PS3 Firmware (v3.21) Update 1st April

Grumpypants

projectmayhem wrote: »

As a platform CFW has been directly responsible for its downfall. People don't buy the games because they don't need to, thus the economy falls apart. I don't know how you could possibly think CFW is a good thing for a platform...

1. Because they have to recoup costs of it through hardware sales. PS3 recoups cost through software sales. You know, because it manages to sell software rather then have it downloaded.

2. Same argument. The price has to stay inflated because the cost of development is higher, because the sales figures are kept artificially lower due to rampant piracy.

3. Same argument again. CFW also became an option months after release. Initial software was awful on the PS3, but that didn't stop them, did it? Sales on awful software is still money in the bank.



You're arguing the PSP's physical deformaties in an argument about piracy? Do you really relate the PSP's single stick and screen to piracy and Sony needing to clamp down on it before it kills off the PS3?



Again, you're arguing ludicrous things, but I'll address this one seperately because the reason UMD didn't develop further is because the hackers never needed the UMD's to play games - they just ran them as ISO's. You'll notice the games required to hack (i.e. the ones with loopholes that allowed hacks to be performed) often had much higher sales then other games.



Again, a redundant argument - but the wifi was good enough to get the PSP online to download CFW's directly on the device over and over again



If you legitimately bought games to keep them on the memory stick then fair play - but dear god are you in the minority. The platform is plagued with piracy, to near-death. In fact the only reason Sony keep it alive is to save face, hence the PSP Go - an attempt to get around piracy by going all digital.



Wii has suffered to piracy but it's in a different class to the 360 and PS3. The fanbase is mainly kids, who do not know about piracy - and most parents don't know either, nor do they want to show their kids how to pirate games.

The 360 is suffering big time. Reports suggest the reason we all still have to pay for XBL and absurd amounts for peripherals is because Microsoft are being screwed by software sales. They were doing fine beforehand because the PS3 was weak, but now the PS3 is as strong worldwide as the 360 sales-wise so that money being diluted is hurting MS and the publishers. It still sells millions of software titles, but when MW2 loses 1 million units (individual sales) on the 360 because of pirates, then that's simply not good. That's a massive amount of money to lose because people decided not to support the developer/publisher.

This is why on the PS2 and Xbox small publishers released games on disk and this time they use XBLA and PSN. Do you really think Rare/MS wanted to re-release Perfect Dark on XBLA? Of course not - but there's no point if people will pirate a game to such an extent that it would lose money.



Read what I said again. When you buy a retail disk from Valve all it does is load your game into Steam - an online checkpoint to ensure the purchase is valid. Do you want every publisher to have online checks? Of course not.

Also, Microsoft in-part paid for L4D exclusivity, so for Valve that means nothing - you can see that in the after-sale support of their titles on consoles.

Firmware comes on disks - just like the PSP. Users won't suffer if they've no internet access.

As for Gabes Russian argument, it only stands up because he wants it to. Notice he didn't bother talking about China, where Counter-Strike is a hugely popular game that Valve have actually made zero dollars on - because every single copy is hacked.

So much miss information in that post im not sure where to start.

Of the major consoles out now

PS3 : Not hacked most expensive for hard ware and soft ware.
Xbox 360 : Hacked : Cheap machine for both hardware and software.
Wii : Hacked Cheap console cheap games.
NDS : Hacked cheap machine cheap games.
PSP : Hacked most expensive handheld hardware and software.

So your arguement about keeping the price high becasue of piracy doesnt really add up it looks more like Sony charge more for their console/games eitherway. Otherwise the PS3 which looses no money to piracy would be much cheaper than the 360.


Belive me Sony have no interest in "keeping face" if the PSP was costing them money they would drop it, i would think thats since its Sold over 50million units thats why they keep it. Also the stuff about Microsoft only charge for online etc becasue of piracy is madness. They charge because they are a private company looking to make money. If they can get away with charging for XBL they will do that. Their is no evidence for this what so ever.

Are you really saying Microsoft are telling people look we only sold 7 million copies of MW2 that should have been 8 million you have to pay us 4 euro a month now to play online. If that was the case Sony who sold 2 million less than that would have to charge twice the amount for online gaming.

Leiva

Varik wrote: »

the ps3 made a loss of over $240 on each unit .

Are you for real ?

31.5 million x $240 = $7560000000

Don't think the SONY share price has or ever will show this loss ??

ongarite

mixednuts wrote: »

Are you for real ?

They did make this loss on the launch units from Jap/US.
They still make a loss on every Slim PS3 sold now.

They rely on software sales to claw back this loss. This is why preventing piracy is such a concern for them.

Grumpypants

projectmayhem wrote: »

Don't for a second think Microsoft allow HD installs because they're being nice. They're doing it to qwell the critisisms of their system being too loud.

Here's the kicker for you: piracy should not be inevitable. Nor should it be symptomatic of people being "rebels" for some cause. Keep in mind the number of games pirated on PS3 thus far is zero. Yep. Zero. In comparison to the 1 billion units of MW2 alone pirated on 360, that saved a lot of money, a lot of people kept jobs because of that, and the industry kept on ticking.

...but no, you'd rather have linux installed on a PS3 then keep that going.

Microsoft introduced the install feature because of their own poor manufacturing standards that meant a large % of their consoles broke down or due to the cheap disk drive where scratching disks. If they had a better manufacturing standard they wouldnt have needed to introduce that feature.

I like the way you say piracy hurts the developers and costs jobs then go on about ACTIVISION !! Loosing 1 million copies of MW2. the same activision that just sacked the 2 guys behind MW2 becasue they are refusing to pay them the royalties that they owe them (it didnt save their jobs did it ??) !! The same activision that did something similar to the Guitar hero guys.

I would argue that activision releasing what is a map pack for a game 2 years old for full price and sucking 1 billion dollars out of the industry was far more harmfull to small developers trying to make games than any amount of piracy.

Thats like Simon Cowell saying downloading music is ruining the music industry. Nothing to do with the fact that he is flooding the market with garbage reality TV singers.

Varik

thebman wrote: »

Its not illegal to play copied games if it is a back up. It is your right as a consumer to do that.

Its only illegal if you don't buy the game, simple as.

this is from the EU and applies unless you live in Spain.


Article 6 of the Directive provides protection for "technological measures", any technology device or component which is designed to restrict or prevent certain acts which are not authorised by the rightholder.Member States must provide "adequate legal protection", which may be civil, criminal or a mix of the two.


Technological measures are only protected if they are "effective", which means not when they actually work but when they have been successfully implemented. A simple password is thus "effective" irrespective of the ease with which it may be cracked.



Rightholders who use such anti-circumvention measures must allow reproduction which is permitted under the limitations to copyright protection [Art. 6(4)]. Digital rights management information is similarly protected (Art. 7).
Unlike Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which only prohibits circumvention of access control measures, InfoSoc Directive also prohibits circumvention of copy protection measures, making it potentially more restrictive.
In both DMCA and InfoSoc Directive, production, distribution etc. of equipment used to circumvent both access and copy-protection is prohibited.

Under DMCA, a potential user who wants to avail herself of an alleged fair use privilege to crack copy protection (which is not prohibited) would have to do it themselves since no equipment would lawfully be marketed for that purpose. Under InfoSoc Directive, this possibility would not be available since circumvention of copy protection is illegal.


Limitations

Temporary copying which is the result of the transmission of a work or of its legal use is not covered by the exclusive right of reproduction, hence internet service providers are not liable for the data they transmit, even if it infringes copyright (good job eircom).

• paper reproductions by photocopying or similar methods, except of sheet music, if there is compensation for rightsholders;
• reproductions made for private and non-commercial use if there is compensation for rightholders;
• reproductions by public libraries, educational institutions or archives for non-commercial use;
• preservation of recordings of broadcasts in official archives;
• reproductions of broadcasts by social, non-commercial institutions such as hospitals and prisons, if there is compensation to rightholders;
• use for illustration for teaching or scientific research, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose;
• uses directly related to a disability, to the extent justified by the disability;
• press reviews and news reporting;
• quotations for the purposes of criticism or review;
• uses for the purposes of public security or in administrative, parliamentary or judicial proceedings;
• uses of political speeches and extracts of public lectures, to the extent justified by public information;
• uses during religious or official celebrations;
• uses of works, such as architecture or sculpture, which are located permanently in public places;
• incidental inclusion in another work;
• use for the advertisement of the public exhibition or sale of art;
• caricature, parody or pastiche;
• use in connection with the demonstration or repair of equipment;
• use of a protected work (e.g., plans) for the reconstruction of a building;
• communication of works to the public within the premises of public libraries, educational institutions, museums or archives.

to add to this if you use an illegal program to make a legal copy that copy is now illegal.

_tony_

ongarite wrote: »

They did make this loss on the launch units from Jap/US.
They still make a loss on every Slim PS3 sold now.

They rely on software sales to claw back this loss. This is why preventing piracy is such a concern for them.

I've come across this point a few times before online. I don't think it is at all possible that they make the loss they say. These units are mass produced - and there is not a 'unit price' as such - production quantity decides unit price.

Around the PS3s launch Sony did make the point that they do make a loss on each unit - but my understanding was that this 'loss' was including the unit design, production plants, and production equipment. So, really, this 'loss' was just saying that in their first year, they were not going to make a profit on the PS3. Of course, during the second year, they use the design and production plants/equipment from the previous year so the cost is far, far less.

if Sony were to say to its shareholders that they plan to make a consistent 100-240$ loss on each PS3 over its 10 year lifespan, which they *hoped* to recover in software/bluray sales I don't think they would be left with any shareholders

Given that IBM is a partner, as is RAMBUS and I think Toshiba may still be a partner, all of the hardware is manufactured by the owners of the console. There is no way that a single PS3 unit hardware (without packaging) costs over 100euro to produce right now (in my non-expert opinion - altho I do have experience with circuit fabrication costs ).

Anyway, all this is getting a bit off topic

Varik

their not making that large a loss now, i think eh phats started making a profit in the end but the slim at the lower price is back at a loss.

_tony_ wrote: »

if Sony were to say to its shareholders that they plan to make a consistent 100-240$ loss on each PS3 over its 10 year lifespan, which they *hoped* to recover in software/bluray sales I don't think they would be left with any shareholders

this is where the numbers come from, sadly a company has to be honest to it shareholders, they can lie to everyone else but not them.

here some stuff on the slim, only slightly old.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article6808050.ece

ongarite

_tony_ wrote: »

There is no way that a single PS3 unit hardware (without packaging) costs over 100euro to produce right now (in my non-expert opinion - altho I do have experience with circuit fabrication costs ).

Complete garbage. The unit cost to Sony including and packaging is still greater than the retail price of the PS3. Their current loss on Slim PS3 is around $30 per unit.
The non-standard architecture of the PS3 will end up costing Sony more money in loss than MS as the life cycle of the console continues.

projectmayhem

Grumpypants wrote: »

PS3 : Not hacked most expensive for hard ware and soft ware.

Software is generally the same as the 360, and first-party titles are generally cheaper then Microsoft first-party titles. Not sure where your argument comes from. To bring a 360 to the same hardware spec as a PS3 costs extra, i.e. XBL, wifi adapter and so on.

Grumpypants wrote: »

Wii : Hacked Cheap console cheap games.
NDS : Hacked cheap machine cheap games.

The Wii has similar production values to a PS2, but remains artificially inflated in cost in both software and hardware. It's not a stretch to buy a 360 or PS3 over a Wii given the cost. The games are also still expensive. Same for the DS, it's not a cheap device given the technology in it. Nintendo have massively inflated prices. If you think €45 for a new DS game is cheap then for the love of god, get me a job wherever you work.

Grumpypants wrote: »

So your arguement about keeping the price high becasue of piracy doesnt really add up it looks more like Sony charge more for their console/games eitherway. Otherwise the PS3 which looses no money to piracy would be much cheaper than the 360.

Just to add to my point above, the cost of a random, new release ps3 game on play.com is €51.99, the same price for a random, 360 game. I've never seen either console have huge differences with prices, bar first-party new releases from Sony which generally get a slightly lower RRP.

Grumpypants wrote: »

Are you really saying Microsoft are telling people look we only sold 7 million copies of MW2 that should have been 8 million you have to pay us 4 euro a month now to play online. If that was the case Sony who sold 2 million less than that would have to charge twice the amount for online gaming.

The argument has nothing to do with Microsoft per se, Activision lost the money, not MS (for the most part). The PS3 version sold less - it didn't lose sales. There's a massive distinction there.

Varik wrote: »

the otherOS was put on the ps3 as a deal/favour to IBM to help programmers, none of you money went to adding it to the ps3.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it was a favour to IBM. That's not quite how huge businesses work. It was a cool feature that allowed people to access this great new technology - but it was under-used and not really a big deal given linux runs on the puniest of hardware... so using a ps3 as your main pc was a bit ludicrous to most normal users in their homes. So when someone comes along with a hack through this feature, it makes sense for Sony to nuke it.

Grumpypants wrote: »

I like the way you say piracy hurts the developers and costs jobs then go on about ACTIVISION !! Loosing 1 million copies of MW2. the same activision that just sacked the 2 guys behind MW2 becasue they are refusing to pay them the royalties that they owe them (it didnt save their jobs did it ??) !! The same activision that did something similar to the Guitar hero guys.

MW2 and Activision is the most readily available example. You know what I'm saying, don't degrade the conversation to nit-picky arguments like that.

Leiva

So the debate rumbles on .....

One question without going off thread too much .
Keeping in mind to forget about the pros and cons of the recent SONY response , but in general .

Where does it end when it's acceptable that a manufacturer can remove a feature from a sold unit ?

Varik

projectmayhem wrote: »

I wouldn't go as far as to say it was a favour to IBM. That's not quite how huge businesses work. It was a cool feature that allowed people to access this great new technology - but it was under-used and not really a big deal given linux runs on the puniest of hardware... so using a ps3 as your main pc was a bit ludicrous to most normal users in their homes. So when someone comes along with a hack through this feature, it makes sense for Sony to nuke it.

i said deal/favour as i can't be sure what went on in terms of agreements or payment, the rest of what you said in relation to this is the same as i did and some others, it allowed programmers the chance to use the cell with out the huge cost and could have improved interest in it for other non-Sony uses.

projectmayhem

mixednuts wrote: »

Where does it end when it's acceptable that a manufacturer can remove a feature from a sold unit ?

It depends on the feature. That's largely where this debate falls down. The only reason I'm defending (if that's what you can call it) Sony is because this feature is utterly superfluous to the device, and does not hinder the majority of users. It's removal has very little impact on the consumer base and with its removal, ensures the machine isn't hacked - which would have a detrimental effect on the overall industry.

Like I said before, Sony wouldn't just "remove" other features from the PS3 if they were mission-critical and were being used for a hack. They'd patch. In this instance, it wasn't worthwhile investing in a patch.

Varik wrote: »

could have improved interest in it for other non-Sony uses.

In fairness it's had about 4 years to improve said interest and if it was going to, it would have done so by now. I'd say that ship has sailed...

Grumpypants

projectmayhem wrote: »

MW2 and Activision is the most readily available example. You know what I'm saying, don't degrade the conversation to nit-picky arguments like that.

Well if rebuffing examples you continue to make to support your arguement is nit picking then there isnt much more i can offer this thread. Also it is getting into a bit of a slaging match which is not my intention. (even though it may come across like that in my posts)

So ill leave it at this. Piracy is wrong it is stealing and no one should do it. But the industry makes out its a bigger problem than it is. Its this miss information that annoys me. Saying people will loose jobs and it will affect small developers is garbage. Large corporations dont give a flying flip about small developers. They only care about profit.

This is why i point to activision who also say piracy hurts developers while they go about shafting developers who have made them billions of dollars. Thats bad for the industry.

The removal of this feature is wrong also, regardless of how many people use it or not. Im not going to take the view of i dont use it so there-for its ok for Sony to take it away, but its not ok to remove a different feature that i do use. Thats not a reasoned response. Once you use something to sell a product you shouldn't take it away from users on very spurious grounds.

This will not save the PS3 from being hacked if anything it will speed it up. While at the same time being another instance of Sony shooting themselves in the foot PR wise.

noodler

MISINFORMATION

For the love of god.

Who the fcuk is Miss Information? Your missus?

Grumpypants

noodler wrote: »

MISINFORMATION

For the love of god.

Who the fcuk is Miss Information? Your missus?

Its a south park quote !

But You are right and an even further mistake i found, the word i should use of course is disinformation. Thank you for pointing that out i hope you can continue to point out items of such importance its the only way ill learn

PS its not spelt FCUK

Varik

noodler wrote: »

MISINFORMATION

For the love of god.

Who the fcuk is Miss Information? Your missus?

yea i think your right, oh i saw her she's in disdirection.

Leiva

noodler wrote: »

MISINFORMATION

For the love of god.

Who the fcuk is Miss Information? Your missus?

Varik wrote: »

yea i think your right, oh i saw her she's in disdirection.

.

_tony_

mixednuts - You're spot on (tho I see your post has disappeared now :P). I think this thread has probably run it's course......altho maybe when it's closed it should be put on pause....we can resume the debate when Sony starts charging for the PSN :pac:

Leiva

_tony_ wrote: »

mixednuts - You're spot on (tho I see your post has disappeared now :P). I think this thread has probably run it's course......altho maybe when it's closed it should be put on pause....we can resume the debate when Sony starts charging for the PSN :pac:

I deleted it cause after re-reading it sounded like I was slighty back seat modding , that's one accusation I can do without , true or not

noodler

mixednuts wrote: »

.

mixednuts wrote: »

I deleted it cause after re-reading it sounded like I was slighty back seat modding , that's one accusation I can do without , true or not

Very helpful additions to the thread etc.

Hypocrite.

AHA

Leiva

noodler wrote: »

Hypocrite.

BOOOMMM

noodler

mixednuts wrote: »

BOOOMMM

BABY!

Grumpypants

I dont know about the rest of ye but im having tons of problems since this update. Both Bioshock 2 (once) and fallout 3 (twice) crashed last night. I just get a black screen but can hear the sound but nothing works. My 60bg PS3 has never crashed so to get 3 crashes in 1 night is suspicious.

My slim is freezing while using the internet browser more than usual but it always did that just not as often.

VenomIreland

Grumpypants wrote: »

I dont know about the rest of ye but im having tons of problems since this update. Both Bioshock 2 (once) and fallout 3 (twice) crashed last night. I just get a black screen but can hear the sound but nothing works. My 60bg PS3 has never crashed so to get 3 crashes in 1 night is suspicious.

My slim is freezing while using the internet browser more than usual but it always did that just not as often.

To be fair now, Fallout 3 has always crashed a lot

Grumpypants

VenomIreland wrote: »

To be fair now, Fallout 3 has always crashed a lot

Usually i would get a screen freeze as if its loading up but the pic would stay the same and it would come back. This is the saem in both games black screen but still have sound but it never comes back. Even holding in the PS button wont turn it off.

Purchiz

imagine by this time next year or 18 months time the PS3 will be 3D and we will have 3D tellys.

wow looking foreword to it

eddhorse

Grumpypants wrote: »

Usually i would get a screen freeze as if its loading up but the pic would stay the same and it would come back. This is the saem in both games black screen but still have sound but it never comes back. Even holding in the PS button wont turn it off.

A few friends of mine are having issues, ie one got Heavy Rain, it did its update and then got a blank screen, brought the game back and had the same issue.

Could be a Heavy Rain update issue though either, recent patch?

Jackobyte

eddhorse wrote: »

A few friends of mine are having issues, ie one got Heavy Rain, it did its update and then got a blank screen, brought the game back and had the same issue.

Could be a Heavy Rain update issue though either, recent patch?

I'm getting lots of black screens with a message saying "Out of Memory".

eddhorse

Is that in Heavy Rain or on the PS3?

check Settings -> System Settings -> System Information

http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps3/current/settings/systeminfo.html

See how much you have left

Jackobyte

eddhorse wrote: »

Is that in Heavy Rain or on the PS3?

check Settings -> System Settings -> System Information

http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps3/current/settings/systeminfo.html

See how much you have left

I'm not sure where it is from. I've only got it playing MW2 but that's the only thing I play. It is just a plain black screen saying "Out of Memory" and always occurs just after the online map has finished loading.

I have 41 gb free space.