Talk:PlayStation 3/Archive 5

message: Please when adding new infomation to this article or changing existing infomation please place a reliable reference in the text or something in the talk page - otherwise someone else will have to attempt to find a reference for it.
Also when editing please try to bear in mind not only the context of the paragraph being changed but also the context of the section or subsection the changes are being made to.
Clealy this does not apply to spelling correction etc.
HappyVR 18:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding to or changing infomation in articles. 

message: We need one. Some of those screenshots are unconfirmed (in-game) and/or are from FMV. Yes, "screenshot" means any shot of a screen (i.e. a word doc in Microsift Word or in this case a screen shot of a FMV), but with regards to videogames, they can often be confused by uninformed gamers as in-game footage (i.e. see Killzone, which was a FMV, but has a first person shooter-type feel). Add discussion here before removing my disclaimer.  We don't want to misinform people. Competition is good for all gamers. What we actaully need is two sections with one being confirmed in-game screenshots and the other being screenshots from FMV or unknown source.
:We do not need it.  Screenshot does not imply in-game footage.  We do not need two sections for "In-Game" and "Prerendered" screenshots.  That kind of thing should be mentioned in the corresponding game's article.  --HQ 00:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We already had this discussion in archive 4. If you want to label a screenshot as non-ingame footage do it on the image page itself. Seraphim 00:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: First off we already discussed this months ago, look at archive 4, we reached a decision to not include the disclaimer, if you want to make a change against consensus you need to use the talk page to discuss it and if you get enough editors on your side the change can be made.  The word "screenshot" does not mean "ingame footage" it never has.  Also as a little side note it would be impossible for me to be a king, i'm more of a princess :p Seraphim 16:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: 209.125.57.2 19:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote for not having a disclaimer, I agree with Seraphim.  Dionyseus 20:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your reply, Dionyseus.21:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And because the PS3 isn't out yet, gamers that care to come to Wikipedia should be smart enough to check the entry for the games and not just look at the pretty little pictures and jump to conclusions.  --HQ 02:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow. I didn't think my discussion post would be such a sore subject. Thanks 209.125.57.2 for your input, but I don't think the others are going to let our edits stick. I guess wikipedia isn't the know it all website I've come to love. Seems we like to misinform the public. Oh well. Win some lose some. But one thing before I go, 67.188.152.129 05:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshot disclaimer 

message: # Ign recently talked to unnamed source at Sony Press Room.  They state that Sony is still aiming for a Spring release, but may not make it.
# Digitimes quotes 2nd tier developers stating that Sony is not ready for PS3 release till August.
# Various articles from unnamed developers stating Sony is not ready till Summer or later.
Let me know if you want sources for these links.  There are additional reputable sources if you want them that say Sony isn't ready.
My recommendation is that we change the Q2 date to something like June+ or June-Sept.  Reputable sources are stating September release in North America.  What do you think?
::Please define "reputable sources," as compared to Sony itself. Mhking 03:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please stop this crusade you don't know what your talking about.  Ign did not say that Sony is aiming for a spring release. They reported that the Sony PR Department said they are aiming for a spring release.  They quote Sony PR as saying that, that means that those exact words came out of the mouth of sony's public relations people.  It is not rumor.  That's like saying that if you link to a news article about the results of an olympic curling match it's considered rumor since the newspaper isn't the IOC.  Also I find it hysterical that you think that information sourced to Merril Lynch is more official then information that sony puts out.  Daniel if you really want the change your going to have to go through dispute resolution, you obviously cannot grasp how future-product articles work, even though 5 people now have told you your wrong. Seraphim 03:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We repeat only what Sony publishes on this matter.  Not speculation from third parties, even if the third parties should magically know better than Sony itself.  This page is about Sony's product, not a place to publish our personal speculation. -- uberpenguin 03:50, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Second Hand Evidence (Also known as Rumor)

message: At E3 05, Sony talked about Playstation World and also had a little presention of it, i cannot seem to find any images for it yet ,online though, we need to find Sony's presention screenshot of it, because everything be on Playstation World for there online stratgy is just rumors, such as the Playstation hub rumor, Sony never said anything about the service being called Playstation hub, Sony offical online service name is currently Playstation World, Sony has not changed the name at all or made any other announcements about the online senice E3 05, so we, need to use the current offical name , Playstation World, until Sony announces a different name, Playstation World could be both the codename and the final name of the service. HP465 14:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They used "Playstation World" as a hype line during e3. It's not the name of the service. Seraphim 19:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Playstation World 

message: PLEASE NOTE
When adding removing references please UPDATE the reference index at the bottom of the page otherwise the reference numbers no longer match. I don't want to spend the rest of my life fixing this.
If anyone knows of a way (perhaps some script) to automatically create a correct reference index for a wiki page please let me/us know.
Otherwise the obvious solution is to use the same (much easier) referencing method that Xbox 360 and Nintendo Revolution pages use.HappyVR 19:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll go through and update it to use the new cite.php ref tags if you want. It makes it so the bottom is automatically updated. Once your done matching up the tags just let me know and i'll do it, should take like 10 mins :p Seraphim 20:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: okies i'll do it Seraphim 21:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, done, looks right but I might have missed an error. Alot of the tags were done wrong you don't need to put   around the stuff in the date fields it's just | date = Month day | year = year |. Seraphim 21:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. Seems okay. Except ref 14 links to IGN site quoting interview with famistu not EDGE and interviewee is Masayuki Chatani so I've moved it up one line. That should be the end of it.HappyVR 22:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References  *&!£$£$* F++@#+++%^

message: It gets a little confusing because it's wikimagic so i'm going to explain it it's actually really simple.
In the article where you used to put  you now simply put what you would have put in the reference section without the  part.  For example if I wrote a line "The alphabet is 26 letters long" and my reference was alphabet.com's faq on the alphabet i'd put:
 
(I have no idea if that page actually exists.)
What's in between the ref tags gets automatically picked up by the references section (by the  tag that's in there don't remove it!).  This allows people to keep the references inline with the text it's referencing, which makes it alot easier to keep track of. Plus it's less work. Seraphim 22:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's because that's how it's properly cited. :p Seraphim 23:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to use the Ref Tags 

message: I just noticed this from Phil Harrison:
"There has been some criticism regarding the design of the new controller. Have you had a chance to use it yet? Is it really that different from a DualShock? 
That controller design is a prototype. It's not the final controller."
Seems pretty clear. I suggest replacing the second paragraph in section 'controller' with this info.HappyVR 20:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We already have sony's CTO saying it's a prototype we should just remove the 2nd paragraph since it's redundant. Seraphim 22:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Controller

message: Can anyone explain the current obsession with floating point performance - not just in general but in this article? As I see it floating point is neccessary for high dynamic range lighting calculations but in terms of vector calculations fixed point is better (faster to compute). Is this just a result of marketing bullshit?HappyVR 17:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your bullshit detector is overheating.  Ten years ago that might have been true.  With enough transistors available, floating point performance rivals fixed point performance.  The Cell processor is unusual in performing floating point multiply faster than fixed point by a small margin.  Both operations use the same multiplier circuitry, but there is an extra small delay for the fixed point operation to 'borrow' the multiplier unit from the floating point unit.  This was a design decision made by Sony.  Use of floating point often simplies algorithms and the Cell is already hard enough to program in other respects.  Working with single precision floating point you do lose some precision (typically 23 mantissa bits vs 31 precision bits for signed integers) but for visualization you don't often need 32 bit precision, and where you do need more precision Cell is still quite impressive working with double precision floats.  For scientific applications it's a lot harder to accept the precision loss involved in working with single point.  Because the operands are twice as large, each instruction completes two results (2x64) instead of four results (4x32) so you lose half your speed right there.  Then IBM/Sony decided to save silicon by reusing the single precision multiplier four times for each double precision operation, which is another factor of four performance loss, plus a little more for juggling.  The final bill is a 10:1 performance degradation.  Still impressive, but unlikely to take the world by storm.  If IBM elects to pursue the scientific market more seriously, a future Cell processor would need to seriously beef up the double precision multiplier.  But for this generation, the nuclear reactor being simulated is only burning virtonium so a little precision loss is no biggie.  FlavarB 02:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  floating point 

message: to add an extra link to a reference that already exists use:
  
and in the original link change:
 <ref> 
to 
 <ref name="insert name here"> 
I think thats right - HappyVR 18:03, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  references 

message: Sony will make a press conference tomorrow and probably the price and launch date will be revelead.   . A press release must be available on WWW.SCEI.CO.JP at 06:00 GMT. --Rick Browser 20:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stay tunned tomorrow (15 march) 

message: Lot of development questions can be answered here:
 
--Rick Browser 16:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I analysed the pics just to be sure, they are definitely actual photos of a projector screen in a professional looking room... --Wulf 01:14, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, they are legit. Bo need to worry. --Thorpe | talk 08:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Yep :) That was my favorite slide. --Wulf 03:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official slide show 15 March 

message: I've found out according to Gamespot and IGN that PlayStation 3 will be released in November 2006 and it'll feature 100% backward compatibility against PS2 and PS1 although any game of PS2 and PS1 will be viewed in the next-gen graphics of the PS3. It'll also have an Xbox Live type-like interface which will be like the PS3's Xbox Live. Apart from that there will be an 60GB Hard Drive which can feature Linux OS and it'll be sold seperately. The game formats for PS3 will be Blu-Ray but since it is backward compatible it can only play DVD's of PS2 and CD's of PS1. No PS3 game will be in DVD. All PS3 games will be in Blu-Ray. Mastermind 11:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the article now reflects all this information. Thanks.  --OscarTheCattalk 11:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've temporarily lost the source but I seem to remember that Sony was / now is telling developers that they can develope games and make the assumption that a HD will be present. Obviously I wasn't there but again I got the impression from reports that the HD will be standard now not an extra - can anyone confirm this???HappyVR 15:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the article next to the hard drive specs. You can see the actual slide as well as IGN's reiteration of what Kutaragi said.  --Kamasutra 16:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, silly me.HappyVR 20:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Release Date 

message: From here. That is totally not right? --Thorpe | talk 20:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  £300? 

message: Sony's taking major hits over reported delays of the PS3. Sony has long led us on to believe a spring release of their new console Playstation 3, though the skyrocketing costs could push back the release date up to 12 months. Merrill analysts estimate that unit could cost Sony $800, costing customers $400 retail. This means that they loose alot of profit on sales that will have to be made up somewhere else such as game sales.
On the business aspect for Sony, their getting killed by Microsoft. Sonys loss on the release date is a gain for the Microsoft Xbox 360. Microsoft plans to sell 10 million units by the end of 2006; which is destroying Sony's 70% market share. In addition to the Xbox 360 domination Microsoft plans to reveal Halo 3 during the PS3 relase. Even though its the games that make the console sales, Sony better fix the bugs and get in the game if they want to win the console war.
LP121
Rolling Stone Magazine: Console Wars 
Issue 996 >> March 23, 2006
''
::Has 2 million Xbox 360 units even been sold yet?  While I highly doubt MS would be able to sell even a quarter of their 10 million goal by the end of 2006, even if they managed to sell that many it would barely put a dent to the huge lead Sony has enjoyed for about a decade.  Considering past Playstation sales records, it wouldn't be impossible for the Playstation 3 to surpass total Xbox 360 sales in just a mere two weeks.  Dionyseus 23:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another joker in the deck is how long they continue to produce Cell at the 90nm node.  The STI alliance has already poured a bundle into the 65nm node.  The 65nm shrink could cut their die size roughly in half leaving the design relatively untweaked.  A smaller die generally improves yields as well, though these speculations have become increasingly less reliable.  From a business perspective, one of the features Sony is selling is a stable platform for the content developers to buy into for a long ride.  It's not a technology that will run out of steam in two or three years.  The cruel reality here is that to pull off this proposition you have to front load manufacturing costs selling a chip with a 230mm die and a bright future (in far less costly editions amortized over the long haul).  What is the present delay costing them?  Large volumes sold at a large loss?  With not enough content available yet to really show off the system?  As I see it, the only component in the PS3 with a poor value/cost ratio at present is the BluRay drive.  The cost of optical technologies tends to fall rather sharply within a year of first introduction.  Normally the expensive front end of the ramp is foisted on price-insensitive early adopters, but in this case Sony wants to slam them out the door to Joe-gamer-sixpack to establish an early foothold on the install base war.  In other respects the capabilities of the system are in reasonable proportional to the cost, so it is late relative to the recent xbox update, but it has not fallen behind the curve on price/performance.  The BluRay subsidy comes from a separate war chest devoted to video format domination redemption (I wonder which one they care more about).  There's no way Sony loses so much share in the six month launch delay that they can't gain it back again if their broad ambitions were well judged. MaxEnt 03:23, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS3 Profit 

message: Well looks like PS3 will be bundled with native 60 GB hard disk! --Rick Browser 17:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is gonna jack the price aint it... Tutmosis 16:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, but I think the HDD may be sold as an extra?HappyVR 17:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  It will be included, and guessing by a statement made by Ken Kutaragi , there will not be any version that doesn't have the hard drive.  It will be upgradeable.  A 3.5-inch 60GB ATA hard drive (just an assumption, the interface has not yet been announced) costs US$40–55 (depending on manufacturer, revolutions/minute, quality, number of platters, interface, etc.) for OEM, which Merrill Lynch factored into some of their estimates (probably not the oft-quoted $800 one , though), so it will probably not have a significant effect on the price, which is still largely unknown.—Kbolino 04:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Woooww... HD native default! 

message: 1. Should the controller be in the hardware section?
2. Should interface and operating system sections be combined?HappyVR 19:14, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Yes, for both questions. --Rick Browser 20:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes to both in my opinion --Wulf 22:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two minor questions or suggestions

message: Seriously, whomever edited that section clearly didn't know what the heck is going on with the PS3 controller. We need verification on that!!! Jack Zhang 21:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Something got removed my accident or on purpose - the backwards compatability section is back to normal now I think. There are some patent cases going on regarding the vibration function - check SONY vs. Immersion on the web or something like that.HappyVR 16:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What's with that patent infringment talk in the "backwards compatibility" section?

message: It seems that the hard disk will be an optional extra  or not?HappyVR 17:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No it will come bundled with the system.  That page is just a simple product outline.  Dionyseus 18:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Confirmed by Gamasutra, the hard disk will be standard, with larger ones available at a later date.  I am modifying the article to clarify this. -- ReyBrujo 16:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hard disk again

message: It seems to mee the issue of pricing is full of random numbers; How and why would sony drop the price of a console within a year of launch? The PS2 didn't drop in the US for 19 months ($300 down to $250). I haven't found pricing data on the PSOne, but if i remember correctly, it was still costly years after it was released.
````phonzonappy
:Indeed : having a bunch of pricing numbers without some references to back it up is just Wikipedia is not a crystal ball territory. Pricing will certainly drop, but it'll depend on market forces (pricing of hardware / demand / competitor's pricing etc etc). --OscarTheCattalk 16:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a bunch of malarkey that should be deleted.  For example ML said costs were $900 not $800.  Daniel.Cardenas 16:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pricing Dilemma 

message: I've removed the majority of the content in this section.  It was a duplicate (and an out-of-date duplicate, at that) of the PlayStation Network Platform page contents.  --OscarTheCattalk 16:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PNP 

message: Neither sourced or mentioned at any other major gaming outlet as matter of factly as it is on this humble PS3 wikipage. So my question becomes, is this or isn't this verifiable? If so, there should be no problem supplying a link? If not, let's get it off of this page. 
And I'm sure we'll all agree that if this are "likely to happen" yet unconfirmed and therefore hearsay, the wording should be changed to reflect that. -- Charles M. Reed 01:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Silent Hill 5, Soul Calibur 4 "news"

message: Can anyone confirm or debunk the 'ps3 released before 11th nov' and if true give a reliable reference to it for the article - all I can find is early november : http://playstation.com/products.htmlThe current reference (bbc webpage) doesn't give this much detail.
HappyVR 10:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 11th Nov

message: I have read a few reports since the 3/15 news that 1080p support has been dropped. Can this be confirmed?č
:Those reports are false.  Dionyseus 19:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Has 1080p support been dropped? 

message: Like the PS2? -- McDonaldsGuy 22:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the specs released - no.17:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Does the PS3 have a firewire port?

message: I'm wondering- I know Sony says there's a HD coming out, but where would it be located (Top, side, etc...) and has anyone seen a prototype of it?Delta Elite 01:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: PS3 Hard Drive

message: Found this link at the bottom of the page attatched to nothing so I removed it: http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/playstation-3/phil-harrison-qa-162269.phpHappyVR 08:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing link

message: Sony was originally aiming for a spring 2006 launch as announced at the 2005 Electronic Entertainment Expo, but Sony revealed during a press conference in Japan on March 15, 2006 that there will be a delay due to issues over a Dual Shock Technology Patent Infringement and the finalization of Blu-ray disc copy protection technology, and as a first for any PlayStation console, Sony is now aiming for a worldwide release in early November 2006.
----
Is this at all related to the PS3 being delayed?  I believe Sony confirmed that the sole reason for the delay were the Blu-Ray finalization issues and that the Immersion lawsuit had nothing to do with it.  Is the lawsuit part speculation, or am I wrong?  --HQ 19:05, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with you - Sony has stated the reason for the delay is blu-ray finalisation. I saw the edit and was thinking about it - the wording is currently wrong. We may speculate that patent problems (ie dualshock and Immersion lawsuit) might play a part in this (and a delay would no doubt help Sony to sort this out etc etc) but as far as I know they have not mentioned dualshock problems at any press conference (nor would anyone expect them to).I'd suggest something like this: "Sony was originally aiming for a spring 2006 launch as announced at the 2005 Electronic Entertainment Expo, but are now aiming for a worldwide release in early November 2006, giving issues relating to the finalization of Blu-ray disc copy protection technology as the reason for the delay."Plus a reference...HappyVR 19:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Alternatively if the controller part is left in then the wording should be changed to something like "due to a lawsuit relating to alledged patent infringment by the Dual Shock Controller's vibration funtion" or similar since Immersion have the patent not Sony. I think adding this would be an infered conclusion - probably not in line with wiki policy.HappyVR 19:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: So yes it's probably speculation but not necessarily untrue - not sure how to handle this - as it stands the current statement seems 'more neutral' but my first suggested replacement - whilst following what Sony officials have said could be considered 'biased towards sony's company line'. Hopefully someone else will sort this out.HappyVR 19:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sony said it was due to BluRay, and the whole controller thing is really unsupported speculation. It seems like everyone at least used to be onboard with the idea that the reason for the creation of the boomerang was to get around the potential lawsuit, and that lawsuit was related to the PS2 only anyway, so it has no bearing on the PS3 barring Sony being dumb enough to put the same technology in the boomerang again to get themselves back in court. So unless I'm missing something, the whole controller issue is basically nonsense, and needs to be removed. Editing to Sony's official statement. Gspawn 14:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unrelated 

message: Removed part about a new final fantasy becuase the evidence is just speculation in a the named magazine - no doubt we'll hear about it when it becomes semi-official.HappyVR 17:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Fantasy

message: This seems promising :http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060405-6526.html Price between 499 and 599 Euros - (about 350 to 420 pounds sterling?) and seems like an official 'estimate'.HappyVR 17:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Recently Gamespot or IGN (can't remember which one) has been hearing some developers stating that Sony announced them the final price will be USD 499, and that there would be no modification. Knowing that, for gaming, €1 = USD1, it seems likely. -- ReyBrujo 18:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes the arstecnica article makes the same 1 dollar = 1 euro assumption based on prices of other consoles. The actual link would be to http://www.europe1.fr/s-exprimer/references.jsp?id=1945&pos=65# I think for play back of a radio interview  (French radio?). I would certainly agree to inclusion of the euro price and not object to the same dollar price in the article (as an estimate).HappyVR 19:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold and do it, since it was your finding ;-) Gamasutra hasn't picked the news up yet, and from work I only check it, not IGN, 1Up or Gamespot. Maybe they have already done that, so better to add that before we get a massive flood of edits pointing to the new price. -- ReyBrujo 19:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Price (again)

message: The new section on the online service seems good but would it be possible to change:"It is official, to answer to Microsoft's Xbox Live, Sony has confirmed a unified online service at the PS Biz meeting in Tokyo, Japan on March 15th, 2006. The name of the service is not known yet but Sony has confirmed that a "basic version" of the online service will be free much
like "xbox" live's "silver" online." To something a bit more descriptive for people who have no idea what Xbox's live service is like?HappyVR 09:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Made a few small changes - added the reference provided in main article. Suggest people might wan't to delete "It's official! to answer to Microsoft's Xbox Live," from the beginning of the article...HappyVR 09:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: >x<ino 14:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Online service