From Software updated the official Armored Core 4 with these 12 720p images. Except for the rather strong aliasing, it certainly looks nice especially the lighting.
I like the armored core series. I hope they bring it to the Xbox 360.
From Software is the same developer, I guess they want to have something different on each console
IGN has comparison videos of AC4 for the ps3 and 360.. I'm betting they'll be out around the same time. PS3 just has more media since that's where the series originated. But obviouslly FROM is all about the 360.. ChromeHounds is a masterpiece!!
720p, it better be only for these images. If the game does not push a minimum of 1080p; than all the trash that Sony and their fan boys keep taking about is being for nothing. I want to see the PS3 doing stuff that the XBox 360 can't.
I thought Sony said the real HD period began with PS64? So why are all games in 720p?
Strange, so strange. Do I hear some lies again?
but this game is changing my mind very quickly. And what's with you bladestar? "all the trash that Sony and their fan boys keep [talking] about"? Mostly it's just people like you complaining about Sony nonstop. Chill dude.
720p is fine for gaming. PS3 developers just have the 'option' of 1080p since Blu-ray movies output at that resolution.
To Silverwolf: Agetec has a separate team making an Armored Core 4 title for the 360. Completely separate games, so it's not truly multiplatform, which is great. It benefits us because each version will play to its respective consoles' strengths or weaknesses.
720p is fine alright but not when u dont have 4X MSAA can anyone say 'high def jaggies' mmm goes down good with warm milk. LMAO
It's strange. Fanboys have changed. First it was their major point against a 360. It 'only' does 720p in games.
Sony made it their major point. It would be True HD. 720p would be not.
And now all games are in 720p suddenly you are all turned off your believe? It really is strange. Come on. Yeah I think 720p is good enough because no one has a 1080p HDTV and about no one will have one the next 3 to 5 years. Furthermore, people that did switch already to HDTV 720p won't switch again in 5 to 7 years.
So gameproducers have the option? No they don't. If the first line of games don't use 1080p the console is probably not strong enough even at this moment in time, when the games don't ask too much of the console, lateron it won't be used for sure because the power has to be used for other things then 1080p.
It's just strange the 360 got bashed by any Sonyfan before on 720p and suddenly it became quiet. Even from Sony's side
i barely noticed, heh. O well, it's a 360 problem too. Anti-aliasing is pretty time-consuming and intensive, so I don't think we'll see jaggies go away just yet. Even Project Gotham 3 has very heavy aliasing on its reflections (but not the rest of the scene, which is really clever). I was impressed that Bizzare Creations was able to blur the reflections enough so that you only notice the aliasing when your car is perfectly still. It's a really neat trick.
So far, this game and full auto 2 are the only PS3 titles I've seen with aliasing. Hopefully that gets fixed before launch since everyone else seems to be doing fine with MSAA.
Nope 360 doesn't have that problem, it has 4 x FSAA for free with the 10 MB embedded ultra fast ram. The first games didn't have Anti-Aliasing because they were produced without the final hardware devkits. Like PGR3.
360 games will have 4 x FSAA where PS3 won't have it because it would take to much from the system itself, where 360 can do it 'on the fly'
bladestar, TheMART, does it matter if it's 720p? It looks great. Doesn't it? So what that Sony is full of lies. So what that it won’t deliver what’s meant to be delivered? People are going to throw their money away no matter what you say. At least let them enjoy what Sony promised. Let them have that. They won’t even care if it’s not in the box. Sony has lied to them plenty of times and they just scoffed at it. They’ll learn when they spend 600$ on the console and 400 on 7 “next gen ps3” titles. It’s cool.
I can see that Sony fans will have same exact problems some 360 fans are having with Dead Rising, but with every title. Better bulk up on those HD TV sets if you want to play PS3.
How is Sony responsible for the output resolutions that 3rd party devs shoot for in their games? Sony provides the capability in the hardware to handle 1080p if the devs choose to. The new Gran Turismo will output at 1080p, Resistance Devs are aiming for it I think, Lair is aiming for that, etc. And for the titles that don't support native 1080p, wouldn't the console be upscaling it to 1080p if the user chose? Not quite as good as native 1080p, but not bad either. It'd at least be better than PGR3 upscaled from 540 to 720p.
Yeah, it's pretty horrible that they had to do that (it might've been 620p, but i'm not completely sure). The ed-ram in the 360 is only 10 Mb, which is nowhere near enough to store 720p frames. So they rendered at a lower resolution and then upscaled to fit the frame in the 10mb without tiling. Some probably don't even bother with Ed-ram considering the drawbacks.
First off: wakkiwakko yeah it does matter. It was their major selling point and I had to hear it over and over again from any Sony brainwashed fan untill it came clear it would all be in 720p. So now they may hear over and over again that it's strange that suddenly it seems not to matter anymore.
400 dollar/euro on 7 titles? I don't think so. I bet it will cost 7 times 80 dollars, 560 dollars/euro with that expensive BR discs.
@ Andy: yup Sony is responsible. If the native resolution had to be 1080p it would be 1080p. Just as MS demands 720p. Otherwise the producers on PS3 could even use 480p. If the hardware at this stage isn't even capable of 1080p on these relative 'simple' games compared to future masterpieces, it won't be able ever. Expect 720p till the end of the lifecylce of the PS3, if they don't have to cut to 480p because indeed, Sony doesn't demand a strict resolution. That's sad actually.
GT4 HD smugged up PS2 version. Yeah well. Let's say this about it. It was just the PS2 version with some smooter graphics but not that much. And most of all. It was just a demo. Not a final version. That's the only thing confirmed and running in a demo, not even on final PS3 hardware but on a PC emulating one...
Upscaling means nothing, the original stays the same. The story about PGR3 is simple. That's a launch game where they had really little time. They produced without the final devkit. That's why. That'll be the only game in that resolution that will ever be on 360.
This is a whole other story. All PS games will be in 720p. At least, only one demo is confirmed in 1080p. That's something different then the Real HD Sony/Ken was talking about.
Just as: 2 x HDMI 1080p, 3 x Gigabit Ethernet ports, how much a BR is needed (for Sony's pockets it is yeah), CGI footage they said was ingame, Cell didn't need GPU and more. It's just that all fanboys may feel. First talking sh!t it would be a major advantage. Well where is that advantage and others now? Nowhere to be seen
DJ you're talking sh!t in major form. The 10 MB embedded ram is extra and you know it. The PS doesn't even have it at all. Man you're stupid
PGR4 will run in 720p. And PGR3 would have if the final hardware and time were there. If you state something like this stupid and you think it's legit supply a link.
Go buy a Wii were you understand the hardware off maybe it's not that high tech
I don't quite get your speculation on PS3 game prices. When you are at Wal-mart one day, take a look at DVD, HD-DVD, and Bluray movie prices. New DVD movies are $19.92, HD-DVD movies are $19.96, and Bluray movies are also $19.96. Now that is a huge margin of four cents. So if there is a four cents difference in DVD and Bluray for the same content, how is it that you figure there will be a $20 difference in Xbox 360 games and PS3 games for the same content.
Uhm, Sony stated that themselves
Get a life you say the same things everyday "2x hdmi 3x gigabit ehternet ports" its really getting old and altleast will have an hdmi port and a gigabit ethernet port and xflop does not have them at all.
1) Don’t you need a TV that supports HDMI?
2) Don’t you need an ISP that supports a gigabit? Just because you have it doesn't mean you can use it. ISP's cap their speeds. Gigabit Ethernet port just adds to the bill. 360s 100mbit is good enough for today’s market.
thats very wrong actually. the 360 doesnt scale anything. the picture is rendered in tiles to the eDRam and once the tile is ready it is transfered to GPU memory and the next tile is rendered. The tiling process is optimized by using informations gathered during the z-only render phase
and since a link to back statements up is always nice: http://www.beyond3d.com/art...
about non-sense technology..in gaming systems. gigabit ethernet,hdmi,blu-ray adds no special value to game play experience..just like 720p vs 1080p...non-sense
Only fanboys make big deal of such things....
it's non-sense to you because you're living in the past. i bet you're still running on 56k dial up.
Its not that they did the game in 720p, because the PS3 cant do 1080p, its just that they probably arent used to teh hardware just yet jsut wait a while. Yuo'll see games in 1080p, VisionGran Turismo, Lair are going to be in 1080p.
All this 720p vs 1080p...non-sense
Only fanboys make big deal of such things.... "specialguest" I talk to people that don't know what HDTV is; people make the future NEO-GEO was futuristic, So where is it?.
that was a bad comparison. 1080p resolution is here to stay and it's the future. better res. is not like a video game company like Neo Geo, better res. can't go bankrupt.
The ps3 Outputing 1080p has nothing to do with the blu ray disc. It has to do with the RSX. But in order to make a game using that resolution its a MAJOR hit on the hardware and most developers see its not worth it in the end. So most developers will hit the sweet spot of 720p and 1080i. You have to understand that it takes much much more ram to display that high of a resolution. High end computers do it and still have to turn off aa or hdr. And those computers have 2 gigs of system ram and video cards with 1 gig of ram. So yes the RSX is capable of outputing 1080p...thats how the blu ray disc can do it. But for a game to do it, it would have to be simplistic or have a slow frame rate or few effects utilized. And with most 1080p tv's able to de interlace the 1080i signal....its not worth it for devs to program in 1080p when you get the same benefit programing in 1080i.
1080p is an resolution used by divices nobody can afford. My cable box doesn't have 1080p, so it must be the future like the way the average person will be able to take a trip to space, through a private company.
#11 was aimed at PS3 not 1080p, no one can use it. lol Sony's name won't allow PS3 to go the way of Neo-Geo(was kidding). But their not going to smash the competition or even lead for that matter.
Congress has now passed a law requiring over-the-air
“analog” TV broadcasting to end on February 17, 2009.
After that date, all local “TV” broadcasts will be “digital.”
Do you know at what resolution? 720p (NOT at 1080p). The standard will be 720p, and that my friend it's the future.
First thing first, to TheMart who said "Yeah I think 720p is good enough because no one has a 1080p HDTV and about no one will have one the next 3 to 5 years" I don't know why you always assume you can speak for "everyone", because not everyone is dirt poor like you. I'm glad that I am given a choice to either hook up the PS3 to my 55" Hitachi Plasma (720p/1080i) in the living room or the 72" Toshiba DLP 1080p (native) in my home theater room. Yeah, all the games coming out may not be in 1080p, but the few that do will truly look magnificent on the Toshiba. That and the fact that on a 72" screen, resolution starts to matter. I understand that you are refering to the general public, but you do not speak for me or my friends (who make substantially less $$ than me, but are more fanatical when it comes to home theater setups). If I recall correctly, the original Xbox games upped their resolutions later in it's life cycle, so why is it so hard to believe that PS3 games won't follow the same trend? Sony has always prided itself (though it be real or perceived) in "future-proofing" it's systems, and I see no fault in this tactic. I remember the same gripes people had when they went from cartridges to CDs, CDs to DVDs, and now DVD's to BR. "We don't need all this tech, we're not ready yet, blah blah blah" to which I say "Then don't buy it" See, freedom of choice.
I heard that PS3 is gonna be 700$ RIP OFF!! PS3 SUCKS!BOOOOOO !!! PS3
sorry but you need to be more creative with your anti-PS3 comments. i can tell that you're a noob here.
serious i heard that ps3 is gonna be 700$
so anyone who says that there isn't a difference obviously hasn't done that math or seen the difference for themselves.
To guys like Mart and DCrider. Stop bagging on Sony just because their system is more capable than the 360. It doesn't mean that the 360 is somehow a horrible system; it just doesn't have as many capabilities. It's still a good game console. Microsoft has a good game console, while Sony has a great media center console.
360 owners get 720p games out of the box while PS3 owners get 720p and 1080p games and blu-ray movies out of the box. What's the big deal? You're obviously paying 20%less than us, so be happy with what you have.
and a 1080p television that de interlaces can play that signal in 1080p. And if you do the math 1280 by 720 doubled is 2560 by 1440 resolution. 1080 isn't double the resolution of 720. DJ, every day you just out right lie and make things up.
1. xbox 360 can output 1080i
2. 1080p is not double the resolution of 720p
3. 1080p tv's can play the 1080i signal in 1080p with the proper de interlacing which is in most new sets.
4. Why do you continue to lie? What is your motive? You think because Sony lies its cool now? Lying is not cool. This is News4Gamers. Stop spreading mis information. Lets see if you can disprove anything I just said or if you are going to personally bash me with no facts.
720p is 1280 x 720 pixels. 1280x720 = 921,600 pixels.
1080p is 1920 x 1080 pixels. 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels.
Divide the number of pixels 1080p has over the number of pixels 720p has and....
1080p has 2.25 times the number of pixels of 720p. Over two million pixels (1080p) vs. a little over nine hundred thousand pixels (720p).
Have a nice day. =]
so 1080i res is pritty much only good for movies because it slows the frame rate in games? is that true? if so well F#ck it i rather play a smoother game with more action than better graphics and/or res.
No. It depends on the game and if it was made for 1080i. If it was there won't be a frame rate issue. And better yet. If you have a 1080p tv that de interlaces. You can actually get 1080p out of a 1080i signal. Thus giving you the benefits without the hit on hardware that a game in 1080p would have.
And DJ....So the pixels for an 1080i game is the same as pixels for a 1080p game as long as the tv de interlaces the interlaced signal...Correct? lol...lol...lol
I see you changed your post. You initially said that its twice the resolution and now you are saying twice the pixels...lol...lol... Your good for that when you get proven wrong. Here is a link with the actual technical data. The difference is smaller than people think due to other facters that you are conveniently leaving out.
Looking at pixel counts we have roughly the same quantity of pixels transmitted each second for all three with the two 1920x1080p,i/30fps being 62,208,000 pixels per second and 1280x720p/60fps being 55,296,000 pixels per second. Notice the 1080 and 720 formats are within 12.5% of each other, so the bandwidth required is about the same. The 720p/60fps format does have a slight advantage of not having to be quite as compressed as the 1080/30fps formats
so what happens when you have PS3 titles running 1080p at 60 frames per second? bandwidth obviously has to go up by 100% since you only included 1080 at 30fps. And how is 1920x1080 resolution compressed?
chose 720 and 1080i as the sweet spots for game developers. So now we can stop with all the lies and mis information folks. The differences are minimal with pixels displayed per second between all 3. And with the 1080p tv's that de interlace the 1080i signal...there is no difference between 1080i and 1080p. Damn I'm good. I'm the Real Deal folks. I aim to inform.
do you know the difference between interlaced and progressive? Use the internet and look it up. 720p vs 1080i may show only a marginal difference, but 1080i vs 1080p...sorry but no contest (on big tvs 50"+)
Frame resolution is determined by pixel width and height. The surface area of a frame(total number of pixels) can be determined by multiplying the width times the height. Simple grade school math does wonders these days.
I didn't change anything. The facts stay the same. And why did you post a link to 720p vs. 1080i. I'm talking about 720p vs. 1080p. If there was no difference in quality do you really think TV manufacturers would go through the trouble of doing 1080p if it offered no visual improvement over 1080i? Be realistic and use your head.
You claim that 1080i is the same as 1080p. But if they're the same quality, why do 1080p sets look better than 1080i sets? I have two HDTVs in my house and I can compare very easily. My 720p/1080i set is great, but can't compare to the clarity of my stepdad's 1080p set.
Here's a resolution diagram to assist you.
And here's a link to a CNET article on the differences between 1080i and 1080p, not to counter RD's wild claims but to allow others to understand what all these crazy terms really mean. There's also a lot of context involved because not all sets have been built equally. It's a mystifying situation, but at least the industry leaders are improving their products.
What is the difference between an 1080i signal being de interlaced on a 1080p television and a 1080p signal playing on a 1080p televions? lol....Explain this one. And then you will see my point. Its all in the display and you know it.
there was sufficient bandwidth to allow only HDTV formats that would not exceed the allowed bandwidth per channel. This ended up allowing three formats that pretty well used up the bandwidth. These are 1920x1080p/30fps, 1920x1080i/30fps and 1280x720p/60fps. There are other possible HDTV formats, but these are the three that are at the bandwidth limit. Looking at pixel counts we have roughly the same quantity of pixels transmitted each second for all three with the two 1920x1080p,i/30fps being 62,208,000 pixels per second and 1280x720p/60fps being 55,296,000 pixels per second. Notice the 1080 and 720 formats are within 12.5% of each other
compare 1080 at 30 frames per second to 720 at 60 frames per second. Skewing the numbers already?
Don't worry, i'll fix the comparison for you.
720p = 1280x720 pixels = 921,600 pixels
1080p = 1920x1080 pixels = 2,073,600 pixels
720p at 60 frames per second = 55,296,000 pixels per second.
1080p at 60 frames per second = 124,416,600 pixels per second. This is 2.25x the pixel bandwidth of 720p.
You can see that there is a 125% difference in bandwidth between 720p and 1080p. 55 million pixels a second vs. 124 million mixels a second. PS3 has the ability to output 1080p at 60 frames per second, so this is an accurate comparison.
There is no difference in pixels per second between 1080i and 1080p. The only difference is one is interlaced and the other is progressive. If the interlaced signal is de interlaced...it then becomes IDENTICAL to the 1080p signal. Get it?
Sonyboys can't get it, thats the problem...they will never get it.
there will be not one game that runs 1080p at 60 fps. sony devs r having a problem running a game 1080p at 30 fps. they can't even manage that. thats why they are choosing 720p 60 fps or 1080i. phony fanz show 1 link to a ps3 game that is running 1080p 60 fps. there aren't even movies or broadcasts running 1080p 60 fps. movies are 1080p 24 fps or 30 fps. so phony fans stop saying the ps3 will do 1080p 60 fps. it will never do that resolution. my friend works for a dev team for a ps3 game and he said that they have to use 720p or 1080i due to major frame rate problems when they try to go up to 1080p. he said there just ain't enough total ram to manage it. good point real deal. there is no difference between 1080i and 1080p on a tv that de interlaces the signal. u must work for microsoft dude. u the most informed guy on here. them sony fan girls sure do hate u. hahahahahahahahahah keep killin em
"Deinterlacing is the process of converting interlaced video (a sequence of fields) into a non-interlaced form (a sequence of frames). This is a fundamentally impossible process that must always produce some image degradation, since it ideally requires "temporal interpolation" which involves guessing the movement of every object in the image and applying motion correction to every object."
Deinterlacing of video actually causes image degradation. Therefore 1080i will never be as high in quality as 1080p, even when de-interlaced by HDTVs. For those of you who are unfamiliar with what the terms 'interlaced' and 'progressive' mean, here are some helpful links.
http://www.animemusicvideos... http://www.axis.com/product... http://www.animotion.nl/dut...
RealDeal, a.k.a. SpankUveryMuch, doesn't want people to know this and claims constantly that 1080i is identical to 1080p. He only does this because the PS3 natively supports 1080p while the 360 only supports up to 720p and 1080i.
im a Multiconsole fan, i dont real too much care for tha companies producing them for me but.....
you guys know as well as any other game does that NO game in the early making of a console is going to push what tha console was meant to push. there will be 1080p on both tha PS and 360 (wii, i dont know and dont really care cuz im not a child ne more) but those games wont be come out til next year. developers are still trying to "develop" games not make crap and put gold leaf around it....
for those who didnt get that last comment, i meant make a crapy game with crapy gameplay but it has very high quality textures, special effects and antialising
Coninues to lie because he hates the fact that Sony is pushing 1080p in their system yet if you go buy a tv TODAY thats 1080p, they will tel you and show you that the tvs are so advanced now that they do de interlace to perfection. Why does DJ not want you to know this? Well because then it would make Sony's claims irrelevant. Go to your local best buy and play a hd dvd player on a 1080p Television and you can see for yourself how a 1080i image de interlaced looks better than the blu ray player playing movies outputting 1080p. You will be shocked and then you can see for yourself how advanced de interlacing has become today. Sure a year ago the techniques weren't as advanced as now. But then again. HD 1080p tvs are still new. I have seen with my own eyes and I suggest you do to. Then you can see who is the Real Deal on this site and who is lying on Sony's behalf. Sure the best option is to have a 1080p signal. But with the proper de interlacing 1080p tv...the difference can't be seen with the human eye. And in some cases as with the hd dvd player and the blu ray player...the de interlaced signal looks notably better. See for yourself folks. DJ is a liar and a Joke and for what? He don't get commission for every ps3 sold, then broke, then re sold. Why does he choose to lie for sony's cause? I have no clue. You can come to your own conclusions.
Both systems can make 1080p games. Its just not feasable. And yes both will display 1080p movies. Very true. I don't see developers making 1080p games on either system. But we will see. I wouldn't be shocked if they eventually did. But the hit on hardware is the issue with that high of a resolution in progressive. even high end computers with 3 gigs of total ram have to turn off hdr or aa to get that resolution. 512 don't cut it for displaying 1080p effeciantly. We'll see.
"Deinterlacing of video actually causes image degradation. Therefore 1080i will never be as high in quality as 1080p, even when de-interlaced by HDTVs.".
If thats true Mr. Liar. Why does the hd dvd player that outputs 1080i look better than the blu ray player that outputs 1080p, when both being played on 1080p tv's? I can give you multiple reviews to where HD dvd wins in the visual department head to head with the 1080p blu ray player. That alone contradicts your claims of 1080i de interlaced will never look as good as 1080p. They are the exact same images. Its just the way its displayed thats different. You don't even understand the links you post. you just read one line and because it sounds good you repeat it. lol...lol.....lol...... There are many factors that play into the image you see on your tv. ITs not as simple as you try to make it sound. Yes Ideally 1080p image would be optimal for an 1080p tv. ITs a simple process to display it rather than de interlace it. But it doesn't guarentee a better video quality as seen with hd dvd beating out blu ray players. Get it? Got it? Good.
The survey was conducted from June 28 to July 2 by Ipsos-Vantis, a company that specializes in forecasting demand for new products and sizing emerging categories. They have evaluated over 1,200 new consumer electronics products worldwide and have successfully predicted the size of the overall market and the individual platforms in emerging categories including DVD. Ipsos-Vantis forecasts have been tracked extensively against in-market sales, and have consistently produced a level of accuracy that is unmatched by any other firm in the world.
1. In response to the question “Which statement best describes how likely you would be to buy an HD DVD player,” respondents were over seven times more likely to buy an HD DVD player vs. a Blu-Ray player when all studios support both formats.
a. 57% would definitely or probably buy an HD DVD player vs. 8% for Blu-Ray.
b. 25% would definitely buy HD DVD vs. 2% for Blu-Ray.
2. Purchase interest in HD DVD remains three times higher than Blu-Ray -- even without HD DVD studio support from Disney and Fox.
a. 56% of respondents would definitely or probably buy an HD DVD player vs. 18% for Blu-Ray.
b. 20% would definitely buy HD DVD vs. 6% for Blu-Ray.
3. The main reason consumers prefer HD DVD over Blu-Ray is its superior value.
a. In response to the question, “Which statement best describes how you feel about the value of an HD DVD player,” nearly 57% of respondents indicated that HD DVD was a “very good” or “fairly good” value vs. 14% for Blu-Ray.
b. Conversely, 68% indicated that Blu-Ray was a “somewhat poor” or “very poor” value vs. 19% for HD DVD.
4. In the 4th quarter 2006, the quantity of titles in the HD DVD format is assumed to be two times more than Blu-Ray (200+ for HD DVD vs. approximately 100 for Blu-Ray).
WE DON'T WANT BLU RAY. I WANT THE NEW PLAYSTATION BUT WE DON'T WANT BLU RAY. WHY MAKE US PAY FOR BLU RAY. THAT ADDS 200 TO THE PRICE OF YOUR GAMING SYSTEM AND WE DON'T WANT IT. ARE YOU LISTENING SONY? MOST PEOPLE DO NOT WANT BLU RAY. WE WON'T BUY YOUR STINKIN MOVIES. IT WILL FAIL JUST LIKE YOUR PSP MOVIE FORMATT. WE WANT GAMES SONY. GET IT? GOT IT? GOOD.
You are the minority. Enjoy your blu ray. But understand that is the reason sony will never sell 100 million systems again. They blew it big time. They was handed the keys to the gaming industry and now they abused that privelage by pushing a formatt that most people DON'T WANT. The truth to sony fans is like krytonite to superman. Get over it.
Taiwanese developers favor HD-DVD in 360
Posted in Xbox 360, Hardware, Business by Curry on August 20th, 2006 at 20:20
Console titans Microsoft and Sony are taking a completely different approach to the next generation of huge storage. The first sticks to the current dual-layer DVD standard completely as far as games are concerned, whilst Sony tries to give its Blu-Ray format extra momentum by incorporating it into its upcoming PlayStation 3 console. Taiwanese game developers and game services providers are now first to openly proclaim they favor Microsoft’s approach.
The main problems Microsoft foresaw with using next-gen formats were mainly with availability, price and speed. Sony saw its console delayed by a year partially because of the lack of drives available, and when it does arrive this November it will be $200 more expensive than a similarly powerful Xbox 360 playing mostly the same games. The speed issue is also not one to be taken lightly: despite having well over 2 times as much storage space available, 25GB on a single layer Blu-Ray disc versus 9GB on the dual layer DVD, the current next-gen drives actually have a data transfer rate below half of what the 360’s 12-speed DVD drive crunches out. 2.5 times as much data at half the speed… and you thought loading times in PGR3 were already bad?
The Taiwanese state Microsoft took the wise route by adopting the backwards compatible and cheaper HD-DVD system as a $200 upgrade, due out this Christmas, rather than a mandatory investment:
External drives have more flexibility than built-in models, the companies pointed out, while adding that despite BD having a much larger storage capacity than HD-DVD, pre-installation of BD drives may decrease the market competitiveness of PS3 units.
Microsoft adopted HD-DVD instead of BD mainly because HD-DVD is compatible with existing DVD formats while also having much lower production costs, the Taiwanese companies noted.
With format support varying, it will still be unclear for a while which format will eventually become the mainstream format for distributing HD video and large amounts of data. Blu-Ray mainly has support from the movie studios due to its rigid implementation of DRM, whereas HD-DVD is backed by PC moguls Microsoft and Intel for ease of implementation and flexibility, and also has some movie studio support.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.