$299 is the sweet spot IMO. Go significantly over $299 and consumers cannot justify the price for what is essentially a high-tech toy. Go significantly below $299 and the perception is your system is underpowered. I think this generation demonstrated that you can launch a videogame system at too low a price. Consumers who were willing to pay up to $300 for a new videogame system saw PS2 and X-Box at $300 and Dreamcast and Gamecube at $200 and concluded, fairly or not, that the $200 systems were inferior. I don't think a $200 launch price for Xenon would be a good idea.
Developers: How important is the PS3 / Xbox 2 storage medium?
- Thread starter john tv
- Start date
$299 is the sweet spot IMO. Go significantly over $299 and consumers cannot justify the price for what is essentially a high-tech toy. Go significantly below $299 and the perception is your system is underpowered. I think this generation demonstrated that you can launch a videogame system at too low a price. Consumers who were willing to pay up to $300 for a new videogame system saw PS2 and X-Box at $300 and Dreamcast and Gamecube at $200 and concluded, fairly or not, that the $200 systems were inferior. I don't think a $200 launch price for Xenon would be a good idea.
Shogmaster said:
100% of stores will be demoing the HD gaming of Xenon and PS3 on HDTVs. Sony will likely put out a demo disc which will show off HD gaming and HD movies and have the "split screen" of how big the difference is. The average Joe sees that the PS3 has "much better graphics" and is "designed for the future."
The Dreamcast didn't die because the hardware was underpowered, it died because the average Joe thought it was underpowered. (Although FWIW, there's no way the Dreamcast could pull off GT4).
Crazymoogle
Member
More storage == More storage!
We like more storage! Sometimes we don't need more storage (Rez, ICO, and Gradius V come to mind), but - and I'm speaking from experience - it's always better to undershoot storage requirements than overshoot them.
We like more storage! Sometimes we don't need more storage (Rez, ICO, and Gradius V come to mind), but - and I'm speaking from experience - it's always better to undershoot storage requirements than overshoot them.
From watch.impress:
This is probably not for PS3 but....
Philips develops all-in-one optical pickup unit for CD, DVD and Blu-ray Disc recording and playback.
From watch.impress:
This is probably not for PS3 but....
Philips develops all-in-one optical pickup unit for CD, DVD and Blu-ray Disc recording and playback.
From watch.impress:
I'd guess that most divergence will happen over the same things that happened this generation...online play and downloadable content. Those also involve the most platform specific code...
Unless Sony is planning to lose $300 per system, I don't see how they're going to keep up with Microsoft's fairly savvy business plan for keeping the functionality of Xbox but still making lots of profit.
Unless Sony is planning to lose $300 per system, I don't see how they're going to keep up with Microsoft's fairly savvy business plan for keeping the functionality of Xbox but still making lots of profit.
More storage is always a good thing but to some extent excessive amounts of it just lets us get lazy.
I mean when it comes to 'game content' your average model looks like this.
~170k for a 512x512 texture (DXT 1, no alpha, includes Mip Maps)
The thing is for every texture now you have a Normal Map, a Specular Map, possibly a Glow Map and maybe a Rough map. You can use the alpha channel of any of the main maps to stick rough, glows, or specs, so they don't really take up that much space. But for the sake of argument we're going to assume each model has 2 maps.
So thats ~ 400k for Your textures, per model. Characters may get 1024 maps but 512 will be the average.
~2-200k for the model, possibly larger. a 200 poly model is about 40k (off the top of my head) Most characters next generation will probably be around 10-20k depending (its plenty, trust me). So you're looking at a model thats maybe a meg, meg and a half to 2megs or so depending. If you're using tri-stripping, which you probably should be. it might get a little bigger to make it more GPU friendly.
Animation etc just makes a model file larger but as of right now for a static world clutter object you're looking at, on average, about .5 meg per object, upwards to 1 meg per object.
The thing is all of these objects are going to get packed togeter in their own compressed file for storage on the disc but the relative size is what we're going for.
When it really comes down to it, even by next gen standards models / textures take up very little space (models more so, they're fairly tiny). So in that respect the space on a 9 gig dvd is a lot.
The real space hog next gen will be voice overs. Its going to be fairly expected from an audience to have voice acting, so between that and FMV (which really needs to be ditched, but lord knows it won't) you're going to need as much space as they can give you. We'll figure out a way to fill it.
Oh and as far as shaders and stuff go, HLSL shaders are on average less than 100 lines for basic shaders, they don't take up much space at all. When their use becomes more prevalent for procedural geometry and animation then game content outside of video and audio can shrink even further.
I mean when it comes to 'game content' your average model looks like this.
~170k for a 512x512 texture (DXT 1, no alpha, includes Mip Maps)
The thing is for every texture now you have a Normal Map, a Specular Map, possibly a Glow Map and maybe a Rough map. You can use the alpha channel of any of the main maps to stick rough, glows, or specs, so they don't really take up that much space. But for the sake of argument we're going to assume each model has 2 maps.
So thats ~ 400k for Your textures, per model. Characters may get 1024 maps but 512 will be the average.
~2-200k for the model, possibly larger. a 200 poly model is about 40k (off the top of my head) Most characters next generation will probably be around 10-20k depending (its plenty, trust me). So you're looking at a model thats maybe a meg, meg and a half to 2megs or so depending. If you're using tri-stripping, which you probably should be. it might get a little bigger to make it more GPU friendly.
Animation etc just makes a model file larger but as of right now for a static world clutter object you're looking at, on average, about .5 meg per object, upwards to 1 meg per object.
The thing is all of these objects are going to get packed togeter in their own compressed file for storage on the disc but the relative size is what we're going for.
When it really comes down to it, even by next gen standards models / textures take up very little space (models more so, they're fairly tiny). So in that respect the space on a 9 gig dvd is a lot.
The real space hog next gen will be voice overs. Its going to be fairly expected from an audience to have voice acting, so between that and FMV (which really needs to be ditched, but lord knows it won't) you're going to need as much space as they can give you. We'll figure out a way to fill it.
Oh and as far as shaders and stuff go, HLSL shaders are on average less than 100 lines for basic shaders, they don't take up much space at all. When their use becomes more prevalent for procedural geometry and animation then game content outside of video and audio can shrink even further.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
You must be joking. Even if a game had a full day's worth of voice, with any modern lossy audio compression scheme it could take less than 1 gigabyte and sound great.Vark said:
JoshuaJSlone
Member
If the hardware costs would be too great, though, it could still be a financially better choice for them to just let Sony have the advantage among that segment of the market. And of course if the "multiple Xbox 2" theory is true, what's to stop them from having a model which does play those movies?Insertia said:
Odnetnin said:
Er...
It's a Tasmanian Tiger. Not a Kangaroo.
Going backwards...
TY The Tasmaninan Tiger 2 (EA) Xbox, GC, PS2, GBA
King Arthur (Konami) PS2, GC, Xbox
Jimmy Neutron: Jet Fusion (THQ) PS2, GC
TY The Tasmanian Tiger (EA) Xbox, GC, PS2
Sunny Garcia Surfboarding (Ubi Soft) PS2
Barbie Ice Magic (Vivendi) PC
Goofy Skateboarding (Disney? Can't remember off hand, not at work today) PC
Barbie Sparkling Ice Show (Vivendi) PC
And before that Krome was generally known as Gee Whiz!, where they made Championship Surfer (PC) oh and a little known PC game called
Halloween Harry
So yeah...not a Kangaroo
Gazunta said:Er...
It's a Tasmanian Tiger. Not a Kangaroo.
Going backwards...
TY The Tasmaninan Tiger 2 (EA) Xbox, GC, PS2, GBA
King Arthur (Konami) PS2, GC, Xbox
Jimmy Neutron: Jet Fusion (THQ) PS2, GC
TY The Tasmanian Tiger (EA) Xbox, GC, PS2
Sunny Garcia Surfboarding (Ubi Soft) PS2
Barbie Ice Magic (Vivendi) PC
Goofy Skateboarding (Disney? Can't remember off hand, not at work today) PC
Barbie Sparkling Ice Show (Vivendi) PC
And before that Krome was generally known as Gee Whiz!, where they made Championship Surfer (PC) oh and a little known PC game called
Halloween Harry
So yeah...not a Kangaroo
Going off-topic a little, Do you know Clint Skeene? I heard he was hired there a while ago and I don't know if he's still there as I haven't spoken to him in a while.
Edit: Halloween Harry friggin rocked! Very underrated platformer!
It's also their job to decide which platforms to develop for. Any hardware maker that has restrictions on media size is going to be looked down upon. If it's a big enough restriction, they'll tell the hardware manufacture to forget about any games. On example of this is N64.
It's the hardware manufacturer's duty to make a viable piece of hardware, and they'll have license fees as they see fit to make the money back.
What if Sony decided to only include 128 MB of RAM on PS3. They'd save some money, and they could just tell developers it's a challenge by your arguement when a viable solution could easily be met.
Yes it is common sense. Decompression is something that a processor does. If there's needed to be a lot of decompression, which there would with DVDs, then the processor is going to be crippled. However, adding the amount of money to install a BR disc drive to the processor production is not going to make up for it. Go look up a processor on the PC market that has any significant performance gains. Hell, for $100 more than another. Keep in mind both processors must be high end. You can't compare, say, and Pentium 2 to and Athlon 64 2800+.
DTS has a much higher bitrate. Unless you're just inflating that bitrate with garbage, it is going to take more memory.
Audio compresses great. My point however is that compared to this gen the amount of voice over audio is going to grow at a rate much larger than textures or polycounts or anything but video (assumed video isn't just 640x480). While textures now take up maybe 2x what they did last gen, your voice work and such is going to increase a good 10 fold. It doesn't matter how well the audio compresses when there is so much more of it.
teh_pwn:
> It's also their job to decide which platforms to develop for.
No. That's usually decided by the publisher.
> On example of this is N64.
Lack of space wasn't a problem for the N64. The extremely high prices of the media were.
> What if Sony decided to only include 128 MB of RAM on PS3.
They won't. But what if they did so they can put in a BRD drive? That's the way you have to look at it. M$ could certainly put in a HD-DVD drive in Xbox 2 but that would just mean that they had to cut down on something else.
> Yes it is common sense.
No. Your numbers are pulled out of thin air. You have no idea what these things cost in reality and how much extra performance $20 buys you.
> Go look up a processor on the PC market that has any significant performance gains.
You can't deduce anything from retail prices.
> DTS has a much higher bitrate.
Irrelevant. Like I said the audio is encoded in realtime and DTS isn't likely to be used in many console titles next gen either way.
> It's also their job to decide which platforms to develop for.
No. That's usually decided by the publisher.
> On example of this is N64.
Lack of space wasn't a problem for the N64. The extremely high prices of the media were.
> What if Sony decided to only include 128 MB of RAM on PS3.
They won't. But what if they did so they can put in a BRD drive? That's the way you have to look at it. M$ could certainly put in a HD-DVD drive in Xbox 2 but that would just mean that they had to cut down on something else.
> Yes it is common sense.
No. Your numbers are pulled out of thin air. You have no idea what these things cost in reality and how much extra performance $20 buys you.
> Go look up a processor on the PC market that has any significant performance gains.
You can't deduce anything from retail prices.
> DTS has a much higher bitrate.
Irrelevant. Like I said the audio is encoded in realtime and DTS isn't likely to be used in many console titles next gen either way.
Pros for HD formatsJohnTV said:
- enough space to do things without having to butt your head against the limitations of the optical disc. Examples from current generation - PC,GC vs PS2,XBox. While not limited to - this is especially a big issue for multiplatform titles, when the lead platform has the bigger drive.
Also consider for a moment that on 32MB machine, in-game only assets using up ~1GB on disc, are not uncommon. With 256+ on nexgen and HDTV targets, ingame assets alone could bring you near breaking point of a DVD9.
- future proof, even if the first crop of titles is below the 9GB line, 5 years down the line, they will be needing more. PS2 titles went from more ~50% CD games during Japanese Launch period, to 0% CD games today. Early titles can still ship on DVD - the drive isn't forcing you to use BDRom if you don't have to.
- HDTV movies
Cons:
- price of the adequately fast drives - is it worth sacrificing any other system components? While 1xspeed BDRom may not be too expensive to include, it will also be considerably too slow. 4xspeed would be the sweet spot, but we don't know yet if it's economically possible.
- due to the above, the HDdrive could possibly end up slower then the standard DVD competition could use.
- media pricing difference could force early titles to ship on DVD, thus failing to demonstrate the advantages of bigger media early on.
Given that new hi-res televisions and new movie players will probably not sell nearly as quickly as in prior generations, this should be interesting. Game systems may be the only new format device people buy in any large numbers.
(Why? People need a reason to upgrade... and for most of the folks out there who don't frequent gaming or hi-fi message boards, there's no reason to buy a new movie player when their DVDs work fine right now.)
(Why? People need a reason to upgrade... and for most of the folks out there who don't frequent gaming or hi-fi message boards, there's no reason to buy a new movie player when their DVDs work fine right now.)
IIRC FFVII took 3 CDs which is impossible on N64...cybamerc said:
Anyway, to prevent piracy, DVD is the worst solution it's sure, while you can't rip BD-ROM. Even if you can, develpers can put in garbage data mixed to fill the entire storage space. Or will MS use a proprietary DVD format like GC?
sonycowboy
Member
Fafalada said:
1) Transfer speeds for both HD-DVD & Blu-Ray are faster than DVD. 36Mbps vs 11.08Mbps. However, DVD has drives that work at up to 16x released soon, for transfer for 176Mbps. The BD-ROM 2.0 specification should be set within the next several months, which will allow for 2x, which is what the PS3 is supposed to be using. That would still only allow for 72Mbs. Haven't heard about 4x BD-ROM yet.
2) The media will cost almost exactly the same. The difference in price is the new hardware in the production facilities.
Sony will have it. That's reason enough. They are the market leader...why do you allow them any forseeable advantage? Sure, MS could make an HD-DVD Xenon later, but then it would just be for HD movies, and nothing else, b/c all games would still have to be on DVD. You can't fragment the market like that. Either HD-DVD's in from the start, or not. I'd prefer to see MS go with HD-DVD, b/c otherwise I think there'll be no chance in Japan again, and Sony will walk the next gen again.
I think that if the Xenon launches first as expected, and packs in an HD-DVD right out the box, then it will at least have a chance of grabbing the technophiles in Japan, and maybe manage a foothold in the market. I mean, Tecmo could buy them time at launch with another DOA as well. I just think conceding the HD video advantage to Sony from the start is a big mistake. MS has a real chance of making a run at it, and I don't think they need any handicaps. PEACE.
I think that if the Xenon launches first as expected, and packs in an HD-DVD right out the box, then it will at least have a chance of grabbing the technophiles in Japan, and maybe manage a foothold in the market. I mean, Tecmo could buy them time at launch with another DOA as well. I just think conceding the HD video advantage to Sony from the start is a big mistake. MS has a real chance of making a run at it, and I don't think they need any handicaps. PEACE.
1x speeds are irellevant, as you noted yourself, DVD is quite economical at 12x already, and there may be 16x out if they work out the rotational speed problems(we're talking about speeds where DVD integrity treshold is reached - the discs begin to shatter at that point). Either way, even at 12x, DVD is considerably faster then any 1x speed HD drive, and faster then 2x speed ones also.SonyCowboy said:
I don't know what PS3 is supposed to be using, but there was talk of Pioneer releasing 4xspeed BR drive in 4th quarter of 2005. That said, from the BD 1.0 specification I remember BD-Rom being rated at 54MBps (36 still holds for BD-RE).
Economies of scale. One of the reasons many early PS2 games shipped on CDs was media price. If DVD pressing was as cheap as CDs from the get go, no PS2 game would ever ship on CD.
sonycowboy
Member
Fafalada said:
I hadn't seen that, but it's good to hear. The Xbox had 5x DVD, which would be ~55Mbsp, and I would hope we'd have faster transfer rates next generation if the storage space really does grow significantly and you're loading even more memory 64MBs vs ~512MBs (maybe just 256). We just can't have longer load times!!
Fafalada said:
Well, there are actually quite a few games still being made on CD, and I'd have to assume it's because of price. Most likely, it's a result of the DVD licensing costs and not production. Although, I'd have to believe that production plants are still producing more CD's than DVD's as there are more music CD's produced than DVD movies and most computers still only have CD's so it's still the dominant media there.
Rainbow L33T
Member
Sony won't launch with anything below 4x BR.If not,they'll hold the machine down and I don't see that happening.Stick with DVDs if your going to be that slow.
sonycowboy
Member
Rainbow L33T said:
They should still be able to read DVD's at whatever speed (12x or 16x) they determine, even if they only have 1x or 2x BD-ROM.
Rainbow L33T
Member
Yeah,but what would be the point of using a BR disc if they go only for 1 or 2 x?Transfer will bug this machine down.So stick with DVD drive and put money elsewhere.
But it ain't gonna happen.They'll ship with 4x or better.
But it ain't gonna happen.They'll ship with 4x or better.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
Holy Crap TEH RAINBOW!!11
Howzit going dude!!!
How are things @ ubisoft??
Howzit going dude!!!
How are things @ ubisoft??
Shogmaster
Member
GXAlan said:
$300 console will not drive the sales of $3000 HDTV sets in a mass scale. Sorry. Just no.
No, DC died because of two things:
A. Japan sales started OK because of VF3TB but started to slow and then almost screeched to a halt because of the arrival of PS2, and that's because Japanese public, not just gamers, bought the damn thing for DVD playback (the cheapest DVD player in Japan by a healthy margin), when PS2 gaming library was all but empty.
B. When DC stopped selling, there were no more revenues coming into Sega Japan, and soon they ran out of operating capital. This was when DC sales in the States were still healthy. If Sega had a decent war chest to continue operating, they would have. But that was all but drained back in Saturn days and developing the DC.
Rainbow L33T
Member
Hey,it's been a while it seems.Good to see yha.Are you into Receivers and TV's like before?
I'll probably need a few advices in the near future for a good tely.I've been out of the loop on TV tech the past year or two.
Still working at the same place.Nothing really major for now,toying with PSP(good shit)and looking for more Xenon info in upcoming weeks.
I'll probably need a few advices in the near future for a good tely.I've been out of the loop on TV tech the past year or two.
Still working at the same place.Nothing really major for now,toying with PSP(good shit)and looking for more Xenon info in upcoming weeks.
sonycowboy
Member
$300 console will not drive the sales of $3000 HDTV sets in a mass scale. Sorry. Just no. [/QUOTE]
Uh, you can find HDTV's for under $500 now. Even large screens for under $1,000.
I love the reasons for the Dreamcast's death. Everybody has their reasons. It died for one reason. Technically, it wasn't up to the PS2 (or later systems). EA saw this and decided not to back it. Sega did so much right with it. They had the best launch titles any system has ever had and they had tremendous marketing behind it. Certainly, Sega didn't have alot of operating capital to fight with, but it was a losing battle from day 1.
Uh, you can find HDTV's for under $500 now. Even large screens for under $1,000.
Shogmaster said:
I love the reasons for the Dreamcast's death. Everybody has their reasons. It died for one reason. Technically, it wasn't up to the PS2 (or later systems). EA saw this and decided not to back it. Sega did so much right with it. They had the best launch titles any system has ever had and they had tremendous marketing behind it. Certainly, Sega didn't have alot of operating capital to fight with, but it was a losing battle from day 1.
Shogmaster
Member
sonycowboy said:
Those "HDTV"s do 1080p? :lol
Those stupid "HDTV"s aren't HD at all! 480p ain't HDTV!!! Neither is scaling 1080i signal down to 540P or 480p. Get with the HD program, foo'! :lol
So your big reason is that EA killed Sega? That's why Sega US did better than Sega Japan, huh? I hear EA games are REAL big in Japan. *place rolleyes here*
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Vark said:
5 gigabytes of 64 kbps audio would be 182 hours. 1 gigabyte would be 36 hours.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
You really think it's going to be commonplace to record dozens of hours of generic NPC audio, and make custom lip animations for them all too? Unless it's a Dragon Quest VII remake with talking going on 100% of the time, how would it be possible to even approach 180 hours?Vark said:
Well as I said eariler the high end is definitely RPG specific. And I fully expect the DQ's, FF's, and anything out of a larger studio to be fully voiced (FFX was a start in that direction). The larger part a story plays in a game, the more 'hollywood' most designers get (the Hideo syndrome).
Look at stuff from this generation. Jak and Daxter, FFX, MGS 2 / 3. MGS not withstanding, how much voice work was in FFIX? None. Platformers prior to JnD? Not many outside of character noises.
So yes. I fully expect any game next gen to tell a story to be primarily VO'd unless its a company like Nintendo, that appreciates the fact that not all characters have to talk.
sonycowboy
Member
Those "HDTV"s do 1080p? :lol
Those stupid "HDTV"s aren't HD at all! 480p ain't HDTV!!! Neither is scaling 1080i signal down to 540P or 480p. Get with the HD program, foo'! :lol
[/QUOTE]
It took me all of two seconds :lol
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...ductCategoryId=pcmcat31800050031&type=product
Advent - 27" Flat-Tube HD-Ready TV HT2751A
1080i capable; flat tube; progressive-scan upconversion; 3-2 pulldown; 4-line comb filter; velocity modulation scanning; digital picture freeze
$379.99
foo'!
or, if you must have 1080p.
http://froogle.google.com/froogle_u...mzt-UZeL4Tjor9Y8fUrO4per4UpJOYSTnJQAAAAAAAAAA
Philips 17PF9945 17" 16:9 HDTV Ready LCD TV
Since you didn't bother to read, I'll write it reallll slow. The reason the Dreamcast died was because:
That reason is why EA didn't back it. Why back a DOA product?
Those stupid "HDTV"s aren't HD at all! 480p ain't HDTV!!! Neither is scaling 1080i signal down to 540P or 480p. Get with the HD program, foo'! :lol
[/QUOTE]
It took me all of two seconds :lol
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...ductCategoryId=pcmcat31800050031&type=product
Advent - 27" Flat-Tube HD-Ready TV HT2751A
1080i capable; flat tube; progressive-scan upconversion; 3-2 pulldown; 4-line comb filter; velocity modulation scanning; digital picture freeze
$379.99
foo'!
or, if you must have 1080p.
http://froogle.google.com/froogle_u...mzt-UZeL4Tjor9Y8fUrO4per4UpJOYSTnJQAAAAAAAAAA
Philips 17PF9945 17" 16:9 HDTV Ready LCD TV
Shogmaster said:
Since you didn't bother to read, I'll write it reallll slow. The reason the Dreamcast died was because:
sonycowboy said:
That reason is why EA didn't back it. Why back a DOA product?
Shogmaster
Member
sonycowboy said:
Every freaking week I swear...
The crap 27": Natively 480p or 540p. It's a 4:3 set, so it might be able to pull off 800x600 natively (usually the ones that can is equipped with a DB15 VGA port on the back). 1080i is through scaling down. The fucker don't have enough bandwidth to maintain 1080 lines vertically 30 times per second, not to mention the fact that the POS is a 4:3, so automatically it is disqualified from being a true HDTV set (16:9).
If you had any inkling about HDTV sets, you'd already know this.
As for the LCD "HDTV", I quote:
"Specifications
Video System NTSC
TV Standard NTSC
LCD Panel 17" Wide Screen
Resolution 1024 x 768 "
Not only can't it display any HDTV signals out of the box (limited to NTSC sources), but the native resolution of the LCD is only XGA (1024x768). You notice that last number? Yes, 768. Is that anywhere close to 1080? Hmmm? This POS isn't even capable of native 720p! Also, another 4:3 set (resolution wise), thus automatic disqualification.
You are basically buying a low res 17" LCD (17" LCDs are usually 1280x1024) with a NTSC TV tuner for $800! You must be an idiot if you buy into that POS.....
Conclusion: You are an HDTV idiot, and must stop arguing HDTV with folks that know what the hell they are talkning about.
Is that why PS2 is doing so well against the superior XBox? There aren't enough rolleyes in the world to reply to your posts, "sonycowboy".
A new word for you: Marketshare. Look into it.
EA not backing Sega this generation had more to do with Saturn than Dreamcast. Any game this generation could really be ported reasonably well to DC (though not perfectly obviously, especially some 4th gen stuff like MGS3, Halo 2 or RE4 would see some noticable cutbacks). Dreamcast's image was what really wasn't up to par, not the technology.
Dreamcast failed because Sega's business model required a ridiculous amount of software to be sold for every DC in order to be profitable. That situation was made more dire because they went into this generation with a vast amount of accrued debt from the failure of the Saturn and 32X. If they were a company in better financial standing, with a sound business plan, or with more resources, they likely could have survived as a hardware maker.
There were other factors, but those are the overriding ones.
Back to the Next-Gen storage debates!
There were other factors, but those are the overriding ones.
Back to the Next-Gen storage debates!
sonycowboy
Member
Shogmaster said:
What crawled up your ass? I'm certainly aware of what 1080p is. However, for several years TV's have been sold as HDTV's and have had various resolutions. Your definition is fine for you, however, it's not the ONLY definition out there. Most HDTV broadcasts are either in 720p or 1080i are are being sold as "HDTV".
Shogmaster said:
The PS2 didn't fail, so I don't particularly see a need to argue why it did. BTW, I think I've got a decent idea of what market share is. And it's not the reason why the dreamcast failed.
Shogmaster
Member
sonycowboy said:
Way to miss the point, which is BR and HD-DVD res of native 720p/1080p is wasted on any set on that price rnage I'm talking about. So I don't give a shit if some half assed web site and OEM is declaring a low res POS a "HDTV". It has nothing to do with the current discussion, and my assertion that $300 console won't drive sales of $3000+ true HDTV sets with BR and HD-DVD worthy native resolutions. End of story.
I don't see you listing any reasons that doesn't take couple sentences of logic to destroy.
While sonycowboy is taking it too far to one extreme, you're going too far in the other direction. If widescreen 720p (1280x720) is the baseline for next-gen visuals, you can easily get TVs that support that *now* for half of your "$3000+" figure.Shogmaster said:
$3000? Usually I agree with you Shogmaster but I think you are a little extreme here. I've been checking the prices of 55-65 inch HDTV sets and they have dropped about $1000 dollars over the last three years. Sets that used to be 3000 are 2000 now and those 4000 about 2700. Also, we are also thinking a little narrow minded when we talk about Blu Ray and HDTV sets. It isn't about 2006. No console sells the highest amount in their first year. Usually the first year is set up trying to meet demand. We need to start looking at about 2008 when the bulk of systems are starting to be sold. What will the prices of HDTV sets be by then? PS3 is built for the HDTV future.
Shogmaster
Member
A few things for you guys to consider:
1. Every single HD-DVD and BR demo at CES was 1080p.
2. $3000 right now is seemingly the entry point for true 720p native sets (Plasmas and DLPs and LCD projections), and by BR HD-DVD's arrival, it's will be entry point for true 1080p sets.
3. I would like to see those $1500 sets you guys are mentioning. I'd venture that they are CRT projections that can do 1080i, but cannot do 720p natively.
4. $1500 720p native sets will be 19"-ish LCD based sets. a.k.a. Computer monitors with extra inputs and huge markups for dummies.
1. Every single HD-DVD and BR demo at CES was 1080p.
2. $3000 right now is seemingly the entry point for true 720p native sets (Plasmas and DLPs and LCD projections), and by BR HD-DVD's arrival, it's will be entry point for true 1080p sets.
3. I would like to see those $1500 sets you guys are mentioning. I'd venture that they are CRT projections that can do 1080i, but cannot do 720p natively.
4. $1500 720p native sets will be 19"-ish LCD based sets. a.k.a. Computer monitors with extra inputs and huge markups for dummies.