ps3 vs xbox 360

[0roo0roo]

no ones making a big deal of it. its only brought up to point out the fact that dvd has had plenty and still does have plenty of excess space for gaming.

 

[Koing]

Sony threatens to pollute the technology by both giving it a bad reputation with consumer if the PS3 has problems, and artificially price stand-alone players out of the market since the PS3 will be subsidized, while stand-alones will likely cost $300+ at launch(which could actually put them over the price of the PS3) - this in turn hurts BluRay adoption by causing the stand-alone market to fail and prices on BluRay players will not drop like DVD players did. I also don't like how Sony is tying BluRay to HDMI, DRM of this level is a bad deal for consumers who will be forced to take it in order to get BluRay.

It is good imo.

It is just another option for people.

When the PS2 came out DVD players were still quite pricey about 5yrs ago. The PS2 is a lot cheaper now and you can buy cheap cheap DVD players and they still sell. IMO it helps to bring prices down. Why should someone sell a BluRay player for £300 when you can get a PS3 for the same price (if it is)? It is up to the person to make the choice. It will help to bring down the prices but obviously a decent BluRay player will beat the PS3 in terms of movie quality, ease of use and feature set. PS2 didn't hurt DVD sales imo and if it did it at least brought prices down further.

The HDMI I don't see as a problem. They are only protecting the HD movies which all content providers want to do anyway. Also if they didn't implement the DRM on the PS3 no movies would be released for it.

For gaming I don't see it making a huge difference unless the manufactures want to add in hrs and hrs of FMV

It is something to entice the consumer with. You can also buy and play the newer BluRay movies on it also.

Koing

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior

Originally posted by: UNCjigga
Why is everyone making a big deal about the XBox 360 having a dual-layer drive? Shocking news--the XBox has one too! And the PS2!! And most any DVD player in the world!!!

That's exactly the reason. XBox has one and PS2 as well. SO why should the 360 not have something better? That's one main selling point for the pS3 is that it wll have bhe BluRay discs for such huge amounts of space while the XBox will have far less space which means less options for cramming in more detail.

Because Xbox360 is coming out for the Holiday 2005 season. BluRay and HD-DVD drives probably won't be available in the quantities MS needs and it doesn't look like either will become the standard at that time either. MS execs have said that if the standards war shakes out in time, they'll probably put the winner in the 360.

Sony is taking a risk with putting BluRay into the PS3 so that they can push their format on to the masses and make their format the defacto standard. Thus, giving them royalties galore.

 

[Queasy]

Oh, Major Nelson goes over a comparison MS engineers did of the Xbox360 vs the PS3.

 

[Qwest]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

not to mention how few xbox games actually fill the single layer. average size is what? 1-2gb? lol

how wrong you are. Ninja Gaiden off the top of my head is about 6.4 gig.
Forza is a little less than 3 gig. Jade Empire is about 7.

i'm at work, so i can't check the rest. but plenty of games top 3 gigs.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Qwest
i'm at work, so i can't check the rest. but plenty of games top 3 gigs.

How many top 4.5 gigs though? That is the limit of the first layer on a DVD.

 

[shabby]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: UlricT

Originally posted by: suse920
slower blue ray with lots of space vs faster cheaper dvd9. Also now with its monster gpu xbox360 is suppose to be on par with the ps3 graphics wise... should be a good gen.

Why is blueray slower? I would have thought it needs to be faster, since it is basically designed to play a 50gb 2hr movie.

blue ray can do like 72Mbps

Isnt that the write speed, not the read speed?

 

[royaldank]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Qwest
i'm at work, so i can't check the rest. but plenty of games top 3 gigs.

How many top 4.5 gigs though? That is the limit of the first layer on a DVD.

Not all that many, but there's a handful or two of games greater than 4.5g.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: royaldank
Not all that many, but there's a handful or two of games greater than 4.5g.

Not to mention, why are you comparing current games with a console that isn't even out yet and is supposed to last multiple years. If a few games today are greater than 4.5gB, then in a few years it will be many games. Anyone who works with computers knows that Storage is one of the most commonly under-estimated things.

 

[Platypus]

Did someone order a dead horse and a box full of baseball bats?

 

[jelkukipik]

PS3 is kicking xbox360 butt with the blue ray technology.

You just cannot ignore that the PS3 will be able to add more content on their games/protect themself( at least for a while) from piracy( not like xbox360 who will get crack in a month or 2 because its again dvd's)

Xbox360 is destinied to be a failure a la dreamcast, its sad to say.(im not claiming that the DC was a bad system here, hell i really love it, but in term of success well...it fail)

Ohhhh wait yeah....vintage girlz will rooooockk....jesssss

 

[royaldank]

Anyone claiming the XBOX360 is like the dreamcast and doomed to failure "like the dreamcast" is just plain ignorant.

 

[AntiEverything]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: AntiEverything
I know I sure am looking forward to the PS3, so I can play my whole library of BluRay movies. :roll:

you do know that the PS3 will be able to read DVD's too don't you?

A little slow there buddy?

So what if it can. So can the Xbox. So why do I care about BluRay?

 

[StageLeft]

It won't. 9 gigs is adequate for anything a game is likely to have through the lifespan of the xbox.

IMO, not that it means much, the PS3 is jumping the gun with blue-ray. It will put a name to the format, but it's simply going to jack the price up on the unit and not be useable to most people. You won't be buying/renting many blu-ray movies any time soon.

 

[jelkukipik]

Originally posted by: royaldank
Anyone claiming the XBOX360 is like the dreamcast and doomed to failure "like the dreamcast" is just plain ignorant.

Then buy it,make microsoft happy and ill become an ignorant for sure!

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: AntiEverything

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: AntiEverything
I know I sure am looking forward to the PS3, so I can play my whole library of BluRay movies. :roll:

you do know that the PS3 will be able to read DVD's too don't you?

A little slow there buddy?

So what if it can. So can the Xbox. So why do I care about BluRay?

Because it can play HD BluRay movies

If the two cost the same or about the same and one can play HD movies that you probably own already on DVD are you going to buy it?

Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD

Koing

 

[AntiEverything]

Yeah, because we all know that early adopters never get left out in the cold by some technology that didn't quite make it. Sony is just going to turn every one of their customers into early adopters. Congratulations, you're a guinea pig.

 

[purbeast0]

the blueray thing IMO is a waste for the PS3. sure it will give another selling point, but think about it. DVDs took what, atleast 5 years to become a standard in peoples homes. I remember when I dad got his dvd player it had svideo as its best output, and was about $500. and he got his probably a year after DVDs were even available to the public.

blueray movies aren't even out yet. and when they do come out, the only people who are going to care about them are videophiles. the general public is not going to give a crap about blueray movies, they are going to stil buy the cheaper DVDs. hell, hardly anyone even has HDTV's yet. so people who don't have HDTV's aren't even going to care one bit about blueray technology. the general public also is not going to go out and re-buy a movie just to watch it in HD. hell, the general public probably thinks that when you hook up your xbox or dvd player via component cables and see stuff in progressive scan that it is high definition when even that is not.

blueray is a huge jump on the gun. I would think that by the time ps3 and xbox360 are dying out and the next NEXT gen consoles are coming that blueray discs or HD-DVDS will be standard around then. I give it atleast 3 years before the HD movie formats will even be thought about by the general public.

not to mention, that even if a game is over 9GB its not a big deal to just ship it on 2 discs, giving a total of 18GB. the 50gb space is such a waste for actual game material. i personally don't think we will see games even nearing 20gb any time soon.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: Koing
Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD
Koing

Except most movies "older" movies won't look any better in HD than on DVD because they're all based on the same masters.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: Koing
Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD
Koing

Except most movies "older" movies won't look any better in HD than on DVD because they're all based on the same masters.

I don't know about that. They're shot on film, and film has a high resolution, much higher than TV does. Have you ever seen a good broadcast of the Wizard of Oz? That's 1939 technology there. The original film copy is higher res than DVD or HD.

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: Koing
Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD
Koing

Except most movies "older" movies won't look any better in HD than on DVD because they're all based on the same masters.

Probably true unless thhey have the original 35mm film. I'm sure if they had the 35mm film the HD version would look better compared to the DVD version.

If BluRay doesn't take off is it going to really matter? Most people are going to buy the PS3 to play games first and foremost. Like the GC it doesn't play DVD's but it can play some decent games.

Games on BluRay aren't going to be more pricey due to the manufacturing costs. Were PS2 games a lot more pricey then PSX games when they were first released? Granted they probably had a bunch of DVD manufacturing plants everywhere in the world by then.

Games ~ £40-£50 for me and that has pretty much kept throughout the years. If they are cheaper great but if not I'll still get the game anyway. But I only buy a few games though

Koing

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: Koing
Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD
Koing

Except most movies "older" movies won't look any better in HD than on DVD because they're all based on the same masters.

Probably true unless thhey have the original 35mm film. I'm sure if they had the 35mm film the HD version would look better compared to the DVD version.

If BluRay doesn't take off is it going to really matter? Most people are going to buy the PS3 to play games first and foremost. Like the GC it doesn't play DVD's but it can play some decent games.

Games on BluRay aren't going to be more pricey due to the manufacturing costs. Were PS2 games a lot more pricey then PSX games when they were first released? Granted they probably had a bunch of DVD manufacturing plants everywhere in the world by then.

Games ~ £40-£50 for me and that has pretty much kept throughout the years. If they are cheaper great but if not I'll still get the game anyway. But I only buy a few games though

Koing

the majority of PS2 games for the first year or 2 were on CD still. by majority i am talking about 90%. only about 10% of the games during the PS2's first times were on DVD. but yea, those games on DVD were $50 just like the CD games were. but then again, DVDs were on the rise to mainstream as these games started hitting DVD.

EDIT: CD games were blue bottomed, DVD games were silverish (or the other way around, i forget).

 

[Koing]

Yup.

TTT was on CD and it didn't have FMV endings and it was on a 'blue/ purple' coloured cd.

DVD's are of silverish colour.

Koing

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: Koing
Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD
Koing

Except most movies "older" movies won't look any better in HD than on DVD because they're all based on the same masters.

I don't know about that. They're shot on film, and film has a high resolution, much higher than TV does. Have you ever seen a good broadcast of the Wizard of Oz? That's 1939 technology there. The original film copy is higher res than DVD or HD.

no kidding, many old classics were actually shot on 70mm no less.
theres plenty of resolution left. sure some studios might half ass a few releases..heck they did that with dvd early on with laser disc masters or whatever. but the qualities there to be had..so many old movies look incredible on dvd. in hd they should look awesome. heck even old tv shows since they were also done on film. the original startrek looks far sharper than say the next generation on dvd already. kinda sad.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: Koing
Glad I didn't invest loads in DVD. You know some collectors are going to have to buy it all again for the HD
Koing

Except most movies "older" movies won't look any better in HD than on DVD because they're all based on the same masters.

I don't know about that. They're shot on film, and film has a high resolution, much higher than TV does. Have you ever seen a good broadcast of the Wizard of Oz? That's 1939 technology there. The original film copy is higher res than DVD or HD.

Except that film deteriorates with time. and the quality of the optics used back in the day was not what it is today, so when you compare DVD to HD you get higher resolution optical aberrations. Splendid.