[iceberg187]

Originally Posted by INKster

According to what i've just read on the back of the box, the 40GB model still has backwards compatibility with PSOne games.
But the warning about the lack of support for PS2 games is there, alright.

[PARANOiA]

I guess this means we shouldn't hold out hope for a firmware update then.

[-tkf-]

EDIT: Better explanation already posted.

[pipo]

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?op...=7441&Itemid=2

"The 40GB model, to be launched in Europe on October 10, is a new model and is not equipped with any of the semiconductors from the PS2, and backwards compatibility would therefore have to be achieved by software emulation alone.

"The sheer numbers of PS2 titles available, together with the increased complexity of using a software only solution for each and every title means that to ensure accurate software emulation for the majority would be technically challenging, time consuming and costly. As we have mentioned on several occasions, our engineering resources are now focused on developing new and innovative features and services for the PS3 and, as a result the 40GB model does not have backwards compatibility with PS2 titles."

[rabidrabbit]

It would be interesting to hear what Ken Kutaragi has to say about the current situation of PS3 and the direction Sony is driving the brand.
If this indeeed means backwards compatibility is no longer to be a feature in future Playstations, that would be bad.
BC has been to me a big feature. True, I might not use it much after I've completed FFXII and Okami, but in the first year or so, I've used the PS2 and PS3 a lot for playing last gen games.
If, however, the BC will be dropped in the future revisions of PS4 hardware, that I don't think would be as much a big deal, as I\m likely to be an early adopter next gen too.

Maybe all this would have worked much better if the PS3 had been priced lower in the beginning, and more people would have been able to buy one. As it is now, there will be a lot of future PS3 owners who miss the BC.

Edit: And what about the coming digital tuner/recorder, that would surely have benefitted from a bigger harddrive, and an extra USB port is nice too so you can keep it plugged.
Really, this 40GB SKU makes little sense, except for price reduction.

[Shifty Geezer]

Originally Posted by Mintmaster

It's not about cost, its about differentiation.

Sure, I get that, but they're differentiating in the wrong direction! Is 40GB is no cheaper than 80GB, you'd want a minimum 80GB model, and the higher-end model to have more capacity. From what's been said before, 60/80 GB is actually the cheapest HDD you can source and 40GB will be more expensive. I dunno if that's true, but these companies can't keep introducing a smaller HDD model every time they want a price-cut, or they'll end up with negative storage amounts!

[pipo]

I'm still baffled by this move. I never expected Sony to drop BC.

Phil said it best:

Backwards compatibility, as you know from PlayStation One and PlayStation 2, is a core value of what we believe we should offer. And access to the library of content people have created, bought for themselves, and accumulated over the years is necessary to create a format. PlayStation is a format meaning that it transcends many devices -- PSOne, PS2, and now PS3.

I suspect there has been some heated debate over this at Sony HQ.

On top of that, the USP 'it plays my old games' is out the window now. Not good.

[V3]

I was right. When I saw that the GS was still there in EE less PS3, it was clear they are going to drop BC. By going with NV it is now clear that they pretty much screw up the PS3 design. RSX is pretty much a band aid solution because it fails to accomodate BC. So many screw up with PS3, from rumble, inferior motion control and now this.

But still getting the PS3 to below $300 is far more important in the long run.

[Kryton]

The dropping of the GS always baffled me because of the monetization it would offer. Over PSN, Sony could happily have sold PS2 titles at $10 a pop (they do this with PS1 titles already). It would only take each person to buy one of those, and the money for the chip would have been made back.

I guess, however, they could just port these titles to the PS3 like Namco did with Tekken 5.

[V3]

Originally Posted by Kryton

The dropping of the GS always baffled me because of the monetization it would offer. Over PSN, Sony could happily have sold PS2 titles at $10 a pop (they do this with PS1 titles already). It would only take each person to buy one of those, and the money for the chip would have been made back.

I guess, however, they could just port these titles to the PS3 like Namco did with Tekken 5.

They would have kept the GS, if PS3 was still selling at the same pace as Wii and 360, but its not.

My guess is their plan was to embed GS into RSX at some point in the future. But I guess sales aren't going as plan. So change of plan.

[Mintmaster]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

Sure, I get that, but they're differentiating in the wrong direction! Is 40GB is no cheaper than 80GB, you'd want a minimum 80GB model, and the higher-end model to have more capacity.

What? Why would they want to increase costs in their higher end model? You're not going to find 120GB or 160GB drives at the same price as an 80GB yet.

When manufacturers do this sort of thing, they nearly always have the complete hardware in the lower end units and just disable parts of it. Sony isn't doing anything in the wrong direction.

From what's been said before, 60/80 GB is actually the cheapest HDD you can source and 40GB will be more expensive.

That makes no sense. A simple firmware change could expose only 40GB on an 80GB drive.

[pipo]

It's probably more to do with the fact that people who payed top cash for the old unit don't feel completely f*cked.

*wonders when MS will replace the 20GB drive*

[Nesh]

Originally Posted by rabidrabbit

Edit: And what about the coming digital tuner/recorder, that would surely have benefitted from a bigger harddrive, and an extra USB port is nice too so you can keep it plugged.
Really, this 40GB SKU makes little sense, except for price reduction.

Only to those that want to benefit from it.

The majority of gamers out there are more familiar with the gaming feature of the playstation brand and almost non existent about anything else. And they prefer cheaper price.

Sony is targeting to increase their sales

[Phil]

Originally Posted by Kryton

The dropping of the GS always baffled me because of the monetization it would offer. Over PSN, Sony could happily have sold PS2 titles at $10 a pop (they do this with PS1 titles already). It would only take each person to buy one of those, and the money for the chip would have been made back.

I guess, however, they could just port these titles to the PS3 like Namco did with Tekken 5.

I agree. I have searched years for a english copy of Final Fantasy VII and VIII. Offering these on PSN would have been an instant buy for me.

[Dr Evil]

Originally Posted by Phil

I agree. I have searched years for a english copy of Final Fantasy VII and VIII.

Scotty look what daddy has!

[Gradthrawn]

Originally Posted by Mintmaster

That makes no sense. A simple firmware change could expose only 40GB on an 80GB drive.

No, they can't, since the user can replace the HDD with their own of any size.

I think Shifty's point is that the low end model, which currently has a 40GB drive, should use a 60/80GB drive, since, to our understanding, those drives are actually cheaper. While the upper unit should be using a 120+GB drive. Thus putting the higher cost drive in the higher priced unit, so they eat less of the cost. Otherwise, if our understanding of drive prices is correct, the more expensive drive, the 40GB, is going into the lower cost unit.

[archangelmorph]

Originally Posted by Phil

I agree. I have searched years for a english copy of Final Fantasy VII and VIII. Offering these on PSN would have been an instant buy for me.

The PS3 is BC with PSX games..

[Phil]

Originally Posted by Dr Evil

Scotty look what daddy has!

Scotty!!! Beam me up!

Damn, I really should have bought FFVIII when I had a chance to back in Australia...


@archangelmorph,
I know... isn't really such a big issue for me, since I'll be getting one of the older PS3 models. I still am looking forward to going back to some games like MGS2&3, ZOE2 etc... I wouldn't want to miss those on the PS3!

[Carl B]

The move to a 40GB drive is likely simply a means being used to keep the psychological appeal of the 60/80GB units in place while they work through those existing stocks. The drive certainly is not lowering the manufacturing costs of the 40GB - as we've speculated elsewhere I think those cost-reducing measures will likely take the form of 65nm silicon, board simplification due to PS2 absence, and of course cutting the GS itself. Having an artificially small drive just lets them move the legacy older systems; no doubt when those are gone, we'll see new SKUs with larger drives based on new hardware.

As to the backwards compatibility, it is indeed a shame. Kutaragi can't be pleased in the over-arching scheme of things, but since he still has an office at SCE HQ and keeps in touch - not to mention helped to outline a years worth of cost-cutting measures - he's probably at least accepting of the situation. I'd like for them to always keep at least one SKU with B/C in play in the market, but I'm not hopeful. I think B/C will be there again though for PS4-->PS3 though should NVidia and Cell remain at the base of the architecture. Here it's just been a specific matter of GS emulation hurdles.

[INKster]

Well, Ars has further info on the 40GB SKU for Japan.

The big news: there will be both black... and white models of the console (with SIXAXIS to match).
Wii buyers, beware !

Now, all that's missing is that yummy Silver model shown back at E3'05.

[patsu]

I wish the White one makes it Stateside. It will make a great gift for my pal.

[pipo]

Originally Posted by INKster

Well, Ars has further info on the 40GB SKU for Japan.

The big news: there will be both black... and white models of the console (with SIXAXIS to match).

Apparently with rumble...

[Carl B]

This is the thread on the Japanese console:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=44801

No rumble included in box.

[Npl]

im very surprised to see Sony dropping BC on any PS3 model. But aslong as there still is a BC-Model available, I dont see much of a problem - you can get BC if you feel its worth paying more. Will be interesting to see what happens when the stock of 60GB Versions is cleared - will Sony brew a cost reduced 60GB Version (like the 40GB Version), but with BC left intact? I surely think and hope so.

[patsu]

Originally Posted by Carl B

This is the thread on the Japanese console:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=44801

No rumble included in box.

That's right. This picture above already indicates so (No DS3):



Since power consumption is 100W lower, are Cell and RSX both 65nm now ? Or just one of them ?