PS3 to Launch with no HD?!?

[RancidLunchmeat]

Qroach:

Don't get your point. Yes, everybody was bitching about the thought that the X360 wouldn't include a harddrive. But, it does. And the PS3 doesn't. So now everybody is bitching about the PS3 not including a harddrive. I missed your point somewhere.

As far as support, last time I checked, the very large difference in load times between the Xbox and the PS2 was almost entirely attributed to the use of the harddrive. Perhaps somebody has information that will show me this isn't the case, but it's certainly the impression that I've gotten. And it has resulted in me cursing the PS2 while waiting 10 minutes for GTA:SA to load.

Now if the PS3 can somehow improve load times (not over the PS2, but over the X360) without the inclusion of a HDD, then more power to them.

But Sony really looks lost since they first started releasing specs on the PS3. They know they are pricing themselves out of the market, so now they are cutting features that consumers want while supplying features that consumers couldn't care less about.

For any defending Sony's decision on this using the 'you can add one via usb later', answer this: Why did MS decide to go with a 20gb removable and upgradable hdd as standard instead of launching with the HDD as an option?

If you can answer that decision (because if it's not standard, nobody will support it) then you know the reason why this is a horrible decision for Sony.

Cut the ports nobody will use, cut the BR drive nobody will use, add a HDD and maybe toss in some more memory and push the box to market at $299. Then you've got a winner.

But it supports up to 7 controllers! Whoo Hoo!

 

[Carl B]

I don't think the HDD competes cost-wise with other components of the system - I think it competes cost-wise with itself and the long-term burden Sony probably feels they would incur by including it.

To repost:

Well the thing is the inclusion of an HD likely costs them more than the inclusion of the 'circus,' and prevents their future creation of something on the order of a slimline PS2 equivelent; with an HD, that will always be an extra ~$30 or so tacked on to component costs that otherwise go down significantly over time. So I could see from a business angle why they would be so hesitant, since Playstation releases for SCEI really are more ten-year plans than they are five-year plans.

I want to add that basically what that means is that the long and profitable life their consoles enjoy after their initial manufacturing hurdles would probably be stunted. Afterall it's hard to get your console under $100 to live out the rest of it's existence when you have a $30 fixed cost that you can't get to budge.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

PS3 not including a hard drive....I thought this was known and not "news"?

 

[Qroach]

Don't get your point. Yes, everybody was bitching about the thought that the X360 wouldn't include a harddrive. But, it does. And the PS3 doesn't. So now everybody is bitching about the PS3 not including a harddrive. I missed your point somewhere.

You obviously get my point. That being it's NOT the same people bitching.

 

[strat_ax]

Didn't Sony showed some specs in E3 that PS3 will have a slot for HD?

Anyways, others pointed out..with Blue Ray, Cell, etc. the console will be expensive. Hopefully, the console won't turned out to be the poorly recieved media centre so called "PSX" and focus more as a gaming console.

 

[wco81]

Even if it doesn't come standard (which I doubt it won't - the official word is that it's "undecided"), you'd be able to plug any 2.5" HDD in it (any size/price you want) and use it for game saves, media playback/custom soundtrack from it. I don't see the big deal.

Really? It doesn't have to be Sony-branded?

What are typical prices like?

I may well consolidate all my entertainment media onto one machine with either X360 or PS3, depending on what their functionality is like etc. so I'd be needing a hard disk, a big one preferably

I don't think that was the case with the PS2 HDD. That is, few games could read and write game saves directly from the HDD. You still had to use a Memory Card. At least that's what I recall reading from people who'd bought the HDD. So it sounded like games had to specifically support the HDD as a storage device for game saves, never mind more sophisticated things like caching, installation or even playing media.

The slot sounds like it's something you'd have to install, not slap it in and out easily like the X360. Then again, the CTO said people would be able to take it around, so that implies it will have a casing of its own, rather than the bare HDD mechanism you slide into the PS2's slot. The 2.5-inch form factor would make it better for taking it with you but of course, 2.5-inch drives cost a bit more than 3.5-inch drives.

I think the only way including a HDD makes sense for either company is if they make the cost back by selling downloads (microtransactions). Or maybe it's a feature checkpoint to help sell the console versus the competition. But as some have noted, it's value for gaming alone is questionable.

The fact that Sony's undecided about including it suggests Sony's online features won't be as extensive as XBL, as most people suspected. One of the reasons Gates was apparently convinced to include the HDD on the Xbox was that it would be needed to support the kind of online features they planned. He supposedly expressed surprise that PS2 was able to do online without a HDD.

 

[marconelly!]

For any defending Sony's decision on this using the 'you can add one via usb later',

Not USB, there's a 2.5" HDD slot. Whether the HDD will be included out of the box is still undecided (Chatani's words from the recent Famitsu interview) As what the support will be like, even if it's not included out of the box - refer to my previous post. It's not black/white the way you make it to be.

Cut the ports nobody will use, cut the BR drive nobody will use, add a HDD and maybe toss in some more memory and push the box to market at $299. Then you've got a winner.

Cutting $1 parts like ports will not help them save any money, especially not if the alternative is adding much more expensive parts like memory or HDD. Cutting BRD is out of question IMO. If you think noone will use it, I think you are terribly mistaken.

 

[JasonLD]

It is funny now that PS3 not potentially having HDD became such a big issue...I believe including HDD is not a cost effective solution and both Microsoft and Sony knows it. Microsoft was kinda forced to include HDD because of ensuring compatibility with Xbox games, if they only had to deal with content download and stuff, they couldve sell HDD as optional Live package.

 

[Shark Sandwich]

I just hope this doesn't turn out like the PS2 HD. Sony bragged about all the wonderful things we could do with it before the PS2 was even out. It turns out it was hardly ever used, and the new slim PS2 doesn't even have a HD slot.

 

[TTP]

I basically agree with what Marconelly and Titanio said, which brings up the question: how's Sony going to menage all those storage formats (HDD, MS, CF, SD) without confusing the dumbass end-user? Will you be able to save anywhere or just on mem sticks? What if you can save anywhere? How will autosaving games decide where to save if there are more than one media format into those slots? Are they gonna ask like "yo! This game has an outsave function. Cool isn't it? But wait a sec, you got a Mem stick and a CF inserted into the system. Where do you want me to save? Oh, btw, check into the option screen if you decide to plug in an HDD 'cos you can save there too eventually!". Not to mention issues related to the "where the fuck did I save the game last time? Was it on the mem stick or on the HDD?" thing.

I mean, there's a hell of options in there and a hell of work to do with UI and such things.

 

[wco81]

I rather have the BR drive than a HDD.

It would suck having slow load times but I wouldn't expect to buy much downloadable content (unless they start distributing full games at a discount to retail shrink wrap). I don't use PPV on the satellite and I don't buy songs from iTunes so I don't foresee compelling microtransactions content.

My music library is on a PowerBook (although thinking about it, X360 or PS3 probably would rip much faster but there are no Firewire ports for my external FW drive or for my iPod) and I often turn down the music in games.

Now if they really had email and web clients in these things as well as competitively priced storage (say I could buy a 200 GB HDD from anyone as opposed to having to get whatever HDD MS and Sony sells), maybe it would be worth transferring media libraries to these consoles.

Of course they would need good music, photo and video editing and library applications as well. MS probably has a better chance to deliver those than Sony. But I believe their idea is to store the media libraries on a Media Center PC and stream that content to the X360 over a simplified interface. You wouldn't actually edit or manage this content directly from the console itself?

I shudder to think what kind of Internet or multimedia applications Sony would have. They really need to make a deal with Apple or some other company with good applications but Apple would really have little incentive, unless they could get $100 for a PS3 version of iLife, which is about what they get now. Problem is, that's way too much for the console market and way more than Sony would probably be willing to pay. Maybe do a deal with Google to port Picasa and do a browser with a Google for PS3 portal.

 

[AlNom]

Not to mention issues related to the "where the fuck did I save the game last time? Was it on the mem stick or on the HDD?" thing.

These are current "problems" with multiple memory sticks and Xbox, btw.

 

[Ruined]

XBOX360 will have the technology edge for sure (again) if PS3 doesn't have an HD builtin.

 

[ManuVlad3.0]

"yet to be decided" != "PS3 to launch with no HD"

 

[_phil_]

XBOX360 will have the technology edge for sure (again) if PS3 doesn't have an HD builtin.

lol.

 

[MechanizedDeath]

I hope it's supported at a minimum spec, at least. If not, I'm probably never gonna buy it. PEACE.

 

[ralexand]

OT: Can you play FFXI on a slim ps2? I thought the harddrive was required for that game.

 

[jvd]

If there isn't a hardrive packed in it will splinter the market .


Other than that as i've already said


Memory sticks are great esp since there is the sd slot . You get 1 gig for 50ish . But 20 gigs worth would cost you 1k .

So everytime a ps3 user has to spend 50$ on another sd or ms that will be x amount of dollars less to spend on new maps and whatever else .

But for sony they save money on the cost of the unit and i guess this is the price to pay for bluray

 

[SedentaryJourney]

Perhaps sony decided to package the 2.5 inch HD like it does memory cards. Meaning it's standard, yet sold separately.

 

[ralexand]

Perhaps sony decided to package the 2.5 inch HD like it does memory cards. Meaning it's standard, yet sold separately.

Yeah, I can't imagine them allowing users shove something in and fudge with those tiny pins on a harddrive.