Dana Jongewaard, editor of Official PlayStation Magazine, says in her 1Up blog that even she will be passing up the PlayStation 3 this November for the less-expensive and currently available Xbox 360. Yes, the OPM editor says she is turning to the "dark side" and picking up the less expensive console. She writes:But when I know that a console's direct competitors cost two-thirds or half of that price, it becomes harder for me to justify shelling out that kind of money. $600 might be worth it if there were several huge titles on the near horizon that were PS3-exclusive. But for the first year at least, there are very few big titles that are PS3 exclusive. GTA4 and Assassins will be available for the 360 at the same time.
The other big reason for people to shell out $600, BluRay, is frankly something I don't care about. So ultimately, I can't justify it. $600 is a lot of money, especially when I can get what -- for me at least -- will be a very similar experience for $400. I would like to own a PS3, and I hope that the price drops soon so I can consider it.
So there you have it. Even the OPM editor seems to be a bit discouraged by the start of the PS3. It's starting to look like Sony will really have to come out with some great exclusives to sell people on the console as months pass by. That first year, though, is shaping up to be a rough one.
[Thanks, DawgOnU]
(Page 3) Reader Comments
"Quit saying that the $499 PS3 can display 1080P. Even if it could (which it can't without HDMI or DVI)"
Please keep on pretending you never said that. Hide your head in the sand.
I stick by my claim of 1080p OUTPUT, please do the same.
Reply
SONY's Blu-Ray players wont even play Blu-Ray movies!
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/11/1815258&from=rss
The first Blu-ray (BD) disc drive for desktop PCs is here, but be warned -- it won't play commercial BD movies.
http://www.cnet.com.au/desktops/dvdburners/0,39029405,40091720,00.htm
Reply
If you can't understand that Sony is selling you something that technically is not possible and can not be used, that is not my fault.
How would you know if he ps3 can output 1080P over component, if there is no way to test it?
Reply
1) That is the Sony BluRay Disc BURNER.
2) The reason you can't play back BluRay movies is that there is no end-user-purchaseable software for playback such as WinDVD BD.
3) It is not sold as a "BluRay Movie Player"
4) It is targeted at people wanting to do backup or create BluRay movies.
5) Slap some playback software into your PC and you can play BluRay movies back using that BURNER.
And as we all know, DVD's are in fact played back by the dvd-drive... oh wait... no. It's software on your computer that does that.
Now for something else...
How's them HD-DVD burners and PC readers, quite nice I hear... oh. Right, none available at all. What a pickle!
Now fanboys, go off and make up something else exciting!
Reply
Reply
Interresting also that it shows that Blu-Ray movies are cheaper.
It must be annoying for those claiming differently when your own "proof" bites you in the behind.
Reply
I feel the broadband thing still applies, because if you cant use it....you cant use it no matter what the circumstances are, no BB, no live, its a moot point yet you still pay for it in a sense when you buy the system and it pretty much expects you to have it for max enjoyment out of the system. The same isnt true for 1080p on the PS3 as that's really just icing and bragging rights for sony.
Reply
After my £200 PSP and crap games, which might as well be my old PS1, im scared that PS3 will go the same way...but this time, i would be £400 down!!
Cmon sony, give up, or chuck blu-ray!
Ashley / Webmaster @ http://www.LaidBackGamers.Net
Reply
And how is it technically not possible that it outputs 1080p over component? It is a proven fact that component can support 1080p. It is claimed on the specs that the 20GB model supports 1080p output on a medium which is NEITHER HDMI or DVI, thus, what else than component?
So basically, you will, just because as far as is known here, no comercially available TV today can take 1080p input over component, claim that the PS3 cannot output 1080p?
What's next? "I have never been on the moon so I refuse to believe someone else was!"?
Reply
You did touch my quote,
you left out the part of the sentence that says
"there are no tv's that can accept a 1080P signal over component".
Don't say it's untouched when you know damn well you left out all of the sentence to try and further your point.
Which you haven't really proven, because nobody knows if the ps3 actually can output 1080P signal over component. Reason why is, its not out yet, and no tv's can accept a 1080P signal over component.
What exactly have you proven?
Oh yeah, you believe everything sony says.
Reply
Back on topic, I find it rather hilarious that an editor on Official Playstation Magazine is going for a 360 this holiday season instead of a PS3. Whether or not OPM is really offliated with Sony is irrelevent, it just plain looks bad. When the editor of OFFICIAL FREAKING PLAYSTATION MAGAZINE says the PS3 is not worth the current price, that looks very, very bad. In fact, MS could even use this to their advantage. "Even OPM Editors agree, the 360 is the must have system of holiday 2006!"
Quite frankly though, I don't blame her. Her arguments are perfectly justified.
1) $600 might be worth it if there were several huge titles on the near horizon that were PS3-exclusive. But for the first year at least, there are very few big titles that are PS3 exclusive
2) The other big reason for people to shell out $600, BluRay, is frankly something I don't care about. So ultimately, I can't justify it.
I'm definitely not going to buy a PS3 at $600, or even $500. It is not just that the PS3 costs half a freakin' grand, it is also that there are no good games coming for it. And don't even say Final Fantasy or Metal Gear Solid, those games are even more overrated than Halo. I could care less about single franchises like that. I want a console with a lot of different games, not just a couple overrated series. I didn't buy my 360 for Halo, I bought it because there were several games on it already that I wanted to play (DOA4, Call of Duty 2, Perfect Dark Zero, etc.), and there were several games coming out that I knew I'd want to play (Dead Rising, Gears of War, and yes Halo 3, even if the series is overrated). I didn't buy the system for one game or one game series. In my humble opinion, buying a system for one, single game or 'killer ap' is just retarded. Do you really want to pay $700 or more (considering console, game, and tax) just to play Metal Gear Solid 4?
If you said yes to that question, then thats fine. Thats your thing. But personally, I have student loans to pay off, so I can't afford expensive steak dinners.
Reply
they got a great track record going anyway. im sure its ok for u to get shafted
betamax, MemoryStick, MiniDisk, UDF, UMD etc.
have fun with ur obsolute blu-ray player
Reply
"Quit saying that the $499 PS3 can display 1080P." - AK
There, a better qoute which does however leave out the part where you claim that only HDMI and DVI are capable of 1080p output.
Again, how does "no TV's of today can take 1080p input over component" translat into "no device can output 1080p over component"?
Your logic is flawed.
Reply
Reply
NO TV OR MONITOR CAN ACCEPT A 1080P SIGNAL OVER COMPONENT.
Maybe the ps3 can output 1080P over component, maybe maybe it can't.
We don't know because
NO TV CAN ACCEPT A 1080P SIGNAL OVER COMPONENT.
Whatever happened to finding a television that could?
Did you give up on that?
It's like telling a retard he is retarded.
One more time,
NO TV CAN ACCEPT A 1080P OVER COMPONENT.
Sony knows this, because THEY MAKE TV'S!
Just accept it buddy. Good luck with your 1080P over component.
Reply
It was 400 dollars in Japan, yes. And the PS3 there is over 600 dollars basic model; approx. 728 dollars full configuration (going by Rakuten's approximate asking price; other vendors will likely follow).
Going by 2000 vs. 2006, 300 dollars -- the MSRP of the PS2 when it came out -- is now $353.48.
Reply
Honestly if you look at the facts you are just going by what sony says, and at this time no hdtv can accept a 1080p signal over component at this time thats a fact.That westinghouse model does not allow 1080p over component only dvi or hdmi.Both are digital signals.Now how can something be justified if you cant use it?Also to the guys talking about broadband and online play, you can buy whatever you want that doesnt make it sane.Because the real gist of this is that the world is moving towards broadband at a higher rate than 1080p hdtv conversion.You want proof?How many companies offer shows in 1080p hd?How many of you guys have broadband?I mean honestly you dont have to take advantage of something to enjoy it, and that goes for the ps3 as well, but if sony is gonna tout it and enforce it then thats the difference."The next generation doesnt start until we say so"?Really?Because of blu ray? over component its 1080i or 720p the same as the competition.Its a marketing trick used by sony for the naive.
Also you are not being charged by m$ significantly to enjoy online play 49.99 will get you a year subscription.And to tell you the truth you will spend that money on xbox live even more than the extra 200 for the ps3, but look at the time frame thats what helps.I mean honestly I have a 360 and 6 games with 4 joysticks etc.I also got the premium, but I will tell you now that I wouldnt and didnt buy all that t launch, not to mention xbla titles.
The chick may not be a true hardcore gamer, but the true hardcore gamers dont buy 100 million systems either, the casual buy more and thats a proven fact.The casual dont habg outside at launch day, they dont buy 400$ or 600$ consoles.They buy after price drop.Look at the ps2 and you will see how long it took to buy 10 million, but after that the casual caught on (after a price drop) and the rest is history.
This ends my rant, I am not coming down on anyone, I frequent this site alot, but rarely comment hence my long post.Theres a reason that sony is getting all this negative comment the same way the 360 got that negativity when they launched.And it wasnt because of fanboys.Sony is fucking up.
Reply
there's a saying I love. "There are none as blind as those who dont want to see". AK is saying, and I'm sure you get this, that even if the PS3 can Output 1080 P over component, no TV's can recieve it, SO IT IS IRRELEVANT.
Sheeeeesh!
Reply
FawF, lets assume that you are 100% right that the $499 PS3 can output 1080p through component. So there, you are right. You win. But as it stands since no TV can input 1080p through component doesnt it make that feature... rather... useless? I mean that is except besides the point of arguing.
Reply
All I'm saying is: Get your facts straight.
Would you for example claim that the HD-DVD drives when they come out without playback software "incapable of playing HD-DVD movies"?
Do you understand how a PC works?
The CD/DVD/HDDVD/BD unit is used to read raw data off the disc. This is processed by software (the actual playback part) and then turned into a series of images which are transfered to the graphics card, or processed on the graphics card and internally turned into a series of images, which are then output over a medium such as DVI, HDMI, VGA or whatever floats your boat.
To claim that the drive itself is incapable of playback is ludicrous and a result of media not having any technical competence and thus misinterpret the whole deal, slap a sensationalistic headline on it, and hey presto: Fanvoys bananza!
And cap-n-crunch:
What? Wasn't the high price of BluRay movies what would make it fail? But highly priced HD-DVD movies will not fail? Logic? Sure... In bizarro land.
And AK:
Why are you still going on about no TV's accepting 1080p over component? I've already agreed with that 30 postings earlier and ever since!
The big question is: Why do you still claim that it cannot output 1080p over component? You don't need a TV to prove it.
Answers these two questions:
1) Component Cables support 1080p (true/false)
2) Since Component Cables can support 1080p (hah, proven already) why can't the PS3 then support 1080 OUTPUT over said medium?
Provide some ACTUAL argument for your cause except for your mantra: "there is no TV's with 1080p INPUT".
Reply
And even if it was? Why is it irrelevant simply because it does not exist today? They might start making such TV's tomorrow, the day after, in a month from now, or a year from now. Is it still irrelevant?
Are HDTV's irrelevant because a minority have them? Is the Xbox 360 or the PS3 irrelevant because they can output HD-quality video?
I would say no. They are both very much relevant and so are HDTV's.
Reply
The PS2 sold well inititally because DVD's were becoming more and more popular, and it was cheap enough so that anyone could afford to have a DVD player. That's how it crushed the Dreamcast in Japan from day one -- Movies. It sure as hell wasn't the game lineup, which, for its first year, was anemic, with only GT3 A-Spec standing out in the pre-MGS2, pre-GTA3, pre-FFX (since they all came out at once in a short span of time) library.
Here's the thing with Sony's reliance on Blu-Ray now... the DVD medium had some time to grow before the PS2 came out -- about two years of being on the market, I believe? Whereas Blu-Ray Disc has only recently hit the market. DVD was a huge jump in quality from VHS, whereas BD-ROM is not as drastic.
Will most average consumers -- the ones without HD televisions, perhaps not even 5.1 surround sound systems (such as myself) -- be so willing to latch onto the PS3? The second-year game blitzkrieg of the PS2 isn't happening this time, and Blu-Ray's image quality won't matter to those using standard TV's. And, there's a chance that it will fail to woo even that tiny minority of HDTV owners, if HD-DVD happens to be successful. What then? You're left with a 500 to 600 dollar system whose main appeal -- the games, namely exclusive ones that can't be found for the same price or less on X360, Wii, or PS2 -- aren't coming out at a fast enough pace; and its secondary appeal, BD movie playback, is crushed by HD-DVD or, heaven forbid, plain old DVD.
Reply
What? Wasn't the high price of BluRay movies what would make it fail? But highly priced HD-DVD movies will not fail? Logic? Sure... In bizarro land.
I never argued why blunderray would win or lose to hddvd. I just think it was a piss poor selling point for buying a video game system. I think we are seeing more and more evidence why.
and no i am not planning on buying hd player any time soon.
Reply
I would say the same argument is very valid for the ICT as well. It might not be here today, but it's coming. The only difference is that the ICT is going to come pretty much guarenteed, and that 1080p over component is more of something that we can hope for.
Reply
Reply
I don't have a 360, and I don't think I plan on getting one. With that argument, you fail to realize that the system is still capable of broadband access. I would never think about getting the $500 PS3, why? Because you can't fully upgrade it to the $600 PS3, and getting it almost identical to it without the HDMI would cost you more than $100. Just like if you buy the Core version of the 360, and get everything that comes with the Premium system for it, will cost you more than the $100 difference.
I won't get either at the lower-priced package deals, and I also won't get either until they get enough good games to justify the prices of their systems.
Reply
BECAUSE YOUR SYSTEM IS DOING ASS IN THE GAMING INDUSTRY! AND IS LOOKING MORE LIKE A POS EVERY DAY TO PUT IT FRANK. DONT SHOOT THE MESSENGER JUST BECAUSE SONY ISNT DOIGN WELL RIGHT NOW.
STFU AND SUCK IT UP. THEY WILL DO BETTER LATER.
Reply
You will still get games at maximum quality and resolution. ICT does not affect that. And gaming should be your primary purpose if you do buy that version of PS3. Any BluRay playback att full resolution should be considered a nice bonus, as I've stated before. What is always possible is to resell your PS3 and buy one with HDMI if ever:
1) ICT is put in use earlier than expected.
2) You feel that you need HDMI because you want to "future-proof" a purchase of an HDTV.
There will always be people with a Standard Defenition TV or a HDTV, that want a PS3, that don't have as a primary purpose to play BluRay movies, or Movies on their console, or even at all. These could certainly want to buy a PS3 in two or three years for $299 or simmilar.
By then, a second hand PS3 with HDMI should not cost you much in an "upgrade", even a retail-new one should not cost too much.
******************************************************
None of the below is substantiated by fact, and is only what I believe based on history as I know it of new technology and how this new gen of media tech is being marketed:
It is my belief that both HD-DVD and BluRay will drastically drop in price over the next one to two years. BluRay will see the largest drop however, possibly with HD-DVD supporting companies following suit. This simply based on the very high number of PS3's being manufactured and yes, even sold.
It would not be unreasonable to thing that at least 75% of all PS3's advertised as being available for retail and end user purchase (at 6 million units worldwide by what was it, next march or something?), will have been put into consumer hands. That would be 4.5mln units with BluRay movie playback support in consumer homes very, very soon. Unless Microsoft or Toshiba market HD-DVD fiercefully, then the sheer number of available units will drive the price of the hardware down and down.
That does not at all guarantee that BluRay will win, but 4.5mln is sure a lot more than what, a few hundered thousand units of HD-DVD players in consumer homes by the same time? Or will HD-DVD have an exponential adoption rate? What would drive that?
The largest driving force I can see today for HDDVD is the Microsoft HD-DVD "initiative" and the simple reliance on "brand fammiliarity".
Reply
Reply
The PS3 "isn't doing well" in the gaming industry for one simple fact: It isn't in the market yet.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Even in my small town up here in school the list for the PS3 is 4x longer than the one for the 360. now of course this isn't a the general rule everywhere but for a 500/600 dollar system the amount of interest and want is staggering. I think once people get over the initial price shock (which it is, dont doubt that) They'll still want one because they'll justify it that it "isn't that much more than the 360". Or heck they'll just end up buying both =)
Reply
Jeez, you two really need to calm down. I don't even know what the hell you two are arguing about anymore. This can't possibly be about the argument anymore anyway. By now you're both just stroking your egos.
The 1080p argument is worthless anyway. The supposed difference between 1080p and 1080i is so small it is virtually indistinguishable. The only way you'll likely tell the difference is by sticking your face right in front of the TV. And if you're gonna pay big bucks on a bigscreen HDTV, why would you smash your face up in front of it?
Sony was obviously just touting 1080p because it is one of the few distinguishing factors of the PS3 (and when your console is more expensive, you have to show the reasons why), and because it is one of the only distinguishing factors of BluRay vs. HDDVD. Also, Sony has been playing the "you can do it I can do it better" game since the 360 came out. 'Sure, the 360 has HD, but we have TRUE HD!' 'Sure, the 360 has next generation graphics, but our graphics will be next generationer!' 'Sure, the 360 has an extensive online system, but ours will be completely %100 FREE (some of it anyway)!' 'Sure, the 360 has a comfortable controller, but our controllers all have Kirby's Tilt n' Tumble built inside to sense gyroscopic movements!' etc. etc. etc.
In conclusion, if you two are going to argue about something, at least argue about something with any relevence. The PS3 displaying at a resolution most HDTVs don't even support is hardly worth talking about, let alone whether you can do it via component or if you have to use HDMI. Jeez, talk about technicalities!
Reply
The average consumer DOES know. Heck, there are signs in GameStation's all over the country saying "The PS3 is coming - £450" and "The Wii is coming - £150" (with little *'s saying that prices are estimates and depend on SKU etcetcetc). It's hilarious, even shops are touting the huge price difference and passers by are laughing royally.
Reply
btw, read the article that i linked on the top of this page, it talks about how sony hasnt even decided on a DRM for their Blu-Ray driver hence it wont playback commercial movies, only home videos. with that in mind, the movies coming out for Sony will be crippled by DRM again just like the PSP. Welcome homebrew
Reply
How much is the 360 over there by the way? Just curious?
Because if it just came down to price then the Wii should royally thrash the 360 and PS3, by that matter the GC should have done so as well.
Luckily more third party support for Ninty this go around thank goodness
Reply
Also, most HDTVs cannot handle 1080P using HDMI. HDMI does not have quite enough bandwidth to transmit 1080P according to specs! In order to transmit 1080P, some of the normal timing signals and sync pauses must be stripped out of the signal in order to squeeze in the image into the available bandwidth. In other words, 1080P over HDMI is really just a widely-accepted "hack" onto a standard that was never designed to support it. And that's part of the reason 1080P is problematic and most HDTVs cannot handle 1080P over HDMI. (FYI, HDMI "Type B" officially supports 1080P, but it uses a different plug with more pins, and has not been adopted by manufacturers.)
Supporting 1080P is not a valid argument for HDMI over component. Many PC video cards support up to 2560x1600 over analog VGA. I have a 24" LCD Dell monitor connected to VGA at 1920x1200, and it looks perfect. If analog VGA can support that kind of resolution, and do it well, there's no technical reason component video can't do 1080P.
Reply
The fact of hte matter is NONE of us will know the outcome for years to come, we'll be able to form some general opinion based on the facts once the new systems DO come out, but until then all were doing here is heresay and happenstance.
It could be that the Wii is the next coming of nintendo and shatter all records OR it could flop, same with PS3 and 360 as it hasn't had any competition yet in the next gen. ALl 3 systems could flourish or fall flat on their faces.
Even a year from now it will still be hard to garner the facts overall as the Wii and Ps3 will probably just be hitting their stride come fall 07.
I think sony's problem is that they're the market leader so they have the most room to fall and their the ones under the most scrutiny. i just hope they can kick it up a notch (or drop prices quick enough) though because i'd like to see some good games from all companies involved this gen and if it ends with a closer match between systems sold.. that'll just be good news for us gamers.
Competition=awesome games and more competitive companies.
Reply
Reply
Reply
with double the power of 360
Reply
I wonder why it took her so long to get one...because of the lack of games perhaps? =)
Reply
I dont think she mentioned that
Reply
I think the Wii will end up coming in second this generation, one step behind the PS3. I was very hyped for the new controller and the '1.5x' graphics until I saw the footage from E3. That controller looks like a nightmare with FPS games and I couldn't stand that goofy little star cursor used in Mario Galaxy. The rest of Mario looked awesome and very reminiscent of SM64, but I couldn't get over how gimmicky the controller was for that game. Probably the second most anticipated title for the Wii (first being Zelda:TP which only uses the Wii controller as an after-the-fact add-on) won't even use the new controller. The only way for that controller to be used effectively in a FPS game is to have the cursor be centered on the screen at all times. It makes perfect sense.
I'm no fanboy, but I love ignorant statements like Andy made just above. If you think Sony and their fanboys are going to get 'pwned' this generation, you have no clue.
Reply
;)
Reply
Reply
Wow I do not believe that I am seeing this. HDTV's on the market do not accept 1080p.... that was a manufacturing choice. By the start of 2007, do not be suprised whne you see new models of the TV's that can accept it. It is not a technical impossibilty the support was left out by design. Considering Sony TV's do not accept 1080p over component either maybe this is a choice that they are making because they "know" that the companies (mainly thier partners) are going to implement this feature.
"Also, most HDTVs cannot handle 1080P using HDMI. HDMI does not have quite enough bandwidth to transmit 1080P according to specs! In order to transmit 1080P, some of the normal timing signals and sync pauses must be stripped out of the signal in order to squeeze in the image into the available bandwidth. In other words, 1080P over HDMI is really just a widely-accepted "hack" onto a standard that was never designed to support it."
Explains why the PS3 is going to be the first system to incorperate HDMI 1.3.
Reply
Reply