gaming consoles and blu ray info

Mernerva

AlecEiffel wrote: »

Word is 'holidays' 2013 for Japan and USA for the PS4, with the EU and rest of the world to follow in early 2014. So a year yet.

But to answer the question- Xbox 360 doesn't play blu-ray but will upscale DVD if you use the right cables. Be careful as there didn't used to be a standard set of ports on Xbox. Some had HDMI some didn't. Not sure about now, may have standardised it.

PS3 plays blu-ray and upscales DVD and all have a HDMI port. They are still one of the best blu-ray and DVD players out there.

We will find out, Feb 20th!

-TangleFoot-

InsideInsurance wrote: »

...your TV will also do upscaling/ deinterlacing as a screen can only show one resolution and anything above or below is either scaled up, bordered or cropped.

I suspect they want to know whether either console can make the pictures look better.

Video scalers are often combined with other video processing devices or algorithms to create a video processor that improves the apparent definition of video signals.

Mernerva

I thought PS3 was supposed to last 10yrs? We are only 6yrs into the cycle.

The PS1 brought CDs into the living room, PS2 brought DVDs in and PS3 is the main reason Blu-Ray won the battle over HD-DVD.

PS4 will be 4K display and may have the new RED-RAY disk format, but if so dont expect it anytime soon.

The xbox1 only had a life of a few years, then xbox360 was rushed out and a high percentage of them broke, it is the most unreliable machine ever. PS3 came later because the PS2 was still selling, and so the PS3 is more powerful than xbox360.

I think Sony should wait for the new xbox to be released and then blow it away a year later with PS4 again much more powerful.

AlecEiffel

Mernerva wrote: »

I thought PS3 was supposed to last 10yrs? We are only 6yrs into the cycle.

Sony still plan for it to last ten yrs. It will still be manufactured and supported after the PS4 releases. They only stopped making the PS2 in the last month.

Mernerva wrote: »

I think Sony should wait for the new xbox to be released and then blow it away a year later with PS4 again much more powerful.

The problem with that is that hardcore gamers are hungry for the next gen. Sony will lose massive ground if they leave it too late after an Xbox release as gamers will jump on it. That was why the PS3 started on the back foot despite being more powerful overall.

Mernerva

AlecEiffel wrote: »

Sony still plan for it to last ten yrs. It will still be manufactured and supported after the PS4 releases. They only stopped making the PS2 in the last month.



The problem with that is that hardcore gamers are hungry for the next gen. Sony will lose massive ground if they leave it too late after an Xbox release as gamers will jump on it. That was why the PS3 started on the back foot despite being more powerful overall.

Really they only stopped making the PS2 last month? Were games still being made for it recently? Its great how Sony consoles have such a long life span. I hope the same can be said of the PS3, then developers can squeeze the most out of the hardware. I remember some amazing games on PS1 being made even after PS2 launched. The PS1 blew away powerful gaming PCs at the time.

Your second point depends how you look at it. Yes the new xbox will make headway but will be very expensive and I personally think its too soon for a new generation of consoles, the present ones are still fine and have lots more potential especially the PS3.

So if Sony wait and fine tune the PS4 hardware making it state of the art, let new xbox get ahead fine, then release the next next gen and get ahead of the next next gen in effect getting a leg up on the next new xbox after this one by a few years.

Gamers will learn that xbox consoles are rushed IE red ring of death and dont have a very long life span, while Sony makes consoles very well and have a lifespan of over a decade letting developers use the hardware to the full.

Mernerva

Playstation wrote: »

The PS1 brought CDs into the living room, PS2 brought DVDs in and PS3 is the main reason Blu-Ray won the battle over HD-DVD.

PS4 will be 4K display and may have the new RED-RAY disk format, but if so dont expect it anytime soon.

I wonder what will be the new format after Blu-Ray? Its not certain the Red-Ray will win, there are competing formats, remember the battle with xbox's HD-DVD and PS3's Blu-Ray. Sony won the battle but no guarantees they will win the next one.

At the moment 4K TVs are too expensive, the PS3 can cater to the masses NOW and for years yet and even to the few who have the latest true HD 3D TVs, so we are not ready for the next generation yet.

When it becomes clear which format will replace Blu-Ray in the future, and 4K TVs are becoming more common place in peoples homes, then will be the time to release PS4 and the VITA 2.0 which can be used just the same as the WiiU controller.

AlecEiffel

Mernerva wrote: »

Really they only stopped making the PS2 last month? Were games still being made for it recently?

Yup - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jan/04/playstation-2-manufacture-ends-years

Games were still being released last year. I think Final Fantasy something or other came out, plus latest footy games etc.

Mernerva wrote: »

Your second point depends how you look at it. Yes the new xbox will make headway but will be very expensive and I personally think its too soon for a new generation of consoles, the present ones are still fine and have lots more potential especially the PS3.

As you say, depends how you look at it. Battlefield 3 on the PC has 64 player multiplayer, consoles have 24 players and smaller maps. No biggie for me, 24 is enough, but the divide between PC and console is growing meaning developers of multiplatform titles have to hold back on the PC side and risk alienating that audience, or spend extra on the console side to adapt it. Ubisoft have been wanting new console gen for a year or so now as they say they've hit the ceiling.

It's thought that the next gen of consoles will be cheaper at launch than the PS3 was. Both next PS and Xbox are based more on PC tech both in CPU and GPU to aid costs and software development headaches (the Cell on the PS3 whilst powerful is a sod to develop for, which is why a lot of multiplatfom titles, esp early ones, run smoother on Xbox than PS3).

Mernerva wrote: »

So if Sony wait and fine tune the PS4 hardware making it state of the art, let new xbox get ahead fine, then release the next next gen and get ahead of the next next gen in effect getting a leg up on the next new xbox after this one by a few years.

Gamers will learn that xbox consoles are rushed IE red ring of death and dont have a very long life span, while Sony makes consoles very well and have a lifespan of over a decade letting developers use the hardware to the full.

They did this to a certain extent on PS3 but that's only catching up now. Technically the PS3 is ahead of the 360. Sales are slowing on both consoles as they've reached the point that if you want one, you will have one by now. New franchises are slowing as sequels that tweak the formula are the norm. The hardware isn't powerful enough to handle major innovation. Both consoles suffer a shortage of memory. Graphics are just about topped out. A lot of this doesn't matter to lot of gamers, they are happy with the current gen. I am most of the time. But there is a hardcore group who are wanting more and want it soon. And they will jump when a new platform comes out. Developers will move on too. Sony's 1st party devs would still develop for PS3 obviously, but if 3rd party devs can develop for the next Xbox and the PC they'll leave the PS3 behind. Sure some 3rd party stuff will still come out but it'll be easy hits, like the footy games etc.

There is a lot of brand loyalty though. The RROD stung a lot of people, but MS's warranty system appeased a lot of them to the point that they were on their 3rd or 4th console but so long as it got replace FOC they were happy.

Mernerva

As you say, depends how you look at it. Battlefield 3 on the PC has 64 player multiplayer, consoles have 24 players and smaller maps. No biggie for me, 24 is enough, but the divide between PC and console is growing meaning developers of multiplatform titles have to hold back on the PC side and risk alienating that audience, or spend extra on the console side to adapt it. Ubisoft have been wanting new console gen for a year or so now as they say they've hit the ceiling.

The PS3 Cell chip is easily powerful enough, they just need to use that performance analyser that Sony made for the PS1+PS2. The developers need to work harder and get the most out of the PS3, and they will in the next few years.

But yes the xbox360 is not up to it anymore, its looking very dated. Maybe now 3rd party developers will not hold back with the PS3 multiplatform title so that it can be released on both consoles. Look at in house PS games like Uncharted 3 compared to 3rd party multiplat titles, that are held back in performance terms and could look at lot better on PS3 if they used the cell chip to its full potential.

It's thought that the next gen of consoles will be cheaper at launch than the PS3 was. Both next PS and Xbox are based more on PC tech both in CPU and GPU to aid costs and software development headaches (the Cell on the PS3 whilst powerful is a sod to develop for, which is why a lot of multiplatfom titles, esp early ones, run smoother on Xbox than PS3).

But as I said they should look better on PS3 which is a superior machine.

They did this to a certain extent on PS3 but that's only catching up now. Technically the PS3 is ahead of the 360. Sales are slowing on both consoles as they've reached the point that if you want one, you will have one by now. New franchises are slowing as sequels that tweak the formula are the norm. The hardware isn't powerful enough to handle major innovation. Both consoles suffer a shortage of memory. Graphics are just about topped out. A lot of this doesn't matter to lot of gamers, they are happy with the current gen. I am most of the time. But there is a hardcore group who are wanting more and want it soon. And they will jump when a new platform comes out. Developers will move on too. Sony's 1st party devs would still develop for PS3 obviously, but if 3rd party devs can develop for the next Xbox and the PC they'll leave the PS3 behind. Sure some 3rd party stuff will still come out but it'll be easy hits, like the footy games etc.

They wont leave PS3 behind with 30million PS3 already in homes, compared with the slow uptake of this new xbox.

There is a lot of brand loyalty though. The RROD stung a lot of people, but MS's warranty system appeased a lot of them to the point that they were on their 3rd or 4th console but so long as it got replace FOC they were happy.

They may have been happy in the end but the RROD has ingrained in everyones minds that MS and XBOX have an unreliable reputation. Japanese consoles are very reliable and have longer life spans.

You are right about brand loyalty I bought the first xbox a few years after launch and then the 360 came out very soon after I just bought my one rendering my console obsolete, because once a new xbox comes out the old one is dead, unlike Sony consoles which have support for years after the next console is released.

AlecEiffel

I see we'll differ in opinion quite a lot

The issue for the PS3 is that multiplatform devs can develop for PC and Xbox in a very similar way (usually dev on PC and port to Xbox) as they both use DirectX and have similar architecture. The Cell is totally different and requires a lot of work and £ to port stuff to. The GPU on the PS3 is weaker too, meaning that devs have to further work on farming off graphics work to the Cell (which is what it's designed for but is not the 'normal' way devs like to work). This is the main cause of disparity. Essentially PS3 CPU > Xbox CPU, PS3 GPU < Xbox GPU. As the 360 had a head start devs played to it's strengths as they knew them better and there was a larger user base to please.

Whilst you're right that devs could push the PS3 more, if a new Xbox comes out that's closer to PC in level and architecture, they will still play to those strengths (it's 2 vs 1, which is why Sony is ditching the Cell for the PS4).

Now the PS3 exclusive devs know the PS3 inside out and have no worries about having to make code work on other platforms. Which is why PS3 exclusives are often prettier than Xbox exclusives as they are playing to the PS3's strengths and pushing it to it's limits. Uncharted 2 & 3 are great examples, but it is not only single platform but also very linear, meaning that there is only a narrow field they need to make look amazing. Stuff like Skyrim features a lot of pop up, low textures, etc, and even PS3 exclusive open world games like Infamous are not as pretty as Uncharted as they have to render wider environments that are accessible to the player.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a PS3 gamer and am so as I can only afford one platform and PS3 has more games I like, plus the reliability factor influenced me, plus the Blu-ray and general entertainment features. I'd like the current gen to continue but I also want all the new games!

Mernerva

AlecEiffel wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I'm a PS3 gamer and am so as I can only afford one platform and PS3 has more games I like, plus the reliability factor influenced me, plus the Blu-ray and general entertainment features. I'd like the current gen to continue but I also want all the new games!

Then we are not that different. You seem to know about the development than I do.

I love Japanese consoles and when I bought the first xbox which cam out well after the PS2 and was then replaced before the PS3 came out, I just said to myself, well if XBOX has sush a short life I will stick to Japanese consoles from now on.