PlayStation 3

[AndrewTS 0]

I think Sony should have kept the 20 GB or produced it in higher numbers. Sure, it has a smaller HDD, but a version for $400 would put them on the same ground as the premium 360.

 

It has less holes to stick widgets in and no on-board Wi-Fi, but even in that regard its on par with 360.

[Guest Smues]

I really didn't plan on getting a PS3 for awhile, but I want the hardware backwards compatibility, and I have ~$330 in walmart money, so I might just get one and stick it in the closet.

[AndrewTS 0]

It would be awesome if it was a huge lie, and Sony said "due to the extremely positive market response" that they would retain the 60 GB PS3....

 

Cutting the EE+GS chipset stealthily once all currently produced units go bye-bye, of course.

 

Please, tell us a lie, Sony.

[World's Worst Man 0]

I finally got a system that didn't have a high-pitched noise coming from it. The interface of the whole system is the best of the three current gen systems. It's nice not to have to pay to access supposedly "free"content in their online shop. They price gouge just as much as MS for the stuff they actually charge for, but insignificant stuff is given away for free (like extra armor models and such). A good number of PS1 games are already available, but nothing too good. There's a few nifty looking things in the regular game section. The system runs so quiet that it's almost hard to believe. It's definitely the best machine of the three, not that it matters until the games start coming out.

[Guest Smues]

I went and bought a PS3, so you can now fully expect Sony to change thier minds and keep making the 60gig, or add the emotion chip to the 80 or some such. On the upside the little amount of space I had left in the closet is now filled.

 

Oh and there was this little conversation as I bought it:

Employee 1: He's buying a PS3

Employee 2: See I told you! They drop the price $100 and it's affordable and people buy them now.

Me: No actually I still didn't want a PS3, but Sony announced that they won't make anymore of this model, and the 80 gig has no emotion engine chip.

Employee 1: Oh................................................................I better go buy one for myself.

 

[World's Worst Man 0]

It's not like they're going to be dropping the 80 gig price anytime soon, although it's possible they could bundle it up real nice. But either way, if you want one for the future, there's no reason not to get a 60 gig now since it's significantly cheaper than the 80. I'll be using mine as a PS2, since I can put the PS2 itself on a more accessible TV for my brother, and I had no memory space left for save files anyway. I won't actually be buying a PS3 game until possibly Stranglehold, which is more than a month away.

[Guest Smues]

I decided to hook it up to see if there were any worthwhile PS1 games. I know they were losing money on the blueray and stuff, and I GUESS I can understand no HDMI cable, but no composite cables in a $600 package? Thanks Sony. So far I've seen nothing that will prevent this from going in the closet.

[AndrewTS 0]

I don't think the BC loss by itself is that much of a tragedy (is keeping a PS2 slim around really all that much trouble? The thing is freakin' tiny), it's the lack of consistency.

 

Sony decided "all of the PS3s will have the EE+GS...for now...except for Europe...until we remove that HW from the other territories' PS3s...then software emulation...which we're not terribly committed to making work..." It's a bloody mess.

 

Freaking hell, at least 360 is across-the-board the way it works (hard drive good, no hard drive bad. With hard drive/updates, these xbox games work -- *online list*). Sony's willy-nillied so damn much with this thing you have to have a flow chart and diagrams to explain the pricing scheme, differences in models, features, and compatibility to anyone who hasn't been paying attention from the beginning.

 

 

[World's Worst Man 0]

The lack of component cables is insane. There's no reason not to include them other than the company wants people to buy their overpriced cables. I'm just using my PS2 component cables, as there's only three component cable inputs in the house, and I have four consoles that could use them (360/PS2/PS3/Wii), so PS2 gets composite again. I would have liked to use HDMI, but I stupidly only have a 3 foot cable, and to make that work I'd have to put on PS3 in a somewhat confined space, which I definitely want to avoid.

 

I certainly want some good PS1 titles that I don't already own. Like say, FFT and Xenogears. Make it happen, please.

[Guest Smues]

I don't think the BC loss by itself is that much of a tragedy (is keeping a PS2 slim around really all that much trouble? The thing is freakin' tiny), it's the lack of consistency.

 

Sony decided "all of the PS3s will have the EE+GS...for now...except for Europe...until we remove that HW from the other territories' PS3s...then software emulation...which we're not terribly committed to making work..." It's a bloody mess.

 

Freaking hell, at least 360 is across-the-board the way it works (hard drive good, no hard drive bad. With hard drive/updates, these xbox games work -- *online list*). Sony's willy-nillied so damn much with this thing you have to have a flow chart and diagrams to explain the pricing scheme, differences in models, features, and compatibility to anyone who hasn't been paying attention from the beginning.

Ahh but I'm a curmudgon who doesn't have a slim, and if my non-slim died I'd shop around until I found another non-slim.

[AndrewTS 0]

Ahh but I'm a curmudgon who doesn't have a slim, and if my non-slim died I'd shop around until I found another non-slim.

 

Oh? Any concrete reason why? Emotional attachment? You use the hard drive? Prefer to have a built-in fan? Have a flip-top mod for your current OG PS2? You're a gambler? I'm honestly curious.

 

The curmedgeon part doesn't seem to add up with rushing out to buy a still-obesely-expensive games console for BC that has the same components for BC as the slim you refuse to buy ever. Curmedgeons have no need for Blu-Ray. If you're going to buy another original PS2 anyway (if yours breaks), why is BC such a big factor for you? I assume you still have your Playstation (1) around.

 

I think there's no chance in hell 60 GB PS3 is going to be some massive hit now because of BC fears. If the mass market wants to play PS2 games, they'll buy a PS2. PS3 isn't at a mass market price; PS2 is.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

In the UK anyway, at least Newcastle and the people I serve, people aren't that bothered about playing their old PS2 games on their PS3 - we had one Console traded in because he couldn't play his PS2 games on it. We told him he could but didn't like the round about way to get them working. I swear you can watch the sales sore in the UK once Fifa and PES comes out, its all anyone wants.

 

 

[AndrewTS 0]

Gamestop is selling refurbished 20 GB PS3s for $369. IF you can find one.

 

http://www.gamestop.com/productavail.asp?m...BO&bn=False

 

Replace "(YOURZIPCODEHERE)" with a local zip code to see if any more are actually available, call for availability natch.

 

MattYoung hasn't been hooking people up here with CAG stuff, so this is secondhand from somebody else, so it sadly may be too late for most.

 

In the UK anyway, at least Newcastle and the people I serve, people aren't that bothered about playing their old PS2 games on their PS3 - we had one Console traded in because he couldn't play his PS2 games on it. We told him he could but didn't like the round about way to get them working. I swear you can watch the sales sore in the UK once Fifa and PES comes out, its all anyone wants.

 

PAL territories also bought almost the same amount of PS3s as NA territories in half the time. Their early adoption rate is out of skew with the rest of the world.

 

And I don't know what point you're actually trying to make, but it seems like Sony's method of offering BC on the PS3 has confused the hell out of people.

 

But I would imagine those soccer games that have historically sold well are going to continue to sell very well, regardless. It's like Madden (and NFL2K?) to NA.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

Pretty much people thought that they were getting the PS3's that NA/Japan got rolled out and ready to PS2 games - this was probably due to customers reading internet reports and Sony/stores not relying the information correctly. However, alot of people who have PS3's still have their PS2's, so they don't seem too bothered about playing PS2 games on their PS3.

 

And yeah Fifa and PES will sell no matter what, even if they had 'this game is shit, don't buy it' on the front cover. Microsoft have a 12 month deal with PES, which runs out in November, which means that it isn't available on PS3 as a game, or BC.

 

As for PS3s selling equal to NA in half the time, that's because UK consumers are fickle shits that like to look trendy and absorb brands like plants with sunlight. If its hyped they will come.

[World's Worst Man 0]

That's no different than people here. I believe the Wii is proof of that. The difference is the Wii costs $350 less. As for the UK who knows? Is the 475 pound price tag lower relative to the prices in NA? What I mean is, do you Brits make less of your own currency than people in the US or Canada make of theirs? The British pound is obviously worth much more than the USD, but if the average salary in the UK is similar to the average salary in the US, based on the currency itself, that 475 pound pricetag is significantly less of a burden than the $600 USD pricetag in the US. And you mentioned that most places sell it for 275, which would even be a bigger difference.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

Minimum wage in the UK is £5.35 an hour, so just over $10 an hour, so I guess it works out to be just a little more expensive when you put it that way.

 

Wii's are £279 which would make it just over $525, so I guess the difference isn't that great, and certinaly compared to the PS3 the difference isn't anywhere near as bad.

[World's Worst Man 0]

I was thinking that £100 to someone in the UK might mean the same to $100 to a person in the US, but that doesn't appear to be the case. UK's average household income is much lower than the US, based on the national currency. It just happens to be higher if converted. And on the other hand, the Canadian average is higher than the US in both cases, so $100 to someone in Canada probably isn't worth as much to $100 to someone in the US. I wonder how these companies get away with charging such a comparatively high price for their products. This is something I've wondered for a while, and thought that maybe the different currency strength had something to do with it, but that does not seem the case. It's pretty shitty in any case.

[At Home 0]

Fucking Sony.

 

I do agree that sony "won" e3, although I haven't read 100% into it. Wii Fit is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard of. Nintendo did a pretty shitty job with their games, showcasing 3 or 4 main games. The PS3 still sucks and seems like a complete waste of money. but then again, there have been 0 games out for Wii that have been worth buying outside of Zelda. My wii has been sitting on the shelf waiting for Metroid or at least something fucking playable. SSX Blur was pretty fun, but it became a one-trick pony real fast.

 

[World's Worst Man 0]

Ironically, it seems like the Wii and PS3 have fairly similar game libraries in terms of quality. Two or three high-end titles, and a few middle of the road, 'ok' looking titles. The price was the original reason for the negative vibes, but this latest nonsense has worsened the situation. Not that it's a dumb move itself, because it's not. They way they handled it was the mistake. If they had come right out and said "we're phasing the 60 gig out, so we're going to knock $100 off the price, and now $600 (the old price of the 60) will get you an 80 gig PS3 with a game bundled in" it wouldn't be such a PR nightmare. People might bitch about no real price drop, but it would inarguably be a better value than the 60 gig. Sony has just been woefully inept at the PR game since the PS3 price was announced.

[At Home 0]

The 60GB PS3 was a pretty dumb deal anyways. I'd never shell out that much money for a system. The only way that I'd do that is if it spat out hundred dollar bills, espresso, and had a little fleshlight hole on the side. I'm not much of a graphics guy, I'm more of a gameplay guy, and the PS3's gameplay is overshadowed by the Wii, which it should be. Besides, to get the really great graphics, you have to factor in the HDMI cables, and the $2000+ for the 1080p for the TV if you don't already have one. Frankly, the Wii's graphics are more than satisfactory, and the price is great.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

I guess the only good thing that Sony has going for it, is that Blu-Ray seems more popular then HD-DVDs at the moment.

[World's Worst Man 0]

The 60GB PS3 was a pretty dumb deal anyways. I'd never shell out that much money for a system. The only way that I'd do that is if it spat out hundred dollar bills, espresso, and had a little fleshlight hole on the side. I'm not much of a graphics guy, I'm more of a gameplay guy, and the PS3's gameplay is overshadowed by the Wii, which it should be. Besides, to get the really great graphics, you have to factor in the HDMI cables, and the $2000+ for the 1080p for the TV if you don't already have one. Frankly, the Wii's graphics are more than satisfactory, and the price is great.

 

HDMI cables cost like, $3. 1080p isn't necessary for "really great graphics" either. Graphics vs. gamplay has nothing to do with anything. Good games are good games. If a game has great graphics and poor everything else, it's not generally considered a good game. The Wii is at a good price, but the system has no longevity. In a graphical and storage sense, it will be completely out of date in two years, Nintendo has very little announced for 2008, and they've already blown their big cash cows (Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Mario Kart, Smash Bros). Maybe the 3rd parties will come through, and maybe they can ride the hype for a while, but it's still a bleak picture.

 

I guess the only good thing that Sony has going for it, is that Blu-Ray seems more popular then HD-DVDs at the moment.

 

The vibe I'm getting is that HD-DVD is more or less done for. Not surprising really, as Blu Ray is a better technology, and when technology is going head to head, the inferior one usually gets put out to pasture unless there is a serious price differential.

[At Home 0]

Wasn't Betamax better technology than VHS, but VHS was cheaper (and also used by the porns)

[World's Worst Man 0]

In picture quality, which is not the only facet of technology.

[Ripper 0]

Blu-ray isn't better technology. Its has better support which is why there never was a race. All the major companies backed Blu-ray.

[World's Worst Man 0]

What do you call ten more gigabytes of storage capacity per layer? That's about the only meaningful difference, but it's quite significant.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I suppose I should move up my decision on the 60 gb for $499 because the 60 gb models are being discontinued and might not be around long if a lot of people go out and get one NOW. The extra 20 gb and game dont make any difference to me, I just want a cheap blu ray player.

 

 

[At Home 0]

What is the hard drive used for?

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

What is the hard drive used for?

 

downloadable stuff and saves..

 

and since I dont have broadband..totally useless for me.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Sony is going to be offering "full-sized" games through their download service, they already have PS1 games available, and they eluded to PS2 games being available as well, so hdd space is definitely a big deal for the PS3. With that being said, Sony doesn't use a proprietary hdd like Microsoft does, so you can buy a big one from a computer shop and use it, rather than paying extra for a model with a bigger hdd.