Sony to Add TV Tuner, DVR to PS3
pjhenley writes "Sony has announced that they will add digital TV and DVR capabilities to the PS3 in Europe. TV can also be watched on a PSP using 'remote play' over WiFi or via downloaded recordings. 'The new box will feature two 1080p tuners, which utilize the European Digital Video Broadcasting system (DVB-T) -- which should dash any US hopes for the time being. The system will allow you to store recorded broadcasts on your PS3 drive, and also transcode and transfer the saved files to your PSP.'"
We keep hearing Sony about how the PS3 is the best game system, but so far the only arguments we hear are that it's a Blu-Ray movie player, a Linux computer and now it's also a PVR. Mind you, if the american PS3 had a PVR to begin with, maybe it wouldn't seem too expensive.
Even as a non-Sony fanboy (I'm a Nintendo fanboy), I do wish Blu-Ray wins against HD-DVD, if only because this isn't a Sony-only attempt at pushing their own crap (Memory Stick, miniDisc, ATRAC, etc) but it's even better than HD-DVD in capacity (especially future potential capacity).
While we've heard a lot about cablecards and cablecard2's and mcards, the Tivo-HD compatibility problems show that we in the USA don't have a good standard yet. It works in some places but not in others. Would Sony face the same problem? Are they just avoiding this fiasco until there's a better guarantee that their tuners will actually work for all buyers in America? How is it that Europe gets better defined standards to work with (GSM, DVB) to ensure compatibility while we in America are rolling the dice with cablecards without knowing if we have the switched video stuff or not that might prevent my cablecard device from working? Or that vastly reduces choice in what phones I can use on my cellphone network?
it prepares food ten different ways! Don't forget, we just added the kitchen sink!
Seriously, though. I like having discrete devices because stuff breaks and I like to:
1. amortize the impact (cost, etc.) of a breakage by having less expensive components
2. get components that do fewer things, but do them better
3. have a DVD on while playing a game. PiP, you know.
and several other reasons i'm forgetting just now.
"If still these truths be held to be
Self evident."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay
Try Nintendo. And don't hold your breath for an iGame. Even if it did come out, it would no doubt go the way of the N-Gage. Apple and gaming have never gotten along.
Gamertag: WyleType
From a gamer's perspective, I'm a bit puzzled by the way everyone seems to love console wars. Personally I dislike exclusives. If they're on a console I own that leaves some of my friends unable to share in my enjoyment of the game. If they're on a console I don't own that's just annoying.
The Wii's great for gaming in general, because it reminds people in the industry that actual gameplay matters. Unfortunately there are downsides too - by making what would once have been a custom peripheral into the standard controller, Nintendo ensure that most Wii games will never appear on other platforms. That's bad news for game studios, because it means less revenue per title. And anything that reduces the profitability of titles is ultimately bad for gamers too.
But there is one lesson I really, really hope the other manufacturers take away from the Wii's success: keep the costs down!
I was under the impression that the receivers didn't handle 1080p, since no receiver has ever claimed it in the specs.
However, when I now look at one of the specs for one set-top box, it says "MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 HP@L4" which would mean it could support 1920x1080 in 30 fps at max 25 Mbps if I read Wikipedia correctly. But it would output it in 1080i probably.
So probably I was wrong then.