-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AACS Mandate: PS3 no longer support HD through component| Existing Units Not Affected
- Thread starter Speedymanic
- Start date
I'm confused why you avoid Sony TV's when their PS3 team is the one that fucked up.nVidiot_Whore said:
Regardless, MS kind of lucked out in regards to output capabilities. It's not like they paid for the R&D that allowed Xenos to scale. Obviously Sony really shit the bed when it came to the SDK though.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Raistlin said:
Being that they are in the TV business.. it gave me reason not to trust their motivations for why the PS3 was so poorly designed to handle different resolutions. And if those teams aren't working closely together to some extent.. what? How in the world did the teams responsible for the video output on the PS3 not work with the other multitude of products Sony has created with video in or out? There's just no way they didn't work together... the PS3 was built to launch Blu-Ray.. the XMB design is ubiquitous across many Sony products, etc.
Do I believe outright they did it to encourage new TV purchases? No.. I don't really care.. it was either incompetence or the shittier side of corporate greed. I enjoy the games on Playstations too much to not buy that product.. but I have no need to buy Sony TV's.. so despite being a general fan of their products in the past, they lost me as a TV customer.
I really don't give half a shit who paid for what R&D. MS released a product that worked correctly on any TV on the market, Sony.. a company that had been creating TV's for decades.. somehow released a product that didn't fully support a huge chunk of TV's... it was fucking ridiculous.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Raistlin said:
Well, as the very first HD system MS followed the HD standard of supporting 1080i. For some reason Sony never supported 1080i fully as most games downscale to 480i. Also, MS didn't have to support any movie format and they officially support VGA so I think they had more freedom.
I think all this weird output stuff comes only from Sony trying to hit the standards of Blu-ray players and not going with what they necessarily wanted to do for their gaming system.
Diablohead
Member
Not every fucking tv had HDMI a few years back, some people bought their tv's then you know.Erasus said:
D
Deleted member 81567
Unconfirmed Member
This. I guess that population doesn't affect them that much.LiK said:
zomgbbqftw
Banned
So is this something that they are taking out of current models via firmware or just removed from the new 3000 model?
The former would be pretty bad, but the latter wouldn't make much difference as most TVs have HDMI input as standard now.
The former would be pretty bad, but the latter wouldn't make much difference as most TVs have HDMI input as standard now.
Why are people with existing PS3s complaining? It's not like it'll affect their gaming experience. This requirement was years in the making.
If you have an older HDTV, chances are that you have an older PS3 as well!
Read the OP. It's only for the new system that's coming out.
If you have an older HDTV, chances are that you have an older PS3 as well!
zomgbbqftw said:
Read the OP. It's only for the new system that's coming out.
mjemirzian
Banned
I'm pretty sure HDMI over 360 isn't HDCP locked. 360 also has no reason to have its component degraded or removed since it isn't a Blu-Ray player.Raistlin said:
It really wasn't a huge chunk of TV's, but regardless ... I guess I just don't follow your logic.nVidiot_Whore said:
You're taking out your frustration on SE, while giving a pass to SCE who did the fuck up.
Yeah I didn't think so. The only logical reason I can think of is maybe Sony had to make some sort of concession to get HDMI and HDCP licensing when requesting a programmable architecture. If not, then it's simply a stupid decision.mjemirzian said:
But yeah, that really has no bearing on this situation.
mjemirzian
Banned
It more than likely has everything to do with blu-ray licensing. If the DVD license required Microsoft to degrade component or HDCP lock HDMI, they would do so. That's not to say that MS won't HDCP lock their next 360 or future consoles or existing consoles with a firmware update 'just because'.Raistlin said:
Chaplain
Member
mjemirzian
Banned
No because PS3 HDMI output is HDCP protected. And presumably PS4.Game Analyst said:
Only evil pirates, evil video game streaming felons (lol 5 years in federal prison for streaming a video game), and people who can't afford new TVs.Amir0x said:
So basically nobody.
That thing does no signal conversion. Component is an analogue signal, HDMI is digital, and that's a gigantic difference. Frankly, that thing is useless... Right? I mean, I know HDMI can transmit YCbCr, but the default colorspace is sRGB, so on top of the DAC, you'd need a colorspace converter.
Can someone educate me on when can such a cable be useful?
Can someone educate me on when can such a cable be useful?
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Raistlin said:
1080i only HDTV's were commonplace on the market just a few years before the PS3 launched. There were still a handful of brand new TV's the year the PS3 launched that didn't support anything but 1080i.
HD devices had been on the market for years with support of 1080i.. to not support that resolution would be a huge anomaly on any product feature sheet. I owned several other HD devices when the PS3 launched.. all supported the resolution.
In fact a lot of the people Sony basically said "fuck you" too were early adopter types.. people willing to spend thousands of dollars to jump into the HDTV market a couple years before they dramatically dropped in price... the exact type of people that would be interested in Blu-Ray for instance.
I understand that HDTV sales had been steadily increasing over those years while 1080i TVs on the market were decreasing.. I get how the math works.. I get that the majority of HDTVs in homes supported 720p at the time..
But it was still a huge chunk of TVs.. millions.. and the owners of those TVs were exactly who would want to be and be willing to buy a $600 console/blu-ray player.
No, I'm taking my frustrations out on Sony. I really don't care if one division fucked up and another didn't. I have a multitude of high quality options to me in the TV business, so I'll take my frustrations out there if I damn well please.. I do not have any other way of playing Playstation exclusive games than to buy a Playstation... so I'll continue to buy that product while voicing my frustrations and concerns.
You can't SERIOUSLY not be following me here.
There are some non reading bitches on Gaf and in this thread.
God damn, it is really fucking sad how many run into a thread and spout shit off without reading even the first page, but it is a Sony thread so I guess it is to be expected.
Sony did not make this choice, it was AACS.
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=5854
I mean god damn it is a Kotaku link, you should feel fucking disgusting just for reading it.
I guess this is a shining example of what I am talking about.
God damn, it is really fucking sad how many run into a thread and spout shit off without reading even the first page, but it is a Sony thread so I guess it is to be expected.
Sony did not make this choice, it was AACS.
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=5854
I mean god damn it is a Kotaku link, you should feel fucking disgusting just for reading it.
Game Analyst said:
I guess this is a shining example of what I am talking about.
Wow, some people here are overreacting.
Here are your choices:
IF you have an old HDTV that has no HDMI:
a. buy a PS3 now while it supports it
b. don't buy a ps3
IF you have an HDTV that has an HDMI:
c. doesn't affect you
IF you have an HDTV that has an HDMI and you also have a capture card that only uses component:
d. buy a PS3 now while it supports it
e. don't buy a ps3
IF you already have a PS3
f. you shouldn't care.
Here are your choices:
IF you have an old HDTV that has no HDMI:
a. buy a PS3 now while it supports it
b. don't buy a ps3
IF you have an HDTV that has an HDMI:
c. doesn't affect you
IF you have an HDTV that has an HDMI and you also have a capture card that only uses component:
d. buy a PS3 now while it supports it
e. don't buy a ps3
IF you already have a PS3
f. you shouldn't care.
Sony's first digital TV was in 1998.nVidiot_Whore said:
To be honest, it's going to be difficult finding information on this ... but from being quite involved in this discussing during PS3's launch, I don't recall there being much in the way of analog TV's availability back then.
What I do recall is that there was some information available regarding HD adoption. And at the time of launch, while it's true analog-only wasn't too far in the past ... actual install base was not particularly high ... which was my point.
This circles back to my argument though. I too think it sucked it didn't support 1080i out of the box, but I'm confused by your reasoning for blaming SE when it's SCE that fucked it up. Your blame is misguided.
If you want to discuss the why's things turned out as they did ... fine ... I'm just confused by taking things out on the wrong party.
I agree, though a console is a bit of a different beast from a technical standpoint. Still should have had things ready in the SDK though.
Dev's have been quite coy about just what the problem was unfortunately, so it's difficult to finger just what happened.
I wouldn't go quite that far ... it was more the middle adopters that lost out. Early adopters would have already had a digital set at that point ... they had been out since PS2 launched and where at reasonable price-points once PS3 hit.
Hell I bought an HDTV in anticipation of PS3, and it wasn't crazy expensive ... and I wasn't remotely an early adopter of digital TV's (in that instance).
I'd be interested to see data on this. I wonder if it was even millions at that point.
If you can take your frustrations out 'where you damn well please', I most certainly can seriously not follow your logic. It's based on an understanding of how conglomerates are run. I can cite a particular product from basically any company that pissed me off ... that doesn't make me write off anything they make ever. Not unless it's some strategic decision that really fucks me over ... which I wouldn't consider this.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Valru said:
only $200, and for the privilege of doing what we're already doing for free! what a deal
OldJadedGamer
Banned
alr1ghtstart said:
I think this is a good insight to why some don't want them mixing movie formats with game systems like in the WiiU thread about it not playing movies. It causes unnecessary things like this to happen.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Raistlin said:
Yes, your logic is obvious. So is mine, it's one company. So this ridiculous "I don't understand you" charade is a huge waste of time.
You can get the original for $99 even from the official site. Cheaper via other vendors. There are also competitors.Stumpokapow said:only $200, and for the privilege of doing what we're already doing for free! what a deal
Obviously not a perfect solution, but let's at least be accurate.
Well that makes no sense.nVidiot_Whore said:
If I believe one thing and there is a logical argument for it, then no ... I'm not going to understand the opposite view.
Well maybe conceptually ... but I think it's a very obtuse view.
Megadragon15
Member
OtherOS says "Hi!"ReBurn said:
Dead Prince
Banned
please sony at least put in HDMI cables :\ and take it out like microsoft later in the year lol.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Raistlin said:
That is really unfortunate for you. I can easily understand where you are coming from. Different segments of the same corp.. gotcha. Moving on.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
DMPrince said:
Pfffft!!! Retailer push for high margin cables would greatly influence against it. Look at the pic, it includes offering HDMI cables in the sale.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
The updated thread title is still extremely misleading.
Existing PS3's won't be affected.
Seems to me.. one interesting tidbit here.
If this is based on a manufacturing date of Dec 31 2010.. and we are just now hearing about it in July.
Is that odd to suggest Sony might not have had to produce new consoles for that long?
Existing PS3's won't be affected.
Seems to me.. one interesting tidbit here.
If this is based on a manufacturing date of Dec 31 2010.. and we are just now hearing about it in July.
Is that odd to suggest Sony might not have had to produce new consoles for that long?
graywolf323
Member
antonz said:
my 360 + Kinect bundle only came with composite cables so it's not just Sony
statham said:
Just sayin', it's so clearly an AACS decision, whose decisions are made by a handful of companies, so it's silly to treat this like another "omg Sony hates their customers, the sky is falling, it's OtherOS all over again" scenario. Still sucks for them that it seems so like another one of their PS3 missteps, though.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll