I gotta say, I've never had a game console at launch, but the number of titles released and announced for release on the PS3 seems really really small. Add to that, I will only buy games that support 1080p and the list gets even shorter.

Is this common? I thought that, by now, some more titles would have at least been announced. If you go to us.playstation.com, there are only 4 or 5 titles announced. And if you don't like racing or sports, you're kinda screwed.

Are there more games in the works that just haven't been announced yet or what?

Honestly, I bought this for the Blu-Ray playback, but I owned the X-Box and PS2 before this and had PLENTY to choose from. Is the amount of detail and difficulty of programming causing delays in titles? Should HD gamers get used to having less high-quality games to choose from?

Nothing out of the ordinary here. Usually takes a year before consoles really hit their stride.

Launch games so far have been better than the PS2 and PS1; and about on par with the 360. The original Xbox launch only had Halo really.

Since you insist on 1080p you've already thrown-out Motorstorm which will be the first Killer App. The only 1080p 'confirmed' games on the horizon are VF5 and Lair.

I'm looking forward to Lair.

However, I knew product launches usually have very few games, but I wasn't sure how long it takes to see, at the very least, announcements for new titles.

Yeah it's gonna take a few more months to finally have amazing games.
Motorstorm, Lair, Heavenly Sword to name a few.

Plenty of games have been announced. Perhaps they aren't listed on the site you checked, but there's a lot in the pipe.

Next month NBA Street Homecourt and Virtua Fighter 5 is being released. That will keep me busy for a while.

http://ps3.ign.com/index/release.html
The list is long, just need to wait another couple months.
About 150 titles have been announced for a 2007 release.

If you insist on only getting 1080p games you really are segregating yourself from alot of wonderful games....and, are the 1080p only games really gonna look all that much better?

If you insist on only getting 1080p games you really are segregating yourself from alot of wonderful games....and, are the 1080p only games really gonna look all that much better?
On a 1080i-only TV? Yes.

gotcha :cool:

The N64 had TWO games at launch. Mario 64 and pilotwings. Games were slow in coming. Xbox 1 also had DOA 3 and PGR.
I would probably be more excited about the PS3 launch titles but most of the games I played on the 360 already.

I gotta say, I've never had a game console at launch, but the number of titles released and announced for release on the PS3 seems really really small. Add to that, I will only buy games that support 1080p and the list gets even shorter.

Is this common? I thought that, by now, some more titles would have at least been announced. If you go to us.playstation.com, there are only 4 or 5 titles announced. And if you don't like racing or sports, you're kinda screwed.

Are there more games in the works that just haven't been announced yet or what?

Honestly, I bought this for the Blu-Ray playback, but I owned the X-Box and PS2 before this and had PLENTY to choose from. Is the amount of detail and difficulty of programming causing delays in titles? Should HD gamers get used to having less high-quality games to choose from?
within 2 months, there will be 20 new games that should be REALLY good... we will see...

March is an awesome month for the PS3 (games). It coincides with the European launch. I don't think thats a coincidence.

Publishers want the biggest audience possible, so you yanks miss out until then. Resistance/Motorstorm/VF5/Heavenly Sword/Ridge Racer 7 at launch for me, amongst others.

within 2 months, there will be 20 new games that should be REALLY good... we will see...

20? Seems optimistic.

In terms of quality of games, I believe I read somewhere that the PS1 actually had the worst launch ever in terms of games and titles.

In terms of quantity of games, I believe the same article I read said that the PS2 had 30 games at launch.

Others have echoed this - all new consoles take 6-12 months to get their legs. Looking back on the PS2 launch, I only had two games (SSX and Sky Odyssey) until June, 2001 when Twisted Metal: Black launched. After that, the titles really started pouring in, with Gran Turismo leading the way.

I've seen this same phenomenon occur through several console launches, going back to the SNES. It's one of the downsides to being an early adopter. I will get better; just give it time. :)

On a 1080i-only TV? Yes.

well if you only have a 1080i TV then how is a 1080P game going to look better?

You need a 1080P TV to get the 1080P resolution of your game that you are buying.

On a 1080i-only TV? Yes.

If you don't have a surround set system yet, you might want to consider getting a receiver that does 1080i upscaling. I believe that Yamaha HDMI receiver in the "Uncompressed Audio for your PS3" thread is down to like $250 at Wally World. You could use component for your video and HDMI for your audio.

well if you only have a 1080i TV then how is a 1080P game going to look better?

You need a 1080P TV to get the 1080P resolution of your game that you are buying.

The PS3 will interlace 1080p native games for them to display properly on 1080i displays.

Yep 1080p games for me only as well. the Yamaha receivers won't upscale 720P to 1080i BTW, will only upconvert 480i or 480P to 720P or 1080i.
I bought the PS3 mostly for BD, but Gran Turismo HD really shows me what 1080P games can look like on my TV. Nothing on 360 comes close to GTHD on my TV.
I've got a 1080i Mits TV, the one with the 9" guns.

I've got a 1080i Mits TV, the one with the 9" guns.

I've got a 1080i Mits too.

Its pretty much the standard lull. This is nothing new. Im sure things will kick in around march-april.

I suspect many of the games listing 1080p support will drop it at the last minute. Why do you care if it supports 1080p or not?:confused:

Again.... 1080p < 720p for this generation. Any game running in 1080p is going to look worse than if they could have made it for 720p. 1080p takes a lot more processing power. I'd rather have more realistic looking games running at 720p than less realistic looking games running at 1080p (where essentially worse graphics, textures, etc will stand out even more).

I'm sorry some of you have TVs that don't support 720p, but you are a very rare bunch. Get a scaler or something. Or get a new TV. 1080p games will be few and far between. I wouldn't be surprised if they stop making them a couple years from now.

Again.... 1080p < 720p for this generation. Any game running in 1080p is going to look worse than if they could have made it for 720p. 1080p takes a lot more processing power. I'd rather have more realistic looking games running at 720p than less realistic looking games running at 1080p (where essentially worse graphics, textures, etc will stand out even more).

I'm sorry some of you have TVs that don't support 720p, but you are a very rare bunch. Get a scaler or something. Or get a new TV. 1080p games will be few and far between. I wouldn't be surprised if they stop making them a couple years from now.
How does that old saying go, "If you don't know what you are talking about ..." :rolleyes:

1080p games will be few and far between. I wouldn't be surprised if they stop making them a couple years from now. And in a couple years computers will be the size of a freakin' house! I'm sure in a few years when the devs have had enough time they will figure out a way to make sure all if not the majority of games run at 1080p. Hey I'm optimistic. :)

Again.... 1080p < 720p for this generation. Any game running in 1080p is going to look worse than if they could have made it for 720p. 1080p takes a lot more processing power. I'd rather have more realistic looking games running at 720p than less realistic looking games running at 1080p (where essentially worse graphics, textures, etc will stand out even more).

I'm sorry some of you have TVs that don't support 720p, but you are a very rare bunch. Get a scaler or something. Or get a new TV. 1080p games will be few and far between. I wouldn't be surprised if they stop making them a couple years from now.
Please. :rolleyes: How insulting. I've been playing 1920x1200p games on my PC for two years before the PS3 came out that look fatastic. I'd be surprised if 720p games last very long with everybody moving to 1080p.

How does that old saying go, "If you don't know what you are talking about ..." :rolleyes:

The system is barely handling 720p games at the moment. To design a game FOR 1080p(NOT upscale from X to 1080p) You're looking at drop in geometry and texture resolution to get a decent FPS. He isn't saying upscaling a game to 1080p so your tv can display it in it's native resolution, but designing it so it's natively 1080p, higher res textures and better looking models and particle effects to actually take advantage of the resolution. It ain't going to happen unless the game looks somewhat crappy.

It's like a PC game, you can run it at 1600x1200, instead of 1024x768, but aside from the amount of jaggies dropping, you're not really getting anymore clearity, and a big performance hit. Instead you would enable FSAA, AF and run it at 1280x960 or something.

The system is barely handling 720p games at the moment. To design a game FOR 1080p(NOT upscale from X to 1080p) You're looking at drop in geometry and texture resolution to get a decent FPS. He isn't saying upscaling a game to 1080p so your tv can display it in it's native resolution, but designing it so it's natively 1080p, higher res textures and better looking models and particle effects to actually take advantage of the resolution. It ain't going to happen unless the game looks somewhat crappy.

It's like a PC game, you can run it at 1600x1200, instead of 1024x768, but aside from the amount of jaggies dropping, you're not really getting anymore clearity, and a big performance hit. Instead you would enable FSAA, AF and run it at 1280x960 or something.

Do you think GT:HD looks somewhat crappy? It all depends on the software and the hardware. Some games manage to take very minimal hits in framerate even when they are rendered at resolutions twice as high as other resolutions.

To design a game FOR 1080p(NOT upscale from X to 1080p) You're looking at drop in geometry and texture resolution to get a decent FPS.

I and my 1080i Mitsu would like to compromise then for games designed for 1080i

:cool:

Do you think GT:HD looks somewhat crappy? It all depends on the software and the hardware. Some games manage to take very minimal hits in framerate even when they are rendered at resolutions twice as high as other resolutions.But GT:HD isn't playing against any other competitors, it's just a single car. Show me GT:HD playing 12 cars racing against each other online in 1080p and then it would be a different story.

Guys, think about it on the PC level and what kind of hardware you need to smoothly run some of the cutting edge games at 1920x1080 smoothly?

But GT:HD isn't playing against any other competitors, it's just a single car. Show me GT:HD playing 12 cars racing against each other online in 1080p and then it would be a different story.

Guys, think about it on the PC level and what kind of hardware you need to smoothly run some of the cutting edge games at 1920x1080 smoothly?

I think the engine in its current state could support the rendering of additional cars if the spectators are removed, which will likely happen in many of the tracks in the final version of the game since they would be out of place.

My PC w/ an Athlon 3500+ and a 7800GTX is capable of running HL2: Episode 1 at 1920x1200 with all of the settings maxed out and my framerate stays around 60-70fps pretty much all of the time and never dips below 40 even under the craziest of circumstances. Obviously that's a comparatively old game, but I think most would agree the CELL is a more capable CPU then what I have, and the RSX is a little bit more powerful than the 7800GTX.

I do agree however that 1080p right now isn't worth the resources at this day and age simply because only a very small amount of HD owners will be able to benefit from the additional pixels, whereas everyone will notice a potential drop in framerate. But framerate isn't really a major concern as far as the gaming media is concerned. Obviously since still images are how most people will see a game before they purchase it, framerate can be sacrificed to produce a better still image. Hopefully Sony can do something with the scaler issue in the PS3.

How does that old saying go, "If you don't know what you are talking about ..." :rolleyes:


Thanks for the laugh. I don't even know what to say.

I'm sorry that you're too simple minded to understand the concept that higher resolutions require more processing power that could be better used making the games look better as opposed to just being higher resolution.

OH BTW, thanks all for derailing the threads to a PS3 need more cpu than it has to run games in 1080p... it's really constructive to end up in name calling as usual.

Now, since XBot 360 needed one year to get the ultimate game which seem to be Gears of War. We can expect the PS3 to need a year also. So we might have next october a some title like GTA4 optimized for the PS3 (the end of the exclusive does'nt mean it won't look better on the same brand platform. Can you imagine shooting an helicopter that fall on a building with windows blowing realistically with physics calculated by the Cell while shooting at the cops all around you?

Not that the Xbot won't do a nice job too, it's just an old hardware, I'm sure you guys can understand that an old piece of hardware has more difficulty keeping up with new technology. In fact, MS is even releasing a new Xbot revision (only one that will get IPTV), it might come bundled with GTA4 next holiday in hope to raise sales... Might do real 1080p too!

Please. :rolleyes: How insulting. I've been playing 1920x1200p games on my PC for two years before the PS3 came out that look fatastic. I'd be surprised if 720p games last very long with everybody moving to 1080p.
You mean on the PS3?

Cos I dont see the 360 going 1080p anytime soon.. Some games are rendered at less than 720p.

You mean on the PS3?

Cos I dont see the 360 going 1080p anytime soon.. Some games are rendered at less than 720p.
Yes. I'm honestly not trying to be rude, but I didn't think I needed to specify the PS3 since we're in the PS3 forum. :)

Obviously that's a comparatively old game, but I think most would agree the CELL is a more capable CPU then what I have

Depends on how it is used. For some things, your CPU is clearly superior.

and the RSX is a little bit more powerful than the 7800GTX.

I'm not so sure about that. Probably about the same, if not a little weaker from what I have seen.

Valve did an amazing job at getting a fantastic frame rate out of the source engine on older hardware. I played all of HL2 and Episode I on a 6600GT at 1680x1050. Now I have a 7900GS, and it is a little smoother, but not amazingly so. The monitor is only refreshing at 60Hz, after all. :)

As for what affects frame rate, the GPU is what mostly affects frame rate at higher resolutions, not the CPU. On PC games when you run a higher resolution, you generally have to turn off effects that make the game look cool in order to achieve the same frame rate that you had with a lower resolution. And that only makes sense, since at 1920x1080, the GPU only has 50% of the time to work on each pixel than at the 1280x720 resolution. So games that work at 1920x1080 probably don't have all that many effects or filters or anti-aliasing turned on.

Basketball games? Golf games? Perfect for 1920x1080, I would guess. They have a slow pace on screen, so the game is more tolerant of a lower frame rate, and there aren't many required effects.