Gotta love the Net folks scouping the print mags Snappy Link
Arsetech wrote: More PS3 details emerge in print
The folks over at Sony managed to get out some more details about the PS3 in the upcoming issue of PSM Magazine, so without any further ado, here are the goods.
* No more memory cards. You know all that stuff about backwards compatibility with the PS2 and the original Playstation? Well, we've got good news and bad news for you. Your old save games won't be usable, thanks to the PS3's reliance on the Memory Stick Duo for storing save data. The good news is that downloading and saving shares via your PC (ahem, ahem) for all three Playstation versions and the PSP will be easy as pie. And we like pie.
* Say bye-bye to peripherals. No more using knockoff DDR pads and wireless controllers, gang. Sony has officially disavowed support for all third-party controllers, but you'll still be able to play PS1/PS2 games just fine with a PS3 pad. My money's on a USB adapter coming out for it soon after release, though.
* Specs? Um, what specs? Sure, Kutaragi might be singing "The best is yet to come, and babe, won't it be fine?" but he's a little off-key. All those impressive tech specs revealed at E3 weren't the be-all, end-all of the story. Engineers have begun talking about improvements to the system, including low-level memory upgrades and other things that make game developers all hot and bothered.
* That hard drive isn't for games. No such luck in getting your save games for Avalon or Dark Sector onto the PS3's micro HDD; Sony wants you to use it for things like downloaded video content, MP3s, and photos. The network hub capabilities will then let you access it from any network-enabled device.
* Use your PSP as a remote. Ever wish you could just power on your PlayStation from the couch? Well, grab a PSP and you'll be able to access the PS3 even in sleep mode. Couch potatotes, rejoice!
* It will have TiVo-like capabilities. Sure, Sony, you might have told me sweet nothings about a USB video input box that will allow the PS3 to record movies and TV to the micro HDD, and you got me so worked up when you whispered to me about being able to download the shows I've missed from my PS3 to my PSP over the Internet, but I think I'll stick with DirecTiVo, thank you ver much.
* Most games will be 720p. Yes, you'll still have 1080i and 1080p high-definition modes, but you can put off that HDTV purchase a little while longer with the news that most game developers are using 720p as the standard target resolution. Good thing too; have you priced an HDTV-ready plasma recently?
* Speed or quality, but not both. PC gamers have it so good. Battlefield 2 not running so well? Play it at a lower resolution and watch the game speed up. Sony wants to have games run faster and smoother by dropping the resolution, but it remains to be seen whether game developers will let us have that choice.
The September issue of PSM Magazine will be available at a newsstand near you in a few weeks.
So much for 1080p as I predicted last month and no more memory cards because we must all suck the memory stick and like it.
Yay...?
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
The PS3 looks more a like a pile of junk each day. No HD save games? Ever change specs? 720p target res? TiVo clone? Phfft. I'll pass. They're trying to be all things to all people, and they're going to screw up and deliver another subpar system.
Kicking themselves in the ass. I have a feeling Microsoft will win the next console wars.
アカラム
I melt two faces in the morning. I melt two faces at night. I melt two faces in the afternoon, it makes me feel alright. I melt two faces in time of peace, and two in time of war. I melt two faces before I melt two faces, and then I melt two more. - Ballad of a PK
Typical Sony agenda, hype a product beyond belief, then fail to deliver.
They said 1080p for all games, now it's 720p (which is exactly what just about everyone predicted based on the hardware), which isn't bad to begin with, but why say that 1080p was going to be the standard? If they just meant to say that the PS3 supports 1080p, well whoopdie-shit, the PS2 and Xbox already support 1080i, but almost never use it.
As for the rest of the decisions, it's a little strange. Killing memory card usage in favor of memory sticks? That kind of kills backwards compatibility no? After all, many of us have years worth of PS1/PS2 save files that we will be loathe to part with.
And dumping third parties? Well, that's certainly a slap in the face to companies that have been supporting the Playstation platform for years. Sure, Sony is going to make more money, but they'll be burning a lot of bridges doing it.
All in all, I'd say that the Xbox 360 is looking better and better.
Why would someone put off buying an HDTV? Mine is 1080p capable and for less than $800.
Yeah, a few years back the PC junkies were mocking consoles for having such low resolution.... now that consoles exceed the common PC's resolution, all they do is bitch about how they're too poor and cheap to buy an HDTV.
Why would someone put off buying an HDTV? Mine is 1080p capable and for less than $800.
Yeah, a few years back the PC junkies were mocking consoles for having such low resolution.... now that consoles exceed the common PC's resolution, all they do is bitch about how they're too poor and cheap to buy an HDTV.
My uber cool awsome monitor best on the market edition costs at most about six hundred dollers or about a thousand for an overpriced LCD.
Your avarage thiry six inch HDTV however can run from $1,200 to $2,400 while your bigger screens run around 5k+.
Just an observation.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Was the next generation of consoles seriously a deciding factor in when people purchased an HDTV? Be honest, here. Was there anyone who was making their decision on when to buy an HDTV based on when the PS3, 360, or Revolution came out?
Seriously, the thought hadn't even crossed my mind. It would've been nice if the new consoles supported my television, but I hardly cared about that when I forked over the cash for it. An HDTV is, first and foremost, a television! Anything else it happens to do is useful and nice, but not necessary, IMO.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Why would someone put off buying an HDTV? Mine is 1080p capable and for less than $800.
Yeah, a few years back the PC junkies were mocking consoles for having such low resolution.... now that consoles exceed the common PC's resolution, all they do is bitch about how they're too poor and cheap to buy an HDTV.
"Exceeds" is going a bit too far. They can match PC resolution, but that's about it. And how many non-CRT HDTVs actually do 1080i native? Not many, if any.
Master of Ossus wrote:Was the next generation of consoles seriously a deciding factor in when people purchased an HDTV? Be honest, here. Was there anyone who was making their decision on when to buy an HDTV based on when the PS3, 360, or Revolution came out?
Seriously, the thought hadn't even crossed my mind. It would've been nice if the new consoles supported my television, but I hardly cared about that when I forked over the cash for it. An HDTV is, first and foremost, a television! Anything else it happens to do is useful and nice, but not necessary, IMO.
It was a factor for me, we need to buy a new TV anyway, and I was intresting for the first time in a console, while HDTV will arrive in Israel only in a good 5-7 years.
Master of Ossus wrote:Was the next generation of consoles seriously a deciding factor in when people purchased an HDTV? Be honest, here. Was there anyone who was making their decision on when to buy an HDTV based on when the PS3, 360, or Revolution came out?
Seriously, the thought hadn't even crossed my mind. It would've been nice if the new consoles supported my television, but I hardly cared about that when I forked over the cash for it. An HDTV is, first and foremost, a television! Anything else it happens to do is useful and nice, but not necessary, IMO.
It was a factor for me since the first real workout it would get would be the next-gen consoles (aside from the progressive scan improvements on the current gen).
HDTV programming is pretty scant, and even the stuff there is isn't very good quality compared to what Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are capable of. I bought mine since for the dual purpose of next-gen games and next-gen DVD.
No, it is not. The average gamer would be lucky to hit 1280x1024, and is more than likely still at 1024x768.
My 6800 GT will do 1920x1200 on BF2 with 2AA and 8AF, with everything set to high, and it plays smooth. Same for HL2, Doom 3 and Far Cry. The average for the next gen cards is looking to be 1600x1200. And if the average gamer is stuck with 1280x1024, they're still getting a higher res than 1200x720. 1024x768 is also very close to 1200x720 (786432 vs 864000 pixels, or 91% of the pixels that what we can realistically expect for next gen consoles).
Saying that next gen consoles will exceed the PC in terms of resolution and graphics ability is being far too generous. They'll match the average new PC when the come out, and then they'll be surpassed. As always.
And how many non-CRT HDTVs actually do 1080i native?
The console and the TV are different devices. I don't see how poor LCD resolution has anything to do with the console's maximum ability.
Simple - because doing more than the TV's max resolution is wasted power. The console *might* be able to do 1080p, but it doesn't matter if the TV only shows 1311x768 or some such. And cheaper TVs will reduce IQ in the process.
Why would someone put off buying an HDTV? Mine is 1080p capable and for less than $800.
Yeah, a few years back the PC junkies were mocking consoles for having such low resolution.... now that consoles exceed the common PC's resolution, all they do is bitch about how they're too poor and cheap to buy an HDTV.
"Exceeds" is going a bit too far. They can match PC resolution, but that's about it. And how many non-CRT HDTVs actually do 1080i native? Not many, if any.
Further, check out Apple's cinema display. Native resolution is 2560 x 1600...
I think we are all forgetting something about comparing resolutions between PC's and consoles. 720p is a huge improvement over 480i/p, and it is comparable to the resolution a midrange PC will use playing a modern game. Furthermore, at least for the Xbox 360, 4x AA will be standard.
The point of all this is that although high end PC's will still play at higher resolutions, 720p with 4x AA is enough to make blurry, low-res console games a thing of the past.
Also in that article is the following snippet some may find interesting:
PSM wrote:None of the game footage was taken from software running on systems using the final PS3 graphics chip, the Reality Synthesizer (RSX). ... The most stunning demo, Killzone PS3, was from an actual game engine running on an alpha kit--at less than five frames per second. The footage was sped up to 60fps in post-production.
Yikes.
"I'm so fast that last night I turned off the light switch in my hotel room and was in bed before the room was dark." - Muhammad Ali
"Dating is not supposed to be easy. It's supposed to be a heart-pounding, stomach-wrenching, gut-churning exercise in pitting your fear of rejection and public humiliation against your desire to find a mate. Enjoy." - Darth Wong
SPOOFE wrote:
And the average computer does not have a 6800 GT.
No but what would you define as the avarage computer?
Say a computer costing 1,500 to build? What year and when?
Computer configurations are bit hard to tack down in term's of avarages unless you have some study I'm not aware of that details such things.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
My 6800 GT will do 1920x1200 on BF2 with 2AA and 8AF, with everything set to high, and it plays smooth.
And the average computer does not have a 6800 GT.
The average computer was never designed to play games, so the point is moot. A typical GAMER'S computer will have at least a 6600GT or the equivalent, and any serious gamer will be packing at least a 6800GT, and a serious gamer with a new machine is probably looking to have a 7800GTX (or two lesser cards).
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
No but what would you define as the avarage computer?
Say a computer costing 1,500 to build?
About a thousand bucks. That's pretty much all you need to run all current games awesomely and all next games well.
I think I defined my standards pretty well: They'll exceed the capabilities of any PC that costs under three times as much. In other words, cost is a major factor to the average consumer. Enthusiasts, obviously, won't blink an eye at spending $3000 on a gaming rig. If you think that person is "average", I weep for your intellect.
Tiger Ace wrote:A 1000$ that runs all games awesomely? You have GOT to be kiddin here.
Easy to do, it simply assume you be shopping lifting the remainder of your parts from Best Buy... Like your new CRT
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
A 1000$ that runs all games awesomely? You have GOT to be kiddin here.
You're right, I'm being very generous. The fact that you'd need an even more expensive computer to match a console's quality is simply even more telling to the next-gen console superiority.
