View Full Version : PS3 Euro Launch delayed until Spring 2007
Sony has some more bad news for European PlayStation fans †“ the PS3 is not going to make its November 17th release date and will instead only be reaching shelves in March 2007.
The reason for this is due to a shortage of essential blue laser diodes needed to manufacture both Blu-ray and HD DVD players. The PS3 is of course banking heavily on its integrated Blu-ray player and High Definition capabilities.
:Yikes:
http://www.techdigest.tv/2006/09/ps3_delayed_exp.html
Graham M
06-09-2006, 09:24
I saw this coming personally :)
Downloads
06-09-2006, 11:13
Same here but i think i'm going to cancel my pre-order now, it's the 360 and Wii only for me now.
Fed up being second class to North America and Japan, they just lost a customer.
TheBlueRaja
06-09-2006, 12:44
Anyone else think something else is going on anyway?
I mean, look at the release dates for Japan and North America, the 7th and 17th November, thats only like 8 or 9 weeks away and yet nobody has even seen one working yet.
Im thinking the Japs and the Yanks are going to be waiting a wee bit longer too.
Sony have really screwed up this time. I also read that you will have to buy the HDMI cable seperately. So you won't be able to make use of the great HD features of Blu-ray without it. lol Sony are so foolish.
I knew this would happen, they have messed up big time. At least that gives the 360 and Wii a christmas without the PS3 and they will have a big head start.
Sony have really screwed up this time. I also read that you will have to buy the HDMI cable seperately. So you won't be able to make use of the great HD features of Blu-ray without it. lol Sony are so foolish.
I knew this would happen, they have messed up big time. At least that gives the 360 and Wii a christmas without the PS3 and they will have a big head start.
Can i just correct you in saying you dont need a HDMI cable to make use out of Blue-ray. With the normal cable you can get 1080i out of it and even 1080p if the tv set allows it through that cable. Plus how many of us really have 1080p tvs?
DocDutch
06-09-2006, 18:40
shawty, quite a few people have HD ready tv's (have a looksie at the prices now for HD Tv) and also with X-mas coming soon and x-mas bonusses coming along pretty soon as well more and more people will invest in HD Tv's so by the time sony have launched their PS3 there might be a 20% of the market using HD ;)
Sony have really screwed up this time. I also read that you will have to buy the HDMI cable seperately. So you won't be able to make use of the great HD features of Blu-ray without it. lol Sony are so foolish.
I knew this would happen, they have messed up big time. At least that gives the 360 and Wii a christmas without the PS3 and they will have a big head start.
I'm still shocked that they removed the dual shock from the controllers, that's a really bad move i think and a step backwards.
Can i just correct you in saying you dont need a HDMI cable to make use out of Blue-ray. With the normal cable you can get 1080i out of it and even 1080p if the tv set allows it through that cable. Plus how many of us really have 1080p tvs?
It doesn't have to be a 1080p HDTV, any HD ready TV with HDMI will work.
I know you don't but they were boasting about the console having HDMI output and now you need to pay extra to use it.
It doesn't have to be a 1080p HDTV, any HD ready TV with HDMI will work.
I know you don't but they were boasting about the console having HDMI output and now you need to pay extra to use it.
Listen, you dont need a HDMI cable to use playstation to use HD, you can use the normal cable that comes with it.
---------- Post added at 19:47 ---------- Previous post was at 19:44 ----------
shawty, quite a few people have HD ready tv's (have a looksie at the prices now for HD Tv) and also with X-mas coming soon and x-mas bonusses coming along pretty soon as well more and more people will invest in HD Tv's so by the time sony have launched their PS3 there might be a 20% of the market using HD ;)
These HDTVs that are so cheap are not 1080p.
Listen, you dont need a HDMI cable to use playstation to use HD, you can use the normal cable that comes with it.
---------- Post added at 19:47 ---------- Previous post was at 19:44 ----------
These HDTVs that are so cheap are not 1080p.
Listen I know you don't need the HDMI I am not stupid. What I am saying was Sony was making a point of bragging about the HDMI seen as the 360 doesn't have one but now you need to buy the cable on its own. You would have thought that for the price of the console the HDMI would be included, not just component cables like the 360 came with.
There are hardly any TVs around just now that do 1080p, Sony are just trying to be better than everyone else again. Most HDTVs will do 1080i, thats is good enough for most things at the moment.
Listen I know you don't need the HDMI I am not stupid. What I am saying was Sony was making a point of bragging about the HDMI seen as the 360 doesn't have one but now you need to buy the cable on its own. You would have thought that for the price of the console the HDMI would be included, not just component cables like the 360 came with.
There are hardly any TVs around just now that do 1080p, Sony are just trying to be better than everyone else again. Most HDTVs will do 1080i, thats is good enough for most things at the moment.
Well everyone ive spoken to about it and myself included find it commen sense that there wasnt gonna be a HDMI cable included, they allways come with the cheaper cable. Whats wrong with sony bragging what there machine can do, i dont see any other next gen consoles that can do 1080p
Well, I'm glad.
It means I won't get incessantly nagged by my 15 year old lad, wanting one for Christmas.
Well, I'm glad.
It means I won't get incessantly nagged by my 15 year old lad, wanting one for Christmas.
No you will get nagged at easter lol.
Downloads
06-09-2006, 22:18
Listen I know you don't need the HDMI I am not stupid. What I am saying was Sony was making a point of bragging about the HDMI seen as the 360 doesn't have one but now you need to buy the cable on its own. You would have thought that for the price of the console the HDMI would be included, not just component cables like the 360 came with.
There are hardly any TVs around just now that do 1080p, Sony are just trying to be better than everyone else again. Most HDTVs will do 1080i, thats is good enough for most things at the moment.
You are of course right. Also there is no point buying a PS3 if you arn't going to get a TV that has HDMI. TVs with HDMI will not have 20% of the market.
If your TV doesn't have HDMI (or DVI which can be converted to HDMI) or you don't have an HDMI cable. Then your Blue Ray player in the future will be a VERY expensive and useless add-on.
I couldn't afford a TV with HDMI, so i made sure it had DVI. However it's all irrelevant now i'm not going to get a PS3.
You are of course right. Also there is no point buying a PS3 if you arn't going to get a TV that has HDMI. TVs with HDMI will not have 20% of the market.
If your TV doesn't have HDMI (or DVI which can be converted to HDMI) or you don't have an HDMI cable. Then your Blue Ray player in the future will be a VERY expensive and useless add-on.
I couldn't afford a TV with HDMI, so i made sure it had DVI. However it's all irrelevant now i'm not going to get a PS3.
Ok so your saying that for about 90% of people who dont own hdtvs not to get a playstation 3, dont be so stupid its there if you want to use it its an extra add on. Playstation 3 will look stunning on any normal tv.
Ok so your saying that for about 90% of people who dont own hdtvs not to get a playstation 3, dont be so stupid its there if you want to use it its an extra add on. Playstation 3 will look stunning on any normal tv.
Yep it'll look just as good as the Xbox 360 which by the time Sony get their finger out and launch in Europe will be sitting with a large bundle of games, far cheaper price and loads of stock.
Downloads
06-09-2006, 22:38
Ok so your saying that for about 90% of people who dont own hdtvs not to get a playstation 3, dont be so stupid its there if you want to use it its an extra add on. Playstation 3 will look stunning on any normal tv.
Don't call me stupid or we will have a problem.
Blue Ray IS NOT an add-on. It is half of what they are selling about the PS3.
Don't call me stupid or we will have a problem.
Blue Ray IS NOT an add-on. It is half of what they are selling about the PS3.
I was talking about hd gaming (yes i know thats blue ray) hd gaming is an add on, you dont need it to enjoy stunnig games.
---------- Post added at 22:42 ---------- Previous post was at 22:41 ----------
Yep it'll look just as good as the Xbox 360 which by the time Sony get their finger out and launch in Europe will be sitting with a large bundle of games, far cheaper price and loads of stock.
How do you know it wont look better or infact could look worse.
How do you know it wont look better or infact could look worse.
Oh I forgot Sony have the special 1080i mode that looks different from the Xbox version of 1080i :rolleyes:
I don't know maybe I've just been going from all the videos and in-game pictures floating about the net. Either that or I just made it up.
Which one do you think is more likely?
Oh I forgot Sony have the special 1080i mode that looks different from the Xbox version of 1080i :rolleyes:
I don't know maybe I've just been going from all the videos and in-game pictures floating about the net. Either that or I just made it up.
Which one do you think is more likely?
Whats 1080i got to do with games looking different. From what ive seen myself and heard from develpors (not personally) the playstation 3 seems to be the better of the 2.
Tezcatlipoca
06-09-2006, 22:55
Sony have really screwed up this time. I also read that you will have to buy the HDMI cable seperately. So you won't be able to make use of the great HD features of Blu-ray without it. lol Sony are so foolish.
Also, they've said that the "cheaper" version of the PS3 won't actually have an HDMI output anyway (only the top end version will), so you'd *have* to use component to connect the "cheaper" version of a PS3 to an HD Ready TV.
And, of course, component video doesn't support HDCP. So, when the studios start enforcing the digital copy protection on BluRay movies, you won't be able to use the "cheaper" PS3 to view them if you want to view them in HD.
And, of course, component video doesn't support HDCP. So, when the studios start enforcing the digital copy protection on BluRay movies, you won't be able to use the "cheaper" PS3 to view them if you want to view them in HD.
thats correct, the deal streches to 2010/2011, after that your on your own with HDCP, its not even a sure thing that the current amnesty will last that long.
Also, they've said that the "cheaper" version of the PS3 won't actually have an HDMI output anyway (only the top end version will), so you'd *have* to use component to connect the "cheaper" version of a PS3 to an HD Ready TV.
And, of course, component video doesn't support HDCP. So, when the studios start enforcing the digital copy protection on BluRay movies, you won't be able to use the "cheaper" PS3 to view them if you want to view them in HD.
Isnt that the whole point of the cheaper version though, your not to bothered about stuff like that you just want to play games.
the official site for the PS3:
http://eu.playstation.com/ps3
Tezcatlipoca
06-09-2006, 23:03
Isnt that the whole point of the cheaper version though, your not to bothered about stuff like that you just want to play games.
If I just wanted to play games, I'd buy something a hell of a lot cheaper than the PS3.
BluRay is a major selling point, just as DVD was for the PS2.
It's stupid having a version which, although it has a BluRay drive & supports HD resolutions, won't be able to make full use of that.
If I just wanted to play games, I'd buy something a hell of a lot cheaper than the PS3.
BluRay is a major selling point, just as DVD was for the PS2.
It's stupid having a version which, although it has a BluRay drive & supports HD resolutions, won't be able to make full use of that.
No but it can make use of having the extra storage for games. Reasons to buy the cheaper ps3 model if you just want it for gaming, Exclusive titles, controler tilt, blue ray space on the discs, and most likely better looking graphics ( from what i have seen comapred to both consoles launch titles and from what developers have said. Obviously Sony want blue ray to sell thats why they stuck it in both. If you want cheaper then go with microsoft or nintendo, plus for the time being you can have full advantage of blue ray movies,
Well, I suppose it will still benefit from the increased storage offered by the BluRay drive.
er, what he said above me (must learn to type faster)
Downloads
06-09-2006, 23:15
Well, I suppose it will still benefit from the increased storage offered by the BluRay drive.
er, what he said above me (must learn to type faster)
I would agree to that if virtually all games wern't cross platform and will therefore cater for the fact the 360 doesn't have BlueRay. Games companies wn't make a version for the 360 using 15gb and then a 50gb version for the PS3.
There's going to be lots of empty space on people's BlueRay discs.
I would agree to that if virtually all games wern't cross platform and will therefore cater for the fact the 360 doesn't have BlueRay. Games companies wn't make a version for the 360 using 15gb and then a 50gb version for the PS3.
There's going to be lots of empty space on people's BlueRay discs.
No1 said they were going to fill them, but the developers and a lot of them said they have never seen anthing like blueray with how much they can fit on.
Heh, yet more FMV intros and loading sequences to come then, eh? :D
Heh, yet more FMV intros and loading sequences to come then, eh? :D
for final fantasy lovers proberbly :p:
Tezcatlipoca
06-09-2006, 23:31
Exclusive titles
There's a lot of cross-platform stuff, and each console has its own exclusives.
controler tilt
Nintendo.
blue ray space on the discs
Probably be wasted.
and most likely better looking graphics ( from what i have seen comapred to both consoles launch titles and from what developers have said.
Pretty much everything I have read says that for power & graphics, the 360 & PS3 come out fairly evenly. Although the PS3 is apparently harder to programme for, so it may take longer for PS3 titles to take real advantage of the hardware.
Downloads
06-09-2006, 23:33
Heh, yet more FMV intros and loading sequences to come then, eh? :D
Exactly what i was thinking. It's what everyone is thinking, more movie stuff in games. Personally i hate it.
I'm of the opinion that the story scenes should be built into the game play as much as possible. Not some high res narated story cut scene that needs loading.
There's a lot of cross-platform stuff, and each console has its own exclusives.
Nintendo.
Probably be wasted.
Pretty much everything I have read says that for power & graphics, the 360 & PS3 come out fairly evenly. Although the PS3 is apparently harder to programme for, so it may take longer for PS3 titles to take real advantage of the hardware.
1)Exclusives that sell the machine i was giving why people would go for the ps3, given these exclusives can take advantage of blue ray because they wont be ported.
2)I was giving reasons why people would buy ps3 and because ps3 has better graphics than the wii then thats the reason why they would buy it, microsoft with the same/ near enough/ worse graphics does not have the tilt function
3)"According to Ryan Schneider, spokesman for Insomniac Games, "Resistance: Fall of Man" Blu-ray PS3 game is making good use of the new format, using up a massive 22 gigabytes for music, level data, textures and code. These discs can only hold 25 gigabytes in total per layer. Pointing to the fact that HD-DVD cannot store this much information on a single layer disc, he kind of threw some sand in Microsoft (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) and Toshiba's (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) eyes. He said for this reason of extra storage capacity, this game will be PS3/Blu-ray only.
Schneider offered some distinguishing stats (which he called MTV News on Tuesday to further clarify). The game, he said, currently takes up 22 Gigabytes of memory (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) on a Blu-Ray disc, the new disc format supported by the PS3 that is one-half of a VHS-vs.-Betamax format war erupting between tech companies throughout the year. While the music and vocals in "Resistance" take up only about 1 Gigabyte of disc space, graphics, level data and programming (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) code occupy most of the remaining 21."
Now we will not know till we are sat infront of the console if it actually is any better using the full use of blue ray storage but as you can see there is already a game that is using 22gb.
4)All the stuff ive heard from the developers is that its good to work with and the blue ray storage is incredible. Also that the graphics are on par if not better than the 360. Dont forget that a lot of people will also be comparing 2nd genertation 360 games to ps3s launch titles.
1)Exclusives that sell the machine i was giving why people would go for the ps3, given these exclusives can take advantage of blue ray because they wont be ported.
2)I was giving reasons why people would buy ps3 and because ps3 has better graphics than the wii then thats the reason why they would buy it, microsoft with the same/ near enough/ worse graphics does not have the tilt function
3)"According to Ryan Schneider, spokesman for Insomniac Games, "Resistance: Fall of Man" Blu-ray PS3 game is making good use of the new format, using up a massive 22 gigabytes for music, level data, textures and code. These discs can only hold 25 gigabytes in total per layer. Pointing to the fact that HD-DVD cannot store this much information on a single layer disc, he kind of threw some sand in Microsoft (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) and Toshiba's (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) eyes. He said for this reason of extra storage capacity, this game will be PS3/Blu-ray only.
Schneider offered some distinguishing stats (which he called MTV News on Tuesday to further clarify). The game, he said, currently takes up 22 Gigabytes of memory (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) on a Blu-Ray disc, the new disc format supported by the PS3 that is one-half of a VHS-vs.-Betamax format war erupting between tech companies throughout the year. While the music and vocals in "Resistance" take up only about 1 Gigabyte of disc space, graphics, level data and programming (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) code occupy most of the remaining 21."
Now we will not know till we are sat infront of the console if it actually is any better using the full use of blue ray storage but as you can see there is already a game that is using 22gb.
4)All the stuff ive heard from the developers is that its good to work with and the blue ray storage is incredible. Also that the graphics are on par if not better than the 360. Dont forget that a lot of people will also be comparing 2nd genertation 360 games to ps3s launch titles.
I wouldn't want the naff tilt function, when i play a game i dont want to be dancing around my living room. That novelty will soon wear off in my opinion. i'd rather have the dual shock which Sony have removed, i'm sure others would agree.
I wouldn't want the naff tilt function, when i play a game i dont want to be dancing around my living room. That novelty will soon wear off in my opinion. i'd rather have the dual shock which Sony have removed, i'm sure others would agree.
Fair enough then switch the titl function off. For every one of you that doesnt want it there will be everyone of you that does want it. Sony did not want to pay royalties to keep the dual shock function. As good as it was when it first come out it doesnt feel the same (for me anyway)
Fair enough then switch the titl function off. For every one of you that doesnt want it there will be everyone of you that does want it. Sony did not want to pay royalties to keep the dual shock function. As good as it was when it first come out it doesnt feel the same (for me anyway)
Personally i think it works great on the 360, games just won't feel the same without it.
Downloads
06-09-2006, 23:56
1)
3)"According to Ryan Schneider, spokesman for Insomniac Games, "Resistance: Fall of Man" Blu-ray PS3 game is making good use of the new format, using up a massive 22 gigabytes for music, level data, textures and code. These discs can only hold 25 gigabytes in total per layer. Pointing to the fact that HD-DVD cannot store this much information on a single layer disc, he kind of threw some sand in Microsoft (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) and Toshiba's (http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=34764#) eyes. He said for this reason of extra storage capacity, this game will be PS3/Blu-ray only.
4)All the stuff ive heard from the developers is that its good to work with and the blue ray storage is incredible. Also that the graphics are on par if not better than the 360. Dont forget that a lot of people will also be comparing 2nd genertation 360 games to ps3s launch titles.
Of corse there is going to be the off game. But i wouldn't spend £500 (extras in) for an odd game.
Funny really, cos all the stuff i heard from the developers is that it's hard to work with.
The Xbox will always be a year ahead in time, we have to compare what we have got at the time.
Of corse there is going to be the off game. But i wouldn't spend £500 (extras in) for an odd game.
Funny really, cos all the stuff i heard from the developers is that it's hard to work with.
The Xbox will always be a year ahead in time, we have to compare what we have got at the time.
The off game, so your telling everyone there is going to be few games that will take advantage of the blue ray space, especialy in 2, 3, 4 years time. Are you a game developer?
Me thinks Shawty is a bit of a Sony fanboy.
I have always been a big gamer and have owned every console, however with the PS3 Sony have lost me as a customer. There are just too many bad things about it. The price, Blu Ray, Delays, total Bull on their behalf trying to say its the best thing there is when many of their big features have been 'borrowed' from other consoles.
Me thinks Shawty is a bit of a Sony fanboy.
I have always been a big gamer and have owned every console, however with the PS3 Sony have lost me as a customer. There are just too many bad things about it. The price, Blu Ray, Delays, total Bull on their behalf trying to say its the best thing there is when many of their big features have been 'borrowed' from other consoles.
A fan boy. Yeah great thanks. Im sat here at the desk and next to me is a ps2 and an xbox. I play on the xbox more. I am not a fan boy, what i am bothered about is real fanboys spouting crap about the ps3. I have not once slated microsoft on here or any other forum. I will buy the strongest console at the time and at the moment its looking like the ps3 is stronger than the xbox 360. Its a shame that they will have to delay the launce ( not that i was going to get one straight away anyway)
Having owned the 360 since launch I would say it is stronger. A system that really works and with a fantastic online service, great controller(which Sony seem to have copied slighty with the home button and trigger buttons at the back.) add to that some cracking games.
I currently play in HD and it looks stunning. You still see the games on a normal TV but whats the point in having HD gaming if you can't access it to its full potential.
Its just the way some of your posts make you sound thats all.
Having owned the 360 since launch I would say it is stronger. A system that really works and with a fantastic online service, great controller(which Sony seem to have copied slighty with the home button and trigger buttons at the back.) add to that some cracking games.
I currently play in HD and it looks stunning. You still see the games on a normal TV but whats the point in having HD gaming if you can't access it to its full potential.
Its just the way some of your posts make you sound thats all.
PS3 is a strong system from what we have heard. The point in having HD gaming is so those with hd tvs can use it. And those that dont can upgrade later.
Exactly, according to Sony it is very good, but the fact they still haven't really shown off an actual working console is a bit worrying.
I have seen the 360 running on SD and HD and the next gen abilities do not really show themselves too well on an SD TV. Also some stuff does appear to come out too dark on an SD set. Which is fixable using gamma settings in game.
cnewton2k
07-09-2006, 00:58
PS3 is a strong system from what we have heard. The point in having HD gaming is so those with hd tvs can use it. And those that dont can upgrade later.
Lets just have a quick look shall we
http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html
In all but 2 of the test there where carried out by an independent company the 360 won each time.
I have doubt the PS3 will be a good machine, but like what has been said before the 360 has got a year on it and as we all know counts for a lot when it comes to the developer using the hardware to its advantage.
Lets just have a quick look shall we
http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html
In all but 2 of the test there where carried out by an independent company the 360 won each time.
I have doubt the PS3 will be a good machine, but like what has been said before the 360 has got a year on it and as we all know counts for a lot when it comes to the developer using the hardware to its advantage.
You post numbers (old post at that) and ill post something from the developers mouth.
http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/730/730101p2.html
cnewton2k
07-09-2006, 01:28
Still it might be an old post but you cant really argue with FACTS now can you.
In nearly every test they did the 360 beat the PS3 FACT
Even in the link that i gave it says the the CELL processor wasnt desgin for games
Quote "Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements"
Still it might be an old post but you cant really argue with FACTS now can you.
In nearly every test they did the 360 beat the PS3 FACT
Even in the link that i gave it says the the CELL processor wasnt desgin for games
Quote "Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. That sort of mix makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. In fact, when analyzing real games one finds almost the opposite distribution of general purpose computing and DSP calculation requirements"
Again ill point you to this. http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/730/730101p2.html
That is from a developer working on the game and to qoute "The answer is both. More time allows us to think about how to do things in different ways. At the same time, the PS3 is a powerful system and there are things we can do on this system that are unique. Each system has its advantages but both systems are really powerful tools that help us to make the great games we want to make. "
The question was "Are the visual improvements specifically thanks to "The power of PS3" or is it simply because the developers had more time to work on next-gen hardware?"
Now all those numbers could mean anything, but here we see that the playstation 3 can do better than the 360 dew to having a long time to produce it and also with the playstation 3 been a powerful system.
This is were im coming from. We seem to be hearing from different developers the same thing that the ps3 is slighty/to much better. Anyway why dont we just sit and wait and when november 11th comes we then can compare first generation games of the ps3 to the 2nd generation games of the 360 and see how they comapre. I think a lot of people will be suprised.
cnewton2k
07-09-2006, 01:50
i agree cause this aint gonna get anywhere apart from stale mate
we have both a PS3 fanboy and a 360 fanboy !!
:angel:
i agree cause this aint gonna get anywhere apart from stale mate
we have both a PS3 fanboy and a 360 fanboy !!
:angel:
Im not a fanboy though so why even say it.
You posted numbers which no1 really knows anything about unless your an expert in that field. I posted pics and a qoute which says dew to long development and a better system, the games visuals are better. Wether that is a lie or now we will see at launch.
But no im not a fanboy, i correct people when they spout crap about systems to gain points for the system they like.
cnewton2k
07-09-2006, 02:17
not a fan boy !!!!!
And the 2006 comedy awards goes to .....
Shawty, The point is everytime a post is made you come back saying the PS3 is the Bees Knees even when there are links to show comparisons with the 2 machines which state that the 360 slightly out performs the PS3.
The fact is until the console is actually released no one can actually say it the best console.
Now the PS3 is delayed here I shall be going for a Wii at christmas ;)
TheBlueRaja
07-09-2006, 10:33
I'll tell you one thing (Im an Xbox 360 owner for what its worth), your both quoting from Ps3 or Xbox sites for your facts and figures.
The chances are they are biased towards the position of the console involved and the statements and figures should be taken with a pinch of salt.
From what i have heard and seen in screenshots, the PS3 is supposed to have slightly better effect processing than the Xbox 360 (lighting etc) but essentailly they are pretty similar and the Graphics processing unit in the PS3 has recently gone and been reduced in clock speed making it slower so that may not even be as pronounced anymore.
The main difference between the two consoles is the Blu-Ray drive from Sony, the PS3 would have been out ages ago if it contained a normal DVD drive.
And THIS is what you are paying your extra money for, not graphics.
It dosent matter what camp your in here, the difference is the drive, thats it, simple.
Saaf_laandon_mo
07-09-2006, 11:23
sod the drive, graphics, processor etc etc. the biggest problem with the PS3 is that pro evo wont be available on it for a year after its been released on the 360 :(
I know which one Im buying.....
All this talk of what is better. We need innovation! Wii wins hands down :angel:
All this talk of what is better. We need innovation! Wii wins hands down :angel:
Nah i think it's to kiddy. But if you're a kid i guess its ok. :)
TheBlueRaja
07-09-2006, 13:01
Nah i think it's to kiddy. But if you're a kid i guess its ok. :)
The best games i have ever played have come from Nintendo.
Nah i think it's to kiddy. But if you're a kid i guess its ok. :)
Wow thats a bit modest.
However each to their own I guess. I like the idea of having to getting up and physically move your self in order for the game to respond, I think that makes the Wii unique.
As for the Sony, well it does seem that they have crapped on europe from a great hight with the delayed release. Nevermind though, give it plenty of time to start pre-loading that first game :)
Just to add, a trailer showing off some of the Wii's features.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73yDRm8KaWY
- I like it anyway..
I'll tell you one thing (Im an Xbox 360 owner for what its worth), your both quoting from Ps3 or Xbox sites for your facts and figures.
The chances are they are biased towards the position of the console involved and the statements and figures should be taken with a pinch of salt.
From what i have heard and seen in screenshots, the PS3 is supposed to have slightly better effect processing than the Xbox 360 (lighting etc) but essentailly they are pretty similar and the Graphics processing unit in the PS3 has recently gone and been reduced in clock speed making it slower so that may not even be as pronounced anymore.
The main difference between the two consoles is the Blu-Ray drive from Sony, the PS3 would have been out ages ago if it contained a normal DVD drive.
And THIS is what you are paying your extra money for, not graphics.
It dosent matter what camp your in here, the difference is the drive, thats it, simple.
See this is why i come here and stick up for the playstation 3.
Number 1. I never qouted from a ps3 website it was from ign which is a gaming website.
Number 2. Where is the official announcement that it has been downgraded.
TheBlueRaja
07-09-2006, 21:27
See this is why i come here and stick up for the playstation 3.
Number 1. I never qouted from a ps3 website it was from ign which is a gaming website.
Number 2. Where is the official announcement that it has been downgraded.
Ok, so its was from a PS3 section of a gaming website, whereas iommi's stuff was from the Xbox360 section of the same site.
So really, if you look at it, you appear to have weakened your argument as the Xbox360 appears to come out on top via unofficial testing on an independant website.
As for number two, there were, at least to my knowledge no official announcements made regarding the clock speeds of the PS3, only what industry insiders were led to belive that they would be, i.e. developers etc, so that they could make games on their dev kits that ran at a reasonable speed on the final machine.
According to the industry insiders, the speed at which the PS3 GPU runs at has been reduced from the initial projected figured by 10% due to "unknown reasons" as of LAST WEEK.
Dont belive me - google the following:-
rsx clock speed
In all honesty though mate, not a lot of people know much about the PS3 except that its going to cost a lot of money.
Given its 2 Months from release - dont your think thats a wee bit weird...
But mate, why are you so determined to defend a bit of hardware?
Ok, so its was from a PS3 section of a gaming website, whereas iommi's stuff was from the Xbox360 section of the same site.
So really, if you look at it, you appear to have weakened your argument as the Xbox360 appears to come out on top via unofficial testing on an independant website.
As for number two, there were, at least to my knowledge no official announcements made regarding the clock speeds of the PS3, only what industry insiders were led to belive that they would be, i.e. developers etc, so that they could make games on their dev kits that ran at a reasonable speed on the final machine.
According to the industry insiders, the speed at which the PS3 GPU runs at has been reduced from the initial projected figured by 10% due to "unknown reasons" as of LAST WEEK.
Dont belive me - google the following:-
rsx clock speed
In all honesty though mate, not a lot of people know much about the PS3 except that its going to cost a lot of money.
Given its 2 Months from release - dont your think thats a wee bit weird...
But mate, why are you so determined to defend a bit of hardware?
First of all the rumor was started by The Inquierer which is not a reliable source, they dont even tell you who said it or were they got it from. Secondly it is just that a rumor, until there is an official statement about it then it is false. Just like the statement about the delay (which i think there was actually no rumors for. As from where i got my source from (ign) about which is better, if you had read it you will clearly see that the developer for fight night round 3 which is a game for xbox360 and soon ps3 has said dew to longer development and a stronger console that the ps3 version is looking better. Thats not a rumor thats either truth or a lie as it came from the developers mouth.
As i said im no fan boy, people hear rumors and take them as fact then go and tell thousands of other people on forums who then also take it as fact. Before we take it as fact look at were the rumor started and how reliable it was. As this one is not very reliable.
TheBlueRaja
07-09-2006, 22:35
First of all the rumor was started by The Inquierer which is not a reliable source, they dont even tell you who said it or were they got it from. Secondly it is just that a rumor, until there is an official statement about it then it is false. Just like the statement about the delay (which i think there was actually no rumors for. As from where i got my source from (ign) about which is better, if you had read it you will clearly see that the developer for fight night round 3 which is a game for xbox360 and soon ps3 has said dew to longer development and a stronger console that the ps3 version is looking better. Thats not a rumor thats either truth or a lie as it came from the developers mouth.
As i said im no fan boy, people hear rumors and take them as fact then go and tell thousands of other people on forums who then also take it as fact. Before we take it as fact look at were the rumor started and how reliable it was. As this one is not very reliable.
I said above that the PS3 was supposed to look better, but only marginally better and that was relevant to the rumor that the GPU had been reduced in speed as that would have a knock on in terms of the difference between the two consoles especially as its rumored to be 10%.
We will just have to wait and see, personally im hoping that, for Sonys sake, its all its hyped upto be, because if its not then the 400 - 500 quid price tag is going to be a bit of a joke to be honest.
pop80_uk
08-09-2006, 15:51
I don't mind as it means more games for my PS2! :D
dilli-theclaw
08-09-2006, 15:53
I don't mind as it means more games for my PS2! :DIt's not all bad - sony are bringing out a pink ps2 in time for christmas :D
Skatoony
09-09-2006, 19:06
I know what I'll be getting and it won't be the 360 & PS3.
dilli-theclaw
09-09-2006, 19:43
I know what I'll be getting and it won't be the 360 & PS3.Looking forward to playing Twilight Princess too?
Skatoony
09-09-2006, 20:48
Looking forward to playing Twilight Princess too?Yup :D
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.