The PS3 version of Rage will be on 1 Bluray whereas the Xbox 360 and PC version will take up 2 DVDs. Click on story for full details.
yeah might cause flame wars  hehe WTF lets all flame to eternity in hell Carmack said in 1up interview "With this game and this engine, we have one set of data assets (textures and such). You're able to see right away if, for example, if the damn PS3 version isn't working [Carmack and other members of id continue to gripe about the wasted RAM overhead involved with a PS3 game]."
I dont care if I have change discs once on my Xbox. And I wont have to change discs PERIOD on my PC after I install directly to my hard drive. : )
Sony's reason for the BD being in there was to win the *Movie* Format war. While more than enough space is useful, in a lot of ways, I can't argue that. They forced developers into justifying the Extra space, while most of the early games are still lack luster.(of course that may change, but on the real tip, if BD and space, have been the real deal, then Xbox 360 wouldn't have won these awards: Best E3 Console Game--Mass Effect Best E3 RPG-- Mass Effect Best E3 Action Game--COD4 Best E3 Action/Adventure--Bioshock Best E3 Sport Game--Madden 08(@60 FPS) Best E3 Online Multiplayer--Halo 3 Best E3 Fighting Game--Virtua Fighter 5(Online via XBL) Best E3 Game not Mentioned--GTAIV(episodic content) Wow, alot of awards for dvd9 games... where are the exclusive PS3 awards ? BluRay Gaming ? SONY is *4.3 MILLION* consoles behind M$ & slippin' everyday. Xbox360's software currently outsells Nintendo & PS3, & that's BEFORE Bioshock, Mass Effect, & Halo3 ! Just wait for the M$'s pricecuts & the *2007* software releasing this Fall - Ouch. Unless the PS3 dramaticly increases it's abysmal hardware & software sales, more & more developers are going to CONTINUE to drop off. *The extra space that has been used on Bluray disks for PS3 games has been used for... 1) The duplication of data (so that the INCREDIBLY slow laser read speed doesn't handicap the system with respect to increased loading times - think Oblivian!) 2) Carefully placed filler and/or junk code so that Sony's first party developers could come out and say that they could not have made the game if not for the increased capacity of Bluray (i.e. Resistance anybody?). 3) Hours & hours of CG footage. Exactly how does that contribute to gameplay ? The bottom line here is that both Bluray and HD-DVD was not yet ready to be implemented into video game consoles because of the very slow read speeds of the first initial drives (*including the one found in the PS3 today). Oblivian only takes up 4.6GB of data - UNCOMPRESSED! - but on the PS3 it requires far more space because the developers HAD to carefully and tediously DUPLICATE DATA at various parts across the duration of the game so that the laser wouldn't have to read back and forth as many distances as a typical DVD-9 drive. Prominant developers have come out and publically stated that drive read speed is far more important this generation than disk storage capacity and anybody with any form of technical insight whatsoever knows that the only reason why Sony was FORCED to include a hard drive *standard* was because they needed to give developers the option of caching off of the hard drive - inorder to reduce slow loading times. So why then do most PS3 games have inferior texture quality to 360 games & why do 360 games run smoother ? ...well it's because you will never see more than 256mb of texture memory used in a PS3 game EVER! ..and yes you can blame that on the partitioned RAM found in the PS3 which was a technical necessity to adapt the floating point monster (which is the Cell) to more general gaming functions. The bottom line here is that DVD-9 is more than fine for games this generation and compression technology is only improving and has to continue to improve if all of the space offered by Bluray and HD-DVD is going to ever be used in future generations of consoles WITH MORE RAM because optical disk read speeds will never be fast enough to blankly make all of Sony's claims founded - as to why they justified including a trojan horse in their console so as to leaverage Sony fanboy's pockets to gain a lead in the *movie* format war and thereby collect royalties from Bluray disks in the future! Despite this, even *IF* they are "running" out of space - I would still take the DVD-9 drive in the 360 over the incredibly slow Bluray drive in the PS3 (for gaming applications) anyday! It's a trade-off, BUT it is not as easy as saying "more space = better". It's technically alittle more complicated than that my friend.
the title is the only thing thats gonna cause a flame war simeply because *NEEDED* would imply that the 360/pc WONT have the game because it can only fit on blu-ray.... however obviously it ISNT *NEEDED* cuz the 360/pc ARE getting the game on 2 dvd's... big deal i say. so xbox owners have to change the disk one whole time... WOW. major problems there.
@1.3 The title of this story was the same on the source website. However the site has since changed its title to: "More Reasons why PS3’s Blu-Ray wins over the 360’s DVD"
Best E3 Action/Adventure--Bioshock Since when is Bioshock an action/adventure game???
@1.2= all the games you listed is not even out yet..and bioshcok is on pc..and most likely comin to the PS3..also mass effect is barely fits into one disk!! you xbots got to understand that swappin disk isnt the future..lol..games will get bigger and blue ray will help out devlopers out a lot..this wont be only the game that will have mulitple disk..just look at blue dragon.its uses 3 disk.and that game isnt even amazing lookin at all..lol.. how many more games will come out in mulitple disk before lemmings stop sayin dvd is enough..lol.i feel so ashame for you guys..
"you xbots got to understand that swappin disk isnt the future" Nobody ever said it was. I'm just not willing to pay extra for this "future". I'd rather wait for the future and get a discount for the present.
"you xbots got to understand that swappin disk isnt the future" *Gasp* God forbid having to swap a disk or two. Are you really that lazy? It certainly isn't an inconvenience to me. With wireless controllers and all, it doesn't hurt getting up once in a while and working a muscle or two. As long as the game is good, I don't really give a crap what format it's on.
It's true ..this day and age you shouldn't have to swap discs.
You don't, it is called PC gaming!!
Are you really that lazy you can't get your ass off the couch to change the disc? If anything it's going to be good for you. Do you only play one game? Or do you call your mom over to change the disc for you? That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
I bet when he's done going potty, he cries out, "Mom, I'm done!"
I'm glad the PS3 uses BD. I'd really hate to pay lots of money on a console and then have to swap the disks.
there are so little games for the PofS3. Less games to swap out. They need to change the name of this site to News 4 Flamers. It's really getting old.
NCAA football sold 89,000 copies for PS3, compared to 468,000 for the Xbox 360. We also know that counting PS3 as a Blu-ray player lowers the attach rate for movies, diluting the higher attach rate of standalone players. Some are using it for games, some are using it for movies. Unless you're using if for both, it is really hurting Sony. As a videogame device, PS3 is turing into a major flop. It's losing exclusives to the 360. Both EA & Midway expressed disappointment in the PS3 last week. Even Ninja Gaiden Sigma, the PS3 exclusive AAA title has yet to sell 90,000 copies. The Xbox price is lowered next week and Halo 3 comes out a month later, I don't see much hope for PS3 as a game machine. Despite the $100 price drop, PS3 only outsold Xbox by 50,000 units in July. It would take 8 years for them to catch Xbox at that rate. As a Blu-ray player, PS3 is doing slightly better. The sheer numbers of people who would blindly buy the next Playstation has given Blu-ray a huge advantage early on, but is it really helping Sony? If someone buys the $499 60GB PS3 as only a Blu-ray player, instead of the BD-300 for example, this is the worst thing that can happen for Sony! It means Sony is paying for a 60GB hard drive, a CELL processor, Wi-Fi adapter, memory card slots, an Nvidia video card and PS2 emotion engine chips for a device that is only going to watch movies. No wonder they are losing $200 on each system sold! On top of that, PS3 is all but killing standalone Blu-ray sales. Why does everybody think everything is rosey in the Blu-ray camp?
Why don't you look and see how much 360s were sold at the start of it's life cycle? The number is very close to that of the PS3 and it's only competition was the PS2. Not to mention that the lauch of the PS3 in Europe was delayed by a couple of months, if it launched sooner, even more PS3s would have been sold. Also, the 360 is only just selling better than the origional Xbox if you compare them.
Yes, PS3 is a major disappointment. It's not just me saying it... it's game publishers, retailers and industry analysts.
Blu Ray has nothing to do with a game selling more on the 360, it's the one year head start witch gave the 360 a higher install base. Plus why are you so worried about how much money Sony loses, think about us the consumer who's getting a good deal.
The point is: including Blu-ray has increased the costs of PS3 to the point where it is too expensive as a game machine.
Saying that the ps3 is not selling well is getting old, your point would be valid two months ago.
In the last month or so: - Blockbuster (largest video rental company) announced they are promoting Blu-Ray over HD DVD - Target (nation's #2 retailer) announced they are only selling Blu-Ray standalone players and will have endcap display units playing BD movies. No equivalant HD DVD display will be setup. - BJ's warehouse went BD exclusive - Even though Blu-Ray standalone players cost almost 2x more than HD DVD standalone players, sales are almost equal with HD DVD having a 55% vs 45% marketshare advantage - PS3 firmware update for DVD upconversion and 24fps support. - PS3 pricedrop which seems to have helped jumpstart more sales - Tons of smaller studios going Blu-Ray - 5 free movie rebate on any new Blu-Ray player (PS3 included) - Blu-Ray crushing HD DVD in the Nielsen Videoscan ratings in the month of July even though HD DVD has more than 2x the releases. It looks like Blu-Ray ended up with a 67:33 lead for the month, even with less releases and the huge price drops on Toshiba players over the past few months.
PS3 is losing money for Sony at the same time it's killing standalone Blu-ray player sales. The new November spec calls for new mandatory hardware to be added to Blu-ray players to encode picture in picture (a feature HD DVD already does). This will make most 1st generation Blu-ray players obsolete. Meanwhile, the Blu-ray promotional group is outspending the HD DVD group by a 10 to 1 margin, yet all they can manage is a 2:1 sales lead? Oh yeah, things are looking great for Blu-ray.. this could turn out to be the biggest blunder in history for Sony! The gambled their video game empire to subsidize Blu-ray and it is not paying off at the moment. Sony may have to swallow it’s pride and do another $100 price cut out of desperation. However they try to spin it, it should be clear that Sony is in real trouble this round.
Well, Clap Your Hands, everything's pretty rosy until you compare HD-DVD and Blu-ray to standard DVD. People can throw out all of the percentages they want to, but neither Blu-ray nor HD-DVD has any sort of mass-market appeal. The truth is that neither format is exactly setting the world on fire, much less destroying the other at anything. As of April only 1 million Blu-ray discs had been sold, which was less than the number of players installed when you account for PS3 sales. This "battle" is barely a blip on the retail radar. It is nowhere near a full-blown format war.
As the console prices come closer and closer, why not have Blu ray when you are paying the same amount for the cosole. By this time next year PS3 will be $400 and xbox elite $400, which do you think looks better to consumers, Bluray player, wifi, bluetooth, card reader, free online all at the same price.. So did Sony make a mistake or 360? Even if 360 added bluray they still couldn't take advantage of it, that's the disapointing thing. Don't give me crap that Sony forced blu ray, when bill gates stated that 360 was going to be release with an HDdvd drive, oh did you forget about those claims...The reason 360 does not have an HDDVD drive is because they rushed their product to get a year headstart not because it wasn't needed......Like when a game gets delayed I don't mind waiting because I know the product will be better when it's not rush.
To PTS, "4 - Blu-ray has been a huge mistake for PS3" Get a brain, steal one if u can
Sony fanboys and any fanboy for that matter shouldnt disagree someone becouse they told the truth JsonHenry was right you shouldnt get angry, the pc is more powerfull then the ps3 its the TRUTH!The ps3 has Blu-Ray which was in my opinion was a smart move by sony,a lot of space is great but that doesnt mean it is gonna win the console war,the wii 360 and ps3 all have the same chance to win so stop acting like know it all jerks! EDIT:no offense you just act like that
get off there lazy asses and make allow developers to make use of HD-DVD then they will come in last place.
I can see why it takes up so much space, did you see the video. The textures were nice.
Youre so right!!!! /CRY, SOB, WAIL I SHOULD HAVE SPENT THE EXTRA $200 so i woulndt have to switch discs! Biggest mistake of my life! Whatever can i do??? /sarcasm off Anyways, I'm glad you guys are happy with your investment in the PS3, it just wasn't worth it to me yet. Probably next gen it will be (once all the costs are driven down), but at the time i got my 360, it was hard enough justifying spending $400 on a console, forget $600. I would happily swap a few discs on a few games if it saved me $200. I didnt find disc swapping on the PS to be a bother at all.
u can always buy a ps3 when they drop in price =)
600 dollars for something b3yond a supercomputer is over worth it, your the one that spent too much for that heatbox 180, get rid of that hot bomb, its defective, its not safe for your household
30% of Americans are obese and need to get off their fat asses once in a while.
But more than 90% of gamers are lazy;-)
yeah true, but that 30% is too busy buying Ho-Ho's and Snackie Cakes to be bothered with buying a game system.
Many adult males suffer from baldness. Fact.
I guess you must be on the of the fat ones, Shiro. I'm not suffering. I really don't care. I started shaving my head before my hair started thinning.
funniest post ever bubbles for you :)
Shaved heads rock. I looooove my new Kojak look. Easy to maintain, too.
its really common sense. DVD = Last gen techonlogy. Blu-Ray/HD-DVD = Next Gen tech. Which platform using which gen do you think will have the most effective and next-gen worthy titles?
Its when sandbox games start requiring two DVDs that its going to get worse. They would have to make it like GTA3 were instead of needing to load between islands you would have to insert a new disc each time.
Blu ray is going to work out cheaper and less delayed games soon where some x box/ pc games will see 2 or 3 dvds I will give blu ray a 1 up on this,
I knew this day would come but now? this actually do justify the bluray, for me anyway =) Tucker: What do you think about not swapping discs Ollie? Ollie: GREAT!!! Tucker: Well me to Ollie, me to!
"More reasons why PS3's blu-ray is needed" define the word "need"... example, I need a plane to fly... I need food to survive... I need water to live... The fact that eventhough the PC game will be released on DVDs and not blu-ray on the PC (though there are blu-ray players on the PC) tells you that developers would release this game on the PS3 on DVDs if they had the choice... blu-ray disk cost more to make. I am not trying to flame or anything.. but you Sony fanboys already trying making a big deal out of everything... " I'd really hate to say lots of money on a console and then have to swap the disks." You mean.. PC... PC as of today can push lots more graphics, take a look at crysis and other games... are they being released on blu-ray disks? You may say, "but you can install the games on the PC"... well.. most games require you to have the disk to play them (i.e. battle field, etc)... No one is denying that more capacity will be needed in the future... True, it is an anoyance having to switch disk, "this day and age you shouldn't have to swap discs" (EVEN TO SWITCH BETWEEN GAMES)... funny thing about it.. you do switch between games... don't you? what interesting is that... most of you play multiple games in your console... you don't own a single game... the chances that you will put a disk in and play the same game for 20-30 hours are very little... So, why would you have a proble changing a disk for the same game... it just does not make sense.... you will probably change the disk to play other games like 100 times before the console ask you to change it to continue onto the next disk... Is is last Gen? yeah! duhh... HD DVD and blu-ray are Next Gen formats... that's their sole purpose... to have more room.. so you don't have to change disks... only draw back of DVDs. Should people pay $200-$300 for not having to change one disk for a specific game? Obviously that depends who you ask... ask a sony fanboy... and they will say yes... duhh.. how else can they feel good about their purchase... The PC gamer and XBox 360 gamers have no problem chaging one disk... we have many games(xbox 360 have many games)... we have to change disks anyways... Maybe for you Sony fanboys.. that probably have 1 game to play this is a problem... not to us... seriously..
I need food to survive, it doesnt mather if i can buy it at the store or if i have to hunt it down myself. If people were lazy this would mather, and in my oppinion they are.. "The fact that eventhough the PC game will be released on DVDs and not blu-ray on the PC (though there are blu-ray players on the PC)" Pc often comes with one install disc and one play disc as you mention, so there is no need for swapping disc more than one time.
Bladestar, since I know you like to ponder things.... Do you think M$ should adopt a larger disc format next generation? And if so, why? Whats going to change between now and then? EDIT How can anyone disagree, I'm asking a question.
Lets see PC gaming regardless of if the title comes with multiple CD's or DVD all get installed on the HDD and the game is run from the hard drive. The only reason most PC games require disk one to be in the drive is to help with piracy. The disk is used to confirm if the game should run on the hard drive and if the disk is not there you can't play the game. This has been the case for along time and since all PC games all run from the hard drive should not even be brought into the equation. No one with the PC version of this or any other game will be required to change a disk :P Now for consoles that is not the case. Games run directly from the disk. When the PS3 was announced MS and all the 360 fanboy proclaimed and yelled from the mountian tops that more space was not needed for this new generation of gaming. Since that time we have seen developer after developer state that Blu-ray is very much needed now. More and more games using more space then what is available on DVD. At first it was only 1st party developers like Insomniac and Factor 5 saying this, so the fanboys cried.."Sony paid them to say that." Now we are seeing 3rd party developers saying it and even releasing the PS3 version of the game on one Blu-ray and PC and 360 game on multi DVD. So obviously all the claims that Blu-ray was not needed and that a single DVD and compression was more then enough for this generation of gaming has been proven to be wrong. This not even a year after the PS3 released. Of course now the claim is "I don't mind changing disks." Sorry but that was never the point. The point was that Sony saw the need for more space on a single disc and MS did not. 360 fanboys screamed from the roof tops that this was true as well and that Sony was only doing this to win the format war for movies and that Blu-ray was completely useless and not needed for gaming. WRONG!
retail game costs 60$, blank blu-ray disc(not the one retail)18$,cost of development per each disk is 30$,48 dollars,12 dollar profit, same does twolayer blank dvd cost.
I don't know.. why someone would disagree.. since they are valid questions.. "Do you think M$ should adopt a larger disc format next generation?" Who knows.. base on what Sony said.. "PS4 will not have a disk drive".. it seems as no one knows.. but there is a big chance it will come with the disk format that wins(Blu-ray or HD DVD)... Microsoft said it.. they have no problem with adopting blu-ray if it becomes the format of choice... This is not about blu-ray being bad... it's more about timing... Though blu-ray is benefitial when it comes to giving developers more room even when they don't need it. Adding blu-ray to the PS3 was not under no means... a desition Sony made just because it was going to be good for games... It's no secret that Sony's primary reason what to help the adoption of blu-ray since they are heavily involved in the movie industry... So, though it was a great move for Sony to add blu-ray in to the PS3... that does not mean.. it would have being a good move for Microsoft... don't forget that Sony can make money selling blu-ray movies like spiderman... so the money they spend adding the HD drive can be made again not only selling games but also movies... now... If Microsoft would do try doing the samething.. they would only sustain loses on the hardware... and the xbox 360 would probably cost like $600-$700... another benefit Sony had was their brand recognition and fanbase loyalty.. that are willing to pay the high price... The xbox 360 would never make it at such high price... forcing microsoft off the market.. since they would never make their money back... All for what? so, less than 5% of the games don't come in 2 DVDs? for the simple reason that asking the user to switch disk after 20-30 hours of gameplay? Remove you fanboy hat and use your brains for once... Good for you that Sony could do this.. since they have more revenues streams in the movie industry that Microsoft does not have.. that let them do such thing... but don't flame Microsoft for making the right business and only move. Let me give you an example... that may help you see what I am talking about... The Playstation 1 was launched in Japan on December 3, 1994, the United States on September 9, 1995.... Sony was very involved on the creation of DVD in early 90's... it was obvious that CD werent big enough.. since games on multiple disk started to appear on the PS from the start... Answer this... why didn't Sony add a DVD to the first Playstation? Their answer is, "Philips and Sony abandoned their MultiMedia Compact Disc and fully agreed upon Toshiba's SuperDensity Disc with only one modification, namely changing to EFMPlus modulation." That was not their propietary format.... it didnt make sense in the business perspective to make a game console... (new brand.. no fanbase... and Nintendo was releasing N64).. and make people pay $500 for it. yes.. DVD players were very expensive... You Sony fanboys(Not talking about you @Bathyj) want to make this only about games.. and trying to make it seem as if Sony did it for the love of games... and not because of pushing blu-ray adoption... something that Microsoft shouldnt have... If you look at the PS3... it's optimized... to be a great blu-ray player... Cell+blu-ray drive.. and other components that are needed to create a great console... Memory, GPU and Development tools... are somewhat... arguably less optimal than the xbox 360... ask youself why... Besides... take a look at this link: http://science.qj.net/Resea... "That just might change in the next few years, as an ongoing research project has found a way to cram three times that capacity(BLU_RAY, HD DVD) (150GB) into a DVD-sized disk, with plans to pump it up to a further 500GB by 2008." as you can see.. more reaseach could have been done.. to increase DVD's capacity... the new Formats are just an attempt to for people to adopt a new line of hardware... "as the Microholas Project's 150GB disk mentioned earlier is just a demonstrator of things to come. The team expects to have an even bigger 1 Terabyte disk out by 2010, with an expected read speed of 250 Mbits." Isn't that something.. ehhh?
the retail price of a blank BD disc is not the cost to the manufacturer. In fact the cost of the discs are much closer to regular DVDs ... we're talking cents here not dollars.
I admit, it would have been harder for M$ to add a new Disc than Sony, and they had less to gain by doing so. I still think maybe they could have gone BR (whether Sony would hae let them is something we'll never know) and there would be no format war by now, or actually supportted HDDVD in a meaningful way and built it in and maybe they would have won by now. I think by sitting on the fence they've not only hanicapped their own machine but as we've starting to see even at this early stage crippled multiplatform games this generation, at least to some extent. You say Sony FB's always make out that BR was made just for games, but Xbox FB's always make out that BR is just for movies. I think its benificial for both. Isn't it better there more than one good reason to have it. Theres many. BR was in developement a long time before PS3 was announced. And when they did announce it with BR in it I was happy because I saw the advantage it could give. And its not about swapping disc. Its about rethinking the way games are made. We build roads because we have to have somewhere for our cars to ride on, but if we had Skycars, infastructure would be build in a different way. I want devs to think different ways in a much grander scope. What you said about DVD in PSone, was DVD even out yet? I dont think so. Maybe invented but certainly now prevelent. Australia only got it about 6 months before PS2 and it wasn't popular. PS2 pushed it alot. You said they didn't use it cos it wasn't a Sony format. Well BR isn't either. They have a big stake in it of course but it doesn't just belong to them. They have more ownership of CD's then BR's. I wouldnt worry about that next format. I'm all for more space but even I'd say 1 TB is overkill. BR is out now and has Studio support and is a good fit for what we need. Anyway the reason I asked the queston was if they are going to go to a bigger disc next gen, why didnt they do it now. Whats going to change to make them need more space if they dont need it now. For me it was the move to HD visuals (and sound) that necessitate all that room. Unless we suddenly switch to even higher def TV by next gen nothings really gonna change so if M$ truley believe they were right sticking with DVD, then they will do it again but somehow I doubt it. The writing will clearly be on the wall by then. One last thing, the movie side of BR is definitly a good thing. Everyone is buying HDTV's now so it stands to reason they want HD content. But if it wasn't for PS3 I wouldnt have bought a BR player yet, or a HDDVD player. PS3 is helping alot of people get into HD movies who wouldn't have otherwise and that can only be seen as good as far as I'm concerned.
I think M$ really kicked themselves by not including atleast a hd-dvd drive in the box because now for the ports, the developers have to limit themselves to the size on a dam dvd, which really could be the reason behind the gta IV delay. Sony was really thinking ahead when they decided to include the blu-ray inside the ps3. Sony has always been known for pushing the next media format and it looks like their doing it again. M$ may be in the lead right now but Sony is definitely going to claim its glory as #1.....well #2 if you count the Wii.
Changing a disk isn't usually a problem i agree,But what happens for a sports/racing game where you need everything in one spot? Are you going to switch out disks in a racing game just to be able to play a certain track? Are you going to want to switch discs to play franchise mode in madden?
Grantourismo on ps1 was on 2 discs,no? and did FF7 sucks cause it was on 4 discs? no
How about remote controller? We dont need that either or do we? It´s not annoying to go to the tv and change channel? Or cars when we can run everywhere, well thats just swell =)
But people do use Blu Ray as a perk for owning a PS3. Because a PC or a 360 dose everything a PS3 can do but with one exception BLu Ray. So Blu Ray having any advantage no matter how little that advantage is will be blown up as large a possible to support Sony's Blu Ray trojan horse and Sony enthusiast need to be #1.
yeah might cause flame wars
 hehe WTF lets all flame to eternity in hell
Carmack said in 1up interview "With this game and this engine, we have one set of data assets (textures and such). You're able to see right away if, for example, if the damn PS3 version isn't working [Carmack and other members of id continue to gripe about the wasted RAM overhead involved with a PS3 game]."
It's true ..this day and age you shouldn't have to swap discs.
I'm glad the PS3 uses BD. I'd really hate to pay lots of money on a console and then have to swap the disks.
NCAA football sold 89,000 copies for PS3, compared to 468,000 for the Xbox 360. We also know that counting PS3 as a Blu-ray player lowers the attach rate for movies, diluting the higher attach rate of standalone players. Some are using it for games, some are using it for movies. Unless you're using if for both, it is really hurting Sony.
As a videogame device, PS3 is turing into a major flop. It's losing exclusives to the 360. Both EA & Midway expressed disappointment in the PS3 last week. Even Ninja Gaiden Sigma, the PS3 exclusive AAA title has yet to sell 90,000 copies. The Xbox price is lowered next week and Halo 3 comes out a month later, I don't see much hope for PS3 as a game machine. Despite the $100 price drop, PS3 only outsold Xbox by 50,000 units in July. It would take 8 years for them to catch Xbox at that rate.
As a Blu-ray player, PS3 is doing slightly better. The sheer numbers of people who would blindly buy the next Playstation has given Blu-ray a huge advantage early on, but is it really helping Sony? If someone buys the $499 60GB PS3 as only a Blu-ray player, instead of the BD-300 for example, this is the worst thing that can happen for Sony! It means Sony is paying for a 60GB hard drive, a CELL processor, Wi-Fi adapter, memory card slots, an Nvidia video card and PS2 emotion engine chips for a device that is only going to watch movies. No wonder they are losing $200 on each system sold! On top of that, PS3 is all but killing standalone Blu-ray sales. Why does everybody think everything is rosey in the Blu-ray camp?
get off there lazy asses and make allow developers to make use of HD-DVD then they will come in last place.