Two New PS3 Bundles On The Way to Europe

[malware]

In addition to the Metal Gear Solid 4 PS3 released in the US and Canada, Sony has two new PS3 bundles being readied for the European market. These include a special Gran Turismo 5 Prologue version which will launch alongside the game in the Spring. The pack includes the game, 40GB console and one Sixaxis controller. The second bundle is a Movie Pack, with a 40GB console, single controller and three Blu-ray movies replacing the usual game: Spiderman 3, 300 and Casino Royale. Both bundles are expected to come in at the current price points.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[cjoyce1980]

dont need silly packs, just better pricing. GT5 prolog is only £20 that aint value for money especially as it was given away for free in japan with any purchase of a PS3 or a game.

 

[JRMBelgium]

dont need silly packs, just better pricing. GT5 prolog is only £20 that aint value for money especially as it was given away for free in japan with any purchase of a PS3 or a game.

The PS3 has a very good value at the moment. It's a Blue-Ray Profile 2.0 player, don't forget that!

 

[candle_86]

but the market won't move to blueray untill its alot cheaper, remember we didnt move to DVD untill the players hit 40 bucks, when that happens the migration will happen, plus HD isnt a huge sector yet, at most, 720 is the most common HD but standard Def TV is still more common, heck i run a standard def 38in Sony TV and i bought an HD decoder box for it, so in 2009 i can still watch TV.

 

[Triprift]

Yeah i got myself a settop box and as soon as my crt goes its hello big screen plasma. With blue ray the hd of choice now that can only help ps3 sales as its a bargain priced player.

 

[cjoyce1980]

The PS3 has a very good value at the moment. It's a Blue-Ray Profile 2.0 player, don't forget that!

just a shame it wont be able to do profile 3.0 when that is due at the end of the year

 

[JRMBelgium]

just a shame it wont be able to do profile 3.0 when that is due at the end of the year

The ps3 does not support all the output formats listed in 3.0 spec, but could potentially do so if Sony wanted. As well the picture quality from the ps3 has been reported to be of lesser quality of a number of the better stand alone units. The PS3 as it is a software player, can be upgraded for as long as Sony wants to.

 

[Ravenas]

but the market won't move to blueray untill its alot cheaper, remember we didnt move to DVD untill the players hit 40 bucks, when that happens the migration will happen, plus HD isnt a huge sector yet, at most, 720 is the most common HD but standard Def TV is still more common, heck i run a standard def 38in Sony TV and i bought an HD decoder box for it, so in 2009 i can still watch TV.

They hi-def market has already moved to blu-ray, it's just a matter of time before HD becomes the mainstream choice.

I personally think DD is way overrated, I think it will only control the rental market. The CD is far from dead.

 

[Ravenas]

The ps3 does not support all the output formats listed in 3.0 spec, but could potentially do so if Sony wanted. As well the picture quality from the ps3 has been reported to be of lesser quality of a number of the better stand alone units. The PS3 as it is a software player, can be upgraded for as long as Sony wants to.

The PS3 will support all of the formats as soon as BluRay live comes out in june.

 

[JRMBelgium]

I have watched Prison Break Episodes in 1080p and in 420p, and when I sit in the couch, I can't see the difference...really...if you get closer, yes, but I don't stand while I watch movies

 

[Ravenas]

I have watched Prison Break Episodes in 1080p and in 420p, and when I sit in the couch, I can't see the difference...really...if you get closer, yes, but I don't stand while I watch movies

The biggest difference I see is in game detail. You can truely see everything in vidid detail. Uncharted: Drakes Fotune is an excellent example...COD4 looks truely amazing. Even games like Pixel Junk Monsters...In movies, I notice a big difference on the 46", but not so much on the 22".

 

[Easy Rhino]

The PS3 will support all of the formats as soon as BluRay live comes out in june.

yup!

 

[JRMBelgium]

The biggest difference I see is in game detail. You can truely see everything in vidid detail. Uncharted: Drakes Fotune is an excellent example...COD4 looks truely amazing. Even games like Pixel Junk Monsters...In movies, I notice a big difference on the 46", but not so much on the 22".

Well yeah, it's normal that you see the difference way better in games.

In-game 1080p isn't as sharp as 420p digital tv though...

 

[Easy Rhino]

Well yeah, it's normal that you see the difference way better in games.

In-game 1080p isn't as sharp as 420p digital tv though...

huh?

 

[JRMBelgium]

huh?

I don't know about image quality in your country, but digital TV in my country, the quality is amazing. I still use SCART for my Full-HD TV ( 420p ) and when people come to my house they think that they are watching HD because I have an HD-Digital-Receiver.

I used component cables to see if HD really was better, but there is just no difference.

So, Full HD game image quality ( 1080p game on PS3 ) still can't compete with the image quality from 420p digital tv...

Probably doesn't make sense, I am just saying that only the next HD generation ( higher then 1080p ) will really show good difference...

 

[bruins004]

I don't know about image quality in your country, but digital TV in my country, the quality is amazing. I still use SCART for my Full-HD TV ( 420p ) and when people come to my house they think that they are watching HD because I have an HD-Digital-Receiver.

I used component cables to see if HD really was better, but there is just no difference.

So, Full HD game image quality ( 1080p game on PS3 ) still can't compete with the image quality from 420p digital tv...

Probably doesn't make sense, I am just saying that only the next HD generation ( higher then 1080p ) will really show good difference...

Why do you use COMPONENT cables for HDTV?
Component can only output 420p at the highest.
You need HDMI cables man.
Thats why you dont see a difference bc you HD TV is being down converted to 420p

 

[Easy Rhino]

I don't know about image quality in your country, but digital TV in my country, the quality is amazing. I still use SCART for my Full-HD TV ( 420p ) and when people come to my house they think that they are watching HD because I have an HD-Digital-Receiver.

I used component cables to see if HD really was better, but there is just no difference.

So, Full HD game image quality ( 1080p game on PS3 ) still can't compete with the image quality from 420p digital tv...

Probably doesn't make sense, I am just saying that only the next HD generation ( higher then 1080p ) will really show good difference...

well i think its like comparing apples and oranges. you cant really compare a 1080p game with a 480p digital tv signal.

 

[JRMBelgium]

Component can only output 420p at the highest.
You need HDMI cables man.

Component cables can carry all HDTV video resolutions (including 1080p) and have three RCA connections, three BNC connections, or a single 15-pin connection.

So many people actually beleave that HDMI is required for 1080p, that is not the case.
Other beleave that component can only go to 1080i, wich is also not true.

You can get 1080p with component cables. I connected my HD-Digital-TV device with component and used 1080p input setting and my other HD-TV is connected to my 360, with component and 1080p works 100%...

 

[Easy Rhino]

component video quality is less than that of hdmi video quality.

 

[DarkMatter]

component video quality is less than that of hdmi video quality.

Not true.
I remember reading a complete article about different signal and conection types, and another one comparing specifically HDMI Vs. component, and what you say it's just not true. Jelle Mees is right, both are of the same quality. Indeed they trade blows, meaning that component can actually have better IQ than HDMI depending on the situation.
Maybe you are making the same mistake as bruins004, and you are confusing composite (one rca) with component (3 rca).

Anyway isn't standard definition video 480p (NTSC) or 576p (PAL, SECAM)? I've never heard of 420p...
EDIT: I've searched a little bit more and it is either 480 or 576. BTW this is a really interesting thing in this topic, since where SD may be low in the US (NTSC, 480p, 30fps), on PAL (or SECAM) countries (576p, 25fps) could be seen as just of enough quality. Indeed for me, accustomed to 576 lines, 480 doesn't look good at all. Just for the record, there's almost as much of a relative change between 480 vs. 576 than 576 vs. 720.

 

[WarEagleAU]

No I guess it just depends on the viewer. I could tell a difference from RCA to Component (RGBRW or Red Greeb Blue Left and Right Audio). Then when I went from that to HDMI, I could tell even a better difference. From both my Toshiba 51" HDTV and my Vizio 32" LCD I can see a difference either sitting down, laying down, away from the TV or standing up. The colors are smoother and more lush, the sound is alot better (louder on lower settings than say regular non hd channels or movies) and the clarity is amazing.

However, as I said, I guess it depends on your POV. American standards are different than the EU obviously.

 

[DarkMatter]

^^ Wow! Not only that but on films, that are recorded at 24 fps, a framerate conversion is needed that reduces image quality even more. And which is even worse, according to wikipedia:

Video professionals and television engineers jokingly referred to NTSC as "Never The Same Color" or "Never Twice the Same Color".[12] Reception problems can degrade an NTSC picture by changing the phase of the color signal, so the color balance of the picture will be altered unless a compensation is made in the receiver. This necessitates the inclusion of a tint control on NTSC sets, which is not necessary on PAL or SECAM systems.

Some of you may say that 3/2 pulldown is better than PAL's speed-up, which makes the film to be 4% shorter (because it runs it faster), but I never realised it was running faster on my TV than on theaters.

As a final thought, NTSC guys, no wonder why are you willing to move to high definition so desperately...

 

[Easy Rhino]

Not true.
I remember reading a complete article about different signal and conection types, and another one comparing specifically HDMI Vs. component, and what you say it's just not true. Jelle Mees is right, both are of the same quality. Indeed they trade blows, meaning that component can actually have better IQ than HDMI depending on the situation.
Maybe you are making the same mistake as bruins004, and you are confusing composite (one rca) with component (3 rca).

Anyway isn't standard definition video 480p (NTSC) or 576p (PAL, SECAM)? I've never heard of 420p...
EDIT: I've searched a little bit more and it is either 480 or 576. BTW this is a really interesting thing in this topic, since where SD may be low in the US (NTSC, 480p, 30fps), on PAL (or SECAM) countries (576p, 25fps) could be seen as just of enough quality. Indeed for me, accustomed to 576 lines, 480 doesn't look good at all. Just for the record, there's almost as much of a relative change between 480 vs. 576 than 576 vs. 720.

i have never seen a 1080p HDTV setup with component cable look better than a 1080p HDTV setup with HDMI. of course, im looking at newer sets (plasma, LCD less than 2 years old.) older sets you cant tell much difference because the hardware is simply outdated.

 

[ktr]

It is damn stupid for sony not to throw in the DS3 with these new bundles.

 

[DarkMatter]

i have never seen a 1080p HDTV setup with component cable look better than a 1080p HDTV setup with HDMI. of course, im looking at newer sets (plasma, LCD less than 2 years old.) older sets you cant tell much difference because the hardware is simply outdated.

Can't remember well the reason, but it had something to do with the source content being digital or analog. Of course, analog source paired with component and digital with HDMI.
I will try to find the articles, they were very technical, so I could only understand the conclusions and little more else, but they were very clear and strigth forward. They weren't biased either as they were proffesionals in that matter, but only customers in the end talking in a blog or a wiki page, meaning that they had nothing to do with the standards. It's just like Spielberg and Coppola discusing which camera is better.

For me both look the same way, and I couldn't tell the difference. But I could tell the difference between a BR played on a good standalone player and the same one played on the PS3, with or without HDMI.
Anyway I can't say you are wrong when you talk about newer sets, because nowadays they always use HDMI in the places where I used to compare. The marketing machine really works... At the same time, I can say that ultimatelly the IQ of the HDTV has increased, so I can compare IQ nowadays (as I said always with HDMI) and a year back and say that today is better. Wether it is because of HDMI or not, it's out of my knowledge. But I will always believe professional considerations, than particular opinions, and the professional ones that I am talking about, talked about bandwidth, color representation, noise, signal aliasing and much, much more. That is the physical properties of the medium and not look at a specific set and say: "Hmm, I think this looks better". What does that mean for me? It might be that today's TVs look better with HDMI, but if that's the case, it's because they didn't bother to make a good implementation of the component output, and not because the component is worse. It's what happens when there's so much unwarranted hype for HDMI.

I will try to find that article, but I don't think I will find it since it didn't appear on google and I reached there after lots of link clicking from forum to forum.