[Madison]

I saw on the news crawl while hitting the treadmill this morning that Sony has pushed back the release date of PS3 until November. Apparently they are having problems with copyright protection on the new Blue Ray Disc format. Hmmm, released right before Christmas, mistake? I don't think so.

Tom

[Super Mario]

They are waiting for the HDMI 2.0 spec which will make PS3 more advanced than any console by far. It will also include a built in upgradable 60GB drive and a Sony Linux OS for web, email and playing media.

[ort888]

Not much of a surprise. I don't think anyone was actually expecting it to launch in spring.

Price??? All I want to know is the price. I bet it's $500.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

I thought it was always supposed to ship in North America in November. The delay is more for Japan.

Either way not a great move as the 360 will have been out for a year by then.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

I thought it was always supposed to ship in North America in November. The delay is more for Japan.

Either way not a great move as the 360 will have been out for a year by then.

Well, us Halo 3 buyers were expecting a spring release. But, November is a pretty conventional release time for Halo games. Maybe MS knew all along. Either way, I'm in no hurry for either.

*Yes, I know Halo3 is not a PS3 game, but for you guys that thought i was off my rocker for saying that, H3 is supposed to be released whatever day PS3 comes out.

[ort888]

Halo 3 won't be ready for November 06.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by ort888

Halo 3 won't be ready for November 06.

Well it was supposed to be ready for the spring introduction of the PS3, but after the PS3 announcement was pushed back, MS said it'll be ready when it's good enough for its fans. So no matter how you look at it, you can blame PS3 for H3 being late, but I hope that just means they'll make it as good as it can be.

They can't wait too long though, because I'm one of many that won't get a X360 until H3 comes out, PS3 be damned.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by ort888

Halo 3 won't be ready for November 06.

Well it was supposed to be ready for the spring introduction of the PS3, but after the PS3 announcement was pushed back, MS said it'll be ready when it's good enough for its fans. So no matter how you look at it, you can blame PS3 for H3 being late, but I hope that just means they'll make it as good as it can be.

They can't wait too long though, because I'm one of many that won't get a X360 until H3 comes out, PS3 be damned.

[goMac]

I was under the impression it would be released in Japan in November, meaning the US wouldn't get it until after Christmas.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally Posted by goMac

I was under the impression it would be released in Japan in November, meaning the US wouldn't get it until after Christmas.

worldwide release in november.

[ort888]

Bill Gates said they would put it out to rival the release of the PS3, but has since said that he spoke too soon. About 5 bazzillion industry experts and bungie themselves have said that it will be ready when it's ready and the game is not that far along.

[Eug Wanker]

Fine by me.

1) By November there may actually be a respectable number of Blu-ray titles available.
2) I can wait to buy a new 1080p LCD TV with the post-Xmas discounts at the end of December.
3) I can get the new Intel Mac mini announced at Macworld 2007 to go along with that 1080p TV.
4) I can sell my empty PS3 box on eBay in early December for $297623.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by goMac

I was under the impression it would be released in Japan in November, meaning the US wouldn't get it until after Christmas.

No the clearly said November WORLDWIDE release.

So in other words the same time the Xbox 360 came out, the new Zelda game and the Revolution.

[TETENAL]

I just want a realistic looking Formula 1 game. But not in November. The season is over by then. So I'm not getting a PlayStation 3.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by ort888

Bill Gates said they would put it out to rival the release of the PS3, but has since said that he spoke too soon. About 5 bazzillion industry experts and bungie themselves have said that it will be ready when it's ready and the game is not that far along.

I think we just said the same thing in different forms of marketing speak.
They were already working on H3 in 2K4, so they're definitely not "not that far along." With PS3 coming out late, bungie has perfect opportunity to "just make" a November release.

And yes, this does give them several extra months for extras, QA, and lots of in-house fragging fun. The game is basically ready. They knew the plotline and designed everything long ago. All the time till the PS3 comes out is gravy for us Halo crackheads!!!!!

[Rumor]

Too much hype involved in the PS3. My roommate is all about it, but personally I'm going to 360 route. I like online gameplay. Supposedly, PS3 is going to have online gameplay but if you look at all the features they plan on having in that thing, I'm going to have to sell my car to afford it. I hear $500 but I'm expecting more along the lines of $800. Unless they nerf the hell out of it. To keep the price down, expect to see a lot of features drop out.

[Super Mario]

It's going to be amazing. Really really worth the wait.

[meelk]

The first years worth of software is going to suck. Buying a ps3 at launch immediately brands you as a sucker.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by meelk

The first years worth of software is going to suck. Buying a ps3 at launch immediately brands you as a sucker.

That makes no sense at all. The PS3 bought at launch is still going to play the games available a year later. In the meantime some of the launch game titles will be OK, and you'll have Blu-ray movie support too. And it's not as if you're going to save a huge amount of money on the console itself by waiting a year.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

I think we just said the same thing in different forms of marketing speak.
They were already working on H3 in 2K4, so they're definitely not "not that far along." With PS3 coming out late, bungie has perfect opportunity to "just make" a November release.

And yes, this does give them several extra months for extras, QA, and lots of in-house fragging fun. The game is basically ready. They knew the plotline and designed everything long ago. All the time till the PS3 comes out is gravy for us Halo crackheads!!!!!

Well, I don't think anyone ever expected the PS3 to actually launch in the spring. Microsoft has been assuming all along that the PS3 would be out by Xmas 2006 and now it's official. Nothing has changed. They have already said that it won't be ready for the PS3 release and it's coming out exactly when every person in the industry thought it would. All Sony did was make what everyone already knew official.

Maybe they will have Halo out, who knows. All we have to go on is speculation by experts and tiny nuggets of info from Bungie and M$. As of right now, none of that info says that they will have Halo 3 ready by xmas. Unless they are trying to blow a smokescreen, then I would be inclined to believe them.

The real way to handle it though, would have been to have Halo out 6 months before the PS3. I don't think Halo on the 360 is going to do anything to hurt Sony's sales. But Halo 6 months before the PS3 might make some people buy a 360, who would have otherwise waited for the PS3.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by ort888

The real way to handle it though, would have been to have Halo out 6 months before the PS3. I don't think Halo on the 360 is going to do anything to hurt Sony's sales.

I disagree. I think it would hurt Sony, especially given the almost guaranteed shortage of PS3's this xmas season. Microsoft just needs to have plenty of 360s available and a solid 2nd gen lineup this fall and I think they'll have a very nice xmas picking up demand Sony couldn't satisfy.

The PS3 delay also, I think, now makes it undeniable that Microsoft launched way too early in Japan. They could've waited until Spring, actually launched with some games, and still faced no competition.

Personally, I really want a PS3, but I get all the consoles. I probably will wait until 2007 for PS3 and pick up a Nintendo Revolution this fall.

[rickey939]

I will buy one of these. Yes, I will.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by itai195

The PS3 delay also, I think, now makes it undeniable that Microsoft launched way too early in Japan. They could've waited until Spring, actually launched with some games, and still faced no competition.

I don't think a re-launch of some sort is out of the question. It's performing miserably over there, even worse than the previous did at the same stage.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

I just want a realistic looking Formula 1 game. But not in November. The season is over by then. So I'm not getting a PlayStation 3.

Realistic looking is one thing, realistic game a whole different one. F1 games suck big time.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Sony has been adding some amazing new features to the PSP such as VOIP, video chat and GPS. I am sure they will make a PSP + PS3 a wicked combo by allowing you to use the PSP as a PVR away from home or even watching shows the PS3 recorded to be watched on the PSP over the internet.

The standard 60 gig hard drive on the PS3 was also nice to hear.

[turbopants]

Well at least they'll have the time to get supply ready for the Christmas season, and get some blu-ray movies and ps3 games ready to go. I think it's a good plan; lots of people are waiting for it. I don't think Xbox or Nintendo will steal much of their business.

[Jawbone54]

If the PS3 is $350+, then I'm not even going to consider getting one. I'd rather have a Revolution.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

If the PS3 is $350+, then I'm not even going to consider getting one. I'd rather have a Revolution.

Better forget about it now then.

[Velocity211]

Sony is making sure the PS3 is perfect, unlike 360...terrible

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by Velocity211

Sony is making sure the PS3 is perfect, unlike 360...terrible

What is wrong with the 360? It is honestly the best gaming system I have ever owned.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

If the PS3 is $350+, then I'm not even going to consider getting one. I'd rather have a Revolution.

There been any estimates as to its cost? (Revolution)

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

What is wrong with the 360? It is honestly the best gaming system I have ever owned.

It's good but by the time PS3 comes out with more power, Blu Ray and HDMI 2.0 it will be a generation ahead. By then many games should be developed so many more PS3 titles on release than X-Box 360 got. By this time next year they could have the same number of titles.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Super Mario

It's good but by the time PS3 comes out with more power, Blu Ray and HDMI 2.0 it will be a generation ahead. By then many games should be developed so many more PS3 titles on release than X-Box 360 got. By this time next year they could have the same number of titles.

The PS3's CPU design is funky, with only 1 PPE core and 8 SPE vector cores. The Xbox 360's CPU design is much more mainstream, with 3 PPE cores.

While for some stuff the PS3's CPU is more powerful, and by a long shot, for many games I suspect the Xbox 360's approach will be more powerful. Even if it isn't, it is much simpler for developers to wrestle performance out of it. Furthermore, a few big name developers have already gone on record as saying that Microsoft's development environment for the Xbox 360 rocks.

Sooo, while I likely will be buying the PS3 and not the Xbox 360, I think it's a mistake to think that the PS3 will necessarily have better games. I don't see how Blu-ray and updated HDMI (1.3?) makes for better games either. Blu-ray is great, and one reason I'm probably going to buy it, but I don't see it as being a major advantage for games.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I don't see how Blu-ray and updated HDMI (1.3?) makes for better games either.

The way I see it games that shipped on CDROM and supported SVGA were better than games on floppy running at half VGA. It's about more content, richer media, higher resolutions, higher quality etc

Of course I liked Defender and Pacman but I'm talking about how we are going towards more realism and definition.

[itai195]

Comparing CD-ROM to floppy, you are talking about two orders of magnitude difference in capacity. The relative difference between Blu-Ray and DVD is much less, and I don't know that it will be significant for gaming. There are also disadvantages, which to me are enough to avoid buying the first run of PS3 hardware -- Blu-Ray is an unproven technology, the drives are expensive, and the disks are likely more expensive. Given that Sony will try to squeeze every penny they can out of the PS3's price, I'm not comfortable buying a first generation Blu-Ray device from them. They did, after all, bungle the CDROM drive in my PS1 (and Microsoft bungled the DVD drive on my original Xbox).

Add to that other factors, for example texture size is more limited by memory in the console than storage on the media, and additional content takes a lot more effort for developers to make.

Now don't get me wrong, I want a PS3 and will get one when the time is right. I'm just not convinced the games will be/look better than 360's. I'm still licking my wounds from PSP vs DS

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by itai195

Comparing CD-ROM to floppy, you are talking about two orders of magnitude difference in capacity. The difference between Blu-Ray and DVD is much less, and I don't know that it will be significant for gaming.

It's not the real world difference in my analogy that I mean. I simply mean MORE content and faster loading (closer packed data).

[ort888]

Well, we have yet to see a single PS3 game in action. rumblings from within the industry are saying that the PS3 is not going to be that much better when it comes to actual performance. It may look better on paper, but the real world is very different.

Also, with the rising costs of game development, I think the real barrier is not going to be the power of the console, but rather the resources and time put in by the developer.


Also remember that Sony is the master of hype and lies. The PS2 was supposed to have Toy Story quality graphics and be used by third world countries to control nukes. Turns out that it was the least powerful system of the generation.

I don't know. We'll have to wait and see. I plan on getting a PS3, but I'm not going to get caught up in the sony hype machine, seeing as how they have a long history of over-promising and under delivering.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by Super Mario

It's good but by the time PS3 comes out with more power, Blu Ray and HDMI 2.0 it will be a generation ahead. By then many games should be developed so many more PS3 titles on release than X-Box 360 got. By this time next year they could have the same number of titles.

Not really.

Sure the PS3 will have HDMI 2.0 and blue ray. Problem is zero TV's and receivers support this yet. So when the PS3 does ship probably 1% of the customers will have the proper equipment to use it to its fullest potential. And only blu-ray movies will look and sound that good.

By the time the PS3 ships the 360 will have been on the market for 1 year with over 100 games on the market. Also by that time the games will be second gen and look much better than they do now (they are already stunning).

Developers have commented how easy the 360 is to program for and how hard the PS3 is.

Microsoft can also add many new features to the 360 through software updates over the next 6 months.

Look at the PS2, gamecube and the Xbox. The PS2 was drastically underpowered compared to the other 2, yet the PS2 had some of the best looking games and in 1080i high def. Why? Because the system was out a year before anyone else and the developers learnt to squeeze every last bit of power out of the system.

In other words by the time the PS3 ships with first gen games the 360 titles will be second gen and look just as good if not better. The cost of the 360 could also drop by then.

In Japan the PS3 will clean up. In the US it might be a tighter race. Heck, Microsoft beat Nintendo at their first try in worldwide sales with the Xbox. Having nintendo's 20+ years in game experience didn't help, people loved the Xbox and its games.

Anywho, I am not the "I have to choose one system" kind of guy. I have my Xbox 360 and will be ordering the PS3 the second I can.

[Velocity211]

IMO, the 360's graphics look the same or a little bit better than the regular one. I saw a cnet article on comparing the two, it was a tie on graphics.

[Velocity211]

IMO, the 360's graphics look the same or a little bit better than the regular one. I saw a cnet article on comparing the two, it was a tie on graphics.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Super Mario

It's not the real world difference in my analogy that I mean. I simply mean MORE content and faster loading (closer packed data).

Blu-ray in the PS3 is likely to be 2X: 72 Mbps
8X DVD-ROM is up to 89 Mbps
16X DVD-ROM is up to 177 Mbps

The way I see it games that shipped on CDROM and supported SVGA were better than games on floppy running at half VGA. It's about more content, richer media, higher resolutions, higher quality etc

The Xbox 360 supports 1080i.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Velocity211

IMO, the 360's graphics look the same or a little bit better than the regular one. I saw a cnet article on comparing the two, it was a tie on graphics.

Well, we'll have to see how the Playstation's graphics look. Seeing as how no one has ever seen one in action, we'll have to just wait and see how it actually looks in real life.

Again, industry rumors are now spreading that the graphical leap is not that large at all. (360 vs. PS3)

We'll see. Maybe if Sony actually had anything to show us, we could make a better judgment.

[meelk]

Originally Posted by ort888

Well, we'll have to see how the Playstation's graphics look. Seeing as how no one has ever seen one in action, we'll have to just wait and see how it actually looks in real life.

Again, industry rumors are now spreading that the graphical leap is not that large at all. (360 vs. PS3)

We'll see. Maybe if Sony actually had anything to show us, we could make a better judgment.

actually the first screens of a verified PS3 game have been floating around a couple days now...and it looks like crap. when I find the links, ill edit and show you.

edit: ah yes..here we go, Dark Kingdom. lolz
http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/814/814614/imgs_1.html

[Rumor]

The graphics between the two aren't going to make much of a difference. Like someone stated earlier, it doesn't matter if it supports HDMI etc if you don't have the TV for it. Personally, I don't see myself buying a HDTV in order to enjoy my gaming. What it comes down to for me is the online experience. I have an xBox now, with xBox live and love it. My roommate has a PS2 that can go online and guess what? He plays my xBox even though the games are the same. If PS3's online gaming is good, I might pick one up. As it sits, I'm leaning towards a 360.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by ort888

Also remember that Sony is the master of hype and lies. The PS2 was supposed to have Toy Story quality graphics and be used by third world countries to control nukes. Turns out that it was the least powerful system of the generation.

I don't know. We'll have to wait and see. I plan on getting a PS3, but I'm not going to get caught up in the sony hype machine, seeing as how they have a long history of over-promising and under delivering.

Sony's "over promising" is just an urban myth. Current PS2 games look far better than any of the tech demos they showed before the release. And it was actually Microsoft that said their console would deliver Toy Story graphics:

"One of the basic premises of the Xbox is to put the power in the hands of the artist," Blackley said, which is why Xbox developers "are achieving a level of visual detail you really get in 'Toy Story.'"

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by Velocity211

IMO, the 360's graphics look the same or a little bit better than the regular one. I saw a cnet article on comparing the two, it was a tie on graphics.

that is because they were comparing the same game for each system but the 360 grabs were not in high def

In other words it was pointless.

Trust me if you see the difference you would be blown away.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by Busemann

Sony's "over promising" is just an urban myth. Current PS2 games look far better than any of the tech demos they showed before the release. And it was actually Microsoft that said their console would deliver Toy Story graphics:

They're both guilty of it, but come on give Ken Kutaragi some credit, the man is just as insane as Peter Moore et al! He said something very similar:

"You can communicate to a new cyber city. Did you see the movie The Matrix? Same interface. Same concept. Starting next year, you can jack into the Matrix!"
- Ken Kutaragi, "the father of PlayStation"

I wouldn't mind some more humility from all these guys. Trip Hawkins and his printing press quote might be the most egregious violation of reality I've heard.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Oh please EVERY company is guilty is it. Someone want to explain how the iPod Hi-Fi is the "home stereo reinvented"?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Dakar

There been any estimates as to its cost? (Revolution)

From what I understand, there have been rumors of Nintendo trying to keep it below $200, but definitely under $300. Then again, we probably won't know for sure until E3 at the very least.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

From what I understand, there have been rumors of Nintendo trying to keep it below $200, but definitely under $300. Then again, we probably won't know for sure until E3 at the very least.

So a $50 difference is not enough to make you get a PS3 even though it will do much much more than just play games? Heck the harddrive alone is worth the difference, nevermind the blu-ray drive.

Keep in mind that blu-Ray players cost $1000 ALONE.