IGN Weighs in on PS3 Base Model's Lack of HDMI

[Reanimated]

IGN Gear (http://gear.ign.com/) has put up their take (http://gear.ign.com/articles/709/709495p1.html) on why the lack of HDMI in the 499 version of the PS3 is an extremely anti-consumer move, and one which interested buyers should steer clear of:

At the least, the decision to remove HDMI support from the $499 PS3 is badly designed means of protecting the market for the higher-end stand-alone Blu-ray players that Sony and its partners plan to launch, beginning with the $999 Samsung BD-P1000 that will hit the streets on June 25. At worst, Sony is committing a massive breach of consumer trust if it markets both the $499 and $599 PlayStation 3s as Blu-ray movie players and does not seek to educate buyers on the differences between them. Considering that, thus far, the most direct communication between manufactures and consumers on the topic of HDCP support has been, at best, obfuscation, and at worst out-right lies, the chances that Sony aims to do the right thing in this regard are low.

Until Sony announces a $499 PS3 design change, we at IGN Gear can, in good faith, only recommend that interested buyers steer clear of the lower-priced PS3 model or make the purchase fully aware that they may in future suffer severe repercussions when it comes to Blu-ray movie playback. 540p, the resolution that the Image Constraint Token will down-convert 1080p movies to in non-HDCP systems, is by no stretch of the imagination Hi-Def, and will, without major changes in PS3 design or studio policy, be the future of Blu-ray playback on the $499 PS3. Sony must either make this truth clear to buyers or make a hardware alteration. Any other response should be counted as negligent and anti-consumer, grave mistakes for a company that is risking so much on the PS3 and Blu-ray's success.
I have to agree with this analysis. The gimped PS3 still carries a VERY premium price for a game console because of the fact that it has the Blu Ray drive. How can you ask that high of a price when your main selling point is crippled?

Editor's Note - Changed text in title from 'Gimped Model' to 'Base Model'.

[devicelimit]

Editor's Note - Changed text in title from 'Gimped Model' to 'Base Model'.

Gimped model has more attitude than Base model. And this site is all about the 'tude.

[BenSkywalker]

Lack of HDMI does not mean that all BluRay movies will be down converted by default. It depends on the particular media and how the studios decided to implement HDCP. For the next few years I would be very surprised to see the studios enforce HDCP to such an extent that it would require HDMI as they would alienate the overwhelming majority of existing HDTV owners and that would result in enormous amounts of lost potential revenue. It is true that movies released that require full HDCP will need HDMI to display at full resolution, but in no way is this certain nor is it appearing particularly likely as of this point.

[JediSanf]

First, a compliment to the editor for protecting the RSS feed from backlash. Bias is for the italics, not the headlines.

Second, I'm still not convinced this is a huge issue. Yes, the base PS3 does not support HDMI/HDCP but then neither does their direct competitor (premium 360 w/HD-DVD drive). Microsoft is in precisely the same boat with it's hi-def video playback solution. Yes, banking on a corrupt and moronic industry to do the right thing and never use the ICT is foolishness incarnate but I don't think the market will allow it to happen for very long (I for one will never buy an ICT movie, because I don't have HDCP input on my TV).

[trip1eX]

The problem with the article is they are assuming no hdmi automatically means blue players won't display resolutions higher than regular dvd players. Well that remains to be seen.

[Serapth]

First, a compliment to the editor for protecting the RSS feed from backlash. Bias is for the italics, not the headlines.

Second, I'm still not convinced this is a huge issue. Yes, the base PS3 does not support HDMI/HDCP but then neither does their direct competitor (premium 360 w/HD-DVD drive). Microsoft is in precisely the same boat with it's hi-def video playback solution. Yes, banking on a corrupt and moronic industry to do the right thing and never use the ICT is foolishness incarnate but I don't think the market will allow it to happen for very long (I for one will never buy an ICT movie, because I don't have HDCP input on my TV).


That is completely not true. Microsofts output is done via a rather ingenious multi resolution output. There is no reason at all they wont ship an HDMI cable that plugs in the back of the 360 when they ship the HDDVD addon. Until then, your just spreading fud.

[Zeal]

Considering a 1080p signal can ONLY be carried through HDMI, the unit COMPLETELY loses its 1080p support for both movies and games.

This is the simple fact tha be must made clear.

Also, after finding out for myself that HD-DVD movies can now be burned to single-layer, 4gig DVD disc (using the new HD H.264 codec (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264)), Blu-Ray has become absolutely meaningless.

[Serapth]

The problem with the article is they are assuming no hdmi automatically means blue players won't display resolutions higher than regular dvd players. Well that remains to be seen.


Well its either that, or HDCP is a stillborn technology and media companies have to deal with another generation of media that is mostly unprotected. Once HDTV adoption gets to a high enough point, you will see the protection flag turned on more and more often.

Do you want to buy a device that becomes gimped 2 or 3 years down the road, even if thats just a possibility?

[ChaosDent]

Lack of HDCP support or digital video out could be a problem for the 360's plans to offer HD-DVD too. The add-on drive doesn't have a HDMI port, and it's not clear whether the base system will ever see an HDMI output. Users who buy into these systems (the gimped PS3 or the 360's HD-DVD drive) could be setting themselves up for a major screwjob by the movie studios.

[Serapth]

Lack of HDCP support or digital video out could be a problem for the 360's plans to offer HD-DVD too. The add-on drive doesn't have a HDMI port, and it's not clear whether the base system will ever see an HDMI output. Users who buy into these systems (the gimped PS3 or the 360's HD-DVD drive) could be setting themselves up for a major screwjob by the movie studios.

Actually Microsoft outright said that there is an HDMI cable in the works, but they opted to include Component ( or is it Composite, I always forget ) with the premium bundle because that supported the greatest number of HDTVs on the market today.

[rjcc]

serapth, if you're talking about the teamxbox interview, no, he didn't specifically say there was aan HDMI cable in the works

[Skjef]

Considering a 1080p signal can ONLY be carried through HDMI, the unit COMPLETELY loses its 1080p support for both movies and games.

This is the simple fact tha be must made clear.

Also, after finding out for myself that HD-DVD movies can now be burned to single-layer, 4gig DVD disc (using the new HD H.264 codec (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264)), Blu-Ray has become absolutely meaningless.Ouch. So 1080i is the highest resolution that can be carried through a component cable?

Gimped indeed.

[JediSanf]

That is completely not true. Microsofts output is done via a rather ingenious multi resolution output. There is no reason at all they wont ship an HDMI cable that plugs in the back of the 360 when they ship the HDDVD addon. Until then, your just spreading fud.

Ok, I'll tell you what; I'll source mine and you source yours.

It's also possible the word has gone out among electronics manufacturers that Hollywood is backing off demands for HDCP and ICS, which might explain why Microsoft thinks it can get away with producing a USB-based HD-DVD drive for the Xbox 360, a console that most certainly does not support HDCP natively (the standard wasn't finalized until the late first quarter of 2006) and presently does not even have wires capable of transmitting a digital signal (DVI or HDMI).

Microsoft has released no information on this issue. Where are the demands for answers? Why do they get a pass on being scrutinized? Until you (and Zeal, et.al.) are as vicious against MS's bullshit as you are against Sony you all are nothing more than fan-boy apologists who take pride in defending a corporate entity that doesn't give a damn about any of us.

[ElectricMonk]

does "gimped" have too much attitude?

[bapenguin]

Ouch. So 1080i is the highest resolution that can be carried through a component cable?

Gimped indeed.

No, component can handle 1080p, but there are 0 TV's or projectors that allow it. It's all about copy protection now and component can't provide that, HDMI can.

[jonat3]

The difference between xbox360 and PS3 is that PS3 is a 100 dolars more expensive, because of it's inclusion of Blu-Ray. In effect, the people buying the 500 dollar PS3 version, will be buying a Blu-Ray player that can't play 1080p content. In my eyes, it's like buying a DVD player while you own a black and white TV. In such an event, the DVD player would be a complete waste of money.
Above problem doesn't apply to the xbox360, because it doesn't include HD-DVD.

[Opty]

Microsoft has released no information on this issue. Where are the demands for answers? Why do they get a pass on being scrutinized? Until you (and Zeal, et.al.) are as vicious against MS's bullshit as you are against Sony you all are nothing more than fan-boy apologists who take pride in defending a corporate entity that doesn't give a damn about any of us.

No one cares about Microsoft because if their player supports ICP doesn't matter to the average consumer because they're not being forced to buy HD-DVD with the 360 like they are with BluRay and the PS3.

If you're going to force the consumer to buy the BluRay drive you should at the very least put in the HDMI so copy-protected stuff will work. Imagine the people who will buy a PS3 Base unit because they had a PS2 and then when they go to put in their BluRay movie 1 or 2 years in the future and then get a warning that the signal chain's been compromised or they notice that the picture's crappier than their BluRays from the previous year that didn't use the ICP, then they'll think their BluRay drive's busted. If they have HDMI you can at least explain to them that they just need to use the other port rather than telling them they need the other PS3 version or real BluRay player for those movies to work.

Microsoft dodges that bullet because the average person who will buy the HD-DVD addon will be looking for it explicitly rather than having it dumped in their laps. As such it will be easier to tell them that Microsoft's HD-DVD is crippled by the same ICP problem that the Base PS3 is only that they have to buy an HD-DVD player (which will be cheaper than a BluRay player by far) to get the full use rather than the $50-$150 HD-DVD addon. If they don't care and want to go the cheap route then they'll buy the addon but if they do care they'll buy the dedicated player. This ability to choose is why people aren't harping on Microsoft as badly as they are Sony.

[kid cabelgo]

Considering a 1080p signal can ONLY be carried through HDMI, the unit COMPLETELY loses its 1080p support for both movies and games.

This is the simple fact tha be must made clear.

Also, after finding out for myself that HD-DVD movies can now be burned to single-layer, 4gig DVD disc (using the new HD H.264 codec (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264)), Blu-Ray has become absolutely meaningless.

that's HD with some insano compression. You can also compress an entire double layer DVD movie into a 700 meg DIVX or XVID movie, but it's gonna look like shit.

it doesn't matter if the movie is in HD if the whole thing is artifacty and garbled.

and yes, artifacty is a word, because i just invented it

[Jack B]

I'd like to see a simple statement by Sony...

"Our low end version will not support 1080p or what we've been calling True HD and we're sorry for slamming Microsoft for not having True HD, when we've decided to do the same thing... If you'd like True HD, please do not purchase our low end version as it's not upgradeable in the future...".

My guess is it will be a cold day in hell before I see that statement coming from the same CEO that said, "frankly, our fans would buy the PS3 even if it didn't come with any software...".

I wonder if he was talking about the gimped non True HD version as well as the True HD version... Ummm, maybe that would be assuming he respected the intelligence of his most loyal fans. He was probably talking about both versions...

[benig]

A lot of you seem to be missing the point. The problem is that HDMI is REQUIRED to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVDs at full resolution. This is not a technical problem, but one of copy-protection. HDMI supports HDCP which is what the new HD DVD formats use. Without HDMI, you will have to watch a downconverted version in 540p. This is just barely more detailed than a DVD.

[Kelegacy]

I think Sony is hypocritical, since they made fun of Microsoft's dual versions and now offer two of their own, one lacking something fundamental for Blu-Ray viewing. I'm hoping the pricing changes due to consumer backlash and fearmongering by the internet before launch, but I'm pessimistic.

And I must say kudos to the editors, for changing the headline here. I have serious respect for that sort of thing.

[Balthasar]

A lot of you seem to be missing the point. The problem is that HDMI is REQUIRED to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVDs at full resolution.
That is wrong. It is only required if the flag is turned on.

[Mason]

That is wrong. It is only required if the flag is turned on.
Exactly. And hopefully the lack of HDMI means that Sony will be leaning on its Blu-Ray partners not to flag their media. Whether or not this succeeds means the difference between the $500 PS3 being a shaft or an unexpected boon to consumers. Remember, flagged media would be down-scaled for all of the non-HDMI HDTVs out there (no idea what the percents are, anyone have that info?), so it is in everyone's best interest to avoid the flagging.

[Siraris]

There has been rumors that HDCP will not be included in High def movies anymore. The lack of HDMI in both the X-Box HD-DVD drive and the PS3's lower end model pretty much confirms this. These systems will outsell stand alone High-def DVD players for a long time, and crippling the output will be a very bad idea. Furthermore, this would be a very easy class-action lawsuit to win against both Sony and Microsoft.

[benig]

That is wrong. It is only required if the flag is turned on.I was under the assumption that the copy protection was implemented for a reason and that major content providers were going to use it.

[GigaFuzz]

A lot of you seem to be missing the point. The problem is that HDMI is REQUIRED to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVDs at full resolution. This is not a technical problem, but one of copy-protection. HDMI supports HDCP which is what the new HD DVD formats use. Without HDMI, you will have to watch a downconverted version in 540p. This is just barely more detailed than a DVD.

Only If ICT is turned on, which from what I gather, won't be much, at least for a while.

EDIT: Late to the party... serves me right for multitasking.

[Mason]

I was under the assumption that the copy protection was implemented for a reason and that major content providers were going to use it.
Initial Blu-Ray movies will be unflagged. I don't think anyone has made big statements about their future plans, although I'm sure they're likely hoping to slowly move consumers over to flagged in the future, when there's better HDMI penetration.

[Balthasar]

Initial Blu-Ray movies will be unflagged. I don't think anyone has made big statements about their future plans, although I'm sure they're likely hoping to slowly move consumers over to flagged in the future, when there's better HDMI penetration.
That's what I'm guessing. If they do use it, I don't expect them to use it right out of the gate. Of course, if you're buying your PS3 with the intention of playing Blu-Ray movies, the most sensible thing would be to buy the $600 model.

[Watership]

First, a compliment to the editor for protecting the RSS feed from backlash. Bias is for the italics, not the headlines.

Second, I'm still not convinced this is a huge issue. Yes, the base PS3 does not support HDMI/HDCP but then neither does their direct competitor (premium 360 w/HD-DVD drive). Microsoft is in precisely the same boat with it's hi-def video playback solution. Yes, banking on a corrupt and moronic industry to do the right thing and never use the ICT is foolishness incarnate but I don't think the market will allow it to happen for very long (I for one will never buy an ICT movie, because I don't have HDCP input on my TV).

Microsoft is NOT in the same boat if they release the HD-DVD drive with an HDMI connector.

Microsoft went the right way with a A/V port, rather than the way PS3 has dedicated ports.

[Balthasar]

There has been rumors that HDCP will not be included in High def movies anymore. The lack of HDMI in both the X-Box HD-DVD drive and the PS3's lower end model pretty much confirms this. These systems will outsell stand alone High-def DVD players for a long time, and crippling the output will be a very bad idea. Furthermore, this would be a very easy class-action lawsuit to win against both Sony and Microsoft.
That's actually a good point I hadn't considered before. Especially if Sony markets the $500 PS3 as Blu-Ray capable. While that's not false, it would be very misleading.

[Watership]

The problem with the article is they are assuming no hdmi automatically means blue players won't display resolutions higher than regular dvd players. Well that remains to be seen.

It's hard to believe the DRM crazy movie studios, sony included, wouldn't implement it. It's Copy protection of a sort. Of course they're going to use it.

[Draft]

The rumor is that ICT won't be turned on until 2010 or 2012 at the earliest (no idea what happened to 2011. Maybe that's when the robots attack.) So the PS3 will play movies in full 1080p until then, and by 2012 the average blu-ray/hd-dvd player should cost around $50.

Of course, it's still unproven technology shoved into a game system as a desperate attempt from a hemorrhaging company to control the DVD market.

[BenSkywalker]

It's hard to believe the DRM crazy movie studios, sony included, wouldn't implement it. It's Copy protection of a sort. Of course they're going to use it.

It isn't an 'if' question, it is 'when'. For the first several years replication and piracy are going to be marginal issues at best due to the cost of it. Combine that with the fact that the overwhelming installed base of HDTV users do not have a HDMI input and you run the risk of alienating a huge chunk of potential consumers. Out of the gate it makes very little sense to enable HDCP, you are seriously limiting your consumer pool and hence potential revenues while at the same time gaining very little as piracy on a new, rather quite costly, media format is going to be a rather small market.

Speaking for myself, I have HDMI and will be buying the $600 PS3 so I am not saying these things as what I want to see, it is just the reality of the marketplace. I'm actually pretty happy that my 360 doesn't also have HDMI as my TV does only have a single input so I would be pretty screwed if I needed multiple inputs.

[Watership]

It isn't an 'if' question, it is 'when'. For the first several years replication and piracy are going to be marginal issues at best due to the cost of it. Combine that with the fact that the overwhelming installed base of HDTV users do not have a HDMI input and you run the risk of alienating a huge chunk of potential consumers. Out of the gate it makes very little sense to enable HDCP, you are seriously limiting your consumer pool and hence potential revenues while at the same time gaining very little as piracy on a new, rather quite costly, media format is going to be a rather small market.

Speaking for myself, I have HDMI and will be buying the $600 PS3 so I am not saying these things as what I want to see, it is just the reality of the marketplace. I'm actually pretty happy that my 360 doesn't also have HDMI as my TV does only have a single input so I would be pretty screwed if I needed multiple inputs.

I'm sure that A/V recievers will have HDMI hubs, if they don't already. I couldn't live without mine.

[Norse]

Hasn't it been confirmed that Warner Bros. will turn on the ict flag???

[Draft]

Hasn't it been confirmed that Warner Bros. will turn on the ict flag???No, it seems very unlikely that any studio will turn it on at first. Like other people said, there are plenty of people who bought non-HDMI tv sets in the last couple years, and even the sleeziest company doesn't want to instantly piss off a million people who can only watch Batman Begins in 540p.

It will be an issue when the ICT flags do get turned on, but like I said, that probably won't happen until whatever next-gen-format-that-wins players are about $50 at walmart. So this is really a non-issue. Anyone who can afford an HDTV can afford a $50 dvd player.

Course, doesn't change the fact that Blu Ray in PS3 is a desperate attempt by Sony to pull their fat from the fryer by trojan horsing their media standard into the world's living room blah blah blah. You guys already know this part.

[Mason]

That's what I'm guessing. If they do use it, I don't expect them to use it right out of the gate. Of course, if you're buying your PS3 with the intention of playing Blu-Ray movies, the most sensible thing would be to buy the $600 model.
Ugh, and how happy do you think it is making Sony that we're saying that?

The way I see it, Blu-Ray will either be dead or a necessity by the time PS3s are widely available for purchase, so I don't worry too much about these details. One of the choices will be very sensible at that point, I'll buy the sensible one.

[JazGalaxy]

I think Sony will have it's work cut out for them explaining what Blueray even IS before they start trying to explain the differences between the consoles to people.

I think Sony is pretty much positioning themselves in the toilet. I have no idea what they're thinking with this...

[Balthasar]

Ugh, and how happy do you think it is making Sony that we're saying that?
Quite, I'm sure.

The way I see it, Blu-Ray will either be dead or a necessity by the time PS3s are widely available for purchase, so I don't worry too much about these details. One of the choices will be very sensible at that point, I'll buy the sensible one.
Yeah, I'm really hopping one of these damned formats win out very swiftly so we can be done with it. I'll probably be holding off on a PS3 for now (not that I would have been able to get one at launch anyway); hopefully the choices will be easier to make by next year.

[HumpYourWay]

Does the HD DVD drive from Microsoft come with or without HDMI cable?
What sense does the HD-DVD drive make when microsoft doesnt include a HDMI cable? The movie studios dont allow HD movies to be played through an unencrypted signal. Not even microsoft (or anyone for that matter) can realease an HD player without encryption.
A HDMI cable would be sweet anyway because then the X360 outputs a pure digital signal (video and audio in one cable). I am waiting for that since the launch now.

[Zeal]

that's HD with some insano compression. You can also compress an entire double layer DVD movie into a 700 meg DIVX or XVID movie, but it's gonna look like shit.

it doesn't matter if the movie is in HD if the whole thing is artifacty and garbled.

and yes, artifacty is a word, because i just invented it

Do you really think I would burn something with noticeably bad compression? I'm a major audio/video nut, so I wouldn't dare waste a DVD on overly compressed crap. The amazing thing about using the H264 codec is that the compression is totally unoticeable.

As a test, I watched my my Superbit 10gig edition of The Fifth Element, then compressed it to slightly over 2gigs using H264.

The result was no noticeable loss in video or audio quality, including its DTS score. This codec is that powerful.

And by the way, this IS the codec HD-DVD and Blu-ray uses to display their movies.

[Draft]

I don't even know why you discuss the $500 model. It's going to be as rare and elusive as Sasquatch, or the X360 core.

The $500 PS3 serves the same function as the $300 X360- it's there to defer sticker shock. I don't think it really worked for either company, but clearly less effective in Sony's case.

edit: compression is getting so good. Every day it becomes more and more obvious that Blu Ray is meaningless to gaming- it's going to allow publishers to put out one SKU with international voice tracks, and that's about it.

[Reanimated]

For all the people with the "blah blah, no HDMI on the 360 HDDVD drive", hold up just one second.

An official HDMI cable for 360 has been all but confirmed. Lik Sang now has a SKU for an official MS HDMI cable. I would be shocked if the add-on HDDVD unit didn't ship with said cable.

[Mason]

And by the way, this IS the codec HD-DVD and Blu-ray uses to display their movies.
Technically MPEG-2 and VC1 are supported, but I don't know why anyone would use them. Hope the studios are sticking to H.264.

[Zeal]

Technically MPEG-2 and VC1 are supported, but I don't know why anyone would use them. Hope the studios are sticking to H.264.It's become the HD standard, thankfully. Those older formats are also supported though, of course.

The only difference is that H.264 requires more processing power, although audio and video are instiguishable to the source.

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/technologies/h264/

[Reanimated]

I don't even know why you discuss the $500 model. It's going to be as rare and elusive as Sasquatch, or the X360 core.

The $500 PS3 serves the same function as the $300 X360- it's there to defer sticker shock. I don't think it really worked for either company, but clearly less effective in Sony's case.

edit: compression is getting so good. Every day it becomes more and more obvious that Blu Ray is meaningless to gaming- it's going to allow publishers to put out one SKU with international voice tracks, and that's about it.




Yeah, the UK isn't even GETTING the 500 dollar model. I get the feeling that they might just drop it alltogether before production starts. It has created a bigger backlash than even the 360 tard pack.

[Draft]

Yeah, the UK isn't even GETTING the 500 dollar model. I get the feeling that they might just drop it alltogether before production starts. It has created a bigger backlash than even the 360 tard pack.They absolutely won't drop it. They'll make 1,800,000 $600 models, 200,000 $500 models, and then trickle them out for a year or two, and then they'll drop it altogether.

[KarmaGhost]

I didn't read the article or any of the other posts, but thank you, fitbabits, for editing the original headline.

[Reanimated]

They absolutely won't drop it. They'll make 1,800,000 $600 models, 200,000 $500 models, and then trickle them out for a year or two, and then they'll drop it altogether.



That wouldn't be very nice. :(

[Kamalot]

That wouldn't be very nice. :(
Sony isn't known for 'nice'. It is a term they can't even comprehend.

[fitbabits]

I didn't read the article or any of the other posts, but thank you, fitbabits, for editing the original headline.
You're welcome. And to everyone else who appreciated the change, thank you! See, I do have my moments. :)

[Yeti2005]

So to sum it all up, the $500 version of the PS3 can't output 1080p EVER and maybe sometime in the future my new Blu-Ray movies maybe down converted to 540p. Talking about what MS and Nintendo are doing is irrelevant. If you're interested in the PS3 then you're almost forced to go with the $600 version.

I know some of you might say, "But I don't own a HDTV so it doesn't matter" but the reality is HDTVs are becoming cheaper and cheaper and if you don't have an HDTV then I'm sure you have a computer monitor that you can use for a display.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

I know some of you might say, "But I don't own a HDTV so it doesn't matter" but the reality is HDTVs are becoming cheaper and cheaper and if you don't have an HDTV then I'm sure you have a computer monitor that you can use for a display.

I agree with your basic point here (i.e. the $500 model isn't future-proofed), but even with the $600 model you couldn't do 1080p BD-Video without an HDCP-compliant PC monitor. There are probably more people here with HDTVs than with HDCP-compliant computer monitors.

[Draft]

So to sum it all up, the $500 version of the PS3 can't output 1080p EVER and maybe sometime in the future my new Blu-Ray movies maybe down converted to 540p. Talking about what MS and Nintendo are doing is irrelevant. If you're interested in the PS3 then you're almost forced to go with the $600 version. no that's not it at all.

[jacktion]

Blueray is just dead. No one wants it. It is expensive. It does not offer any advantages. This is going to be a huge albatross around Sony's neck. I think that we will see a PS3 without Blueray offered in the next 9 months.

[Grifter]

Blueray is just dead. No one wants it. It is expensive. It does not offer any advantages. This is going to be a huge albatross around Sony's neck. I think that we will see a PS3 without Blueray offered in the next 9 months.

The only problem with that is, from what I can remember, it was stated at the press event that ALL PS3 games will be burned on Blu-ray discs. Even if we don't give a shit or want to pay for the over priced and unnecessary media we have no choice.

The thing that pisses me off the most is that I really want to play Heavenly Sword, Assasins Creed and Warhawk but I just don't think I can convince myself to spend $500 to $600 on a PS3, not yet any way. Even if I could convince myself to go with the tard pack, and not really caring about Blu-ray, just knowing that the option is not there after spending that kind of money would bug me.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

There's a dev at the Qt3 forums who's working on a PS3 game and he said they couldn't fit it on a DVD-9 even if they wanted to. The fact that localized versions will supposedly be included on the same disc will balloon game sizes as well, at least for titles with lots of dialogue and/or prerendered cinemas.

[Kelegacy]

Sony isn't known for 'nice'. It is a term they can't even comprehend.
Sony existing at all must really chap your ass.

Irony is someday learning that Sony is your father and that you've blindly hated him all along. But it will be too late, when he's gasping and wheezing on his deathbed, and your pleading tears for him to hold on, that it will be all right, cascade and shatter onto cold earth, and the man you joyfully hated for countless years dies never knowing his child's reciprocated love.

[bean19]

I bet 3rd party developers who are tied to Sony are really sweating that price-point. . . I bet we are going to see a lot of developers hedging their bets and not keeping their games as Sony "exclusives".

[Siraris]

I don't even know why you discuss the $500 model. It's going to be as rare and elusive as Sasquatch, or the X360 core.

The $500 PS3 serves the same function as the $300 X360- it's there to defer sticker shock. I don't think it really worked for either company, but clearly less effective in Sony's case.

edit: compression is getting so good. Every day it becomes more and more obvious that Blu Ray is meaningless to gaming- it's going to allow publishers to put out one SKU with international voice tracks, and that's about it.

Incorrect. The $500 PS3 is there so that Sony can offer the $600 PS3. See, what people fail to realize is that the people who do the marketing for these companies are usually very smart. The average consumer has NO CLUE how electronics work, yet they make up the vast majority of who buy electronics in the first place. With the PS3, all they know is that they stick a disc in a drive and their game magically appears on their television. They have no clue what a CELL is, or what HDMI means.

Sony is chosing to sell the lower-end PS3, so that the higher-end PS3 is not $800-$900. They are most likely saving a good chunk of money on the lower-end system, and this allows them to price the higher-end version at $600. Furthermore, the lower-end version has some superfulous bells and whistles removed that the average consumer would not use, so there will be less confusion and more savings.

People are making way too big of a deal about the PS3's price. I know there is much more exposure today than there was 5 years ago, since so many more people play games and use the internet, but stop and think for a moment. $499-$599 for the PS3 is a VERY good deal:

You are getting an extremely powerful gaming system that plays close to 10,000 games already on the market, you are getting an internet/media hub, a high-definition movie player, and much more. I was shocked at first at the price of the PS3, but if you look at this as a long term investment and take into account what it offers, it's a great deal.

[Chandler]

HDCP is bad for sony and consumers, hopefully they don't go this route for the sake of all of us and not just people who will buy a PS3. It doesn't make sense that after we boguht so many HDTVs we now have to buy a new one.

[Kamalot]

Sony existing at all must really chap your ass.

Irony is someday learning that Sony is your father and that you've blindly hated him all along. But it will be too late, when he's gasping and wheezing on his deathbed, and your pleading tears for him to hold on, that it will be all right, cascade and shatter onto cold earth, and the man you joyfully hated for countless years dies never knowing his child's reciprocated love.That would be pretty funny. As long as when I find out, the film slows down as I shout at the sky, "Noooooooooo!"

:-)

[Nessus]

Sony existing at all must really chap your ass.

Irony is someday learning that Sony is your father and that you've blindly hated him all along. But it will be too late, when he's gasping and wheezing on his deathbed, and your pleading tears for him to hold on, that it will be all right, cascade and shatter onto cold earth, and the man you joyfully hated for countless years dies never knowing his child's reciprocated love.



No. No. That's not true! That's impossible!

[antoniogaud]

HD-DVD movies can now be burned to single-layer, 4gig DVD disc (using the new HD H.264 codec (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264)), Blu-Ray has become absolutely meaningless.

Wow! Will this play on normal DVD players? How about the X360 without the HD-DVD add-on?

[51|RandoM]

Until then, your just spreading fud.

And you're just spreading wishful thinking. You're two guys in the same rowboat, just rowing different directions.

[Reanimated]

The thing that pisses me off the most is that I really want to play Heavenly Sword, Assasins Creed and Warhawk but I just don't think I can convince myself to spend $500 to $600 on a PS3, not yet any way. Even if I could convince myself to go with the tard pack, and not really caring about Blu-ray, just knowing that the option is not there after spending that kind of money would bug me.



Don't sweat it. Assassins Creed is coming to the 360, Heavenly Sword looks just like God of War - so you can get your fix with God of War 2 on PS2, and Warhawk is bound to be mediocre. In any event, none of those titles are slated for 06. HS was, but it has slipped.

[51|RandoM]

Considering a 1080p signal can ONLY be carried through HDMI, the unit COMPLETELY loses its 1080p support for both movies and games.

This is the simple fact tha be must made clear.



Maybe if it were a fact, which it is not. There are a number of displays that accept 1080p over component TODAY. There are component video switchers that support 1080p over component TODAY.

There is only one thing that doesn't (want to) support 1080p over component, and that is the movie studios. Most of them have given in, though, with Warner being the only one likely to throw in the ICT flag early on.

While the inclusion of DVD on the ps2 has been hailed as one of the brightest moves ever made in this business, I think blu-ray inclusion on the ps3 is going to go down as one of the dimmest.

It doesn't matter to me one way or another. I'm not going to repurchase my entire DVD library on blu-ray or hd-dvd. If they remaster what I have already purchased at higher resolutions, I expect I might be spending a good deal of time with Azureus in my system tray.

[Vanthar]

Rofl 25 gig torrents are the new norm.. that just sounds sickening.

[maja]

I have purchased TWO Hi-Def TVs in the past two years. Niether of them support HDMI and niether does my A/V reciever. This whole HDMI thing really makes me upset and frankly makes me want to give the whole movie/gaming/electronic industry the middle finger.

I really don't give a damn about 1080p cause niether of my TVs support it. But I should be able to watch movies at 1080i or 720p. I work hard for my money and spent lots of cash for my TVs and now they are going to make my TVs obsolete? Now I know why so many people don't bother buying new technology. You're bound to get burned. I believe I'm burnt to a crisp.

So that said I know I won't bother with BlueRay or HD-DVD unless they can guarentee me that ALL THE MOVIES will be playable at 1080i/720p without the use of an HDMI input. I'm not buying any more HDTVs.

[NightRain]

I have purchased TWO Hi-Def TVs in the past two years. Niether of them support HDMI and niether does my A/V reciever. This whole HDMI thing really makes me upset and frankly makes me want to give the whole movie/gaming/electronic industry the middle finger.

I really don't give a damn about 1080p cause niether of my TVs support it. But I should be able to watch movies at 1080i or 720p. I work hard for my money and spent lots of cash for my TVs and now they are going to make my TVs obsolete? Now I know why so many people don't bother buying new technology. You're bound to get burned. I believe I'm burnt to a crisp.

So that said I know I won't bother with BlueRay or HD-DVD unless they can guarentee me that ALL THE MOVIES will be playable at 1080i/720p without the use of an HDMI input. I'm not buying any more HDTVs.

What sets did you buy without HDMI? HDMI has been around for several years now and pretty much every HD set has at least one HDMI input now. In the last two years you could have bought a HDMI set, espeically when you consider all the HDMI talk that has been floating around.

[Serapth]

Ok, I'll tell you what; I'll source mine and you source yours.



Microsoft has released no information on this issue. Where are the demands for answers? Why do they get a pass on being scrutinized? Until you (and Zeal, et.al.) are as vicious against MS's bullshit as you are against Sony you all are nothing more than fan-boy apologists who take pride in defending a corporate entity that doesn't give a damn about any of us.


Ok, you need to chill. You know, running around calling other people fanboys is probrably the number one way to make yourself look like a fanboy. Plus, I didnt say shit about Sony, I simply said the statement that Microsoft cant support HDMI is simply untrue.

As to citing sources, I have it in a print magazine, where one of the designers of the XBox said, straight out, that the multi AV hookup could support HDMI and they would make a cable available if market really demanded it. If you really care enough, I can dig through all my bloody magazines to find the article in question.

Or, you can simply look at lik-sang, who pretty much spilled the beans on a cable being available ( Microsoft provided ).

http://www.lik-sang.com/info.php?category=319&products_id=8540&

[Wombat]

Sorry if this has been answered already in this thread, I've only skimmed it, but does anyone know WHY the HDMI port is being left out? Is the cost to include it really significant? Or is there some licensing fee they would have to pay?

I just don't see why this is a logical saving for SONY to make, as there is no way to upgrade it later, unlike the smaller hard drive.

[Jack B]

I have purchased TWO Hi-Def TVs in the past two years. Niether of them support HDMI and niether does my A/V reciever. This whole HDMI thing really makes me upset and frankly makes me want to give the whole movie/gaming/electronic industry the middle finger.

I really don't give a damn about 1080p cause niether of my TVs support it. But I should be able to watch movies at 1080i or 720p. I work hard for my money and spent lots of cash for my TVs and now they are going to make my TVs obsolete? Now I know why so many people don't bother buying new technology. You're bound to get burned. I believe I'm burnt to a crisp.

So that said I know I won't bother with BlueRay or HD-DVD unless they can guarentee me that ALL THE MOVIES will be playable at 1080i/720p without the use of an HDMI input. I'm not buying any more HDTVs.

Maja,

I'm in exactly the same boat. I bought both my HDTV's about 4-5 years ago. Neither support 1080p and until they die, I'm not likely to replace them. When they do, maybe at that point I'll likely get 1080p with HDMI, but that could be anywhere from now to a few years from now...

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

It's going to be interesting to see how the 360 handles HDMI -- you can't do HDMI straight from the 360's multiout because the HDMI spec only allows Type A and Type B connectors (i.e. the standard inputs/outputs you see on all HDMI devices, including the PS3). You can get around this by using a DVI-to-HDMI adapter, but the adapter must ship with the device itself. So either MS gets an exemption from HDMI Licensing (which might be difficult, since Sony is one of the HDMI Founders) or the 360 doesn't do HDMI -- right now the Lik-Sang SKU is the only evidence it does (the only official word from MS on the matter is a pre-launch statement to the effect that they'll provide HDMI when it makes sense to do so, which could just as easily refer to a future 360 hardware revision as to an HDMI cable).

[Serapth]

Most likely answer is, they ship HDMI with the HDDVD, which would qualify it as shipping with the device.

Frankly, outside HD playback there isnt much point in HDMI, other then convenience.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

Most likely answer is, they ship HDMI with the HDDVD, which would qualify it as shipping with the device.

The problem with this is that the device in question would be the 360 -- as far as we know the HD DVD drive has no video outputs of its own and relies on the 360's outputs to actually send video to the monitor.

[JediSanf]

Ok, you need to chill. You know, running around calling other people fanboys is probrably the number one way to make yourself look like a fanboy. Plus, I didnt say shit about Sony, I simply said the statement that Microsoft cant support HDMI is simply untrue.

As to citing sources, I have it in a print magazine, where one of the designers of the XBox said, straight out, that the multi AV hookup could support HDMI and they would make a cable available if market really demanded it. If you really care enough, I can dig through all my bloody magazines to find the article in question.

Or, you can simply look at lik-sang, who pretty much spilled the beans on a cable being available ( Microsoft provided ).

http://www.lik-sang.com/info.php?category=319&products_id=8540&

The Lik-Sang link is a placeholder since Microsoft has made no official announcement yet on any such cable. I was not questioning the machine's capabilities, merely the lack of a HDMI/HDCP connection. My original statement remains, Microsoft does not have an official HDMI/HDCP solution to go with their new drive. This may or may not change in the future.

Rereading my post, I admit that I may have gone overboard. I apologise. My sole posistion on HDCP has been that it may end up being DOA. The rant against fan-boys was inspired from revulsion of the corporate flag waving mentality that crops up around E3 and an unfortunate encounter with some morons at EBGames (and before you ask how I know they were morons, one of them bragged about having "read it on GameFaqs").

[Draft]

Something you should keep in mind-

While component is more than capable of outputting a 1080p symbol, component cables can't reliably carry that signal more than 3 feet. So if you're players are more than 3 feet from your TV (home theater guys, I'd imagine) forget about using component.

[JediSanf]

Something you should keep in mind-

While component is more than capable of outputting a 1080p symbol, component cables can't reliably carry that signal more than 3 feet. So if you're players are more than 3 feet from your TV (home theater guys, I'd imagine) forget about using component.

Really? The interference gets that bad even on good shielded cables? Damn.

[maja]

What sets did you buy without HDMI? HDMI has been around for several years now and pretty much every HD set has at least one HDMI input now. In the last two years you could have bought a HDMI set, espeically when you consider all the HDMI talk that has been floating around.


In 2003 I bought a Toshiba 34HF81 ( manual http://tacpservice.toshiba.com/ConsumerProductSupport/Manuals/TV/2001/34hf81a.pdf ). Basicly I wanted an HDTV that fit in my entertainment center and this was the best one I could find.

Last year I bought a Hyundai ImageQuest HQL320WR (manual http://www.hyundaiq.de/support/manuals/LCDTV/Deu.pdf ). We (the wife and I) where looking for a flat panel tv for the bedroom that we could hang on the wall. The price was right (under $1000) and it has a quick refresh rate (8ms) wich is good for gaming purposes.

But unfortunately I did not know about HDMI until this year. And now I have two obsolete HDTV sets.

[Kamalot]

But unfortunately I did not know about HDMI until this year. And now I have two obsolete HDTV sets.I'm not a fan of HDMI. I don;t like having my audio and video together in one cable. It means that when I want to get another sound system, I need to buy special HDMI splitters, adapters and receivers. It is all vert expensive since it has to conform to the DRM specs the movie industry wants.

Personally, I don't care for other companies telling me what I can and can't do with my image, and forcing me to upgrade my whole home theater for DRM. HDMI is the exact same video signal you get over a DVI connection, just in a different shaped plug, combined with audio and protected with DRM.

Down with HDMI.

[ruceree88]

No, component can handle 1080p, but there are 0 TV's or projectors that allow it. It's all about copy protection now and component can't provide that, HDMI can.

Indeed. This is why I highly recommend to anyone that cares that they avoid such attempts to lock down the optical disc format. That is all this forced format changeover is about. To be able to try to lock down the format and lock in people to their respective vendors. To be able to control how you are able to use what you "own"

[NightRain]

Hoepfully it won't have too much of an impact on you. I bought my first HDTV in 2002 (Toshiba 50H81) and I replaced it in January of 2005 (Toshiba 57HX84) I now have HDMI with my new set but no 1080P support, which I can live without.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

Something you should keep in mind-

While component is more than capable of outputting a 1080p symbol, component cables can't reliably carry that signal more than 3 feet. So if you're players are more than 3 feet from your TV (home theater guys, I'd imagine) forget about using component.

It's closer to three meters than three feet (at least with high-end cables), and that's only at 59.97/60fps -- at 24fps or 30fps you can pretty much circumnavigate the globe. Chances are if you have a 1080p set it can handle a 24fps or 30fps signal, so long as the device can actually output one.

[Achilles]

I'm not a fan of HDMI. I don;t like having my audio and video together in one cable. It means that when I want to get another sound system, I need to buy special HDMI splitters, adapters and receivers. It is all vert expensive since it has to conform to the DRM specs the movie industry wants.

Down with HDMI.I love HDMI. My TV has an optical out, allowing me to control volume and source the way I normally would on the TV while still getting surround digital sound. It's great, but right now the 360 doesn't have HDMI, and now the PS3 with it is an extra $100. Very disappointing.

[Kamalot]

Do most HDMI TVs have 2 or more HDMI connectors on the back?

Lets say you have an Xbxo 360 and a PS3, each with HDMI cables, How would you plug both of them in?

[Achilles]

Do most HDMI TVs have 2 or more HDMI connectors on the back?

Lets say you have an Xbxo 360 and a PS3, each with HDMI cables, How would you plug both of them in?Not sure about most TVs, mine's got 2 however. One of them can also be used as a PC input, since it's got plugs for a separate audio source, which you would need if you did DVI to HDMI.

[Kamalot]

Not sure about most TVs, mine's got 2 however. One of them can also be used as a PC input, since it's got plugs for a separate audio source, which you would need if you did DVI to HDMI.
Yeah, I'm curious what people would do with multiple HDMI devices. For example, if you got a PS3, a 360 and a TivO-like device (in the future) that all used HDMI, how would you hook them up or switch them?

I think I'll hold out as long as I can. My projector has an HDMI connection, but I use VGA for everything. A KVM switchbox to control input from the media PC, Xbox 360, GameCube and Dreamcast is much cheaper than trying to convert all signals to HDMI and find a switcher for the audio/video.

Dan

[Zeal]

The PS3's HDMI feature won't even become useful for a few years, anyway. Once 1080p becomes the HD standard, and sets support it at a reasonable price, then you'll see Sony with the advantage.

[Balthasar]

Yeah, I'm curious what people would do with multiple HDMI devices. For example, if you got a PS3, a 360 and a TivO-like device (in the future) that all used HDMI, how would you hook them up or switch them?
My DVR/cable box uses my only available HDMI imput, so I have no idea.

[Kamalot]

My DVR/cable box uses my only available HDMI imput, so I have no idea.
You know, I think it may have been a very safe move for Nintendo and Microsoft not to jump on the HDMI bandwagon too early. If most TVs only have 1 HDMI input, what would people do with 3-4 HDMI devices? This way, you can have your DVR hooked into your HDMI port and everything else running through an inexpensive component switcher.

[bean19]

You know, I think it may have been a very safe move for Nintendo and Microsoft not to jump on the HDMI bandwagon too early. If most TVs only have 1 HDMI input, what would people do with 3-4 HDMI devices? This way, you can have your DVR hooked into your HDMI port and everything else running through an inexpensive component switcher.

I bet there are HDMI splitters out already.

I'm looking forward to it. All the wires with component cables are just silly.

[Serapth]

The PS3's HDMI feature won't even become useful for a few years, anyway. Once 1080p becomes the HD standard, and sets support it at a reasonable price, then you'll see Sony with the advantage.

There is a big if there. Chances are either 1080i or 720p will become the norm. I would say 90% of the TVs sold today dont support 1080p and up to a year ago, almost none existed. The market with probrably set the standard. Not to mention, is it even worthwhile for game developers to support 1080p or 1080i? That graphical difference isnt that major but doubling your pixel count is expensive performance wise.