@Trezzer

Quote:

select few (expensive)

You can use many cheap monitors, I provided many screenshots of PS3 games running on some cheap 1080p monitors.

Quote:

I'm sure you can figure out which one was the 360 number though ;)

I know your claims. I am more looking foward to the dozens of PS3 exclusives I actually know about, the bigger projects will likely find their way onto the PS3 eventually or Microsoft will have to arrange exclusivity deals.

Quote:

Well, it's not as if you have a choice anyway...

3rd party controllers from companies like Splitfish and Logitech, sure there is and will be plenty of personal choices to be made? Under Linux you should be able to use the XBox 360 controller, at least I heard something like that.

Quote:

Nice try. Most of the space is indeed taken up by FMV.

I don't know and I don't really care how much FMV the game uses, God of War 2 is the type of game I like to see on my primary gaming platform! I'm looking foward to God of War 3 for the PS3 in fulll 1080p.

Quote:

Why should you have to install games to harddrive?

Because it possible to achieve near arcade speeds, a harddrive is significantly faster than the loud DVD drive in your XBox 360 or the PS3's Blu-Ray drive, you will notice this when comparing the reading speed of harddrive installed game demos and the actual full versions which don't support HD installation.

Personally speaking if I have the space left, I will always make use of such provided features. If I need a larger drive, it's easy to upgrade.

Quote:

A quick estimate would be that 20% of one layer will have slightly lower read speeds than Blu-ray

Your estimates are wrong, I already provided you clear data earlier. Any 12x DVD drive reads dual layer DVD discs at maximum 8x speeds. The lowest reading speed of the inner rings is well below half the sustained reading speed of a 2x Blu-Ray drive.

You really want these things to be so, don't you? This still doesn't make them factual...

Last edited by MikeB on 25-Mar-2007 at 09:24 PM.

@Trezzer

Quote:

Please understand that I am first and foremost talking about 360 and PS3 as gaming machines. I consider VGA more practical than HDMI - that's just for my setup though. If I had a different set-up it might be different.

Still, HDMI *is* something Xbox 360 is missing. Hopefully the rumors are true and an Xbox 360 with HDMI will be available soon. HDMI is super-conventient once you get your system built around that. Parading words like HDMI 1.3 is just hype, but HDMI (1.1 onwards I guess) in general is good.

I think it is important, for a balanced discussion, that we acknowledge this is something Xbox 360 is missing that a gamer could benefit from. The thing is, unless PS3 pulls ahead in performance some way, there really isn't all that much Xbox 360 is missing at a far lower price and many benefits too.

Having just dished out for the PS3, I'm hoping at least they get out some real nice exclusives to justify this purchase. I'm not holding out my breath for a decisive performance victory any time soon, so the games will likely make or break this for me.

So far, I do like Motorstorm a lot.

@MikeB

Quote:

You can use many cheap monitors, I provided many screenshots of PS3 games running on some cheap 1080p monitors.

Do they really use HDMI/DVI without HDCP (or are you referring to some cheap screens that have HDCP)? I've read from many places that PS3 doesn't support HDMI/DVI output without HDCP. That would indeed be a weird restriction to make, perhaps it isn't so?

At least one guy in a Finnish forum is just battling this issue not getting a picture without HDCP.

Last edited by jtsiren on 25-Mar-2007 at 09:39 PM.

@jtsiren

HDCP support is required for the PS3 to output 1080p graphics, 720p/1080i should be possible with a non-compliant monitor.

In the past Trezzer always claimed you will not see any difference between 1080i and 1080p anyway. The above can only be an issue if the latter statement would be incorrect.

Last edited by MikeB on 25-Mar-2007 at 09:51 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 25-Mar-2007 at 09:51 PM.

Why use hdcp flag for games? I can understand copyrighted movies, but it makes zero sense to use such a restriction for a game.

@MikeB

1080i vs. 1080p is pretty moot for movie viewing (since 60 or less frames interlaced can manage 24 frames progressive). But I wouldn't quite agree with games since at 60 frames a second progressive, which a game (or non-film/movie based video material) could provide, you sort of loose half the information (half of each frame) when using an interlaced signal. Of course there is also the question of how well your system puts the interlaced signal back together, but for games I'd say p over i is preferable, for movies lesser issue.

Xbox 360 does 1080p nicely over component for games (that is what I use), but HDMI would be a plus.

Checking more on this now, I don't think, actually, that PS3 does any kind of video over HDMI without HDCP, not even 1080i. I hope that a future HDMI Xbox 360 won't have the same limitation.

@MikeB

Quote:

Under Linux you should be able to use the XBox 360 controller, at least I heard something like that.

Most likely. The wired controller works with both Windows and Mac OS X.

Quote:

I don't know and I don't really care how much FMV the game uses

But that Is the point though. No PS2 games have been even *near* maxing out a DVD-9 without going overboard with FMV. Heck, I doubt any have come close to maxing out a DVD-5 once you remove FMV. As FMV removes you from the in-game universe I consider it a bad thing in general. It's even sillier when FMV is done using the game's own engine - just to take up space.

Quote:

Because it possible to achieve near arcade speeds

Again: Why should I *have* to? I don't *want* to. Besides: Game load times really aren't very different when you load up a demo and compare it to the full game. I don't mind if the game uses the harddrive as a cache, but I really don't want to have to go the PC route to play my console games.

Quote:

I already provided you clear data earlier.

I did not see any clear data. Merely yours statements which I tend to take with a grain of salt. Nor have I been able to find affirmation or confirmation of the matter.

At least the pretty constant flow of "slower loading on PS3" seems to indicate that my theory is right (and since we're focusing on blu-ray/dvd disc access there's no reason to include HD installed games in the argument) - or all games are shipping on DVD-5 which means there's still a lot of room left for growth in data size...

Quote:

the loud DVD drive in your XBox 360

I'm sorry. When did you have the chance to listen to my 360's drive? FYI the noise levels in 360s vary quite a bit and mine's rather quiet. It's not silent, but it's not as loud as my PS2 was when I had that.

@jtsiren
Sure.. an HDMI 360 will be great. That's one additional possibility to an already great line-up.

@MikeB

Quote:

HDCP support is required for the PS3 to output 1080p graphics, 720p/1080i should be possible with a non-compliant monitor.

Not if you only have the option of DVI. You will get zero signal from a PS3 via HDMI if the monitor does not support HDCP. It's completely bonkers but that's the way it is. One can hope Sony rectifies this with a firmware update.

@MikeB

Quote:

In the past Trezzer always claimed you will not see any difference between 1080i and 1080p anyway.

Again you misquote me, but nothing new there. I said you won't see much difference - mostly during pans and even then some people most likely won't notice at all.

Oh, and
Quote:

The above can only be an issue if the latter statement would be incorrect.

is incorrect.

@jtsiren

Quote:

1080i vs. 1080p is pretty moot for movie viewing (since 60 or less frames interlaced can manage 24 frames progressive).

For a lot of games it will be too. There are quite a few 60 FPS games, but most are historically (unfortunately) 30 FPS. And yes, a progressive display will be better for 60 FPS, but try playing a 30/60 fps in 480i - there's still a noticeable difference.

@Tomas

Quote:

Why use hdcp flag for games? I can understand copyrighted movies, but it makes zero sense to use such a restriction for a game.

That's why

@jtsiren

The 1080i, which is the most my TV supplies makes Linux practically unusable because of screen flicker. MyTV is a cheap model now a few years old. I am now saving for a BenQ true HDTV LCD monitor.

_________________
Greg Schofield, Perth Australia

@GregS

Is it a CRT screen then? A TFT screen should automatically convert it to progressive (although a handful won't because of poor scalers).

@Trezzer

Quote:

Again you misquote me, but nothing new there. I said you won't see much difference - mostly during pans and even then some people most likely won't notice at all.

MikeB (2006):

"If you want to use your display for Blu Ray movies and desktop computing, getting a 1080p display is IMO well advised."

Trezzer:

"You've been seriously dipping into the kool-aid haven't you? The average user will have an extremely hard time telling the difference between 1080i and 1080p. *Extremely* hard time. In fact it's so difficult that experts with high-end equipment tend to have a hard time telling the difference."

OK, but you did make it sound like you need to be an expert to be able to tell any difference.

@MikeB

Yes, I was saying that experts had a hard time telling them apart (in fact I just read an article, before posting the quote above, describing two videophiles closely inspecting 1080i and 1080p side by side and they saw very little difference - in most places none).

As for desktop computing... what do you need > 30 FPS for? Word processing? The display will be very nice at 30 FPS and 60/120Hz for desktop usage. As for Blu-Ray movies - I believe there are no 1080p/60 movies shot yet? Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

Last edited by Trezzer on 26-Mar-2007 at 12:16 AM.

@Trezzer

CRT unfortunately, now three years old - a bargain at the time and one of the few that could even get close to HDTV standards at the time (without spending thousands of dollars).

LCD/Plasma is clearly the only way to go - anyhow CRT HDTV seems to have died - I cannot find any available (I was hoping for a another cheap option - but it looks now like LCDs and a hefty price tag - at least I will know it is a long term investment).

_________________
Greg Schofield, Perth Australia

Personally, as far as HDTV's go around here they are being had at bargain basement prices thanks to a company called Syntax-Brillian.com also known as Olevia..

I have two of these units in the family and they work great..

I see local computer outlets selling these for around $500 and they are quite affordable on the 26-32" range..

I think the value of these is quite amazing..

so for around $1000 you could get a PS3 and an LCD HDTV here..

Why would you want HDMI anyway, it propagates copy protection, doesn't work through daisychaining very well. Also there is HDCP available over DVI.. Just because it supports copy protection and 5.1 audio in one cable doesn't make it better..

Last edited by DonnieA2 on 26-Mar-2007 at 03:21 AM.

@Trezzer

Quote:

For a lot of games it will be too. There are quite a few 60 FPS games, but most are historically (unfortunately) 30 FPS. And yes, a progressive display will be better for 60 FPS, but try playing a 30/60 fps in 480i - there's still a noticeable difference.

Sure. A lot of us Europeans have been playing 25/50 fps interlaced for years of course. But considering that we are discussing the performance of these platforms, I think it is important to make the distinction between i and p when there is some difference. The difference between i and p is potentially at least somewhat larger on 60 fps games than 24 fps movies. Once Xbox 360 does HDMI (hopefully without HDCP for games) as well as VGA, component etc. it will provide quite versatile connection options.

I think a lot has gone into discussing which console, PS3 or Xbox 360, is the most consistent package. I used to think, like I've made the point many times, that PS3 wins this hands down. But then there has been many disappointments along the way that for me have taken away from that image: lack of fully functional scaling hardware, loosing various planned features (dual screen for instance), not fully 1080p as suggested, disappointing RSX performance, lesser backwards compatibility, no IR control, rumble not there (luckily I hope this will change), things like lesser battery support on the controller... PS3 could have been far more perfect than it turned out to be. Some of these things are "wrong" on the Xbox 360 as well of course, but that just evens things out. Neither are close to perfect.

Coming back to comparing these packages for the gamer, I still get back to the point that Xbox 360 is too noisy and it lacks HDMI. Once these are rectified, for a gamer, a lot of good things shine: Live will continue to lead the pack, the controllers and other gaming accessories are excellent, etc. I think it is turning out to be a very wholesome package for a gamer. It isn't an elegant movie machine I'll give you that (and I doubt it will ever be), but as a gaming box I think it has proven itself quite well. The initial feeling with the PS3 is that it may be a overall quite capable general-use box, but so far it doesn't feel as "tight" for a gamer as the Xbox 360 does.

Sony streched themselves wider on the PS3 than Microsoft, who have historically been more appealing for the hardcore gamer anyways. PS3 tries to be so many things at once (and many of these things being "not quite there" at least not yet) where as I see the Xbox 360 first and foremost a games machine and things like the controller (be that the controller itself or batteries etc.) really start to make a difference for me. The Xbox 360 has gained a lot of appreciation from me during this process. It is far more elegant for what I use it for (games), than I guess many people give it credit for.

Getting the PS3 hasn't changed that feeling, all I'd take from it is still the HDMI and perhaps less noise (PS3 isn't quiet either). I don't watch movies or digital photos, surf the Internet or whatever on a gaming console nor will I want to run Linux. OTOH, things like ergonomic controllers, exchangeable batteries, rumble are important to me and in these Xbox 360 takes the cake (nice first-party wheel as a bonus). It will have to take a performance victory for PS3 (which is still possible of course!) for me to start buying multi-platform games for it instead of Xbox 360.

Edit: Just want to say - don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the first few days with PS3. I have mostly played Motorstorm which is certainly a worthy game.

Last edited by jtsiren on 26-Mar-2007 at 07:55 AM.

@Trezzer

Quote:

strongly doubt it would fit the one spot I have available: where the old Xbox used to be

A picture may speak louder than words:



I did not put the XBox 360 inside this small cabinet, because of the huge additional transformator and two big rigid cables sticking outside of the back of the device. Also IMO the device doesn't look nice in there.

Quote:

Non-sense. Of course they would if they had to. Mass Effect fits on a single dvd.

PS3 game developers don't need to worry about making storage sacrifices, in the end developers will have more freedom to create the content they want to create. I think the Blu-Ray benefit of more storage will be more evident with regard to PS3 exclusive software compared to multi-platform developers which need to worry about the the XBox 360 capabilities while designing their games.

@MikeB

Quote:

PS3 game developers don't need to worry about making storage sacrifices, in the end developers will have more freedom to create the content they want to create.

I really don't think anyone is disputing more storage is better. It remains to be seen if this will have any material effect as to what kind of games will be available for either platform. I guess the sentiment is mostly that even the DVD space is currently quite often more than enough. It is not like most games come on many DVDs or something.

It would definitely be better if Xbox 360 would have had a HD drive, sure. This is something PS3 wins. It just remains to be seen if it makes a difference in the end. Same thing can be said of the better development tools on Xbox 360. Who knows how much of a difference will that eventually result in, if any.

I certainly am not advocating that the DVD drive on Xbox 360 is better than the BD drive on PS3. It might be slightly faster in real-world scenarios (at least it feels like it!) but space- and quiet-wise the PS3 wins easily.