(Maybe) Getting a PS3, need advice please

[Riggidig]

So my friend, who jokingly told me a while back that she'll give me her PS3 for my birthday in Jan, turned out to be serious. While I am still debating with myself whether I can accept such a lavish gift, I was just wondering if I'll actually BE able to play it.

I currently own a 19 inch/37 cm plain old CRT TV, but I'm saving up to get me a 22 inch/48 cm flatscreen HD Ready (I can't afford Full HD) LCD TV early next year sometime. Is there perhaps anything else I should be aware of?

Thanks in advance :-)

[ShiroiHikari]

To be honest, it might be a little difficult to see PS3 games on a 19" standard TV-- I sometimes have a hard time seeing the text on my 27" SDTV (but not always-- depends on the game). If your friend really does want to give you a PS3, you can always accept it and hang onto it until you do have a bigger TV.

[Bobtheduck]

The problem with 360 / PS3 games tends to be small text size and ignoring of safe frames...

The rules of videography are constantly being ignored in the HD era, even though people:

1. Still have small TVs and
2. Still have TVs with overscan. Even most HDTVs have overscan... My Parents' Vizio has overscan, and it tends to cut off the edges of HD games and movies... It's really annoying...

I have a feeling game and movie and TV makers will start to realize this and stop doing stupid things like that eventually... I guess they're just overzealous entering the HD era and want to show it off for all it's worth...

[ShiroiHikari]

Our SDTV cuts off a bit of the edges, too, and I don't know how to do anything about it. It's irritating. :|

[Riggidig]

So, will a widescreen, HD Ready, LCD TV be sufficient to run the system on? I currently have my eyes set on purchasing a 22 inch Sinotech widescreen LCD TV sometime within the next 6 months. I believe it has both an HDMI, as well as a VGA connection.

[Bobtheduck]

Our SDTV cuts off a bit of the edges, too, and I don't know how to do anything about it. It's irritating. :|

The only way to change it is in service mode, and if you enter service mode without being licensed, you void the warranty (if you still have one), and it's not exactly user friendly. I entered service mode on my old TV, and it's just numbers... Not even an easy way to change them, no clue what they mean... If you change the wrong thing, it can really screw up your TV.

I think a friend and I accidentally entered service mode on when we were fighting over the TV where we were living at the time (using 2 remotes) and we made the image tall and skinny and overscan got worse on the top and bottom... We had to pay over 100 dollars for repair, which involved them erasing the memory or something on the TV... I'm sure the charge was overblown, but we couldn't have fixed it...

And, yeah, 22 inches will be fine as long as you're sitting really close to it... Won't be good for parties, though.

[Riggidig]

Nah. It'll only be for me in my room. Tired of having to sit less than a meter away when watching movies or playing games. My friend's mom has a 42 inch tv. Now THAT thing is HUGE...

[sdzero]

Nah. It'll only be for me in my room. Tired of having to sit less than a meter away when watching movies or playing games. My friend's mom has a 42 inch tv. Now THAT thing is HUGE...

I just recently got a 32" HDTV and it's not too big or too small for my room. Spent quite a few bucks on it for longevity purposes [at least 15 - 20 years before I get a new tv] but it was worth it. I say if you're going to get a new hdtv, make sure you buy one that you won't regret owning for a long time.

By the way, which PS3 model is she going to give you? The 20, 40, 60, 80 or the 120 Gig model?

[Riggidig]

I just recently got a 32" HDTV and it's not too big or too small for my room. Spent quite a few bucks on it for longevity purposes [at least 15 - 20 years before I get a new tv] but it was worth it. I say if you're going to get a new hdtv, make sure you buy one that you won't regret owning for a long time.

By the way, which PS3 model is she going to give you? The 20, 40, 60, 80 or the 120 Gig model?

That's why I'm rather going for a 22 inch LCD TV than a 32 inch CRT TV. Both are the same price, and while the CRT is bigger I figure in the long run the LCD will be of better value. And I have no idea which model it is. It's more than a year old is all I know. Is it important which model it is?

[blkmage]

We've been running a PS3 off of a 24" monitor and it's been fine for large groups (read playing Rock Band).

[sdzero]

That's why I'm rather going for a 22 inch LCD TV than a 32 inch CRT TV. Both are the same price, and while the CRT is bigger I figure in the long run the LCD will be of better value. And I have no idea which model it is. It's more than a year old is all I know. Is it important which model it is?

The 20, 60 and most 80 Gig models have Ps2 backwards compatablity.They are the most sought after versions of the console. Here's a list of the different PS3 capablities. http://www.joystiq.com/2009/08/18/tabulator-ps3-slim-and-phat-sized-up/

[Bobtheduck]

That's why I'm rather going for a 22 inch LCD TV than a 32 inch CRT TV. Both are the same price, and while the CRT is bigger I figure in the long run the LCD will be of better value. And I have no idea which model it is. It's more than a year old is all I know. Is it important which model it is?

60 or 20 gig means full backwards compatibility

old 80 gig means BC with 80% of PS2 games

New 80 gigs and 160 gigs mean no PS2 BC

All models are 99% BC with PS1, though.

[Riggidig]

The 20, 60 and most 80 Gig models have Ps2 backwards compatablity.They are the most sought after versions of the console. Here's a list of the different PS3 capablities. http://www.joystiq.com/2009/08/18/tabulator-ps3-slim-and-phat-sized-up/

You know, I just don't get why the NEWER the PS3's got the LESS compatible they got regarding the PS2 backwards compatibility. Also what I really, REALLY, [SIZE="3"]REALLY[/SIZE] don't get, is that ALL the models are [SIZE="5"]PS ONE[/SIZE] compatible. It makes me go:

http://static.desktopnexus.com/wallpapers/145380-bigthumbnail.jpg

[blkmage]

It's quite simple if you understand the various implementations of backwards-compatibility, the costs associated with each, and the fact that Sony likes to create processors that require a Rosetta Stone to develop for.

[Bobtheduck]

PS1 software emulation is relatively easy. PS2 has done it since they released the slim, the PSP does it pretty easily, and the PS3 is a much more powerful machine... Plus, the PS1 isn't still selling. PS2 is. They'll put BC back, at least partially, when the PS2 finally dies, but it won't be easy.

Think about this: They have a functioning Wii emulator on the PC now. Wii... That's more powerful than a Gamecube. Know what they DON'T HAVE yet? A decent PS2 emulator. PS2 emulation is incredibly difficult. There were weird quirks about the design of it that gave it potential that the other 2 didn't have, even though it was the technical weakest of the 3, and these things are not present in the PS3 or in many PCs. To use even the crappy PS2 emulators that exist takes much more powerful machines than using the Wii emulator, and that's because of these quirks.

The same goes for the PS3. The PS3 didn't have those quirks built in (except for the models that had PS2 hardware put in) so it is actually very difficult to accurately emulate the PS2 on there.

THe PS3 is a different architecture than the PS2. PS3 is PowerPC based, PS2 was MIPS based. To compare, both Xboxes were Intel based and both of the disc based Nintendo systems were PowerPC based. It's much easier to emulate something that had the same architecture (though N64 is MIPS based, and is emulated on the Wii, the N64 was an absurdly simple system compared to the PS2, as was the PS1)

Then there's the PS2's graphics card. It was specially made, unlike the PS3's graphics card which was basically a consumer PC graphics card with a couple modifications.

The final issue is the ram. There wasn't much ram in the PS2, but what existed was FAST... Faster than the PS3's ram, I believe. This allowed, from what I was told, particle effects that the other 2 systems weren't capable of doing. It's one reason why, for instance, the Xbox version of Metal Gear Solid 2 didn't quite match up with the PS2 version, even though the Xbox was a more powerful system overall. This means even if the PS2 is fully emulated in Software, the games will never run perfectly with the PS2's ram out of the picture.

[blkmage]

Essentially, these problems are borne out of Sony's insistence on creating the most needlessly complex consoles possible. A common complaint of both the PS2 and the PS3 are that they're both ridiculously difficult to develop for compared to the other consoles, which drives up the cost of developing for them. This is pretty evident if you look at the games in the early years of both consoles and compare those to the final year of releases.

The reason why PS2 backwards compatibility degraded over time was because the initial batch of PS3s contained the PS2 hardware, so it didn't need to emulate it. Obviously, that's prohibitively expensive, so they switched to software emulation and eventually just scrapped it until they can figure out a better way to do it.

Also, the 360 uses PowerPC, like the Wii and the PS3. Of course, x86 to PPC emulation is a lot easier (or at least not unheard of) than mystery Emotion Engine to crazy Cell PPC. My friends were amused that PCs were converging on x86 and x86-64 (since Macs dropped PPC), while consoles converged on PPC.