My Quick Unbiased PS3 Review

thanks for the review, very good.

as for the multi-axis thing.... do you really think it's a gimmick for future use? i mean right now they're only going to bring out demo titles that are designed to try and use it, but having futzed around with it did you sit there thinking "if only......" ??

but yeah, frankly i won't get one for a year or so, at least until GT5 comes out, but maybe for TDU if that seems good.

personally, i'm more interested in the 'smoothness' of graphics than the prettiness, i want realism in movement first, visuals are a secondary concern.

 

Thanks for your review...first I've read.

 

My friend got one, not sure about the graphics because the only games I played were non-graphics-intensive bowling and a surgery game, but the controllers are so nifty, I love it. I recommend it, considering it's about 2/5 of the PS3 price, it's worth it.

 

i love my ps3.. resistance fall of man is an amazing game

 

Don't you worry about burn-in by playing video games on a plasma?

 

I never thought of that question. Interesting to see what the answer is.

 

1080p is the true HD...1080i is interlaced aka them making you think its better when in fact its about the same as 720p. 1080p's are awesome! They make 720p "HD"s look like a joke (which they are). I too have had my hours at the PS3, madden is ok and Need for Speed is ok. Nothing to write home about! I can't wait to see games in the future though!

 

The only reason i am getting the PS3 is FFXIII.

 

I played the PS3 today at a stand Target had set up. The controller is basically the same as the PS2, except the shoulder buttons. L2 and R2 are more like the trigger buttons on the X-box controller. Should be a little better for racing games.
I played MotorStorm for a bit. Its nothing special, but the graphics are really good. Easily on par with the 360. You have to remember though, this is the first go-around for the programers. Just wait until they really use the Cell to its full compacity. That will be a sight to see.

 

This is not true. 1080p and 1080i have exactly the same amount of resolution. The only difference is that 1080i interlaces, which means first it draws even lines, then comes back and draws the odd lines. If a TV can do 1080i at 60hz, that is identical to 1080p at 30hz. There is nobody who could look at the picture and say its any different between the two, because it is not. 1080p@60Hz would provide a less jittery picture than 1080@30Hz, but 1080p60 is not available and not currently broadcast or used by anyone or anything - not HD-DVD, Bluray, HDTV, PS3, XBOX or anything else. 1080i@60hz is the normal 1080 signal you hear about. But because it transmits half the signal at a time, 1080i@60hz is the same as 1080p@30hz. They are identical - no difference between 1080i60 and 1080p30. The one folks spooge over is 1080p60 but that does not exist and probably wont for a looooong time.

On a TV that supports native 1080, 1080i and 1080p will look identical, and they will both look better than 720p. Problem is much HD content is in 720 format so it is scaled up to 1080. IMO 720p on a native 720 screen will look better than 720 on a 1080 screen because it's not scaled.

When buying a plasma or LCD TV, check the resolution. But just as important is what will you be viewing with it? People say 1080p is "smoother" than 1080i - thats only true if they are comparing 1080p60 to 1080i60. But there is no 1080p60, its a format that isnt currently used. What IS used is 1080p24 or 1080p30, which is the same as 1080i60.

Most sports is broadcast in 720p, because that runs at 60Hz. 720p is the highest resolution you can get at 60hz (60 frames per second). 1080 only runs at 30hz. Yes, some TV's are capable of displaying 1080p@60Hz but NOTHING is produced in this format. Not Bluray, not HD-DVD, not HD Television programming, not digital cable, Dish, DirecTV, nothing. Also, all the current production hardware used by the TV and movie studios does not support 1080p, and there is a lot of questions about whether it will ever actually be used outside expensive custom equipment.

When you walk into Circuit City or Best Buy, even if the TV "supports" 1080i, check what the native resolution is. If it is not 1920x1080, then it's going to be doing some scaling. As you can see when you change your laptop to an other-than-native resolution, scaling on a fixed-pixel (like an LCD or plasma) does not look good - not as good as native resolution. Then again, if you watch almost all sports then a native 720p (1280x720) will probably look better with most of what you watch, even if it scales the 1080 to squeeze it into your 720 pixels.

Before the PS3 fanboys attack me, Sony has already said that the PS3 cannot support the bandwidth necessary to do 1080p@60Hz without a big impact on graphics quality.

So for now and for the foreseeable future, I think 720p is the standard that will be used for sports and fast motion, with 1080i used for less motion intensive stuff. If buying a TV, 1080p60 is something thats not bad to have since it may someday get used, but paying extra for it is not going to get you anything. You are much better off buying a TV with a *native* resolution (i.e. pixel count) of 1080 vertical pixels, as this will allow a 1080 signal to be displayed without any scaling. IMO that looks a lot better than a TV that "supports 1080p!" but has 720 vertical pixels and scales all the images.

 

excellent thread. thank you both, SRT MIKE and Luxurybazzar.

 

My PS3 comes in this week. I'll post some pics up and a review once I get it. Do you guys know how long it will take to get my PS3 here from Corona, California via USPS "Media Mail?"

Thanks

 

I honestly dont know - I am not nearly as into it as some guys are. I am not really sure which type of screen (LCD or plasma) is winning the big screen wars, but it seems there are more LCDs now than plasmas. But I could be wrong.

I think the big thing with plasma is the blacks look good and IMO the picture usually does seem more crisp, but then again I have seen some TV's with great specs that look crappy in the store and other TV's that would appear to be bad based on specs look great in person.

I'm surprised nobody makes something (like a box) that runs 1280x720 in a box (with bars around) on a 1920x1080 TV. To me, I'd rather have the greater clarity over the max picture size, but then again maybe someone does do it? Or if not, I bet the average Joe would be furious that his new expensive TV didn't "do full screen".

I wouldn't worry about what monitor you have lux, I have an older 43" Hitachi that "supports" HDTV. It will do 480i (regular TV) and 1080i. But I have heard the CRT's in it do not have the resolution to produce 1920 pixels across, so I guess it would be sort of scaling the picture anyway. When I bought that TV, a 40" TV was around $25k. Those $25k TV's did not have HDMI/DVI ports, and they did not run 1920x1080. Now you can get a 47" plasma at Walmart that is native 1920x1080 for around $1800. So IMO going nutso and making sure you have a 1080p TV today "for future-proofing" is a waste of time. Any electronics stuff becomes obsolete so quick. I gave up buying expensive laptops because you can spend $3500 on the best today, or spend $800 and get something 70% as fast. Difference is in two years they will both be pretty old and slow, except you can keep buying $800 laptops every 2 years at a net of $400/yr, or you can get the best at $1,750 a year. It adds up quick. Same with TV's. I paid $1500 for my 43" probably 9 years ago. I'm planning to get a 50-something inch plasma in the next year and it will be around the same $$ I bet. In another 5 or 6 years when the new stuff comes out, whatever that is, I will just get something to replace it then rather than trying to stay on the cutting edge, spending mega-$$$ and getting stuff that's not compatible with whatever the actual standards end up being.

 

For those of you with PS3s, you can pre-order the Japanese version of F1 '06 Championship Edition now, which comes out on the 21st of December at yesasia.com. The game menus are 85% English and the commentary is entirely English. With overnight shipping, it will get here on the 23rd. I already pre-ordered my copy. I just thought I would let you guys know that, because that is the only game I am really looking forward to in the near future.

-John

 

MEDIA mail??? Are you sure its Media mail peewee??? I thought media mail was for things like books, CD's and videotapes. I think it takes 2-3 weeks, but it's real cheap. I am not even sure you could send a PS3 by media mail!


Luxury,

You are right that 1080i would not refresh as much... some people say the picture will look "choppy" - like if your video card is maxing out when playing games on a PC. I don't think it will really ghost so much, because that is a function of the response time of the pixels. I think it would just look a bit jittery or flickery. You can notice it on 1080i when viewing an action sequence.

The problem with 1080p is the sheer amount of data that must be moved. 1920 x 1080 pixels, times 32-bit color, times 60 frames per second is around 466 megabytes per *second* of data (if my math is right). That's 3.9 gigabits! Even after you compress it, you're still talking maybe 3 gigabits (maybe 320 gigabytes per second)- that's huge. And you need to do it every second. The sheer processing power needed is massive, and you have to do it every second, you can't buffer it like you can with bursts on ethernet. The circuitry is expensive, the chips are very expensive, the cables and processors are expensive, and the size requirements are huge. Even bluray disks aren't nearly big enough to store long 1080p movies.

In addition, the movie studios shoot in 1080i. It would mean new cameras, new storage mediums, new processors to make the raw film into edited content, new storage media for the consumer, and on and on. Its taken quite a few years for HD to become somewhat mainstream (I remember them talking about it something around 10-15 years ago)... it will probably be half as long again before people really get into 1080p... and why 1080p? Why not go to 2000p or something? 1080p isn't *that* much better than 720p, so if they are gonna go to the hassle, may as well make it worth it

Sorry, didnt mean to go off on a tangent!

 

That's everybody is saying. I didn't know I had any other options, so I just got that shipping. It was already added on to the Paypal price when I went to pay. Here is what it says on the shipping options page...


Ships to
United States
Country: Zip or postal code:
Shipping and Handling To Service
US $8.21
37075, United States
US Postal Service Media MailTM
Estimated delivery 2-9 days*
US $27.65
37075, United States
US Postal Service Priority Mail®
Estimated delivery 2-3 days*
US $53.30
37075, United States
US Postal Service Express Mail®
Overnight to many areas*

Country:
Shipping and Handling To Service
Calculate
United States
US Postal Service Media MailTM
Estimated delivery 2-9 days*
Calculate
United States
US Postal Service Priority Mail®
Estimated delivery 2-3 days*
Calculate
United States
US Postal Service Express Mail®
Overnight to many areas*

 

Media Mail is technically 4th Class. Could take up to 2 weeks...but probably not.

RMX

 

You probably could if it contained DVD games.

RMX

 

It says it will take 2-9 days. I just talked to my eBay Powerseller friend and he said the Media Mail goes for TVs and game systems, too. Thanks for the info, though.