Is The Sony PS3 Worth It?

[Suhit Gupta]

http://abcnews.com.com/Sony_PlayStation_3_60GB/4505-6464_7-31355103.html?tag=pdtl-list

"In the gaming world, being first to market has its advantages, but it also has some downsides. With its Xbox 360, Microsoft has staked itself a year lead over archrival Sony in the next-gen gaming wars and, just as importantly, the battle for living-room dominance--these powerful minicomputers also do double duty as digital media hubs. In those 12 months, Microsoft has managed to sell several million consoles, work through some hardware glitches, upgrade the system's internal software, and bring out a full selection of accessories as well as a few signature games, including the company's own smash hit, Gears of War. But that year has also given Sony time to polish its more ambitious--and pricier--PlayStation 3. Like the 360, the PS3 is available in two versions. Both feature the brand new Cell processor, a built-in Blu-ray player, and HDMI video output. The baseline 20GB version retails for $500, while the step-up deluxe model--reviewed here--boasts a 60GB hard drive, built-in Wi-Fi, a multiformat memory card reader, and silver trim for $100 more. Even though its original specs included even more features--dual HDMI output, for example--what's left is still a lot to throw into a new system, and the final product, expensive though it is, is quite impressive."



I think most people are in agreement that the XBox 360 is just as good as the PS3 when it comes to gaming features but in terms of pure specs, the PS3 is clearly better. Of course, this matters only if you can get your hands on one. If you do however get your hands on one, you will enjoy all games in high-definition; watch high-def Blu-ray movies in addition to standard DVDs; and HDMI output with 1080p support.

[Suhit Gupta]

http://abcnews.com.com/Sony_PlayStation_3_60GB/4505-6464_7-31355103.html?tag=pdtl-list

"In the gaming world, being first to market has its advantages, but it also has some downsides. With its Xbox 360, Microsoft has staked itself a year lead over archrival Sony in the next-gen gaming wars and, just as importantly, the battle for living-room dominance--these powerful minicomputers also do double duty as digital media hubs. In those 12 months, Microsoft has managed to sell several million consoles, work through some hardware glitches, upgrade the system's internal software, and bring out a full selection of accessories as well as a few signature games, including the company's own smash hit, Gears of War. But that year has also given Sony time to polish its more ambitious--and pricier--PlayStation 3. Like the 360, the PS3 is available in two versions. Both feature the brand new Cell processor, a built-in Blu-ray player, and HDMI video output. The baseline 20GB version retails for $500, while the step-up deluxe model--reviewed here--boasts a 60GB hard drive, built-in Wi-Fi, a multiformat memory card reader, and silver trim for $100 more. Even though its original specs included even more features--dual HDMI output, for example--what's left is still a lot to throw into a new system, and the final product, expensive though it is, is quite impressive."



I think most people are in agreement that the XBox 360 is just as good as the PS3 when it comes to gaming features but in terms of pure specs, the PS3 is clearly better. Of course, this matters only if you can get your hands on one. If you do however get your hands on one, you will enjoy all games in high-definition; watch high-def Blu-ray movies in addition to standard DVDs; and HDMI output with 1080p support.

[Chris Gohlke]

At the current pricing, no way. I think HD DVD will win, so BlueRay is just a worthless add on for me. I'll be going with the Wii for now and with a 360 next year.

[rzanology]

Is the ps3 worth it? No. Was the ps3 worth it? Hell yes. Pound for pound spec for spec it’s a better machine. But that has nothing to do with whats going on here. The 360 has been out for a year now, and that is a year that microsoft used to the best of their ability. Lets take it back to e3...when sony lied and said the kill zone demo was actually real time. Well...guess what....360 has the graphics from that kill zone movie...and we have it NOW aka gears of war. This proves the 360 is just as capable as the ps3. Lets put gaming to the side for a second. Sony says they want the ps3 to be the ultimate living room component. Well....guess what, its not, the 360 is, and sony seems to be following hard in the footsteps of microsoft. Strangely enough, they still can't seem to mimic the right things. The 360 is really shaping up to be much more than we ever thought it would. Streaming form wmp11? 1080p? Hd video downloads? All these things with an update? This is madness. I was reading over at gizmodo, when you plug the ipod into the ps3 it shows up as a hard drive, and when you plug the zune it, it doesn’t even recognize it. What is going on sony? These are all things microsoft has squared away. One could argue microsfot had a year to do the same...but lets not forget...SO DID SONY! Sony had a whole year to sit on the side and watch and learn, much like microsoft did with the first xbox. Microsoft watched, learned and executed with the first xbox, why can't sony do this with the ps3? My point is, so is losing too much ground. Game wise, no matter what they do microsoft will be a step ahead...and they will hurt them no matter what. I didn’t even get into xbox live, we all know sony has nothing to offer like xbox live. When you have a major update for your console/product the first day of its launch....that clearly shows the world you are not ready. Could you imagine being told when you buy your brand new bmw m3, you'll have to leave it at the dealer for a day so they can fix a problem they are having with the engine? How would that sound to you? Is the ps3 worth it? No...not at this point. We’re no longer in the days where sony owns a crap load of exclusive games, infact...a whole lot of companies jumped ship...rockstar and ea to name a few. Sony has lost its iron grip on the industry. This is not surprising...this has always been the case in the game industry. Nintendo....sega...and now sony. They all must and will fall. I think people are so unwilling to admit sony has fallen only because its to the hands of microsoft...and we all know the whole world loves to hate microsoft.

[Doug Johnson]

I'm sure the PS3 is a great machine... great at playing games, and adequate, if not good, at playing Blu-ray movies. But the 360 is a great machine too, and its considerably less money.

Yes, if you factor in the HD-DVD add-on the 360 is the same price as the PS3. But, honestly, how many people use their game consoles to watch movies? Especially in the target market of the PS3? Most people who are able to afford the PS3 will probably also be able to afford a separate player (once they come down in price anyway). I don't see that as a super significant selling point, even though Sony and most PS3 supporters do. None of the consoles so far have been good movie players, and I doubt the PS3 will be either. And it won't be long before the HD players will be cheap enough that nobody will want to use their game console for movie playback. It might be a slight advantage for PS3 short-term, but somehow I doubt it. Especially considering the movie selection currently available on Blu-ray: nothing I'd want to buy.

The graphics on the PS3 I'm sure will be killer. But so are the graphics on the 360. I really hope Sony didn't screw up the graphics on the PS3 like they did on the PS2. I can't stand to watch my brother play games on his PS2; the aliasing and poor texture mapping actually hurts my eyes. I read somewhere that Sony is not requiring AA on PS3 games. That's a big mistake if you ask me.

In order for the PS3 to succeed they will have to have a lot of killer games, and they'd better hurry. Microsoft has a year and 200-game head start. And I hope for their sake that they have something equivalent to Xbox Live Arcade... I play games on XLA more than 360 games, because they are simpler and in a lot of ways more fun. The Wii seems to be focusing on great gameplay rather than amazing specifications, and I think it will succeed based on that and its low price.

Will the PS3 succeed? Most likely. They've got a huge base of enthusiastic PS2 fans that will be happy to have the new console. But as how many will pay the price to upgrade? And how many new customers will they attract? My guess is that it won't be as many as Sony hopes. The price is just too high.

Will I be buying a PS3? You betcha. So I can turn around and sell it on eBay for several hundred dollars above its already inflated price. I have no interest in actually owning one, though; I love my 360. And I will also be buying a Wii... not to sell, but to actually play the games.

[jeffd]

Actually I think the xbox360 may have the better video chip. The unified shaders are real nice and it seems the xbox360 handles adding AA much better, while the PS3 takes a significant frame hit.

[Felix Torres]

Originally Posted by jeffd

Actually I think the xbox360 may have the better video chip. The unified shaders are real nice and it seems the xbox360 handles adding AA much better, while the PS3 takes a significant frame hit.

There is a whole story there, actually.
A looong story. The bottom-line, however, is that the 360 has a waaay better graphics chip: the 360's XENOS gpu is about 80-90% of a 2007-vintage DirectX10 chip, whereas the PS3 chip is merely a current-gen (2005-6) mid-range DirectX9 gpu. And the 360 chip has more memory and way more bandwidth to work with. And on top of that, the 360 uses memory sparringly and effectively with on-the-fly compression and decompression. I've seen a report that the 360 architecture is so ridiculously well-balanced the GPU can easily run at 95% of peak efficiency for a broad range of heavy-duty graphics. Translation: it has a lot of theoretical power *and* it delivers on that promise.

The most damning comment I've seen was that because of the bandwidth advantages of the 360, it will easily deliver *clearly* better performance at 1080p than the PS3, even though MS doesn't make much of a point of it. Its almost as if MS was daring Sony to make an issue out of 1080p performance...

Or to put it another way: the things Sony has been hyping on PS3 just happen to be the very things the 360 does *way* better than PS3, while they are ignoring the areas in which the PS3 has slight advantages over the 360. 8O ???

A full point by point comparo of real-world functionality (as opposed to theoretical specs) would show the 360 winning about 2/3 of a long list of comparison points. In general, the PS3s uncontested advantages come down to:
- 10-15% better cpu performance on physics and vector code
- HDMI
- Linux
- unlocked hard drive file system

Other "advantages" are actually trade-offs:
- Bluetooth support for the remotes and controllers, but no infrared, means no universal remote support
- bluray media for games means 23GB of content but half the data-rate; most games apparently pre-install hundreds of MB of data on the HD to compensate
- ability to copy music files to the HD for local playback, but no streaming
- Mpeg 1,2,4 support but not for DiVX or WMV/VC1
- BD-Rom playback but no upscaling of DVDs or video files
- tilt-sensor controllers but no rumble

And then, there's the "features" that are a bit less than advertised:
- "free online gameplay"... except for games that chose to charge for it
- unified online IDs and buddy lists, except for games that choose to go it alone (Resistance, no less...)
- 100% backwards compatibility, except for the games that don't run or lose all audio :twisted:

Finally, there's inexplicable glitches, like how can a graphics-light *launch* game like Tony Hawk Project 8 end up with major frame rate issues? Or why the signature game (Resistance) for a console heavily hyped as 1080p capable, just happens to run at 720p? :lol:

The PS3 hardware is actually pretty decent in absolute terms but it does not live up to the hype or the price structure its been saddled with by Sony management.

Small wonder MS has publicly stated that they *welcome* comparisons.

I'm sure the PS3 will make a good buy as a living room Linux box, if you can actually find one before next june, but as a gaming console? Not in 06 or 07.
Maybe once the price drops?

[Felix Torres]

Update: Expected US launch shipment estimates just got cut by 50% from last week's reduced estimates:
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?op...=4205&Itemid=2

150-200K units at launch?
That's 1/3 of what the 360 launched with.
And 750K by new year's?

Never mind: it doesn't matter if its worth it or not if only reviewers and pro athletes can get it. :roll:

[sojourner753]

I heard a radio spot this morning talking about the launch of the PS3. They said that its not backwards compatible with PS2 games.

Can anyone confirm or deny this?

[Felix Torres]

Originally Posted by sojourner753

I heard a radio spot this morning talking about the launch of the PS3. They said that its not backwards compatible with PS2 games.

Can anyone confirm or deny this?

Can confirm that as of today it is compatible with some, not all.
(Some run eithout audio, some not at all. Supposedly, the majority do.)
http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/14/tech...ion=2006111407
Sony is supposed to be working on fixes for the problems but its hard to tell what runs and what doesn't because there is no official list like for 360, so its hit and miss for now.
They claim its only a handful and we know how trustworthy Sony is, so...

Your call.

[Felix Torres]

Seems the PS3 doesn't upscale at all; not DVDs, not videos, and not games:
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/746/746282p1.html

When a 720 game encounters a 1080i display (CRTs, for example) it downscales to 480p instead of upscaling and interlacing, the way the 360 does it.

It really, really, wants to see at least a 720 display.