Blu-ray, shoe-ray, HD-DVD, HIV. The console with the best game library wins.

Blu-Ray will win because it's catchy

Not if their competition makes a cheap copy called red ray. Red always beats blue. There's no evidence for it, but it's scientific fact.

Yeah. That blue ranger was a wuss.

Yeah. That blue ranger was a wuss.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ya and he wore over-alls. Which made him look like a four year old.

 

Blu-Ray will win because it's catchy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But HD-DVD is even catchier.

Edited May 21, 200619 yr by Craigboy2

Blu-Ray will win because it's catchy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How about Blu-Egon or Blu-Peter?

Blu-Ray will win because it's catchy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How about Blu-Egon or Blu-Peter?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

*groan*

Blu-Ray will win because it's catchy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But HD-DVD is even catchier.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Not really, it doesn't really roll off the tongue

Hi

 

I do not think that either one of them will win the console war.

 

As I see it each platform/console appeals to different targets group.

 

Xbox 360 appeals to a more mature audience that PS3 does. Typically PS3 will be bought by families, while Xbox 360 would be bought by

a bit more mature audience e.g. fathers, males over 25 or 30.

 

And Wii, is as understand is, a console for kids.

 

So each of these console have different strengths and weaknesses.

And each of them will be bought by different targets group.

 

bye

aries101

That's bull you know. Total bull.

Yes! Each console will sell 40million units all making a profit and so will result in The Console War being declared a draw by the console god Consollah.

That's bull you know. Total bull.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed.

Hi

 

I do not think that either one of them will win the console war.

 

As I see it each platform/console appeals to different targets group.

 

Xbox 360 appeals to a more mature audience that PS3 does. Typically PS3 will be bought by families,  while Xbox 360 would be bought by

a bit more mature audience e.g. fathers, males over 25 or 30.

 

And Wii, is as understand is, a console for kids.

 

So each of these console have different strengths and weaknesses.

And each of them will be bought by different targets group.

 

bye

aries101

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Pretty ignorant statement all around... <_<

Hi

 

I do not think that either one of them will win the console war.

 

As I see it each platform/console appeals to different targets group.

 

Xbox 360 appeals to a more mature audience that PS3 does. Typically PS3 will be bought by families,  while Xbox 360 would be bought by

a bit more mature audience e.g. fathers, males over 25 or 30.

 

And Wii, is as understand is, a console for kids.

 

So each of these console have different strengths and weaknesses.

And each of them will be bought by different targets group.

 

bye

aries101

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Pretty ignorant statement all around... <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

QFT

 

Just going to point out that somtimes kids art has a storyline for adults and visa versa.. Also the 360 is probably the gameing machine of choice in america for those males between the ages of 16 and 25

 

byond 25 people are computer geeks and below that they usually have a ds.

The core PS3 version does not even have a HDMI connection that's required for Blu-Ray playback.

 

No. HDMI is not required for HD playback. Hence the last 4 years of HD tvs not having HDMI. The core system will be capable of HD.

No. HDMI is not required for HD playback. Hence the last 4 years of HD tvs not having HDMI. The core system will be capable of HD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do some research on Blu-Ray, you'll notice it requires a HDMI connection for HD playback.

No. HDMI is not required for HD playback. Hence the last 4 years of HD tvs not having HDMI. The core system will be capable of HD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do some research on Blu-Ray, you'll notice it requires a HDMI connection for HD playback.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4760553.stm

 

The decision to offer a model without HDMI has raised concerns about the high-definition compatibility of the PS3.

 

Mr Harrison shrugged off these fears, insisting that the both models would offer full HD output.

 

"What we should be clear about is that the functionality is identical in both machines," he told the BBC News website. "There is no difference in what the machine does."

 

"It's just that the technical method of extracting audio and video from the devices is slightly different," said Mr Harrison, who heads up Sony Computer Entertainment worldwide studios.

 

If it couldn't play back HD from the blu-ray discs without HDMI how would it be able to display HD at all since all the games will be on blu-ray discs?

 

EDIT: So far what I've gathered, is that Blu-Ray is playable without HDMI, just not at 1080p, which most HDTVs don't even support. You can still play it at 720p or 1080i.

Edited May 22, 200619 yr by Oerwinde

You need HDMI to enable the HDCP copy protection. The consistent thing I've heard about Blu Ray (and a reason why the movie studios love it) is that it has very strict copy protection. With out HDMI the Blu-Ray movie picture will be "downconverted" to something like 540p. While this is greater than what is capable on current gen DVD it still falls far short of BR' capabilities.

 

So no HDMI on the lite PS3 is odd considering you need it to to get true HD output. If you can't view the games or movies in HD then what is exactly is the point of making customers pay extra for a BR drive?

You need HDMI to enable the HDCP copy protection. The consistent thing I've heard about Blu Ray (and a reason why the movie studios love it) is that it has very strict copy protection. With out HDMI the Blu-Ray movie picture will be "downconverted" to something like 540p. While this is greater than what is capable on current gen DVD it still falls far short of BR' capabilities.

 

So no HDMI on the lite PS3 is odd considering you need it to to get true HD output. If you can't view the games or movies in HD then what is exactly is the point of making customers pay extra for a BR drive?

Not quite true. There is a function called ICT built into the Blu-Ray standard, that is able to down convert the audio/video if it is passing through an un-encrypted port, but most movie companies has opted not to make use of that function. If it is used, the rules state that it has to be clearly visible on the package that the movie uses the ICT function.

 

Also, I read that the reason why the Blu-Ray players are so expensive is that it takes quite some computational power to decode all the data from the disc. That should be no problem for the Playstation 3 as the CELL is perfectly capable of decoding the data in real time and then some. Not having to include any dedicated decoding hardware might mean that the Playstation 3 gets a faster Blu-Ray player than expected. The article I read mentioned the possibility of a 4x Blu-Ray player!

You need HDMI to enable the HDCP copy protection. The consistent thing I've heard about Blu Ray (and a reason why the movie studios love it) is that it has very strict copy protection. With out HDMI the Blu-Ray movie picture will be "downconverted" to something like 540p. While this is greater than what is capable on current gen DVD it still falls far short of BR' capabilities.

 

So no HDMI on the lite PS3 is odd considering you need it to to get true HD output. If you can't view the games or movies in HD then what is exactly is the point of making customers pay extra for a BR drive?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You don't need HDMI, HDCP is also available in DVI, though I'm not sure if thats on the PS3 or not.

The decision to offer a model without HDMI has raised concerns about the high-definition compatibility of the PS3.

 

Mr Harrison shrugged off these fears, insisting that the both models would offer full HD output.

 

"What we should be clear about is that the functionality is identical in both machines," he told the BBC News website. "There is no difference in what the machine does."

 

"It's just that the technical method of extracting audio and video from the devices is slightly different," said Mr Harrison, who heads up Sony Computer Entertainment worldwide studios.

 

If it couldn't play back HD from the blu-ray discs without HDMI how would it be able to display HD at all since all the games will be on blu-ray discs?

 

EDIT: So far what I've gathered, is that Blu-Ray is playable without HDMI, just not at 1080p, which most HDTVs don't even support. You can still play it at 720p or 1080i.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sony has said things regarding this console and previous consoles that haven't come true. The simple fact of the matter is without a HDMI/DVI-D connection, Blu Ray movie playback is strickly limited to standard resolution (480), or perhaps even no playback at all (the rarest of condidtions). To my understanding, the core PS3 model includes neither of those, since the only AV outputs on the machine are composite, S-Video, component and HDMI ("premium" only).

They will likely all be winners at what they choose to do best.

 

Why in the world would anyone think there was only going to be one winner?

BECAUSE THERE WILL BE AND YOU'LL LIKE IT DAMMIT!

I called it long before the consoles were released, and I'm calling it again.

 

Xbox 360 = winner

 

PS3 not a winner

Where were you when the Hexbox was having all sorts of problems?

 

I'm surprised you didn't come here and call them features and incentives to buy additional units.