This will probably be null and void in ten years with pure digital distribution.
possibly.
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
This will probably be null and void in ten years with pure digital distribution.
possibly.
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
My prediction has always been - DVD will dominate until digital distribution. I may be wrong, but I seriously don't see another physical media replacing DVD for a long time and by then, everyone should have a phat pipe.
This will probably be null and void in ten years with pure digital distribution.
possibly.
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
My prediction has always been - DVD will dominate until digital distribution. I may be wrong, but I seriously don't see another physical media replacing DVD for a long time and by then, everyone should have a phat pipe.
Except even then most advanced countries will still have only about 25% penetration of said "phat pipes" because the telcos are lazy and stingy when it comes to laying fiber.
Japan may do it, and possibly the UK, outside of that I doubt it heavily.
On topic: Can you plug a USB wifi card into the PS3 20GB to make it wireless? Or do you have to get something overpriced and "official"?
What are the downsides of the 20GB compared to the other models available? (You can upgrade the HDD, right?)
ArcSyn on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
This will probably be null and void in ten years with pure digital distribution.
possibly.
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
My prediction has always been - DVD will dominate until digital distribution. I may be wrong, but I seriously don't see another physical media replacing DVD for a long time and by then, everyone should have a phat pipe.
Except even then most advanced countries will still have only about 25% penetration of said "phat pipes" because the telcos are lazy and stingy when it comes to laying fiber.
Japan may do it, and possibly the UK, outside of that I doubt it heavily.
On topic: Can you plug a USB wifi card into the PS3 20GB to make it wireless? Or do you have to get something overpriced and "official"?
What are the downsides of the 20GB compared to the other models available? (You can upgrade the HDD, right?)
From what I understand, Canada has excellent broadband penetration. Even my DAD has broadband and he hates computers.
This will probably be null and void in ten years with pure digital distribution.
possibly.
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
My prediction has always been - DVD will dominate until digital distribution. I may be wrong, but I seriously don't see another physical media replacing DVD for a long time and by then, everyone should have a phat pipe.
Except even then most advanced countries will still have only about 25% penetration of said "phat pipes" because the telcos are lazy and stingy when it comes to laying fiber.
Japan may do it, and possibly the UK, outside of that I doubt it heavily.
On topic: Can you plug a USB wifi card into the PS3 20GB to make it wireless? Or do you have to get something overpriced and "official"?
What are the downsides of the 20GB compared to the other models available? (You can upgrade the HDD, right?)
From what I understand, Canada has excellent broadband penetration. Even my DAD has broadband and he hates computers.
Can't we all just agree that HVDs should be the next common data storage medium? 3.9 TB maximum storage capacity and the potential to be backwards compatible with DVDs (and I'd guess CDs, as well) is good news for all sorts of consumerism.
The bad part is the initial $15,000 price tag and ~$100 price tag per disc at the start of production; although I recall a time when CD players were hundreds of dollars...(after they'd become a bit more common).
As for the more on-topic debate. Well, if I could spare the small fortune, I'd only bother considering buying a PS3 once they get some stuff I'd want to play on there. The drop of PS2 backward compatability influences my choice negatively; that'd ba good incentive to get one for the backlog of PS2 games I never got a chance to play and it was one of the only major reasons I had considered the option anyway. Considering the obscene price of the basic console coupled with an additional $100 for one that, in the future, may or may not be BC is insane.
UltimaGecko on
The facehuggers want to play with you in the AvP LP. Facehuggers also want you to check out the TF2 cards here. View the in-progress RE mansion recreation for L4D here.
On topic: Can you plug a USB wifi card into the PS3 20GB to make it wireless? Or do you have to get something overpriced and "official"?
You can not expect a PS3 without wifi to have drivers for random PC usb wifi plugs. I'm not sure an official version exists. The only ones I found when searching for it was a plug to turn a PC into a access point.
ArcticMonkey on
"You read it! You can't unread it!"
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
This will probably be null and void in ten years with pure digital distribution.
possibly.
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
My prediction has always been - DVD will dominate until digital distribution. I may be wrong, but I seriously don't see another physical media replacing DVD for a long time and by then, everyone should have a phat pipe.
Isn't the USA supposed to be undergoing wiring to get the country hooked up on broadband?
I don't think digital distribution will be a favored option - and please note I say option and not the replacement for DVD - until more of the country is able to handle it.
I don't think Digital Distribution has to be internet based. I think it's more the idea of looking at a FILE as the basic unit of media, instead of a physical storage medium.
ie - We're not selling you the DVD, we're selling you the file on the DVD.
Then different physical formats or the internet or whatever just become different ways to distribute the same thing.
shryke on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I don't think Digital Distribution has to be internet based. I think it's more the idea of looking at a FILE as the basic unit of media, instead of a physical storage medium.
ie - We're not selling you the DVD, we're selling you the file on the DVD.
Then different physical formats or the internet or whatever just become different ways to distribute the same thing.
You mean like the difference between a regular music CD and an MP3 CD?
I don't think Digital Distribution has to be internet based. I think it's more the idea of looking at a FILE as the basic unit of media, instead of a physical storage medium.
ie - We're not selling you the DVD, we're selling you the file on the DVD.
Then different physical formats or the internet or whatever just become different ways to distribute the same thing.
You mean like the difference between a regular music CD and an MP3 CD?
I don't think Digital Distribution has to be internet based. I think it's more the idea of looking at a FILE as the basic unit of media, instead of a physical storage medium.
ie - We're not selling you the DVD, we're selling you the file on the DVD.
Then different physical formats or the internet or whatever just become different ways to distribute the same thing.
You mean like the difference between a regular music CD and an MP3 CD?
When I said 'future investment', I meant that you wouldn't have to worry about picking up a BR player in the future, hence you already have one.
Someone had said how pointless BR was, I said that the future is heading towards a world of HD, not the opposite. The amount of SD TV's for sale is dropping like a rock, and most SD TV' aren’t worth jacks hat. I can pick up a 27+ inch SD TV on craigs for less than 30 at times, some people giving away for free.
I personally don't see what all the bitching is about. If we want our products to progress and get better, what the fuck is wrong with BR? DISC swapping sucks, some people say "oh I don't mind", but if it’s not so much of a big deal, why did PC games start getting released on DVD's... in hopes to prevent DISC swapping and to make the install a more seamless event.
Games are not going down in size as time goes on. Textures get larger, more polys, more of everything = more space needed. Sony has included BR on every PS3 so there’s no confusion as to 'which copy should I buy'... 'oh damnit grandma you bought the BR version of this game and my PS3 doesn't have it'. Over PS3 life span the BR disc is going to get used to its max potential. On the plus side it can also be used to watch BR movies. If you have a HDTV, and you don't know anything about BR or HD-DVD,.... I don't think its going to take anyone that long to figure out what the fuck these things are. Especially with more advertising on TV for new movies getting released on new formats. Anyone that invests money in an HDTV is probably going to want to get some stuff worth watching on their TV. What’s the point of upgrading and buying an HDTV to hook up a VHS or your standard DVD player with composite cables and everything look shittier than your old SDTV.
So basically, I don't see what all the bitching is about. I probably won't have to worry about any sort of disc swapping with the PS3, and also have the advantage of watching BR movies. When I say future investment, I meant people that don't own a HDTV but only a SDTV... but still decide to pick up a PS3. I would think that as time goes on he/she would eventually get some sort of HDTV (doesn’t have to be 50' god damn inches) which if they did... bam they already have a BR player, and all that’s needed now are some movies to go with your player and TV.
Those that say 'I don't give a shit about BR and would of rather had a sku w/o it' (basically what their saying) are probably the same people bitching that Sony has already released so many skus. I think by having a BR and a non-BR PS3 would only confuse things more, there would have to be 2 diff manufacturing lines for the same game, non-br and br. Packaging, shelf space, etc. It would be a hassle and a bitch. I'm also glade they didn't release only a PS3 w/o BR. Like I stated earlier, I hate disc swapping and I don't see how we are progressing if we are doing the same thing.
If this so-called rumor of Microsoft releasing a build of the X360 with built in HD-DVD... I bet there’s gonna be a lot of pissed off consumers, especially if they start releasing HD and non HD-DVD games.
Man, you just swallow anything Sony says, don't you?
I'll be getting a PS3 eventually. I'll probably be getting the 40gig version as I don't give a shit about BC and want a BluRay player as cheaply as possible. I'm an HD whore. But the simple fact remains that as of now, Sony doesn't have a killer app. They have games, and some of them are damned good, but none that make most people go, "holy shit I have to have one."
When I said 'future investment', I meant that you wouldn't have to worry about picking up a BR player in the future, hence you already have one.
What about the people who only wanted a PS3 and didn't want a BR player? Why should it be forced upon them?
But the BR player is what the GAMES come on. BR allows for more storage space = bigger and better games?
I can remember the days when people used to say "You'll never need 1 gig of ram, thats way to much and will bog down your system".
Why put a DVD player in the PS2.. I don't want a DVD player, why should it be forced upon me/them? Because of storage space? Because it held more than your standard CD? Also was a form to help keep piracy down (at the time DVD burners didn't exist for the home market, and if they did, it wasn't cheap by any means) Well Because the games run on DVD... why not also allow DVD movie playback... it only makes sense.
Why don't they just release PS3 games on your old standard CD... 750 mgs or so... and have 13 disc games so all those people that don't mind 'disc swapping' can have their fun with that. BR is preventing disc swaping, allows for more content on the disc... whether thats a game, extra content or w/e.
So moving away from your standard DVD you have HD-DVD and BR... what you think they gonna go with?
I think its already been stated by a few devs that X360 discs are going to 'hold back' some games in terms of content, because they can't put it all on one disc.
It would be confusing to release a PS3 with BR and one w/o... like I said, that means more shelf space for the same game, means some games might only go with 1 format for that same console (not every game on PC goes DVD and standard CD)... I just think some people try to find anything they can to bitch about Sony. I just think that is retarded. I could care less if Sony drops out of the console market, but speaking in terms of just a plain console ... PS3 or not... I would rather have the option of picking a format that is larger and has a longer live span/potienal than one that is older and smaller.
BakerIsBored on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
bigger and better games? those don't go hand in hand.
When I said 'future investment', I meant that you wouldn't have to worry about picking up a BR player in the future, hence you already have one.
What about the people who only wanted a PS3 and didn't want a BR player? Why should it be forced upon them?
But the BR player is what the GAMES come on. BR allows for more storage space = bigger and better games?
I can remember the days when people used to say "You'll never need 1 gig of ram, thats way to much and will bog down your system".
Why put a DVD player in the PS2.. I don't want a DVD player, why should it be forced upon me/them? Because of storage space? Because it held more than your standard CD? Also was a form to help keep piracy down (at the time DVD burners didn't exist for the home market, and if they did, it wasn't cheap by any means) Well Because the games run on DVD... why not also allow DVD movie playback... it only makes sense.
Why don't they just release PS3 games on your old standard CD... 750 mgs or so... and have 13 disc games so all those people that don't mind 'disc swapping' can have their fun with that. BR is preventing disc swaping, allows for more content on the disc... whether thats a game, extra content or w/e.
So moving away from your standard DVD you have HD-DVD and BR... what you think they gonna go with?
I think its already been stated by a few devs that X360 discs are going to 'hold back' some games in terms of content, because they can't put it all on one disc.
It would be confusing to release a PS3 with BR and one w/o... like I said, that means more shelf space for the same game, means some games might only go with 1 format for that same console (not every game on PC goes DVD and standard CD)... I just think some people try to find anything they can to bitch about Sony. I just think that is retarded. I could care less if Sony drops out of the console market, but speaking in terms of just a plain console ... PS3 or not... I would rather have the option of picking a format that is larger and has a longer live span/potienal than one that is older and smaller.
I think there are people who just wanted a game system, and not a BR player. Also, BR is not nearly as popular as a storage medium as DVDs were when the PS2 came out. Not a very good comparison there.
FCD on
Gridman! Baby DAN DAN! Baby DAN DAN!
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
When I said 'future investment', I meant that you wouldn't have to worry about picking up a BR player in the future, hence you already have one.
What about the people who only wanted a PS3 and didn't want a BR player? Why should it be forced upon them?
But the BR player is what the GAMES come on. BR allows for more storage space = bigger and better games?
I can remember the days when people used to say "You'll never need 1 gig of ram, thats way to much and will bog down your system".
Why put a DVD player in the PS2.. I don't want a DVD player, why should it be forced upon me/them? Because of storage space? Because it held more than your standard CD? Also was a form to help keep piracy down (at the time DVD burners didn't exist for the home market, and if they did, it wasn't cheap by any means) Well Because the games run on DVD... why not also allow DVD movie playback... it only makes sense.
Why don't they just release PS3 games on your old standard CD... 750 mgs or so... and have 13 disc games so all those people that don't mind 'disc swapping' can have their fun with that. BR is preventing disc swaping, allows for more content on the disc... whether thats a game, extra content or w/e.
So moving away from your standard DVD you have HD-DVD and BR... what you think they gonna go with?
I think its already been stated by a few devs that X360 discs are going to 'hold back' some games in terms of content, because they can't put it all on one disc.
It would be confusing to release a PS3 with BR and one w/o... like I said, that means more shelf space for the same game, means some games might only go with 1 format for that same console (not every game on PC goes DVD and standard CD)... I just think some people try to find anything they can to bitch about Sony. I just think that is retarded. I could care less if Sony drops out of the console market, but speaking in terms of just a plain console ... PS3 or not... I would rather have the option of picking a format that is larger and has a longer live span/potienal than one that is older and smaller.
I think there are people who just wanted a game system, and not a BR player. Also, BR is not nearly as popular as a storage medium as DVDs were when the PS2 came out. Not a very good comparison there.
They are a better medium.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
When I said 'future investment', I meant that you wouldn't have to worry about picking up a BR player in the future, hence you already have one.
What about the people who only wanted a PS3 and didn't want a BR player? Why should it be forced upon them?
But the BR player is what the GAMES come on. BR allows for more storage space = bigger and better games?
I can remember the days when people used to say "You'll never need 1 gig of ram, thats way to much and will bog down your system".
Why put a DVD player in the PS2.. I don't want a DVD player, why should it be forced upon me/them? Because of storage space? Because it held more than your standard CD? Also was a form to help keep piracy down (at the time DVD burners didn't exist for the home market, and if they did, it wasn't cheap by any means) Well Because the games run on DVD... why not also allow DVD movie playback... it only makes sense.
Why don't they just release PS3 games on your old standard CD... 750 mgs or so... and have 13 disc games so all those people that don't mind 'disc swapping' can have their fun with that. BR is preventing disc swaping, allows for more content on the disc... whether thats a game, extra content or w/e.
So moving away from your standard DVD you have HD-DVD and BR... what you think they gonna go with?
I think its already been stated by a few devs that X360 discs are going to 'hold back' some games in terms of content, because they can't put it all on one disc.
It would be confusing to release a PS3 with BR and one w/o... like I said, that means more shelf space for the same game, means some games might only go with 1 format for that same console (not every game on PC goes DVD and standard CD)... I just think some people try to find anything they can to bitch about Sony. I just think that is retarded. I could care less if Sony drops out of the console market, but speaking in terms of just a plain console ... PS3 or not... I would rather have the option of picking a format that is larger and has a longer live span/potienal than one that is older and smaller.
I think there are people who just wanted a game system, and not a BR player. Also, BR is not nearly as popular as a storage medium as DVDs were when the PS2 came out. Not a very good comparison there.
They are a better medium.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
No, Sony is making a long term investment choice by planting a Blu Ray player in every house that buys a PS3 and thus giving it an advantage of HD-DVD.
The move to DVD's was warrented as many games were becoming multiple CD's which DVD's then solved. I'm not sure if we are at that stage yet with DVD's but we are getting close.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
I own one.
And the original Xbox cost more when it originally came out in AUS.
$250 more to be precise.
Also, the quality of the PS3 is fantastic, I could not have hoped for a more reliable product.
I beleive it is the only of the three to not have had a gigantic hardware scare.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
Considering the hardware in the damn thing?
*looks up at "Why do we need Bluray" argument*
I think we've been here, already.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
Considering the hardware in the damn thing?
*looks up at "Why do we need Bluray" argument*
I think we've been here, already.
Talking about the other elements under that black plastic that isn't a BR drive.
BakerIsBored on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
DVD9 is big enough you all say
Bluray isn't totally neccesary you say
Resistance fall of man is 16gb I say.
"Update on disc size
I'm probably adding fuel to the fire by bringing up this issue again. But the debate over Resistance's size on disc has been raging for a while and I want to give you guys the final number. Earlier I gave some very specific reasons why we were over 20Gb - all legit then and now. And I've also been careful to say publicly that this size was the current size of the game whenever I brought it up. And this week on Neogaf’s forums the topic was brought up yet again as part of the thread on an interview Phil Harrison did.
As we moved into the final week of finishing up the game we made two big changes which dropped the size of the final disc to just over 16Gb – still pretty large nonetheless. What were the changes? We removed PAL movies and further improved our data compression. It turns out that the NTSC movies (not HD, but NTSC just in case Lachamania is reading this) could be converted on the fly to look really good on PAL TVs and therefore we saved space by removing them. It's something that was a pleasant surprise. Why did we bother when we had so much space to work with? It simply saved us time when burning discs. When you're making revs every day and distributing them to a large test team, saving burn time is crucial. We could have left the PAL movies on disc and not improved compression to keep the size around 20Gb but that would have been inefficient and a little disingenuous. We don’t want to pad the disc just to get it to a certain size. Whatever the game needs is what we put on the disc. Still, having a lot of space on Bluray means that we’re including things we wouldn’t have been able to include if we had had to use dual layer DVDs: higher res game assets and more of them, HD movies, higher fidelity sounds, more dialogue, all languages on one disc, etc."
If you read carefully you may notice he said they could have hit 20gb, but wanted to speed up the burning process for the test team.
And about the cost aside from the BR.
Read my previous post.
Quality, assured quality.
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
Considering the hardware in the damn thing?
*looks up at "Why do we need Bluray" argument*
I think we've been here, already.
Talking about the other elements under that black plastic that isn't a BR drive.
Are we talking about the Cell processor which is incredibly hard to program for, so hard in fact, that despite the PS3 being the lead console for Assasain's Creed it has never been shown in public once running on the PS3 because they have that much trouble with it?
The PS3 is full of big bright shiny things, almost all of which are overpriced and not necesary.
I'm probably adding fuel to the fire by bringing up this issue again. But the debate over Resistance's size on disc has been raging for a while and I want to give you guys the final number. Earlier I gave some very specific reasons why we were over 20Gb - all legit then and now. And I've also been careful to say publicly that this size was the current size of the game whenever I brought it up. And this week on Neogaf’s forums the topic was brought up yet again as part of the thread on an interview Phil Harrison did.
As we moved into the final week of finishing up the game we made two big changes which dropped the size of the final disc to just over 16Gb – still pretty large nonetheless. What were the changes? We removed PAL movies and further improved our data compression. It turns out that the NTSC movies (not HD, but NTSC just in case Lachamania is reading this) could be converted on the fly to look really good on PAL TVs and therefore we saved space by removing them. It's something that was a pleasant surprise. Why did we bother when we had so much space to work with? It simply saved us time when burning discs. When you're making revs every day and distributing them to a large test team, saving burn time is crucial. We could have left the PAL movies on disc and not improved compression to keep the size around 20Gb but that would have been inefficient and a little disingenuous. We don’t want to pad the disc just to get it to a certain size. Whatever the game needs is what we put on the disc. Still, having a lot of space on Bluray means that we’re including things we wouldn’t have been able to include if we had had to use dual layer DVDs: higher res game assets and more of them, HD movies, higher fidelity sounds, more dialogue, all languages on one disc, etc."
If you read carefully you may notice he said they could have hit 20gb, but wanted to speed up the burning process for the test team.
And about the cost aside from the BR.
Read my previous post.
Quality, assured quality.
One game requiring such a large amount of space isn't evidence that ALL games have the same needs. It is only an anecdote.
Resistance being 16gb seems to indicate a failure (or rather lack of effort) to compress it properly. If freaking Oblivion can fit comfortably on a DVD9, I'm pretty sure something like Resistance could too.
Daybreak on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
Considering the hardware in the damn thing?
*looks up at "Why do we need Bluray" argument*
I think we've been here, already.
Talking about the other elements under that black plastic that isn't a BR drive.
Are we talking about the Cell processor which is incredibly hard to program for, so hard in fact, that despite the PS3 being the lead console for Assasain's Creed it has never been shown in public once running on the PS3 because they have that much trouble with it?
The PS3 is full of big bright shiny things, almost all of which are overpriced and not necesary.
You mean that cell processor that is the future of hardware whether people like it or not?
That thing that drives the PS3's potential above the Xbox 360's?
The fact is, dev's will get used to programming for it, and seeing the power it can shit out on a whim, they will be better off for it.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
I own one.
And the original Xbox cost more when it originally came out in AUS.
$250 more to be precise.
That's a flat out untrue. When the Xbox launched, it it launched at AU$699, then dropped within a couple months to 399. NZ got it for $579. It had to to be within range of the then 350/399 PS2
PS3 launched at what, AU$1000?
So, you're either saying you payed 1250 bucks for an Xbox, or that you somehow secured a PS3 for AU$450/150.
Which is it?
Monaro on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
Resistance being 16gb seems to indicate a failure (or rather lack of effort) to compress it properly. If freaking Oblivion can fit comfortably on a DVD9, I'm pretty sure something like Resistance could too.
Oblivion was released a fair few years ago.
Also, do you own Resistance?
If you have there may be some merit to your argument.
Having a dick around at your friends house does not give you an indepth insight into the game.
Monaro: The Xbox came out at $1250, and I didn't buy one. I do recall seeing them at that price. They dropped drastically afterwards though.
Can you make any worse of a stupid statement there?
You mean that cell processor that is the future of hardware whether people like it or not?
That thing that drives the PS3's potential above the Xbox 360's?
The fact is, dev's will get used to programming for it, and seeing the power it can shit out on a whim, they will be better off for it.
One, you're awesome. Future of hardware, future potential, you're the best.
Two, why would devs bother getting used to it when the marketshare of the PS3 is so small and they could make more money doing an easier job programming their games on the 360? You know, that thing they're doing now?
The Cell hardly shits things out on a whim, except for maybe frustration.
Posts
I look forward to that day, honestly... but I don't want to get there until I can get 1080p at a good bitrate with all the special features and audio tracks my hd discs currently provide, on a download that takes less than two hours (meaning that the content for most films would be streamable while it downloads.
Considering the hd films we have right now average about 25 gigs in size, and are already compressed to maintain the quality level they have under the size cap... until we can grab 15 gigs an hour through the tubes, the service isn't a reality.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
My prediction has always been - DVD will dominate until digital distribution. I may be wrong, but I seriously don't see another physical media replacing DVD for a long time and by then, everyone should have a phat pipe.
Except even then most advanced countries will still have only about 25% penetration of said "phat pipes" because the telcos are lazy and stingy when it comes to laying fiber.
Japan may do it, and possibly the UK, outside of that I doubt it heavily.
On topic: Can you plug a USB wifi card into the PS3 20GB to make it wireless? Or do you have to get something overpriced and "official"?
What are the downsides of the 20GB compared to the other models available? (You can upgrade the HDD, right?)
From what I understand, Canada has excellent broadband penetration. Even my DAD has broadband and he hates computers.
But are they phat?
They need sufficient girth.
The bad part is the initial $15,000 price tag and ~$100 price tag per disc at the start of production; although I recall a time when CD players were hundreds of dollars...(after they'd become a bit more common).
As for the more on-topic debate. Well, if I could spare the small fortune, I'd only bother considering buying a PS3 once they get some stuff I'd want to play on there. The drop of PS2 backward compatability influences my choice negatively; that'd ba good incentive to get one for the backlog of PS2 games I never got a chance to play and it was one of the only major reasons I had considered the option anyway. Considering the obscene price of the basic console coupled with an additional $100 for one that, in the future, may or may not be BC is insane.
You can not expect a PS3 without wifi to have drivers for random PC usb wifi plugs. I'm not sure an official version exists. The only ones I found when searching for it was a plug to turn a PC into a access point.
Isn't the USA supposed to be undergoing wiring to get the country hooked up on broadband?
I don't think digital distribution will be a favored option - and please note I say option and not the replacement for DVD - until more of the country is able to handle it.
ie - We're not selling you the DVD, we're selling you the file on the DVD.
Then different physical formats or the internet or whatever just become different ways to distribute the same thing.
You mean like the difference between a regular music CD and an MP3 CD?
There's quite a difference there.
But without the loss in quality.
I'm waiting for these to come down in price: (Or others like them, if they are produced)
http://us.lge.com/superblu/
But I fear that by the time they are around $200-$300 bucks the format war may be nearing the end.
Someone had said how pointless BR was, I said that the future is heading towards a world of HD, not the opposite. The amount of SD TV's for sale is dropping like a rock, and most SD TV' aren’t worth jacks hat. I can pick up a 27+ inch SD TV on craigs for less than 30 at times, some people giving away for free.
I personally don't see what all the bitching is about. If we want our products to progress and get better, what the fuck is wrong with BR? DISC swapping sucks, some people say "oh I don't mind", but if it’s not so much of a big deal, why did PC games start getting released on DVD's... in hopes to prevent DISC swapping and to make the install a more seamless event.
Games are not going down in size as time goes on. Textures get larger, more polys, more of everything = more space needed. Sony has included BR on every PS3 so there’s no confusion as to 'which copy should I buy'... 'oh damnit grandma you bought the BR version of this game and my PS3 doesn't have it'. Over PS3 life span the BR disc is going to get used to its max potential. On the plus side it can also be used to watch BR movies. If you have a HDTV, and you don't know anything about BR or HD-DVD,.... I don't think its going to take anyone that long to figure out what the fuck these things are. Especially with more advertising on TV for new movies getting released on new formats. Anyone that invests money in an HDTV is probably going to want to get some stuff worth watching on their TV. What’s the point of upgrading and buying an HDTV to hook up a VHS or your standard DVD player with composite cables and everything look shittier than your old SDTV.
So basically, I don't see what all the bitching is about. I probably won't have to worry about any sort of disc swapping with the PS3, and also have the advantage of watching BR movies. When I say future investment, I meant people that don't own a HDTV but only a SDTV... but still decide to pick up a PS3. I would think that as time goes on he/she would eventually get some sort of HDTV (doesn’t have to be 50' god damn inches) which if they did... bam they already have a BR player, and all that’s needed now are some movies to go with your player and TV.
Those that say 'I don't give a shit about BR and would of rather had a sku w/o it' (basically what their saying) are probably the same people bitching that Sony has already released so many skus. I think by having a BR and a non-BR PS3 would only confuse things more, there would have to be 2 diff manufacturing lines for the same game, non-br and br. Packaging, shelf space, etc. It would be a hassle and a bitch. I'm also glade they didn't release only a PS3 w/o BR. Like I stated earlier, I hate disc swapping and I don't see how we are progressing if we are doing the same thing.
If this so-called rumor of Microsoft releasing a build of the X360 with built in HD-DVD... I bet there’s gonna be a lot of pissed off consumers, especially if they start releasing HD and non HD-DVD games.
I'll be getting a PS3 eventually. I'll probably be getting the 40gig version as I don't give a shit about BC and want a BluRay player as cheaply as possible. I'm an HD whore. But the simple fact remains that as of now, Sony doesn't have a killer app. They have games, and some of them are damned good, but none that make most people go, "holy shit I have to have one."
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
I'm waiting for holographic discs.
What about the people who only wanted a PS3 and didn't want a BR player? Why should it be forced upon them?
But the BR player is what the GAMES come on. BR allows for more storage space = bigger and better games?
I can remember the days when people used to say "You'll never need 1 gig of ram, thats way to much and will bog down your system".
Why put a DVD player in the PS2.. I don't want a DVD player, why should it be forced upon me/them? Because of storage space? Because it held more than your standard CD? Also was a form to help keep piracy down (at the time DVD burners didn't exist for the home market, and if they did, it wasn't cheap by any means) Well Because the games run on DVD... why not also allow DVD movie playback... it only makes sense.
Why don't they just release PS3 games on your old standard CD... 750 mgs or so... and have 13 disc games so all those people that don't mind 'disc swapping' can have their fun with that. BR is preventing disc swaping, allows for more content on the disc... whether thats a game, extra content or w/e.
So moving away from your standard DVD you have HD-DVD and BR... what you think they gonna go with?
I think its already been stated by a few devs that X360 discs are going to 'hold back' some games in terms of content, because they can't put it all on one disc.
It would be confusing to release a PS3 with BR and one w/o... like I said, that means more shelf space for the same game, means some games might only go with 1 format for that same console (not every game on PC goes DVD and standard CD)... I just think some people try to find anything they can to bitch about Sony. I just think that is retarded. I could care less if Sony drops out of the console market, but speaking in terms of just a plain console ... PS3 or not... I would rather have the option of picking a format that is larger and has a longer live span/potienal than one that is older and smaller.
I think there are people who just wanted a game system, and not a BR player. Also, BR is not nearly as popular as a storage medium as DVDs were when the PS2 came out. Not a very good comparison there.
They are a better medium.
Playstation probably just thought, what the fuck, lets give them some quality.
Sony is making a loss from this, not the consumer, so people, stop bitching.
No, Sony is making a long term investment choice by planting a Blu Ray player in every house that buys a PS3 and thus giving it an advantage of HD-DVD.
The move to DVD's was warrented as many games were becoming multiple CD's which DVD's then solved. I'm not sure if we are at that stage yet with DVD's but we are getting close.
Satans..... hints.....
I'd say the consumer is taking a loss here - have you seen how much the damn things cost?
You know what I ment, stop being an ass. Bigger allows for more options to do more things that could lead to better things.
I own one.
And the original Xbox cost more when it originally came out in AUS.
$250 more to be precise.
Also, the quality of the PS3 is fantastic, I could not have hoped for a more reliable product.
I beleive it is the only of the three to not have had a gigantic hardware scare.
Thus leading to bigger and the same.
Defeating the purpose of more storage space.
Considering the hardware in the damn thing?
*looks up at "Why do we need Bluray" argument*
I think we've been here, already.
Talking about the other elements under that black plastic that isn't a BR drive.
Bluray isn't totally neccesary you say
Resistance fall of man is 16gb I say.
If you read carefully you may notice he said they could have hit 20gb, but wanted to speed up the burning process for the test team.
And about the cost aside from the BR.
Read my previous post.
Quality, assured quality.
Are we talking about the Cell processor which is incredibly hard to program for, so hard in fact, that despite the PS3 being the lead console for Assasain's Creed it has never been shown in public once running on the PS3 because they have that much trouble with it?
The PS3 is full of big bright shiny things, almost all of which are overpriced and not necesary.
Satans..... hints.....
One game requiring such a large amount of space isn't evidence that ALL games have the same needs. It is only an anecdote.
You mean that cell processor that is the future of hardware whether people like it or not?
That thing that drives the PS3's potential above the Xbox 360's?
The fact is, dev's will get used to programming for it, and seeing the power it can shit out on a whim, they will be better off for it.
That's a flat out untrue. When the Xbox launched, it it launched at AU$699, then dropped within a couple months to 399. NZ got it for $579. It had to to be within range of the then 350/399 PS2
PS3 launched at what, AU$1000?
So, you're either saying you payed 1250 bucks for an Xbox, or that you somehow secured a PS3 for AU$450/150.
Which is it?
Oblivion was released a fair few years ago.
Also, do you own Resistance?
If you have there may be some merit to your argument.
Having a dick around at your friends house does not give you an indepth insight into the game.
Monaro: The Xbox came out at $1250, and I didn't buy one. I do recall seeing them at that price. They dropped drastically afterwards though.
Can you make any worse of a stupid statement there?
One, you're awesome. Future of hardware, future potential, you're the best.
Two, why would devs bother getting used to it when the marketshare of the PS3 is so small and they could make more money doing an easier job programming their games on the 360? You know, that thing they're doing now?
The Cell hardly shits things out on a whim, except for maybe frustration.