PS3 Virtua Tennis 3 in 1080p Comments by Tom Bramwell

"Go vist the PS3 forums at us.playstation.com, Plenty of peolpe seem to have them, And they are always posting deals on the latest 1080p tvs which seem cheaper than many of the 720p screens over here."

The people on the PS3 forums hardly represent the majority. Sure, the hard-core gamers ran out and got their 1080p sets, but most people still have regular old sets.

Unfortunately, Europe always seems to have to pay double what Americans do, and you have to wait twice as long for everything.

@Wonga

I made no projections about it being widespread, I mocked the fact that the arguments of those against its implementation rely on such televisions NEVER even coming to Europe, to be of any merit.

I agree that based on current experience PS4 will be here in 5-6 years, but there are less than a quarter of XBox owners who have made the jump to 360 even a year after its launch. The usable lifespan of a console does not end immediately after its successor is launched. As PS2 is still selling strongly, and is likely to do so for quite some time, a similar situation with PS3 offering 1080p games as superior to launch games as the outgoing consoles last games were to their first can only benefit from this ability.

I didn't realise calling you Nostradamus was an insult, but I suppose he was a bit of an ugly git, so I apologise for any offence caused. It's just that to me, your prediction that technophiles won't buy a PS3 until 2017 seemed a little unlikely, but then, with Sony's record for product avauilability, you may have a point.

@ Le Dilletante

lol

I'm just about to upgrade and my girlfriend is very non-plussed, although
she did say HD looked nice when we saw some feed at Curry's recently.

Have you been up-scaling DVD as well as your Sky HD watching?

Hughes. no the only one trying to dissmiss anything they dont like is you my friend with nothing more than a pretty weak arguement(which I pointed out you never understood in the first place) to back you up.

The statement by the MS chap was more along the lines of:

1080p @60fps is going to cost(yes it will!, its simply a heavier workload and we cant overlook the fact that 360 and PS3 are pretty even in the fillrate stakes), its not that it cant be done its just common sense that at that resolution they will have less resources then for other aspects of the visuals such as textures or shader effects and AA(especially on the PS3) which also rely heavily on fillrate, where as a 360 game could easily take advantage of that(since its more powerfull and capable for a start ;) ) and may look better in the end as a result. So is it really an advantage if they have to sacrifice compared to what 360 will be capable of at 720p/1080i? *which lets face it alot more people will beable to appreciate right now*

Hughes I can see what you are trying to do: "its all bullshit, PS3 is gonna be way powerfull man and 360 is shit" no sorry the only one trying to "shut people up with bullshit" is you.

........Come on guys,we can do it,I think we can stretch out a story about screen resolutions to around 1500 replies.
Hmmmm,the 360 sucks,it can only do a pityful res of 720p.It blows,it's sooo last gen.
There's the fuel chaps.

Just because the PS3 is obviously better in every way, it doesn't stop the 360 being an okay machine.

;)

I feel sorry for Resistance, a launch-title "tick the boxes" FPS that's suddenly pimped out like a ten-dollar whore because it's the only major title Sony have right now that they can use to push the "strengths" of the PS3:

"It needs 22 gigs!" Because it has the same game binaries multiple times for different languages on the same disk.

"It's 1080p!" except at 30FPS (proven multiple times) it's the same as 1080i.

Watch out for horrid tacked on "six axis" support for the poor thing any day now.

Fall of Man preview

12Gb of level data alone.

They're aiming 1080p.

And the game is already going to implement tilt to shake off the Chimera that latch onto you.

Maybe Sony's pimping the game because it's attracting alot of attention since E3 maybe?

"Hmmmm,the 360 sucks,it can only do a pityful res of 720p.It blows,it's sooo last gen. "

Sadly incorrect as the 360 can easily do 1080i/30, and would be able to handle (say) Dead Or Alive 4 at 1080p/60 if it had any way of actually _emitting_ that; currently there's about 1 TV in the Western hemispehere that supports 1080p over component, and even then only 1080p/30.

Can we get the Nintendo Wii nutters in? Their shitty console can barely do VGA; I'm sure they've got loads of reasons why anything higher than 480p is a Bad Thing for Humanity. :)

When are these suckers going to realise that there is no discernable difference between 720 and 1080 (at the disctances that regular folk sit from a TV before you '1024x768 beats 800x600 4eva' PC boys pipe up) until you break the 40" barrier. Will all the people planning on spending 5k on a 40+" 1080p TV please stand up?

/tumbleweeds

Ahhh,you bit onto what was blatantly a joke :) I friggin love the 360,I've got one it's great,infact i'm pretty sure it'll ground the PS3 into the ground......Anyone else?

"Maybe Sony's pimping the game because it's attracting alot of attention since E3 maybe? "

(a) How do Sony measure this? Do people write in going "Wow! Killzone 2 was a total lie but please tell me more about your generic 50s/Sci-Fi FPS. PLEASE!"

(b) How do _you_ know?

"And the game is already going to implement tilt to shake off the Chimera that latch onto you."

Does that sound _good_ to you? Or tacked on as in "why don't you just waggle the thumbstick instead?" tacked-on? Also, didn't that game mechanic die in 2002?

("DEAD RISING?") "Shutupshutupshutup I can't HEAR you"

Steroyd: 12Gb of level data alone.


I wonder if people are thinking what Im thinking: Is it going to be apparent that this space was necessary(it will have to be shown to be bigger than any FPS we've seen on any platform, theres still only 512mb of ram afterall and lets not get silly and bring the hard drive into this like the PS3 is the first platform to feature one) or are they being purposefully wastefull to push the point about blue-ray? what about load times? Are we atleast in agreement that loading data off the "slow-ray" drive will take longer than it will on the 360 drive?

"Are we atleast in agreement that loading data of the "slow-ray" drive will take longer than it will on the 360 drive? "

Oh man, I've tried that one more than a few times - it goes alright until somebody thinks CAV is some kind of magic goes-faster-pixie-dust that fixes the rotational latency of the thing, then they just stop listening. 12Gb sounds interesting though. At PS3's 9MB/s read time would mean something like a cumulative load time of 37 hours, _uncompressed_. (sorry, missed a decimal point)

Of course, if they gave out compressed figures that would kinda spoil the argument for BluRry, wouldn't it? :)

@Calgon

Thank you for clarifying the position originally stated by the MS representative. The statement cited is one which has clearly been mis-represented by many trolling forumites on gaming websites. But, this one-off statement was only one part of what I said, the more important being the months of trolling based on that mis-representation. If you choose to ignore that part purely to maintain your view that people are just trying to justify a higher price to themselves, rather than enjoying watching trolls try to turn the argument around to an anti-Sony angle again. Maybe you need to re-inforce your negative view of people who prefer Sony's consoles?

"Hughes I can see what you are trying to do: "its all bullshit, PS3 is gonna be way powerfull man and 360 is shit"

You quite obviously can't. At no point have I made any such statement, or even a statement that could be mis-interpreted that way. I have offered no suggestion of greater power for the machine than the article itself suggest, I have no information that suggests either machine is much more powerful than the other, nor derided the 360 for anything other than the fact that it chose to limit itself to 720p, which actually seems to be cause for celebration among some people here. Go team!

*cough*

Wait and see, that's all I'm going to say.

Best comment in this thread. Let's just wait a year or 2 and then there will be brilliant games on all platforms that will look great in their own way. And, yes, we will actually have fun with them instead of pulling hairs over a fucking screen format. Tjees.

"nor derided the 360 for anything other than the fact that it chose to limit itself to 720p, which is an entirely factual position"

Huh? XBox 360 is 720p and 1080i, always has been. Mine's running at 1080i right now. Do you mean the requirement by Microsoft that all games render internally to _at least_ 720p? I don't see that being any different to Sony's requirement, as the vast majority of PS3 titles will also be 720p, so they must have a similar requirement.

And nobody's called my premium rate sex-chat line either!

What a waste of all my typing!

"And, yes, we will actually have fun with them instead of pulling hairs over a fucking screen format. Tjees."

Well like the majority of 360 owners I've been having fun with mine for getting on a year :P

Still plenty of spare time for Sony-bashing in forums though. If I were to take the amount of time 360 users spend writing about the PS3 rather than playing their games as an indication of how compelling a machine it was, I might come to the conclusion they're not worth having. Good thing I'm a more charitable soul than that.

I supsect I might actually think Killzone 2 is shit compared to VT, if the first Killzone is anything to go by.

"Still plenty of spare time for Sony-bashing in forums though."

It's difficult to get away with playing Gotham at work, even during those "slack" moments. At home trust me, the 360 gets plenty of playtime. And there's not enough time in the World for one person to comprehensively bash Sony, given how everything they've done for the past couple of years should be accompanied by clown music.

They even have second-rate astroturfers, who can muster up no more than a "wait and see" when presented with HDTV facts. You'd think they'd at least have briefed them with ATSC standards given they're pushing this train-wreck of a console as "true HD" (or at least attempted to during June).

Hughes. Well its nothing to do with people prefering Sony consoles as far as Im concerened, Im not sure what you read now then or who you were addressing. I was under the impression that you were implying the MS chap was proved wrong somehow(my bad if not but thats how it looked).

If some people prefer Sony consoles thats fine(they are the ones paying the money... I just hope its for the games they want to play and not in the hopes of a console that will blow everything away), Id prefer an even split in the userbases but thats about it. The only thing I dont like is misinformation so I might chip in when I feel like it, even though it can sometimes lead to simple bashing, it can also lead to a good debate and a few people might learn something. I dont think anyones celebrating 360 not supporting 1080p, its just that the reallity is the PS3 games that do support it may not really be a cause to celebrate either, it all depends on what else is being done and whats missing compared to the top 720p 360 or even 720p PS3 games at that time.

STOP.

Sony's new box has now become the MOST BORING OBJECT EVER RELEASED

since the invention of consumer electronics.

I'd rather stick a fucking toaster under my TV and burn £500 with a blow-torch
that type or read another word about it.

"It's difficult to get away with playing Gotham at work, even during those "slack" moments."

Pah! Excuses, excuses. Portable generator, handheld TV, hide it under your desk. When the boss asks what the noise is you tell them you've got bad indegestion.

"I'd rather stick a fucking toaster under my TV and burn £500 with a blow-torch
that type or read another word about it."

I dunno, the console is boring, but watching Sony PR run around like the Keystone Kops whilst people allegedly in charge of the largest electronics company in the world say contradictory things in the Press has been endlessly amusing to me. It'll be a bit of a downer when the thing's in people's homes and it's obvious it's basically an XBox 360 with BluRry. For £425.

"When the boss asks what the noise is you tell them you've got bad indegestion."

The Vrum Vrum noise of the cars or the DVD drive noise?

@Calgon

An even market split would be my ideal too, hopefully pushing big two to achieve higher standards in 1st party software. I certainly won't be benifiting from any kind of HD in the near future, but as a console with a theoretically long lifespan, I'm sure it will get utilised well at some point. Whether it will make a difference I can see without a magnifying glass is another matter.

@Garulon

I was thinking the generator might make a bit of a racket, you'd probably need to issue earmuffs to co-workers if this is going to work as a plan for stealth gaming.

http://www.247electrical.co.uk/epages/tw...

Pricy, but certainly available for tech freaks. :)

http://www.fotoconnection.com/viewitem.p...

Damn americans, getting things so cheap. ;)

@SergioAguero

Yes thats right, the PS3 is boring. So boring in fact that every thread even slightly related to it quickly balloons with positive and negative passion. So much so that even you post a comment yourself telling us how bored you are of it.

Enjoy that toast.

Good to see that Garulon isnt an MS fanboy obsessed with bashing PS3. If your so convinced that few PS3 games will play in 1080p at 60fps, why dont you just sit back and wait to be proven to be right? I dont undertsand why you feel the need to say the same thing over and over again, and deride the PS3 constantly. Was your dad sacked by Sony in the past or something?

And who the hell was saying that Xenos is better than RSX? On paper it might look slightly better, but its employing unified shaders- Its a jack of all trades, master of none. I have a friend who is a complete PC and console techie who owns a 360 and isnt a sad fanboy like most on here, and he says he wouldnt be surprised if RSX combined with Cell walks all over anything 360 can offer.

Overall, I think its fine that Sony have given people the option. If you like 360, then just buy one. People on here are talking like PS3 is £425 because it supports 1080p. Complete nonsense.

"Don't be such a retard. Please show everybody where they can buy a 1080p HD TV in Europe. Oh and try and find a model that you don't need to mortgage for. Oh and I mean a TV that's able to display all 1080 horizontal lines, not just accept a 1080p signal and rescan it."

There's are several affordable 1080p TVs out now or on the horizon. The Sony X Series (available now), Sharp XD1E (available next month) (ignore the 1080i info on the Sharp UK site as that is incorrect), Samsung F71, etc. The 42" Sharp will be around £1,600. OK, retard???

Once upon a time it was 'Oh, PS3 will never do a single 1080p game.'

Now it's changed to 'Oh, but even so, noone will ever be able to take advantage of it.'

And soon, as 1080p TVs inevitably drop in price, and people DO take advantage of it, we can all look forward to the next change of tack. :)

We have two HD sets in the house, neither of which offer 1080p. Maybe I'll pick one up in a few years when the price is reasonable (same goes for the PS3).

That's right LeDilettante, and for games running at 30fps, there's no difference between 1080i and 1080p on a 1080p TV that deinterlaces properly.

"Yes, I'm the retard here. I paid about 350 quid for a 720p/1080i capable set. No way I'd pay over a grand for TV. 1600 for a set, is this a new meaning for the word 'affordable'? You must be so clever."

£1,600 for a piece of kit like that is not a massive amount of money. Even a 1024x720 plasma goes for around the same price. You're now getting 1080p sets for the same price or a little more than 720p. You seem to be in your own insular little world where whatever your opinion is, that's the way it has to be and everyone else is incorrect. I wonder why you even bother communicating with other people and don't just sit in your arm chair and wallow in your own magnificence. Oh but of course, you couldn't agree because that would ruin your argument. Silly me. Perhaps you do indeed need a mortgage for £1,600.

You fucking idiots! If you $ony fanboys think your getting a better console just becasue one game outputs in a slightly higher-res. I hope you've all got cash to burn when you need to spend £500 on a console and a grand on a hdtv that actually fucking supports 1080p. I hope you enjoy that microscopic difference in graphics. Sure they can do a tennis game, when you've only got two characters on a screen, but an fps or a game like dead rising (360 exclusive), there's no chance in hell theyd be able to do that in 1080p unless you like your games to play like a slideshow. Xbox 360 has a slightly more powerful gpu than the PS3 and can easily output to 1080i if the developers wanted, but most games aren't going to because the framerates will be crap. Maybe for a sports or fighting game, but that's about it. I have a message for all you rabid mindless $ony fanboys who swallow all the $ony bull$hit and come back for more....go home and die!

vic said
And who the hell was saying that Xenos is better than RSX? On paper it might look slightly better, but its employing unified shaders- Its a jack of all trades, master of none. I have a friend who is a complete PC and console techie who owns a 360 and isnt a sad fanboy like most on here, and he says he wouldnt be surprised if RSX combined with Cell walks all over anything 360 can offer.

Hmm vic

So why unified shaders the next big thing?

The damage control engines are runnin' at maximum captain, they cannae take anymore!

:)

Amusing how many losers think it's clever or helping gamers the world over to try to slag off Sony, PS3 or any of it's features. The PS3 is outputting at this resolution for some games, great news. Only rabid fanbois or retards would spend so much effort trying to explain why it doesn't really matter. Get a life.

Unified shaders the next big thing?

I think you've been reading too much of ATI's PR team. Nvidia realise that unified shaders wont be neccessary for a few years yet.

So far our best information on the RSX makes it a 7800GTX with 28% more clockspeed. Combined with Cell big things will happen. It could be a while before devs starts using Cell for graphics though, as it'll be a pain to program at first, but its very specialized and powerful and able to work in conjunction with RSX. The 7 SPE's are less flexible than a general purpose CPU, but they add considerable power to the Cell in specific application types. That extra power provides flexibility in terms of what you can do with the CPU in real time.

As for Xenos being more powerful, there is no solid info but based on raw specs and initial dev comments the opposite seems to be true. Xenos is weaker overall than the RSX. Not by much though. Also, remember MS included two threads per each of the three cores of the CPU. Parallezing code among three processors caused lots of anguish on PS2, and will undoubtedly cause similar difficulties on 360.

This is why I think PS3 will open up a significant (but not huge) gap in its second and third-generation games.

@ Vic
"Parallezing code among three processors caused lots of anguish on PS2, and will undoubtedly cause similar difficulties on 360"
Of course,you coded on all three platforms,so the PS2 and 360 are very similar in architecture.
What the f**k are you smoking???

The 7 SPE's are less flexible than a general purpose CPU, but they add considerable power to the Cell in specific application types.

What gamers want to know is if among these applications are games.

Vic: You are the least convincing techie Ive seen on EG and that says alot.

As for Xenos being more powerful, there is no solid info but based on raw specs and initial dev comments the opposite seems to be true. Xenos is weaker overall than the RSX. Not by much though. Also, remember MS included two threads per each of the three cores of the CPU. Parallezing code among three processors caused lots of anguish on PS2, and will undoubtedly cause similar difficulties on 360.

hahahahaha! :D WTF? I hope Im not the only one who realises how funny that paragraph is(especially the last bit... in-order processing is something that makes alot of devs groan but the situation will be far worse with Cell than it will be for Xenon for a number of reasons *I'm hoping I didnt really need to explain that but there it is*)


Xenos and RSX isnt an apples to apples comparison and unified shaders arent the only new or unique feature it brings(RSX is basically an off the shelf part whereas Xenos is a custom designed GPU to perfectly fit a CONSOLE, this being the 360). Your statement was innacurate, in raw theoretical terms, in a few areas(such as pixel shading/processing power which I'll admit is important to devs these days) the RSX looks to be stronger(which is the only dev comment that holds weight infact I dont think Ive heard anything other than that supporting RSX) this is of course only theoretical and on paper(even the strengths RSX has are minimal --you could easily say that Xenon is the stronger overall with just the spec sheets because its plain to see its simply more powerfull in alot of ways-- but everyone should know by now that on their own theoretical specs can mean very little in the end) but this would not be fair to Xenos which doesnt have your traditional pipeline like RSX does and it has its more unique features to weigh in(which any fair comparison should take into account and when they do Xenos is clearly ahead). The more you look at the things that matter(ie closer to IN-GAME circumstance) the better Xenos starts to look over the RSX. So no overall Xenos is the stronger of the two. The hardware comparisons will usually conclude: CPU > Cell, GPU > Xenos *and since Cell is unproven this could change yet*

Cell has had an increasing number of skeptics since the day it was announced and this is justified, and even if these skeptics are proved wrong it appears TOO specialised to some critics(we already know its behind Xenon in some areas) and this could be a bad thing because it could well be that most of its strengths wont be a big help to game developers when all is said and done(even though in some ways it appears good on paper I dont think I need to repeat the old saying...).

Im sure devs will eventualy find out a good way to use some of Cells strengths but I doubt the Cell > RSX combo will ever beat out the Xenon > Xenos(these were actually designed/made to work together as a pair for a start and they each have their strengths over the PS3 offering) and if it somehow does(this would have to mean that Cell is even more super awesome than Sony told us it was... which I doubt), certainly not by a significant margin IMO.

Garulon: It'll be a bit of a downer when the thing's in people's homes and it's obvious it's basically an XBox 360 with BluRry. For £425.

And since Xbox 360 is best console ever (right?) why is it a bad thing that PS3 is like an Xbox 360 with Blu-Ray? It's more expensive now, but it has different set of games right from the start and I bet among them we will see some fun and cool games that you might enjoy. Or not. And some of them might run in 1080p. Or not.

PS3 = Xbox 360 with Blu-Ray. How can that be bad for Xbox 360 fans?

"And soon, as 1080p TVs inevitably drop in price, and people DO take advantage of it, we can all look forward to the next change of tack. :)"

drumbaby +1 or 2 even ;)

@Garulon
Just make sure you got a really good 1080i screen with your Xbox 360 before you start comparing the performance on it to PS3 with a 1080p screen + game running on that resolution.

Here we go, quoted from ps3forums:

"Again, you didn't answer my question.
Is it the same if you run a game 30 fps @ 1080p and 60 fps @ 1080i?

Sorry, but I will have to say, it depends...but at least my post has a link to an article that helps explain my answer.

If you have a 1080p signal then you will be able to get the full 1080p 30 fps as expected.

But with 1080i, your biggest worry will be hour your TV handles the input.


More than 48 percent of the displays I tested failed to process and deinterlace the 1080i signal properly, losing up to one-half of the vertical resolution. How is this possible?

A number of TV vendors opt to use a simpler and cheaper way to process 1080i signals. They do it by handling one 540-line field at a time and upconverting the one-half-resolution picture to the given digital HD set's native resolution. To get a sense of how askew this is, note that HD displays have 720, 768, or, in the case of the highest-resolution HDTVs, 1,080 horizontal lines.

Cheap, unsophisticated signal processors simply take a single 540-line field and synthesize all the missing lines of information to create the number of lines of the display, which can be 720, 768, or 1,080, depending on the display's native resolution. This method of scaling results in a softer picture accompanied by motion artifacts.

That four consumer electronics companies (JVC, Hitachi, Pioneer, and Toshiba) have been boasting for the last couple of years that their displays properly process all the 1,080 broadcast lines at once should help further illustrate the importance of proper signal processing of 1080i broadcasts. According to our tests, these displays really do.

http://hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/0506h...


So with 1080p, you relieve the TV of having to process the 1080i signal and you do not have to worry. Otherwise, make sure you get a TV that passes the tests mentioned in the article.

As for the fps that you mention, many assume that because you are comparing a 1080i signal that has twice as many fps, that somehow helps to look the same. But it is not just display speed that is the problem (as mentioned above, the TVs are displaying progressive anyway so in 1080i 60 fps, there is no painting of every other line that would need to happen twice as fast in order to get all lines displayed in the same amount of time as 1080p 30 fps). If you do 1080i at 60 fps with a TV that does not process 1080i well, you simply end up with twice as many frames per second of badly processed 1080i, compared to the same 1080u signal at 30 fps.

@Vic "Good to see that Garulon isnt an MS fanboy obsessed with bashing PS3. If your so convinced that few PS3 games will play in 1080p at 60fps, why dont you just sit back and wait to be proven to be right?"

Because I like educating people? And I also enjoy pointing out Sony's desperate lies? And my point wasn't that very few games will be 1080p, my point _was_ that Resistance Fall Of Man at 30 FPS is technically equivalent to 1080i/60. Excuse me for trying to teach fanbois something; It's a shame your too religiously hung up on the PS3 to listen. :(

"On paper it might look slightly better, but its employing unified shaders- Its a jack of all trades, master of none."

On Paper it looks massively better; unified shaders mean they can automatically be pixel _or_ vertex shaders dynamically - you get 48 "ALUS" that can be 24 Pixel and 24 Vertex shaders, or if your doing an early Z-pass of your geometry, you can have 48 Vertex shaders. The RSX can't do this.

And Calgon, IIRC the fillrate advantage of the RSX has been pretty much eliminated since the RSX and GDDR3 was downclocked to 500MHz/650MHz. It's now worse at drawing plain old triangles than Xenos. Just FYI :)

On Paper it looks massively better; unified shaders mean they can automatically be pixel _or_ vertex shaders dynamically - you get 48 "ALUS" that can be 24 Pixel and 24 Vertex shaders, or if your doing an early Z-pass of your geometry, you can have 48 Vertex shaders. The RSX can't do this.

And Calgon, IIRC the fillrate advantage of the RSX has been pretty much eliminated since the RSX and GDDR3 was downclocked to 500MHz/650MHz. It's now worse at drawing plain old triangles than Xenos. Just FYI :)

All that doesn't matter because the Cell processor can draw triangles (hence the close relationship between Cell and RSX), that's why games like Lair and Metal Gear Solid seem to be in the overkill area when it comes to the amount of triangles used.

You can't judge the graphical grunt of the PS3 in the RSX alone because the Cell processor can help in that area also because of it's specific design.

Virtua Tennis 3 on PS3!! Good news.... shame I only have a black and white TV.
:-(

@drumbaby

"only it's looks.Really"



it's called sarcasm

/goes back to sleep