PS3 to last 10 years?

lesman said:
Pertaining to the topic at hand, Sony is talking out of their ass, simple as that. 720p is the beginning *official* HD resolution...not 1080p. And in that interview when they state that "the games are rendered in 480i and then upscaled" they are purely taking cheap shots to try and confuse people who don't know what's going on...ie, the "dumb consumer". The 360 internally renders ALL games at 720p, and it's downscaled to 480i if you have that sort of TV. It's simple: Sony is using the "dumb consumer" tactic.
Click to expand...

Finally someone not talking out their BUTT!

If u look, alot of the newer HD set will also handle just a touch over 70fps so the 60fps stuff isn't the issue.

Ok, at that rate, i'd won't say the system will last 10 years, but if they use blu-ray with up to 50gig disc capabilities might give them better longivity, the extra space for future games that have larger/better graphics along with larger levels compared to the 360.

I'd hate to see loading times on this system though, also they don't mean for the hardware itself to last, cause stuff does break or wear out, they just mean the could be a entertainment center piece for 10 years.
 
They said similiar things about the PS1, which was actually true. It was still selling pretty well long after its 5-year prime lifespan and well into PS2's lifetime. It was actually outselling the Xbox1 for a couple years.

When they say PS3 is going to last 10 years, they don't mean it's going to dominate the market for 10 years; they just mean that its lifetime before they discontinue production will be 10 years.
 
RogueTrip said:
Finally someone not talking out their BUTT!

If u look, alot of the newer HD set will also handle just a touch over 70fps so the 60fps stuff isn't the issue.

Ok, at that rate, i'd won't say the system will last 10 years, but if they use blu-ray with up to 50gig disc capabilities might give them better longivity, the extra space for future games that have larger/better graphics along with larger levels compared to the 360.

I'd hate to see loading times on this system though, also they don't mean for the hardware itself to last, cause stuff does break or wear out, they just mean the could be a entertainment center piece for 10 years.
Click to expand...

Can you name an HDTV that will do 70FPS? No, because there aren't any. 60FPS is the *specification*, officially, for progressive scan, simple as that.

Also, the day when a developer fills the whole 25GB (any game that exceeds the 9GB of DVD will use a single layer BD-ROM, mark my words), let alone 50GB dual layer, with actual game CONTENT and not pre-rendered scenes, is the day I eat my own crap.

Load times on PS3 will be humorously slow. A 2X BD-ROM drive is roughly equal to a 6X DVD-ROM, and we all know how long those have been replaced by 12X-16X drives.

Jason
 
Im personally thinking 6 years top's. Then they would release another console. The PS3 may be around 10 years, but not as there main.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Also, the day when a developer fills the whole 25GB (any game that exceeds the 9GB of DVD will use a single layer BD-ROM, mark my words), let alone 50GB dual layer, with actual game CONTENT and not pre-rendered scenes, is the day I eat my own crap.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that we're never going to see 25 GB of game content? Ever?

Well... ok.

But I don't think so. ;)
 
At some stage video games will reach the point of diminishing returns in terms of graphics. Nintendo is the only one who has been making this argument when they emphasize gameplay over graphics. So, it is possible the next or following generation of consoles will last longer. Eventually, we will have video games that have virtually limitless power to produce images as detailed as the real world, and after that why would we need console upgrades? Anyway, 10 years is a long time and nobody knows what is going to happen between now and then. The point is simply that the next generation of consoles may have a longer lifespan since potential graphics improvements are much less than before.
 
Nintendo is the only one who has been making this argument when they emphasize gameplay over graphics.
Click to expand...

I just dont know about Nintendo. If your playing Gran Turismo for PS1 or Even the PS2. And someone starts playing PGR for the 360 next to you on a different display. Your going to want to play PGR, or at the very least stare at it for a good long time. It's hard to ignore that kind of Eye candy.

Gameplay over Grahpics anyday in my book. But graphics sale Games.
 
Well ill be glad,when im going to see people,eating the "crap" (words) they spread about the Ps3 someday.I also have a feeling that this day might come really soon. :D
 
If by really you mean winter, and by soon you mean 2006... then I can't wait for that day either :D

(gets in line for the poo buffett..)
 
With soon i meant when sony finaly reveal all the info about the Ps3 with some playable games ;) That wont be long,maybe even 23 days longer than today who knows.Then i can see alot of people eating their words :D All the "clues" are out there,we just have to connect them. ;)
 
When is this anouncement you speak of so quixotically supposed to come? January 7th?

What signifigance does that date hold?

TELL ME MAN, TELL ME!


...

Reveal your secrets!
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Can you name an HDTV that will do 70FPS? No, because there aren't any. 60FPS is the *specification*, officially, for progressive scan, simple as that.

Also, the day when a developer fills the whole 25GB (any game that exceeds the 9GB of DVD will use a single layer BD-ROM, mark my words), let alone 50GB dual layer, with actual game CONTENT and not pre-rendered scenes, is the day I eat my own crap.

Load times on PS3 will be humorously slow. A 2X BD-ROM drive is roughly equal to a 6X DVD-ROM, and we all know how long those have been replaced by 12X-16X drives.

Jason
Click to expand...
how do you get 70fps out of native 60hz tvs? are you a magician
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Can you name an HDTV that will do 70FPS? No, because there aren't any. 60FPS is the *specification*, officially, for progressive scan, simple as that.

Also, the day when a developer fills the whole 25GB (any game that exceeds the 9GB of DVD will use a single layer BD-ROM, mark my words), let alone 50GB dual layer, with actual game CONTENT and not pre-rendered scenes, is the day I eat my own crap.

Load times on PS3 will be humorously slow. A 2X BD-ROM drive is roughly equal to a 6X DVD-ROM, and we all know how long those have been replaced by 12X-16X drives.

Jason
Click to expand...

Are the load times really going to be that slow? Anyone got any numbers guesstimated about that and could point me towards them?
 
Yes i have...Blu-ray averages are higher than a 12x dvd drive..People must learn how to compare.We dont see the top speed only.

The blu-ray 1x theoretical reference transfer is 36 mbps(megabits).But Its be proved that the blu-ray in order to be functional as a movie player..It needs 56 mbps.So From now on we dont consider the 1x blu-ray as 36kbps anymore.The 2x blu-ray (that probably the Ps3 will have) is capable of 108kbps a.k.a 13.5 mbps (megabytes).And it will be near to it full reading potential.And the average reading will be alot higher than the x360 drive.We all know that the slower the drive is its easier to read to it fullest.That was a simple explanation of the matter...Ill try to find the link about the 108mbps of the blu-ray..Its alittle complicated but as i see it,we will never going to see a 1x reference speed blu-ray.Remeber the main reason of blu-ray is to be used as a movie player.So if the movie needs 54kbps (1,5x reference speed) then a 2x in order to be fanctional will be 108kbps.

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#2.3
 
arfi-gorgona said:
Yes i have...Blu-ray averages are higher than a 12x dvd drive..People must learn how to compare.We dont see the top speed only.

The blu-ray 1x theoretical reference transfer is 36 mbps(megabits).But Its be proved that the blu-ray in order to be functional as a movie player..It needs 56 mbps.So From now on we dont consider the 1x blu-ray as 36kbps anymore.The 2x blu-ray (that probably the Ps3 will have) is capable of 108kbps a.k.a 13.5 mbps (megabytes).And it will be near to it full reading potential.And the average reading will be alot higher than the x360 drive.We all know that the slower the drive is its easier to read to it fullest.That was a simple explanation of the matter...Ill try to find the link about the 108mbps of the blu-ray..
Click to expand...

Thanks... But nevermind, don't worry about it. Ill check in on that for myself. I.......Prefer my own research. Thanks again.
 
Sure, it can be there system for the next ten years if they want it to be. It just won't be current gen in another 5 years when the new Xbox and new nintendo come out.

It will be the death of Sony if they really think it will last for ten years.
 
would be nice if you posted a link to this 10 year comment. i beleive its 5 years from what i remember reading.
 
would be nice if you posted a link to this 10 year comment. i beleive its 5 years from what i remember reading.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you have been readin, but I remember reading that it was supposed to last 10 years as well. Of course it may not, but KK is always making outrageous statements.
 
Sony: The Playstation 3 will be the single most powerful computing device in the history of computers, will play the newest and best games for at least ten years, and is better than every single human being on the planet.

Satan: I'm Satan, and I approved this message.
 
While I got into it slightly in the OP's first thread regarding the PS3, one thing may very well curb the 10 year 'theory' proposed by Sony. Its highly dependent if the trend of Sony's DRM paranoia pisses off the end user enough for them to pass on by. The PS3 is going to do one other thing besides be a game console....its also going to be a launching to get Blu-Ray into as many homes as possible. That an Sony's insistance on proprietary interfaces that only work on their products.

I hate Sony myself, and I hate their business practices...i do like however how the whole Cell architecture was developed from the ground up to be a next generation media content machine. Now we have to see if Sony can truly get it, or if they cut their own nuts off by trying to control everything. This was an original argument I think with the PS2, if I recall too...but it was overcome I think. Time will tell. I need to be able to do something with these new contraptions other then to play games. Microsoft seems to be SOMEWHAT cool to open hardware, but they too are closed off on the software side of things. Meh.

We'll just have to wait to see what the modders can get them to do ;)
 
Ill say this, I think it's a whole truckload of PR bullshit. The PS3 will no doubt be powerful. But no amount of programming is going to carry any console for 10 years IF and that's IF another company release's nexgen hardware say 5 years after the PS3 is out.

It would be no different then Sony saying that the PS2 would last 10 years and now It's having to fend off the Xbox 360. If sony did'nt release the PS3 for another 5 years how well could the PS2 do in that amount of time against the 360? In 5 years time the 360 would Own the console market competing against the PS2, Not because the PS2 isin't a good console, but because it's so outclassed by the much newer technology.

With Sony's financial woes they can't give PS3's away like Microsoft will be doing. And they have already said this puppy is going to be expensive. They want buyers to think of it as an Investment. If people actually think they won't have to buy another console for 10 years then a $500-650 Price tag may not be to much of a turnoff.

I think it's purely PR.
 
Json23 said:
I don't know what you have been readin, but I remember reading that it was supposed to last 10 years as well. Of course it may not, but KK is always making outrageous statements.
Click to expand...

I posted the links on page 3 to the ten year articles.
 
How come all of the sony fan(boys)s keep talking about the ps3 like it's going to be the second coming? We don’t' have specs and all I hear is ps3 is gonna pwn.....

It's going to be the equivalent of the 360 period. There will be games you can play on both, and games you can't. Even if it has 1018p or i or fucking q, or does 1280 X 768 or 19 billion X 21 billion it won't be too noticeably different than the 360. This, no matter how much any of you on either side don't want to hear it, is how it is going to be.

It will be another competing option, like a good market should have, to another product (360, rev, psp, etc).

Why do people argue about it? It's funny how pc vs console is the equivalent to murder, but just about every other topic and every other thread turns into arguing and sometimes name calling.

Just make a pc vs console sticky and let everyone get their aggression out there....
 
eblislyge said:
With Sony's financial woes they can't give PS3's away like Microsoft will be doing. And they have already said this puppy is going to be expensive. They want buyers to think of it as an Investment. If people actually think they won't have to buy another console for 10 years then a $500-650 Price tag may not be to much of a turnoff.

I think it's purely PR.
Click to expand...
This is what thought exactly, first Sony kind of freaked people out that some will have to work extra hours to get PS3, and now stating this to cover their (not there) asses with supposed longetivity of the hardware. I think it's all BS, I mean if MS will put out a new console in 5 years then Sony has to have something against it, It doesn't matter how PS3 will be superior or not, but with new tech in 5 years MS will clearly take ground if unresponded.

Also, if PS3 will be really capable of doing graphics like those shown in trailers from E3 (killzone, warhawk, etc.) we won't be needing anything better because those graphics are really stunning, truly I don't want to go to virtual reality graphics.
 
While I certainly want great game play, i can't wait until I can play madden and not be able to distinguish whether or not I'm watching a tv game or playing the game.
 
Killzone? Heheh... if you like your console to play CGI movies, then yes, you'll enjoy that.
BTW, Blu-Ray will read slower than current highspeed DVD drives, no ifs ands or buts. The PS3, like the PS2, will not be the fastest at loading games (=understatement).

Of course it's PR. Hell, the ONLY advantage that the PS3 has over the X360 is the SPE's, which are only good for 1 thing: graphics. If you like your image quality, the PS3 will have a slight advantage. That said, it only has 1 CPU core, to the X360's 3. And even though they are both cache-crippled in-order cores, you can still do more (non-graphical) things with 3 cores than you can with 1. So I expect that the systems will be fairly evenly matched, and so should everyone else that expects the Cell to be the second coming of Jesus or something.

Let me repeat it to you... the X360 has 3 IBM PPE's at 3.2ghz with 1mb total cache. The PS3 has an EXTREMELY similar 1 IBM PPE at 3.2ghz with 7 SPE's designed for media/graphics processing (they are useless for anything else) and 512kb of total cache. If you expect one of these systems to beat the living shit out of the other because of a so-called "new architecture", be advised that the core technologies behind both machines are pretty much the same.

The notion that the PS3 will last 10 years as their main console is as ridiculous as Dick Cheney telling us that they will be greeted as liberators. The uneducated may believe either statement, but us here at the [H] know that in 5 years there will be a PS4 on the shelves. That's an absolute guarantee. And whether the 10 year comment was misquoted or misunderstood, it was SOME type of PR tactic meant to pull wool over what may be coming.

Hey... that just gave me an idea. The US should hire Kutaragi (aka Satan's little helper) as their PR director. It would make watching the news funny as hell :D
 
steviep said:
Killzone? Heheh... if you like your console to play CGI movies, then yes, you'll enjoy that.
BTW, Blu-Ray will read slower than current highspeed DVD drives, no ifs ands or buts. The PS3, like the PS2, will not be the fastest at loading games (=understatement).

Of course it's PR. Hell, the ONLY advantage that the PS3 has over the X360 is the SPE's, which are only good for 1 thing: graphics. If you like your image quality, the PS3 will have a slight advantage. That said, it only has 1 CPU core, to the X360's 3. And even though they are both cache-crippled in-order cores, you can still do more (non-graphical) things with 3 cores than you can with 1. So I expect that the systems will be fairly evenly matched, and so should everyone else that expects the Cell to be the second coming of Jesus or something.

Let me repeat it to you... the X360 has 3 IBM PPE's at 3.2ghz with 1mb total cache. The PS3 has an EXTREMELY similar 1 IBM PPE at 3.2ghz with 7 SPE's designed for media/graphics processing (they are useless for anything else) and 512kb of total cache. If you expect one of these systems to beat the living shit out of the other because of a so-called "new architecture", be advised that the core technologies behind both machines are pretty much the same.

The notion that the PS3 will last 10 years as their main console is as ridiculous as Dick Cheney telling us that they will be greeted as liberators. The uneducated may believe either statement, but us here at the [H] know that in 5 years there will be a PS4 on the shelves. That's an absolute guarantee. And whether the 10 year comment was misquoted or misunderstood, it was SOME type of PR tactic meant to pull wool over what may be coming.

Hey... that just gave me an idea. The US should hire Kutaragi (aka Satan's little helper) as their PR director. It would make watching the news funny as hell :D
Click to expand...
1x blueray(edit 2x probably cant either) transfer 1080p video :p afaik the highest ive seen is 2x which is funny because it doesnt have the transfer rate for movies
 
Speaking of PS3 shooters...

What happend to Factor 5's Lair? I want to watch the trailer, but for some reason no one has it. Anywhere. :confused:

Oh yeah, the topic. Yeah, just PR talk. :D Someone earlier made the analogy about the PS1 being alive well into the life of the PS2, and so I think this is going to the same deal. PS3 will be the prime focus of Sony's efforts for maybe 4-6 years, and then we'll see it fade out as everyone gets hyped about the introduction of warp-bend-space-time-continuum PS4, light-phase-inducting-explosion X-1080, and super-gyro-crazy-mind-controlled Revolution: Reloaded.
 
Just to clear up some confusion, the ATSC has recently finalized the 1080p standard to support 23.976, 24, 29.97 and 30 Hz.

1080p30 uses 1920x1080 pixels of resolution per frame, this means that in order to take advantage of this resolution you need a display with a resolution equal to or greater than that. For example many TV's currently support 1080p, however their native resolution is 1366 x 768. What you are effectively getting by running at 1080p30 is 720p60 resolution running at only 30 fps.

The reason why 1080p is limited to 30 Hz and 720p is set at 60 Hz comes down the bandwidth, both use a comparable amount of bandwidth.

For this generation of consoles 720p is the best resolution to use because it is progressive scan, has a high frame rate and a good resolution. Like others have said already, few games are going to run at 1080p as the performance trade off running at the resolution would mean lowering the overall quality of the ingame assets. This isn't worth doing as a majority of people with HDTV sets can't display true full resolution 1080p frames anyway.
Click to expand...


hm?
 
Kutaragi reminds me in a lot of ways of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Iraq at the time of the main invasion of Baghdad in our current US debacle.

Some great past Kutaragi gems include this current one being debated, and my favorite regarding the PSP, the 'we designed it like that on purpose'

Oh you mean you made one of the buttons not feel right on purpose, because if you actually achieved perfection in your own right, your self inflated ego might crush you?

I expect the BS alert to raise to red shortly after the new year, and procede through to bumpy flaming crimson until someone puts hands on and plays this damn thing.


oh and
Ballz2TheWallz said:
please......we could output 200000x2000000@1000hz, doesnt mean THATS THE COMPATABILITY STANDARD, and yes i found out the STANDARD for 1080p is 1920x1080@60hz, so is 1080i but its of course interlaced
Click to expand...

WTF does that have to do with anything I said? Nowhere did I state anything about standards of compatibility. Please make sure are reading before you post replies to my threads. If 1920x1080 was less than a 60hz refresh rate, it wouldn't be a progressive signal now would it? I was responding to the claim that it was a 30hz signal.

This is twice now, why are we having this issue?
 
Kahnvex said:
Kutaragi reminds me in a lot of ways of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Iraq at the time of the main invasion of Baghdad in our current US debacle.

Some great past Kutaragi gems include this current one being debated, and my favorite regarding the PSP, the 'we designed it like that on purpose'

Oh you mean you made one of the buttons not feel right on purpose, because if you actually achieved perfection in your own right, your self inflated ego might crush you?

I expect the BS alert to raise to red shortly after the new year, and procede through to bumpy flaming crimson until someone puts hands on and plays this damn thing.


oh and


WTF does that have to do with anything I said? Nowhere did I state anything about standards of compatibility. Please make sure are reading before you post replies to my threads. If 1920x1080 was less than a 60hz refresh rate, it wouldn't be a progressive signal now would it? I was responding to the claim that it was a 30hz signal.

This is twice now, why are we having this issue?
Click to expand...
progressive doesnt automatically mean 60hz it just means your seeing each FULL frame in each single screen refresh instead of the full frame being split between 2 refreshes in interlace
 
Gotcha, I see where we got off from then.

Heres my understanding of the process

Interlaced takes 60 frames, but because of the process of interlacing you get 30 because of the alternating frames.

Progressive displays all 60 at once, you see all the frames hence the better picture

Thats where I was coming from, so technically I suppose 30 frames progressive makes sense from a tech perspective, but in implementation in doesn't really seem like it would benefit the end user. I.E. 1080p30 vs 1080i
 
Progressive scan normally gives a better picture, but it's only noticable with very good sources and on larger screens.

A progressive scan display will show all of frame 1 then all of frame 2 then all of frame 3

In an interlaced display it shows the first half of frame 1 then the second half of frame 1 then the first half of frame 2. So at this moment in time every other display line is frame 1 and the other lines are frame 2. This can lead to discontinuities in the picture. Again this really only affects the higher end stuff it's present on the lower end stuff, it's just imperceptible.
 
Ok I'll chime in.

Although I think the 10 year claim by Sony is just PR to get people that are on the fence about the 360 to hold off, I do wonder if we aren't gonna hit a wall as far as the NEED for more powerful hardware. I mean is there really anything these two machines won't do for a programmer?

I kind of find this true about my computer. I don't need to upgrade nearly as often as I used to back in the 90's.

Just a thought.
 
Kahnvex said:
Gotcha, I see where we got off from then.

Heres my understanding of the process

Interlaced takes 60 frames, but because of the process of interlacing you get 30 because of the alternating frames.

Progressive displays all 60 at once, you see all the frames hence the better picture

Thats where I was coming from, so technically I suppose 30 frames progressive makes sense from a tech perspective, but in implementation in doesn't really seem like it would benefit the end user. I.E. 1080p30 vs 1080i
Click to expand...
all its doing in reality is eliminating interlaceing artifacting, so really unless you plan to use a 1080p tv as a pc monitor the standards are set and not 1080p isnt so amazing....same resolution with differnt display method
 
There will always be a need for better hardware. If not for graphics, then for processing more sophisticated AI and gaming environments that are infinitely larger than even the largest MMO while having photorealistic visuals.

It will be a long time before we reach a "brick wall" where nothing can be improved upon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top