This topic is locked from further discussion.
First of all I am not bashing the system. I'm gonna buy the MGS bundle but... Why doesn't it come with a Component/Composite cable? Like seriously. It's a Blu Ray player what were they thinking. 50$ DVD Upscale players come with Component Cables :P
I'm sure this was talked about and If this isn't true I am sorry but If it is why whould they do that? I can understand no HDMI but no component is crazy. I'm stressed enough paying $500 now I need to buy 50$ cable as well.. Oh lord.
50 dollar component cable? yeah maybe by monster cables but a ps3 cable is not 50 dollars that i know of.
now hdmi? yeah its pricey if you want a good long one.
50 dollar component cable? yeah maybe by monster cables but a ps3 cable is not 50 dollars that i know of.
now hdmi? yeah its pricey if you want a good long one.
WilliamRLBaker
30$ sorry even worse now... Can't give a brother a 30$ cable out of the box? After i just spent 500$.
First of all I am not bashing the system. I'm gonna buy the MGS bundle but... Why doesn't it come with a Component/Composite cable? Like seriously. It's a Blu Ray player what were they thinking. 50$ DVD Upscale players come with Component Cables :P
I'm sure this was talked about and If this isn't true I am sorry but If it is why whould they do that? I can understand no HDMI but no component is crazy. I'm stressed enough paying $500 now I need to buy 50$ cable as well.. Oh lord.
Antikyth3ra
It comes with Composite Cables...yeah I know lame. But Component cables will get you up to 1080p but not on the PS3 because of all the HDCP issues.
Just buy a HDMI cables from monoprice, it can be had for under $10. Dont listen to those foos who try to tell you Monster Cables are somehow worth its price. Yeah its a good cable but the same quality cable can be had for about $5-$7 for a nice 6FT HDMI cable. 10FT? Couple of dollars more.
My launch core 360 didn't come with one either. not really a big deal imo.
payed 10euros for my HDMI cable
Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
It might be a bit daft but Sony are doing all they can to keep the price down. $10 might not seem like a lot to you but that adds up if you sell 10 million consoles. Plus how long a cable do they include, some people need 3 ft others 10+? Are some people going to complain about the quality of a cheap cable? Alot of people don't have HD, should they pay extra for a cable they don't need? I really don't think people should be going bananas over it. Its one of those things that people make a big issue over (yes I know so did sony about next gen etc) but I still think its better to let the consumer decide rather than raising the price of the console to pay for it.
Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
The_Crucible
Well thats why the 360 had a good setup (sans core) the cable was compatible with HD and SDTV's. Even had a little switch on the cable. Why Sony couldnt up with a similar solution is beyond me.
When I first got my PS3, I was pretty pissed it didnt have at least a component cable. But no problem as I just used my PS2's component cable. But many other people with HDTV setups didnt have that option.
If that was the case maybe they shouldn't have run off at the mouth about how the PS3 was a "TrueHD" system.Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
The_Crucible
TV's with component jacks have been available for at leat 10 years. They could have at least gone with that.It was a STUPID move. Did it hurt anybody? No. But the results would have been the same. Somebody would have to buy a cable. It's idiotic to market a system as an HD system and ship it with SD cables.
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]50 dollar component cable? yeah maybe by monster cables but a ps3 cable is not 50 dollars that i know of.
now hdmi? yeah its pricey if you want a good long one.
Antikyth3ra
30$ sorry even worse now... Can't give a brother a 30$ cable out of the box? After i just spent 500$.
hehe if anything it should come with the TV :P BTW you can get even get an HDMI cable from just $3.60 over the net.
[QUOTE="Antikyth3ra"]First of all I am not bashing the system. I'm gonna buy the MGS bundle but... Why doesn't it come with a Component/Composite cable? Like seriously. It's a Blu Ray player what were they thinking. 50$ DVD Upscale players come with Component Cables :P
I'm sure this was talked about and If this isn't true I am sorry but If it is why whould they do that? I can understand no HDMI but no component is crazy. I'm stressed enough paying $500 now I need to buy 50$ cable as well.. Oh lord.
rappid_rabbit
It comes with Composite Cables...yeah I know lame. But Component cables will get you up to 1080p but not on the PS3 because of all the HDCP issues.
Just buy a HDMI cables from monoprice, it can be had for under $10. Dont listen to those foos who try to tell you Monster Cables are somehow worth its price. Yeah its a good cable but the same quality cable can be had for about $5-$7 for a nice 6FT HDMI cable. 10FT? Couple of dollars more.
I have composite and my ps 3 does 1080p. the hdcp has been all rumors plus if there was hdcp then i would not be able to rent blu-ray movies. sony sqashed that rumor a lond time ago.Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
The_Crucible
Or, they could go and put all the cables in there. The increase in cost for a component/composite cable package is minimal if you're already going to use a propietary-to-composite cable (and the propietary jack is designed for both component and composite). And If HDMI cables are so cheap, why not throw them in? A $5 expense on the part of the customer for a cable means a couple cents on the part of the manufacturer in cost.
It's not so hard, it's not impossible. The 360 Elite did this, and the premium at least involves component cables (which will give the vast majority of the population a good solution, both in SD and HD).
It's just what should be considered the least Sony could do if they're touting their "TrueHD" machine.
[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]If that was the case maybe they shouldn't have run off at the mouth about how the PS3 was a "TrueHD" system.Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
heretrix
TV's with component jacks have been available for at leat 10 years. They could have at least gone with that.It was a STUPID move. Did it hurt anybody? No. But the results would have been the same. Somebody would have to buy a cable. It's idiotic to market a system as an HD system and ship it with SD cables.
Man, you have to try real hard to be stretching so far to bash PS3.So, because the PS3 doesn't include cables to work with every setup, including HD cables (HDMI or Component) that makes the PS3 less of a HD gaming machine? Is that what you are saying?
360 is marketed as a great online system yet the wireless comes separate with most 360 SKU's. So what? Does that make Live a lesser feature/service? :lol:
The only problem with that is the cables don't cost 10 bucks for Sony, it's a lot cheaper than that..And that's really not the point. The PS3 is primarily a Blu-ray player at the core, it's the best one on the market. You can't even take advantage of the core function of the unit with the cable they provided.It might be a bit daft but Sony are doing all they can to keep the price down. $10 might not seem like a lot to you but that adds up if you sell 10 million consoles. Plus how long a cable do they include, some people need 3 ft others 10+? Are some people going to complain about the quality of a cheap cable? Alot of people don't have HD, should they pay extra for a cable they don't need? I really don't think people should be going bananas over it. Its one of those things that people make a big issue over (yes I know so did sony about next gen etc) but I still think its better to let the consumer decide rather than raising the price of the console to pay for it.
blue_hazy_basic
I have composite and my ps 3 does 1080p. the hdcp has been all rumors plus if there was hdcp then i would not be able to rent blu-ray movies. sony sqashed that rumor a lond time ago.GARRYTH
Two things:
1) I certainly hope you don't mean you get 1080p through composite.
2) In Blu-Ray movies, not all studios will enable the ICT. If they do, chances are that they'll set it to display SD resolution instead of HD if you're running on a non HDCP compliant device (If you're running on composite, then, you'll see this as a seamless process - the player is downscaling to the resolution you're displaying anyway).
Man, you have to try real hard to be stretching so far to bash PS3.
So, because the PS3 doesn't include cables to work with every setup, including HD cables (HDMI or Component) that makes the PS3 less of a HD gaming machine? Is that what you are saying?
360 is marketed as a great online system yet the wireless comes separate with most 360 SKU's. So what? Does that make Live a lesser feature/service? :lol:
The_Crucible
Two things:
1.- Yes, a HD device that cannot display HD out of the box is certainly a rather ridiculous thing - thankfully in this case, it's cheap and easy to solve it, but that doesn't make it less stupid.
2.- The 360 is internet-enabled out of the box. There's an ethernet jack and an ethernet cable in there. Wireless = gravy. Apples to oranges, I'm afraid.
[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]The only problem with that is the cables don't cost 10 bucks for Sony, it's a lot cheaper than that..And that's really not the point. The PS3 is primarily a Blu-ray player at the core, it's the best one on the market. You can't even take advantage of the core function of the unit with the cable they provided. but if sony included a 3ft cable you'd have people moan they needed a 6ft one, if they included a 6ft one you'd have people complaining it wasn't 10 ft. I actually said it was a little daft they didn't but tried to lay out why they didn't. Even if it costs Sony $2 spread out over the lifetime of the console that all adds up and has to come from somewhere. I'd rather they included the emotion chip for BC ...It might be a bit daft but Sony are doing all they can to keep the price down. $10 might not seem like a lot to you but that adds up if you sell 10 million consoles. Plus how long a cable do they include, some people need 3 ft others 10+? Are some people going to complain about the quality of a cheap cable? Alot of people don't have HD, should they pay extra for a cable they don't need? I really don't think people should be going bananas over it. Its one of those things that people make a big issue over (yes I know so did sony about next gen etc) but I still think its better to let the consumer decide rather than raising the price of the console to pay for it.
heretrix
[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]The only problem with that is the cables don't cost 10 bucks for Sony, it's a lot cheaper than that..And that's really not the point. The PS3 is primarily a Blu-ray player at the core, it's the best one on the market. You can't even take advantage of the core function of the unit with the cable they provided.It might be a bit daft but Sony are doing all they can to keep the price down. $10 might not seem like a lot to you but that adds up if you sell 10 million consoles. Plus how long a cable do they include, some people need 3 ft others 10+? Are some people going to complain about the quality of a cheap cable? Alot of people don't have HD, should they pay extra for a cable they don't need? I really don't think people should be going bananas over it. Its one of those things that people make a big issue over (yes I know so did sony about next gen etc) but I still think its better to let the consumer decide rather than raising the price of the console to pay for it.
heretrix
The core function, Mr. PS3 hater, is to play games. Don't get it twisted up. And right out of the box, a PS3 owner can play ANY game, online, on ANY TV with composite connections and better. Have you really even thought about that? Right out of the box, you can plug your PS3 into a TV via composite, connect to your wireless router, create a PSN account, buy and download Warhawk, and be playing Warhawk online within a matter of minutes. And I can do that with ANY PS3.
Yeah, how crappy of Sony.
Blu-ray is a HUGE feature for PS3. Why? Because its an up-and-coming format in an up-and-coming quality (HD). It's a bonus for gamers.
And that's why we are here, right? We like games, right?
[QUOTE="GARRYTH"]I have composite and my ps 3 does 1080p. the hdcp has been all rumors plus if there was hdcp then i would not be able to rent blu-ray movies. sony sqashed that rumor a lond time ago.Grive
Two things:
1) I certainly hope you don't mean you get 1080p through composite.
2) In Blu-Ray movies, not all studios will enable the ICT. If they do, chances are that they'll set it to display SD resolution instead of HD if you're running on a non HDCP compliant device (If you're running on composite, then, you'll see this as a seamless process - the player is downscaling to the resolution you're displaying anyway).
i have the red,blue,green wires and when watching a blu-ray movie it is 1080p. so yes the ps 3 can use composite to get 1080p.for number 2 all studios are not using this feature until say 2012 when all hdtv are sold with hdmi and becomes a standerd. to many people with hdtv without hdmi they use dvi.
[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"]If that was the case maybe they shouldn't have run off at the mouth about how the PS3 was a "TrueHD" system.Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
The_Crucible
TV's with component jacks have been available for at leat 10 years. They could have at least gone with that.It was a STUPID move. Did it hurt anybody? No. But the results would have been the same. Somebody would have to buy a cable. It's idiotic to market a system as an HD system and ship it with SD cables.
Man, you have to try real hard to be stretching so far to bash PS3.So, because the PS3 doesn't include cables to work with every setup, including HD cables (HDMI or Component) that makes the PS3 less of a HD gaming machine? Is that what you are saying?
360 is marketed as a great online system yet the wireless comes separate with most 360 SKU's. So what? Does that make Live a lesser feature/service? :lol:
A sure sign of when you don't have a point is when you change the subject. But since you want to go there, a wired system is a MUCH better connection than wireless anybody that thinks otherwise doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.The only thing better about wireless is the convienience of not having to run cables. Functionally, ethernet SMOKES wireless.Back to the cables. It isn't a bash, it was just a dumb move on Sony's part. There is nothing wrong with not having the HD cables, EXCEPT when you brag about your system being truehd when compared to the competiton and not having to the cables, yet the competition does.
Nowhere did I remark about the quality of either system.Where you got that from nobody knows, but I noticed you used the opportunity to sneak in a comment about the 360 when it was completely unneccessary. You always try to come off like you aren't a fanboy yet you tend to pull nonsense like this that completely betrays your true position.
At least I own a PS3 so my comments are coming from a postion of ownership. Not idiotic fanboy bias. I love my PS3, it's a quality piece of hardware and I've said this many times.
[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]Man, you have to try real hard to be stretching so far to bash PS3.
So, because the PS3 doesn't include cables to work with every setup, including HD cables (HDMI or Component) that makes the PS3 less of a HD gaming machine? Is that what you are saying?
360 is marketed as a great online system yet the wireless comes separate with most 360 SKU's. So what? Does that make Live a lesser feature/service? :lol:
Grive
Two things:
1.- Yes, a HD device that cannot display HD out of the box is certainly a rather ridiculous thing - thankfully in this case, it's cheap and easy to solve it, but that doesn't make it less stupid.
2.- The 360 is internet-enabled out of the box. There's an ethernet jack and an ethernet cable in there. Wireless = gravy. Apples to oranges, I'm afraid.
Apples to oranges, huh? If you can play the game, you can play the game. It's the same thought behind you internet argument, if you can get online you can get online. HD and wireless are pluses, bonuses.
And the HD/PS3 issue is solvd for around $20. Allowing you to buy whatever make you wish. How about the 360 wireless issue? How nice is that?
While, again, I will agree that it sucks, I don't sit and fault Sony for it. I don't feel it's that biug of a deal when you consider all you get with the system. You people in here bashing the PS3 are telling me how not having the HD cables sucks because of blu-ray. WHERE'S THE BLU-RAY PLAYER ON THE 360 OR WII???? How many HD-DVD players were included with 360's?
[QUOTE="Grive"][QUOTE="GARRYTH"]I have composite and my ps 3 does 1080p. the hdcp has been all rumors plus if there was hdcp then i would not be able to rent blu-ray movies. sony sqashed that rumor a lond time ago.GARRYTH
Two things:
1) I certainly hope you don't mean you get 1080p through composite.
2) In Blu-Ray movies, not all studios will enable the ICT. If they do, chances are that they'll set it to display SD resolution instead of HD if you're running on a non HDCP compliant device (If you're running on composite, then, you'll see this as a seamless process - the player is downscaling to the resolution you're displaying anyway).
i have the red,blue,green wires and when watching a blu-ray movie it is 1080p. so yes the ps 3 can use composite to get 1080p.for number 2 all studios are not using this feature until say 2012 when all hdtv are sold with hdmi and becomes a standerd. to many people with hdtv without hdmi they use dvi.
Ah, bit of misunderstanding:The RGB cables are *component* cables. And yeah, those do get 1080p on some TV sets.
[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]The only problem with that is the cables don't cost 10 bucks for Sony, it's a lot cheaper than that..And that's really not the point. The PS3 is primarily a Blu-ray player at the core, it's the best one on the market. You can't even take advantage of the core function of the unit with the cable they provided.It might be a bit daft but Sony are doing all they can to keep the price down. $10 might not seem like a lot to you but that adds up if you sell 10 million consoles. Plus how long a cable do they include, some people need 3 ft others 10+? Are some people going to complain about the quality of a cheap cable? Alot of people don't have HD, should they pay extra for a cable they don't need? I really don't think people should be going bananas over it. Its one of those things that people make a big issue over (yes I know so did sony about next gen etc) but I still think its better to let the consumer decide rather than raising the price of the console to pay for it.
The_Crucible
The core function, Mr. PS3 hater, is to play games. Don't get it twisted up. And right out of the box, a PS3 owner can play ANY game, online, on ANY TV with composite connections and better. Have you really even thought about that? Right out of the box, you can plug your PS3 into a TV via composite, connect to your wireless router, create a PSN account, buy and download Warhawk, and be playing Warhawk online within a matter of minutes. And I can do that with ANY PS3.
Yeah, how crappy of Sony.
Blu-ray is a HUGE feature for PS3. Why? Because its an up-and-coming format in an up-and-coming quality (HD). It's a bonus for gamers.
And that's why we are here, right? We like games, right?
You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.And you sure spend a ton of time bashing them.I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
heretrix
Dude, 90% of your posts I see here in SW are anti-PS3. Does that mean I see all of your posts? Hell no. Just the same, you don't see all of mine.
I have a PS3, PS3 only. I've never claimed otherwise. But that changes nothing. Facts are facts.
You get into how wired is better than wireless. Who said different? My point was, Sony has given the gamer EVERYTHING they need out of the box to play PS3 games. Everything. You don't have a HDTV, you can still play. You have a HDTV, you can still play on composites. You don't have you PS3 setup near your modem but you have a wireless router, you can still play. You don't have a wirleless router, you can use wired. You want to play online, it's free. You want to save data and games, you have a HDD.
Get it? Its obvious HD is better than SD. Its obvious wired is better than wireless. I have never argued against that. Again, all i am saying is that complaining about a $20 cable when you get all of those other features to suit any environment you may have, out of the box, is lame.
It is such a small thing. Yet, people here make it out to be a reason to bash Sony.
Apples to oranges, huh? If you can play the game, you can play the game. It's the same thought behind you internet argument, if you can get online you can get online. HD and wireless are pluses, bonuses.
And the HD/PS3 issue is solvd for around $20. Allowing you to buy whatever make you wish. How about the 360 wireless issue? How nice is that?
While, again, I will agree that it sucks, I don't sit and fault Sony for it. I don't feel it's that biug of a deal when you consider all you get with the system. You people in here bashing the PS3 are telling me how not having the HD cables sucks because of blu-ray. WHERE'S THE BLU-RAY PLAYER ON THE 360 OR WII???? How many HD-DVD players were included with 360's?
The_Crucible
You'd be right, if Sony hadn't gone on such a media Blitz regarding their "true HD" and their being the only "true HD" console on the market... to drop with a package that isn't outputting HD. It's not just about Blu Ray (although it is a part of it), but the media blitz focused on games. On 120fps at 1080p. Of the power of HD that only sony had.
It's not the end of the world, of course. It's just a rather large bit of egg on the face of sony. Remember, sometimes the worst embarrasments come from the unlikeliest sources, and often, this has nothing to do with money spent.
[QUOTE="GARRYTH"][QUOTE="Grive"][QUOTE="GARRYTH"]I have composite and my ps 3 does 1080p. the hdcp has been all rumors plus if there was hdcp then i would not be able to rent blu-ray movies. sony sqashed that rumor a lond time ago.Grive
Two things:
1) I certainly hope you don't mean you get 1080p through composite.
2) In Blu-Ray movies, not all studios will enable the ICT. If they do, chances are that they'll set it to display SD resolution instead of HD if you're running on a non HDCP compliant device (If you're running on composite, then, you'll see this as a seamless process - the player is downscaling to the resolution you're displaying anyway).
i have the red,blue,green wires and when watching a blu-ray movie it is 1080p. so yes the ps 3 can use composite to get 1080p.for number 2 all studios are not using this feature until say 2012 when all hdtv are sold with hdmi and becomes a standerd. to many people with hdtv without hdmi they use dvi.
Ah, bit of misunderstanding:The RGB cables are *component* cables. And yeah, those do get 1080p on some TV sets.
lol composite and component cables i get confused all the time which one is which. lucky for me though i already had COMPONENT ps 2 cables when i got the ps 3 and yes i be mad if i did not have those cables when opening the box.sony should atleast include component cables.
[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]Apples to oranges, huh? If you can play the game, you can play the game. It's the same thought behind you internet argument, if you can get online you can get online. HD and wireless are pluses, bonuses.
And the HD/PS3 issue is solvd for around $20. Allowing you to buy whatever make you wish. How about the 360 wireless issue? How nice is that?
While, again, I will agree that it sucks, I don't sit and fault Sony for it. I don't feel it's that biug of a deal when you consider all you get with the system. You people in here bashing the PS3 are telling me how not having the HD cables sucks because of blu-ray. WHERE'S THE BLU-RAY PLAYER ON THE 360 OR WII???? How many HD-DVD players were included with 360's?
Grive
You'd be right, if Sony hadn't gone on such a media Blitz regarding their "true HD" and their being the only "true HD" console on the market... to drop with a package that isn't outputting HD. It's not just about Blu Ray (although it is a part of it), but the media blitz focused on games. On 120fps at 1080p. Of the power of HD that only sony had.
It's not the end of the world, of course. It's just a rather large bit of egg on the face of sony. Remember, sometimes the worst embarrasments come from the unlikeliest sources, and often, this has nothing to do with money spent.
I could see how you would have a firm leg to stand on if the PS3 itself didn't perform. If it couldn't do 1080p at all. But it can. And it does it quite well. You just need to get a $20 cable with it.Its the Sony comments about running dual HDTV's at 1080p that is ownage. Not this cable crap. Seriously.
It's a friggin' $20 cable, people! You have the option of getting it anywhere and anyway you want. Every system is missing something. No? Wii, no HDD, no DVD/blu-ray. 360, non-standard HDD and no blu-ray. right?
sooo many lemmings bashing the ps3 for not comming with a $5 cable...please lems at least the ps3 comes with wifi, HDD, wireless controllers right out of the box. plus as you lemmings always say most of the people still only own sd tv's rendering hd cables useless. so the ps3 doesn't include them to cut costs. that and if i dont pay $5 on the net for HDMI they're like $25 at wallmart.
That sucks that they don't include cables. I never would have thought that there wasn't a way to connect it to your tv included in the box.Senor_Kami
Do you people see what kind of misinformed gamers you make with these threads?
Here's a gamer who now is thinking you cannot connect your PS3 to any TV. :lol:
[QUOTE="heretrix"]You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.And you sure spend a ton of time bashing them.I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
The_Crucible
Dude, 90% of your posts I see here in SW are anti-PS3. Does that mean I see all of your posts? Hell no. Just the same, you don't see all of mine.
I have a PS3, PS3 only. I've never claimed otherwise. But that changes nothing. Facts are facts.
You get into how wired is better than wireless. Who said different? My point was, Sony has given the gamer EVERYTHING they need out of the box to play PS3 games. Everything. You don't have a HDTV, you can still play. You have a HDTV, you can still play on composites. You don't have you PS3 setup near your modem but you have a wireless router, you can still play. You don't have a wirleless router, you can use wired. You want to play online, it's free. You want to save data and games, you have a HDD.
Get it? Its obvious HD is better than SD. Its obvious wired is better than wireless. I have never argued against that. Again, all i am saying is that complaining about a $20 cable when you get all of those other features to suit any environment you may have, out of the box, is lame.
It is such a small thing. Yet, people here make it out to be a reason to bash Sony.
None of my posts have EVER bashed the PS3. 100 percent of my post have been responses to some idiotic post from some fanboy claiming PS3 superiority. I challenge you to find 1 post that I have made that has said "The PS3 sucks"I guarantee you won't find one. I have OFTEN said the PS3 hardware is superior to the 360's crap build.
I love the PS3, but I can't stand Sony fanboys. It more often than not will put me on the 360 side simply because of the ridiculous nonsense they spew in these forums. Do I take them seriously? No. But I will not hesitate to debate something I feel is incorrect.
[QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="heretrix"]You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.And you sure spend a ton of time bashing them.None of my posts have EVER bashed the PS3. 100 percent of my post have been responses to some idiotic post from some fanboy claiming PS3 superiority. I challenge you to find 1 post that I have made that has said "The PS3 sucks"I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
heretrix
I guarantee you won't find one. I have OFTEN said the PS3 hardware is superior to the 360's crap build.
I love the PS3, but I can't stand Sony fanboys. It more often than not will put me on the 360 side simply because of the ridiculous nonsense they spew in these forums. Do I take them seriously? No. But I will not hesitate to debate something I feel is incorrect.
Dude, you totally misunderstood me. I said "them", meaning Sony. In this thread you are bashing Sony over a $20 cable.
[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]Apples to oranges, huh? If you can play the game, you can play the game. It's the same thought behind you internet argument, if you can get online you can get online. HD and wireless are pluses, bonuses.
And the HD/PS3 issue is solvd for around $20. Allowing you to buy whatever make you wish. How about the 360 wireless issue? How nice is that?
While, again, I will agree that it sucks, I don't sit and fault Sony for it. I don't feel it's that biug of a deal when you consider all you get with the system. You people in here bashing the PS3 are telling me how not having the HD cables sucks because of blu-ray. WHERE'S THE BLU-RAY PLAYER ON THE 360 OR WII???? How many HD-DVD players were included with 360's?
Grive
You'd be right, if Sony hadn't gone on such a media Blitz regarding their "true HD" and their being the only "true HD" console on the market... to drop with a package that isn't outputting HD. It's not just about Blu Ray (although it is a part of it), but the media blitz focused on games. On 120fps at 1080p. Of the power of HD that only sony had.
It's not the end of the world, of course. It's just a rather large bit of egg on the face of sony. Remember, sometimes the worst embarrasments come from the unlikeliest sources, and often, this has nothing to do with money spent.
Exactly. That's all I was saying. If they hadn't made such a big deal out of it then it wouldn't even be worthy of a mention.It is about the lack of cables, it's about not practicing what you preach. It's such a cheap thing that it really seems stupid to me to leave it out. And I don't understand how this is perceived as bashing Sony, it's just an observation of a really silly bonehead maneuver.It's like bragging that the 360 is the premier online system and only giving you the option out the box to connect it to a modem.
What it all boils down to is what it has always boiled down to if all you have is a PS3.
You will take whatever it is and you will like it or too damn bad for you because it's not like you have a choice one way or the other.
If you did not want discipline instilled into you then tough luck that's what you are getting.
Accept it like you have accepted everything else.
[QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="heretrix"]You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.And you sure spend a ton of time bashing them.I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
heretrix
Dude, 90% of your posts I see here in SW are anti-PS3. Does that mean I see all of your posts? Hell no. Just the same, you don't see all of mine.
I have a PS3, PS3 only. I've never claimed otherwise. But that changes nothing. Facts are facts.
You get into how wired is better than wireless. Who said different? My point was, Sony has given the gamer EVERYTHING they need out of the box to play PS3 games. Everything. You don't have a HDTV, you can still play. You have a HDTV, you can still play on composites. You don't have you PS3 setup near your modem but you have a wireless router, you can still play. You don't have a wirleless router, you can use wired. You want to play online, it's free. You want to save data and games, you have a HDD.
Get it? Its obvious HD is better than SD. Its obvious wired is better than wireless. I have never argued against that. Again, all i am saying is that complaining about a $20 cable when you get all of those other features to suit any environment you may have, out of the box, is lame.
It is such a small thing. Yet, people here make it out to be a reason to bash Sony.
None of my posts have EVER bashed the PS3. 100 percent of my post have been responses to some idiotic post from some fanboy claiming PS3 superiority. I challenge you to find 1 post that I have made that has said "The PS3 sucks"I guarantee you won't find one. I have OFTEN said the PS3 hardware is superior to the 360's crap build.
I love the PS3, but I can't stand Sony fanboys. It more often than not will put me on the 360 side simply because of the ridiculous nonsense they spew in these forums. Do I take them seriously? No. But I will not hesitate to debate something I feel is incorrect.
sorry heretix but i have to agree with the crucible. ALOT of your post are anti PS3. doesn't mean you hate sony per se but everytime i see you you're rambling on about the ps3 being crappy. you say you're only argueing with the fanboys but considering how overrun these forums are with lemmings, one would think we'd see at least a few posts argueing with the lems.
[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="heretrix"]You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.And you sure spend a ton of time bashing them.None of my posts have EVER bashed the PS3. 100 percent of my post have been responses to some idiotic post from some fanboy claiming PS3 superiority. I challenge you to find 1 post that I have made that has said "The PS3 sucks"I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
The_Crucible
I guarantee you won't find one. I have OFTEN said the PS3 hardware is superior to the 360's crap build.
I love the PS3, but I can't stand Sony fanboys. It more often than not will put me on the 360 side simply because of the ridiculous nonsense they spew in these forums. Do I take them seriously? No. But I will not hesitate to debate something I feel is incorrect.
Dude, you totally misunderstood me. I said "them", meaning Sony. In this thread you are bashing Sony over a $20 cable.
I am not bashing Sony at all. I am critiquing one decision they made. As a company, they don't suck because they made the decision, the decision itself was dumb. Are you seriously that dense that you don't know the difference?First of all I am not bashing the system. I'm gonna buy the MGS bundle but... Why doesn't it come with a Component/Composite cable? Like seriously. It's a Blu Ray player what were they thinking. 50$ DVD Upscale players come with Component Cables :P
I'm sure this was talked about and If this isn't true I am sorry but If it is why whould they do that? I can understand no HDMI but no component is crazy. I'm stressed enough paying $500 now I need to buy 50$ cable as well.. Oh lord.
Antikyth3ra
You ever think that Sony only packaged the bare minimum because not everyone can use a HDMI or component cables? Just like everything else in life, if you need one go buy it. I see nothing wrong with it.
Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
The_Crucible
oh i dont know, how about you include both types of cables (component and HDMI) in the box.
is it really that difficult for sony to do that?
[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"][QUOTE="heretrix"]You are such a Sony apologist that it's embarrassing.And you sure spend a ton of time bashing them.I'm a Sony hater?
I own:
a Sony 46in XBR4, PS3, PSP, Sony dreamtheater 5.1 surround system, 30 in Sony WEGA HD (bedroom)
For someone that hates Sony I sure spend a lot of money on their products.
:|
enygma500
Dude, 90% of your posts I see here in SW are anti-PS3. Does that mean I see all of your posts? Hell no. Just the same, you don't see all of mine.
I have a PS3, PS3 only. I've never claimed otherwise. But that changes nothing. Facts are facts.
You get into how wired is better than wireless. Who said different? My point was, Sony has given the gamer EVERYTHING they need out of the box to play PS3 games. Everything. You don't have a HDTV, you can still play. You have a HDTV, you can still play on composites. You don't have you PS3 setup near your modem but you have a wireless router, you can still play. You don't have a wirleless router, you can use wired. You want to play online, it's free. You want to save data and games, you have a HDD.
Get it? Its obvious HD is better than SD. Its obvious wired is better than wireless. I have never argued against that. Again, all i am saying is that complaining about a $20 cable when you get all of those other features to suit any environment you may have, out of the box, is lame.
It is such a small thing. Yet, people here make it out to be a reason to bash Sony.
None of my posts have EVER bashed the PS3. 100 percent of my post have been responses to some idiotic post from some fanboy claiming PS3 superiority. I challenge you to find 1 post that I have made that has said "The PS3 sucks"I guarantee you won't find one. I have OFTEN said the PS3 hardware is superior to the 360's crap build.
I love the PS3, but I can't stand Sony fanboys. It more often than not will put me on the 360 side simply because of the ridiculous nonsense they spew in these forums. Do I take them seriously? No. But I will not hesitate to debate something I feel is incorrect.
sorry heretix but i have to agree with the crucible. ALOT of your post are anti PS3. doesn't mean you hate sony per se but everytime i see you you're rambling on about the ps3 being crappy. you say you're only argueing with the fanboys but considering how overrun these forums are with lemmings, one would think we'd see at least a few posts argueing with the lems.
Prove it. The challenge is there. Find one post where I said the PS3 sucks or that it's crappy..JUST ONE.You can't be serious. :lol:What it all boils down to is what it has always boiled down to if all you have is a PS3.
You will take whatever it is and you will like it or too damn bad for you because it's not like you have a choice one way or the other.
If you did not want discipline instilled into you then tough luck that's what you are getting.
Accept it like you have accepted everything else.
Riverwolf007
why is xbox live gold $50 dollar a year? can't give a brother free peer to peer after purchasing an expensive console?
why does microsoft controllers come without rechargeable batteries?
why does the wii remote come without a rechargeable battery?
how come only the 360 elite support hdmi?
stop crying and deal with it. All consoles have extra expenses we have to deal with. We know about them before the purchase, so don't make a big deal out of it!!!!
[QUOTE="enygma500"]Prove it. The challenge is there. Find one post where I said the PS3 sucks or that it's crappy..JUST ONE.sorry heretix but i have to agree with the crucible. ALOT of your post are anti PS3. doesn't mean you hate sony per se but everytime i see you you're rambling on about the ps3 being crappy. you say you're only argueing with the fanboys but considering how overrun these forums are with lemmings, one would think we'd see at least a few posts argueing with the lems.
heretrix
This one. You are bashing Sony over a $20 cable when you get all of those other features with it. Some that other systems of equal price don't have.
Hmmmm, let's think on this a bit.
Do you provide a cable that EVERYONE has the use of? Or, do you provide a cable that could leave some out?
I agree, it sucks, a little. I have a HDTV, therefore, I wouldn't use the composite (RCA) cables. But what about John Doe with the SDTV? He gets a PS3 and it comes with HDMI, what then? He can't even play it out of the box. Same could go for componenets, not all have those jacks. See how dumb that is?
And then there's the whole separate guessing game just for the HD cables. Do you provide components that do HD but don't do all of the HD PS3 features? Or, do you do HDMI where a lot of TV's don't even have the jack.
Get it?!?!
Why don't you people think a little before spouting off. Put yourself in their position. Think about how you would best service 1000's of people with 1000's of different setups. Then tell me how it makes sense to provide anything other than what is bneeded for EVERYONE to be able to play right out of the box.
The_Crucible
No, the 360 comes iwth composite and component cables in one cable. And if you buy the elite it also comes with an HDMI cable to boot.... to solve the problem, don't buy a ps3. lol JK, someone had to say that. You can buy cables cheap off ebay.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment