http://gamingtrend.com
December 20, 2014, 06:00:05 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: PS3 -- Keep it or sell it?  (Read 7829 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Kobra
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3240


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2006, 05:30:24 PM »

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 05:09:39 PM

Hetz, Aren't you the same person 8 months ago that was ripping the shit out of BR, saying it was done before it gets started, and would never equal the quality of HD-DVD? You are the John Kerry of gaming Hetz, and thats ok, because I do like you (and Kerry), but you are all over the place on stuff. You really come off like you are trying to sell your decision to jump on the PS3 to us, like you are justifying it, when you don't have to, you like it, God knows we know you like it, but you wanna ram it down our throats over and over. STOP.....We love ya Tongue, we will still love ya, regardless of whether we are salivating over the PS3, or not.

Just wear your "Hetz" colored glasses man..

Logged

All truth goes through three stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is
violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2006, 05:36:04 PM »

Quote from: Kobra on December 08, 2006, 05:27:32 PM

Sell it..   Rebuy it next year for less $$ with 10 times the game selection.

That plus reasons #3 and #4 on his original list.

Was anyone else lucky enough to duck the Hetz ePeen swung at their face? I did hear a couple of smacks during the commotion.
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
Kobra
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3240


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2006, 05:37:49 PM »

Quote from: fyedaddy on December 08, 2006, 05:36:04 PM

Was anyone else lucky enough to duck the Hetz ePeen swung at their face? I did hear a couple of smacks during the commotion.

Couple guys got hit.   :icon_sad:
Logged

All truth goes through three stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is
violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2006, 06:07:09 PM »

Quote
Bull. Check 20 random reviews at dvdtalk.com of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies and tell me there are a "ton" that look great. Even many of the VC-1 coded BR discs fail to meet the quality of HD-DVD titles.

That is not true at all. Go to a better site than DVD Talk and you will see the Warner VC-1 titles on Blu-Ray are EXACTLY the same as the HD-DVD's. Many of the Fox titles look just as good as the best that is out on HD-DVD. Ice Age 2, Kingdom of Heaven:DC, X-Men 3...they all look amazing. Also, The Wild from Disney is another stunner.

Blu-Ray got off to a very bad start and I called them out on that. Their first titles were absolute crap. Sony did a HORRIBLE job mastering them and it looked like they were rushed to the market. They have now gotten their shit together and are looking good. Blackhawk Down by Sony even looks great now. They are getting out some great looking titles now. Heck even when they use MPEG-2 now it looks good!

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/worldtradecenter.html

Quote
Lastly, 'World Trade Center' offers me the rare opportunity to do an immediate comparison between the Blu-ray and HD DVD versions, as they are being released simultaneously and Paramount sent us both in the same mailing for review. Despite the fact that the studio continues to use different codecs for each format -- Blu-ray goes MPEG-2, HD DVD gets VC-1 -- the image on both is very similar. My impressions are consistent with the differences I've been noticing between the two codecs. I tend to find MPEG-2 gives an image a slightly coarser, harder-edged look. Noise is a tad bit more pronounced versus VC-1, which gives off a smoother veneer. Again, though, these differences are minute enough that I suspect reactions could be different on other players and display devices. Based on 'World Trade Center' alone, I certainly wouldn't claim ]one codec superior over the other.

 icon_cool

Quote
Aren't you the same person 8 months ago that was ripping the shit out of BR, saying it was done before it gets started, and would never equal the quality of HD-DVD? You are the John Kerry of gaming Hetz, and thats ok, because I do like you (and Kerry), but you are all over the place on stuff.

I would rather be the John Kerry of the forum and be able to change my mind about things, than the George Bush and refuse to change my opinion no matter what.

Quote
God knows we know you like it, but you wanna ram it down our throats over and over. STOP.....We love ya , we will still love ya, regardless of whether we are salivating over the PS3, or not.

So listing reasons why I would keep it in a thread where he asks for opinions, is ramming it down your throat? Say what?  saywhat
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 06:13:47 PM by Hetz » Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15610


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2006, 06:12:26 PM »

Sell it. I sold mine. Didn't make as much as I thought I would, but did pretty well.

Prices may spike at christmas, but if word gets around that the console sucks (bait) then prices will continue to drop.

Or you could sell it to me for retail and I'll sell it. slywink
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11552


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2006, 06:14:30 PM »

Quote from: Knightshade Dragon on December 08, 2006, 04:32:01 PM

Quote from: msduncan on December 08, 2006, 04:30:37 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on December 08, 2006, 04:20:53 PM

I don't know how much of a factor it is, but don't forget that the current models have hardware emulation for backwards compatibility, while in the future the emulation will be done by software.

What exactly does that mean?

And where did you hear it?

It would mean that the current PS3s have a little baby PS2 inside of them running the backwards compatibility, but later they might scrap that method and have it all done by the PS3 processor.

I did a search, and this thread may be what I was remembering.  Reading it again, it sounds like it was just speculation spawning from the announcement of the hardware emulation, so just ignore my original post. smile
Logged
warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7325



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: December 08, 2006, 06:17:33 PM »

You know for a fact that you'll eventually be able to buy it later for less right?

Are you running out of games to play on your 360 and Wii now?  Probably not.

Sell that puppy or turn it into a grill!
Logged
jblank
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4215


Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned


View Profile WWW
« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2006, 06:23:01 PM »

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 06:07:09 PM

Quote
Bull. Check 20 random reviews at dvdtalk.com of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies and tell me there are a "ton" that look great. Even many of the VC-1 coded BR discs fail to meet the quality of HD-DVD titles.

That is not true at all. Go to a better site than DVD Talk and you will see the Warner VC-1 titles on Blu-Ray are EXACTLY the same as the HD-DVD's. Many of the Fox titles look just as good as the best that is out on HD-DVD. Ice Age 2, Kingdom of Heaven:DC, X-Men 3...they all look amazing. Also, The Wild from Disney is another stunner.

Blu-Ray got off to a very bad start and I called them out on that. Their first titles were absolute crap. Sony did a HORRIBLE job mastering them and it looked like they were rushed to the market. They have now gotten their shit together and are looking good. Blackhawk Down by Sony even looks great now. They are getting out some great looking titles now. Heck even when they use MPEG-2 now it looks good!

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/worldtradecenter.html

Quote
Lastly, 'World Trade Center' offers me the rare opportunity to do an immediate comparison between the Blu-ray and HD DVD versions, as they are being released simultaneously and Paramount sent us both in the same mailing for review. Despite the fact that the studio continues to use different codecs for each format -- Blu-ray goes MPEG-2, HD DVD gets VC-1 -- the image on both is very similar. My impressions are consistent with the differences I've been noticing between the two codecs. I tend to find MPEG-2 gives an image a slightly coarser, harder-edged look. Noise is a tad bit more pronounced versus VC-1, which gives off a smoother veneer. Again, though, these differences are minute enough that I suspect reactions could be different on other players and display devices. Based on 'World Trade Center' alone, I certainly wouldn't claim ]one codec superior over the other.

I would rather be the John Kerry of the forum and be able to change my mind about things, than the George Bush and refuse to change my opinion no matter what.

A better site than DVD Talk? Hmm, could be it be the one site that reviews movies that is about as biased towards BR as possible? Is that the site you're talking about? DVD Talk does an outstanding job reviewing movies. They are unbiased, thorough with their reviews, and most importantly, are intelligent about technology. What about them is worse than any other review site? Most people at AVS would tell you they are among the best, if not THE BEST, review site on the Internet. What is it about their reviews that wants you to automatically toss out them out? They are quite relevant and if their contention is that at this point Blu-Ray, for the most part, lags behind HD-DVD in overall picture quality among released movies, what is wrong with that? You admit BR got off to a horrid start and considering how many 25GB MPEG-2 movies are continuing to be released, it looks like the trend will continue, and HD-DVD will maintain the PQ edge.

For the record, I can show you reviews of many releases that say the BR version is barely better, or no better than their DVD counterpart, I cannot show you a single HD-DVD reviewed movie that says that. That speaks volumes, and you USED TO agree.

As to your second point, I never said you, or anyone else, had to be rigid in your opinions, but when you flip flop all over creation everytime you get a new shiny, flashy thing, it comes off as a little bit phony. Everyone here has changed their opinion on something from time to time, but you take hard stances, in many cases offering up EXCELLENT information to back up your claims, but then when you do a 180 on something like this, it cheapens what you said before and makes me scratch my head. I'm not saying you are lying about anything, but when someone said last week that it sounded like you were trying to justify your PS3 purchase, rather than simply debate the console, I agreed, because whether its your intention or not, thats how it comes off sometimes. No hard feelings bro.

With regards to your "  saywhat ", I think you know what I am talking about. Probably a dozen times, in various threads, you have gone on and on about the system, sort of trying to bait and provoke a bit with what you say, and you've been called on it, so don't act as though that comment of mine came out of nowhere, you know what I am referring to, and its NOT solely this threads contents.

I'm gonna back off now or risk potentially damaging our relationship. We've always gotten along well and the Playstation 3 game console is no reason to go to war.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 06:25:51 PM by jblank » Logged

XBOX 350 Gamertag = Phobos of Mars
PSN Gamertag = PhobosofMars
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: December 08, 2006, 06:42:34 PM »

Quote from: jblank
For the record, I can show you reviews of many releases that say the BR version is barely better, or no better than their DVD counterpart, I cannot show you a single HD-DVD reviewed movie that says that. That speaks volumes, and you USED TO agree.

Well, here you go then....

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/fullmetaljacket.html

Quote
Can I say that I've never been all that impressed with the visual look of 'Full Metal Jacket?' I always thought it was a rather ugly, drab film. Lacking in any bravura sense of style, and with a really grainy, soft, flat look. Unfortunately, even this new HD DVD release doesn't do much to reverse my opinion -- this is by far the weakest HD DVD release I've yet seen.

My biggest problems are the softness of the image and the wonky fleshtones. I don't know what Kubrick intended, so I'm only guessing here, but how come in some scenes everyone looks rather reddish, like a pig? Skintones frequently appear unnatural, as if the tint setting on my TV was wrong (wait, let me adjust my rabbit ears...) The image is also very soft, lacking in sharpness and depth. The master used for both the standard DVD release and this new HD DVD version appears to be the same, and it is weak, lacking the three-dimensional appearance that marks the best high-def.

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/u2rattleandhum.html

Quote
So, why is this transfer disappointing? While it is encoded in 1080p and does accurately represent the severely grainy, messy look of the film, the source material suffers unnecessarily from age and neglect. Dirt is frequent, as are blemishes, and even the vivid lighting of the color portions of the film look fuzzy and smeared. Video noise is frequent, noticeable and distracting, and add to that some pixelization, edge enhancement and inconsistent contrast and sharpness, and you have an image that hardly impresses. Detail is also predictably wanting, with only a few of the better black and white concert sequences boasting any true sense of depth. For example, the songs "Exit" and "Bad" look quite good, with rich, deep blacks and a nearly three-dimensional appearance. Sure, there is still some obvious grain, but the transfer during these numbers still looks good. Then, oddly, the big color concert sequences that make up most of the second half of the film look pretty crappy (aside from "With or Without You," which is a bit better than the rest). Shadow delineation is weak, colors unstable and overall the picture just looks more like a middling DVD release than great high-def.

OMG....how can this be???   icon_wink

My point is that there are weak HD-DVD titles as well as weak Blu-Ray titles. Yes, lots of the first Blu-Ray titles were horrible. Now though, they have done a complete 180. I dare you to watch Ice Age 2 on Blu-Ray and tell me that it looks like crap. Same goes with Kingdom of Heaven or a bunch of other new Blu-Ray titles.
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
jblank
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4215


Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned


View Profile WWW
« Reply #49 on: December 08, 2006, 06:43:46 PM »

For anyone that is basing their PS3 purchase on Blu-Ray:

http://news.digitaltrends.com/talkback158.html
Logged

XBOX 350 Gamertag = Phobos of Mars
PSN Gamertag = PhobosofMars
jblank
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4215


Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned


View Profile WWW
« Reply #50 on: December 08, 2006, 06:49:29 PM »

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 06:42:34 PM

Quote from: jblank
For the record, I can show you reviews of many releases that say the BR version is barely better, or no better than their DVD counterpart, I cannot show you a single HD-DVD reviewed movie that says that. That speaks volumes, and you USED TO agree.

Well, here you go then....

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/fullmetaljacket.html

Quote
Can I say that I've never been all that impressed with the visual look of 'Full Metal Jacket?' I always thought it was a rather ugly, drab film. Lacking in any bravura sense of style, and with a really grainy, soft, flat look. Unfortunately, even this new HD DVD release doesn't do much to reverse my opinion -- this is by far the weakest HD DVD release I've yet seen.

My biggest problems are the softness of the image and the wonky fleshtones. I don't know what Kubrick intended, so I'm only guessing here, but how come in some scenes everyone looks rather reddish, like a pig? Skintones frequently appear unnatural, as if the tint setting on my TV was wrong (wait, let me adjust my rabbit ears...) The image is also very soft, lacking in sharpness and depth. The master used for both the standard DVD release and this new HD DVD version appears to be the same, and it is weak, lacking the three-dimensional appearance that marks the best high-def.

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/u2rattleandhum.html

Quote
So, why is this transfer disappointing? While it is encoded in 1080p and does accurately represent the severely grainy, messy look of the film, the source material suffers unnecessarily from age and neglect. Dirt is frequent, as are blemishes, and even the vivid lighting of the color portions of the film look fuzzy and smeared. Video noise is frequent, noticeable and distracting, and add to that some pixelization, edge enhancement and inconsistent contrast and sharpness, and you have an image that hardly impresses. Detail is also predictably wanting, with only a few of the better black and white concert sequences boasting any true sense of depth. For example, the songs "Exit" and "Bad" look quite good, with rich, deep blacks and a nearly three-dimensional appearance. Sure, there is still some obvious grain, but the transfer during these numbers still looks good. Then, oddly, the big color concert sequences that make up most of the second half of the film look pretty crappy (aside from "With or Without You," which is a bit better than the rest). Shadow delineation is weak, colors unstable and overall the picture just looks more like a middling DVD release than great high-def.

OMG....how can this be???   icon_wink

My point is that there are weak HD-DVD titles as well as weak Blu-Ray titles. Yes, lots of the first Blu-Ray titles were horrible. Now though, they have done a complete 180. I dare you to watch Ice Age 2 on Blu-Ray and tell me that it looks like crap. Same goes with Kingdom of Heaven or a bunch of other new Blu-Ray titles.

Ok, wanna go to Defcon 3, we can go there:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=24110

Video:
The Full Metal Jacket HD DVD is encoded on disc in High Definition 1080p format using VC-1 compression. The movie's theatrical 1.85:1 aspect ratio has been slightly opened up to fill a 16:9 frame with negligible impact to the composition.

Let's begin by addressing the controversy about the movie's widescreen aspect ratio. Full Metal Jacket was composed for and played theatrically at 1.85:1. However, when his films were released on the VHS and laserdisc formats in the early 1990s, Stanley Kubrick instructed that they be presented open-matte, exposing the entire image on the camera negative regardless of his original framing intentions. In some films, this revealed previously hidden production flubs such as the helicopter rotors at the top of the frame early in The Shining. On other films like Dr. Strangelove, the full-frame presentation resulted in aspect ratio variances from shot to shot within scenes, since certain shots had hard mattes in place inside the camera while others didn't. Both of these artifacts would normally be invisible or at least lessened with proper widescreen matting. In almost all of the films, the looser 4:3 framing simply throws off the compositional balance of the entire movie, leaving too much empty headroom at the top of shots and dead space at the bottom.

Kubrick asked for the full-frame presentations because, to be perfectly blunt about it, he was a black bar hater and didn't like seeing letterboxing on his TV screen. He had some eccentric ideas about black bars affecting the viewer's perception of the movie. Unfortunately, the director died before the prevalence of widescreen televisions on the market, and we will never know if he might have eventually changed his opinion (William Friedkin used to be a black bar hater too, but now embraces widescreen on home video). This is especially problematic because it's lead to the common misconception that 4:3 was always the intended Original Aspect Ratio for these films, which is simply not the case. When it came time to release them on DVD, Warner Home Video believed that they were doing the right thing in honoring Kubrick's wishes by retaining the 4:3 framing, even for the "Digitally Remastered" editions released in 2000.

Film purists protested the full-frame decision, and now Warner is using these new High Definition releases as their excuse to finally unveil Full Metal Jacket in widescreen for the first time on home video. The widescreen framing is a marked improvement, restoring the proper sense of balance and proportion to the shots. Facial close-ups that were previously centered too low in the frame are now more effectively positioned (the golden rule for close-ups is that the actor's eyes should be placed no more than 1/3 of the way down from the top of the frame), and Kubrick's striking symmetrical compositions are better emphasized.

With all that out of the way, the other picture quality aspects of this disc are also likely to perplex and frustrate many viewers. The fact of the matter is that Stanley Kubrick had his own preferences for motion picture photography that were usually antithetical to the slick and glossy style that Hollywood has weaned us all on. The Full Metal Jacket cinematography is drab, hazy, flat, and grainy. That's the way it's meant to look, and to be honest it's often quite beautiful in its way. Especially toward the end of the film, as the soldiers are maneuvering through the burning remnants of a bombed-out city, much of the imagery is really lovely, and wouldn't be nearly as effective in the usual magazine-perfect Hollywood style. With a movie like this, you're not going to get popping colors or rich black levels with vibrant three-dimensional depth. Nevertheless, with the exception of some occasionally pinkish flesh tones, the color transfer here is accurate to the way the movie is supposed to look.

We do have a couple of issues with the disc's technical mastering, though. Warner authored this HD DVD disc from an older HD master originally transferred in 1080i format and only recently deinterlaced to 1080p in the studio. Unfortunately, at the time the master was struck, heavy vertical domain filtering was applied to reduce the appearance of aliasing and interlace artifacts on 1080i TVs. The process has the side effects of losing vertical resolution detail and introducing jagged artifacts and shimmer in diagonal lines when reassembled to 1080p or other progressive resolutions. It's still better than standard DVD, but not nearly as good as the best that High Definition can deliver, especially when combined with the movie's already soft photographic style.

The other noticeable problem is grain. Although for the most part well rendered to retain the appearance and texture of film grain, this is a rather grainy movie in parts and at times the compression can't keep up, rendering it as mosquito noise that clusters around specific objects in the frame (which real film grain would never do). The MPEG2 compressed Blu-ray also has this problem, to a somewhat greater extent. The difference between the two discs is slight, with a small advantage to the HD DVD.

Neither problem is severe enough that it should deter Kubrick fans who want to see Full Metal Jacket in its best presentation to date.


There is your explanation for that, and the summary, that it STILL is the best its ever been, and is STILL better than the Blu-Ray release.

For Rattle & Hum

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=22952

Video: Skim through any home theater enthusiast forum and you'll find ominous sounding posts like Avoid U2 Rattle and Hum like the Plague. It's certainly an unconventional choice for an early HD DVD release; I would've expected Paramount to whip out nothing but glossy eye candy to show off the strengths of the format in these early days, and Rattle and Hum is on the polar opposite end of that spectrum. This is by design an extremely grainy film and was shot almost entirely in black and white. The film opts for more of a spontaneous documentary feel instead of meticulously lighting each shot, and the result is that black levels are often anemic and contrast looks off. The 1.85:1 image tends to be murky and inconsistently soft, lacking the sort of crispness and clarity that viewers have come to expect from HD DVD.

Personally, I love it. The black and white photography gives Rattle and Hum a timeless appearance -- the short stretch in color looks especially dated by comparison -- and I see the gritty texture of the film grain as an effective stylistic choice, not a flaw that should be smoothened out. As mentioned a few paragraphs up, I'm not keen on every aspect of the execution, especially the way Bono's humorless, messianic posturing is captured on-stage, but as a concept, I find it much more engaging than the sterile, unimaginative video-based photography I'm used to seeing on cable high definition channels.

Rattle and Hum was encoded using MPEG-4 rather than the industry standard VC-1, and it's currently the only domestic HD DVD to do so. It's been theorized, admittedly by someone with a vested interest in Microsoft's VC-1 codec, that it's because current MPEG-4 encoders soften the image somewhat that it got the nod for Rattle and Hum as it helps mask some of the film's eccentricities. It'd be disappointing if there's any merit to that. Given this movie's unusual appearance, it's not really possible to use it to draw any definitive conclusions about how MPEG-4 stacks up against VC-1, but the fast camera whips and mild strobing don't result in any compression hiccups. Some stretches late in the movie seemed somewhat blocky, but I couldn't tell for sure if that was artifacting or just golf ball-sized film grain.

The movie was released on DVD seven years ago, and the master used for this HD DVD may also date all the way back to 1999, especially considering that the number of specks scattered throughout is much higher than I'd expect from a Paramount catalog title these days. If this is the case, a new transfer may result in a more attractive image, although this is and should remain a grainy film.

Coming up with a quick summary is a bit tricky. Strictly by comparison to the other HD DVD releases from Warner, Universal, and Paramount, Rattle and Hum scrapes the bottom of the list in terms of overall video quality. As far as how representative this transfer is of the best Rattle and Hum could look without damaging it with video noise reduction or betraying the intended look of the film, I'm not really in any position to know. This isn't a disc anyone would want to use to show off a home theater, though, and more casual U2 fans probably won't find the improvement over the current DVD to be dramatic enough to warrant spending another $25.

So it's better, but probably not MUCH better, and they also explain WHY it's not much better.


EDIT - For the record, I never said Blu-Ray releases looked like crap.

 



« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 06:53:14 PM by jblank » Logged

XBOX 350 Gamertag = Phobos of Mars
PSN Gamertag = PhobosofMars
Autistic Angel
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3685


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: December 08, 2006, 06:54:32 PM »

Is there a smiley or emoticon that replicates the image of looking into the Ark of the Covenant?

-Autistic Angel
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: December 08, 2006, 06:54:46 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on December 08, 2006, 06:14:30 PM


I did a search, and this thread may be what I was remembering.  Reading it again, it sounds like it was just speculation spawning from the announcement of the hardware emulation, so just ignore my original post. smile

You're right- PS2 emulation is indeed hardware emulation right now- the PS3 has an Emotion Engine chip inside of it.
Logged
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: December 08, 2006, 06:56:07 PM »

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 06:43:46 PM

For anyone that is basing their PS3 purchase on Blu-Ray:

http://news.digitaltrends.com/talkback158.html

Anyone that takes that article seriously....well you shouldn't get a PS3 anyway.  icon_wink

Nobody will be winning this war until next Christmas at the earliest and probably not even then. It will take a couple years at least.

The way I see it-

HD-DVD:

+ Cheaper
+ Has the DVD name
+ Has Universal firmly in it's camp
+ The Xbox 360 add-on is selling at a nice price
- Only available as an add-on for the 360, not built in which means not as many people will buy it
- Three major studios are refusing to support it
- The only major hardware manufacturer supporting it is Toshiba
- Only 30GB for Dual Layer Discs


Blu-Ray

+ Has Fox, Disney and Sony Pictures firmly in it's camp
+ Built-in the PS3, which means it will have a huge install base, pretty quickly
+ 50GB Dual Layer Discs
+ Has many hardware manufacturers supporting it
- More expensive
- Had initial quality issues that left a bad taste in peoples mouths
- Slow to come to market
- Hardware shortages
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
jblank
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4215


Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned


View Profile WWW
« Reply #54 on: December 08, 2006, 06:58:39 PM »

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 06:56:07 PM

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 06:43:46 PM

For anyone that is basing their PS3 purchase on Blu-Ray:

http://news.digitaltrends.com/talkback158.html

Anyone that takes that article seriously....well you shouldn't get a PS3 anyway.  icon_wink

Nobody will be winning this war until next Christmas at the earliest and probably not even then. It will take a couple years at least.

The way I see it-

HD-DVD:

+ Cheaper
+ Has the DVD name
+ Has Universal firmly in it's camp
+ The Xbox 360 add-on is selling at a nice price
- Only available as an add-on for the 360, not built in which means not as many people will buy it
- Three major studios are refusing to support it
- The only major hardware manufacturer supporting it is Toshiba
- Only 30GB for Dual Layer Discs


Blu-Ray

+ Has Fox, Disney and Sony Pictures firmly in it's camp
+ Built-in the PS3, which means it will have a huge install base, pretty quickly
+ 50GB Dual Layer Discs
+ Has many hardware manufacturers supporting it
- More expensive
- Had initial quality issues that left a bad taste in peoples mouths
- Slow to come to market
- Hardware shortages

 icon_lol I love it!!!! So Rob Enderle is null and void because he opposes BR? He did EXACTLY what you did, took a stand on the technology, and admitted he was wrong, and then corrected himself, but it's the DIRECTION he went on December 6 that invalidates his article. Okey dokey.

How's about this, is it valid? Was it fixed? WIll it be fixed?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/11/20/6034
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 07:00:38 PM by jblank » Logged

XBOX 350 Gamertag = Phobos of Mars
PSN Gamertag = PhobosofMars
Arkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6073


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: December 08, 2006, 07:00:23 PM »

Back on track... have you decided?

Honestly, if your wife would rather buy you stuff for Christmas, don't deprive her of that.  You can get a PS3 in a few months when they are more available.
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11552


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: December 08, 2006, 07:05:58 PM »

Quote from: Kevin Grey on December 08, 2006, 06:54:46 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on December 08, 2006, 06:14:30 PM


I did a search, and this thread may be what I was remembering.  Reading it again, it sounds like it was just speculation spawning from the announcement of the hardware emulation, so just ignore my original post. smile

You're right- PS2 emulation is indeed hardware emulation right now- the PS3 has an Emotion Engine chip inside of it.

The part that I now think was just rumor/speculation is that Sony plans to switch it from hardware to software emulation sometime in the future.
Logged
naednek
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4741



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: December 08, 2006, 07:09:35 PM »

Guys we already have 10+ threads about which console is better, lets stay on topic
Logged
whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7850


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: December 08, 2006, 07:10:05 PM »

Quote from: Autistic Angel on December 08, 2006, 06:54:32 PM

Is there a smiley or emoticon that replicates the image of looking into the Ark of the Covenant?

-Autistic Angel

No, but there damn well should be for topics exactly like this.
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: December 08, 2006, 07:10:16 PM »

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 06:58:39 PM

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 06:56:07 PM

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 06:43:46 PM

For anyone that is basing their PS3 purchase on Blu-Ray:

http://news.digitaltrends.com/talkback158.html

Anyone that takes that article seriously....well you shouldn't get a PS3 anyway.  icon_wink

Nobody will be winning this war until next Christmas at the earliest and probably not even then. It will take a couple years at least.

The way I see it-

HD-DVD:

+ Cheaper
+ Has the DVD name
+ Has Universal firmly in it's camp
+ The Xbox 360 add-on is selling at a nice price
- Only available as an add-on for the 360, not built in which means not as many people will buy it
- Three major studios are refusing to support it
- The only major hardware manufacturer supporting it is Toshiba
- Only 30GB for Dual Layer Discs


Blu-Ray

+ Has Fox, Disney and Sony Pictures firmly in it's camp
+ Built-in the PS3, which means it will have a huge install base, pretty quickly
+ 50GB Dual Layer Discs
+ Has many hardware manufacturers supporting it
- More expensive
- Had initial quality issues that left a bad taste in peoples mouths
- Slow to come to market
- Hardware shortages

 icon_lol I love it!!!! So Rob Enderle is null and void because he opposes BR? He did EXACTLY what you did, took a stand on the technology, and admitted he was wrong, and then corrected himself, but it's the DIRECTION he went on December 6 that invalidates his article. Okey dokey.

How's about this, is it valid? Was it fixed? WIll it be fixed?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/11/20/6034

That was a bug that was introduced with the latest firmware update. I am sure it will be fixed very soon. Anyway, I play all my Blu-Ray discs in 1080p so I had no idea about it.

Also, about the article. I am taking him to task for declaring the war over. That is just nuts. It's nowhere near over. Next Christmas? Maybe.
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: December 08, 2006, 07:11:38 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on December 08, 2006, 07:05:58 PM

Quote from: Kevin Grey on December 08, 2006, 06:54:46 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on December 08, 2006, 06:14:30 PM


I did a search, and this thread may be what I was remembering.  Reading it again, it sounds like it was just speculation spawning from the announcement of the hardware emulation, so just ignore my original post. smile

You're right- PS2 emulation is indeed hardware emulation right now- the PS3 has an Emotion Engine chip inside of it.

The part that I now think was just rumor/speculation is that Sony plans to switch it from hardware to software emulation sometime in the future.

Pretty sure I've seen some recent confirmation that the switch is indeed "the plan" but who knows if they'll be able to get the emulation good enough to justify it?  I'm not sure that after they put in all of the time (and consequently money) getting that to work that the EE chips won't be just as cheap if not cheaper to use. 
Logged
Arkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6073


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: December 08, 2006, 07:12:43 PM »

Damn it, stay on target!!!



[attachment deleted by admin]
Logged
jblank
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4215


Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned


View Profile WWW
« Reply #62 on: December 08, 2006, 07:13:54 PM »

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 07:10:16 PM

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 06:58:39 PM

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 06:56:07 PM

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 06:43:46 PM

For anyone that is basing their PS3 purchase on Blu-Ray:

http://news.digitaltrends.com/talkback158.html

Anyone that takes that article seriously....well you shouldn't get a PS3 anyway.  icon_wink

Nobody will be winning this war until next Christmas at the earliest and probably not even then. It will take a couple years at least.

The way I see it-

HD-DVD:

+ Cheaper
+ Has the DVD name
+ Has Universal firmly in it's camp
+ The Xbox 360 add-on is selling at a nice price
- Only available as an add-on for the 360, not built in which means not as many people will buy it
- Three major studios are refusing to support it
- The only major hardware manufacturer supporting it is Toshiba
- Only 30GB for Dual Layer Discs


Blu-Ray

+ Has Fox, Disney and Sony Pictures firmly in it's camp
+ Built-in the PS3, which means it will have a huge install base, pretty quickly
+ 50GB Dual Layer Discs
+ Has many hardware manufacturers supporting it
- More expensive
- Had initial quality issues that left a bad taste in peoples mouths
- Slow to come to market
- Hardware shortages

 icon_lol I love it!!!! So Rob Enderle is null and void because he opposes BR? He did EXACTLY what you did, took a stand on the technology, and admitted he was wrong, and then corrected himself, but it's the DIRECTION he went on December 6 that invalidates his article. Okey dokey.

How's about this, is it valid? Was it fixed? WIll it be fixed?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/11/20/6034

That was a bug that was introduced with the latest firmware update. I am sure it will be fixed very soon. Anyway, I play all my Blu-Ray discs in 1080p so I had no idea about it.

Also, about the article. I am taking him to task for declaring the war over. That is just nuts. It's nowhere near over. Next Christmas? Maybe.

But would you not at least agree that he makes some excellent points in there? I'm not declaring it over either, but the guy makes a good case for why it might be.
Logged

XBOX 350 Gamertag = Phobos of Mars
PSN Gamertag = PhobosofMars
jblank
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4215


Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned


View Profile WWW
« Reply #63 on: December 08, 2006, 07:14:35 PM »

Quote from: naednek on December 08, 2006, 07:09:35 PM

Guys we already have 10+ threads about which console is better, lets stay on topic

You're right, sorry about that. I'm stopping right.................................now.
Logged

XBOX 350 Gamertag = Phobos of Mars
PSN Gamertag = PhobosofMars
Arkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6073


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: December 08, 2006, 07:15:27 PM »

Quote from: jblank on December 08, 2006, 07:14:35 PM

Quote from: naednek on December 08, 2006, 07:09:35 PM

Guys we already have 10+ threads about which console is better, lets stay on topic

You're right, sorry about that. I'm stopping right.................................now.

If not, they will unleash the Final Countdown on you two!



[attachment deleted by admin]
Logged
IkeVandergraaf
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2784


RRoD FTL! F MS!


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2006, 07:18:19 PM »

I assume you bought it as a game machine, and not a Hi def movie machine.  If that assumption is correct, it doesn't make sense to keep it.  A $600 PS3 = >10 XBox 360 games.  And that doesn't take into account that you haven't bought and PS3 games.

I believe that a year into its life cycle, the 360 is finally starting to hit its stride.  Decent stable of games and they're starting to work out the hardware issues.  I don't think the PS3 is going to be worth owning for a year.
Logged

Gamertag = IkeV
I KNOW DEEP IN MY NMIND THAT THIS DISGUSTING WEBSITE THAT IS OBIVOUSLY OPERATED BY HIGHSCHOOL DROPOUTS LIVING PURPOSELESS AND JOBLESS LIVES
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: December 08, 2006, 07:19:24 PM »

Quote from: Autistic Angel on December 08, 2006, 06:54:32 PM

Is there a smiley or emoticon that replicates the image of looking into the Ark of the Covenant?

-Autistic Angel

Don't look at the light!!!!

« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 07:21:18 PM by Hetz » Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Arkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6073


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: December 08, 2006, 07:25:40 PM »

Quote from: Hetz on December 08, 2006, 07:19:24 PM

Quote from: Autistic Angel on December 08, 2006, 06:54:32 PM

Is there a smiley or emoticon that replicates the image of looking into the Ark of the Covenant?

-Autistic Angel

Don't look at the light!!!!



Man the image quality on that sucks... it must be from the Blu-Ray version....

.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Sorry couldn't resist.

 nod
Logged
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: December 08, 2006, 07:27:07 PM »

Ok, I laughed. Good one!

 icon_lol
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Calvin
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13895

President of G.R.O.S.S.


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: December 08, 2006, 07:50:01 PM »

All I konw is that trying to pick a fight over high definition televisions and playback, newer tech hardware, HD vs Blu-Ray with JBlank of all people is a particularly bad, bad idea. The man has mountains of the most updated information at his fingertips. Its like his primary hobby, and I have found that arguing against him often makes you/me/anyone look a tad silly.
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5391


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: December 08, 2006, 08:05:34 PM »

 Bring your own! deadhorse locked
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2993


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: December 08, 2006, 08:07:37 PM »

Did anyone ever answer my question about whether I can hook up either the PS3 or the 360 to one of the big dell monitors or not via DVI connection?
Logged
Dante Rising
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2336


View Profile
« Reply #72 on: December 08, 2006, 08:09:07 PM »

Msduncan-

Don't listen to any of us. Make a list of all the PS3 releases that will be available in the next 3 months. Mark down the ones you MUST have that are not available on the 360. Now take that list and decide if those games are worth a $650 investment.

Then take a look at all the games you plan to buy for the Wii and 360. Look at the time sink you'll invest into those systems. Now, are their enough games and TIME to warrant the purchase?


Good luck on your decision!
Logged
Calvin
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13895

President of G.R.O.S.S.


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: December 08, 2006, 08:09:43 PM »

Quote from: msduncan on December 08, 2006, 08:07:37 PM

Did anyone ever answer my question about whether I can hook up either the PS3 or the 360 to one of the big dell monitors or not via DVI connection?

Err is DVI equivalent to what would be the VGA output? Because if you are talking about what I think you are then you can absolutely hook up the 360 that way.
Logged
Pyperkub
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1575


View Profile
« Reply #74 on: December 08, 2006, 08:31:28 PM »

Quote from: msduncan on December 08, 2006, 08:07:37 PM

Did anyone ever answer my question about whether I can hook up either the PS3 or the 360 to one of the big dell monitors or not via DVI connection?

You'll need an HDMI-DVI cable for the PS3 (or the less efficient adapter), but other than that, no problem.  For the 360, you'll need to use the VGA connection.

PS. I vote sell - as stated on the 'other' forum, I think that there will be some technical glitches with the initial PS3's, like it has been shown that there were for the initial 360's.  dante makes a great point though.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 08:34:34 PM by Pyperkub » Logged

Pardon me, but that is a .... damn fine cup of coffee.
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9018


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #75 on: December 08, 2006, 08:33:36 PM »

Quote from: Pyperkub on December 08, 2006, 08:31:28 PM

Quote from: msduncan on December 08, 2006, 08:07:37 PM

Did anyone ever answer my question about whether I can hook up either the PS3 or the 360 to one of the big dell monitors or not via DVI connection?

You'll need an HDMI-DVI cable for the PS3 (or the less efficient adapter), but other than that, no problem.  For the 360, you'll need to use the VGA connection

Won't the PS3 freak out if it can't form the 'relationship' with the TV?  Does that still work through DVI?

gellar
Logged
Pyperkub
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1575


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: December 08, 2006, 08:35:58 PM »

Quote from: gellar on December 08, 2006, 08:33:36 PM

Quote from: Pyperkub on December 08, 2006, 08:31:28 PM

Quote from: msduncan on December 08, 2006, 08:07:37 PM

Did anyone ever answer my question about whether I can hook up either the PS3 or the 360 to one of the big dell monitors or not via DVI connection?

You'll need an HDMI-DVI cable for the PS3 (or the less efficient adapter), but other than that, no problem.  For the 360, you'll need to use the VGA connection

Won't the PS3 freak out if it can't form the 'relationship' with the TV?  Does that still work through DVI?

gellar

As long as the cable is of decent quality, the CP handshake should be seamless.  *Really* cheap knockoffs *may* have problems, as well as older spec DVI monitors, but I don't recall seeing anything about that.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 08:39:05 PM by Pyperkub » Logged

Pardon me, but that is a .... damn fine cup of coffee.
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #77 on: December 08, 2006, 08:38:48 PM »

Quote from: gellar on December 08, 2006, 08:33:36 PM

Quote from: Pyperkub on December 08, 2006, 08:31:28 PM

Quote from: msduncan on December 08, 2006, 08:07:37 PM

Did anyone ever answer my question about whether I can hook up either the PS3 or the 360 to one of the big dell monitors or not via DVI connection?

You'll need an HDMI-DVI cable for the PS3 (or the less efficient adapter), but other than that, no problem.  For the 360, you'll need to use the VGA connection

Won't the PS3 freak out if it can't form the 'relationship' with the TV?  Does that still work through DVI?

gellar

It works just fine with most HDMI-DVI adapters. You can get a pretty good one at Wal-Mart for like $30.

As for the 360, yeah you have to use the VGA connection. DVI is not the same as VGA.

Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #78 on: December 08, 2006, 09:07:57 PM »



« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 09:14:06 PM by unbreakable » Logged
msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2993


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: December 09, 2006, 02:35:14 PM »

Thanks for all the advice guys.

I'm still mulling this over and trying to decide what to do.   My wife says she genuinely doesn't mind if I choose for her to give that to me.   I don't think she's bluffing.    She's just been as busy as she could be this holiday season trying to get everything together for our trip while also getting the kids' christmas ready.

Anyway, that being said:   would it make a difference in anyone's advice if I said that I don't currently own a PS2?    I could fill the empty spaces during the long dead period for PS3 games with stuff like Kingdom Hearts and Colossus, and Bully....?    Just a thought.

I ponder this still.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.198 seconds with 104 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.047s, 2q)