hahaha this made me lol

[tylorwalls]

from Interview

I can understand why there's no HDMI cable in the PS3 box because it is still reasonably uncommon for TV owners, but why no component cable? One of your competitors managed to ship with a dual Composite/Component cable. It seems like a cheap omission given the quality of the rest of the package.

HDMI is growing interface and there's also component, S-video and composite all available. We thought that the consumers would choose. There's obviously a cost factor and we thought "Why build up the cost?"

lol. why add the bluray then?

 

[Shiftfallout]

from Interview




lol. why add the bluray then?

gee, another biased person looking for find anything he can, no matter how illogical, to make another system look bad.

Edu-ma-cation time 4 u.

1. http://www.cnet.com.au/games/hardware/0,239029706,240054823,00.htm
Xbox 360 has no HDMI support. Microsoft is released another version of the xbox to make up for this. Even then its not able to utilize it fully.

2. The wii isnt HD.

3. The PS3 is HD but requires you to purchase HDMI cables if you want them to work with newer TVs. BIG DEAL. Why add blue ray? Blue ray holds more data. Its not just for better graphics. And its not uncommon to sell adapter cables seperately.

All the systems requires you to buy accessories to take full advantage of their systems. Wii with its numchucks for example. At least the PS3 Can support HD fully.

Nice try. You come close to trolling.

 

[Major Tom]

OK. Sonys PS3 is not a very good system. It won't win the console war.

 

[Shiftfallout]

OK. Sonys PS3 is not a very good system. It won't win the console war.

why is it not a very good system?

It supports HD quality, it has one of the best GPUs on the market, It uses the most advanced cell CPU seen on a console, It has Blue Ray which disks hold 50gigabytes worth of data, its controller has sixaxis motion control, the most advanced firmware/OS for any of the consoles to date, and its a completely open ended system which encourages the mod community to make things for it.
The wii remote works on the PS3, the Xbox controller works on the PS3, the PS3 controller works on PCs as well, The system runs linux, users can create their own software for the PS3 and share it with other users...

now tell me, why is it not a very good system?

A test done by stanford shows the power of the PS3 CPU:

Well we knew that the Cell processor -- which makes the PS3 a pretty cheap supercomputer, along with its myriad other roles -- was well suited to the task of crunching numbers for Stanford's Folding@Home project, but there's no way we could have expected the unbelievable impact made by 35,000 some gamers in only a few days. In what can only be described as a total hijacking of the leaderboard, PS3s are currently accounting for 734 of the 990 teraflops Folding processes at peak capacity; in other words, Cell processors have more than tripled the project's power even though they only account for around 13% of the total machines grinding away at any given time. Now keep in mind that Sony's boxes have only been pitching in since midweek, and with tonight's Sunday Night Foldathon -- an event which encourages PS3 owners to simultaneously run the app while they sleep -- we should see even more impressive performance as the slumbering masses donate record numbers of cycles. This would also probably be a good time to direct you towards instructions for joining Team Engadget, as well as to suggest that even though this is primarily PS3-centric, that shouldn't stop other PC-equipped team members and owners of even bigger supercomputers (we're looking at you, IBM) from participating.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/03/25/ps3s-already-pwning-folding-home-leaderboard-tonights-foldatho/

Seriously, get your facts straight. Its the best system on the market technically speaking. Thats why its so damn expensive.

Now if you are referring to its game selection, style.. or what not. well thats all subjective now isnt it?

ADD: you might find this interesting, as we dont know how accurate it is. http://www.engadget.com/2007/03/25/sonys-playstation-3-selling-faster-at-release-than-xbox-360/

 

[tylorwalls]

lol @ shiftfallout first

second, I'm pointing out the fact that they could have very easily made the ps3 with an optional bluray drive, but because sony yet again needs to find a way to mass market its new unnecessary media standard, it makes it a mandatory thing. The amount of storage offered on the media isn't make or break for the quality of the titles. (ex. x360) The fact that he said why build up the cost with that in mind makes me laugh. Sony FTW!?!?! not so much

 

[Shiftfallout]

lol @ shiftfallout first

second, I'm pointing out the fact that they could have very easily made the ps3 with an optional bluray drive, but because sony yet again needs to find a way to mass market its new unnecessary media standard, it makes it a mandatory thing. The amount of storage offered on the media isn't make or break for the quality of the titles. (ex. x360) The fact that he said why build up the cost with that in mind makes me laugh. Sony FTW!?!?! not so much

nice try.

They could NOT have easily made a console with optional blue ray. The ammount of storage offered for the media is one of the main draws for developers who dont want to be as restricted to make a game with blue ray in mind. Next gen games, as seen on PCs are taking up upwards of 10 gigs per game and the ammount rises. To make a large world like Vangard saga of heroes, one must have 20 gigs free. So, to push beyond whats offered now, the more storage a developer has to work with, the more content and graphics/audio/video he can cram into a game. Make sense? Making blue ray optional would only mean that you would limit the games that could work on the cheaper system. Thats not acceptable and no one would buy it.

 

[retro_joe]

lol @ shiftfallout first

second, I'm pointing out the fact that they could have very easily made the ps3 with an optional bluray drive

having a blueray drive optional is idiotic, the games are all on blueray discs(50gig)... you planning on spanning games across 6 or MORE DVD's(oh the fun of THAT)...

If you complain that you cant afford a Bently/Roles Royce, buy yourself a Ford. ut:

 

[tylorwalls]

Thats not acceptable and no one would buy it.

Spot on! Seeing as the 360 hasn't sold too well without it, and the games on it look just as good/better than the ps3. It's definately underselling, you're right.

 

[retro_joe]

Spot on! Seeing as the 360 hasn't sold too well without it, and the games on it look just as good/better than the ps3. It's definately underselling, you're right.

You only compare because other consoles have been out longer than a PS3 :crazy:

 

[Shiftfallout]

Spot on! Seeing as the 360 hasn't sold too well without it, and the games on it look just as good/better than the ps3. It's definately underselling, you're right.

what are you smoking? You misused my quote by far and you know it. No one would buy the PS3 that had no blue ray OVER the one that did. Lets twist quotes around shall we?

 

[Shiftfallout]

You only compare because other consoles have been out longer than a PS3 :crazy:

Theres an article floating around that announces that the PS3 is selling more with their launch period than the 360 did.

 

[tylorwalls]

How am I misusing it? You're saying that a console without a "next generation storage media" would be inable to produce large quality games and be successful, yet the 360 is without one, its outselling the hell out of the ps3. Therein lies the point! GASP! PEOPLE ARE CHOOSING THE 360 OVER THE ps3 EVEN WITHOUT A HD-DVD DRIVE!

 

[tylorwalls]

and by "optional bluray drive" I mean external, just so you know

 

[tylorwalls]

Theres an article floating around that announces that the PS3 is selling more with their launch period than the 360 did.

link please? I'd LOVE to see that.

 

[retro_joe]

link please? I'd LOVE to see that.

Links to numbers on the pic.