Talk:PlayStation 3/Archive 11

message: I add that someone at Sony called Wii and XB360 overpriced.  I cited my source and all.  Can I put it back in?--NFAN3 "I try so hard to be a Uber Geek!"~Jason Fox 11:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: please put comments at the end. Some things are non-notable, even if they are cited. the wiki syntax in your signature is messed up. --24.7.86.143 18:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why was the part I added deleted?

message: can we get rid of this stupid image? it doesn't add any usable information, and makes this look like a porn page. I know wikipedia's not censored, but it doesn't add anything here. The box art is highly irrelevant. relevant images, in my opinion, would be nvidia shader examples, and although it introduces bias into which one, impressive game renders. --24.7.86.143 05:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I entirely agree- that image should never have been inserted in the first place. There are other "questionable" ones on that page too- do we really need that "This is living" image? And lastly, the image of the two PS3s in black is copyrighted and has not been released to the public by Sony. In fact the picture actually HAS THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE right on it! I'll get a few more opinions tonight, and if nobody objects, I'll toss out those two images. Ex-Nintendo Employee 06:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "This is living" belongs to a marketing section. If someone wants to restore the image then they should writing up a marketing section for it to be included, otherwise it doesn't make any sense. --Thax 17:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  should be too stupid for inclusion anyway. Does wikipedia include every marketing slogan? no. it shouldn't. Also, :Image:Psp-to-ps3.jpg is crud. Another delete. --gatoatigrado 04:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  dumb box art 

message: First, I should point out that I made a change to the System Features table in the Playstation 3 article page. I made an adjustment that agreed with the requirements of Thax. The problem is that for some reason, my adjustment keeps referring to a "Template." If you can fix this, I would appreciate it. 
I would like to say one other thing: The type of cables included with a videogame system are very important, and we need to keep people as well informed as possible at all times. Sony has only made one official announcement about the cables that will be included with the Playstation 3: Sony has officially said that there will be no high-definition cables of any kind included with the Playstation 3. There will not be an HDMI cable capable of carrying a high-definition signal, and there will not be a Component cable capable of carrying a high-definition signal. At this point in time, it would be irresponsible of us to not allow people to be aware of this publicly announced fact. Even if this information does not appear in the System Features table, as I believe it should, this information about absolutely no form of high-definition cable being included with the Playstation 3 should definitely appear in the article about the Playstation 3. You can read about this cable information at this reference:  Mike mgoblue 19:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a quick fix. Sorcre 20:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: You are a fanboy, don't deny it next time. Nice find though, it's certainly true and certainly relevant.But pointing out how important it is to have reliable sources, which you didn't last time - DMC 4 is ps3 exclusive at this point, officially, which is after the article you made a big fuss with. --gatoatigrado 04:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another thing though - undue weight to no-so-crucial things is biased. It's okay if you're a fanboy, but you must keep this out of it. Does the Xbox 360 article even mention the lower version requires a $40 memory card or $100 hard drive? Compared to your two lines complaining about $10 cables? --gatoatigrado 04:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a good point to make, we need to be careful about not biasing articles.  Regarding the Xbox 360 drive, perhaps someone should edit that article then.  This article should stand on its own, we shouldn't be deciding content based on articles for other consoles.  CPitt76 16:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Template Proble

message: Location of error: 
The reference article was updated with this information: "SOE has been in talks with Xfire about potentially including some of their technology in Untold Legends Dark Kingdom, our PlayStation 3 launch title. This proposed deal is completely separate and independent from the PlayStation Network Platform, and is something that SOE was examining specifically for Dark Kingdom. More information on Xfire and Dark Kingdom will be coming soon." 
(emphasis mine)
69.181.2.143 06:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PNP and Xfire information is incorrect 

message: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6158144.html
Not exactly mindblowing as I've been hearing, this is protected yes? Keep it like that. The keynote description doesn't sound all too impressive (Gs writer), especially with the one trailer being Afrika not really showing what the games about. But I know there's some good news. Keep alert from vandalism and remove that big fat announcement up there, it's overlapping things and it doesn't mention that as of now that's it's confirmed for Japan only. Note this may be a Japan only price drop friends, don't jump the gun.--Signor 03:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: SCEA told www.1up.com that HDMI was standard for all PS3s. http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3153860 Amish Gramish 02:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A bit underwhelming... 

message: "7:22: A question on why HDMI only is in the high level version of the PS3 only. Kutaragi explains that sony was worried that if they put the HDMI in the lower version, some would complain about having to pay for something they don't want. However, HDMI penetration has come faster than expected. He then asks people if they want HDMI in all models. Everyone in the audience says yes. He then confirms that all models, including the 20 gig version, will have an HDMI port."
:: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734010p1.html --Ciao 90 03:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A Japanese source http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/games/articles/0609/22/news034.html. --Revth 07:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this still only Japan? From that very article: "From what we can tell, this is only for Japan. You'll have to wait for overseas confirmation to see if this applies in your territory as well." Reverting to "no" as such, and removing the link as it's clearly misleading. You only had to read the very next sentence to see... gspawn 11:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Configs changed: HDMI in both models 

message: Not composite.. it's component because you can use just one cable of the component to fit as composite. This is already made on Xbox 360 Premium. I really doubt the "HD-console" will give stupid composite cables.. this is nonsense. --Ciao 90 03:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the PS3 supports both component and HDMI it is not entirely unreasonable if they choose only to give low definition cables. It is $10 online, and you have no evidence to the contrary. Do not edit the article if something seems unlikely; find a good source first, then discuss it, then edit. Thanks. By the way, I like the ps3 as well, but this is not the place to discuss that. Wikipedia's purpose is to inform, not convince. With multiple editors, it can hopefully come as close as possible to npov. --gatoatigrado 03:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm.. say the package comes with composite is misleading. This is type of information that we should wait the launch. The box is fine now. --Ciao 90 02:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composite AV cables? 

message: The table of PS3 features in this article indicates that both "Flavors" of the PS3 will have HDMI ports. But the article states that the 20-GB version will not have one, and that this may interfear with high resolution playback of Blu-Ray discs. 
This is important, because the PS3 will be the cheapest blu-ray player on the market at time of launch (probably). This would be the primary reason for me to buy one, although I will do some gaming. I don't think I'd need a 60GB hard drive otherwise.
What's the story?
: The news was just updated; I think this has been fixed. --gatoatigrado 16:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In every single territory EXCEPT Japan, there is no HDMI in the 20gig. Changing to "No" as such. Someone can find a way to note the exception if they want, but at launch, only one in five PS3 20gigs will have HDMI (based on US vs Japan shipment numbers stated by Sony). gspawn 02:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS3 Article is inconsistent about HDMI Port 

message: Why is Warhawk listed as a launch title when the release date for it is August 2007? --Zeno McDohl (talk) 00:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this was recent. Gamespot says tba now. I will move it. another source said the game is only about half done. --gatoatigrado 04:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warhawk? 

message: I added L.A. Noire to the major titles. 1)because Rockstar games are in general considered mayor titles and 2)the buzz around the announcement of the game already pretty much gave it that status. JackSparrow Ninja 02:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I assumed you didn't write about it (as with most). I think it should be removed, but I changed it back if you have any more arguments. There used to be plenty of "unnamed  shooter" titles, about 50 actually, in the List of PlayStation 3 games, and they were fortunately removed. If that reason doesn't get it into the much longer list of games, it certainly doesn't belong on the main page. There is often a "buzz" around things. I think the other part you implied - that it has just been announced - shows it is not major yet. --gatoatigrado 04:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes that's probably a better idea. I did the initial organization but I don't truly know these games. If they belong to a different genre, please change the infobox on their game pages. Again, please note that this is not the full list of PlayStation 3 games. Eventually it will have to be shrunk to the most major titles, as there will be many unless something bad happens to sony. --gatoatigrado 04:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  L.A. Noire 

message: I thought PS4 had its own article. Now its being redirected to PS3. I wonder why...Sr13 08:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah someone made a bad edit. . --gatoatigrado 05:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirecting? 

message: I have been told to assume good faith, but the tables and stuff are completely messed up. I suggest reverting to . We decided earlier not to use a table for the game because of the issue of "exclusives", and now with the cquote inside it and headers floating all the **** over, I think it's time to go back to the previous version. The additional criticism is undue weight. The criticism section is probably not a good idea... it would certainly be nice to have in the article, but as the article is unlocked now it's just an invitation for xbox 360 fanboys to vandalize the page. --24.7.86.143 20:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: okay, I am reverting it; the version before the revert is at . the games table - the only thing that was changed, was so messed up, and we already decided not to have a table. It's too large and unsightly, and gives undue weight to things like who published what game. besides, it is misleading because the playstation 3 is region free. --24.7.86.143 20:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: please see  for the previous discussion. --24.7.86.143 20:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: even a well coded table gets messed up - see . Information other than linking to games pages is irrelevant as far as the playstation 3 is concerned. If they are valuable, please write them as concise prose. --24.7.86.143 20:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  this page got messed up 

message: Lock this page please. More vandalism 68.23.178.54 20:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: +1. -- Chronos 21:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: yeah same here. now. --24.7.86.143 21:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock this page 

message: I wanted to add a link to Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire on the list of games as the Gundam franchise, while often underwhelming, has nonetheless been a staple of Sony systems for several years, and has a large following. However, it seems that there isn't yet a Wikipedia page about this game. Is there anyone out there who feels qualified to write up a quick blurb? I could do it, but I don't know all that much about the game yet aside from what's in the trailers. 129.128.233.48 23:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to try and build up the article before posting it - extremely short articles will probably be deleted - feel free to do it here. --gatoatigrado 05:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: In my opinion, it might be best to leave it off, for now.  While the game does look impressive and has the potential to be a big seller, there just isn't that much information about it available at this time--even its release date has been pushed back significantly, to "TBA 2007."  So, instead of writing a stub now that will probably just get deleted, we should wait until (at least) a release date is made public, and/or more information about the game is made public.  Mance 11:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire 

message: Can someone please change the PS 3 picture at the top of the page? There are a lot of better pictures out there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Einstein the afrodude (talk • contribs) 03:24, 28 September 2006  (UTC)
:If you can point us to a better picture with a license that is at least as free as the one we're currently using, that we could surely make the change. We have to avoid using images with more restrictive licensing whenever possible, according to Wikipedia's fair use criteria. Dancter 03:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess some moron deleted my notice. . --gatoatigrado 04:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How many times do we have to repeat ourselves, some people think we are dumb, we know Sony has released nice media photos of the PS3, we can't use them because of the above.  Some people need to read more about how to use Wikipedia before doing changes.  Someone please revert back to the original silver photo.Pumapayam 13:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not his fault; I wouldn't want to search through all of the discussion. The header should stay; that was the only real error. --gatoatigrado 17:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS 3 Pictures 

message: okay, I see that it is probably coming. I didn't see a release date though. I hope the screenshots improve; they aren't very good right now. --24.7.86.143 04:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's already another article for this above listed as The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, which is a launch title, according to Official PlayStation Magazine it is a launch title, and also on Next-Gen.Biz, http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3901&Itemid=2 Amish Gramish 02:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  oblivion launch? 

message: So it's true. The PS3 will have $80 games.
Link: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734950p1.html
Here's what this new article has to say:
QUOTE: "In Japan, the standard price of a PS2 game is 6,800 yen, with only the biggest titles like Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy rising to the 8,800 yen mark."
QUOTE: "To most gamers, the most eye-catching part of the feature is a claim about game prices. Citing "multiple information sources," the article states that the price of PS3 games will be concentrated in the 8,800 to 9,800 yen range."
Math Time:
6,800 Yen - $58.00 US (PS2 game price)
8,800 Yen = $75.50 US
9,800 Yen - $85.00 US
http://www.xe.com/ucc/
So $75 for the low end games and $85 for the good stuff.
The Japanese always pay a little more for games than we do. But its only a little. So its reasonable to say that PS3 games will range between $70 and $80 US*.
thebird71.236.225.50 01:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Games in Japan tend to cost $15 to $20 more than in the U.S., not "only a little". Amish Gramish 02:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

text: According to this article on GameSpot , games are being priced at $60 in the US, although Sony has made no official announcement on pricing yet so nothing definitive can be said. BryanG(talk) 01:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: There is no need to post the exact same comment twice on one page. It's bad form. I have deleted your earlier post to avoid redundancy. The reason we didn't include your US$70-80 figure is that it's original research, asserting something which wasn't directly stated by the source. And as BryanG said, we have another source that relates specifically to US prices, and which contrasts with your research. Dancter 01:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: www.sonystyle.com $59.99 endd of discussion. 159.153.138.70 23:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GUYS, THE PS3 GAMES WILL COST 7-80 DOLLARS 

message: Currently the Playstation 3 table has ONCE AGAIN experienced an alteration where it does not show fact-based information that is very important to gamers. The Playstation 3 will NOT include an HDMI cable, and it will NOT include a Component cable. This means that the Playstation 3 is not capable of displaying high-definition graphics out-of-the-box! This is an important factor. Please do not allow this information to be taken out of the table again. I am not going to waste time or life adding that AGAIN. Please add that information to the table and do not allow it to be removed. Here is the reference that shows Sony has announced that neither version of the Playstation 3 will come with any form of high-definition cable: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6157113.html 68.61.44.215 22:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "This means that the Playstation 3 is not capable of displaying high-definition graphics out-of-the-box!". Wrong. That's why it's not in the table and will not make it. Also, the fact that the PS3 doesn't include HDMI or Component cables at shipping is another thing, and this information doesn't belong in the System Features. The System Features table contains a list of FEATURES about the SYSTEM. Cables aren't features. -- Chronos 22:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  arguably bluetooth wireless controllers are not either, but it is obviously much more "gray" there. You are both overzealous fanboys; please tone down your comments even as we get closer to the playstation 3 launch (whether Chronos was speaking in imitation or not I don't know, but either way is inappropriate). --gatoatigrado 01:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: "Please add that information to the table and do not allow it to be removed" - this is a free encyclopedia. If you missed whatever discussion where it was decided to be removed, then I'm sorry, well, not really. --gatoatigrado 03:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Please don't get too worked up about the included cables. As the information is all speculative at this point it is okay to leave the section out for now; once the console launches the included cables will be revealed. We all know Sony changes things all of the time, so I wouldn't doubt if they included an HDMI cable at the last second. --Thax 03:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Please do NOT allow the table to be adjusted in a way that allows IMPORTANT facts to be removed

message: well, if no one is going to convert them - i don't know how - the us prices should be removed. I think that was the consensus we reached above. --gatoatigrado 05:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to remove them(and the note below) whenever you want. Unneed and just clutters everything up.70.101.200.243 20:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, the price of the 20 GB version was dropped in Japan to what would convert to about $425 in US currency, but it appears that the price drop is only for Japan, and that the 20 GB version will still be US$499 in the US. Dancter 03:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see -- and apparently USA Today says that the US price isn't affected.  I just remember seeing a blurb on the subject in the morning news about a week ago.  --Stratadrake 12:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think that was the consensus reached above, at all.  Most people seemed to be in favor of keeping the prices, if the VAT could be removed--so what's the problem?  -Mance 14:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  us prices 

message: :"An ICT flag can be set by content producers, which forces non-HDCP video down to a pixel resolution of 960×540 (50% greater than DVD-Video at NTSC resolution, and 25% greater than PAL resolution). SCEA president Kaz Hirai stated that it is "too early to speculate at this point" whether movie producers will activate the ICT feature.[8] According to German publisher Spiegel, a behind-the-scenes agreement was made not to enforce the ICT flag on next-generation optical formats until at least 2010, or possibly even 2012."
Does a paragraph like this really belong in the system configuration section? Initially it had some purpose when the lack of HDMI was problem HD playback but now it just seems out of place.  Should we eliminate it, move to a another article, what? --Kenn Caesius 16:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: perhaps the Xbox 360 article, but they haven't even come out with the HD-DVD drive yet. --gatoatigrado 16:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only way you could use it is if you say that you would have to buy an HDMI cable at some point, and yes, with the HD-DVD drive for the Xbox 360. Amish Gramish 02:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I read on some highly unreliable sites that the Xbox 360 may be able to support a HDMI output - the "AV" adapter in the back isn't a direct video port or anything. Actually here's an interview. "We do have the capability to deliver the software and, if needed, the hardware". . There hasn't been much talk about it, so maybe best to wait. --gatoatigrado 08:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ICT mention: do we really need it?