Console pricing thread

[Crossbar]

Then it wouldn't be viable as a cost-saving measure (short-to-interim term), would it...?

I am not sure I follow you. You would need ten of those chips to get 20 GB of storage anyway, still at a cost of $17.

Now, I do think there will come a point in the PS3s lifespan where a SSD of (what will then be deemed to be) a reasonable size will cost less than the base cost of the cheapest HDD alternative at a transparent (or advantageous) performance level for the user, but I think it's highly unlikely for it to happen within a year.

My guess is that this would correspond with the (almost) certain introduction of a "PS3-Slim" since going with a smaller form factor SSD (mini PCIe?) would offer design advantages and materials savings at the same time.

Maybe they will, but I hope they will have an empty 2.5" HDD SATA slot in the slim unit instead of some esoteric SSD slot. The size shouldn´t really be a problem considering that most laptops use a 2.5 HDD. That would offer an easy cheap upgrade path to large storage.

 

[Zaphod]

I am not sure I follow you. You would need ten of those chips to get 20 GB of storage anyway, still at a cost of $17.

There's more to the cost of a SSD than the memory itself. Not that I'm an expert on the matter, but I'd venture to guess that a 16GB as used in the cheapest netbooks aren't too far from the cost you're envisioning; however, they're also unbearably slow. The cheapest 16GB 2.5" SATA I could find are $91.00 ($215 for 64GB) and those are about the same overall speed as a 60GB HDD (effectively still slower writes, but also faster read).

My bet: SSD equipped "PS3-Slim" available in November 2010.

 

[Crossbar]

There's more to the cost of a SSD than the memory itself. Not that I'm an expert on the matter, but I'd venture to guess that a 16GB as used in the cheapest netbooks aren't too far from the cost you're envisioning; however, they're also unbearably slow. The cheapest 16GB 2.5" SATA I could find are $91.00 ($215 for 64GB) and those are about the same overall speed as a 60GB HDD (effectively still slower writes, but also faster read).

My bet: SSD equipped "PS3-Slim" available in November 2010.

I don´t think we should take much bearing on the current SSD market. It´s still a novelty that hasn´t reached that high volumes yet, I think the resellers are still skimming the market. We also don´t know which size Sony will go for, what kind of chips, etc. But the actuall prices of flash do give a rough estimate that a PS3 with flash-based storage is not totally out of reach next year.

But I think you may be right about fall 2010, Sony has not been a fast mover when it comes at introducing new hardware, thinking about the DS3, official headset, controller keyboard etc. Maybe it will turn up earlier in Japan than elsewhere. The Japanese market seems keen on small designs, so it may show faster benefits from a slim unit.

 

[Squilliam]

Wouldn't an Xbox 360 with internal flash based storage be more viable? They only need 4gb for caching games and the rest is just for downloadable content. A Viable PS3 flash drive would probably have to be 2-4* the size of a viable 360 drive and the 2010 timeframe sounds pretty good to me for the introduction of a slim model.

 

[eastmen]

Wouldn't an Xbox 360 with internal flash based storage be more viable? They only need 4gb for caching games and the rest is just for downloadable content. A Viable PS3 flash drive would probably have to be 2-4* the size of a viable 360 drive and the 2010 timeframe sounds pretty good to me for the introduction of a slim model.

Whats the largest mandatory install for a ps3 game ? Is it 20 gigs ? If so they need to have at least 20 gigs free for the ps3. However bluray has a 50 gig storage capacity. So if they do have alot of drm and other things and loose space to it we are still looking at over 40 gigs.

So sony would need 20-40 gigs of space while ms can most likely get away with 8 gigs or mabye even 16 gigs. Though I think a core unit with just 8 gigs would be a big move foward for ms . They can keep costs down and at some point they might even be able to do away with the pro eddition and just have a arcade unit with flash and the elite with a very large hardrive.

 

[Crossbar]

Wouldn't an Xbox 360 with internal flash based storage be more viable? They only need 4gb for caching games and the rest is just for downloadable content. A Viable PS3 flash drive would probably have to be 2-4* the size of a viable 360 drive and the 2010 timeframe sounds pretty good to me for the introduction of a slim model.

What would the point be? MS already has a low cost/low end entry model in the Arcade unit. Sony on the other hand would of course benefit if they could reach a mass market price point faster through a simpler and cheaper upgradeable entry model.

@eastmen, It probably comes as a surprise to you that Sony sold a 20 GB PS3 sku at launch.

 

[Squilliam]

What would the point be? MS already has a low cost/low end entry model in the Arcade unit. Sony on the other hand would of course benefit if they could reach a mass market price point faster through a simpler and cheaper entry model.

Microsoft also has the Pro SKU as well. Anything which would make the PS3 cheaper will likely make the 360 cheaper as well since they are so similar.

Whats the largest mandatory install for a ps3 game ? Is it 20 gigs ? If so they need to have at least 20 gigs free for the ps3. However bluray has a 50 gig storage capacity. So if they do have alot of drm and other things and loose space to it we are still looking at over 40 gigs.

So sony would need 20-40 gigs of space while ms can most likely get away with 8 gigs or mabye even 16 gigs. Though I think a core unit with just 8 gigs would be a big move foward for ms . They can keep costs down and at some point they might even be able to do away with the pro eddition and just have a arcade unit with flash and the elite with a very large hardrive.

The largest install size and im pretty sure of this is 5gb. So for a consumer system the minimum size for the PS3 would be about 40gb and since they aren't likely to reduce it unless they introduce a new SKU a flash based model would need 80gb HDD space minimum. They won't go backwards on specifications.

For the 360 its pretty much anything above 512mb. So really for the 360 its how they intend to use it, and the cost benifit ratio they percieve. I do expect them to transition to an internal flash for the Arcade SKU at least. From what I understand it would cost them less money in the long term and give them a chance to really beef up the storage options on the SKU.

 

[Crossbar]

Microsoft also has the Pro SKU as well. Anything which would make the PS3 cheaper will likely make the 360 cheaper as well since they are so similar.

Why on earth would MS want to scale down the storage of the Pro unit and make it compete with the Arcade unit? The Arcade unit as the cheap entry model fits it purpose pretty well. It is Sony that is lacking a cheap entry model not MS.

MS is probably very happy with the market positions of the current SKUs. Perhaps the HDD of the Elite unit will be increased to 200+ GB during next year else I don´t expect very much to change.

 

[RobertR1]

I believe the biggest has been 5gb and there's a few around that size.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Max mandatory install on a PS3 game is 5gb i think

 

[quest55720]

Max mandatory install on a PS3 game is 5gb i think

The problem is so many games have mandatory installs. The minimum size Sony could get away with is 40gigs now. Anything less would basically piss of customers and make them less likely to buy any new games because of having to delete previous games and reinstall ect. Sony messed up by allowing mandatory game installs. They should of done it the way MS has done it. Set aside so much for games to cache data.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How much annoyance is that in reality? For me it's not a problem whatsoever, but I don't know what the Average Joe's response is. IMO most gamers don't finish the games. wquickly moving on, and never returning. I doubt many at all play a dozen full-sized games at the same time and want them with immediate access. I've never seen any research into this though.

 

[quest55720]

How much annoyance is that in reality? For me it's not a problem whatsoever, but I don't know what the Average Joe's response is. IMO most gamers don't finish the games. wquickly moving on, and never returning. I doubt many at all play a dozen full-sized games at the same time and want them with immediate access. I've never seen any research into this though.

Since most people don't finish games fast it makes it a major annoyance. I remember bringing my PS3 with to a friends house. We rented some games and the install times just annoyed the hell out of my friends. I could only imagine how annoyed they would be if they had to manage game installs because of limited drive space. If you have 40 gigs or more space it makes it much less likely to have to deal with managing installs. I could only imagine how bent someone would be if they got lets say a 20 gig PS3. They would end up having to micro manage installs very quickly if they bought the wrong games.


It is not just game installs it is demos, videos,DLC and MP3s that also suck up drive space.

 

[eastmen]

The problem is so many games have mandatory installs. The minimum size Sony could get away with is 40gigs now. Anything less would basically piss of customers and make them less likely to buy any new games because of having to delete previous games and reinstall ect. Sony messed up by allowing mandatory game installs. They should of done it the way MS has done it. Set aside so much for games to cache data.

whats the average install time for those games ? I hear dmc4 is 20 minutes ? If so I don't think many people would be happy having to constantly install and uninstall games

 

[DrJay24]

Sony messed up by allowing mandatory game installs. They should of done it the way MS has done it. Set aside so much for games to cache data.

From what Joker said they changed the TRC in early 2007/late 2006 for loads so that with some games installing was the only solution. I suspect Sony will either change it again or developers will come up with better solutions. LBP, R2 and MSR all have small or no HD footprints. Sony should just make the TRC more flexible so the install solution is optional.

 

[betan]

How much annoyance is that in reality? For me it's not a problem whatsoever, but I don't know what the Average Joe's response is. IMO most gamers don't finish the games. wquickly moving on, and never returning. I doubt many at all play a dozen full-sized games at the same time and want them with immediate access. I've never seen any research into this though.

Don't know about Joe Avarage, but on B3D I don't recall reading any complaints from 20GB owners, like myself. I'm sure someone does care somewhere, but what's interesting is here people who seem to care, don't really game on PS3 at all (maybe because of that ).

Installs are welcome.

 

[Crossbar]

The problem is so many games have mandatory installs. The minimum size Sony could get away with is 40gigs now. Anything less would basically piss of customers and make them less likely to buy any new games because of having to delete previous games and reinstall ect. Sony messed up by allowing mandatory game installs. They should of done it the way MS has done it. Set aside so much for games to cache data.

It would be an entry level SKU, nothing more nothing less. It will insufficient for hard core gamers in the long run just like the Arcade unit. Is the Arcade unit pissing off customers? There are other options (SKUs) at hand and it is actually possible to upgrade when there is a need, so why should they get pissed?

Some developers think MS messed up by not having a mandatory hdd. There are two sides of this coin you see,

 

[quest55720]

It would be an entry level SKU, nothing more nothing less. It will insufficient for hard core gamers in the long run just like the Arcade unit. Is the Arcade unit pissing off customers? There are other options (SKUs) at hand and it is actually possible to upgrade when there is a need, so why should they get pissed?

Some developers think MS messed up by not having a mandatory hdd. There are two sides of this coin you see,

I am sure the arcade unit does make a few customers pissed who want to play online and find out the hard drive is pretty much a requirement. If a person is a casual gamer who does not go online then the arcade would be just fine for them. The casual gamer is not going to want to micro manage drive space like they would on a 20gig PS3.

The next year of sales will tell who was right. If the sub 200 dollar arcade unit leads to good sales MS was right. If the sub 200 dollar arcade unit does not sell then the developers were right.

 

[DrJay24]

The next year of sales will tell who was right. If the sub 200 dollar arcade unit leads to good sales MS was right. If the sub 200 dollar arcade unit does not sell then the developers were right.

That would assume no one buys a HD separately.

 

[Crossbar]

I am sure the arcade unit does make a few customers pissed who want to play online and find out the hard drive is pretty much a requirement. If a person is a casual gamer who does not go online then the arcade would be just fine for them.

I guess MS has been pissing off customers for three years now and I don´t see people are getting to vocal about it.

The casual gamer is not going to want to micro manage drive space like they would on a 20gig PS3..

You are out of touch with reality. I have a 60 GB since launch with a number of installs of large BD games like GTA4, MGS4, PlayTV + about 5 more titles and heavy downloads like GT5 Prologue, Burnout Paradise, Siren, EyeCreate + large number of small downloadable games.

So far I have never been forced to remove one single game installment, some videos and demos have been removed sure, but I still have many demos and videos installed. If I only had one third of the games I have and no demos or videos that would still be plenty of games. Perhaps beyond that point you are no longer casual? Time to buy a harddrive?

I will probably buy a larger harddrive myself, but that is mainly because I want to keep recordings from PlayTV for longer times.

The next year of sales will tell who was right. If the sub 200 dollar arcade unit leads to good sales MS was right. If the sub 200 dollar arcade unit does not sell then the developers were right.

Don´t you worry, the Arcade will sell plenty. I can now find the 360 in toy stores which only carried PS2s and Wiis before. The Arcade is sold for about 2/3 of the price of the Wii and in supermarket even less than that, there are a lot of cheap parents.