what do you think sony should do to the ps3 price?

it accualy is. the rsx is a 7900 gt in almost every way. all the rsx is is the gpu. all the extra circuitboarding is probably done by sony, much like 3rd party radeon cards.


@pressed
i am an amd fan too, but you dont know conroe. its going to use a 65nm process at first then a 45nm. the overclock abilities are like nothing you even know. plus, the architechture with the 65nm and 45nm have been redone, and a 2.2 ghz conroe matches that of a 2.4 amd.

 

Price is irrelevant because people have already shown the sky is the limit when getting something you want so it comes down to the "want" factor.The ps3's price is high and game prices are speculated by sony themsleves to be more than xbox 360's pricetag of $59.99 but not as much as $99.99 so go figure it out

 

kaz harai hinted at game being 60 americans and $40 will be rare. and $70-80 is not out of the quesion or maybe $100? what is he trying to say?

 

doesnt sound like an educated man if ya ask me, or maybe just extrememly indecisive. Im sure hes educated but im just saying that he was rambling on and not stating anything outright so it was pointless to bring up...

 

depends on how you look at things....i wouldnt say he is indecisive, if anything it seems they (sony) are trying to be extremely careful with their comments. just imagine what would happen if, he came out and said the price of games will match that of the 360, but come november we find games being priced higher....people hate/dislike sony for their own reasons, and something like that would just be more fuel to the fire...

being fair, his comments certainly did not narrow the gap any, and has led to more speculation. i guess a possible way to think about it would be, if they use the window of $59.99-$99.99 for games, when the 'official' price is revealed and whether it is on par with the competition or more, they can always say "hey, its better than paying $99.99/game." either way im hoping for the range to be $59.99-$69.99.

a benefit that i have, is the fact that when games are released on multiplatforms both my computers are able to play them. i'll prolly stick to just buying the exclussives, with a few exceptions.

a side note...something that i havn't seen ANYONE address, is the fact that it costs up to $399(edited..sry) for the 360 and you will have the ability to play ANY and ALL games, but computers are CONSTANTLY outdated and in need of upgrades to stay up-to-date. i hope some people when making that claim take into consideration that as of NOW, the PC versions of games are $10 cheaper. so when i buy 10 games for my pc and someone buys those 10 for their 360...they will have unfortanately paid $100 MORE than i have(not including online fees)...its just another thing to think about. especially considering how feasible it is for people to aquire PC parts at discounted prices. I know not everyone is comfortable with taking things apart and game consoles would seem the better fit for them, but its NOT that bad really. for me this is probably the main reason why i won't own an xbox 360...so many are offered for both formats.

 

How does the 360 cost up to $499.99?
core is $299
premium$399

so even if you get the premium and 2 years of online play your still saving money over teh premium ps3 so its like not even paying for online

 

How does the 360 cost up to $499.99?
core is $299
premium$399

so even if you get the premium and 2 years of online play your still saving money over teh premium ps3 so its like not even paying for online

 

How does the 360 cost up to $499.99?
core is $299
premium$399

so even if you get the premium and 2 years of online play your still saving money over teh premium ps3 so its like not even paying for online

 

Ok ok, hade you bring some good point but also some flawed ones.

I know what you mean but announcing the price of games would give us ps3 guys some much need info and squash the rumors of games being more expensive.Is sony hiding it intentionally to keep our confidence up knowing they will be more than $59.99?

dnglebry has a good question.Triple posted lol.

The pc is different. I don't even buy pc games and I have them all lol.The pc games don't play on every system.On the consoles every game plays(which is what you were saying).Plus keyboard and mouse isn't attractive like gamepads.

Really the pc genre can't be compaired to consoles and will never sell as much games making them cheaper to buy.Pc is for rts and rpg games mostly.Further more you could buy an xbox 360 and a ps3 for the same price as the average gaming pc.

a real gaming pc can cost hella bucks. Here an average alienware not the worst not the best go ahead and configure
http://www.alienware.com/Configurat...SysCode=PC-AURORA-7500-R3&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT

 

Ty cobb

MS just said that they wouldnt be coming out with the xbox 360's with the internal hd-dvd to clear up what that article i posted said about MS releasing the 360 with the internal hd-dvd drive so were all good...

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/11285/Microsoft-Has-No-Plans-for-Internal-HD-DVD-Drive/

Yet again i dont know why teh urls arent poppin up from teamxbox.com but its there
love that triple post

 

Good .Whoever started that should be sued and are just ms haters as usual.I love all the systems and can't see what drives these people.These are not forum folks rooting for there system these are corporate tycoons gunning for money.It's a disgrace.

I'm glad my 360 is still the primo one and not the sub lacks hd-dvd primo one.

 

i concur

 

hd-dvd will be kinfa ugly on the 360 because it only has analog output and 1080i.

 

There were reviewers of the Sammy Bluray player who actually preferred the analog component picture compared to HDMI. Other users had varying results comparing 1080i and 1080p/HDMI and component:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwocentsa123.html
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=691562
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=692990

I did not test the component picture from the Sammy before I returned it but I predict I would have gotten a similar result. It all depends on your player and your display. If you have a 1080P display that has a very good scaler - like my Sony SXRD - it may be better to use a 1080i signal and let the tv scale it to 1080p. The Sammy does not "pass thru" an actual 1080P signal. It decodes 1080i and does internal scaling to 1080p. If your display does a better job at scaling then the results would be better if you output 1080i. In some other HDTV's skipping the additional digital to analog conversion step can produce a better picture. A lot depends on how your display handles 1080i/p thru HDMI and component.

Added:
This guy compares 1080i (not 1080p) from the Sammy and finds a better more detailed picture from the HDMI:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=694589
He also says at the end that the display and proper set-up of the display has a lot to do with the results.

 

nice lil bit of information there...helps me out on my future purchases for my tre 60

 

@dblbogey7 how can you tell yet? The bluray movies were encoded with mpeg2 and not mpeg4.I understand movies can only be 24fps so 1080i doesn't matter right now but an hdmi with 1.3 spec which the ps3 has will have an advantage over an analog source.I honestly don't think you'l be able to tell the difference anyways.

I can't really judge the ps3 brd against the sammy anyhow.Same with xbox 360.I've seen those links before but reviews are best given by real legit sources.How do I know these guys aren't already favoring hd-dvd?It's really just opinion not a review...

 

tycobb:

These guys were not talking about HD-DVD. They were talking about BluRay in a BluRay forum. I was just making the point that some people saw that 1080i or analog component can produce a better picture depending on your display. Don't write off 1080i just yet especially if you have a good 1080p scaler in your TV.

I'm planning on doing a side by side comaprison of the PS3 and Sony's standalone BD player and I'm sure other early adopters will do the same.

 

@dblbogey7

you cannot compare hd-dvd to this player that ame out. its only supporting mpeg 2 t the moment, and it was rushed so they would have something out. to say analog and output a better image than digital is blasphemy, its the player itself that needs work. wait for sony's player.

 

The Sammy also supports MPEG4 and VC1. Only the studios chose to use MPEG2 for it's initial releases.

I never said analog is better than digital. I only pointed out that some people saw a better picture with 1080i. I still prefer HDMI on my TV for most HD programming.

Yes but I think we will get a lot more improvement in PQ if the studios start using more advanced codecs and start using BD50 dual layer discs to come up with better releases.

Like I said I will compare the PS3 and the Sony standalone player when they come out. Hopefully we'll have better BD releases by then. If the PQ of the PS3 for BD movies is as good as the standalone then I might just return the standalone. We'll just wait and see.

 

yeah, the studios need to kick in gear. the hd-dvd releases were in mpeg 4 and the bluray in mpeg 2, so to say they saw a better image is self explanatory as to why. when most bluray is mpeg 4 or better the difference will be well noted the other way.