crazy. He was a great engineer (60GB PS3 still going strong)
marketer not so much. I still can't believe they picked Stringer over him
for
CEO.http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-unlocks-120fps-ken-kutaragi-...
I'll admit as this article points out 120FPS at 720P is still pretty
impressive so it says "Who's crazy now?".
Reading "120 fps at 720p" certainly seems impressive at first, but
ultimately when the visual gets to the gamer it's just 60 fps
(granted, that's in 3D).

I'm still wondering how well something like this can work, though. I
just watched Toy Story 3 in 3D the other day at the theater, and I had
to adjust the glasses so many times sometimes because of how they
clashed with my "real" glasses and sometimes just for how they fit on
my head.

Aren't the ones for the television sets actually heavier than those
dark plastic ones in the theaters?


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

the glasses I'm using at home are 33 grams. super light. barely leave a
footprint on your nose after a couple hours of use.

he games I've played in 3D are insane. SuperStarDust is a standout, but
MotorStorm PR, Wipeout HD, and Avatar (and others) look/play awesome in 3D
too. hear Pain and Invincible Tiger are lamesauce, but they can't all be
winners. can't wait for Killzone 3 and GT5.

Cloudy/Meatballs and a Disney Sampler disc are all I've seen so far
moviewise (gonna try Monsters vs Aliens tonight), and they too look awesome.
the Disney Sampler has some especially good effects.

there's really no good reason to not make everything 3D from this point
forward. the studios can charge more for tickets/discs, the games don't
require much extra work, and 3D content can easily be viewed as 2D for those
who don't care.
The alMIGHTY N
2010-07-26 15:39:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser,
so crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
I mean no disrespect to the guy but his comments up to the launch of the PS3
were pretty crazy. He was a great engineer (60GB PS3 still going strong)
marketer not so much. I still can't believe they picked Stringer over him
for
CEO.http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-unlocks-120fps-ken-kutaragi-...
I'll admit as this article points out 120FPS at 720P is still pretty
impressive so it says "Who's crazy now?".
Reading "120 fps at 720p" certainly seems impressive at first, but
ultimately when the visual gets to the gamer it's just 60 fps
(granted, that's in 3D).
I'm still wondering how well something like this can work, though. I
just watched Toy Story 3 in 3D the other day at the theater, and I had
to adjust the glasses so many times sometimes because of how they
clashed with my "real" glasses and sometimes just for how they fit on
my head.
Aren't the ones for the television sets actually heavier than those
dark plastic ones in the theaters?
-------------------------------------------------------
the glasses I'm using at home are 33 grams.  super light.  barely leave a
footprint on your nose after a couple hours of use.
he games I've played in 3D are insane.  SuperStarDust is a standout, but
MotorStorm PR, Wipeout HD, and Avatar (and others) look/play awesome in 3D
too.  hear Pain and Invincible Tiger are lamesauce, but they can't all be
winners.  can't wait for Killzone 3 and GT5.
Cloudy/Meatballs and a Disney Sampler disc are all I've seen so far
moviewise (gonna try Monsters vs Aliens tonight), and they too look awesome.
the Disney Sampler has some especially good effects.
there's really no good reason to not make everything 3D from this point
forward.  the studios can charge more for tickets/discs, the games don't
require much extra work, and 3D content can easily be viewed as 2D for those
who don't care.
Making *all* movies in 3D will *hurt* ticket sales, and studios can't
make those decisions on their own, anyway. Theaters have to be willing
to upgrade all of their equipment, and you'd be eliminating the
plethora of second-run theaters that a lot of people frequent.

While it sounds good at first to be able to just charge everyone more
money, what would happen is that most moviegoers would just stop going
to the theater. You can make an argument to pay $15-20 to see Avatar
in 3D, but what about The Backup Plan? The thing is, movies like
Avatar, Toy Story, etc. are just a small percentage of all films
released in a year - most are movies that people would never need to
see in 3D.

And let's not forget about all the independent films that wouldn't fit
in this "brave new world."
khee mao
2010-07-27 02:10:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser,
so crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and
soon
3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
I mean no disrespect to the guy but his comments up to the launch of the PS3
were pretty crazy. He was a great engineer (60GB PS3 still going strong)
marketer not so much. I still can't believe they picked Stringer over him
for
CEO.http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-unlocks-120fps-ken-kutaragi-...
I'll admit as this article points out 120FPS at 720P is still pretty
impressive so it says "Who's crazy now?".
Reading "120 fps at 720p" certainly seems impressive at first, but
ultimately when the visual gets to the gamer it's just 60 fps
(granted, that's in 3D).
I'm still wondering how well something like this can work, though. I
just watched Toy Story 3 in 3D the other day at the theater, and I had
to adjust the glasses so many times sometimes because of how they
clashed with my "real" glasses and sometimes just for how they fit on
my head.
Aren't the ones for the television sets actually heavier than those
dark plastic ones in the theaters?
-------------------------------------------------------
the glasses I'm using at home are 33 grams. super light. barely leave a
footprint on your nose after a couple hours of use.
he games I've played in 3D are insane. SuperStarDust is a standout, but
MotorStorm PR, Wipeout HD, and Avatar (and others) look/play awesome in 3D
too. hear Pain and Invincible Tiger are lamesauce, but they can't all be
winners. can't wait for Killzone 3 and GT5.
Cloudy/Meatballs and a Disney Sampler disc are all I've seen so far
moviewise (gonna try Monsters vs Aliens tonight), and they too look awesome.
the Disney Sampler has some especially good effects.
there's really no good reason to not make everything 3D from this point
forward. the studios can charge more for tickets/discs, the games don't
require much extra work, and 3D content can easily be viewed as 2D for those
who don't care.
Making *all* movies in 3D will *hurt* ticket sales, and studios can't
make those decisions on their own, anyway. Theaters have to be willing
to upgrade all of their equipment, and you'd be eliminating the
plethora of second-run theaters that a lot of people frequent.

While it sounds good at first to be able to just charge everyone more
money, what would happen is that most moviegoers would just stop going
to the theater. You can make an argument to pay $15-20 to see Avatar
in 3D, but what about The Backup Plan? The thing is, movies like
Avatar, Toy Story, etc. are just a small percentage of all films
released in a year - most are movies that people would never need to
see in 3D.

And let's not forget about all the independent films that wouldn't fit
in this "brave new world."

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

my point is that if everything (granted, not _everything_, but starting with
all blockbusters at least) were shot in 3D, you'd have 2D already built in
by just showing either the left or right (not both) image. this is the
premise behind 3D blu-rays being backwards compatible on non 3D blu-ray
players or to watch them in 2D on a 3D player. that way everyone's happy.
3D consumers have content and pay the extra for it, and there is still 2D
for those who don't think 3D is worth the investment. it's kind of a
win-win.
The alMIGHTY N
2010-07-27 15:54:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser,
so crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and
soon
3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
I mean no disrespect to the guy but his comments up to the launch of the PS3
were pretty crazy. He was a great engineer (60GB PS3 still going strong)
marketer not so much. I still can't believe they picked Stringer over him
for
CEO.http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-unlocks-120fps-ken-kutaragi-...
I'll admit as this article points out 120FPS at 720P is still pretty
impressive so it says "Who's crazy now?".
Reading "120 fps at 720p" certainly seems impressive at first, but
ultimately when the visual gets to the gamer it's just 60 fps
(granted, that's in 3D).
I'm still wondering how well something like this can work, though. I
just watched Toy Story 3 in 3D the other day at the theater, and I had
to adjust the glasses so many times sometimes because of how they
clashed with my "real" glasses and sometimes just for how they fit on
my head.
Aren't the ones for the television sets actually heavier than those
dark plastic ones in the theaters?
-------------------------------------------------------
the glasses I'm using at home are 33 grams. super light. barely leave a
footprint on your nose after a couple hours of use.
he games I've played in 3D are insane. SuperStarDust is a standout, but
MotorStorm PR, Wipeout HD, and Avatar (and others) look/play awesome in 3D
too. hear Pain and Invincible Tiger are lamesauce, but they can't all be
winners. can't wait for Killzone 3 and GT5.
Cloudy/Meatballs and a Disney Sampler disc are all I've seen so far
moviewise (gonna try Monsters vs Aliens tonight), and they too look awesome.
the Disney Sampler has some especially good effects.
there's really no good reason to not make everything 3D from this point
forward. the studios can charge more for tickets/discs, the games don't
require much extra work, and 3D content can easily be viewed as 2D for those
who don't care.
Making *all* movies in 3D will *hurt* ticket sales, and studios can't
make those decisions on their own, anyway. Theaters have to be willing
to upgrade all of their equipment, and you'd be eliminating the
plethora of second-run theaters that a lot of people frequent.
While it sounds good at first to be able to just charge everyone more
money, what would happen is that most moviegoers would just stop going
to the theater. You can make an argument to pay $15-20 to see Avatar
in 3D, but what about The Backup Plan? The thing is, movies like
Avatar, Toy Story, etc. are just a small percentage of all films
released in a year - most are movies that people would never need to
see in 3D.
And let's not forget about all the independent films that wouldn't fit
in this "brave new world."
--------------------------------------------------------
my point is that if everything (granted, not _everything_, but starting with
all blockbusters at least) were shot in 3D, you'd have 2D already built in
by just showing either the left or right (not both) image.  this is the
premise behind 3D blu-rays being backwards compatible on non 3D blu-ray
players or to watch them in 2D on a 3D player.  that way everyone's happy.
3D consumers have content and pay the extra for it, and there is still 2D
for those who don't think 3D is worth the investment.  it's kind of a
win-win.
Without looking into a cost analysis of a 3-D film project, that seems
like a fair enough idea. It'll be interesting to see how easily
filmmakers adapt to the significantly different filmmaking techniques
used to make a 3-D film.

The last thing the industry needs is more disaster caused by studios
deciding after filming that they want a movie to be 3-D.
The alMIGHTY N
2010-07-21 15:27:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being.  so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays.  get that guy some crazy pills.
In other words, he designed a computer. Innovative! ;-)
khee mao
2010-07-22 00:15:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
In other words, he designed a computer. Innovative! ;-)

==========================================

that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released. now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs. you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age. I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
The alMIGHTY N
2010-07-26 15:41:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
In other words, he designed a computer. Innovative! ;-)
==========================================
that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released.  now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs.  you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age.  I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
I wouldn't disagree if you're talking about videophiles and
moviephiles.

Of course, the reality is that you don't have to have only one device.
khee mao
2010-07-27 02:17:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web
browser,
so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
In other words, he designed a computer. Innovative! ;-)
==========================================
that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released. now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs. you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age. I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
I wouldn't disagree if you're talking about videophiles and
moviephiles.

Of course, the reality is that you don't have to have only one device.

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

the reality for you and me, yes.
Smitzor
2010-07-31 22:47:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web
browser,
so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
In other words, he designed a computer. Innovative! ;-)
==========================================
that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released. now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs. you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age. I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
I wouldn't disagree if you're talking about videophiles and
moviephiles.

Of course, the reality is that you don't have to have only one device.
___________________________________________
True, the general consumer is not limited to owning a single gaming console
as long as you have that kind of money to spend.

I found a sweet deal recently. I traded an Elite unit with a 20 GB HD and 50
bux for a barely used launch 60 GB model. I would have originally gotten a
PS3 had it not been so expensive and elusive in my area at release. Sure, I
could have spent half the rent or a car note on another console just to say
I have it OR maintain a decent quality of life with todays economic
situation. Ultimately I made the correct financial decision because I still
have a car and a roof and the console I originally wanted.

I wonder if Nintendo is kicking themselves in the ass knowing that the PS
has done so well independantly when it was originally designed to be
additional hardware for the SNES?
The alMIGHTY N
2010-08-02 15:27:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by The alMIGHTY N
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web
browser,
so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
In other words, he designed a computer. Innovative! ;-)
==========================================
that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released. now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs. you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age. I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
I wouldn't disagree if you're talking about videophiles and
moviephiles.
Of course, the reality is that you don't have to have only one device.
___________________________________________
True, the general consumer is not limited to owning a single gaming console
as long as you have that kind of money to spend.
I wasn't really talking about owning multiple gaming consoles, but
rather owning multiple devices attached to your television.
Post by The alMIGHTY N
I found a sweet deal recently. I traded an Elite unit with a 20 GB HD and 50
bux for a barely used launch 60 GB model. I would have originally gotten a
PS3 had it not been so expensive and elusive in my area at release. Sure, I
could have spent half the rent or a car note on another console just to say
I have it OR maintain a decent quality of life with todays economic
situation. Ultimately I made the correct financial decision because I still
have a car and a roof and the console I originally wanted.
I wonder if Nintendo is kicking themselves in the ass knowing that the PS
has done so well independantly when it was originally designed to be
additional hardware for the SNES?
Probably, but at the same time Nintendo was back then like Apple is
now... they were control freaks.

And they're probably not terribly upset at the moment with total
domination of both the console and handheld spaces.
Doug Jacobs
2010-08-05 19:26:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by The alMIGHTY N
I wouldn't disagree if you're talking about videophiles and
moviephiles.
Of course, the reality is that you don't have to have only one device.
___________________________________________
True, the general consumer is not limited to owning a single gaming console
as long as you have that kind of money to spend.
I don't think he was talking about having more than 1 game console.

I think he was referring more to the idea of having a separate blu-ray
player, and set-top media streamer.

From the AVR/Video/Moviephile point of view, the PS3 was innovative
because it was the first to combine so many different AV functions into a
single unit - oh and it also could play PS3 games. For the first 12-18
months, the PS3 was the best blu-ray player on the market in terms of
price and features. However, that was only because Sony was essentially
eating $200-300 in red ink.

With the upcoming firmware update that will make the PS3 able to play 3d
blu-rays, the PS3 again stands to be considered one of the better values
for (3d) blu-rays on the market.

Unfortunately, none of this really does much for gamers. Honestly, if
you're only interested in playing games, the 360 is still your best value,
and arguably always has been.
Post by The alMIGHTY N
I found a sweet deal recently. I traded an Elite unit with a 20 GB HD and 50
bux for a barely used launch 60 GB model. I would have originally gotten a
PS3 had it not been so expensive and elusive in my area at release. Sure, I
could have spent half the rent or a car note on another console just to say
I have it OR maintain a decent quality of life with todays economic
situation. Ultimately I made the correct financial decision because I still
have a car and a roof and the console I originally wanted.
I wonder if Nintendo is kicking themselves in the ass knowing that the PS
has done so well independantly when it was originally designed to be
additional hardware for the SNES?
--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
Doug Jacobs
2010-08-05 19:17:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
Ocassional? It seems the thing needs updating about every other week - and
thanks to PSN's "innovative" network, that process is horrendously slow.

Not to mention the "innovative" service itself tends to brick a few units
each time. Well, OK, that's not innovative. Microsoft implemented the
brick-your-box-by-updating-it system long ago.
Post by khee mao
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released. now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs.
Ah, yes, but only because Sony was eating $200-300 per sale.

Not innovative when talking about the game console market, but I guess
it's somewhat innovative for the general AV market. It also implies that
basically Sony basically bought victory in the format war.
Post by khee mao
you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age. I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
I don't know if I'd say it's getting better with age. I'm still pretty
annoyed that they dropped PS2 backwards compatibility. So that means I
need to still have a PS2 hanging around. There's also the issue with big
games being delayed into oblivion. How many years have we heard that GT5
will be released "this year - for sure!"? Even other games took longer
than expected to arrive, leading Sony to repeatedly tell gamers "The
games are coming soon - we promise!"

The real innovation of the PS3 is that it encapsulates so many different
features in a single unit. Ah, yes, Convergence at last! The holy grail of
buzzwords for consumer electronics from the late 90s! Problem is,
multi-do-it-all tools rarely do the tasks they were designed for as well as
single purpose tools. For instance, the PS3 can stream media, but its
feature set and supported formats pales in comparison to even the most
rudimentary set-top streamer on the market - some of which now cost less
than $100. Even its blu-ray player is fairly limited compared to more
robust offerings from, say, Oppo Digital. My Oppo upscaling DVD player will
handle just about any audio or video format you can shove onto a CD or DVD
disc - and cost less than a PS3 when I bought it.

As an AV convergence device, the PS3 is indeed marvelous, but as a game
console, it fails to live up to (let alone exceed) the legacy of its
predecessor, the PS2. That is my main beef about the PS3. Sony quite
consciously marketed the PS3 as a blu-ray player that can play games,
whereas the PS2 was marketed as a game console that could play DVDs.

I'm curious to see what will happen next generation. From a gamer's
perspective, I think Sony should use the PS4 to get back to the basics
that made the previous Playstations such a huge success - GAMES.
--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
The alMIGHTY N
2010-08-06 15:18:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
that you don't have to fidget with minus the occasional firmware update,
Ocassional?  It seems the thing needs updating about every other week - and
thanks to PSN's "innovative" network, that process is horrendously slow.
Not to mention the "innovative" service itself tends to brick a few units
each time.  Well, OK, that's not innovative.  Microsoft implemented the
brick-your-box-by-updating-it system long ago.
Post by khee mao
sits in your livingroom, is connected to your bigscreen, and delivered PS
gaming, blu-ray, media streaming, internet, online gaming + everything else
for less than a standalone blu-ray player's cost when it was released.  now
it's upgradeable to a 3D blu-ray player, which alone cost about what a PS3
costs.  
Ah, yes, but only because Sony was eating $200-300 per sale.
Not innovative when talking about the game console market, but I guess
it's somewhat innovative for the general AV market.  It also implies that
basically Sony basically bought victory in the format war.
Post by khee mao
you gotta give it to Crazy Ken, because of his foresight, the PS3
just keeps getting better with age.  I mean seriously, if you could only
have one piece of gear in your livingroom to connect to your AVR/TV for home
entertainment, you'd be crazy to not pick the PS3...
I don't know if I'd say it's getting better with age.  I'm still pretty
annoyed that they dropped PS2 backwards compatibility.  So that means I
need to still have a PS2 hanging around.  There's also the issue with big
games being delayed into oblivion.  How many years have we heard that GT5
will be released "this year - for sure!"?  Even other games took longer
than expected  to arrive, leading Sony to repeatedly tell gamers "The
games are coming soon - we promise!"
The real innovation of the PS3 is that it encapsulates so many different
features in a single unit.  Ah, yes, Convergence at last!  The holy grail of
buzzwords for consumer electronics from the late 90s!  Problem is,
multi-do-it-all tools rarely do the tasks they were designed for as well as
single purpose tools.  For instance, the PS3 can stream media, but its
feature set and supported formats pales in comparison to even the most
rudimentary set-top streamer on the market - some of which now cost less
than $100.  Even its blu-ray player is fairly limited compared to more
robust offerings from, say, Oppo Digital.  My Oppo upscaling DVD player will
handle just about any audio or video format you can shove onto a CD or DVD
disc - and cost less than a PS3 when I bought it.
I'm looking at the Western Digital TV boxes that allow you to hook up
any old USB hard drive and watch pretty much every format. It's only
about $100 for the networked version so you can stream off your PC,
too, and it basically allows you to have unlimited size mega libraries
of video available in a much easier format than a library of physical
discs.

Screw all this disc-based nonsense! ;-)
As an AV convergence device, the PS3 is indeed marvelous, but as a game
console, it fails to live up to (let alone exceed) the legacy of its
predecessor, the PS2.  That is my main beef about the PS3.  Sony quite
consciously marketed the PS3 as a blu-ray player that can play games,
whereas the PS2 was marketed as a game console that could play DVDs.
I'm curious to see what will happen next generation.  From a gamer's
perspective, I think Sony should use the PS4 to get back to the basics  
that made the previous Playstations such a huge success - GAMES.
--
It's not broken.  It's...advanced.
Miles Bader
2010-08-17 08:22:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jacobs
As an AV convergence device, the PS3 is indeed marvelous, but as a game
console, it fails to live up to (let alone exceed) the legacy of its
predecessor, the PS2. That is my main beef about the PS3.
As far as I can see, the _only_ thing the PS2 had going for it as a game
console was that everybody was making games for it -- the actual
hardware was amazingly bad.

To succeed with the PS3, Sony would have had to come in with a
reasonable price-point, and they simply weren't up to it, mainly,
AFAICS, due to gross errors in the whole direction of the PS3 program --
they probably would have been far better off with a more conservative
and conventional design, but they somehow got in their head that they
were a 'l33t super-computer company....

Hubris strikes again...

-Miles
--
Hers, pron. His.
GMAN
2010-07-22 21:48:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/07/16/sony-limiting-use-of-1080p-3d-in-ps3-games
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
Yet the 360 fans forget this shit???


khee mao
2010-07-23 01:53:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by GMAN
Post by khee mao
Post by Jim
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/07/16/sony-limiting-use-of-1080p-3d-in-ps3-games
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being. so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays. get that guy some crazy pills.
Yet the 360 fans forget this shit???
http://youtu.be/wvsboPUjrGc
haaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha
Jim
2010-07-23 13:04:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by GMAN
Yet the 360 fans forget this shit???
http://youtu.be/wvsboPUjrGc
Isn't he taking over the gaming division now that Allard&Bach are gone?
They're going get reminded frequently in the future.
The alMIGHTY N
2010-07-26 15:42:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by GMAN
Post by khee mao
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/07/16/sony-limiting-use-of-1080p-3d-in-ps...
So much for crazy Ken's 1080P at 120FPS remark. :P
yeah, poor ol' crazy Ken, father of the most advanced home entertainment
system ever brought into being.  so crazy for insisting on standard hard
drives and wireless and blu-ray, so crazy for implementing a web browser, so
crazy for making a rock solid system that can play 3d games and soon 3d
blu-rays.  get that guy some crazy pills.
Yet the 360 fans forget this shit???
http://youtu.be/wvsboPUjrGc
What does that have to do with the Xbox 360?
Loading...