Talk:PlayStation 3/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

← Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12 →

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

notice - some comments may appear on later archives. Please check the current page or Archive 12 when it exists. Thanks. --gatoatigrado 02:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Archives
Archive 1 (May 2005) Archive 2 (May 2005 - July 2005) Archive 3 (Jul 2005 - Dec 2005) Archive 4 (Dec 2005 - Feb 2006) Archive 5 (Feb 2006 - Apr 2006) Archive 6 (Apr 2006 - May 2006) Archive 7 (May 2006 - June 2006) Archive 8 (June 2006) Archive 9 (July 2006) Archive 10 (August 2006)

Contents 1 Why was the part I added deleted? 2 dumb box art 3 Template Proble 4 criticism 5 XFire only for one game 6 The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion 7 PS3 Controller 8 US$? 9 Is it true that you can't rent games for the PS3 10 PNP and Xfire information is incorrect 11 A bit underwhelming... 12 Configs changed: HDMI in both models 13 Composite AV cables? 14 PS3 Article is inconsistent about HDMI Port 15 Warhawk? 16 You guys got THREE DAYS to add this in, or that's it. I will 17 7 SPEs? 18 L.A. Noire 19 Redirecting? 20 this page got messed up 21 Lock this page 22 Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire 23 PS 3 Pictures 24 oblivion launch? 25 GUYS, THE PS3 GAMES WILL COST 7-80 DOLLARS 26 PS3's defense 27 Please do NOT allow the table to be adjusted in a way that allows IMPORTANT facts to be removed 28 us prices 29 ICT mention: do we really need it?

Why was the part I added deleted?

I add that someone at Sony called Wii and XB360 overpriced. I cited my source and all. Can I put it back in?--[[User:NFAN3|NFAN3 "I try so hard to be a Uber Geek!"~Jason Fox]] 11:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

please put comments at the end. Some things are non-notable, even if they are cited. the wiki syntax in your signature is messed up. --24.7.86.143 18:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

dumb box art

can we get rid of this stupid image? it doesn't add any usable information, and makes this look like a porn page. I know wikipedia's not censored, but it doesn't add anything here. The box art is highly irrelevant. relevant images, in my opinion, would be nvidia shader examples, and although it introduces bias into which one, impressive game renders. --24.7.86.143 05:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I entirely agree- that image should never have been inserted in the first place. There are other "questionable" ones on that page too- do we really need that "This is living" image? And lastly, the image of the two PS3s in black is copyrighted and has not been released to the public by Sony. In fact the picture actually HAS THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE right on it! I'll get a few more opinions tonight, and if nobody objects, I'll toss out those two images. Ex-Nintendo Employee 06:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The "This is living" belongs to a marketing section. If someone wants to restore the image then they should writing up a marketing section for it to be included, otherwise it doesn't make any sense. --Thax 17:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

should be too stupid for inclusion anyway. Does wikipedia include every marketing slogan? no. it shouldn't. Also, Image:Psp-to-ps3.jpg is crud. Another delete. --gatoatigrado 04:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Template Proble

First, I should point out that I made a change to the System Features table in the Playstation 3 article page. I made an adjustment that agreed with the requirements of Thax. The problem is that for some reason, my adjustment keeps referring to a "Template." If you can fix this, I would appreciate it.

I would like to say one other thing: The type of cables included with a videogame system are very important, and we need to keep people as well informed as possible at all times. Sony has only made one official announcement about the cables that will be included with the Playstation 3: Sony has officially said that there will be no high-definition cables of any kind included with the Playstation 3. There will not be an HDMI cable capable of carrying a high-definition signal, and there will not be a Component cable capable of carrying a high-definition signal. At this point in time, it would be irresponsible of us to not allow people to be aware of this publicly announced fact. Even if this information does not appear in the System Features table, as I believe it should, this information about absolutely no form of high-definition cable being included with the Playstation 3 should definitely appear in the article about the Playstation 3. You can read about this cable information at this reference: [1] Mike mgoblue 19:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) mike_mgoblue

I did a quick fix. Sorcre 20:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You are a fanboy, don't deny it next time. Nice find though, it's certainly true and certainly relevant.But pointing out how important it is to have reliable sources, which you didn't last time - DMC 4 is ps3 exclusive at this point, officially, which is after the article you made a big fuss with. --gatoatigrado 04:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Another thing though - undue weight to no-so-crucial things is biased. It's okay if you're a fanboy, but you must keep this out of it. Does the Xbox 360 article even mention the lower version requires a $40 memory card or $100 hard drive? Compared to your two lines complaining about $10 cables? --gatoatigrado 04:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a good point to make, we need to be careful about not biasing articles. Regarding the Xbox 360 drive, perhaps someone should edit that article then. This article should stand on its own, we shouldn't be deciding content based on articles for other consoles. CPitt76 16:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

criticism

let's keep this concise. --gatoatigrado 04:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

• "dual HDMI Display output" - who cares? This was a stupid show-off feature, along with the however many mpeg 2 streams they were decoding.
• None of the 7 expensive consoles more expensive than the PlayStation 3 were very popular.
• A much better point for the price would be

1. Blu ray player (included) - most are $770 now, the HD dvd players haven't gotten too much cheaper either (blu ray fell $230 to its price, hd fell from $500 to $440)
2. free online service
3. inclusion of hard drive with both system
4. Neither xbox 360 nor Wii have any option of an HDMI port
5. neither Xbox 360 nor Wii have the current generation drive; this was a downfall for the dreamcast apparently.

Better yet, leave the whole thing out. I think it's best to present the console with its current achievements and merits, and let consumers decide if they want one console or another, multiple consoles, or no consoles. On second thought, a small note would be fine. All of the refutes I provided above perhaps give too much emphasis to one point. Avoid exact production numbers, we don't know for now. Leave the controller vibration issue for the other page. Compared to Microsoft (wifi cuts and hard drive cut for lower model), I think the ps3's loss of dual hdmi is rather irrelevant. Neither needs any mention though. --gatoatigrado 04:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

revision 1

I would disagree. Common criticisms which have been raised by several reliable outside sources which we cite should usually be mention as is normal with all articles on wikipedia. Remember that wikipedia is an encyclopedia NOT a place intended to help people decide which console. By providing neutral and accurate info, we may help readers decide but the primary purpose of an encylopedia is not to help readers decide. More specifically, this article is primarily about the PS3, not about differences between the PS3 and the Xbox360. Indeed I would suggest it's a violation of NPOV to not mention common criticisms. How much detail we go in to of course is debatable. Clearly the most basic issue is the criticism of the price (i.e. the price is too high). We should probably also mention other same gen consoles are cheaper but if we do, we need to make some mention that they have different feature sets. However I don't think we need to go into to detail of the different feature sets. This would be best left for another article. (Alternatively, readers can just compare the different articles.) It is not up to ask to try and tell the reader which one is better or whether the PS3 is worth the high price. This would not be NPOV. Instead, it is simply our job to mention that some people have stated they feel the price is too high. Also, I don't know much about the dual HDMI issue but if it was a widely touted feature or the loss of dual HDMI has been widely criticised then it must be mentioned. You seem to have misunderstood perhaps the nature of an encylopedia. It is not our job to decide whether the loss of a feature is important and as I have stated before, this article should be primarily about the PS3 not about comparisons with the Xbox360. Therefore, there no reason for us to exclude mention of something just because Microsoft has greater issues. The only question should be whether the loss of dual HDMI is noteable enough or not (i.e. we shouldn't give undue weight to something which no one cares about)... Nil Einne 07:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Well said. As I've stated in previous posts, the price point has been an issue with gamers/developers that has been documented in other media. This isn't POV, we're not putting "the PS3 is too expensive" in the article, we're documenting a criticism raised by mutiple groups about the system. CPitt76 16:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I think your vision for it is the same as mine. I agree with all of your points. The last point I made at the top brought out more relevant issues than the historical context. It is obviously not included in the revised criticism section. I did feel that the other opinions had undue weight and were too competitive. Please tell me what you feel should be added back in. [2]. --gatoatigrado 17:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

This is completely opinion, but the loss of dual hdmi is not noticable. The rumble capability is better left for the ps3 controller article. There was certainly a lot of media attention about it (e.g. push polls, articles). However in the end I don't think it will be a major detraction from the game; plenty of people play computer games without rumble packs. In politics I think there's an effect where something is a "major controversy", but when it goes the "other" way (against the public), it becomes apparent people don't care about the issue. I think it's similar here. News sites report things they think will get them traffic, not necessarily important things. --gatoatigrado 17:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of the price by developers and/or publishers have been very few, so they're not quite worthy of mentioning. In fact, some publishers like Midway and Bandai Namco said it's reasonable at launch (and only at launch). I would certainly say that analyst and gamer crticism would be an appropriate addition, simply because it's been covered quite a bit. This isn't a brand new product per se, it's the successor of the most popular console of all time, and therefore the pricing issue is valid. But everything else, including dual HDMI and whatnot, aren't, simply because any piece of hardware is subject to change prior to its release. Consumer criticism based on one random article isn't quite valid in my opinion simply because the competitors to the console rely on sequels (or popular games) as well. The Wii is launching with a Zelda, while the Xbox 360's most anticipated game is Halo 3. That's not to say that the three consoles are void of original IP's. The source article cited did just that, with no mention of some of the origianl games that the PS3 library contains (Resistance, Eye of Judgement, Heavenly Sword etc.) , and simply mentioned original Wii titles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.12.150.231 (talk • contribs) .

Im petitioning to remove any critcism section, until, I dont know, ITS ACTUALLY BEEN RELEASEDEvangelion883 01:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe the criticism section can stay, as it is well documented. With that kind of thought, we should remove the specifications until it is released, the games until they are released, etc. -- ReyBrujo 01:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with removing however it should be trimmed, Criticism is a rebuttle that has caused a negative effect, in this case the high PS3 price has caused Sony's stock prices to drop and has scared away developers, It is also well cited. I do however believe the section regarding games based off sequals should be removed. since we have yet to see any negative effect -- Dctcool 03:41 12 October 2006 (UTC)

XFire only for one game

Sony has deniend that XFire will be the backbone of Playstation Network Platform. It will only be used for one game, at least initially.

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=67590

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

this was denied in Bethesda forums (elderscrolls.com). The source given was a podcast. A podcast??? I wish the public education system worked better as far as educating people about reliable sources. --gatoatigrado 01:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The podcast that gatoatigrado talks about is from the website www.1up.com, which is put out by Ziff Davis Media, which is a major video game website, and is the publisher of Official PlayStation Magazine, and a lot of other video game magazines. The podcast speaks of this game as a launch title for the PlayStation 3. This game has not been denied by the company, they just state that it has not been announced yet. I believe if anyone is to be trusted about something like this, especially when it has been explicitely stated, and the RadiOPM podcast stated that the November cover would blow your mind. (Amish Gramish 04:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC))

My mistake, someone said it was denied but I couldn't find the link. "This game has not been denied by the company, they just state that it has not been announced yet." - that's exactly right, and why it doesn't belong here. I still don't believe a podcast is desirable because it is difficult for people to look at, but I suppose other forms of media are trusted. I am sorry for being snobbish in my previous comment; however inherently trusting something that has been written and edited, such as the New York Times as opposed to Fox News is - in my opinion - not a bad "gut feeling". --gatoatigrado 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Concisely - written things are less "live" and more looked over in general. --gatoatigrado 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The Podcast hinted that this was going to happen, it is still okay to take it down from the page because it has not been confirmed yet, but it seems most likely.--Anonymous

AHA!!!!! I am going to put this game back into the article, because it has just been announced by the company, and will be on the cover of OPM, which is Official PlayStation Magazine. I new they would announce it, and you gatoatigrado, have just been an annoyance. And by the way, this is going to be on the PSP as well, but it will be a whole new game. You all can go to http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154065 and look at it, and you can't delete it now, or I'll start to get moderately disgruntled. Amish Gramish 03:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

"I new [sic?] they would announce it, and you gatoatigrado, have just been an annoyance". that's nice. If you find verifiability and reliable sources annoying, and believe all unconfirmed rumors to be true, perhaps you should go to another website. I have no problem with the facts as they stand now. --gatoatigrado 05:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

"you can't delete it now, or I'll start to get moderately disgruntled" - excuse me? You need to calm down and lose the overzealous and aggressive attitude. I am in no way trying to delete things. As far as I can see, most rumors turn out not to be true. Wikipedia is not "time critical", and it doesn't depend on having everything "up to the minute" to make a profit like the news companies. I think waiting "until the dust settles" often results in a better article with more accurate information. --gatoatigrado 05:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

"And by the way, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is the cover of the November issue of the Official PlayStation Magazine" [3] - read my previous reply; at the time it wasn't. I said it's okay. Here's a more official link, by the way. [4].

Did you really listen to the audiocast? The time is 1:15:50 (the media doesn't have clearly define start positions, so you can't skip exactly to the right position), not 1:14 to 1:15 as you said [5]. I doubt anyone on Wikipedia would want to listen to an 86 minute audio file (which requires a 30 megabyte download) searching for the word "Oblivion". Did you hear how they introduced the talk - "we've got some stuff from 'the' message boards" - doesn't sound very official to me. They were chatting with someone from New York over skype talking about what was popular with gamers. Also doesn't sound very official. You're right, the real words sound convincing - "We're getting so close to the ps3...they haven't shown the ps3 version, which is apparently a launch title...", if you brought it up - which would require you actually listening to it - I would have been more than accepting, and I certainly don't mean to assume bad faith. Needless to say, I admitted I was wrong when the official announcement was made. I made - well, maybe a non-apology apology - when you talked about it - and I am sorry if you were offended by my negative reaction to the podcast; it wasn't personal. You, on the other hand, are making childish ad hominem remarks, which I don't appreciate.

No other sources made the same claim. ps3land (a GameSpot "union" member) said "we're holding our breath". Kotaku said it was a "rumor". Also, as you can read (how convenient) on gamasutra [6] "Up until this confirmation, Bethesda has adamantly denied that the game was in development for either platform.".

PS3 Controller

I've read on ps3land.com that the new controller may be named the sixaxis because of the six different mediums of determining motion. No one has confirmed it yet but the name has been trademarked by SONY. Jasper 17:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

If you want to add it, you'll need to find a source (a link) first. Ex-Nintendo Employee 22:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

http://www.ps3land.com/article-701.php is the link to my previous post about the controller, I couldn't get the link earlier because I was at school and our filters are hardcore. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.67.99.233 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't need to be mentioned in this article. Not yet, at least. It is currently a rumor, one that would merely take up more space when we're trying to cut down on the article's size. The rumor is already addressed in the PS3 Controller article, with a source and everything. That's enough for now. Dancter 00:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

here is the US Trademark Application sent in by sony for "sixaxis"...i think that would be enough proof http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1I1/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.gov.uspto.tow.actions.DetailViewAction/.c/6_0_CH/.ce/7_0_1JJ/.p/5_0_1CH/.d/3#

Not really. The content of the application does not explicitly assert a relationship with the PS3 controller. Making the connection would still be original research. A patent approval was similarly presented as "proof" for the !!M service for Wii, which has yet to pan out as predicted. Considering that the SIXAXIS logo is featured on new official press images of the controller, I imagine it's only a matter of time before we get the sort of confirmation we need. But as of right now, it's just as possible that the SIXAXIS trademark refers to the technology, rather than the device. Just wait a little longer. I'm sure Sony will announce something about it soon. Dancter 22:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

US$?

why are all the international retail prices exchanged into us dollars,isnt that a little biased? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.30.202.19 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

perhaps. the table could be a bit smaller. The release date is already shown in the infobox above. The price comparisons are not valid because different countries have different import and tax policies, right? If that's true, this is supposed to be about the console, not taxation in different countries. --gatoatigrado 02:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not biased, this is the English version of the Wikipedia so dollars make sense. Plus, Wikipedia is based in the US. However, I'd expect this page in other languages feature all the money amounts in their own currencies, and our USD into their currency. LighthouseJ 21:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

You do realise that the US isn't the only country in the world that speaks English? As Gatoatigrado says above, these comparisons are meaningless anyway, since the US prices are given without tax, while those in the EU, say, are given including VAT. Tim 09:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

even better said. the small table looks better anyway. --gatoatigrado 03:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

+1 -- Chronos 18:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately the statistics for Wikipedia is currently down so I can't make the assertion that most traffic to the English Wikipedia originates from the United States. However, take an article like Security clearance (of which I have contributed to). This article should introduce the general idea of intelligence security levels and how they interact with each other, but the system in place in the US is prominently displayed. Even the UK has a blurb at the bottom and a seperate special page elsewhere. My point is that most of the writing in the English Wikipedia is by Americans for Americans. Sure, Austrailians, Brits and other English speakers add their variations but Americans set the pace here. Typical knee-jerk foreigner reactions ... Make your own free encyclopedia and _I_ won't do you the dishonor of complaining about it. LighthouseJ 20:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it is http://en.wikipedia.org and not http://us.wikipedia.org. - Chronos 20:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I was willing to support the use of US dollar conversions (most countries use US dollars for reporting exchange rates anyway, and the issue of various taxes could be addressed without outright removal), but certainly not for the reasons LighthouseJ was giving. There are reasons why Wikipedias are distinguished by language, and not territory, WP:NPOV being only the most obvious among them. This is an English-language Wikipedia, and while Americans do constitute the largest single group of users here, the number of non-Americans here is not insignificant, and shouldn't simply be dismissed by a "majority rules" mindset. We should not be so quick to cave in to systemic bias. Dancter 21:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

The choice of one specific currency for price conversions is to allow easy comparison between prices, not to allow one social or geographic group to readily identify with pricing. As such it is nothing but a lingua franca for pricing, and the choice of currency is arbitrary. I'm not American, but have no problem with the USD being used - it's an internationally used currency. The question of VAT and sales taxes is one that cropped up on Wii recently, and I believe we came up with a solution there, after much debate, that is of genuine use to the reader. Also, giving prices down the the final dollar, and updating ever week seems to be an attempt at spurious precision - to the nearest $5 is good enough - we're only trying to help people grasp the differences between prices, not help them budget their Christmas spending. Dpmarshall 22:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with the use of dollars, it's the tax issue that's the main one here. Tim 16:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I would think nearest $10 would be even better. If you can remove taxes, I guess it's fine. --gatoatigrado 00:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I absolutely believe the USD conversion should remain--USD is one of the 'baseline' currencies in the world used to compare the relative strength of currencies; in the English-speaking world, I'd venture to say it's the most common, though likely by a plurality. It doesn't really hurt anything to keep the there, either. -Mance 11:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I Absolutely agree with everything Mance states directly above. I believe it is very relevant as often times in various places you can find comparisons made to USD as a baseline so people can get a sense of comparison. -Billywhack 06:50, 15 october 2006 (UTC)

Please read the previous arguments. This article does not compare tax policies of different regimes. --gatoatigrado 20:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reflecting your support of the US Dollar. I am sure many people feel the same way. It is a decent system of currency, considering it has repelled counterfeit based more effectively than things such as the English pound using a relatively old design. In fact, it would be equally okay if we used any other currency - all a user would have to do is look at the comparison from one country to the converter currency to their own currency. Anyone with simple math skills could do this. US prices are good because they don't reflect taxes as well. When you have removed taxes for other countries for even comparison, feel free to put it back in. And the \d\d\d.\d\d\d\d\d\d "precision" needs to be removed with rounding to the nearest $5 or $10. Not only does that remove the need to update them, it gives a realistic sense of accuracy. --gatoatigrado 20:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Is it true that you can't rent games for the PS3

IF this is, they are screwed up the @$$ The Bird71.236.225.50 01:42, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

yes you can rent. what you have to understand is there are huge numbers of scare tactics and false rumors by people who want the PS3 to fail. They only need 1 of these rumors to pass onto a guy who doesnt have the internet to correct the misgiving and they lose 1 sale. In 2 months all will be revealed, every single detail so there is no point worrying about all these incredible news that keep popping up and just wait.

Are you sure? I heard that they thought about taking the idea out....but it would delay the launch....So yeah, you CAN'T rent games. the bird66.154.192.129 15:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The rumors that the playstation 3 console will be designed not to playback rented or used games or that brand new purchased games will be tethered to play only on the console it was first played on are FALSE. If I recall correctly, these rumors began several months ago when Sony acquired the patent to such technology and computer game reporting sites created articles on the possibilities of its application to future media formats.

Since that time, Sony has stated several times that it will not the apply such a feature to the Playstation 3 console. An article in the Los Angeles Times Business section (featured three months ago?) explains this rumor and mentions that it will not be used. Incidentally, the article puts a altruistic spin on the rumor by stating that Sony obtained the patents so that no corporation would ever apply it (without paying hefty licensing fees).--Kenn Caesius 16:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Retailers such as Gamefly opened PS3 rentals. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.167.37.245 (talk • contribs) .

In order for that to work all PS3s would have to be connected to the internet and send the message to Sony or the developer/publisher, or all PS3s would have to be able to write on the Blu-Ray Discs, but that would cost a lot more just for the writing capabilities. Amish Gramish 02:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

this is incorrect

unless they managed to pull off some crud licensing thing.... this rumor needs to die. --gatoatigrado 06:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

This rumor started out with the rootkit scandal,for some reason. We'll see what happens in a few weeks... --The jazz musician 01:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

PNP and Xfire information is incorrect

Location of error: [7]

The reference article was updated with this information: "SOE has been in talks with Xfire about potentially including some of their technology in Untold Legends Dark Kingdom, our PlayStation 3 launch title. This proposed deal is completely separate and independent from the PlayStation Network Platform, and is something that SOE was examining specifically for Dark Kingdom. More information on Xfire and Dark Kingdom will be coming soon." [8]

(emphasis mine)

69.181.2.143 06:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

A bit underwhelming...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6158144.html

Not exactly mindblowing as I've been hearing, this is protected yes? Keep it like that. The keynote description doesn't sound all too impressive (Gs writer), especially with the one trailer being Afrika not really showing what the games about. But I know there's some good news. Keep alert from vandalism and remove that big fat announcement up there, it's overlapping things and it doesn't mention that as of now that's it's confirmed for Japan only. Note this may be a Japan only price drop friends, don't jump the gun.--Signor 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

SCEA told www.1up.com that HDMI was standard for all PS3s. http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3153860 Amish Gramish 02:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Configs changed: HDMI in both models

"7:22: A question on why HDMI only is in the high level version of the PS3 only. Kutaragi explains that sony was worried that if they put the HDMI in the lower version, some would complain about having to pay for something they don't want. However, HDMI penetration has come faster than expected. He then asks people if they want HDMI in all models. Everyone in the audience says yes. He then confirms that all models, including the 20 gig version, will have an HDMI port."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734010p1.html --Ciao 90 03:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

A Japanese source http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/games/articles/0609/22/news034.html. --Revth 07:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this still only Japan? From that very article: "From what we can tell, this is only for Japan. You'll have to wait for overseas confirmation to see if this applies in your territory as well." Reverting to "no" as such, and removing the link as it's clearly misleading. You only had to read the very next sentence to see... gspawn 11:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Composite AV cables?

Not composite.. it's component because you can use just one cable of the component to fit as composite. This is already made on Xbox 360 Premium. I really doubt the "HD-console" will give stupid composite cables.. this is nonsense. --Ciao 90 03:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

As the PS3 supports both component and HDMI it is not entirely unreasonable if they choose only to give low definition cables. It is $10 online, and you have no evidence to the contrary. Do not edit the article if something seems unlikely; find a good source first, then discuss it, then edit. Thanks. By the way, I like the ps3 as well, but this is not the place to discuss that. Wikipedia's purpose is to inform, not convince. With multiple editors, it can hopefully come as close as possible to npov. --gatoatigrado 03:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm.. say the package comes with composite is misleading. This is type of information that we should wait the launch. The box is fine now. --Ciao 90 02:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

PS3 Article is inconsistent about HDMI Port

The table of PS3 features in this article indicates that both "Flavors" of the PS3 will have HDMI ports. But the article states that the 20-GB version will not have one, and that this may interfear with high resolution playback of Blu-Ray discs.

This is important, because the PS3 will be the cheapest blu-ray player on the market at time of launch (probably). This would be the primary reason for me to buy one, although I will do some gaming. I don't think I'd need a 60GB hard drive otherwise.

What's the story?

The news was just updated; I think this has been fixed. --gatoatigrado 16:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

In every single territory EXCEPT Japan, there is no HDMI in the 20gig. Changing to "No" as such. Someone can find a way to note the exception if they want, but at launch, only one in five PS3 20gigs will have HDMI (based on US vs Japan shipment numbers stated by Sony). gspawn 02:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Warhawk?

Why is Warhawk listed as a launch title when the release date for it is August 2007? --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 00:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I think this was recent. Gamespot says tba now. I will move it. another source said the game is only about half done. --gatoatigrado 04:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

You guys got THREE DAYS to add this in, or that's it. I will

Y'all know that the PLAYSTATION 3 can have up to 7-8 controllers right? If not, that I'll add that in once I get back from Las Vegas...Again. Three days....... The Bird71.236.225.50 01:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Seriously, what is "three days" ultimatum nonsense? If you have something to add, then go ahead and add it. I have no idea what threatening to contribute positively to Wikipedia is supposed to accomplish. Dancter 01:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

lol. If you give me a link I will add it using the cite template. save details for the ps3 controller article though. --gatoatigrado 04:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

he doesn't have an account apparently. --gatoatigrado 04:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I added it in, though to be honest, "The Bird"'s edit history doesn't give instill much confidence that their post was made completely in good faith. Dancter 05:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Nice job finding the link. --gatoatigrado 17:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I find it odd that the PS3 supports 7 controllers via bluetooth but the controller itself has 4 lights to indicate the controller number. You can see the lights on the wikipedia picture, but they are hard to read, here is a picture where you can see the writing: Controller Picture Link The specs say 7, so I agree that is the number to use, however I wonder if what Sony refers to a controller means up to 4 people but up to 7 devices. This would allow for 4 controllers, 2 headsets and a webcam or something. --Thax 22:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

He can't edit it as anonymous users can't edit the page now. Hbdragon88 07:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

You could have 7 controllers using 4 lights.(1 = a light) 1000 could 1 of them, 1100 would be 2nd, 1110 would be third, 1111 would be 4th 1010 would be the 5th,1001 the 6th and 1011 could be the 7th. It would be confusing but yeah...I say just put a small screen that shows the number >.> However this is very unlikly —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 167.93.28.235 (talk • contribs) .

7 SPEs?

What does that really mean? What is the difference from that with the xbox 360s 3 cores?Jimmy93211 12:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC) 16:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

You can think of the SPE's as individual mini-processors. The PPE is what controls and maintains the SPE. A programmer can give one of those mini-processors its own program which runs independant of everything else. The dual-cores and threads of todays processors (in the Xbox 360) don't have that independance. For example, say I have 100 units of work that needs to be done, 33% of it is audio, and 66% is video. The Xbox 360 might take the first three units of work (2 video and 1 audio) and evenly divide them among the 3 cores. If one core finishes it's work ahead of time, it has to wait to be given more (which is very possible not to be available on demand; thus CPU cycles are wasted). In the PS3, programmers can assign one SPE to work on audio and the other 2 on the video tasks, then basically forget about giving it work. All programmers need to do is make sure resources like textures are available for the SPE's to use. This independance of the processing elements from each other and the function of the rest of the system is what is one of the most important aspects of Cell. It's a much more efficient use of processing power than todays PC processors and what's in the Xbox 360. LighthouseJ 17:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

"If one core finishes it's work ahead of time, it has to wait to be given more" - I don't think so, if it has a good scheduling algorithm. I am pretty sure these things were solved when dual processor servers came out however many years ago. Unfortunately I don't know how it works, but I would imagine for all of these years they wouldn't want their second processor to be completely wasted. You might think it would be nice to have the PPE dedicated to "feeding" the SPE's, with a low chance of getting loaded down itself (although I think it might do the few integer intensive calculations). I remember I saw an article in the game developer's conference about animating a 10 000 unit crowd, and the spe's were only 33% loaded, waiting for the ppe to give them work. Hopefully more standard audio / video tasks are a bit more independent - in this simulation the crowd was interacting, probably reducing the number of operations each spe could do on a group of members before they began to interact with others. --gatoatigrado 00:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Your suspicion is merited. The statement you quoted is simply untrue, as are most of the other claims in LighthouseJ's explanation. Cell is basically MIMD-on-a-chip reminiscent of vector computer designs. It's pretty clear that it's a great design for vector computing, but it's not yet totally clear whether it is a really good alternative to the superscalar world game programmers are more used to. However, the whole industry seems to be going the parallelization route; Sony has just chosen to go with a more vectorized approach. It will be pretty interesting what IBM delivers with its octopiler (google it). If octopiler works well, Cell might end up being quite a successful approach to general computing after all. -- mattb @ 2006-09-26T01:59Z

that compiler looks very neat. i won't be surprised if the compilers become better at optimizing than programmers again. and it's neat to have a product with some potential in a few years. --gatoatigrado 04:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

about the dual processor servers - I think the dual core is almost the same, except for being on the same die and sharing the same cache. correct me if I'm wrong. --gatoatigrado 00:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Correct, though dual core packages may or may not share cache (and sometimes, may or may not have even shared the same die). -- mattb @ 2006-09-26T02:05Z

All processors have to wait some, even pipelined or superscalar processors. There's all kinds of things to make a processor wait (like out-of-order execution or page faults) even with the best scheduling algorithm. In the end, you try to minimize waiting but the processor will do some waiting. There simply is no perfect scheduling algorithm to completely use the processing element(s) all the time. To rebut mattb, I read about Cell from whitepapers on IBM's website and that's basically how they described the execution when applied to the PS3. True, I could have tossed out big words like you but who I was replying to didn't seem like they'd understand. If you have problems with what I said, then you have a problem with IBM's explanation (or maybe you don't understand Cell as much as you think you do). LighthouseJ 12:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Or perhaps you simply read IBM's description of something that has been around for years and, for lack of experience, assumed it is novel. There's nothing wrong with avoiding "big words" for simplicity if you can, but they are appropriate in a discussion of microarchitecture. You didn't do a very good job of explaining the different approaches to parallelism evident here in laymens' terms, so I gave a terse explanation of the issue. Again, Cell is MIMD-on-a-chip. It takes a very strong thread level route to parallelism rather than focusing on instruction parallelism. It's a different approach than a superscalar design, but it's hardly a new one (what's new is the level of integration). One of the fundamental concerns here is that thread level parallelism puts a lot of work on the programmer, who must figure out ways to parallelize a task. That rolls off the tongue nicely, but in practice can be exceedingly difficult to accomplish for many applications. This is largely why the superscalar method has been pretty popular for a while. Vector TLP has largely been confined to the supercomputing arena (see: BlueGene, SX-6, Cray, etc) because supercomputing often deals in "embarrassingly parallel" tasks.

That's why I indicated that it remains to be seen whether Cell can be a successful general purpose microprocessor (or indeed, an entirely successful game console microprocessor). IBM is working on a compiler (which I already mentioned) that is designed to make parallelization nearly transparent to the programmer. If that turns out to be the case, then suddenly a high TLP system is a very very desirable thing. -- mattb @ 2006-09-26T23:25Z

"the processor will do some waiting" - this happens any time you have to synchronize threads, or grab a task from a scheduling queue, etc. If the question requires a technical rebuttal, the use of jargon doesn't hurt unless it is just thrown out. Your rebuttal isn't a rebuttal. I don't think the main argument is about the cell, it's about the statement you said that the 3 core power chip will have to keep a core idle and wait for the others to finish. This is only true in the waiting before "finishing" a frame, and the same problem applies to the cell.

There's probably more on the cell article. It looks very neat. Apparently it has been 5 years since the project started. Amazing...long term corporate research. It seems impossible for AMD and Intel, biting at each other's throats and celebrating 30% performance gains every year or so. --gatoatigrado 00:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info!! So are these 7 SPEs the same power as the 3 cores but broken down in a way that will do the job faster? It is not like have 7 cores is it?lol

somewhat... I guess you could think of the spe's as more specialized for things like matrix operations, and the power processing element doing most of the main processing.

Thanks again Jimmy93211 12:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

L.A. Noire

I added L.A. Noire to the major titles. 1)because Rockstar games are in general considered mayor titles and 2)the buzz around the announcement of the game already pretty much gave it that status. JackSparrow Ninja 02:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I assumed you didn't write about it (as with most). I think it should be removed, but I changed it back if you have any more arguments. There used to be plenty of "unnamed <big name corporation> shooter" titles, about 50 actually, in the List of PlayStation 3 games, and they were fortunately removed. If that reason doesn't get it into the much longer list of games, it certainly doesn't belong on the main page. There is often a "buzz" around things. I think the other part you implied - that it has just been announced - shows it is not major yet. --gatoatigrado 04:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I changed White Knight Story from an action game to an RPG, and Devil May Cry 4 from a shooter to Action, We should fill the shooter list with Coded Arms, Turok, Medal of Honor: Airborne, etc...

Yes that's probably a better idea. I did the initial organization but I don't truly know these games. If they belong to a different genre, please change the infobox on their game pages. Again, please note that this is not the full list of PlayStation 3 games. Eventually it will have to be shrunk to the most major titles, as there will be many unless something bad happens to sony. --gatoatigrado 04:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Redirecting?

I thought PS4 had its own article. Now its being redirected to PS3. I wonder why...Sr13 08:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

yeah someone made a bad edit. [9]. --gatoatigrado 05:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the edit. Sr13 04:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

this page got messed up

I have been told to assume good faith, but the tables and stuff are completely messed up. I suggest reverting to [10]. We decided earlier not to use a table for the game because of the issue of "exclusives", and now with the cquote inside it and headers floating all the **** over, I think it's time to go back to the previous version. The additional criticism is undue weight. The criticism section is probably not a good idea... it would certainly be nice to have in the article, but as the article is unlocked now it's just an invitation for xbox 360 fanboys to vandalize the page. --24.7.86.143 20:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

okay, I am reverting it; the version before the revert is at [11]. the games table - the only thing that was changed, was so messed up, and we already decided not to have a table. It's too large and unsightly, and gives undue weight to things like who published what game. besides, it is misleading because the playstation 3 is region free. --24.7.86.143 20:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

please see [12] for the previous discussion. --24.7.86.143 20:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

even a well coded table gets messed up - see [13]. Information other than linking to games pages is irrelevant as far as the playstation 3 is concerned. If they are valuable, please write them as concise prose. --24.7.86.143 20:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Lock this page

Lock this page please. More vandalism 68.23.178.54 20:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

+1. -- Chronos 21:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

yeah same here. now. --24.7.86.143 21:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire

I wanted to add a link to Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire on the list of games as the Gundam franchise, while often underwhelming, has nonetheless been a staple of Sony systems for several years, and has a large following. However, it seems that there isn't yet a Wikipedia page about this game. Is there anyone out there who feels qualified to write up a quick blurb? I could do it, but I don't know all that much about the game yet aside from what's in the trailers. 129.128.233.48 23:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

If you want to try and build up the article before posting it - extremely short articles will probably be deleted - feel free to do it here. --gatoatigrado 05:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, it might be best to leave it off, for now. While the game does look impressive and has the potential to be a big seller, there just isn't that much information about it available at this time--even its release date has been pushed back significantly, to "TBA 2007." So, instead of writing a stub now that will probably just get deleted, we should wait until (at least) a release date is made public, and/or more information about the game is made public. Mance 11:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

PS 3 Pictures

Can someone please change the PS 3 picture at the top of the page? There are a lot of better pictures out there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Einstein the afrodude (talk • contribs) 03:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

If you can point us to a better picture with a license that is at least as free as the one we're currently using, that we could surely make the change. We have to avoid using images with more restrictive licensing whenever possible, according to Wikipedia's fair use criteria. Dancter 03:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I guess some moron deleted my notice. [14]. --gatoatigrado 04:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

How many times do we have to repeat ourselves, some people think we are dumb, we know Sony has released nice media photos of the PS3, we can't use them because of the above. Some people need to read more about how to use Wikipedia before doing changes. Someone please revert back to the original silver photo.Pumapayam 13:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not his fault; I wouldn't want to search through all of the discussion. The header should stay; that was the only real error. --gatoatigrado 17:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

oblivion launch?

okay, I see that it is probably coming. I didn't see a release date though. I hope the screenshots improve; they aren't very good right now. --24.7.86.143 04:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

There's already another article for this above listed as The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, which is a launch title, according to Official PlayStation Magazine it is a launch title, and also on Next-Gen.Biz, http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3901&Itemid=2 Amish Gramish 02:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

GUYS, THE PS3 GAMES WILL COST 7-80 DOLLARS

So it's true. The PS3 will have $80 games.

Link: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734950p1.html

Here's what this new article has to say:

QUOTE: "In Japan, the standard price of a PS2 game is 6,800 yen, with only the biggest titles like Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy rising to the 8,800 yen mark."

QUOTE: "To most gamers, the most eye-catching part of the feature is a claim about game prices. Citing "multiple information sources," the article states that the price of PS3 games will be concentrated in the 8,800 to 9,800 yen range."

Math Time:

6,800 Yen - $58.00 US (PS2 game price)

8,800 Yen = $75.50 US

9,800 Yen - $85.00 US

http://www.xe.com/ucc/

So $75 for the low end games and $85 for the good stuff.

The Japanese always pay a little more for games than we do. But its only a little. So its reasonable to say that PS3 games will range between $70 and $80 US*.

thebird71.236.225.50 01:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Games in Japan tend to cost $15 to $20 more than in the U.S., not "only a little". Amish Gramish 02:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

According to this article on GameSpot [15], games are being priced at $60 in the US, although Sony has made no official announcement on pricing yet so nothing definitive can be said. BryanG^(talk) 01:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to post the exact same comment twice on one page. It's bad form. I have deleted your earlier post to avoid redundancy. The reason we didn't include your US$70-80 figure is that it's original research, asserting something which wasn't directly stated by the source. And as BryanG said, we have another source that relates specifically to US prices, and which contrasts with your research. Dancter 01:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay thank you Dancter, also I would have deleted the previous statement but everytime I edit out some of my points I make on discussions I seem to get banned....Anyway, thank you. thebird71.236.225.50 02:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

www.sonystyle.com $59.99 endd of discussion. 159.153.138.70 23:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

PS3's defense

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.212.96.26 (talk • contribs) .

Uhh... That's nice... What does it have to do with Wikipedia? -- mattb @ 2006-09-29T19:35Z

yeah i was wondering that. perhaps he is criticizing the criticism section, but it's not pov if other people have criticized the playstation for its launch price. --gatoatigrado 19:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

i was criticizing the criticism section, and pretty much anyone who has bad-mouthed the console. but anyone who criticizes the PS3 for it's price, you know that person would buy it if it wasn't for the high price range.

Sorry but Blu-Ray has NOTHING Todo with the look of a game :) Almost Games aren't bigger as 8 GB so also a Dual Layer DVD can handle it. The reason the BluRay is in, is that you can view BluRay Movies. And Sony needs cash. Also its the best way to get a new Media Type to the masses. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.80.27.49 (talk • contribs) .

When people buy the Xbox 360 for 600+ dollars on ebay and criticize the PS3 for making that their normal price high is...dumb. Price is nothing if you have a system that backs up the price. Remember, your spending 50 bucks a year to play XBOX live which is most likely where microsoft is making the real money. In a couple years, you'll be saving money sorta.

Please do NOT allow the table to be adjusted in a way that allows IMPORTANT facts to be removed

Currently the Playstation 3 table has ONCE AGAIN experienced an alteration where it does not show fact-based information that is very important to gamers. The Playstation 3 will NOT include an HDMI cable, and it will NOT include a Component cable. This means that the Playstation 3 is not capable of displaying high-definition graphics out-of-the-box! This is an important factor. Please do not allow this information to be taken out of the table again. I am not going to waste time or life adding that AGAIN. Please add that information to the table and do not allow it to be removed. Here is the reference that shows Sony has announced that neither version of the Playstation 3 will come with any form of high-definition cable: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6157113.html 68.61.44.215 22:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)mike_mgoblue

"This means that the Playstation 3 is not capable of displaying high-definition graphics out-of-the-box!". Wrong. That's why it's not in the table and will not make it. Also, the fact that the PS3 doesn't include HDMI or Component cables at shipping is another thing, and this information doesn't belong in the System Features. The System Features table contains a list of FEATURES about the SYSTEM. Cables aren't features. -- Chronos 22:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

arguably bluetooth wireless controllers are not either, but it is obviously much more "gray" there. You are both overzealous fanboys; please tone down your comments even as we get closer to the playstation 3 launch (whether Chronos was speaking in imitation or not I don't know, but either way is inappropriate). --gatoatigrado 01:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

"Please add that information to the table and do not allow it to be removed" - this is a free encyclopedia. If you missed whatever discussion where it was decided to be removed, then I'm sorry, well, not really. --gatoatigrado 03:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Please don't get too worked up about the included cables. As the information is all speculative at this point it is okay to leave the section out for now; once the console launches the included cables will be revealed. We all know Sony changes things all of the time, so I wouldn't doubt if they included an HDMI cable at the last second. --Thax 03:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

us prices

well, if no one is going to convert them - i don't know how - the us prices should be removed. I think that was the consensus we reached above. --gatoatigrado 05:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to remove them(and the note below) whenever you want. Unneed and just clutters everything up.70.101.200.243 20:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

One question I have is, there was some news about the $499 price point being changed to $425 -- any sources for this? --Stratadrake 03:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the price of the 20 GB version was dropped in Japan to what would convert to about $425 in US currency, but it appears that the price drop is only for Japan, and that the 20 GB version will still be US$499 in the US. Dancter 03:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I see -- and apparently USA Today[16] says that the US price isn't affected. I just remember seeing a blurb on the subject in the morning news about a week ago. --Stratadrake 12:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that was the consensus reached above, at all. Most people seemed to be in favor of keeping the prices, if the VAT could be removed--so what's the problem? -Mance 14:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

ICT mention: do we really need it?

"An ICT flag can be set by content producers, which forces non-HDCP video down to a pixel resolution of 960×540 (50% greater than DVD-Video at NTSC resolution, and 25% greater than PAL resolution). SCEA president Kaz Hirai stated that it is "too early to speculate at this point" whether movie producers will activate the ICT feature.[8] According to German publisher Spiegel, a behind-the-scenes agreement was made not to enforce the ICT flag on next-generation optical formats until at least 2010, or possibly even 2012."

Does a paragraph like this really belong in the system configuration section? Initially it had some purpose when the lack of HDMI was problem HD playback but now it just seems out of place. Should we eliminate it, move to a another article, what? --Kenn Caesius 16:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

perhaps the Xbox 360 article, but they haven't even come out with the HD-DVD drive yet. --gatoatigrado 16:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

The only way you could use it is if you say that you would have to buy an HDMI cable at some point, and yes, with the HD-DVD drive for the Xbox 360. Amish Gramish 02:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I read on some highly unreliable sites that the Xbox 360 may be able to support a HDMI output - the "AV" adapter in the back isn't a direct video port or anything. Actually here's an interview. "We do have the capability to deliver the software and, if needed, the hardware". [17]. There hasn't been much talk about it, so maybe best to wait. --gatoatigrado 08:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Execs for Microsoft have confirmed that the 360 is capable of HDMI-supported digital out, and that an HDMI cable outputting 1080p for movies (games are already done via Component) is completely possible for Xbox 360. They just don't think there's enough HDMI on the market to warrant releasing the cable. [18] So PS3 and 360 are in the same boat- you just have to buy an HDMI cable for 1080p movies. That means that this bit needs to be in for BOTH consoles, because neither can support 1080p on next-gen DVDs without it.gspawn 11:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)