Slashdot Mirror


September PS3 Launch, Online Service

Next Generation (which has generally been fairly reliable regarding information of this nature) has a report indicating that the PlayStation 3 may be launching in September of this year. They also have information about the Sony online console service that has been rumoured for the last few weeks. Apparently called HUB, they theorize details about that aspect of the console will be made available in the next few weeks. From the article: "PlayStation HUB is being described to developers as a 'subscriber service' suggesting a monthly charge. We understand the service is being created by Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, although this is unconfirmed. Sony boss Howard Stringer is pushing for all media content to be available for distribution over PlayStation HUB, such as music and movies, thus opening up a powerful iTunes-like distribution network for Sony."

93 comments

  1. Re:GNAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    God you're retarded....

  2. It will be Interesting by DarkNemesis618 · · Score: 0, Troll
    It will be interesting to see how this service does compared to the new XBOX Live available for the XBOX 360 users. XBOX Live over the past couple years has become the standard for online console gaming with in my opinion great service and the ability to download content for live-enabled games.

    The online console era is the new thing for consoles and is now definitely here to stay as it looks like both XBOX 360 and PS3 both are going to be media centers in one form or another. I think HUB is going to have some catching up to do to match the growing success of XBOX Live.

    --
    What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?
    1. Re:It will be Interesting by garrett714 · · Score: 0

      XBOX Live over the past couple years has become the standard for online console gaming

      Too bad all the "online" games for Xbox suck ass.

    2. Re:It will be Interesting by stevesliva · · Score: 1, Interesting

      With its monthly fees, the Live service must also be a key aspect of justifying losing hundreds of dollars on every XBox sold. Given the fact that the PS3 will also have a few C-notes wrapped around every console, Sony absolutely needs this to make up that money.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    3. Re:It will be Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it will be interesting. But what's more interesting is the insistance of Microsoft and possibly Sony to pay to use the Internet through their machines. I'm barely willing to pay for movies and games when I download them. I'm *not* willing to pay for the opportunity to browse through those games.

      It's like asking someone to pay a cover charge when they walk into a store. iTunes doesn't charge me to look around at the merchandise.

      I'm already paying my ISP just for the ability to connect my game consoles to the Internet. Why would I stand to be gouged again?

      You may point out that I'm paying to be able to play online against other people. Well, guess what. I can do that on my computer games without coughing up a monthly/yearly fee (MMOs excluded). Are consoles and computer games really that different? I think not.

    4. Re:It will be Interesting by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      i wouldnt say that. its more like the other gamers really suck.

      you have to really do some networking and try to stick to playing against people you know arent assholes.

    5. Re:It will be Interesting by StocDred · · Score: 1

      I would like to see some evidence that your non-interesting pathetic attempt at a comment is not the result of a paid shill, trying to seem non-partisan yet still staunchly pro-Xbox Live. "The online console era is the new thing for consoles and is now definitely here to stay"? Come on now, really. Did you phone in this comment from the year 2000?

    6. Re:It will be Interesting by cornface · · Score: 2, Informative

      It will be interesting to see how this service does compared to the new XBOX Live available for the XBOX 360 users. XBOX Live over the past couple years has become the standard for online console gaming with in my opinion great service and the ability to download content for live-enabled games.

      The online console era is the new thing for consoles and is now definitely here to stay as it looks like both XBOX 360 and PS3 both are going to be media centers in one form or another. I think HUB is going to have some catching up to do to match the growing success of XBOX Live.


      The growing success, put into perspective.

      10% of Xbox owners ever got on Live. Microsoft's Xbox sales were 20% of Sony's PS2 sales. Nintendo's sales were also around 20% of Sony's. Doing the math, we can see that Live stormed onto the scene and sucked in a whopping 1.6% of the console gaming market.

      Holy cow! How will Sony ever catch up to that???

    7. Re:It will be Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how is it that you imply it is not?

      -Post brought to you by the image word
      "tackle"

    8. Re:It will be Interesting by pboulang · · Score: 1
      There are people like that, you gay fucking loser?!

      Why do you even come on here, just to be taken out like this?

      [/irony]

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

    9. Re:It will be Interesting by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      thanks for the irony tag. almost didnt get the joke.

      you gotta point though, maybe im a sucker for punishment; i /did/ eventually renew my live subscription for some reason. [havent used it since november, though].

      but at least the racists arent as pronounced here on slashdot as on live.

    10. Re:It will be Interesting by sibtrag · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft has claimed publicly that about half of XBOX360 users have joined XBOX live. No word on how many are regular users vs. tried it once. Also, I believe that Xbox live access is required to run old Xbox 1 games on XBOX 360, so some folks may have joined just for that.

    11. Re:It will be Interesting by DarkNemesis618 · · Score: 1

      All that is required to play old XBOX games is the hard drive. Microsoft released the required updates online so that users can download the updates, burn them to CD, and then the XBOX 360 will copy the needed updates onto the hard drive to allow them to be played.

      --
      What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?
    12. Re:It will be Interesting by Manmademan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget that 50% figure is almost entirely composed of early adopter hardcore gamers, Xbox Live silver users who pay nothing (can't play games online, but can buy content and post scores) and trial users which are also currently paying nothing.

      We'd have to wait a little longer to see if the actual, Live Gold user statistics are truly higher than the 10% who subscribed to Live on the Xbox1.

    13. Re:It will be Interesting by Erwos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's kind of misleading. By the time Sony's put out the PS3, they'll have to deal with an Xbox 360 that's had a good half year's head start in the channel, since the supply chain problems have apparently been fixed. Last stats I heard, _50%_ of 360 owners had put their console online. That's an excellent number, if they can maintain it.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    14. Re:It will be Interesting by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Now all you have to do is wait and see how much of the market the 360 captures, and you may be on to something.

      It's not an excelent number until you know if the console is a success or not, and that is far from certain at this point. Come back in two years and we'll talk.

    15. Re:It will be Interesting by dup_account · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't forget that you have to pay to get patches for Xbox games, which ironically need patches... My PS/2 doesn't crash nearly like my Xbox (as in almost never).. Stupid Xbox thing...

      Now if I can just defeat Malak..

    16. Re:It will be Interesting by Jarlsberg · · Score: 1

      Come now, you're just trolling. I've had the original Xbox since it was launched, and it has never crashed or needed patches. Nor has my PS2.

    17. Re:It will be Interesting by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      As has been said before, access to the XCircle online store doesn't cost money. Playing multiplayer games online does.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    18. Re:It will be Interesting by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I have a gut feeling that MS will only release figures for all XBL users, not mentioning how many of those are paying.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    19. Re:It will be Interesting by cornface · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has claimed publicly that about half of XBOX360 users have joined XBOX live. No word on how many are regular users vs. tried it once. Also, I believe that Xbox live access is required to run old Xbox 1 games on XBOX 360, so some folks may have joined just for that.

      Right. Well, considering that 360 sales to date are a fraction of the original Xbox sales, I don't think taking even half of the total 360 owners into consideration is going to change the percentage very much.

      I guess my point was that MS has had Live out as the only service for several years, and the adoption by users has been pretty slow to date. If there were 20 million people hooked on Live already, Sony might have something to "catch up" to or worry about. As it is, the lagging sales of Microsoft's consoles have limited the potential impact of their head start.

      This isn't a dig on Microsoft or Live, just the current facts.

    20. Re:It will be Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50% of 360 owners are online with the free service (not the Gold one where you actually pay MSFT money, and without the subscription you can't do that much except buy things, so no real multiplayer). Remember, Xbox had less than 10% of its user base paying for Xbox Live at the end of its run, and I don't think anyone expects the situation to change. There is also probably some inflated statistics for online usage because the early adopter market is more willing to use all of the features available.

      The big 3 talk about how online gaming will take over the world, but so far most people would rather just play alone or with friends that are physically next to them.

    21. Re:It will be Interesting by cornface · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's kind of misleading. By the time Sony's put out the PS3, they'll have to deal with an Xbox 360 that's had a good half year's head start in the channel, since the supply chain problems have apparently been fixed. Last stats I heard, _50%_ of 360 owners had put their console online. That's an excellent number, if they can maintain it.

      If they are able to get actual 360's in stores, and add a couple of interesting exclusive titles to the lineup by the summer, they may have a chance. The supply problem has really squandered a lot of the initial launch excitement. When the PS3 launches, MS is going to be in the unenviable position of being "last year's" console in the face of Sony and Nintendo unless they have an impressive stable of games.

      My opinion, obviously. We'll see what happens.

    22. Re:It will be Interesting by 0racle · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The first thing my XBox did when I tried a demo disk was install patches, its also the first thing it does when you connect it to Live.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    23. Re:It will be Interesting by Vr6dub · · Score: 1
      After some quick googling, I found that only 15-25% of American households actually have broadband internet access. That makes the 10% number sound a lot better huh? Also consider that quite a few Xbox owners also owned a PS2.

      This is a wild guess but I would say roughly 30-40% of Xbox owners with broadband decided to subscribe to Xbox live.

      MS has a huge headstart on Sony. Granted, Sony has been able to sit back and see where MS went wrong, they still have a lot of work to do. Trying to diminish the impact Xbox LIVE had on gamers who chose to enjoy their service is only denying the inevitable. There will always be room for good single player games but personally, the computer is boring and not challenging. Humans are much tougher opponents.

    24. Re:It will be Interesting by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1

      This is what gets me... how is Sony going to pull this online gaming network off without charging people? I mean, they've gotten some people really happy that their online gaming solution was free, what will those people do now?

      Not meant to troll or anything, I'm geniunely interested in what Sony will do, because providing free online gaming has made them kinda the "good guy" in many people's eyes. And if they provide this service for free, I don't see how their service could compare to Live. It's too obvious to say that we'll have to wait and see and I'd really like to know what they're planning.

      Remember, the Playstation brand has been saving Sony as of late, and it's a brand that they can't let become a money drain. This'll be interesting.

      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
  3. What? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Funny

    thus opening up a powerful iTunes-like distribution network for Sony.

    Except it's not portable. Insert "wah-wah-wah-waaaaah" sound.

    Come on, an internet-required playstation is about as portable as a grammaphone.

    1. Re:What? by TacNuke · · Score: 1

      Are we sure that most /.'ers know what a grammaphone is? In other words, its not............

      --
      I am not a number. I am a free man!
  4. A proprietary HUB by EggyToast · · Score: 1, Troll
    Movies and music... that only work on your Sony device. We are already familiar with the tiff Sony had with Apple regarding iTunes in Australia, and we know how loathe they are to open up their own formats.

    So you can potentially buy movies and music, and apparently the thing also plays video games (which we haven't heard much about). The Xbox360 lets you plug your iPod in at least (and apparently does a pretty good job of handling it). Yet Sony wants people to not only pay a monthly fee, but also use their service to buy movies and music electronically, encumbered and weighed down with DRM, and which will almost assuredly work only with Sony devices.

    "But it'll have Blu-Ray!" Yeah, big deal.

    1. Re:A proprietary HUB by Pranadevil2k · · Score: 1

      You download music from HUB onto your cute little Memory Stick. You put that memory stick in your PSP. You connect that PSP to your PC via the easily available USB Mini-B connector. Voila.

    2. Re:A proprietary HUB by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Informative

      And you'll get files in a proprietary format that only works with a specialized Sony player...

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    3. Re:A proprietary HUB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoever modded this flamebait is on crack. i'll put money on sony putting so much drm shit on whatever they put out for the PS3. it'll probably display a warning over the top of every game if it detects a non-sony tv.

  5. Sony who? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There used to be such a company that existed up until they willingly attacked the worldwide information infrastructure with malicious software and assumed all their customers were criminals. But now that company is dead as far as I am concerned.

  6. Expect by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Expect the ability to transfer stuff from your PS3 directly to your PSP for portability.

    Also expect the ability to transfer music and small videos directly to your Walkman phone.

    1. Re:Expect by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      Can't the PSP already go out onto the interwebs? Why the extra work?

    2. Re:Expect by brunes69 · · Score: 1

      Maybe the PSP will be able to connect directly as well.

      It isn't out yet so we don't know, do we?

    3. Re:Expect by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      they are supposedly playing up psp/ps3 connectivity. ill wager this is how they plan to charge for psp content as well. download music and video to your psp from the website; play the files on the psp or ps3. what i would be interested in knowing is if psp/ps3 connectivity will finally give people a way to play umds on their tvs. im sure the ps3 can handle the upscaling, if the psp can provide some form of video output. can anyone chime in about this psp locationfree stuff?

    4. Re:Expect by Masami+Eiri · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't UMDs below standard DVD resolution? (I forget the dimensions) If so, viewing them on a TV would look like.. well.. ass.

    5. Re:Expect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sony has already announced a relaunch of Connect for PSP in March. You'll be able to buy media directly from your PSP - or alternatively from your PS3, and presumably share with your PSP.

    6. Re:Expect by damsa · · Score: 1

      Apple is selling tons of video at low resolutions. So I guess there would be a market for something similar to this.

    7. Re:Expect by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      the UMD movies are encoded around the same resolution. but using better compression. [i think...]. besides, supposedly the ps3 should be able to upscale video pretty well.

    8. Re:Expect by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

      Too bad I own an iRiver IHP-120 which does not support DRM. Plus I don't want a portable video device, but I would like to take movies to my friends' house to watch. Guess I'm SOL? Screw this, I'm just buying content the old way where I can rip + do what I want.

    9. Re:Expect by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 1

      That's not the point. He's discrediting the utility of playing UMDs on a TV. Sure, PSP videos (would) have a market, but playing them on a TV wouldn't.

      --
      "This is considered plagiarism."
  7. Money by Karem+Lore · · Score: 0, Troll
    Anybody who doesn't think that Sony will try and milk PS3 to the maximum is sorely deluded. The playstation is the name carrying the company at the moment and they need to maximise their profits.

    Karem

    --
    When all is said and done, nothing changes...
    1. Re:Money by jferris · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I highly doubt that the Playstation is "carrying" Sony in any way, shape, or form. I am sure that it contributes to its profits, but there is more of a world besides video games to Sony, as a company. I am sure that their publishing and a/v equipment carry the company more than the console does.

      --
      You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.
    2. Re:Money by sibtrag · · Score: 2, Informative
      Operating income (profit) information taken from Sony's financial disclosures (on its web site under investor relations):
      FY 2004 (ended 31 March 2005)
      (millions of dollars, converted from Yen)
      Electronics -321
      Games 404
      Music 82
      Pictures 597
      Financial Services 519
      Other -38
      Total 1243
      So, games was about 1/3 of Sony's profits for the most recent year. Certainly much more than music over that period.

      And, to gauge against XBOX 360 sales, they sold 16.17 million PS2 units between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2005.

      Disclaimer: I worked on the microprocessor in the XBOX 360 and also on the Cell processor expected in PS3. I game on both XBOX 360 and PS2.

  8. Sony is building its own infraestructure? by bubulubugoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or this "live" is an internet based service.

    And, if it is an internet based service, then ISP will ask for their cut as the "Free ride" thing with Google?

    Or this will be another reason to push the tiered internet?

    --
    Â_Â
  9. Re:What's that you say? by EggyToast · · Score: 1
    What in my comment mentioned Apple, beyond the iPod? In fact, I recall talking directly about the Xbox 360 and how it supported the iPod?

    Apple isn't selling a video game device, nor is it setting up an online hub for a monthly fee. It already controls over 70% of the portable MP3 player market. It doesn't make TVs with memory stick ports, nor does it create its own Cameras, Camcorders, DVD players, and so on.

    But if a company is going to sell me a product, it better try its hardest to at least make other stuff work. When I plug my Archos AV420 into my mac, it shows up in iTunes -- it's recognized. Sure I can't do funky playlist stuff with it, but I can copy music to it. iTunes supports MP3 the same as it does its own AAC format (and music purchased from the iTMS).

    All that completely disregards the fact that Apple has had its iPod out for years prior to the iTMS coming out, proving that the iTMS was created to supplement the iPod. Sony's portable offerings have been laughable, and performed poorly in the market, yet they keep pushing proprietary formats and stores on people. And this shows that they're taking the same approach for their PS3.

  10. Re:What's that you say? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    You know Stalin was just as bad as Hitler... So what?
    I don't think that anyone is saying that Apple is a bastion of openness. I will say that Apple isn't as bad as Sony. As far as I know Apple has not ever put a root kit on end user computers to protect their content. That would make Sony worse than Apple IMHO.
    Frankly I am not fond of Apple's iTunes or Sony at this point.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  11. Speculation of Info by VGMSupreme · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is so layer in speculation, that I can smother my pancakes with it. Probably doesn't taste as great though.

    It seems wierd that they mention none of the details are specific, nor confirmed by Sony, but they can say that Japan and US might get it around the same time? Somehow, I think Sony would honor their Japanese market before it every makes it over the Pacific.

    As for the subscription service, I would like to see it in action, and how well it can hold up to Xbox Live. "an iTunes like distrubtion"? Sounds like like you still pay seperately for each Online game you purchase. You might see a list of games on the server, and pick two, for like $9.99 each per month. Might be more convient to acquiring the game, but it would suck if they charge for each game's monthly subscription seperately. I know they hinted at it just beinga flat monthly fee, but still...

    But remember, this is speculation.

    --
    The Galatic Freedom Force marches on! Defend!
    1. Re:Speculation of Info by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Actually the DS was released in the US a week before it was in Japan(to take advantage of "black Friday"). And the truth of the matter is, in terms of sales the Japanese video game market is in decline, and while the west isn't growing in leaps and bounds, it holds more and more interest to console manufacturers and game publishers.

    2. Re:Speculation of Info by Renraku · · Score: 1

      It would be retarded for them to charge anything. Suddenly Joe Sixpack has to get out his credit card and pay to play an online game that he just paid $50 for, after just having made fun of us PC gamers for doing the same thing with something like World of Warcraft.

      How fun would it be if you had to pay $10 a month to play HL2 online? Or even BF2?

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    3. Re:Speculation of Info by CMiYC · · Score: 1

      How fun would it be if you had to pay $10 a month to play HL2 online? Or even BF2?

      When did the video game industry start having anything to do with fun?

      I agree it would be retarded to charge extra. However. There's no such thing as a stupid product. Only the people who buy them.

  12. So Much for Online Games... by superdan2k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A subscription model? You're kidding me, right? I'm sorry, if I am going to be paying $50-$60 for a new game, the last thing I am doing is shelling out more money on a monthly basis to play online. Furthermore, given the stupid subsciption model, where's the incentive to upgrade from my PS2? I can still play SOCOM and Madden online, if I'm inclined.

    OTOH, I don't think there's a single PS2 game that has me inspired to play online -- of the four years I've owned my PS2, I've had it plugged into a network for maybe 10 days.

    --
    blog |
    1. Re:So Much for Online Games... by wickedj · · Score: 1

      I think that the service should be tiered. A basic free online matchmaking service for games. Then you can purchase higher levels of service with more options such as online chat (without a game), file sharing (save games, etc.), marketplace (new expansions, extra levels), music, videos, etc. I believe Xbox Live is already tiered and does something similar. I agree with you that online multiplayer should be free or at least included with the console. If they want to charge, there should be more than just multiplayer.

    2. Re:So Much for Online Games... by Bellum+Aeternus · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You're kidding me, right? I'm sorry, if I am going to be paying $50-$60 for a new game, the last thing I am doing is shelling out more money on a monthly basis to play online.

      Why not, 5.5 million WoW users do it every month?

      Subscription service may even let us see free games in the coming years as developers realize that the majority of their income is from the subscriptions and not the sold box; especially once they stop selling boxes and start providing downloadable content. Of course, faster network connections and a very large audience is need to support that; but that's what this all about right? M$ vs $ony for the title of network/distribution owner?

      You think M$ is willing to lose millions on the XBox and 360 because they hope to make it up in game sales? No way, they want the network and control. Same as $ony.

      --
      - I voted for Nintendo and against Bush
    3. Re:So Much for Online Games... by Erwos · · Score: 1

      Milton Friedman said it best: "There's no such thing as a free lunch."

      $45 yearly seems reasonable for matchmaking and actual servers, to me at least. Those servers cost real money to maintain and provide bandwidth for, regardless of whether you paid for it all up front or not. Along with that, you also get at least a certain level of service that random, player-owned servers don't give. If Joe Random's Q4 server dies, there aren't any real consequences to him beyond the loss of the server. If something goes wrong at the Xbox Live server farm, there's a whole chain of people who have responsibility to get it fixed, or possibly be fired.

      There's also incentive to keep things secure and working. Remember CoD 2 for PC? No one's paying them directly for servers, so they've got no incentive to care about security and cheating issues in the game once it goes off the shelves. When you're paying yearly, there's still at least some reason for Microsoft to care - bad service makes you less likely to pay for Live.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    4. Re:So Much for Online Games... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, it worked for the XBox Live, but I agree 100% with you. Long before online gaming on consoles got popular, PC games set a precedent: No monthly fees unless central server infrastructure is used (MMOs). Unnessecary central server infrastructure used only as chat/meeting areas and not essential to gameplay (all of battle.net, countless other products) doesn't qualify for the monthly fee. So I wouldn't buy it, but history shows that some people will.

      I personally hope at least one of the next gen consoles absolutely tanks, we need to cut some of the bullshit off the market. Maybe the Revolution should tank. Paying again to play old NES/SNES games that I already paid for the first time around and can play free via emulators on PC now anyway... now there's a selling tactic, but then again, I wouldn't mind seeing Sony eat some dirt either. DRM, Blue-Ray, and this new subscription crap need a slap in the face. Does that mean I support the XBOX 360? Choices, choices... =/

    5. Re:So Much for Online Games... by aztektum · · Score: 1

      yes but WoW is designed with long term playability in mind. do you think someone is going to pay a monthly sub to play madden 07 which they will then trade in? or worse (for sony), play on xbox for the one year fee? and with WoW you buy one box. if sony does monthly, they expect people to buy 3-4 games a month plus their sub? uh, no, sorry. with WoW you spend 50 once and 15/month. not 50 (or 60 if next gen prices average that) dollars every time a diff. title comes out plus the subscription fee.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    6. Re:So Much for Online Games... by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Your assumptions don't make sense, here are mine:

      1) It definitely will not be a pay-per-game subscription I expect you will pay a monthly fee for access to PS-HUB.
      2) Most likely the subscription service will have a free level and paid level and there will be restrictions on what you can play at the free level.
      3) Most likely the prices will be competitive with the Xbox subscription.
      4) Most likely they're developing this specifically to compete with Xbox Live.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  13. Re:What's that you say? by apoc06 · · Score: 1

    people talk with their wallets.

    after the poor reception of atrac, sony has seen the light finally. the psp plays mp3s as does its new line of walkman products. i dont see the real problem, unless you just dont like sony in general.

  14. Re:What's that you say? by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    But if a company is going to sell me a product, it better try its hardest to at least make other stuff work. When I plug my Archos AV420 into my mac, it shows up in iTunes -- it's recognized. Sure I can't do funky playlist stuff with it, but I can copy music to it. iTunes supports MP3 the same as it does its own AAC format (and music purchased from the iTMS).

    And if I plug my memory stick loaded with MP3s into my PSP, it will play them. And if I bluetooth some mP3s to my Walkman phone, it will play them. What's your point?

  15. I believe "Sony Pictures" is carrying Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...not "Sony PlayStation".

  16. Launches by the+computer+guy+nex · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Sony *has* announced that this will be launched in Japan first, with US and Europe following.

    September for Japan makes this a November/December (Christmas) release in the US for a PS3, about where most people anticipated.

    1. Re:Launches by ethorad · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which means it'll be out around Spring 2007 in Europe :(

      So long to wait until the Xbox 360 drops in price ...

    2. Re:Launches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Sony *hasn't* announced anything about the rollout sequence and territories. Just the "Spring 2006" timeframe, that was all. In interviews they even said that various rollout options were being considered in terms of territories, but that they could confirm none. So it's perfectly plausible that it could launch in Japan and the US simultaneously - at least they've said nothing to contradict that.

    3. Re:Launches by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      with japan and the US now belonging to the same "region" in regards to regional machine encoding, i wouldnt be surprised if they tried to pull off a simultaneous launch. the same consoles can pretty much be used for both launches; sans a few packaging details. can they do it? i highly doubt it.

      please reference your /sony/ source where they announced which territories will be released first?

      also, keep in mind that this is a rumor article still. not OFFICIAL word. september 16/21 or whatever could be crap. september is a long way away from "spring" in terms of when they stated they would launch.

      personally, id rather have the ps3 in september if that means i get more launch titles and a larger [and more stable] supply of the actual consoles.

    4. Re:Launches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mods check post history.

      Paid for Microsoft astroturfer spreading lies.

  17. Help for moderators by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    The above comment is not a troll. The defnition of trolling is expressing a view that you do not believe in order to elicit a desired response. If anything, it would be flamebait, except badmouthing sony isn't exactly going to start a flame war. The parent comment is not deserving of negative moderation. (This one is offtopic - consider this parenthesized statement a continuance of your moderation education information.)

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  18. UMD? by abrotman · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen anything to suggest it, but will the PS3 play the UMD discs that work with the PSP?

    1. Re:UMD? by steveo777 · · Score: 1
      I'd say not a chance. It's just another peripheral they'd have to include in the price. We haven't seen another device that utilizes the UMD. No players or computer add-ons via USB or even the 3.5" ports on your box (remember those? they had the floppys). UMD likely won't make it off of the PSP, at least for a while. Maybe if there's a PSP2 it will be backward compatable. I hope it isn't though. Expenses aside, they should be using solid state.

      In my opinion, no handheld should have moving parts. Even HDD's. They eat power, they move and they can be damaged fairly easily (even with a caddy). My biggest complaint, however, is load times. Especially for a game that I'm playing on the go. Load times have always pissed me off on consoles, but I put up with it because I was just sitting on my butt anyway. With a handheld, I usualy have it on when I've got spare time. The GBA adaptor helps a lot for time-intesive games (I hate staring at all the portable screens for more than five minutes). So, even though you can leave the PSP (or DS) on suspend, I don't because I never know when I'll get back to it, but I'd preffer the console to not be dead when I return.

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    2. Re:UMD? by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      hmmm... i like the thought of a console with a suspend button. hmmm... or maybe im the only idiot that pauses games if im not near a save point, and walks away for hours.

      its funny to see that ive spent 24+ hours playing a game and ive only gotten to the fourth level.

    3. Re:UMD? by steveo777 · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine couldn't afford a memory card for his Playstation. He bought Gran Turismo and played it for around 8 days without powering it off. He went to the bank to get money for the card and when he returned, the game had finally frozen on him. I think he had 38 hours of play in.

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
  19. Will HUB bring anything new? by jchenx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Will HUB bring anything new to console gaming? Or is Sony going to primarily focus on copying as much of Xbox Live as possible? It's pretty easy to point at an existing competitor and try to copy as much as their features as possible, but much more difficult to bring something new to the table. The concept of having HUB be a "media HUB" for Sony music, films, etc. is interesting, but I really wouldn't call that new. (And it's something that can already be done on the 360, and presumably Nintendo's Revolution)

    As much as people like to whine about the 360's subscription model (which only applies to the "Gold" membership) and the lack of users so far, I do enjoy some of the new features introduced in the latest incarnation of Live. For example, the gamerscore and the achievement system have turned into "mini-games" in themselves (if you enjoy that kind of thing). However, there are definately improvements that can be made. I wonder if Sony's going to go the extra mile, or if they're just going to be content (for now) with playing catch up?

    --
    -- jchenx
    1. Re:Will HUB bring anything new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will HUB bring anything new to console gaming? Or is Sony going to primarily focus on copying as much of Xbox Live as possible?

      I can't speak for anyone else, but "not pay to play" is about the only feature I'm really looking for.

    2. Re:Will HUB bring anything new? by jchenx · · Score: 1

      TFA mentions that HUB will be subscription based. However, it doesn't mention if you'll need to pay to access ANY of HUB's features, or just to be able to do multiplayer (which is what Xbox Live does now).

      Come to think of it, pricing and functionality is going to be a big deal. Many folks, like yourself, cringe at having to pay to have multiplayer functionality. They're going to hate it even more, if they have to subscribe to TWO (or more!) online services. Most likely, they'll just choose one and stick with it. If one services has better features, more access to games, and is cheaper, then the competitors are in trouble.

      --
      -- jchenx
    3. Re:Will HUB bring anything new? by The-Bus · · Score: 2, Informative
      "The concept of having HUB be a "media HUB" for Sony music, films, etc. is interesting, but I really wouldn't call that new."


      Well, there's a couple of problems. First off, Sony already has a music store. The fact that no one seems to mention it tells me that it's not very well known or well-used. Their Japanese online music service might be faring a bit better, I don't know. Both sites reek of "me too"-ism... if Sony is going to let the Media part of their company control the other divisions (as it currently does now, eventhough it's not the most profitable), then HUB might be another bust.
      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    4. Re:Will HUB bring anything new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TFA mentions that HUB will be subscription based.

      Sure. However, I have no particular reason to believe TFA is any more accurate than any of the other vague rumor pieces we've gotten on this subject over the last three months.

    5. Re:Will HUB bring anything new? by jchenx · · Score: 1

      TFA mentions that Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) is rumored to be developing HUB. I'm looking at the Wikipedia entry for Sony and the most well-known product I can see from SCEE is Killzone (from Guerilla Games). I wonder if this means that HUB will be a bit more FPS-centric. Although you can easily argue that the first Xbox Live iteration was much the same way with Halo 2.

      Yeah, it's going to be very interesting to see how much pressure is put on SCEE from other Sony divisions. (Not like Microsoft doesn't have the same problems, I'm guessing there's a lot of crossover work going on too)

      --
      -- jchenx
    6. Re:Will HUB bring anything new? by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 1
      "(which only applies to the "Gold" membership)"

      Yeah. I want to see Sony come up with an online gaming service that doesn't let you play online. Cause that's extreme, or something.

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
  20. Yet another monthly fee. by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps it's because the PC has always been my primary game platform, but I simply am unwilling to pay a fee to game online. I see this as nothing more than a way to have a sustained monthly income for Sony and M$.

    1. Re:Yet another monthly fee. by masamax · · Score: 0, Troll
      Well, to be fair, Xbox Live, and whatever this HUB service ends up being, will offer more than just your standard online experience. Sony did make gaming free for the PS2, but XBox Live was far superior because it meant universal access. Whether you are playing NHL or Halo, xbox live allows you to still keep track of your xbox friends, as well as a stable network on which to play, not to mention media content availible through the service.

      The fact is, anyone who has played PS2 online knows how varied the experience can be. Really, from my experience, only the Sony and EA games ever did it well, and that's merely because they are huge companies. These services allow even a small developer to gaurentee a stable and fun online experience because they can put the responsibility on Sony or MS.

      --
      I like to kill your couch. HE DIED HARD! MOO.
  21. In theory, DVD = 720x480. In practice, no. by tepples · · Score: 1

    PSP resolution is 480x272 pixels. Though DVD in NTSC regions is encoded at up to 720x480 pixels, there are major differences between what's on the DVD and what the viewer sees:

    • Most people watch DVDs through a composite video cable, which sends luma and chroma over different frequency bands (roughly 0-2.7 MHz and 2.7-4.5 MHz) on one wire pair. In order for the luma not to overlap the chroma and cause color fringing, the DVD player horizontally filters the image down to the equivalent of 480 pixels wide. Now you're down to 480x480, the same resolution as SVCD.
    • Most people watch DVDs and SVCDs on a 4:3 TV with no underscan support. This means that your DVD player has to downsample the 480 lines of your 16:9 anamorphic DVD to 360 lines tall. Now you're down to 480x360.
    • Most people watch DVDs and SVCDs through a composite video cable, which supports only 480i video, not 480p video. In order for fine horizontal lines not to flicker like crazy on an interlaced monitor, the DVD player has to vertically filter the image. This takes out about 30 percent of the resolution, leaving you with an effective 480x270.

    Sure, UMD Video on a PSP isn't as good as DVD Video on a high-end monitor, but it's at least as good as most people's affordable TVs.

  22. Too eager to take sides... by mjhacker · · Score: 1

    I've noticed that lately there has been a trend among /.ers.

    1. Pick an evil corporation that is making billions of dollars.
    2. Hate evil corporation! Say bad things about it and refuse to acknowledge any good aspects it may have!
    3. ?
    4. Profit!

    Guess what? It's possible to like all the consoles for different reasons! *Gasp!* You don't have to take sides at all! Sony isn't better than Microsoft, and vice versa. They're both companies, and it is their job to make their stockholders happy by increasing profits. Of course, the Xbox is seeming to make Microsoft LOSE money, but that's another story.

    Anyway, Microsoft's Xbox Live service has many good aspects, and Sony recognizes this. They decided NOT to include an online service with the PS2 because back then they saw no need for it, but the fact is they thought about it. Now that they've seen that a centralized online service is not only feasible but also desirable, they are creating one as well. So, enough of this talk about "OMG they copied xbox! Xbox rules $ony sucks! [insert comment about rootkit or DRM]! LOLz"
    They contemplated a centralized online service long before Xbox live existed.
    At any rate, I am interested in how Sony's online service will debut (provided it even exists). While I personally favor the PS3 to win the next-gen console war, I recognize that the 360 will have had a year-long headstart, along with a well-established online service, and that will be very dangerous footing for Sony. If they can't convince people that the PS3 will surpass the 360, then they will probably even lose to the Revolution (which, seeing the way things are going now, might win the console conflict yet). It won't be a dull war this time around, that's for certain.

    1. Re:Too eager to take sides... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not a trend on slashdot. It's the way things are on slashdot. It's why alot of intellegent people I know don't really come to slashdot anymore.

      Personally I view it as people outing themsleves and their lack of intellect. Much like assholes on the freeway who introduce themselves by tailgating, cutting people off and driving dangerously, the intellectually weak announce themselves here on slashdot by blind hatred or approval of an entity regardless of the specifics of the situation.

      You could complain, but really, it makes things much more clear cut around here.

      "A great many people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging
      their prejudices."
      - Edward R. Murrow

  23. And remember kids, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Translation : "If other people manage to do it for free, we can still treat our own players like cash cows, as they are the lowest common denominator."

    This endorsement has been paid for by the Microsoft Corporation! Be sure to enjoy your shining future(TM), thanks to Microsoft Corporation!

    Fucking PLANT

  24. Concurrent launches, do they really work? by Kaldaien · · Score: 1

    Is it really wise to launch a new platform at the same time in two countries that speak different languages? Many of the games - actually, all of them - that I own for my PS2 are English translations of Japanese games. The only reason I own a PS2 is in fact for the Japanese console RPGs and Gran Turismo. Unless SONY pulls off a miracle, launch titles in the US will mostly be cross-platform franchise titles (i.e. EA Sports games) and it could be 6+ months until the good Japanese games are released in English / US. I suspect that is partly why the XBOX 360 is selling so poorly in Japan.

    SONY clearly realizes that Spring is not the best time to release a new platform. But the question remains, will they rush the console out the door before Christmas even if the selection of US launch titles is as abysmal as the PSP's. You could argue that it can play the existing library of PS1 and PS2 titles, but I do not see many parents justifying the $500 pricetag because it can play their kids' old games and eventually desirable PS3 games. The Revolution on the other hand, if priced reasonably, may be able to fallback on NES/SNES/N64 download service and GameCube backward compatibility at launch.

    The only saving grace I see for the PS3 in such a scenario is the BluRay player. I own two HD sets and would gladly fork over $500 for a BluRay player that can also play PS1/PS2/PS3 games ;)

  25. WTF? by brunes69 · · Score: 1
    I don't know much about the subject, but the fact that I know that this statement is total crap makes me disbelieve all of it:

    Most people watch DVDs through a composite video cable, which sends luma and chroma over different frequency bands (roughly 0-2.7 MHz and 2.7-4.5 MHz) on one wire pair. In order for the luma not to overlap the chroma and cause color fringing, the DVD player horizontally filters the image down to the equivalent of 480 pixels wide. Now you're down to 480x480, the same resolution as SVCD.

    Bollocks. You can take any S-Video cable (which by your definition would not have said filtering), stip it, twist the luma and chroma wires together, and pop it into any composite jack. I would challenge anyone to see any "color banding". I have played literally hundreds of movies over such a connection because I was too cheap to go buy a converter when twisting two wires will do.

    1. Re:WTF? by tepples · · Score: 1

      You can take any S-Video cable (which by your definition would not have said filtering), stip it, twist the luma and chroma wires together, and pop it into any composite jack. I would challenge anyone to see any "color banding".

      Even on your TV that displays S-Video, can you get 360 distinct vertical lines of luma (720 pixels alternating white and black) to display clearly? If not, then your TV doesn't have enough luma bandwidth for 720x480. I allege that most consumers TV don't have enough luma bandwidth for 720x480.

      the fact that I know that this statement is total crap makes me disbelieve all of it

      If you disbelieve one statement A because another statement B is false, and A is not said to follow from B, then you are using an ad hominem fallacy. Even if you could get a full 7 MHz of luma bandwidth over S-Video on entry level TV equipment, as would be required for 720 luma columns, that would take the resolution in the conclusion down to 720x272. Is that a significant improvement over 480x272 in practice? "I would challenge anyone to see" the difference.