By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS3 as blu-ray player: "for the money, it can't be beat" - CNNMoney review

Garnett on 23 November 2008

Another score for Sony fanfiends,But Blue Ray is great,cant wait to get my PS3.



*Remember when the world was supposed to end on May 21st, 2011? Well click here to see our short parody video of it [not]ending*

Around the Network
KBG29 on 23 November 2008

PS3 is the best Blu-ray player, the Best gaming machine, and the best value on the market. The problem is people don't care. People want games machines for $199 or less. Until the PS3 gets down that low Sony will be stuck with decent sales, but never enough to be a number one contender.

Personally I hate that people are not willing to spend more on a media center in a box. For me PS3 is an awsome system, but it had so much more potential had Sony really jacked it up. I would have been happy to spend $1000 on PS3 at launch had Sony stuck in an extra 512MB or RAM, went with dual RSX and Cell, and include a 4x BR drive. With thouse specs PS3 would have been viable tell 2020. Sadley it would have never taken off, and Sony would have had to leave the buisness.



Stop hate, let others live the life they were given. Everyone has their problems, and no one should have to feel ashamed for the way they were born. Be proud of who you are, encourage others to be proud of themselves. Learn, research, absorb everything around you. Nothing is meaningless, a purpose is placed on everything no matter how you perceive it. Discover how to love, and share that love with everything that you encounter. Help make existence a beautiful thing.

Kevyn B Grams
10/03/2010 

KBG29 on PSN&XBL

S.T.A.G.E. on 23 November 2008
KBG29 said:
PS3 is the best Blu-ray player, the Best gaming machine, and the best value on the market. The problem is people don't care. People want games machines for $199 or less. Until the PS3 gets down that low Sony will be stuck with decent sales, but never enough to be a number one contender.

Personally I hate that people are not willing to spend more on a media center in a box. For me PS3 is an awsome system, but it had so much more potential had Sony really jacked it up. I would have been happy to spend $1000 on PS3 at launch had Sony stuck in an extra 512MB or RAM, went with dual RSX and Cell, and include a 4x BR drive. With thouse specs PS3 would have been viable tell 2020. Sadley it would have never taken off, and Sony would have had to leave the buisness.

 

Best Blu Ray player for your money: Fact. Best gaming system: Opinion. So what you're telling me that people shouldn't feel like the economy is on their ass and choose and alternative if they have the choice? Blu Ray isn't standard, so stop acting like it is. Just like my friend said, "I already have a DVD player and sorry I don't feel like seeing Brad Pitts pores, and I especially don't want to see anyones pimples while enjoying a flix." I have the PS3, but why do you hate the fact that people hate the fact that people wouldn't want to spend money on it? We're a free market society, so that discounts your fanboy logic.



SpartanFX on 23 November 2008

PS3 is "Entertainment in a box"
what did you expect man?? ;)



 

 

 

gebx on 23 November 2008
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
gebx said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
goddog said:
when did people claim its a subpar blue ray player? i had always heard it was one of if not the best on the market.... and that was one reason the ps3 cost so much

 

most recent example was uber-fanboy kowenicki, here (and did the OP imply it, too?  failed to check..):

 

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=48843&page=1

 

He's not stating the PS3 is a subpar player, he's just stating new Blu Ray players coming out have better specs...

Nice attempted save after reading a bit further.

He said, "as there are many many blu ray players with better spec and output quality than the PS3".  Are there many many many many players out there, such that PS3 is behind many many of them but not subpar?  Nitpick that, nitpicker.

And, funny that you were in the original thread but failed to correct others that also thought kowenicki was claiming that PS3 wasn't a good blu-ray option even though in fact PS3 is consistently the best option or nearly so.  Yet, here, after making yourself look like an ass with your first post, now you want to say that kowenicki was being misinterpreted.  But he said there 1) ARE 2) MANY MANY blu-ray players with better spec and output quality than the PS3.  Sound right to you?  Does it sound like he's saying that new blu-ray players coming out have better specs?

Plus, when he said "entry level you meant to say" in his first post, he implied that the PS3 was entry-level quality.  Let me guess, entry level is not subpar?  Dig yourself deeper.

 

 

I never bothered correcting Kowenicki because I didn't interpret his comment as him saying the PS3 was a subpar Blu Ray player.

Unlike you I don't bother analysing his every word, adjective, adverb, etc...



Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)

                   

Around the Network
NiKKoM on 23 November 2008

"for the money, it can't be beat"

Well.. duh... some manufacturers  are trying to make money.. They can't sell their blu ray player with at a lost...



 

Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!) 

Loud_Hot_White_Box on 23 November 2008
NiKKoM said:

"for the money, it can't be beat"

Well.. duh... some manufacturers  are trying to make money.. They can't sell their blu ray player with at a lost...

 

No, "for the money, it can't be beat" means that no standalone at $400 or less matches up to PS3's quality of blu-ray playback.  Which is pretty awesome.