Print

[Kira Yamoto]

Ok i'm almost convinced now.  Earlier I was running some tests on a friend's laptop, running WMV and Quicktime HD trailers and the 1080p WMV's were struggling along on a 3.2ghz pentium 4/ati radeon 9800 while the 720p videos were coasting right through.  The Quicktime 720p videos were performing well too, but still don't know what would happen w/ 1080p video.

I dunno though, they still could possibly find a way to get non-mpeg2 1080p to display, as its going to be in MGS4, but its not like they're gonna share their secrets.  We still don't know how powerful RSX can be, in a system thats designed specifically for games.  As everyone should know by now that PC and Console specs can't measure up to each other the same, because PC has other stuff running in the background, and Console games are programmed and designed specifically for the console.

[incognegro]

Im sure the ps3 can handle 1080p movie fine. Sony built the system specifically for things like this. 1080p gaming is another thing...

Hell ATI has said that the 360 gpu can handle 1080p movies ok (if it had HDMI) so I don't see the why the ps3 can t do it.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(Exist2Resist @ Aug 14 2006, 11:43 AM)

I agree with Lex the new formats are unnecessary, and it jacked the price of the PS3. In my opinion the only reason these new formats are coming out is because the movie studios want to absolutely control the content that is stored on those disks, and when the times comes where you will have to authorize your BD or HDdvd movies over the net, you will have lots of pissed of ppl.

yet ANOTHER reason someone is using to blame for the high-price.  Look at what Sony did for PS2.  They did future proof with DVD, but their GPU was sorely lacking and their CPU was inferior, simply because Nintendo waited, and MS entered late in the game.  People highly criticized Sony for their weakest machine, and thus producing titles that COULD have looked better, and played better (such is the case for PS2 Battlefront 2 compared to PC/Xbox Battlefront 2)

Now after all this criticism, and their console won the 2nd war in a row, do you think they're going to sit by and let people downplay their console again? This time, they want to prove to you that they got the titles, AND the muscle to back up the titles.  Sure there is a hefty price of 500/600, but if that'll mean the Playstation titles we know and love, will be buffed and play/look the way its supposed to be, I'd have no complaints.  As I'm sure other people who will own a PS3 will think while they're playing it.

[Reaper527]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 14 2006, 12:44 PM)

yet ANOTHER reason someone is using to blame for the high-price.  Look at what Sony did for PS2.  They did future proof with DVD, but their GPU was sorely lacking and their CPU was inferior, simply because Nintendo waited, and MS entered late in the game.  People highly criticized Sony for their weakest machine, and thus producing titles that COULD have looked better, and played better (such is the case for PS2 Battlefront 2 compared to PC/Xbox Battlefront 2)

Now after all this criticism, and their console won the 2nd war in a row, do you think they're going to sit by and let people downplay their console again? This time, they want to prove to you that they got the titles, AND the muscle to back up the titles.  Sure there is a hefty price of 500/600, but if that'll mean the Playstation titles we know and love, will be buffed and play/look the way its supposed to be, I'd have no complaints.  As I'm sure other people who will own a PS3 will think while they're playing it.

well, DVD was already an accepted standard when they put a dvd player in the ps2. blueray is NOT. it has its own war, and sony is using the ps3 to attempt to give blueray an advantage over HD-DVD.  this isn't future proofing, its aggressive marketing (and infact could be the opposite of future proofing if blueray fails)

they could easily have an affordable system if they didn't include the blueray player and had it as an optional accessory like the HD-DVD player for the 360.

[lex_luther23]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 14 2006, 12:44 PM)

yet ANOTHER reason someone is using to blame for the high-price.  Look at what Sony did for PS2.  They did future proof with DVD, but their GPU was sorely lacking and their CPU was inferior, simply because Nintendo waited, and MS entered late in the game.  People highly criticized Sony for their weakest machine, and thus producing titles that COULD have looked better, and played better (such is the case for PS2 Battlefront 2 compared to PC/Xbox Battlefront 2)

Now after all this criticism, and their console won the 2nd war in a row, do you think they're going to sit by and let people downplay their console again? This time, they want to prove to you that they got the titles, AND the muscle to back up the titles.  Sure there is a hefty price of 500/600, but if that'll mean the Playstation titles we know and love, will be buffed and play/look the way its supposed to be, I'd have no complaints.  As I'm sure other people who will own a PS3 will think while they're playing it.

You know what the ps3 is not going to have alot of games to offer that 360 is not going to have hell just like assissen's creed and elvon was ps3 exclusives now their both coming to 360 as well i don't think you grasp just how much ground controll sony is losing. Their all running to micorsoft it is getting Resident evil 5/assissen's creed / elvon /grand teft auto 4/ and EA sports said on gamertv their not putting any ps3 games out untill 5 months after the console is out to see how it sells also all the devs are porting from 360 to ps3 what does that tell you? Yes im going to buy the system but to be honest the system does not really have any thing the 360 don't nothing that SCREAMS BUY ME IM WORTH BUYING A PS3!!

[Kira Yamoto]

If you notice though, only the American devs are jumping ship.  Why oh why, would an American developer stand by a Japanese one, if your country's system is already the majority installed base, cheaper to develop for, and have stellar technology (imo).  About RE5, it was multiplatform anyways.  Capcom is about the money as we already know, so multi-platform is their choice.  They haven't jumped ship yet.  Theyre still on board to develop for PS3.

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 14 2006, 12:44 PM)

yet ANOTHER reason someone is using to blame for the high-price.  Look at what Sony did for PS2.  They did future proof with DVD, but their GPU was sorely lacking and their CPU was inferior, simply because Nintendo waited, and MS entered late in the game.  People highly criticized Sony for their weakest machine, and thus producing titles that COULD have looked better, and played better (such is the case for PS2 Battlefront 2 compared to PC/Xbox Battlefront 2)

Now after all this criticism, and their console won the 2nd war in a row, do you think they're going to sit by and let people downplay their console again? This time, they want to prove to you that they got the titles, AND the muscle to back up the titles.  Sure there is a hefty price of 500/600, but if that'll mean the Playstation titles we know and love, will be buffed and play/look the way its supposed to be, I'd have no complaints.  As I'm sure other people who will own a PS3 will think while they're playing it.

I think you need a little bit of a history lesson...

DVD was created out of a format war between two formats MultiMedia Compact Disc (MMCD) and Super Density disc (SD)... the war started in the early 90s and the owners of the two formats (ironicly Sony and Toshiba) agreed on a hybrid of the two which was finalized in 1996 as the "DVD" we know today. The Playstation 2 didn't come out until 2000 (4 years later). The format was already well accecpted as the predecessor to VHS and the PS2 just helped it along. the Dreamcast was the only last gen console that DIDNT use a DVD drive tech, and the reason they did that was to help prevent piracy (reguardless of the fact that in the end it didn't) and to help reduce licensising costs that they would have to pay to the DVD Forum. YES even the GC used DVD discs, they were just small DVDs, but DVDs none the less, in Japan there was a version that played DVD movies as well called the "Q" system.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD

The format war between HD-DVD and BD is just now beging... it would be equivalent to Sony trying to use the MMCD format (essentially DVD) in the Playstation 1 to help it win out over SD... If anything this will make it difficult for the two competitors to reach a common ground and make a SINGLE agreed upon predecessor to DVD.

IF Sony were truely folloing the footsteps of the PS2 they would have released the PS3 last year and made use of currently availble DVD tech with plans for the PS4 to make use of the (by that time) 4 years standarized blue laser disc tech (as would every other console).

[Kira Yamoto]

I already know the DVD history.  Even though DVD was standardized back then, it was still pretty expensive tech (which was a big point i tried to make), and could have installed a CD instead.  That's what I meant by future proofing, they went ahead, and used DVD, even though it was expensive because that was the future format, the next-gen media of choice.  They released DVD on the PS2 at a loss and in turn became successful because of it.

Remember that I dug up the 1996 1st gen dvd player reports and in the process..........

[Reaper527]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 16 2006, 10:37 AM)

Even though DVD was standardized back then, it was still pretty expensive tech (which was a big point i tried to make), and could have installed a CD instead.  That's what I meant by future proofing, they went ahead, and used DVD, even though it was expensive because that was the future format

yes, and my point was that DVD at the time was the future format at the time, it was well known it was the future format at the time, and there was no doubt it would succeed, and it had no compitition. it made sense to put it in there.

i will repeat myself, Blueray does NOT have that next gen distinction. it does have competition, it may fail, theres no guarentee that sony's "future proofing" as you like to call it, doesn't consist of putting a useless drive in the ps3 to help promote blueray. sony has a long list of failed media's. i'll start with

betamax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betamax
minidisc - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiniDisc
UMD - http://en.wikipedia....rsal_Media_Disc

lets just say sony does NOT have a good track record with this stuff. the blueray player is in the ps3 for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only,

1. to force blueray into peoples homes and try to give it a heads up
2. to say "ps3 has blueray out of the box and 360 doesn't", even though your paying for it in the end and not getting any deal over the 360.

also, lets not forget the craptacular dvd drives the ps2's shipped with, is there any guarentee that the blueray player won't be equally terrible?

[incognegro]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 16 2006, 03:37 PM)

I already know the DVD history.  Even though DVD was standardized back then, it was still pretty expensive tech (which was a big point i tried to make), and could have installed a CD instead.  That's what I meant by future proofing, they went ahead, and used DVD, even though it was expensive because that was the future format, the next-gen media of choice.  They released DVD on the PS2 at a loss and in turn became successful because of it.

Remember that I dug up the 1996 1st gen dvd player reports and in the process..........

Even with that being said there is another HUGE difference between then and now. Back then sony gave devs the option to make games on CDs instead of DVDs (to make things cheaper) unlike the ps3, everybody has to use blu ray whether they like it or not. Now if sony took that approach this generation then it would downplay their push to make Blu Rays win the war and it would make games cheaper and overall better for everyone. So its in their best interest to force ppl to use blu ray and blame it on piracy. They kno what they are doing by making ppl believe Blu Ray is needed.

Truth is blu ray/Hd dvd is not NEEDED by anyone but to some its is WANTED. You mentioned the itagaki statement as an example but that is also an example of of wanting and not needing. Despite not getting HD DVD he is still happy. Sometimes less is more, get what im saying?

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 14 2006, 12:44 AM)

I dunno though, they still could possibly find a way to get non-mpeg2 1080p to display, as its going to be in MGS4, but its not like they're gonna share their secrets.  We still don't know how powerful RSX can be, in a system thats designed specifically for games.

its because of those words right there that prove how little you actually know.  if you believe for a second that MGS4 is going to be 1080p or that they have "secrets" your sorely mistaken.  also there are many who believe that sony built the ps3 based around its unproven technology rather then gaming.  if sony really built the ps3 for gaming first and everything else second they would not have included the Cell chip and made developers lives even harder.  the ps3, for sony, is their trojan horse to push their technology out in the industry and penetrate a market that would otherwise not warm up so fast to it.  the ONLY thing in the ps3 built for gaming is the RSX chip and that baby was slapped in at the last minute

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(KAGE360 @ Aug 20 2006, 05:51 PM)

its because of those words right there that prove how little you actually know.  if you believe for a second that MGS4 is going to be 1080p or that they have "secrets" your sorely mistaken.  also there are many who believe that sony built the ps3 based around its unproven technology rather then gaming.  if sony really built the ps3 for gaming first and everything else second they would not have included the Cell chip and made developers lives even harder.  the ps3, for sony, is their trojan horse to push their technology out in the industry and penetrate a market that would otherwise not warm up so fast to it.  the ONLY thing in the ps3 built for gaming is the RSX chip and that baby was slapped in at the last minute

and your post proves to me how little you can actually read.  the 1080p comment was regarding VIDEOS, in which it was said before that 1080p video was not possible on the PS3.  Hence the NON-MPEG2 keyword.  I said what I said because I believe they're able to come up with a custom codec of their own to display 1080p with more relaxed requirements, but also having better compression than current MPEG2 Bluray.

The whole "harder-to-develop" thing is only a ploy by MS "AMERICAN" dev's that are totally biased against Sony.  I have not seen ONE Japanese developer step up and say that development was actually harder than what they had to go thru for PS2.  And also couple the fact that even though PS2 development was tough in the beginning, in the end, the awesome games still came out, so your point about "harder to develop" is moot.  Even 360's development isn't maxed out as none of the dev's are taking advanage of the so called 3 cpus.

[Kira Yamoto]

QUOTE(joerehall @ Aug 21 2006, 05:14 AM)

Your arguing is pathetic, the entire time your trying to hold ground but your backpeddling trying to explain your self, if you explained yourself well enough and didnt state FICTION, not everyone here would disagree with you. All the stuff brought up about Sony and its Cell/1080p/BlueRay technology isn't a coincidence, and there isnt a perfectly legit reasoning behind why is plain out SUCKS.  I could tell you to kick rocks and find a ps3fanboy board, but that would be immature, so please do me a favor and step back for a minute and look at all the technologies out there with a UNBIASED view.

If then you really thing blueray is still better, then so be it, but you sound like a little kid stating fanboy "facts" and when people disagree you do nothing but backpeddle

lol, I buy all the consoles so fanboy? no I'm not.  There was once a time when I was defending the hell out of the 360 before it was launched and now I'm doing it for PS3 because I know people are wrong.  Wtf is wrong with that? I don't have to defend the Wii because fanboys are so extreme that you don't have to.

You would take perfect legit reasoning, even though the console isnt OUT YET? That you don't even have one yourself, nor have any games to justify saying that, "oh well due to perfectly legit reasoning, this console sucks".  My view is unbiased enough considering I bought all the consoles, and I bought my favorite franchises on each.

I can't exactly call these technologies "bad" because I don't have them yet, and to make assumptions based on secondhand information is plain retarded and would make me look like a f***** moron.  I won't accept people's opinion (but will take into account) because merely one's views could be subjective.  There could be a slight difference in contrast, and color saturation, and a videophile reviewer could be turning that, into the biggest difference in the world.  But other people wouldn't see it that way, know what I'm saying?

I never exactly said, bluray was better, but I know the potential it has, so I'm being the smarter person by waiting to see what companies have up their sleeve.  Technically, bluray IS better.  How you can't see that attests to your lack of research.  Both format's support the same codec.  But Blu-Ray is bigger in size and both cost the same.  So logically Bluray > HDDVD, but that is not so, because HDDVD is making better use of their space.  Technically better does not translate exactly to better overall.  

I've been repeatedly saying, that Sony always has the capacity to blow HDDVD out of the water anytime they felt like it and it is true.  Their players support VC-1 and H.264.  But they choose not to do this because current players aren't fast enough to decode 1080p in those codecs, therefore they choose 1080p through Mpeg2.  Nowhere in your posts, have you tried to dispute this, and all you do is call me a fanboy and backpedaller.

It seems what you want to hear from me.  Is that Bluray is not superior to HDDVD, and that the PS3 has inferior technology compared to the 360.  That's what you want to hear, and I'm not providing it.  Thats why you're going off on me with all this backpedalling nonsense.  It looks like you can't read, and defend other's posts by calling me a backpedaller, when I'm just restating, or rephrasing what I said, due to a lack of understanding.  I know that my posts are hard to read sometimes, and they get lost and think a totally different thing other than what I tried to convey in the 1st place.  Yes I've been criticized about that on another forum.

[incognegro]

Yes ur debating skills suck

lol

[KAGE360]

QUOTE(Kira Yamoto @ Aug 20 2006, 10:39 PM)

and your post proves to me how little you can actually read.  the 1080p comment was regarding VIDEOS, in which it was said before that 1080p video was not possible on the PS3.  Hence the NON-MPEG2 keyword.  I said what I said because I believe they're able to come up with a custom codec of their own to display 1080p with more relaxed requirements, but also having better compression than current MPEG2 Bluray.

The whole "harder-to-develop" thing is only a ploy by MS "AMERICAN" dev's that are totally biased against Sony.  I have not seen ONE Japanese developer step up and say that development was actually harder than what they had to go thru for PS2.  And also couple the fact that even though PS2 development was tough in the beginning, in the end, the awesome games still came out, so your point about "harder to develop" is moot.  Even 360's development isn't maxed out as none of the dev's are taking advanage of the so called 3 cpus.

i read everything just fine and i was pointing to your twisted thinking that MGS4 will actually be rendered at 1080p.  you point as us "AMERICAN" developers complaining, i have heard complaints from all over the globe.  also IF you actually knew what the hell you were talking about instead of being too busy sniffing sony's ass you would understand and know that the Cell chip IS NOT the most ideal processor for gaming.  EVEN SONY has admitted and stated that it was designed for streaming of video and audio <- that is entirely different then running the many gaming applications.  you wont hear any developer say that its harder to develop for then the ps2 because its not, its easier but that does not mean that they built the system for gaming first and everything else second.  

i can give a shit about how the ps3 does anything with blue ray movies, its a game system to me and a poorly designed one at that.  if you dont think so then how is it that the 360 launched a year earlier and yet the two system are so close in power that its pointless to debate.  

also i dont understand what you mean by "so called 3 cpus"  WTF are you talking about?  at least we know whats in the 360, sony has been rather vague lately with any clock rates with either the Cell or the RSX if you really pay attention so much