PS3 a mistake

[All this Crap]

 

As I've said plenty of times in the past, Sony should have just cancelled the ps3, went back to the drawing board and released the ps4... or otherwise they should have just delayed the ps3 and reworked the following:

 

1.  A competitive online service.

2.  Better dev support.

3.  Lower production costs.

4.  Ditch BR and use HD DVD instead.

 

Unfortunately, none of those were ever going to happen when a company becomes so blindingly arrogant as Sony has.  They spent a great deal of money on R&D and production of BR... and for what?  Why take such a gamble on creating your own proprietary format when you would be much better off embracing another format instead of trying to compete against it?  It's financial suicide.

 

And again with the cell processor, they should have put a much greater emphasis on developing a sound sdk for this bleeding edge heap of silicon.  It's obvious most devs are put off by the current situation.

How would using HD-DVD lower the price of the PS3? This post of yours just goes to show that you just hate Sony. For no good reason. If Toshiba had Blu-ray and Sony had HD-DVD which they were using in the PS3....YOU WOULD SAY THE opposite.

 

Why do you think it was Sony that took the gamble? It couldn't be Toshiba, no way....even if that is true......they tried working out a deal, they didn't agree....but I know you will blame Sony for that..

Edited January 23, 2007 by All this Crap

[SIP YEK NOD]

what i love about this high-def format war is that they couldn't agree on a disk standard, but were able to agree in a case-size standard. what wonderful people.

 

as for myself, i bought the HD-dvd drive, i can buy any high-def movie that comes out and play it. no matter which format loses, the other player isn't leaving my cabinet. it only cost 400 bucks to boot. 200 for sony's forced adaptation, 200 for microsofts optional.

 

in the end i am sure both formats will fall to digital distribution, but in the here and now, i am the win either way.

[GTA3Freak-2001]

The PS3 would of been cheaper with HD-DVD integrated since dedicated players are cheaper then their Blu-Ray counterparts no? Then again if Sony did choose HD-DVD they would of also been smart enough to make the HD-DVD a optional addition to the console. Heck they could of done that with Blu-Ray but noo they wanted to cram it in the PS3 so that in turn they also crammed it into the market as clearly Sony want the format to succeed.

[All this Crap]

 

as for myself, i bought the HD-dvd drive, i can buy any high-def movie that comes out and play it. no matter which format loses, the other player isn't leaving my cabinet. it only cost 400 bucks to boot. 200 for sony's forced adaptation, 200 for microsofts optional.

 

You have both an HD-DVD and Blu-ray (PS3 or stand-alone) if I understand correctly?

 

 

The PS3 would of been cheaper with HD-DVD integrated since dedicated players are cheaper then their Blu-Ray counterparts no? Then again if Sony did choose HD-DVD they would of also been smart enough to make the HD-DVD a optional addition to the console. Heck they could of done that with Blu-Ray but noo they wanted to cram it in the PS3 so that in turn they also crammed it into the market as clearly Sony want the format to succeed.

 

Microsoft was going to include an HD-DVD drive for the 360 but they did not since it would increase cost and they wouldn't have been the first to hit the market.

[SIP YEK NOD]

as for myself, i bought the HD-dvd drive, i can buy any high-def movie that comes out and play it. no matter which format loses, the other player isn't leaving my cabinet. it only cost 400 bucks to boot. 200 for sony's forced adaptation, 200 for microsofts optional.

 

You have both an HD-DVD and Blu-ray (PS3 or stand-alone) if I understand correctly?

i have the 360 hd-dvd drive and the ps3 as a blue-ray player

[All this Crap]

as for myself, i bought the HD-dvd drive, i can buy any high-def movie that comes out and play it. no matter which format loses, the other player isn't leaving my cabinet. it only cost 400 bucks to boot. 200 for sony's forced adaptation, 200 for microsofts optional.

 

You have both an HD-DVD and Blu-ray (PS3 or stand-alone) if I understand correctly?

i have the 360 hd-dvd drive and the ps3 as a blue-ray player

So you have the best of both worlds....well you have no reason to worry it looks like.

[GTA3Freak-2001]

Microsoft was going to include an HD-DVD drive for the 360 but they did not since it would increase cost and they wouldn't have been the first to hit the market.

Well that's true yes, that might of been better because we may have had a more interesting release with both consoles being released close together. As they say competition is good and usually rewards the consumer in the end. Still aren't HD-DVD Players cheaper then Blu-Ray ones? Meaning the 360 with inbuilt HD-DVD drive would of been more expensive but still cheaper then the PS3?

[All this Crap]

Microsoft was going to include an HD-DVD drive for the 360 but they did not since it would increase cost and they wouldn't have been the first to hit the market.

Well that's true yes, that might of been better because we may have had a more interesting release with both consoles being released close together. As they say competition is good and usually rewards the consumer in the end. Still aren't HD-DVD Players cheaper then Blu-Ray ones? Meaning the 360 with inbuilt HD-DVD drive would of been more expensive but still cheaper then the PS3?

If it would be cheaper it wouldn't be by much because you have to consider that the 360 without a HD-DVD drive is being sold for $399.99 which is only a $100 less comparing it to the closest configured PS3.

 

I think it would have been more like (if Microsoft wanted to be less than Sony) $450 and $550....or $350 and $550 if Microsoft decided to not include the hard drive with the core but I assume they would have if they released the 360 later only to compete with the PS3's configuration. Not saying they couldn't have been cheaper but Microsoft would have taken a bigger loss and I don't think they wanted to with the 360 seeing as they lost $4 billion with the Xbox.

[Exkabewbikadid]

If Toshiba had Blu-ray and Sony had HD-DVD which they were using in the PS3....YOU WOULD SAY THE opposite.

 

Why do you think it was Sony that took the gamble? It couldn't be Toshiba, no way....even if that is true......they tried working out a deal, they didn't agree....but I know you will blame Sony for that..

What the f*ck is it with you? In the 90s, Toshiba et al were behind DVD and Sony was behind MultiMedia Compact Disc. Sony (and Phillips) dropped their fomrat and and agreed with Toshiba's DVD format.

 

But Sony just doesn't give up. Instead of embracing the TRUE successor to DVD aka HD DVD, they go out of their way to once again try to rule the next format. It's just stupid to go against those who had already established a successful format with consumers. I suppose Sony's game plan was to piggyback their format in on the PS3, thinking the PS3 would sell like mad based on the success of the previous two consoles. So far, not so good.

 

And yes, I most certainly would blame Sony for failing to agree on the next format. Just look at how restrictive they are trying to be with BR, for example, no porn. When you're trying to win a format war, the last thing you would want to do is try to impose some kind of moral obligation on the world. That's about as retarded as a car company refusing to sell it's cars to anyone under 25 because they fear younger people might speed more and they don't want their cars associated with speeding.

[Jordan]

Edited January 23, 2007 by Jordan

[DexX]

 

Wow, doesn't anyone remember the PS2 launch? Everyone said it was doomed.

The exact same sh*t is being said during the PS3 launch.

they did? not around here they didn't.

 

People said the PS2 was too expensive,

again, no. $300 dollars wasn't ostentatious, and many other consoles had launched before at that price, or more expensive (the Saturn launched at $400, and the 3do @ $600-700, if i remember correctly. note that both consoles died in the market).

 

 

didn't have enough good games at launch and that using DVD as the new format was suicide. Regardless of all the naysayers, how'd the PS2 do in the long run?

Dvd wasn't owned by sony though, and was becoming popular before the system came out. Sony was adapting to a widely recognized new format, not forcing their own on everyone. Pretty big difference.

They also had another, ignored advantage - no competition. A one year leap on the xbox and gamecube goes a long way, especially when the only competition at the time, Dreamcast, gets axed halfway to that point.

 

 

Also, comparing 1st generation PS3 titles against 2nd generation 360 titles is just stupid. Developers already have a grasp on the 360 whereas the PS3 is still new and difficult to develop for. We'll probably see what the PS3 will be capable of later on next year at the earliest, not at launch.

that doesn't matter. consumers compare what is out when they make the purchasing decisions, if thats they have to work with then so be it. Arguably, sony could have shipped dev kits sooner if they could have made up their mind on what the system was supposed to be.

[Timpo]

so if I get all this right, I shouldn't be buying a PS3 anymore?

[3niX]

Well...

 

And yes, I most certainly would blame Sony for failing to agree on the next format. Just look at how restrictive they are trying to be with BR, for example, no porn. When you're trying to win a format war, the last thing you would want to do is try to impose some kind of moral obligation on the world. That's about as retarded as a car company refusing to sell it's cars to anyone under 25 because they fear younger people might speed more and they don't want their cars associated with speeding.

Whoa whoa whoa!

Sony didnt restrict porn. The porn industry decided to support the HD- DVD not the other way around.

Also Blu-ray is supported by well-known film companies (such as Columbia and Sony pictures) which produce movies for general public.

 

The porn industry alone wont win the format war.

I also might have to mention that the example you brought up is horrible (no offence).

 

Furthermore ...

 

But Sony just doesn't give up. Instead of embracing the TRUE successor to DVD aka HD DVD, they go out of their way to once again try to rule the next format. It's just stupid to go against those who had already established a successful format with consumers. I suppose Sony's game plan was to piggyback their format in on the PS3, thinking the PS3 would sell like mad based on the success of the previous two consoles. So far, not so good.

I have to disagree... the console war isnt over yet... hell... it has barely started. And you are allready marking the winners. Eve though I have to say that I too favor HD-DVD atm. because there have been some reports of BD still beeing a bit buggy.

BUT trying to invent new technology isnt stupid.

Only thing stupid here (IMO) is the fact that it is not optional on the console.

 

I respect your thoughts but you are just acting too close-minded about some things.

[Exkabewbikadid]

 

Whoa whoa whoa!

Sony didnt restrict porn. The porn industry decided to support the HD- DVD not the other way around.

You need to actually know what's going on before you bother replying. Sony DOES NOT WANT porn on blu-ray. Period. Just search "Sony + anti-porn" and you'll find plenty of articles on the subject like this one. The porn industry chose HD DVD because there is really no other choice.

 

 

I have to disagree... the console war isnt over yet... hell... it has barely started. And you are allready marking the winners.

I marked no winners. Stop letting your bias blindside my straightforward observation.

 

 

BUT trying to invent new technology isnt stupid.

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid, not to mention arrogant and costly. The whole idea behind creating a format is to create a STANDARD that all companies can easily adhere to. Sony lost Betamax to VHS, MCD to DVD, and Blu-ray has a long ways to go. It's obvious from observing history that they'd be better off combining efforts and not dividing them.

 

[All this Crap]

BDA Association announced that they are willing to work with any content providers. Vivid is releasing on Blu-ray. Maybe it's you who actually needs to know what's going on.

 

"The Blu-ray Disc Association, which oversees the licensing of the technology, says it has not banned anyone from using the format. "We look forward to working with any content providers interested in providing their audience with the best possible high definition home entertainment experience," the group said in a statement."

 

"One major adult film company, Vivid Video, plans to release a sequel to the classic "Debbie Does Dallas" in both Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD this spring, its first-ever high definition video offering. A spokesman for the company, Shylar Cobi, declined to comment on how Vivid would gain access to stampers, but said he does not expect it to be a problem."

 

Sony just won't be the one manufacturing the discs for those companies. There are other companies that support Blu-ray you know other than just Sony.

 

Link: http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/01/19/...LC-TB2007-01-19

 

'Marty Gordon, vice chair of the BDA US Promotions Committee and vice president of the Philips Electronics Hollywood Office: "There is not a prohibition against adult content. The BDA welcomes the participation of all companies interested in using and supporting the format, particularly those from the content industry. We look forward to working with any content providers interested in providing their audience with [the] best possible high definition home entertainment experience."'

 

Link: http://www.stereophile.com/news/011507pron/

 

Sony is the leading supporter of Blu-ray. They are other companies who support it too. Why hate just Sony? Oh wait, I forgot.....you just hate Sony.

 

 

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid, not to mention arrogant and costly. The whole idea behind creating a format is to create a STANDARD that all companies can easily adhere to. Sony lost Betamax to VHS, MCD to DVD, and Blu-ray has a long ways to go. It's obvious from observing history that they'd be better off combining efforts and not dividing them.

 

Sony is not the only company backing Blu-ray. As a matter of fact, more hardware companies back BD over HD DVD. Who is working against who?

 

HD DVD has Toshiba, NEC and one other company. Microsoft does not make hardware.....360 and Zune are the exceptions...but even the technology inside those is made by others....basically three companies.

 

BD has Sony as the biggest supporter and Panasonic, Samsung, Hitachi, Lite On...just check blu-ray.com, there are a lot more.

 

 

I marked no winners. Stop letting your bias blindside my straightforward observation.

 

Straightforward? Haha, don't make me laugh. You have negative bias against blu-ray because Sony is the biggest supporter it has. What do you like about Sony? Answer that please....

Edited January 23, 2007 by All this Crap

[3niX]

Well...

 

Sony has announced that they are willing to work with any content providers. Vivid is releasing on Blu-ray. Maybe it's you who actually needs to know what's going on.

I was about to mention it because it was refferenced in the news he provided.

 

This makes me believe that Vivid, the one company that is still promising a Blu-ray title won't get very far with it. It may just not be aware of the wall they are about to hit, or it may have a backdoor. One person in the booth said that it was a done deal and the disks were coming out. There was no spokesperson available for official comments however, but there were banners with the Blu-Ray logo on them in the booth. I guess we will see when Debbie Does Dallas Again comes out.

 

 

I marked no winners. Stop letting your bias blindside my straightforward observation.

Maybe I did understand you a bit wrong... I apologize if I did so.

But I wasnt biased.

 

I suppose Sony's game plan was to piggyback their format in on the PS3, thinking the PS3 would sell like mad based on the success of the previous two consoles. So far, not so good.

I suppose I didnt read the very last sentence with much attention... so i guess it was my mistake.

I apologize for that.

 

 

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid, not to mention arrogant and costly. The whole idea behind creating a format is to create a STANDARD that all companies can easily adhere to. Sony lost Betamax to VHS, MCD to DVD, and Blu-ray has a long ways to go. It's obvious from observing history that they'd be better off combining efforts and not dividing them.

Working against the successor?

Please explain!

...

[AndyGanteks]

had to laugh on that one

[Moth]

had to laugh on that one

ah no you didn't it has already been on the forums for awhile and some fanboy made it.

 

and all of this crap i agree with everything youu said

[E.A.B.]

had to laugh on that one

ah no you didn't it

ah, yes he did

 

He can laugh at what he wants

[VideoPoker]

 

they did? not around here they didn't.

Okay.

 

 

again, no. $300 dollars wasn't ostentatious, and many other consoles had launched before at that price, or more expensive (the Saturn launched at $400, and the 3do @ $600-700, if i remember correctly. note that both consoles died in the market).

 

Perhaps the reason I noticed the price often being complained about was because here in Canada, the price was $450, which was not equivalent to $299 USD at the time.

 

 

Dvd wasn't owned by sony though, and was becoming popular before the system came out. Sony was adapting to a widely recognized new format, not forcing their own on everyone. Pretty big difference.

 

They were still criticized for the adoption of DVD as many people considered the addition a costly and relatively pointless ad-on (especially considering most, if not all of the first generation PS2 games were still on CD-ROM).

 

 

They also had another, ignored advantage - no competition. A one year leap on the xbox and gamecube goes a long way, especially when the only competition at the time, Dreamcast, gets axed halfway to that point.

 

Excellent point.

 

 

that doesn't matter. consumers compare what is out when they make the purchasing decisions, if thats they have to work with then so be it. Arguably, sony could have shipped dev kits sooner if they could have made up their mind on what the system was supposed to be.

 

Sure they can compare them for whatever reason, such as deciding to purchase the system, but using them to argue whether one system is actually better than another is still stupid in any light.

 

 

P.S. Wow, Jordan yet again adding nothing to a topic. Astounding.

Edited January 24, 2007 by VideoPoker

[jking]

holy crap guys, the PS3 has been out for a little over 2 months and your talking about the ps3 being dead, give me a f*ckin break!!! Let it get some titles that'll blow the 360 outta the water, then critisize! The ps3's low sales IS because of the ps3's shortage at release!

 

 

PS3 4 life!!!

[MMFF]

Agreed. It looks like there is some good games coming out in March. I can't wait.

[TheDude5000]

holy crap guys, the PS3 has been out for a little over 2 months and your talking about the ps3 being dead, give me a f*ckin break!!! Let it get some titles that'll blow the 360 outta the water, then critisize! The ps3's low sales IS because of the ps3's shortage at release!

 

 

PS3 4 life!!!

Shortage? Try 300k units left unsold!

 

And looking at the horrible launch line-up consisting of regurgitated games I played months earlier, horrible 3rd party flops(Gundam: Crossfire), and one ok shooter, it all makes sense.

 

I just hope we get MGS 4 and other such titles this year, because I actually want a PS3.

 

The thing is:

 

Last gen, Sony had a huge year long advantage, a modest price, and a huuuuuuuuuge library of games. That's not true this gen. 360 launched first, it's getting tons of exclusives(some of them being taken away from PS3), some great multi-plat games which used to be exclusive(GTA 4, RE 5), and it's library is growing quite nicely, with many huge games still on the horizon. PS3 doesn't have the exclusivity factor PS2 had, and it got to the market a year later, meaning it's library probably won't be as large as the 360's.

 

Sony doesn't have as many huge exclusive franchises as it did last gen. Meanwhile, MS keeps unveiling new features for the 360, such as downloadble movies/shows, and now IPTV capabilities. The 360 is still looking fresh, thanks to plenty of anticipated games coming to the console, along with all these features being revealed.

 

And of course Nintendo came out of nowhere and sold out Wii all over the US. Let's just say this gen's console war will be much more heated and all three companies will get close to #1.

[All this Crap]

holy crap guys, the PS3 has been out for a little over 2 months and your talking about the ps3 being dead, give me a f*ckin break!!! Let it get some titles that'll blow the 360 outta the water, then critisize! The ps3's low sales IS because of the ps3's shortage at release!

 

 

PS3 4 life!!!

Shortage? Try 300k units left unsold!

 

And looking at the horrible launch line-up consisting of regurgitated games I played months earlier, horrible 3rd party flops(Gundam: Crossfire), and one ok shooter, it all makes sense.

 

I just hope we get MGS 4 and other such titles this year, because I actually want a PS3.

 

The thing is:

 

Last gen, Sony had a huge year long advantage, a modest price, and a huuuuuuuuuge library of games. That's not true this gen. 360 launched first, it's getting tons of exclusives(some of them being taken away from PS3), some great multi-plat games which used to be exclusive(GTA 4, RE 5), and it's library is growing quite nicely, with many huge games still on the horizon. PS3 doesn't have the exclusivity factor PS2 had, and it got to the market a year later, meaning it's library probably won't be as large as the 360's.

 

Sony doesn't have as many huge exclusive franchises as it did last gen. Meanwhile, MS keeps unveiling new features for the 360, such as downloadble movies/shows, and now IPTV capabilities. The 360 is still looking fresh, thanks to plenty of anticipated games coming to the console, along with all these features being revealed.

 

And of course Nintendo came out of nowhere and sold out Wii all over the US. Let's just say this gen's console war will be much more heated and all three companies will get close to #1.

Microsoft had to supply North America, Europe and Asia with units. Sony was going to do that but they decided to supply North America and Japan.

 

What do you think is easier to do? supplying two regions or three regions with units?

 

Sony decided against doing world wide because they faced production problems. They focused on NA and Japan for the first launch....which is why it shouldn't surprise you that you can find some units in stores now.

 

With all these posts I see about units in stores it surprises me that Best Buy online and Circuit City online have been sold out....and it's been a week.

[Exkabewbikadid]

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid, not to mention arrogant and costly. The whole idea behind creating a format is to create a STANDARD that all companies can easily adhere to. Sony lost Betamax to VHS, MCD to DVD, and Blu-ray has a long ways to go. It's obvious from observing history that they'd be better off combining efforts and not dividing them.

Working against the successor?

Please explain!

...

Sony is working against HD DVD with Blu-ray.

 

HD DVD is headed by Toshiba.

 

Toshiba headed DVD.

 

DVD won the previous format war.

 

DVD was successful among consumers.

 

Sony et al should have united with Toshiba et al to develop the best possible format succeeding DVD.

 

Instead Sony ventures off into the wilderness again and develops Blu-ray. Why? Because they are power hungry goons looking to rule the next format with an iron fist? Who knows.

 

My main point is that it is not good to have two competing formats introduced into the market. It doesn't bode much confidence in consumers. Had a single format been settled on long ago, then Sony could have included the new format in the ps3, probably at a much more reasonable cost, and consumers wouldn't have to fret over spending $600 on a ps3 with a format that has a chance of failing. That's just my founded opinion.

 

 

As for the porn situation, I don't care if vivid claims to be releasing just ONE porno on Blu-ray. It hasn't happened yet, so it's still just speculation. I also don't care what some goon from Phillips claims. If it were all so black and white as the BDA claims, then the porn industry doesn't have much of a reason to turn down Blu-ray. The full story isn't known yet but film companies aren't choosing one over the other based on a coin toss.

[Brutuz]

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid, not to mention arrogant and costly. The whole idea behind creating a format is to create a STANDARD that all companies can easily adhere to. Sony lost Betamax to VHS, MCD to DVD, and Blu-ray has a long ways to go. It's obvious from observing history that they'd be better off combining efforts and not dividing them.

Working against the successor?

Please explain!

...

As for the porn situation, I don't care if vivid claims to be releasing just ONE porno on Blu-ray. It hasn't happened yet, so it's still just speculation. I also don't care what some goon from Phillips claims. If it were all so black and white as the BDA claims, then the porn industry doesn't have much of a reason to turn down Blu-ray. The full story isn't known yet but film companies aren't choosing one over the other based on a coin toss.

But don't most people use the internet now?

[Mister Pink]

 

Wow, doesn't anyone remember the PS2 launch? Everyone said it was doomed. The exact same sh*t is being said during the PS3 launch. People said the PS2 was too expensive, didn't have enough good games at launch and that using DVD as the new format was suicide. Regardless of all the naysayers, how'd the PS2 do in the long run?

 

Also, comparing 1st generation PS3 titles against 2nd generation 360 titles is just stupid. Developers already have a grasp on the 360 whereas the PS3 is still new and difficult to develop for. We'll probably see what the PS3 will be capable of later on next year at the earliest, not at launch.

 

I'm not saying the PS3 will be able to pull off what the PS2 did, infact I highly doubt that it can, but some of you guys need to calm down and at least give it a chance. Damn.

I completely agree.

 

Also, people are saying that Blu-Ray is finanial suicide, they should of worked with Toshiba and agreed on one format etc. That's bollox. This means market competion. Who will make the best/cheapest/easy to use product etc? This also means choice. If Toshiba didn't ' 'venture out to the wilderness' and develop the DVD what would it be like now?

 

What if the first car companies said. Oh, we'll work together on the best car for all to use? There wouldn't be the different choices of cars we enjoy today.

 

Market competion= healthy for consumers.

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2007 by ThePinkFloydSound

[Gouveia]

 

Wow, doesn't anyone remember the PS2 launch? Everyone said it was doomed. The exact same sh*t is being said during the PS3 launch. People said the PS2 was too expensive, didn't have enough good games at launch and that using DVD as the new format was suicide. Regardless of all the naysayers, how'd the PS2 do in the long run?

 

Also, comparing 1st generation PS3 titles against 2nd generation 360 titles is just stupid. Developers already have a grasp on the 360 whereas the PS3 is still new and difficult to develop for. We'll probably see what the PS3 will be capable of later on next year at the earliest, not at launch.

 

I'm not saying the PS3 will be able to pull off what the PS2 did, infact I highly doubt that it can, but some of you guys need to calm down and at least give it a chance. Damn.

I completely agree.

 

Also, people are saying that Blu-Ray is finanial suicide, they should of worked with Toshiba and agreed on one format etc. That's bollox. This means market competion. Who will make the best/cheapest/easy to use product etc? This also means choice. If Toshiba didn't ' 'venture out to the wilderness' and develop the DVD what would it be like now?

 

What if the first car companies said. Oh, we'll work together on the best car for all to use? There wouldn't be the different choices of cars we enjoy today.

 

Market competion= healthy for consumers.

Completely Agree with both of you. The PS3 is a 3 months old console and it's fighting agaisnt a 1 year old console, the XBOX 360. In my opinion, I doubt that the PS3 will be revolutionary at this year and maybe in 2008 too, but it'll make Microsoft think twice before messing with Sony. As far as I know, the PS3 has some of the coolest things that teh XBOX360 had, plus, it has a mindbreaking controller and a respectable name that makes it unique. I know the PS3 is much expensive(at least in Brazil it is)and the X360 is cheaper, but sometimes, cheaper is worst. In my humble opinion, we'll have much more PS3 games untill Sony break it's own technology with a much better videogame.

 

BTW, can any PS3 owners tell me if a burned PS2 DVD works on PS3? It works on my PS2.

[All this Crap]

 

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid, not to mention arrogant and costly. The whole idea behind creating a format is to create a STANDARD that all companies can easily adhere to. Sony lost Betamax to VHS, MCD to DVD, and Blu-ray has a long ways to go. It's obvious from observing history that they'd be better off combining efforts and not dividing them.

Working against the successor?

Please explain!

...

Sony is working against HD DVD with Blu-ray.

 

HD DVD is headed by Toshiba.

 

Toshiba headed DVD.

 

DVD won the previous format war.

 

DVD was successful among consumers.

 

Sony et al should have united with Toshiba et al to develop the best possible format succeeding DVD.

 

Instead Sony ventures off into the wilderness again and develops Blu-ray. Why? Because they are power hungry goons looking to rule the next format with an iron fist? Who knows.

 

My main point is that it is not good to have two competing formats introduced into the market. It doesn't bode much confidence in consumers. Had a single format been settled on long ago, then Sony could have included the new format in the ps3, probably at a much more reasonable cost, and consumers wouldn't have to fret over spending $600 on a ps3 with a format that has a chance of failing. That's just my founded opinion.

 

 

As for the porn situation, I don't care if vivid claims to be releasing just ONE porno on Blu-ray. It hasn't happened yet, so it's still just speculation. I also don't care what some goon from Phillips claims. If it were all so black and white as the BDA claims, then the porn industry doesn't have much of a reason to turn down Blu-ray. The full story isn't known yet but film companies aren't choosing one over the other based on a coin toss.

Sony was for DVD just like they are for Blu-ray right now (they were a big supporter of it which is why they included it in the PS2 and PEOPLE did complain about that just like they are now about blu-ray being included with the PS3) The PS2 helped DVD. You can search google for that too.

 

Sony going against HD DVD is the same as Toshiba going against Blu-ray. Get rid of your anti-Sony bias.

 

You don't care about Vivid because you can't admit you were wrong? It doesn't matter who the studios are choosing when you originally said the studios don't have a choice. They do have a choice and some are releasing on Blu-ray....and don't forget now we have the internet. You were wrong about that, admit that you were. It's speculation because you say it is? Why don't you research a little more please.

 

I also find it funny that the link you provided that says Blu-ray is doomed because of porn is The Inquirer....you just lost the credibility you had. They have posted many ridiculous articles before that have turned out to be false.

Edited January 24, 2007 by All this Crap

[3niX]

Well...

This is why Im a bit confused by your thoughts .

 

Of course not, but inventing new technology while simultaneously working against the successor of those who have already established the accepted precedent most certainly is stupid

I asked what does working against them really mean....

 

Sony is working against HD DVD with Blu-ray.

 

HD DVD is headed by Toshiba.

 

Toshiba headed DVD.

 

DVD won the previous format war.

 

DVD was successful among consumers.

 

Sony et al should have united with Toshiba et al to develop the best possible format succeeding DVD.

 

Instead Sony ventures off into the wilderness again and develops Blu-ray. Why? Because they are power hungry goons looking to rule the next format with an iron fist? Who knows.

 

My main point is that it is not good to have two competing formats introduced into the market. It doesn't bode much confidence in consumers. Had a single format been settled on long ago, then Sony could have included the new format in the ps3, probably at a much more reasonable cost, and consumers wouldn't have to fret over spending $600 on a ps3 with a format that has a chance of failing. That's just my founded opinion.

I guess youre quite right about that... it wouldve been cheaper and easier to co-develop a new format ... but thats just how it goes...

 

Think about Intel and AMD... both trying to exceed eachother.

If one develops better technology so does the other.

New (and different) technologies are applied because one might work better (in some ways) than the other. I can see why Sony tried to develop their own format... they wanted more room for data on the same amount of space and were searching for better answeres. I wouldnt blame them for that.

I mean...

You wouldnt find a switch in a dark room without moving around and searching for it.

 

Its how things work in life and thats how things will keep working.