Blu-ray holds about 5 times more than a DVD per layer.

DVD - Around 4 GB
BD - Around 25GB

Well thats better than DVD. I just can't wait for the Blue ray burner for the pc lol.

Just a minute. Lets go back to Blu Ray again. Last I heard, Blu Ray only supports High Definition TVs and won't display on anything less. At least, that's a rumor I heard. What of us who don't have High Def? (my poor wallet will be hurting pretty bad here in a few months)

I'm pretty sure it just supports it out of the box, whereas DVDs had to be programmed with HDTV capabilities.

Let us hope that that's the case... if not, we all are going to have really nice TV's and very little money.

I will, when it doesn't cost my left arm to purchase.

When it comes out, it's likely to be a left arm and a few fingers from what's left of your right one....

and an eyeball....

and maybe all your hair.

...and a your first layer of skin for tax.

We won't tell you what else it'll require.

sperm sample?

Okay okay, I'm sorry... I just couldn't stop myself... and I can't get myself to backspace either, which is a good thing I haven't made a typo yet.

heh the ps3 needs satisfying

lmao, then me and my ps3 would be doing eachother a favor!

Some stuff according to the latest issue of PSM (some you already knew, but I'm retyping just in case):

- A simultaneous worldwide release this November, with 1 million units available in the US on day 1, with another half-million before the year's end.

- The system "will not retail for under" about $425 in Japan, meaning a likely price of $399 here.

- Comes with 60GB hard drive.

- No required regional lockout on games, with some even holding "every country's version of a game on a single disc".

- PS1 and PS2 games will run in the various high-resolution modes including 1080p.

- PS3's online service will be like Xbox Live, except free. Though they intend to make money through downloaded content.

- The next Ratchet & Clank game will be on PS3. D'oh! It's not supposed to get my interest this early!

Despite how much I don't care for PSM, they are reliable more often than not.

If it's about $399 here, I "might" bite the bullet, but I'm not real sure. As long as it's nothing higher.

I just hope they have one solid release of their system (Hard Drive, bells whistles trinkets and all), unlike what the 360 did (Deluxe edition for a really good system, Core edition which lakcs everything but a skeleton).

Once the price goes down.

So my guess was 49 bucks off... go me

I'll pre order and pay a little each week. That way, I'll never really loose that much money at one time. So yeah... I'm going for it.

I usually don't get a game console until the price drops down to at least $199. How fortunate was I that the GameCube started off at that price.

eh. 399$ isnt that bad. at least u get a good set in it. IE: the harddrive. with the xbox360 u pretty much had to buy the harddrive serperate. actually i cant rememebr. im just kidna obsessed with my new comp right now =( but ill be getting the PS3....and will be my last console ill ever get...

Well, if the blu-ray crap is true to the rummor of HDTV requirment then we are all screwed. The smallest HDTV I've seen is 15 inches and is about 250 bucks... But I have come to doubt it. That would be gay, and would turn away at least 50% of their sales, because HD isn't common enough.

Who actually has a high definition TV? Not I...

If you think that's rediculous, Sony is trying to copy the DS, where you could plug the PS3 into two HDTVs side-by-side. I don't see very many developers (if any) taking advantage of a second screen beyond multiplayer mode, but the potential is there. If you're very rich.

I don't see dual screens on a console system being of much use. I mean, yeah, handhelds you need the room, and it's right there at your finger tips. But what would you do with two 24 inch TV's... The only real idea I could think of, outside of touchscreen, is a menu (like from zelda) open to you 24/7. I would say you could pan out the screen over the whole 48 inches, but that would leave an irritatingly large gap right in the center where the frames of the two TV's meet. So, yeah... I think outside of multi-player games, dual screens is crap.

Now for computers, on the other hand, duals are ideal if not for one reason... multi-tasking. Also, what's cooler than having a movie maximized on one screen while going about your computing business on the other?