PlayStation Network to add video, advertising, and more

you Really amaze me Digi......I mean I have seen hundreds of post for many forums and blogs and you are still the only one the bitch about having a ps3....you are truly special

Even when there is a very very small positive news about the ps3...you bitch about it....all of this from a ps3 owner?...you bought the most expensive and hated console on the market and you still can't accept or say anything positive about it?...you are truly a paradox

I agree with you 49

JJ, i hear you. i understand the time it takes games and networks. but MS managed it, why couldn't Sony. what about Sony lets them have a year or two to match their competiton.

also, great point about all the advertising in XBL. that is relatively new to XBLive (yes it has changed), and i agree with you. by now it should be self-funding. i think it will be soon.

what i dont get is why $50 a year is bad considering what you're getting at the TIME vs. paying $200 now for what you will get later. way later. anyone?


.

@Sweeth Tooth

"Oh and I suppose Sony is the only company ever accused of "hype"? Are you serious? It's called Marketing. It's called P.R.."

I never said that and we all know what it's called. What a waste of text.

"Every company hypes up its product in advance to build up anticpation. Microsoft does this, Nintendo does this, every company does this. You are singling out Sony for some irrational reason."

Once again, pointing out the obvious. Yes, all major companies (including MS) hype up their products to a certain degree, but it seems Sony hypes concepts without really thinking too much about implementing them. And seeing as how this post is about Sony, I don't feel I have singled them out; I'm just on topic.

To reiterate: they all use hype, Sony just abuses it.

@Jack of No Trades

So, if you love the 360 and PS3 unconditionally like they were your offspring, does that make the Wii the bastard child that is kept locked up in the basement?

digi

400(360) + 200(HDDVD) + 100(wifi) =700

600(PS3) it comes with bluray & wifi and free online.

Is there really cause for concern that the PS3 only has 256MB video memory? Most PC graphics cards out today only have 256 and can still produce great graphics. My 7800GT can run HL2 with everything turned on high and run at acceptable and very playable frame rates. Isn't the vram ddr3 also?

megaStryke

The wii is like a closet girlfriend. You see her just for a quick clean fuck then leave. The 360 & PS3 are the serious relationship type.

Wow....The Playstation Network will finally match XBOX LIVE 2007.....like in 2020.

jack of no trades

400(360) + 200(HDDVD) + 100(wifi) =700

600(PS3) it comes with bluray & wifi and free online.

I don't have an hdtv or wireless internet so I have to pay an exta $200 to $300 counting the core system to pay for a system with no good games yet.

Matt

Unreal Engine 3 was designed for the PC and 360's archetecture thats why Gears couldnt be produced on PS3. If a company made a engine that was specificly designed for games on the PS3(the White Engine) then the PS3 would have games the 360 couldn't play...

@Jack of No Trades

You know, polyamory can be quite overwhelming. Do 360 and PS3 know you see the other, or have they given mutual consent?

It might not be a good deal for you, but to people that have a HDTV and wireless internet it is. Also, the games will come. Oblivion will take up my time till Lair and FF.

400(360) + 200(HDDVD, don't want it/won't buy it)-200 + 100(wifi, don't need it, won't buy it)-100 =400!

600(PS3) it comes with bluray (don't wan't it, forced to buy) & wifi(don't need it, forced to buy)and free online (you get what you pay for)=600

Weird, my math was a little different.
Also, I have an HDTV and Wi-Fi.

jack of no trades

I am sorry I finished oblivion and all the other ps3 ports already on the 360 maybe not have finished all of them but played them

jack of no trades

I am sorry I finished oblivion and all the other ps3 ports already on the 360 maybe not have finished all of them but played them

I hate to interupt everyone's arguments and whatnot, but does it appear odd to anyone that Sony would release downloadable movies? They have this thing called Blu-ray that they're trying to convince everyone to buy, and at the same time they're going to push a service to download the exact same movie for a competing medium? I really don't understand. For about every HD movie downloaded there is one loss of a BD.

suck, the only reason you think i'm different is because i'm truly brand agnostic. what you normally see on boards and forums are "brand sheep" and fanboys who have fallen for the fabricated image by a marketing company for one console or the other.

i bought my PS3 wanting it to be BETTER than my 360. why? because i don't care about Microsoft or Sony in any other aspect than what they can do for ME as a consumer.

i wanted my PS3 to be the xbox1 of last gen, a technically superior late comer that considerably improved games over the current console i had at the time. that's all.

and it's not. and it won't be any time soon. its not because Sony couldn't, it's because they didn't. they let some media agenda i dont care about get mixed in with what the playstation always was to me, a game machine.

here on joystiq, i'm actually more anti-fanboy than anti-sony. i can at least understand why Sony does what it does (even if i dont agree with their approach), but these hypocrits who used to be all about "the games" and now talk about everything else BUT games just need to be called out.


.

megaStryke

Well, I think they both like my hands fingering them. I say don't fight. There is plenty of gameplay to go around.

jason

I didn't play Oblivion on my 360. Whether its has ports or not I still will keep it.

jack, if you haven't noticed by now most 360 fans don't care about HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. its funny how those price lists always include that HD-DVD player though isn't it?

this site is called Joystiq, not Remot. most of the people here care about games not HD movies.

games used to be what every PS2 lover cited as the reason PS2 was better than xbox1 not technical superiority. now, the playstation lovers have abandoned that argument and just care about (highly debatable) technical superiority and HOME, which incidently is only peripherally about games too.

this is the hypocrisy i'm talking about, and its why the real trolls never answer my questions.



.

Jack,
Come on bud. We don't need to copy paste that again. I don't own WiFi or HDDVD, and my 360 is more fun than my friend's PS3, based on our experience. Are you happy now?

Xbots Suck,
Dude, you don't get to bash Digi. Digi is one of the better posters here and makes intelligent comments. You just post mindless dribble. Most farts are better thought out than your posts.

The 360 is more fun right now and costs about the same as a PS3. My posts on average reflect that. If the roles were reversed, I'd be raving about how fun Gears is on my PS3 and how disappointing the 360 was after a year late, extra cost, and very poor game selection without any decent summer release.

Hell, I've owned every Nintendo and Sony console ever made besides the PS3 and never had an Xbox. I don't consider myself a fanboy in the least. But you don't have to be a fanboy to play two systems and prefer one over the other.

I am just really disappointed with the PS3 right now. It didn't meet the lofty expectations that Sony gave me for it. 360 owners get a Halo Beta, Mass Effect, Forza2, C&C, Two Worlds, Bioshock, and maybe some I forgot. PS3 owners get an old Xbox game in 1080p and Lair. And the two systems share several decent games that I don't mention.

But let me guess, since many of the 360 games are also available on PC we somehow don't count them.

If you would have asked me what this summer would mean for the PS3 a year ago, I'd be raving about how the PS3 would be blowing the 360 away with Killzone gfx and more/better games. My how things change.

Digi Smalls, congrats for owning this thread. I share your common sense opinions and am also waiting for a real answer why "give it a year" would make sense to any consumer looking to buy either system today and enjoy it now. Seriously, is there any other product where this mentality makes sense?

"how about how PS3 has no good games after it's been out for over 6 months? "

I have good PS3 games.

"but your not considering the fact that Live is currently far and away better than PSN"

I've considered it, and I consider it false.
Live is only incrementally better than PSN.
All you get is acheivements, and in game messaging.
That's it, and PS3 is apparently getting both with Home and the rumored 2.0

What you're not considering is the fact that since PSN uses dedicated servers, and Live uses P2P, PSN has a by far superior service.

"Is there really cause for concern that the PS3 only has 256MB video memory?"

No, because PS3 can use both banks of 256 MB for textures. 1 bank is just dedicated to the GPU (thus giving it higher performance) So RSX can use one bank of RAM at full speed, and if needed, share the other bank

Since 360 uses shared memory, it's performance is divided in 2.

I hate to be "that guy", but the only thing that you can do on PSN that you can do on a FREE Live Silver account, is play online multiplayer, and PSN only has a few (Two) games with online matchmaking.

As for the "velocity girl" stuff:
1. Test Drive Unlimited allows you to customize and sell cars over Live. Forza 2 will also support this feature.
2. Microsoft is currently sponsoring a contest to create your own tv show. The winning entry will receive some funding from MS to make more episodes, which will appear on Live Marketplace later this summer.
3.XNA.

Is that enough user created content for you, or are you still wating for Little Big Planet and Game 3.0 to get in on the user created content action.

Note: Little Big Planet looks awesome, and i'll be buying it when it releases later this year.

Extinction you're trying hard, but to dismiss xbox live as achievements and in game messaging is rather flat. its in-game COMMUNITY and its been active since 2005. you're still only talking about "rumors" for fall 2007, two years later.

the same exact thing was said about this spring's PSN update and no-dice. Home is a separate app you start from XMB, not something available to you at all times and in every game. you can discount that as much as you want, but if it's so meaningless why doesn't Sony have it yet?

you're VRAM argument is also misleading, while it can store textures in the other bank for imminent display, it can't display more than 256mb of textures on the screen simultaneously like the 360 can and does in Gears of War.



.

"Extinction you're trying hard, but to dismiss xbox live as achievements and in game messaging is rather flat"

I'm not trying that, I said those are the only features Live has that PSN doesn't, and stating Home has acheivements (I'm in the Beta) and I admitted 2.0 is a rumor.

"the same exact thing was said about this spring's PSN update"

No it wasnt

"Home is a separate app you start from XMB, not something available to you at all times and in every game"

The beta is yes, but the finished product will be made API available to games

"you're VRAM argument is also misleading, while it can store textures in the other bank for imminent display, it can't display more than 256mb of textures on the screen simultaneously like the 360 can and does in Gears of War."

No, you're misleading. PS3 CAN use more than 256 MB of ram for textures. I plain out said it, RSX can use BOTH banks of ram for textures.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=9

Despite the fact that the RSX comes from the same lineage as the G70, there are a number of changes to the core. The biggest change is that RSX supports rendering to both local and system memory, similar to NVIDIA's Turbo Cache enabled GPUs. Obviously rendering to/from local memory is going to be a lot lower latency than sending a request to the Cell's memory controller, so much of the architecture of the GPU has to be changed in order to accommodate this higher latency access to memory. Buffers and caches have to be made larger to keep the rendering pipelines full despite the higher latency memory access. If the chip is properly designed to hide this latency, then there is generally no performance sacrifice, only an increase in chip size thanks to the use of larger buffers and caches.

And by using both banks for textures, it does mean it can display more than 256 MB of textures on screen at once. Only the first 256 MB has faster access.

this past spring PSN update was very much rumored to bring "Entitlements" and bring PSN up to par with XBLive for months before it came and brought us...background downloading.

i remember this Anandtech article, it was written over a year before PS3 came out and was far from conclusive. they still had a lot of questions. i'm not sure if you caught the big *IF* in that excerpt you yourself just copy/pasted. got anything more recent?


.

Entitlements were user rights, and referred to alowing you to download stuff to 5 PS3s/PSPs

i believe you, but thats not what they were (quite oft) rumored to be:

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154563

@Jake

WoW..Sorry there jake, I didn't mean to insult your boyfriend digi smalls....let me make it up...."360 PWNSSSS and PS3 Suxxross"


There I hope everyone feels better

suck do you ever have anything to actually contribute?

by the way, your name alone is the only thing saying something "suxxx"

Did they say anything about new games?

Digi Smalls, I've noticed that you put the 360 up high on a pedestal and don't get why others don't follow you in doing so. Thing is, for a lot of people Microsoft is a turn off/not a choice. A lot of people simply will never buy the xbox because of this.

required, i understand that all too well. but this fevered allegiance to a brand is what literally defines fanboyism.

i come from a design background, a mac user for life, and have hated microsoft as long as i've used computers. but i was smart enough to learn that what i hated was windows, not the entirety of microsoft. microsoft's 360 team made a superior console, and i can recognize that. can you?

what you're saying would be like someone not watching Spiderman 3 or listening to a Sony BMG recording artist because they hate Sony. does that sound reasonable to you?



.

Im curious, how come everyone is going "ah but PSN is NEW so of course its not as good as Live" when TECHNICALLY PSN was launched on PS2?

Sure its not the PSN they are workong on now, but isn't that just proof that Sony lacked vision and had to go back to the drawing board on PS3 because they screwed up online on PS2?

Basically, Sony shouldn't be this far behind at all. Online support has been possible since the PS2, its been supplied as part of the console since the slimline PS2 which I might add they didn't even bother to include the online portal disk with.

I first played Burnout online on PS2 but wasn't that impressed with it. I then sold it and got it on Xbox and a Live account, since then I never looked back. The service even back then was worth the money, even for just the one game. Its even better today on 360.

Anyone giving excuses for Sonys poor online service clearly is a fanboy because they have had plenty of time to get the service up to Live standards. The fact that its FREE is WHY its taking so long, theres not as much of a financial incentive to doing it. Id rather pay now and get a service than have it for free and have NO comeback when it sucks. At least with Microsoft if they fudge up the service you can use the "fix it or I cancel my account" line, with Sony you are just plain stuck because they have no obligation if you aren't paying for it. Even if its advertising supported its not the same security as paying them directly yourself.