PS3 General Discussion

[DuckRacer]

Yep, the center PlayStation logo on the controller brings up the Operating System which is always running in the background.

Nice.

Okay, here it goes.

1) As we all know, flight games, to include futuristic racers like Wipeout (basically flying cars / ships / jet moto style stuff)

.....

With the DS2, tilting can be used in multiple ways throughout the same game, while offering traditional control at the same time (though this is also the case with the Wii, I find the DS2 to be a tad more functional as a traditional controller due to the analog sticks and shoulder buttons).

Hmm. Sounds pretty decent.

Everything except for HDMI can be upgraded.

Ok.

 

[KENJIusa]

ok, it looks like you guys are settled.

Kutaragi: Linux and OS X on PlayStation 3
by Justin Pinter

A recent interview posted on Gamespot had Ken Kutaragi commenting on the PS3, and the console possibly running Apple's OS X Tiger along with other operating systems such as Linux.

The interview quoted Kutaragi stating that there should be no difficulties running popular operating systems such as; Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X.

"...To the PS3, an OS is like any other application...[however] I think that perhaps you'll see a general purpose Cell [built-in] OS," Kutaragi said.

Sony has stated that a Linux OS will be pre-installed on the PS3 hard-drive for consoles at launch.

Editor's Note: Those of you who read Ken Kutaragi's interviews will be aware of his rather superfluous nature. Whilst he does suggest OS X and Windows could run on the PS3, he is merely boasting about the PS3's architecture and capabilities. Neither Apple nor Microsoft will allow their respective operating systems to run on PS3. Linux, however, is totally open source and free, and is likely to ship with the PlayStation 3 when it launches on November 17th.
www.ps3land.com

 

[slackbladder]

Here's a question. Will the PS3 support VGA? I know of several people who would rather plug their PS3's into their monitors than buy a HD TV set. I know the 360 supprots VGA. Will the PS3?

 

[LaBounti]

VGA is not out of box for the 360, so you can bet vga cables will be available for PS3 but hopefully will not cost $40.

 

[kikie]

I use to play GT4 (PS2) on my LCD computer screen with Component. You just need a PAL, NTSC convertor. I also used a TV-tuner with a build in convertor, capable of component.

 

[Sprite]

Here's a question. Will the PS3 support VGA? I know of several people who would rather plug their PS3's into their monitors than buy a HD TV set. I know the 360 supprots VGA. Will the PS3?

just get one of these

LINK

and then the same from DVI to HDMI depending on what your monitor can support. Most new flat screens have DVI, in that case you only need a HDMI to DVI converter (like in the link above) but if you want to go to VGA then just use a DVI to VGA on top of one of those, it should do the trick, although dont hold me to it.

 

[kikie]

These are only adapters. You need a convertor to convert a PAL, NTSC (= PS2 or PS3) signal into a VGA or DVI signal. I don't think a simple adapter would do the trick.

link

 

[Sprite]

@ Kikie I have one of those converters (ones I put up) and it works fine for the PS2, but im sure you could be onto something, but I didnt think that NTSC and PAL come into play with monitors or HD screens?

 

[DuckRacer]

Also, one more question...

Will I be able to play all PS1 and PS2 games (except for the few oddball ones) in 720p/1080i/1080p and in anti-aliasing, like the 360?

 

[slackbladder]

Also, one more question...

Will I be able to play all PS1 and PS2 games (except for the few oddball ones) in 720p/1080i/1080p and in anti-aliasing, like the 360?

I'm not sure if Sony have said anything definate but would assume so. We've seen GT4 running in 1080p at E3 so it looks probable. I know there was a thing about whether the PS3 would have (essentially) a PS2 inside it and some speculated that meant no 720p etc playback (though it may have been untrue). It would be a major bummer if it does'nt happen.

 

[Sprite]

if they stick all the PS2 gubbing in the PS3 then no upscaleing of AA, but more than likly all games would work straight out of the box, but if they go the emulation route they you will get 720p games with maybe some AA but some games wont work or you may have to update the emulation software later on to support further games.

 

[tha_con]

if they stick all the PS2 gubbing in the PS3 then no upscaleing of AA, but more than likly all games would work straight out of the box, but if they go the emulation route they you will get 720p games with maybe some AA but some games wont work or you may have to update the emulation software later on to support further games.

Actually that's not entirely the case. It would be very easy for them to write software for the PS2 hardware that would implement AA or upscale. Though I'm almost positive that the PS2 hardware inside the PS3 is a myth, and the games will be running via emulator.

 

[Sprite]

Actually that's not entirely the case. It would be very easy for them to write software for the PS2 hardware that would implement AA or upscale. Though I'm almost positive that the PS2 hardware inside the PS3 is a myth, and the games will be running via emulator.

actually I agree with the PS2 inside a PS3 rumours being a myth. I just hope they get it rite, and not skrew us over like MS did with 360 owners.

 

[tha_con]

I dont' think they will. The difference between the 360 and Xbox was very drastic, and MS did not develop the hardware for the Xbox, so in order for them to use features from it, they would have to pay royalties to Nvidia to use their hardware, but they didn't want to do that, so they emulate instead.

With the PS1 and PS2, sony created the hardware themselves, and the development cycle has a strict guideline as to what they need to do for their games. Sony thought ahead with PS2 development, and all games that follow their development guidelines will be backward compatible (this is all 1st party titles, and a ton of 3rd party titles).

 

[Solid Lifters]

More speculation about the price of the games.

PlayStation 3's high price has also made people think that games developed for Sony's next-gen console would also be rather expensive. Sony's Kaz Hirai has been talking with PlayStation Magazine and gave some hits regarding the price policy for future PlayStation 3 games.

“PSM: Can we expect PS3 games to be priced in the same range as Xbox 360 titles?

KH: Generally Speaking, over the past twelve years or so, there has been a consumer expectation that disc-based games are maybe $59 on the high end to $39 on the low end. So, what I can say now is, I think it would be a bit of a stretch to think that we could suddenly turn around and say "PS3 Games now $99.99." I don't think consumers expect software pricing to suddenly double. So, the quick answer is that we want to make it as affordable as possible, knowing that there is a set consumer expectation for what software has cost for the past twelve years. That's kind of the best answer I can give you. So, if it becomes a bit higher than $59, don't ding me, but, again, I don't expect it to be $100.”

However, such statements are far from being reassuring. It's true, Sony's representative admits the price won't go as far as nearly $100, but, then again, most people would most-likely skip a product that expensive. The same applies to the console itself, which will be sold in two versions, with the cheapest one set at $499.

Also, PlayStation 3 games will only be released on Blu-ray discs, which are far more expansive than regular DVDs. According to the Blu-ray Disc Association (the trade group behind the next-generation format), the BD-R (recordable) disc has a price tag of $19.99, while regular DVD's go as high as 10 cents.

Last but not least, Sony's aim is to sell games in order to cover its losses on the price of the console. So, nobody should be amazed if PlayStation 3 games were to cost around $70 - $80.

 

[DuckRacer]

And I thought $60 games on the 360 were expensive.

 

[Swift]

Well, blue ray discs will drop in price with time just like CD's and DVD's

 

[DuckRacer]

Well, blue ray discs will drop in price with time just like CD's and DVD's

Well, I'd imagine for the first year or two, PS3 games won't drop in price a lot.

 

[Swift]

Well, I'd imagine for the first year or two, PS3 games won't drop in price a lot.

Right. Then they'll do the "greatest hits" or something similar to have games down to at least 29.99$. That's when I bought God of War, when it went on the greatest hits list. Though I must admit, I'm mad for having waited so long

 

[LaBounti]

Also, PlayStation 3 games will only be released on Blu-ray discs, which are far more expansive than regular DVDs. According to the Blu-ray Disc Association (the trade group behind the next-generation format), the BD-R (recordable) disc has a price tag of $19.99, while regular DVD's go as high as 10 cents.

Why are they comparing BD-R to regular DVD's?

 

[tha_con]

Seriously, did eveyrones comprehension skills just fly out the window?

TWICE Kaz say's he would find it hard to believe games would be over $60...TWICE.

Yet because 1up says something that TOTALLY contradicts what he said, you're willing to believe it?

Come on now... I'd like to think we're all a *tad* smarter than that...why even post this trash, seriously...we shoudl all know it's just tabloid nonsense anyway...it baffles me.

 

[Swift]

Why are they comparing BD-R to regular DVD's?

Because DVD's are the format for PS2 at it's release and BD-R is the PS3 format. It's a logical comparison. The question is how much did DVD's cost when the PS2 came out?

 

[DuckRacer]

Right. Then they'll do the "greatest hits" or something similar to have games down to at least 29.99$. That's when I bought God of War, when it went on the greatest hits list. Though I must admit, I'm mad for having waited so long

Who'd want to wait that long for a game? Unless it's something like Madden 07 and you're waiting 6 months for it to become $20, and you have Madden 05/06, I can't see myself waiting so long for Star Wars Battlefront III, or GT5, or some other game I want.

Why are they comparing BD-R to regular DVD's?

Because the price of the disc will jack the prices up.

 

[Swift]

Who'd want to wait that long for a game? Unless it's something like Madden 07 and you're waiting 6 months for it to become $20, and you have Madden 05/06, I can't see myself waiting so long for Star Wars Battlefront III, or GT5, or some other game I want.

You're missing my point. How many games to you buy for 50$ right now? I don't buy many at all. Infact, the only one I can remember paying 50$ for in the past 2 years is GT4. So I get the games that come out costing less or are on the greatest hits list. Granted, there are some games you just BUY. Like the ones you mentioned, Final Fantasy, and other marquee series. But there are a lot of good games that get cheaper and are worth the wait to save 20-40$

 

[tha_con]

Because DVD's are the format for PS2 at it's release and BD-R is the PS3 format. It's a logical comparison. The question is how much did DVD's cost when the PS2 came out?

Cost of the disc has nothing to do wtih the cost of the game itself.

The games cost is directly dictated by it's development budget. However, since most titles retail for $50, this is the generally accepted price range, so many games often debut at that price, development costs or not.

Even with development costs on the rise for video games, I don't see their prices raising much, as the profit margin of a video game is still pretty nice.

But yea, movies have HUGE budgets, and DVD's still arent' super expensive, because they sell multiple copies. So, big games will sell a LOT, and they have huge budgets, so the price is able to stay down. Small games have small budgets, don't sell as well, but still break even. Don't worry about price people.

 

[DuckRacer]

You're missing my point. How many games to you buy for 50$ right now? I don't buy many at all. Infact, the only one I can remember paying 50$ for in the past 2 years is GT4. So I get the games that come out costing less or are on the greatest hits list. Granted, there are some games you just BUY. Like the ones you mentioned, Final Fantasy, and other marquee series. But there are a lot of good games that get cheaper and are worth the wait to save 20-40$

Well, I bought all my 360 games (8 of them) at an average of $60 a game. If it were $80, that'd be an extra $160 out of my pocket.

Right now, the PS3 isn't looking really nice to me. Sure, there's a lot of nice features, but there's no games on it that I want that wouldn't be on the 360 (except GT5, and it's a year or two off from release at least). With a $500 price tag minimum initially, and with the price of games looking high, the Wii is looking better, to me and my wallet.

 

[Swift]

Cost of the disc has nothing to do wtih the cost of the game itself.

The games cost is directly dictated by it's development budget. However, since most titles retail for $50, this is the generally accepted price range, so many games often debut at that price, development costs or not.

Even with development costs on the rise for video games, I don't see their prices raising much, as the profit margin of a video game is still pretty nice.

But yea, movies have HUGE budgets, and DVD's still arent' super expensive, because they sell multiple copies. So, big games will sell a LOT, and they have huge budgets, so the price is able to stay down. Small games have small budgets, don't sell as well, but still break even. Don't worry about price people.

I'm not worried about the price. But how can they sell PS2 games for 20$ and still make money...because the DVD's cost less then 20$ a shot. I'm not completely disagreeing with you. Just that it is a factor. How can the cost of the media NOT be a factor? It may not be the number one on the list, but it's still a factor in the cost of games.

Well, I bought all my 360 games (8 of them) at an average of $60 a game. If it were $80, that'd be an extra $160 out of my pocket.

Dang...480$ for games huh? Sounds like your wallet is doing just fine. I've spent that much in maybe the past 5 years. But to each his own...when it comes to gaming

 

[kikie]

Well, I'd imagine for the first year or two, PS3 games won't drop in price a lot.

Only when that particular game gets platinum.

 

[tha_con]

I'm not worried about the price. But how can they sell PS2 games for 20$ and still make money...because the DVD's cost less then 20$ a shot. I'm not completely disagreeing with you. Just that it is a factor. How can the cost of the media NOT be a factor? It may not be the number one on the list, but it's still a factor in the cost of games.

The cost of the media is minimal.

DVD Games can cost less than $20 because there are a lot of shoppers willing to buy games from the bargain bin, and they are created off of nothing more than basic SDK tools, requiring little development time, and a very small budget with out large amounts of resources.

Name one big seller that you've seen under $50 at it's debut?

MGS? No.
FF? No.
Tekken? No.
VF? No.
Madden? No.
DMC? No.
GTA? No.
GT? No.
PoP? No.

Duck : Are you serious? NONE of the games coming for PS3 are "interesting" To you?

And what, may I ask, is so interesting on 360? Another Halo? It'll probably have three improvements, I'm calling it:

Larger Levels
Better Graphics
New Weapons

Wow, does that really warrent your $400 purchase? What else? Name these games on 360 that won't be on PS3? The number of exclisives on PS3 (great established IP's) are far greater than that on 360. IF you buy a 360 your pretty much gambling that the new IP's coming to it will be good, and if they suck, you're stuck with a few good games, and some devent titles.

I'll play the safe route, and have my entire PS1/PS2 library open to me, along with:

MGS4
DMC4
FF
Tekken
VF
R&C
GoW
GT
Unreal2K7
Jak n Daxter
Assasians Creed

If you look at it, the PlayStation name brand has spawned MORE great IP's than Xbox, in fact, even just the PS2 alone has spawned more great IP's like:

GTA
SSX
NBA Street
GoW
DMC
etcetc

I cannot see how you would just step behind a console for the fact that you think price is *that* much of a factor given it's functionality.

The PS3 already has superior audio and video capability as far as decoding.

BTW, I own a 360, and I rarely play it anymore, because most of the games I want to play aren't out, and won't be out for a while...like next year...so that's 2 years where I've had my 360 with only a few good games.

With my PS3, I'll get MGS4 in July of 07. That alone is reason enough to be excited. Fact is, PS3 will get MORE titles in a shorter span of time (quality titles BTW) than the 360 did.

 

[DuckRacer]

Dang...480$ for games huh? Sounds like your wallet is doing just fine. I've spent that much in maybe the past 5 years. But to each his own...when it comes to gaming

You also have to factor in I bought NBA Live and Madden for $40, and PGR3 was bundled with the 360. I bought about 3 of them (not including the ones mentioned) myself, while my parent bought 2 of them. So really, it was $260 for me.

That said, even $70 for games gets to me. My parents are practically anti-elecricity at this point, and if they buy me another game, I'm getting on my knees and praising God.