View Full Version : glitch on the ps3!!!!!!!!
there are two glitches on the ps3 that i know of. i wanted to know what you guys think, or if you know any other glitches tell me.
Glitches:
1.) you cant play a game that you have plyed in your ps3 on another ps3.
2.)you cant play ps2 games.
1. I hear PS3 games are copy protected to the console they're played on first. To stop theft and copies.
2. I call BS, maybe you're not putting the right games in.
alexanderpas
30-11-2006, 22:34
2.)you cant play ps2 games.should read: you cant play all ps2 games.
this is a known error and sony doesn't know exactly how to fix it XD just like with ps2 vs. PS1
1.) you cant play a game that you have plyed in your ps3 on another ps3.
solution, don't connect to thee interweb.
for a game to work it has to fit a certain criteria, an official Sony standard of the way it was made
alexanderpas
30-11-2006, 22:44
for a game to work it has to fit a certain criteria, an official Sony standard of the way it was made
actually... that was all nintendo's idea!
the Official Nintendo Seal of Quality
sony just stole it XD
but B.O.T.
i think that locking the CD is a no-no, cause what would happen if your ps3 broke...
and it will, it's a sony product.... anyone remembered faulty lasers!
Zidane007nl
30-11-2006, 23:10
1.) you cant play a game that you have plyed in your ps3 on another ps3.
If that's so it would be bad. Sometimes I bring games to friends to show them, but it won't be possible with PS3 games then.
2.)you cant play ps2 games.
You CAN play PS2 games, but not all games are compatible yet. Hopefully firmware updates will solve those problems.
~Manick~
30-11-2006, 23:12
Odd, my one works perfectly.
And I've played PS2 Games on it.
actually the ps3 only has a 43% chance of working out of the box so be careful when you buy always buy with insurance.
~Manick~
01-12-2006, 09:58
actually the ps3 only has a 43% chance of working out of the box so be careful when you buy always buy with insurance.
Wtf? Source prz.
yeah what the hell
i know the source, some wii fanboy
~Manick~
01-12-2006, 15:23
Probably, no way Sony would release PS3 if the percentage was that bad.
It's funny, the Sony PS3 costs roughly $850 to make, yet they were selling for $500-$600. Sony lost out big on console sales, but I think they were relying on income from the game titles. They sure as hell need it.
Fyi, don't believe random crap you hear on some websites.
alexanderpas
01-12-2006, 15:32
It's funny, the Sony PS3 costs roughly $850 to make, yet they were selling for $500-$600. Sony lost out big on console sales, but I think they were relying on income from the game titles. They sure as hell need it.you know that the game yo ps3 ratio is only 1.5 XD
lets see i bought a ps3 at walmart and it did not work so it's personal preference not some fanboy for the wii. i bought another one and it still did not work until i bought my 3rd one which i upgraded to the 60 gig then it turned on but that was it. plus the graphics are just as good as 360's so i think it was a waste 0f 700$ plus it's next gen line up is crap except for ff13 and kh3 but thats it plus they pissed off the unreal company and now the ps3 lovers loose unreal championship 2007 because of sony's "next gen does not start until we says so" comment made the unreal company because well look at gears of war graphics beat all the games that are on ps3 right now.
*coughxboxornintendofanboycough*
Let's consult our friend Wikipedia:
On the backward compability glitch:Glitches in the backwards compatibility have been reported by the media and Sony. At least 200 of the 8,000 games from the previous generations of the Playstation have problems such as dropped audio[51] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_3#_note-15), freezes or controller malfunction[52] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_3#_note-16). Popular games reported to have this glitch include Final Fantasy, Tekken 5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tekken_5), and Gran Turismo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_%28series%29). As of 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006)-11-16 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_16), a firmware upgrade has been posted online by Sony that is intended to address some of these issues.[53] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_3#_note-17)
I've heard nothing of the PS3 locking the games to only one console, that'd be just silly, and if they've done it I'm sure complaints would've been all over the Internet by now.
I'd say 6/16 of the launch games are worth buying, I've excluded some since I'm no fan of Icehockey and Baseball.
Poison Mushroom
02-12-2006, 20:39
i think that locking the CD is a no-no, cause what would happen if your ps3 broke...
and it will, it's a sony product.... anyone remembered faulty lasers!
that's exactly how my PS2 broke. i got it fixed two times and the third time, it finally gave up.
but about the glitches, they could be worse,
1) Anyone remember flaming 360's?
2) My N64, when it was almost new, maybe a year old, you could just poke the game cartridge and it would freeze, glitch or both. same with alot of my friends.
3) THE 3/4 RED CIRCLE OF DEATH!
http://www.thegamefeed.com/storage/images/News/Ring%20of%20Death.jpg
and i'm sure there's been more...
~Manick~
03-12-2006, 13:56
lets see i bought a ps3 at walmart and it did not work so it's personal preference not some fanboy for the wii. i bought another one and it still did not work until i bought my 3rd one which i upgraded to the 60 gig then it turned on but that was it. plus the graphics are just as good as 360's so i think it was a waste 0f 700$ plus it's next gen line up is crap except for ff13 and kh3 but thats it plus they pissed off the unreal company and now the ps3 lovers loose unreal championship 2007 because of sony's "next gen does not start until we says so" comment made the unreal company because well look at gears of war graphics beat all the games that are on ps3 right now.
Ok, well seeing as you included no source to the 43% chance of working, I call BS.
As for it being the same graphics as the 360, thats not true either, the PS3 is somewhat stronger and able to handle more graphic capabilities than the 360. The developers explained it at the Japan launch.
Console specifications are a lot like statistics in that you can really change perceptions by paying special attention in selecting what you measure and how you go about measuring it. Microsoft may have been the first manufacturer to announce its next-generation console, but in order to gain that advantage Microsoft also had to reveal its console specs first--giving a fat target-list for Sony's marketing team. Do you really think that Sony would have even mentioned the 51-billion-dot-product-operations per second number during the PS3 press conference if Microsoft hadn't boasted that the Xbox 360 could do 9-billion-dot-product-operations per second? What if we told you that Sony combined the CPU and GPU performance numbers to come up with the 51-billion number while Microsoft only reported its CPU performance number? The Xbox 360 actually has 33.6-billion-dot-product-operations per second if you also include GPU performance.
We're not saying to ignore specifications altogether--most of them are relevant in some way or another. And we're going to talk about the specifications that really jumped out at us at first glance. Let's start with the processor. Sony has announced that the PlayStation 3 will have a 3.2GHz Cell processor that consists of a PowerPC-based core with seven synergistic processing units. The PS3 spec-sheet says that there's an eighth SPE reserved for redundancy--whatever that means. The Xbox 360, in comparison, has a multicore PowerPC processor that has three dual-threaded cores that can handle six total threads at a time. You might be able to call the Cell's SPEs overgrown math units, but we think Sony's Cell processor wins from a brute power perspective.
There's no denying that the PS3 is both a beauty and a beast. Shinier than Darth Vader's helmet, the curvaceous console shows no visible switches or buttons (the eject and power buttons are subtle, touch-sensitive emblems on the unit), with only a series of four USB ports causing a faint ripple on its surface. Lurking beneath is a series of powerful microprocessors and circuitry that makes the PS3 the most powerful and complex game console ever. It's truly a high-definition machine, capable of displaying games and movies at 1080p resolution through its HDMI port. (Trust us: What may sound like gibberish to you is beautiful music to anyone who owns an LCD or plasma set.) The PS3 also plays Blu-Ray movies, one of the two high-definition DVD formats that Sony is betting will eventually replace standard DVDs. Considering stand-alone Blu-Ray players cost around $1,000, you can argue the PS3, at $600, is actually a bargain. It also includes useful memory card slots that can display your digital photos, a large 60 GB hard drive, and built-in Wi-Fi to connect the unit to your home network. The PS3's menu navigation, called the Cross Media Bar, is as elegantly designed as the machine itself. It sports a clean interface and lets you quickly rotate through the jungle of multimedia formats that the PS3 can play.
It also states that alot of the PS3's graphic features can't be displaced on conventional TV's. HDTV onry for this beast, if you want to fully experience the graphic capabilities.
PS3 will also be able to support Linux.
Also remember that the games out right now are only starter titles. As soon as game developers learn how much the PS3 can do, and how to create specific games to play on it, they will get better. Just look at all the previous console released before this one.
My verdict,
The upcoming year will be very interesting to see, I think the PS3 will turn out to be a frickin' beast of a machine.
The PS3 is stronger when it comesl to graphics, becaue of the trype of processor. It's using a CELL processor which is newly developed by IBM, Toshiba, and Sony.
the Cell in the PS3 runs at 3.2Ghz and has 7 out of 8 operating SPE's with 6 being available to developers and 1 being kept for OS Security.
The thing with Cell and the way it processes things is that it is much faster at processing real time graphics much faster than a normal processor (Apparantly 40 times faster.) This makes it exceptionally more powerful than other next gen consoles when it comes to rendering graphics in real time.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5768840796984121642&q=cell+processor
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4194111054003841639&q=cell+processor
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8025980825115926132&q=cell+processor
It is particularly good at the physics aspect of rendering, that's why Half Life 2 and games using the Source engine are going to be put onto the PS3, because they basically want to see what the two combined can do, and that... excites me..
The PS3 is stronger when it comesl to graphics, becaue of the trype of processor. It's using a CELL processor which is newly developed by IBM, Toshiba, and Sony.
the Cell in the PS3 runs at 3.2Ghz and has 7 out of 8 operating SPE's with 6 being available to developers and 1 being kept for OS Security.
The thing with Cell and the way it processes things is that it is much faster at processing real time graphics much faster than a normal processor (Apparantly 40 times faster.) This makes it exceptionally more powerful than other next gen consoles when it comes to rendering graphics in real time.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5768840796984121642&q=cell+processor
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4194111054003841639&q=cell+processor
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8025980825115926132&q=cell+processor
It is particularly good at the physics aspect of rendering, that's why Half Life 2 and games using the Source engine are going to be put onto the PS3, because they basically want to see what the two combined can do, and that... excites me..
orly than how come half life 2 is a 360 exclusive and the halflife2 for 360 also has team fortress 2 both expansion packs and portal. so where ever you heard or it was coming out for the ps3 was wrong.
and here is proofses http://www.oxm.co.uk/articles/news/1st_person/half-life_2_misses_the_xmas_rush...
http://www.oxm.co.uk/articles/news/1st_person/half-life_2_confirmed_for_xbox_360
Half-Life 2 is not exclusive for either 360 or PS3. It'll be out on both. I've closed the window where I had the link to a source, if you absolutely want to check it out. Just go to wikipedia, search for Half-Life 2 and look around. You'll find the release quartal for the game on both PS3 and 360.
And don't trust magazines that are for one console only when looking for sources, if there exists magazines out there that are biased up to their noses, it is gaming magazines that only support one console.
IGN, gamespy, Wikipedia. Now *that's* reliable sources.
Elf-chan
05-12-2006, 04:59
But with ANY new thing, there will be little problems with them, for they really never got a hardcore test. And its sad that there are still so many problems with the 360. I trust Sony for they've been around longer and they know there shit. But even the reg Xboxs arn't lasting. ****, my PS2 is # years old and still works like a charm, and its first Gen, and when they first came out.
But if you have people that know in how to look after them, then hell yeah they will last. But then again, many tech people look at me funny because I know my shit. But you see, I have tits so I should be stupid...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Tharrick
05-12-2006, 08:32
I've heard nothing of the PS3 locking the games to only one console, that'd be just silly, and if they've done it I'm sure complaints would've been all over the Internet by now.
http://ezinearticles.com/?PS3-Games-Patent&id=242574
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3152081
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/12/193225
And the list goes on...
Sony have been toying with the idea of putting this in consoles for a while though, so there's no certainty it'll be going in the ps3.
*coughxboxornintendofanboycough*
It's a well known fact that Sony are haemmorhaging exclusives like there's no tomorrow.
my PS2 is # years old and still works like a charm, and its first Gen, and when they first came out.
Wow, you have a ps2 that was made in 1972? I'm impressed :P
I think that you meant 6th gen :P
orly than how come half life 2 is a 360 exclusive and the halflife2 for 360 also has team fortress 2 both expansion packs and portal. so where ever you heard or it was coming out for the ps3 was wrong.
and here is proofses http://www.oxm.co.uk/articles/news/1st_person/half-life_2_misses_the_xmas_rush...
http://www.oxm.co.uk/articles/news/1st_person/half-life_2_confirmed_for_xbox_360
That article says Jack about HL2 (and sequels, spin offs, related like Fortress 2 and Portal) being exclusive to the XBOX360.
Elf-chan
05-12-2006, 21:02
Wow, you have a ps2 that was made in 1972? I'm impressed :P
I think that you meant 6th gen :P
You get in what I mean, silly ^_^ *does random happy dance *
Dark Sephiroth
07-12-2006, 22:17
i have been told you can play ps2 games on a ps3 many sites say that you can.
and that xbox 360 does not look right
by who
who has told you this
by who
who has told you this
dude
it's called backwards compatibility
PS2 has it
XBOX360 has it
nnnnnnnnnnnduhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Dale Anthony
08-12-2006, 13:02
You know, I just have the funniest feeling that the PS3 will cock up big time. I mean, don't get me wrong. I hate Xbox 360 and I'm a huge fan of the Wii, but I can't help but think...the PS3 won't be as expected. I just know that in the past:-
A lot of Hype + Longer waiting time (usually) = A Terrible Mess
Although, that's just my opinion. I know there's been a lot of great things said about the PS3, but hey...it's possible it'll be bad!
~Manick~
08-12-2006, 14:28
There's something about waving a controller around that just doesn't appeal to me whatsoever.
I mean kudos on them trying something different, but c'mon, they should have at least released a standard controller for those that don't feel like looking like an idiot while playing a video console. I loved the GameCube, but this Wii-remote looks like it'll get get tired fast. If they did have a normal controller I would buy it right away.
There's something about waving a controller around that just doesn't appeal to me whatsoever.
I mean kudos on them trying something different, but c'mon, they should have at least released a standard controller for those that don't feel like looking like an idiot while playing a video console. I loved the GameCube, but this Wii-remote looks like it'll get get tired fast. If they did have a normal controller I would buy it right away.
They do have a normal controller for it, I think the remote controller fits into it aswell. Have a look around, there is one.
Dale Anthony
08-12-2006, 18:06
There's something about waving a controller around that just doesn't appeal to me whatsoever.
I mean kudos on them trying something different, but c'mon, they should have at least released a standard controller for those that don't feel like looking like an idiot while playing a video console. I loved the GameCube, but this Wii-remote looks like it'll get get tired fast. If they did have a normal controller I would buy it right away.
I wholeheartedly agree. The only thing that holds me back from wanting a Wii is the fact that, I like to be intouch with the game I'm playing and as much as this Remote and Nunchuk thing might add realism, I'd rather hold a controller. I'm a Nintendo guy, to be honest. First console I got was NES way back in 1993 and I loved it. Playing with a Remote isn't how I want to experience gaming after all these years. Sure, I'll probably TRY it out but it's not something I think I'd adjust to.
And yeah, Dom is right...there is a standard controller being released but the thing that makes me uneasy about that is despite all the reviews I've read, the controller is taking a backseat. Now that might just be because they've released a "revolutionary" way of playing games with the Remote and Nunchuk but at the same time, I fear the controller may not play big parts in any game and may after awhile not even be compatible as all things turn Remote-Controlled.
~Manick~
08-12-2006, 22:17
They do have a normal controller for it, I think the remote controller fits into it aswell. Have a look around, there is one.
Yeah I saw, I like that, but the majority of the games for Wii will be designed for the original Wii-remote, only few games will be specifically designed for Classic controller, (Super Smash Bros. Brawl etc.) I've always loved the Smash Bros. series, I might wait a while to see what games come out compatible with Classic controller, but I would love to play the new Smash Bros.
Sony just needs to work more on their online play, although it's free unlike Microsoft's Xbox-live, it's not really as good. You get what you pay for I guess. But hopefully it's something Sony will work on.
wow i never tought my post would be dis popular..... well it is interesting talking about this i mean who knows what will happen any thing could. these are all good gaming companiesand they know what they are doing.............. .. that sounded so gay!:D :P
alexanderpas
20-12-2006, 03:12
facts:
google define:"backwards compatibility"
In technology (especially computing), backward compatibility has several related but differing meanings:*A system is backward compatible if it is compatible with earlier versions of itself, or sometimes other earlier systems, particularly systems it intends to supplant. That is, other systems or objects that interoperate with the old version of the system should continue to interoperate with the new version.
the only true backwards compatible console is the Wii, both Xbox360 and PS3 has problems playing certain games while all GameCube games can be played on the Wii.
The only two thingsthat are not compatible with the Wii are the modem and the GameBoy Player (both are using the high-speed port ;)) (take THAT Mickeysoft ans Sony)
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.