Talk:PlayStation 3/Archive 11

• Archive 1 (May 2005)
• Archive 2 (May 2005 - July 2005)
• Archive 3 (Jul 2005 - Dec 2005)
• Archive 4 (Dec 2005 - Feb 2006)
• Archive 5 (Feb 2006 - Apr 2006)

Controller

http://sony.gamerfeed.com/gf/news/4815/ somebody add this in about the controller, Sony had thought of the idea for the motion controller YEARS before nintendo's wii. Edit: Did it myself, I felt this was vital and will help quench the whole blaze of forum/nintendo debate of all this senseless "Copycating", at least a little.

512 Mb graphics memory

is what it says in the area about the rsx. shouldent it be 256 Mb? -- matjet 18:30, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

No, sony has said 512. (70.71.162.88 02:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC))

PlayStation Katana

Has anyone heard about the name change to "Katana"? I saw it on the News about an hour ago over here in Mexico, I was just wondering if it was true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Katana3 (talk • contribs) .

Well, seeing its not on news.com or digg or slashdot or wired or google news, its likely a hoax -- Tawker 05:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

And Playstation's official website still refers to it a Playstation 3.--Joe Jklin 05:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't that the Dreamcast's codename during development? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.9.32 (talk • contribs) .

You would be correct. Katana was the project name for the Sega Dreamcast. Douglasr007 02:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

PLAYSTATION 3

Be more careful when replacing the name. With the change, you broke the internal wikilinks and the interwiki. Discuss it here, please, and if necessary modify only the ones that do not break compatibility. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 12:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

PlayStation 3 is the correct capitalization. It's common practise in press releases to put product or company names in all caps for emphasis. -- uberpenguin @ 2006-04-24 15:42Z

PlayStation 3 is the way it is capitalised. Just like PlayStation Portable, PlayStation 2 and PlayStation. --Thorpe | talk 16:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No, PLAYSTATION 3 is the correct name.

Look at this page (and other official releases) with your eyes to see how it's different from "PlayStation2".

http://www.playstation.com/products.html

Heck, even Ken Kutaragi talks about why it's all in caps if you can read Japanese.

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0608/kaigai186.htm

(A very rough English translation of the above article

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/623/623546p1.html)

-- K —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.148.132.251 (talk • contribs) .

did you accept the sonic boom however? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.54.8.253 (talk • contribs) .

we so had this discussion like months ago D: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.68.84.20 (talk • contribs) .

I see something wrong here.

To answer to Microsoft's Xbox Live, Sony has confirmed a unified online service at the 2006 PlayStation Business Briefing meeting in Tokyo..[4] The name of the service has been given the working title "PlayStation Network Platform". Sony has confirmed that the basic online service will be free and will have sufficient functionality for online gaming. The online service is being developed jointly by Sony Computer Entertainment and Sony Online Entertainment. This Sony service is expected to be a huge rip-off of Xbox live because Sony sucks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Captain Kevles (talk • contribs) .

You are so mature and eloquent, congratulations! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.156.193.53 (talk • contribs) .

Pricing April 28

We don't need to put rumor on this article. The PSM article doesn't quote sources. It is contradictory to what other sources have said. For example Sony execs in Japan have stated it will not cost less than $50K yen, which translates to $425 and the Japan price has always been lower than U.S. price. Daniel.Cardenas 15:23, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

PSM admits they are wrong: http://www.sony-ps3.ca/04272006/17/playstation_3_for_399_dream_deferred_psm_backtracks

They are wrong for more than one reason. Japan consoles are cheaper than U.S. not more expensive. For example PSP is cheaper in Japan.

I deleted the link about Sony England announcing a price range. It sounds believable, but we need to be consistent in rumors we delete. I hope the person that posted it finds a source and puts in back in. I tried to find a source and couldn't.

Daniel.Cardenas 20:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

While the lowpoint of $350 sounds reasonable, $650 doesn't sound reasonable at all. Dionyseus 20:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you are referring to the vandalized price of US $350. The low price was 350 pounds which is about $638 dollars. Although price in the U.S. would be cheaper. Daniel.Cardenas 20:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

So it's E3 time: Sony announced at today's press conference: 20 GB model for $499 US ($599 CAD)that will not include Blu-Ray playback because of no HDMI capability, no memory card slots, and no WiFi. 60 GB model for $599 US ($699 CAD) wich only has 1 HDMI connection instead of the 2 Sony announced earlier.

The newest spec sheet i have seen only has 1 HDMI for the $600 PS3, so some one confirm this and change it if Sony did remove the other one. DidYouLoseASock 05:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

23 March or March 23

Although 23 March is as correct as March 23 (I use 23 March myself in spanish), per date guidelines: Use consistent date formatting throughout an article, unless there's a good reason to vary it. So, either use the day month or month day format throughout the entire article. Remember that casual readers don't have a preference set, and finding both types of dates in a single article may confuse them. -- ReyBrujo 03:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Initial losses

I quote GamesIndustry article (fifth paragraph) [1]:

With the launch of the next-generation console in November, which it is widely expected Sony will sell at a loss for at least the first year, the company is expecting to post a loss during the current fiscal year of approximately YEN 100 billion (EURO 697 million), although post-launch costs for the units are expected to be drastically reduced.

I believe it is a good piece for the article. -- ReyBrujo 18:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Totally meaningless and useless info, with no grounds in any known fact (70.71.162.88 01:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC))

Read the article please, the numbers have been posted by Sony itself. If they don't know... -- ReyBrujo 03:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Backwards compatibility

The article states that 'Estimates by game developers put the number of PS and PS2 titles that have passed the TRC to be around 50-85%.'. Speaking as a game developer, this is a peculiar statement and both the Wikipedia article and linked article are misleading, the Wikipedia article moreso. *EVERY* game released on PS1/PS2 has to pass Sony testing, with Sony's technical requirements specified in form of the TRC. Ultimately Sony manufacture the copy-protected discs, and can (and do) reject games if they do not meet quality or technical requirements - schedules often allow for multiple submissions to Sony before setting a planned release date. Incompatibilities in the emulation are more likely to arise because Sony or internal testing *didn't catch* violations of the TRC, rather than they did not pass at all. With the costs involved with a submission to Sony (successful or otherwise), few would make one knowing that they fragrantly disregard the TRC. --82.39.14.169 20:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I've corrected the offending statement, and changed TRC acronym explanation to Technical Requirements Checklist) --82.39.14.169 21:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

From what I understand, all released PS and PS2 games have passed the TRC. Now, I believe the article was referring that they are retesting the requirements on the released games in order to build a compatibility list, using the emulator as new console. However, in this case, it is backwards: instead of the game developers having to modify the games in order to comply with the TRC, it is Sony that is now modifying the emulator to make the game pass the test. Anyways, thanks for the clarification, it will surely help non technical people. -- ReyBrujo 21:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I changed 'will' to 'should' in the intro - does this solve this problem for now?HappyVR 17:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Memory

Not sure where the 400MHz figure for memory is coming from? - also not sure how this can match quoted bandwidth? Also memory subsection is incorrectly worded as it stands.HappyVR 11:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

My mistake, I have now reverted it to your version. Dionyseus 11:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Blu ray

I removed the region code table - is this for blu ray or dvd - it seems wrong for blu ray - however I put a hyper-link to the blu ray article.

This is what I removed:

Region code	Area
1	North America, Central America, South America.
2	Europe,Japan and Africa
3	China, Russia, India, Pakistan and all other countries.

HappyVR 12:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

This is from http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=15908

Region 1: North America, South America, East Asia except for China (India, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Malaysia etc.)

Region 2: Europe and Africa

Region 3: China, Russia and other countries

HappyVR 12:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

E3

Today is E3 Owning day: So...people and editors, I won't bother refereshing or contributing to this article. I will leave the job for you:P So....Everytime I referesh at Wiki, I do want to see new info! Infact, I won't bother adding info to other articles, accept for the one I chose to work for.

So...people. GET TO WORK>:-] oh yea, not time yet:P

>x<ino 19:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The new prices have been unveiled, anyone want to note them in the article?

Picture

What happen to the front starting picture of this article? The owning picture? The picture of ps3 with white background. Infact they changed all official white background console pictures with Wiki editor own made pictures. Why!?

>x<ino 19:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Probably just to be extra safe against a copyright infringement. 20:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daniel.Cardenas (talk • contribs) .

Onslaught of possible vandalism

I think that the possibility of rampant vandalism to this article in the next few days should be considered a high priority. Fanboys are gonna come here and trash/misinform a lot in the next 12-24 hours. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MilitantRabbit (talk • contribs) .

Yea, that is why it will be the owning day:P...same will apply for Revo 21:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xino (talk • contribs) .

Vandalism? All is fair when dealing with thieves! And XFD at that price tag! PS3 is SO gonna flop! Infinitys 7th 02:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I move to lock for vandalism. Dothefandango 02:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Why? This is all you need to know! "Well, let's see. They stole a bunch of crap from Nintendo, and they act like they came up with it. That's about all you need to know." Infinitys 7th 02:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Sony are fucking thieves. This is quite possibly the most blatant act of thievery they've ever committed.

I say, on with the vandalism! ZeroRaider 02:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Power on! None of the edits are by me. . .by the way. . .so leave me alone. Infinitys 7th 02:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh wow. . .in order to protect the innocent PS3 you had to lock the topic. . .sad. Everyone already knows it is loserific! Infinitys 7th 02:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

INNOCENT PS3?! I'd delete this article here and now if I didn't want to get banned... Andrex 02:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't judging what's right or wrong. It's bringing the facts. If the stealing makes you angry, there are plenty of game chats or forums that you can discuss. Wiki however, is neutral.~Ujjay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.48.141.3 (talk • contribs) .

Just to clear some things up - there is no "thieveing" involved. Motion-sensing tech was used in many games before (like those baseball sims where you throw a wired ball towards your TV), not to mention that in order to use that tech, IF it was patented by Nintendo, Sony would have to license it as well. Please get your facts straight before crying bloody murder. Tani unit 02:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, come on! They showed the fricking bananarang a few months ago and now they have a freaking Dualshock 2 with an motion detection system! Infinitys 7th 02:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

They changed controller's look based on an outcry that ensued in online communities after it's debut.

As far as motion-sensing - they never said "batarang" didn't have any, so why assume? Knowing their tactics, it's likely they were waiting for this e3 to make that known. I'm not protecting Sony by any means, as a lot of the things this company does is questionable, but in this case i see no reason to bash them Tani unit 02:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

This discussion page alone is argument enough to support locking the page down for vandalism. Everybody screaming about how it's stealing should remember this is supposed to be non-biased documentation, not your own personal soapbox. Get a life, fanboys. Hossenfeffer 02:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Something has to be noted about the controversy though... you can't just ignore it. The Kids Aren't Alright 02:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

"Noting" the controversy and using Wikipedia as a tool to bash Sony are two different things, though - and most of the people complaining are doing the latter, not the former. If they're that upset about it, they should feel free to call Sony's corporate number and complain, not rant about it here. There's a reason neutral voice exists and is preferred - and most of the people editing this page are so anti-Sony, it's like watching an 8-year old draw in an encyclopedia with crayons. And about as desireable. Hossenfeffer 02:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand that Wiki is neutral and is not the right place to talk about Grand Theft Controller, but I still think it's just IGNORANT not to mention the controversy at all. Something like, "...features motion sensing technology similar to that of Nintendo's Wii controller. The Playstation 3 controller has encountered criticism because of this similarity, since it was unveiled after Nintendo announced similar technology in their next system." llamapalooza87 02:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

If any attempt to mention the controversy is going to result in "OMG SONY SUXXORS!!", it's better not to mention it at all. The article can wait a week down the line, a month, or however long it takes for people to cool down and put their non-biased faces back on to write it. Hossenfeffer 02:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it is definitely worth a small mention (eventually, as Hossenfeffer noted) that initial controller design was met with rather dissapointing reactions from online communities, and was scrapped in favor of virtual copy of PS2 controller. As far as mentioning critisism because of similarity to Wii - I hardly see the point. The only ones who are concerned with that seem to be anti-sony fanboys. Although mentioning similarity itself does seem relevant. Tani unit 03:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, this page is being linked to many message boards with not-so-mature users *coughgamefaqscough*. The anti-fanboys know what they're doing is wrong - they just don't particularly care. You can't reason with them. Just ban them and protect the page. The "controversy" will die down eventually.--Claude 03:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Just watch as half of US goes listen, when reveiwing Revolution details

06:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Need to mention in Controversy

wikipedia is crazy and it doesnt update, so I wanted you all to write down that PS3 copied not just Wii but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Sidewinder The Sidewinder! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mattrb (talk • contribs) .

Well Nintendo's "controller idea" is not a new idea at all, and it is definitely not Nintendo's idea or invention. Dionyseus 02:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It is in mainstream gaming. Infinitys 7th 02:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I find it rather amusing that people think Sony using similar tech implies "thieving".

Why not accuse xbox for "stealing" ideas from PC's for using a harddrive and an OS to run it?

Or Wii of "stealing" an idea for "remote" from TV sets? Seems like a rather pointless discussion based solely on bias and clouded judgement Tani unit 02:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Stop it with this "company has copied an idea from here" and "company has copied an idea from there" bullshit. If we did that to everything, we would probably get a whole list of ideas that were copied from all the way back to the Caveman Era. Douglasr007 02:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

You'd also have to make a list of the ideas Nintendo stole from Mattel, Coleco, and Atari when they first came out with the NES, but that would introduce too much logic into the discussion. Though, I suspect at least half the people screaming about this weren't even born when the Famicom first came out anyway. Hossenfeffer 02:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this needs to be kept at this revision Fro81 02:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Important Press Conference - May 8 2006

Lots of new data, the page needs to be updated - see http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/08/engadget-and-joystiqs-live-coverage-of-sonys-playstation-3-e3-ev/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheArmadillo (talk • contribs) .

SEVEN controllers?

The Dual-tilt 3 (no SHOCK, anymore) controller only has lights for up to four controller ports. This conflicts with the previously announced fact that the PS3 was supposed to support up to 7 controllers. Whoopsies? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masamunecyrus (talk • contribs) .

Watch the press conference in the beginning the "7 controllers" are there. I don't know how thi is work.. but the information was presented again at this night. --Ragnarok Addict 04:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Wii's Controller Controversy

Those with ears shall hear;

http://revolution.ign.com/articles/705/705870p1.html

"The technology inside Sony's controller is a basic tilting accelerometer device. In a sense, that's the same style of control as the left hand of the Wii combination. Think of the technology as true 3D movement vs. basic tilt. The Wiimote will sense all pointing, motion and a new dimension of control, while the PS3 controller will expand only on the specific tilt functions."

Fanboys, get it through your heads, this is not the same tech, PS3's controller is a lot more basic and doesn't allow the features that make Wii's controller "revolutionary". Put it to rest for f@ck's sakes Tani unit 03:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, I noticed that someone mentioned that the PS3's controller may have been 'inspired' from the Wii's. This change was reverted quickly. In the spirit of neutrality, I think that if the Wii's page makes reference to the PS3's conroller, the PS3 article should make reference to the Wii's. -Omega21 04:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture change

I changed the picture with the Final retail design (black) and the new controller. --Ragnarok Addict 04:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution. However, we can't accept it right now. The first Fair use policy states that we can only use images under the Fair use license when there is no free alternative. And as addition, a free image (if appropriate, although this may be discussed) will always have more priority than a Fair use image. -- ReyBrujo 04:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The current image is outdated... it is a TGS 2005 image, showing the old controller.. up-to-date information is more important than license priorities. --Ragnarok Addict 04:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, but that is not correct. I have provided you with the guideline that states free images have always the priority. Where in the policies it is said that up-to-date information is more important than license? I am reverting your image again, as you haven't provided any reference for your claim. -- ReyBrujo 04:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Ragnarok. Besides, the old picture is unsatisfactory (can barely see the console) and shows the scrapped controller model. Dionyseus 04:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, since another voice has joined the discussion, I am not reverting and instead discuss the matter. I will ask you too: where in the guidelines and/or policies is stated that up-to-date information is more important than license? -- ReyBrujo 04:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay.. I know GNU image must be priorized but the question here is the obsolescence.. the image that ReyBrujo are reverting turns the article 7 months obsolet and absolutely unfair and disinformative due to conferecence today. According to ReyBrujo, license must be pushed against the nature of good information, I guess. --Ragnarok Addict 04:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The only difference between both pictures is the controller. The console is still the same one. Anyways, I am posting about this in the Fair use talk page to see what is their opinion. I won't be reverting to the free image unless they state the free image is fine enough. Of course, any other editor who agrees with me is able to revert to the previous image. -- ReyBrujo 04:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

In case you are interested in the follow-up, go here. Also, I am removing the image from the Talk page, that is a Fair use violation. -- ReyBrujo 04:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Specs.. basic edition

Has no HDMI and card slots on 499 edition.. and the Dual HDMI was cut off in both versions [2] --Ragnarok Addict 04:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Already fixed, also that USB shrinked from 6 to 4, Ethernet shrinked from 3 to 1, and no Wi-Fi for basic edition. Kenimaru 04:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

7 controllers/4 controllers issue

[3]

This slideshow was presented this night by SONY. The 7 players capability are being keeped according to Kaz Hirai. --Ragnarok Addict 04:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Their slide was incorrect. http://ps3.ign.com/articles/705/705934p1.html clearly shows only the numbers 1-4 on the controller. Ign thinks it's 4 controllers and 3 bluetooth devices. Seraphim 05:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)