Talk:PlayStation 3/Archive 11

Archives
Archive 1 (May 2005) Archive 2 (May 2005 - July 2005) Archive 3 (Jul 2005 - Dec 2005) Archive 4 (Dec 2005 - Feb 2006) Archive 5 (Feb 2006 - Apr 2006) Archive 6 (Apr 2006 - May 2006) Archive 7 (May 2006 - June 2006) Archive 8 (June 2006) Archive 9 (July 2006) Archive 10 (August 2006)

info

JUST CONFIRMED 20GB PS3 WILL COME WITH HDMI HERES THE LINK http://ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734010p1.html IM OFF TO EDIT!

Edit request

I'm probably not doing this right, but I'd like to suggest a change. In the section "Hardware Summary", the sentence "Each SPE has its own L1 cache. " should become "Each SPE has its own 256 MB L1 cache, but no direct access to shared system memory." Reference is same as rest of section, the SDC slides [40]. Feel free to remove this comment when done.

This is all completely wrong. This is my first wikipedia edit too, so I may be doing it wrong. But the above poster is off. First, each SPE has 256 KB not MB. Second the use of the word L1 cache is misleading. The local store memory is NOT cache. Cache implies that it is used to accelerate access to a second tier of larger but slower memory. Calling the local store cache would be as wrong as calling the DDR ram on a PC L3 cache and an IDE hard drive L4 cache. The elimination of cache memory and replacing it with local store is the single most important change to the Cell architecture that gives it the potential to reach almost 100% (~92 - 95% of its theoretical capability). Cache misses are unavoidable in a conventional CPU. Smart programming on a SPE can almost completely avoid them. I would recommend wording a replacement description of the SPE with something to the effect of: "each SPE has its own 256 KB of on-chip memory known as its local store instead of cache memory". I'm not really good at wording long complex sentences, but showing that local store memory is a parellel to cache memory but different is good. Esper256 21:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Would someone add Mexico to the First Available list? It's the only region not listed there. We want this article to be completely thorough, thanks. --Dyold Knip 03:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

It says the 20GB model does not include HDMI, but at TGS, Sony said that there will be

dumb box art

can we get rid of this stupid image? it doesn't add any usable information, and makes this look like a porn page. I know wikipedia's not censored, but it doesn't add anything here. The box art is highly irrelevant. relevant images, in my opinion, would be nvidia shader examples, and although it introduces bias into which one, impressive game renders. --24.7.86.143 05:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I entirely agree- that image should never have been inserted in the first place. There are other "questionable" ones on that page too- do we really need that "This is living" image? And lastly, the image of the two PS3s in black is copyrighted and has not been released to the public by Sony. In fact the picture actually HAS THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE right on it! I'll get a few more opinions tonight, and if nobody objects, I'll toss out those two images. Ex-Nintendo Employee 06:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The "This is living" belongs to a marketing section. If someone wants to restore the image then they should writing up a marketing section for it to be included, otherwise it doesn't make any sense. --Thax 17:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

should be too stupid for inclusion anyway. Does wikipedia include every marketing slogan? no. it shouldn't. Also, Image:Psp-to-ps3.jpg is crud. Another delete. --gatoatigrado 04:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Template Proble

First, I should point out that I made a change to the System Features table in the Playstation 3 article page. I made an adjustment that agreed with the requirements of Thax. The problem is that for some reason, my adjustment keeps referring to a "Template." If you can fix this, I would appreciate it.

I would like to say one other thing: The type of cables included with a videogame system are very important, and we need to keep people as well informed as possible at all times. Sony has only made one official announcement about the cables that will be included with the Playstation 3: Sony has officially said that there will be no high-definition cables of any kind included with the Playstation 3. There will not be an HDMI cable capable of carrying a high-definition signal, and there will not be a Component cable capable of carrying a high-definition signal. At this point in time, it would be irresponsible of us to not allow people to be aware of this publicly announced fact. Even if this information does not appear in the System Features table, as I believe it should, this information about absolutely no form of high-definition cable being included with the Playstation 3 should definitely appear in the article about the Playstation 3. You can read about this cable information at this reference: [1] Mike mgoblue 19:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC) mike_mgoblue

I did a quick fix. Sorcre 20:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You are a fanboy, don't deny it next time. Nice find though, it's certainly true and certainly relevant.But pointing out how important it is to have reliable sources, which you didn't last time - DMC 4 is ps3 exclusive at this point, officially, which is after the article you made a big fuss with. --gatoatigrado 04:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Another thing though - undue weight to no-so-crucial things is biased. It's okay if you're a fanboy, but you must keep this out of it. Does the Xbox 360 article even mention the lower version requires a $40 memory card or $100 hard drive? Compared to your two lines complaining about $10 cables? --gatoatigrado 04:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a good point to make, we need to be careful about not biasing articles. Regarding the Xbox 360 drive, perhaps someone should edit that article then. This article should stand on its own, we shouldn't be deciding content based on articles for other consoles. CPitt76 16:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

criticism

let's keep this concise. --gatoatigrado 04:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

• "dual HDMI Display output" - who cares? This was a stupid show-off feature, along with the however many mpeg 2 streams they were decoding.
• None of the 7 expensive consoles more expensive than the PlayStation 3 were very popular.
• A much better point for the price would be

1. Blu ray player (included) - most are $770 now, the HD dvd players haven't gotten too much cheaper either (blu ray fell $230 to its price, hd fell from $500 to $440)
2. free online service
3. inclusion of hard drive with both system
4. Neither xbox 360 nor Wii have any option of an HDMI port
5. neither Xbox 360 nor Wii have the current generation drive; this was a downfall for the dreamcast apparently.

Better yet, leave the whole thing out. I think it's best to present the console with its current achievements and merits, and let consumers decide if they want one console or another, multiple consoles, or no consoles. On second thought, a small note would be fine. All of the refutes I provided above perhaps give too much emphasis to one point. Avoid exact production numbers, we don't know for now. Leave the controller vibration issue for the other page. Compared to Microsoft (wifi cuts and hard drive cut for lower model), I think the ps3's loss of dual hdmi is rather irrelevant. Neither needs any mention though. --gatoatigrado 04:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

revision 1

The high launch price of the PS3 has been subjected to criticism from analysts and developers.

The console has repeatedly been delayed, from Spring 2006 (ref) to November 17 (ref) and then for European customers to Spring 2007. Also, fewer PS3 consoles will be available at launch(ref) than originally expected (ref).

I would disagree. Common criticisms which have been raised by several reliable outside sources which we cite should usually be mention as is normal with all articles on wikipedia. Remember that wikipedia is an encyclopedia NOT a place intended to help people decide which console. By providing neutral and accurate info, we may help readers decide but the primary purpose of an encylopedia is not to help readers decide. More specifically, this article is primarily about the PS3, not about differences between the PS3 and the Xbox360. Indeed I would suggest it's a violation of NPOV to not mention common criticisms. How much detail we go in to of course is debatable. Clearly the most basic issue is the criticism of the price (i.e. the price is too high). We should probably also mention other same gen consoles are cheaper but if we do, we need to make some mention that they have different feature sets. However I don't think we need to go into to detail of the different feature sets. This would be best left for another article. (Alternatively, readers can just compare the different articles.) It is not up to ask to try and tell the reader which one is better or whether the PS3 is worth the high price. This would not be NPOV. Instead, it is simply our job to mention that some people have stated they feel the price is too high. Also, I don't know much about the dual HDMI issue but if it was a widely touted feature or the loss of dual HDMI has been widely criticised then it must be mentioned. You seem to have misunderstood perhaps the nature of an encylopedia. It is not our job to decide whether the loss of a feature is important and as I have stated before, this article should be primarily about the PS3 not about comparisons with the Xbox360. Therefore, there no reason for us to exclude mention of something just because Microsoft has greater issues. The only question should be whether the loss of dual HDMI is noteable enough or not (i.e. we shouldn't give undue weight to something which no one cares about)... Nil Einne 07:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Well said. As I've stated in previous posts, the price point has been an issue with gamers/developers that has been documented in other media. This isn't POV, we're not putting "the PS3 is too expensive" in the article, we're documenting a criticism raised by mutiple groups about the system. CPitt76 16:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I think your vision for it is the same as mine. I agree with all of your points. The last point I made at the top brought out more relevant issues than the historical context. It is obviously not included in the revised criticism section. I did feel that the other opinions had undue weight and were too competitive. Please tell me what you feel should be added back in. [2]. --gatoatigrado 17:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

This is completely opinion, but the loss of dual hdmi is not noticable. The rumble capability is better left for the ps3 controller article. There was certainly a lot of media attention about it (e.g. push polls, articles). However in the end I don't think it will be a major detraction from the game; plenty of people play computer games without rumble packs. In politics I think there's an effect where something is a "major controversy", but when it goes the "other" way (against the public), it becomes apparent people don't care about the issue. I think it's similar here. News sites report things they think will get them traffic, not necessarily important things. --gatoatigrado 17:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

XFire only for one game

Sony has deniend that XFire will be the backbone of Playstation Network Platform. It will only be used for one game, at least initially.

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=67590

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

this was denied in Bethesda forums (elderscrolls.com). The source given was a podcast. A podcast??? I wish the public education system worked better as far as educating people about reliable sources. --gatoatigrado 01:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The podcast that gatoatigrado talks about is from the website www.1up.com, which is put out by Ziff Davis Media, which is a major video game website, and is the publisher of Official PlayStation Magazine, and a lot of other video game magazines. The podcast speaks of this game as a launch title for the PlayStation 3. This game has not been denied by the company, they just state that it has not been announced yet. I believe if anyone is to be trusted about something like this, especially when it has been explicitely stated, and the RadiOPM podcast stated that the November cover would blow your mind. (Amish Gramish 04:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC))

My mistake, someone said it was denied but I couldn't find the link. "This game has not been denied by the company, they just state that it has not been announced yet." - that's exactly right, and why it doesn't belong here. I still don't believe a podcast is desirable because it is difficult for people to look at, but I suppose other forms of media are trusted. I am sorry for being snobbish in my previous comment; however inherently trusting something that has been written and edited, such as the New York Times as opposed to Fox News is - in my opinion - not a bad "gut feeling". --gatoatigrado 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Concisely - written things are less "live" and more looked over in general. --gatoatigrado 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

PS3 Controller

I've read on ps3land.com that the new controller may be named the sixaxis because of the six different mediums of determining motion. No one has confirmed it yet but the name has been trademarked by SONY. Jasper 17:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

If you want to add it, you'll need to find a source (a link) first. Ex-Nintendo Employee 22:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

http://www.ps3land.com/article-701.php is the link to my previous post about the controller, I couldn't get the link earlier because I was at school and our filters are hardcore. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.67.99.233 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't need to be mentioned in this article. Not yet, at least. It is currently a rumor, one that would merely take up more space when we're trying to cut down on the article's size. The rumor is already addressed in the PS3 Controller article, with a source and everything. That's enough for now. Dancter 00:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

US$?

why are all the international retail prices exchanged into us dollars,isnt that a little biased? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.30.202.19 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

perhaps. the table could be a bit smaller. The release date is already shown in the infobox above. The price comparisons are not valid because different countries have different import and tax policies, right? If that's true, this is supposed to be about the console, not taxation in different countries. --gatoatigrado 02:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not biased, this is the English version of the Wikipedia so dollars make sense. Plus, Wikipedia is based in the US. However, I'd expect this page in other languages feature all the money amounts in their own currencies, and our USD into their currency. LighthouseJ 21:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

You do realise that the US isn't the only country in the world that speaks English? As Gatoatigrado says above, these comparisons are meaningless anyway, since the US prices are given without tax, while those in the EU, say, are given including VAT. Tim 09:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

even better said. the small table looks better anyway. --gatoatigrado 03:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggested retail price by region*

Region	Expected pricing at release
	Basic	Premium
Japan	JP¥59,800	Open price
United States	US$499	US$599
Canada	C$549	C$659
Mexico	-	-
Eurozone (excluding Finland)	€499	€599
United Kingdom	-	GB£425†
Switzerland	CHF 749	CHF 899
Norway	-	5000 NOK†
Denmark	4495 DKK†	5495 DKK†
Sweden	-	5999 SEK†
Finland	€550	€650
Australia	A$829	A$999
New Zealand	NZ$999†	NZ$1199.95†

* Prices and release dates subject to change.
† Price not confirmed as official suggested retail price

Is it true that you can't rent games for the PS3

IF this is, they are screwed up the @$$ The Bird71.236.225.50 01:42, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

yes you can rent. what you have to understand is there are huge numbers of scare tactics and false rumors by people who want the PS3 to fail. They only need 1 of these rumors to pass onto a guy who doesnt have the internet to correct the misgiving and they lose 1 sale. In 2 months all will be revealed, every single detail so there is no point worrying about all these incredible news that keep popping up and just wait.

Are you sure? I heard that they thought about taking the idea out....but it would delay the launch....So yeah, you CAN'T rent games. the bird66.154.192.129 15:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The rumors that the playstation 3 console will be designed not to playback rented or used games or that brand new purchased games will be tethered to play only on the console it was first played on are FALSE. If I recall correctly, these rumors began several months ago when Sony acquired the patent to such technology and computer game reporting sites created articles on the possibilities of its application to future media formats.

Since that time, Sony has stated several times that it will not the apply such a feature to the Playstation 3 console. An article in the Los Angeles Times Business section (featured three months ago?) explains this rumor and mentions that it will not be used. Incidentally, the article puts a altruistic spin on the rumor by stating that Sony obtained the patents so that no corporation would ever apply it (without paying hefty licensing fees).--Kenn Caesius 16:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Fighting diseases

This should be worked into the article. I would add it myself, but it's late and I'm tired. http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/fun.games/09/18/playstation.folding/

David Bergan 04:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

right, I will add folding@home. It isn't an innovation on Sony's part, but it was nice of them to get involved (and they got some good pr out of it). --gatoatigrado 03:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

the article was updated to include folding@home. --gatoatigrado 03:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

PNP and Xfire information is incorrect

Location of error: [3]

The reference article was updated with this information: "SOE has been in talks with Xfire about potentially including some of their technology in Untold Legends Dark Kingdom, our PlayStation 3 launch title. This proposed deal is completely separate and independent from the PlayStation Network Platform, and is something that SOE was examining specifically for Dark Kingdom. More information on Xfire and Dark Kingdom will be coming soon." [4]

(emphasis mine)

69.181.2.143 06:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

20 gig version now HAS HDMI port in japan at least

will also cost less than 50,000 yen [[5]] 7:22: A question on why HDMI only is in the high level version of the PS3 only. Kutaragi explains that sony was worried that if they put the HDMI in the lower version, some would complain about having to pay for something they don't want. However, HDMI penetration has come faster than expected. He then asks people if they want HDMI in all models. Everyone in the audience says yes. He then confirms that all models, including the 20 gig version, will have an HDMI port.

From what we can tell, this is only for Japan. You'll have to wait for overseas confirmation to see if this applies in your territory as well.

7:25: Now a question on the price. Kutaragi says the Japanese media and retailers have complained about the cost of the system. He then confirms that the price for the 20 gig model in Japan will, including tax, now be below 50,000 yen. This model will include the HDMI port. He doesn't give the exact price.

I hope this coming to american models too. --Ciao 90 03:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I do as well; however I urge you to keep it what you find to be verifiable. As if it needed to be said. --gatoatigrado 03:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I am not at all sure about edit as of this posting: The configuration table list both PS3 versions as having a HDMI port, but the 60GB now has two HDMI ports? I cannot verify that anywhere.--Kenn Caesius 15:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Should I not have removed it? Perhaps it didn't follow assume good faith, but I would assume if it was true the poster would at least make some claim here. --gatoatigrado 16:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

A bit underwhelming...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6158144.html

Not exactly mindblowing as I've been hearing, this is protected yes? Keep it like that. The keynote description doesn't sound all too impressive (Gs writer), especially with the one trailer being Afrika not really showing what the games about. But I know there's some good news. Keep alert from vandalism and remove that big fat announcement up there, it's overlapping things and it doesn't mention that as of now that's it's confirmed for Japan only. Note this may be a Japan only price drop friends, don't jump the gun.--Signor 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Configs changed: HDMI in both models

"7:22: A question on why HDMI only is in the high level version of the PS3 only. Kutaragi explains that sony was worried that if they put the HDMI in the lower version, some would complain about having to pay for something they don't want. However, HDMI penetration has come faster than expected. He then asks people if they want HDMI in all models. Everyone in the audience says yes. He then confirms that all models, including the 20 gig version, will have an HDMI port."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734010p1.html --Ciao 90 03:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

A Japanese source http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/games/articles/0609/22/news034.html. --Revth 07:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Composite AV cables?

Not composite.. it's component because you can use just one cable of the component to fit as composite. This is already made on Xbox 360 Premium. I really doubt the "HD-console" will give stupid composite cables.. this is nonsense. --Ciao 90 03:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

As the PS3 supports both component and HDMI it is not entirely unreasonable if they choose only to give low definition cables. It is $10 online, and you have no evidence to the contrary. Do not edit the article if something seems unlikely; find a good source first, then discuss it, then edit. Thanks. By the way, I like the ps3 as well, but this is not the place to discuss that. Wikipedia's purpose is to inform, not convince. With multiple editors, it can hopefully come as close as possible to npov. --gatoatigrado 03:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

PS3 Article is inconsistent about HDMI Port

The table of PS3 features in this article indicates that both "Flavors" of the PS3 will have HDMI ports. But the article states that the 20-GB version will not have one, and that this may interfear with high resolution playback of Blu-Ray discs.

This is important, because the PS3 will be the cheapest blu-ray player on the market at time of launch (probably). This would be the primary reason for me to buy one, although I will do some gaming. I don't think I'd need a 60GB hard drive otherwise.

What's the story?

The news was just updated; I think this has been fixed. --gatoatigrado 16:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Release List?

Launch titles are listed for the Wii, but not for this thing. Why not?

did you get a vandalized page? --169.229.215.5 21:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Games

Launch titles	Other major titles