ps3 quality

[thetoyaddict]

Pioneer's blu-ray players are better than the PS3. Blu-rays just look better on the Pioneer.

[clownface]

Originally Posted by Another_Dude

My PS3 outputs video in 1081p.

Its that good.

DITTO!!!!! LOL!!!!

[solarrdadd]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

Why do you want a player to bitstream and pay extra to have a receiver that decodes all the codecs compared to a decoder and player in 1 for half the price? Maybe your just one of the people that like to be able to see the codecs on your receiver instead of just PCM so whatever.

So, why can't we want what we want and get what we want? Don't you have what you want? You've got your setup the way you want it, so, why can't the next person have it setup the way they want it and who is to say who is correct?

Life is unexpectedly short, lets be happy with what we have for however long we have it.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by solarrdadd

So, why can't we want what we want and get what we want? Don't you have what you want? You've got your setup the way you want it, so, why can't the next person have it setup the way they want it and who is to say who is correct?

Life is unexpectedly short, lets be happy with what we have for however long we have it.

+100000 There will be no comment that's better than solardadd's - it actually caps the discussion and ends it !!!! Next.....!

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by neos_peace

as with what was said earlier. I use my PS3 as my Blu-ray player. It's awesome. I won't ever go with a standalone ever.

I have 2 PS3s that are used solely for movies..... but I'm getting my next player soon hopefully.... and it'll be a Stand-Alone...

As far as AQ/PQ goes... there is no "Notable" difference as others have said...

At the level of detail that Blu-ray provides, you'd have to study the picture side by side from 2 feet away to notice any variations I'd think..... even then, who knows

Bench-tests using computers to pull information etc... rate players differently.... but I've yet to meet someone who could look at a side-by-side, and tell what image is coming from what player....

As far as audio goes.... there's so much more you can do to improve it with your speakers, connections, and other components, that any variations in AQ from the player, at this point, aren't that great..... I use a dedicated player for DVDs and a Dedicated player for CD playback though..... but that won't change even when I get a Stand-alone.... so any faults in playback of that type of media the PS3 may have (no... it's not a good CD player or DVD player, despite what you want to believe) aren't even a factor in me replacing my PS3 in the Media room..... I want a normal remote, and normal sized component, and one that is quieter......

[Blaze98]

Originally Posted by Another_Dude

My PS3 outputs video in 1081p.

Its that good.

LOL very nice!

[scweb13]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

Why do you want a player to bitstream and pay extra to have a receiver that decodes all the codecs compared to a decoder and player in 1 for half the price? Maybe your just one of the people that like to be able to see the codecs on your receiver instead of just PCM so whatever.

I have my stand-alone and my PS3 both connected to my Reciever. I prefer the bitstreamed audio to the LPCM audio. That's my opinion.
Why are you trying to be an ass?

[Grevlin]

Originally Posted by John72953

When I inserted IN THE NAME OF THE KING I would have liked my receiver to say: "Mayday! Mayday! EJECT Immediately!"

John

-- That is 90min of my life I would like back...

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by thetoyaddict

Pioneer's blu-ray players are better than the PS3. Blu-rays just look better on the Pioneer.

This is true. NO ONE can argue with that.

But the PS3 is a better bang for your buck and the PQ in terms of Blu-ray playback are comparible. Your strickly talking from a DVD playback opinion. Of course Bitstreaming audio is the other advantage for the Pioneer. But should have no discernable difference with the way the PS3 PCM's the audio out.

Now the advantages of the PS3? There are literally too many to count. Here are a few:

Cheaper
Faster load times
Top Rated Video Game Console
Wireless Networking (Streaming Video)
Web Browser
Regular online updates (Improving the system each month)

No one on this forum can argue that the PS3 is the best and most logical choice for blu-ray playback for most people out there. Your just wasting money on another player or really hate Sony.

[Another_Dude]

Originally Posted by thetoyaddict

Pioneer's blu-ray players are better than the PS3. Blu-rays just look better on the Pioneer.

ORLY?

Can you expand on that second part for me?

[scweb13]

Too many PS3 fans are getting their panties in a bunch.
OMG! TEH PS3 IZ DA BEST EVAH!!!

[Batman1980]

Is the PS3 the best ever? Nope. Have I ever had major problems with blu-ray playback on it? Nope. I'm perfectly happy with what I have and as long as it keeps running, I imagine I will continue to enjoy it.

[scweb13]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Is the PS3 the best ever? Nope. Have I ever had major problems with blu-ray playback on it? Nope. I'm perfectly happy with what I have and as long as it keeps running, I imagine I will continue to enjoy it.

Nice post. More people should have your point of view.

[gonk]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

No one on this forum can argue that the PS3 is the best and most logical choice for blu-ray playback for most people out there. Your just wasting money on another player or really hate Sony.

For most people? I would disagree that - simply because it is too all-encompassing. I'd also suggest that buying a standalone player does not automatically mean you are wasting money or hate Sony.

If you want the PS3 for video gaming, it can definitely be a great Blu-ray and DVD player at essentially no cost. If you have a surround receiver with HDMI v1.1 support or don't have a surround system at all, it becomes even easier to rely solely on the PS3. However, there will be a lot of people interested in Blu-ray for whom that combination of "ifs" will not apply - and the number of such people is only going to increase as Blu-ray market penetration rises. Think about this: how many standalone DVD players have been sold compared to PS2's and XBox's? It's not an apples-to-apples comparison since the format arrived before those consoles were available and neither was as good in that secondary role as the PS3 is, but it helps remind us that the number of households with current-generation game consoles is always going to be smaller than the number of households that want to watch movies on disc.

For people who don't want the PS3's video game capabilities, there are now players with load times that will match the PS3's. Such players are still rare, but that will change very rapidly now - and some of those players will cost less than the PS3. Standalone players also offer greater convenience (familiar IR remotes that are included for free with the player and can be easily integrated with universal remotes), and the PS3's lack of multichannel analog output creates a significant group of people with surround sound systems who simply cannot get the benefit of the new lossless audio formats using the PS3.

I have nothing against the PS3 (it spent several years firmly entrenched as king of Blu-ray players) and it remains a very valid choice for a number of people, but I have a hard time agreeing with the idea that it is still unshakably superior to its standalone brethren.

[Living Near Shamu]

Originally Posted by scweb13

Nice post. More people should have your point of view.

Well, this is a PS3 thread, so you'll get a ton of people who love it (including me )

[scweb13]

Originally Posted by Living Near Shamu

Well, this is a PS3 thread, so you'll get a ton of people who love it (including me )

Yes, but there is a difference between loving it and force feeding it to everyone.

[Living Near Shamu]

Originally Posted by scweb13

Yes, but there is a difference between loving it and force feeding it to everyone.

Its ok, my son. I forgive you just because I can't stop staring at your avatar, lol

[Exy]

I had a stand alone SONY BSP900 Player and I was happy enough with it but I could not use any of the BD Live features on any of my discs as it was not connected to the Internet.

I chopped it in for a PS3, also because I wanted to replace my Wii with a games machine that looked good on my HD TV. There was no differnce in picture or sound quality and it connects to my Internet by wireless.

The BD Live features are no big deal but the big upside is that my Bluray player now gets it's firmware updated automatically via the Internet, this is a massive advantage, who wants to hard wire there Bluray up to there PC to do an upgrade, what a pain in the arse that would be?

[UncleMarsellus]

I keep waiting for a worthwhile stand-alone to supplant my PS3 but I can't seem to find one yet. If the new Oppo player had wireless, maybe. But I, personally, don't see a stand-alone that blows it away yet. Some might do certain things better, but maybe they're missing a feature, or the feature doesn't work as well... things like that. The PS3 is still the most well-rounded player on the market and I don't know if that's disappointing or plain-old mindblowing.

My biggest complaint with it is fan noise. The damn thing sounds like a jet engine. It has plenty of ventilation but it's still a noisy bugger. Other than that, the only thing I've noticed is that it doesn't upcovert DVDs as good as the Samsung I used to have but that's not a big deal. The wireless is a huge plus. I refuse to have an ethernet cable permanently connected to it and it's not physically possible in my setup. That alone is enough to make me keep it.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by John72953

When I inserted IN THE NAME OF THE KING I would have liked my receiver to say: "Mayday! Mayday! EJECT Immediately!"

John

I wish mine would have done that. I didn't give up on that garbage until about halfway through.