• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Who is dissapointed by the Sony E3 conference?

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Wasn't the $600 version supposed to have dual-link HDMI, meaning it could output to two displays simultaneously? That along with support for up to 7 controllers was the only reason I was interested in the PS3 over the 360, I figured multiplayer/party games would be insanity.

So did they scrap that, and if not, does that mean the $500 version of the PS3 will lack this feature?

$600 PS3 - One HDMI, support for 4 controllers
$500 PS3 - No HDMI, Support for 4 controllers, no wifi, no memory card slots, not upgradeable, 20GB HDD

Sony dropped alot of stuff from the hype of last year's E3. The number of ethernet ports went from 3 to 1 and the number of usb ports went from 6 (or 7) to 4 along with now having only one HDMI port.

They both have support for se7en controllers, not 4
 
Originally posted by: AMDZen
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Wasn't the $600 version supposed to have dual-link HDMI, meaning it could output to two displays simultaneously? That along with support for up to 7 controllers was the only reason I was interested in the PS3 over the 360, I figured multiplayer/party games would be insanity.

So did they scrap that, and if not, does that mean the $500 version of the PS3 will lack this feature?

$600 PS3 - One HDMI, support for 4 controllers
$500 PS3 - No HDMI, Support for 4 controllers, no wifi, no memory card slots, not upgradeable, 20GB HDD

Sony dropped alot of stuff from the hype of last year's E3. The number of ethernet ports went from 3 to 1 and the number of usb ports went from 6 (or 7) to 4 along with now having only one HDMI port.

They both have support for se7en controllers, not 4

Take a look at the pictures of the PS3 controller. There are only 4 controller indicators.
 
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: AMDZen
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: MechaSheeba
Wasn't the $600 version supposed to have dual-link HDMI, meaning it could output to two displays simultaneously? That along with support for up to 7 controllers was the only reason I was interested in the PS3 over the 360, I figured multiplayer/party games would be insanity.

So did they scrap that, and if not, does that mean the $500 version of the PS3 will lack this feature?

$600 PS3 - One HDMI, support for 4 controllers
$500 PS3 - No HDMI, Support for 4 controllers, no wifi, no memory card slots, not upgradeable, 20GB HDD

Sony dropped alot of stuff from the hype of last year's E3. The number of ethernet ports went from 3 to 1 and the number of usb ports went from 6 (or 7) to 4 along with now having only one HDMI port.

They both have support for se7en controllers, not 4

Take a look at the pictures of the PS3 controller. There are only 4 controller indicators.


4 indicators = 7 possiblities. 😉
Doubt they'll actually do that though, it would be kinda wierd.
 
Even if there still is support for 7 controllers, now that they've scrapped dual displays, what the hell good is 7 anyways? I'm not gonna split my screen in anymore than 4 ways.
 
Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer
I'm just always disappointed in sony, they make crappy products that are proprietary and then drm it all to hell

this is nto even that though...this is them bullsh!ting consumers and reneging on promises, plus half-assed implementations of technologies and very "convenient" and suspicious times...
 
Though I wish Nintendo would have adopted HD graphics, I do think there is too big of an emphasis on graphics sometimes over gameplay. One thing you'd be hard pressed to debate is that almost all of the games presented at the conference by Nintendo are going to be a blast to play. Probably the biggest problem with Nintendo is how long you have to wait in between games worth owning. I'm no N fanboy either, although I have owned every Nintendo console made, but I also have a 360, and owned the original PS but skipped PS2 and original Xbox. Also I would get a Playstation 3 if the price was right and there was a "must have" game. However, with the pricepoint for the PS3 it would really have to be a spectacular exclusive game. (That or it better come with fleshlight controllers.)
 
Originally posted by: smartt
Though I wish Nintendo would have adopted HD graphics, I do think there is too big of an emphasis on graphics sometimes over gameplay. One thing you'd be hard pressed to debate is that almost all of the games presented at the conference by Nintendo are going to be a blast to play. Probably the biggest problem with Nintendo is how long you have to wait in between games worth owning. I'm no N fanboy either, although I have owned every Nintendo console made, but I also have a 360, and owned the original PS but skipped PS2 and original Xbox. Also I would get a Playstation 3 if the price was right and there was a "must have" game. However, with the pricepoint for the PS3 it would really have to be a spectacular exclusive game. (That or it better come with fleshlight controllers.)

People would call me a "console" fanboy, and I have to say that I think both MS and PS3 are pushing this whole "high definition" thing farther than the general consumer even cares. Sure some people have went out and upgraded their TV for the xbox360, but probably like .05% of the consumers went and did that. I personally know 2 people. 2 people out of what ... millions?

To the general consumer as well, they will have no clue the difference between 720p and 1080p. As long as it's high definition, they dont even care. The general consumer would plug in an HDTV, put on any old channel, and think they are watching TV in HD even though the 4:3 picture is stretched out.

Same goes for DVD's. The average consumer who hooks up their DVD player to their new HDTV all of a sudden thinks that they are watching stuff in HD, when it's only 480p.

They just DO NOT CARE and DO NOT KNOW the difference between 720p and 1080p. Although maybe that the consumer knows that 720 is smaller than 1080, or that "p" is a better letter than "i", but in the end, as long as they know it's "high definition" I think that's all that matters to them, if even that.

If you ask the general consumer just what 720p or 1080i means, they will have no fvcking clue what hte difference. Granted on these forums we are mostly techies, but we make up a VERY small percentage of the average consumer out there.

So in general, while I love the whole HD thing with the XBox 360 and it looks great on my DLP TV, I really think that MS and Sony put too much effort into the whole HD thing, and that Sony flat out went overboard. Nintendo hit this generation right on the money IMO.
 
Originally posted by: smartt
Though I wish Nintendo would have adopted HD graphics, I do think there is too big of an emphasis on graphics sometimes over gameplay.

You pretty much summed up Nintendo's press conference right there, and that's how I've felt for a long time. Some of my favorite games are SNES games. The greatest game of all time is an SNES game (Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past). You don't need great graphics to make a great game, you need great gameplay.
 
Originally posted by: austin316
You guys are being rediculous. Systems always come down to the games available for it. And the bottom line is this: PS3 will have MGS:4, FFXIII, God of War III and Grand Theft Auto. These games will ensure that the system will be a massive hit. And I don't understand why the pricepoint is pissing people off.
It's worth noting that GTA IV is not going to be a PS3 exclusive in any sense now - in fact, it seems the 360 will be getting the better version because of the downloadable content. Three amazing games, two of which were utterly MIA at E3, are not going to be driving the system - especially when you've got the huge cost difference factored in.

As for the 360, a few points:
1. HD-DVD drives for the PC are much cheaper than you apparently realize - the price point being quoted is usually $120. Stand-alone players cost much more because of the H.264 decoding hardware they require.
2. The wireless adapter for the 360 is $100 - but it does 802.11a in addition to 802.11b and 802.11g, which really does make it a superior piece of hardware compared to most wireless adapters, including the one in the PS3. A hundred bucks is still quite a lot, I admit.

I will point out that tacking on accessories to even the price is a bit dishonest. Not everyone needs or wants the accessories you've listed - for instance, I personally have no need of the wireless adapter or the HD-DVD drive. At least the 360 gives you the choice of buying them or not!

-Erwos
 
Originally posted by: austin316
You guys are being rediculous. Systems always come down to the games available for it. And the bottom line is this: PS3 will have MGS:4, FFXIII, God of War III and Grand Theft Auto. These games will ensure that the system will be a massive hit. And I don't understand why the pricepoint is pissing people off.

Yeah, but what is going to happen when the PS3 games are $70-$80 while the 360 games are $60 and less? And the Wii games are $50 and less?

If I'm a consumer that wants to play GTAIV, I'm going to choose the Xbox360 for $400 and games that are $60 or less over a PS3 that is $600 with games that are $70 and up.
 
Back
Top