PS3 HDD REQUIRED to Play Games but is NOT Standard?

[Joe DeFuria]

I personally view the PS3 "hardrive required" message to devs much the same as Microsoft's "Live is required" messge to devs.

MS "requires" that devs make their games "live aware." This does not obviously mean that you can't play the game if you are not connected to live.

 

[Diamond.G]

After looking up the retail price of OEM 2.5 inch HDD's I wonder in what quantity Sony would have to purchase them to sell a 60gig drive for 50 dollars and still be able to make profit off of them like they did with their memory cards.

I wonder if MS will ever release the number of Xbox Cores that have a HDD attached to them.

 

[ROG27]

I personally view the PS3 "hardrive required" message to devs much the same as Microsoft's "Live is required" messge to devs.

MS "requires" that devs make their games "live aware." This does not obviously mean that you can't play the game if you are not connected to live.

This is exactly what KK said...in an awkward Engrish kind of way (language barrier's fault mostly).

 

[Inane_Dork]

The initial PS3 SKU will come 'bundled' with a 60 GB harddrive...for a premium price (think PSP Value Pack).

A year or two down the line, when a solid customer base has been established, Sony will offer a revised SKU less HDD for a substantially lower price. By this time, Sony will be offering a number of different sized HDD options (ie 40 GB, 60 GB, 100 GB, etc.) to be purchased separately. The customer will be able to choose at this time which option is best for them...but the precedent (and incentives attached to the precedent--enable full feature set of game) that there is always a hdd present to play games will have been established by this time, thus avoiding the splitting of the userbase while allowing Sony to control costs on their end (so that they don't hit a cost floor with the HDDs like MS did in XBOX1).

A much better solution than the 2 SKUs sold by Microsoft.

The problem there is that, precedent or not, some people will not want to buy a HDD. Every time you give the customer an option, you "fracture" the userbase because they are independent. I say "fracture" because the word choice presumes the unattractiveness of having a split userbase.

It wouldn't work.

 

[Titanio]

Sony will be in the same position with their hard drive solution. Games will have to expect that one might not be there.

Not to go round in circles on this, but the translations of Kutaragi's comments seemed to indicate he was telling them NOT to develop for systems with AND without a HDD, but just with a HDD i.e. we're not asking you to accomodate systems without the HDD. To paraphrase him slightly more specifically, he said something along the lines of "rather than asking you to develop for systems both with and without a HDD, we'd asking you to develop with the assumption that all PS3s have a HDD". And went on later to talk about not wanting a situation where some PS3s have HDDs and other not.

The problem there is that, precedent or not, some people will not want to buy a HDD.

I think his scenario hinges on the notion that it is required, and that that requirement is enforced in some compelling way (e.g. need it to play games, or whatever).

Whether Sony can go this route - make it a required, but seperate purchase - IMO is all down on how much they could sell it for. 2.5" 60GB drives in the kind of volume Sony could rely on could probably be sourced for them at less than $50 a piece. If they could hit ~$50 at retail, I think they could make it a requirement. Maybe they could get away with a bit more starting out, amongst early adopters, also.

The whole thing is slightly unclear, though. I'm hoping Phil Harrison will make it known definitively what the story is next week - I'm sure if devs are going on the same info as us, that they're also as confused as us, and will be asking questions on this.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Not to go round in circles on this, but the translations of Kutaragi's comments seemed to indicate he was telling them NOT to develop for systems with AND without a HDD, but just with a HDD i.e. we're not asking you to accomodate systems without the HDD.

As I'm sure you know, there is a huge difference between OR and AND.

He said, Not to develop for a PS3 with OR without a HDD, but rather 'as though' it has a HDD.

That means he is clearly making a distinction between it 'having' a hdd, and it being 'as though' it has a HDD.

Seriously, if it's required his entire 5 minutes of speech was redundant. All he had to say is HDD is standard and will be required for gameplay. There would be no need to 'ask' devs to support it, as it would be the deFacto standard anyways. There would be no need to spend 5 minutes clarifying the difference between is and as though, he would simply say "code for a PS3 with a hdd" end of story...

 

[Inane_Dork]

I really don't think that compelling reasons have anything to do with this. People, in large numbers, are aimless and ignorant. They're not going to be aware of what the HDD brings, and they're not going to want to buy a peripheral when they can get GTA4 for the same price.

As Peter Falk said in It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, "We're dealing with moronic people."

 

[scooby_dooby]

I really don't think that compelling reasons have anything to do with this. People, in large numbers, are aimless and ignorant. They're not going to be aware of what the HDD brings, and they're not going to want to buy a peripheral when they can get GTA4 for the same price.

As Peter Falk said in It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, "We're dealing with moronic people."

And sony knows this, which is why they will still sell cheap memory cards for a profit, and then sell HDD's on the side for even more profit to the people who want one. I can't even see sony bundling a memory card with their console, let alone the HDD.

Sure they did it for the PSP, but that was a very expensive handheld, not a console already being sold at a loss and a cutting edge BR player on top. The last thing they need to do is give it more 'added value', much much more important is to hit the lowest price possible.

There's no way they bundle a HDD or a memory card, that's money in the bank and Sony knows it.

 

[ROG27]

And sony knows this, which is why they will still sell cheap memory cards for a profit, and then sell HDD's on the side for even more profit to the people who want one. I can't even see sony bundling a memory card with their console, let alone the HDD.

Sure they did it for the PSP, but that was a very expensive handheld, not a console already being sold at a loss and a cutting edge BR player on top. The last thing they need to do is give it more 'added value', much much more important is to hit the lowest price possible.

There's no way they bundle a HDD or a memory card, that's money in the bank and Sony knows it.

Your logic is flying in the face of what Sony has already set the precedent for with it's PSP, which initially it was losing boatloads on, as well.

 

[Titanio]

There would be no need to 'ask' devs to support it, as it would be the deFacto standard anyways.

Not true. If they're going to either bite the bullet and include the system or place the onus on consumers to purchase it (in order, perhaps, to play games fullstop), it's a fairly significant commitment on their part and they're going to want to see that strategy rewarded by games that actually take advantage of the situation. If devs didn't, the strategy would be a failure. So one way or another he definitely would need to ask for their support on it, to make it worth Sony's while. I actually think he was throwing this out there to gauge the level of enthusiasm amongst the developers on this..I'm sure some have already lobbied him to include it, but obviously he'd want all developers to make full use of it if it were there. The wider reaction of devs may influence their decision to put it in every box themselves or not.

Reading the rest of his comment, it seems pretty clear to me that he's happy, and wants devs to target the system only as if it had a HDD. It's still unclear how such a premise will be supported - by bundling or otherwise - but I think he seemed quite clear on how he thinks devs should be able to treat the system.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Your logic is flying in the face of what Sony has already set the precedent for with it's PSP, which initially it was losing boatloads on, as well.

Your logic is that precedent set on a handheld actually has any relevance whatsover to a console.

PSP was a $300 handheld I don't care what the heck it costs sony to make, and neither do consumers, it's handheld video game device and that is a hell of alot of money to ask. Bundling the MC was necessity because the pricepoint was already hard to justify for consumers. It would be an equivalent to releasing a console for twice the 'traditional' price, like $600 or $700. In that scenario, you almost have to include a MC or it just won't be appealing too consumers.

What does this have to do with PS3? PS3 is already a steal of a deal, BR players will be $1000. The last thing Sony needs to do is make the thing a better 'value', and if they wanted to, lowering the price will be much more effective way of increasing the value with the majority of consumers than bundling a hdd.

Your best argument, IMO, is that Sony will invest in the future of it's online media delivery services, by bundling the HDD with the hopes to make money back that way.

But, that's just too risky IMO for a company already taking a ton of risks. They need to mitigate some of these risks, if BR fails they'll already be bleeding for years, I don't see them taking another risk on bundling a HDD in the hopes it pays off 2,3 or 4 years down the road.

Better strategy is to offer the HDD as an add on, so they don't have to pay for it on 100% of the machines, and then create the content/delivery mechanism that will drive HDD sales among the fraction of users that may potentially be interested in that content. Part of that strategy would be to request(not demand) from developers that they support the HDD, driving sales even more, which is what I think KK did last wednesday.

 

[Sis]

Not to go round in circles on this,

My position is that Sony will not require the PS3 to have a HDD, primarily because I believe that this:

could probably be sourced for them at less than $50 a piece. If they could hit ~$50 at retail

is wishful thinking.

The HDD is probably just slight of hand on Sony's part, but I can't imagine them actually introducing this kind of hard dependency on this kind of component. It may make sense for launch, but it sure doesn't make sense once we get down to the PS3 Slim model 4 years from now, and the only way Sony could ever release a non-HDD version of the PS3 is if they set expectations from the beginning with their developers.

However, this does not mean that Kutaragi is wrong for encouraging it's use, just that this encouragement, to me, does not equate to "PS3 HDD is standard."

 

[scooby_dooby]

is wishful thinking.

that should be the title for this thread. wishful thinking.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

Its not standard, but Sony know that add-ons flop. So they tell Dev's to program games for it so that consumers can see that it is actually worth buying. Then bingo HDD is a success

EDIT :

A Sony representative has confirmed this morning that PlayStation 3 will come with a 60GB HDD as standard, but that can be upgraded if preferred. Some of the larger US websites have been speculating that PlayStation 3 would be shipping with an optional 60GB hard disc drive. However it was confirmed this morning that all PS3 consoles will be sold with the HDD out of the box. Sony's president of Computer Entertainment, Ken Kutaragi, announced on Wednesday that all PS3 games are being developed to take advantage of the 60GB HDD.

http://www.ps3today.com/Blogs/NewsCom/hqs/blr_2681.aspx

 

[ROG27]

that should be the title for this thread. wishful thinking.

Why is it so hard you to fathom that Sony will include a HDD with the unit?

It will be a differentiating factor that will make digesting the price of an expensive machine worth it. You need to look cross-industry to see how luxury items are marketed and sold. You need to have the most features to be perceived a luxury item. If the PS3 has a next-gen medium, as well as a hdd standard...that automatically makes it stand out from the competition right there. Early adopters care not about price! There are more than enough rabid early adopters in the first year or so that will be willing to buy a unit bundled with a harddrive. So much so, Sony will have a hard time keeping up with the demand even at the higher retail price.

It's been done before with other consoles. The fact that the HDD is physically removable and upgradeable makes it even easier for Sony to revise a SKU in the future and sell it less HDD to prevent the HDD's cost floor from eating into the hardware profits they will eventually be making when cost comes down in the future.

The wishful thinking you speak of may be more of a concern on the part of the 'anti-fans' here than wishful thinking of the 'fans' present.

 

[seismologist]

But I still have difficulty seeing Sony selling a console which needs a HDD and that will not be included. Sure, by not including the price for the PS3 looks lower, but will not consulers see through that, when they pay $425 for the console and $50-100 for the HDD which they need. With that money they can get a premium and a game...

The numbers you cite are pulled out of the air. It all depends on the pricing model.
Imagine if Apple sold $100 ipod's with the HDD purchase separately. Even though it's required, I Know I would be alot more likely to own an ipod by now.

 

[seismologist]

My position is that Sony will not require the PS3 to have a HDD

How can this be your position when they've already stated that the HDD is required? You seem to be the one wishfully thinking.

 

[Sis]

How can this be your position when they've already stated that the HDD is required? You seem to be the one wishfully thinking.

Because I don't believe everything I hear on the internet.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Why is it so hard you to fathom that Sony will include a HDD with the unit?
...
The wishful thinking you speak of may be more of a concern on the part of the 'anti-fans' here than wishful thinking of the 'fans' present.

1. KK himself stated they are currently unsure, 8 months out from launch that tells me a lot
2. Consumers do not understand the benefits of a HDD, meaning it will not be a distinguishing factor
3. Sony has never bundled any memory storage with any console, and have made a killing on memory cards in the past.
4. The PS3 is already going to be an extremely good deal, and does not need any extra buying incentive. It needs is as low a price as possible.

Believe me, I have no wish for Sony to not bundle a HDD, I think it would be a steller move for the simple fact that I feel permanent storage needs to be part of every console as a matter of principle, and that memory cards need to die. And if Sony were to do this, that would set a huge precedent in the industry that would hopefully set the tone for generations to come.

However, I'm a realist, and there's no way Sony is going to bundle the HDD and eat the price at cost. They don't have to, they don't need a distunguishing factor, their console is expensive already, it will be even more expensive with the addition of the hdd, the price for consumers will go up, they will make LESS money on peripherals, there's just very little motive for them to do this...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

they will make LESS money on peripherals, there's just very little motive for them to do this...

Except for potentially much greater earnings in sales of content. If you want to sell people content, but leave the storage optional, they're not likely to buy it. But if storage comes as standard, they'll give it a look out of curiosity. Like photo cameras for example. The idea of sending pictures from phones sounded pretty preposterous to many as it launched, but the moment their phone came with a camera anyway, people started using it. 'If you build it, they will come!' Give people a place to store content and an easy access system, and they'll likely use it, at least for a few small purchases if they eventualy lose interest. Those purchases are extremely profitable.

How much money would MS be making off Live if they weren't selling the XB60 Premium at greater loss than the Core to encourage uptake of the HDD? They want people to have the HDD. That means more revenue. So they targetted the Premium system as such a bargain you'd be crazy not to get it. People buying the Core aren't giving MS the money from Live Arcade purchases. It could be that Sony, rather than just trying to encourage people to uptake HDD by selling a package deal, decides absolute inclusion is a safer way to get people buying downloadable content.

As such there is good reason to take a hit on profitability and lose earnings on peripherals. As for their history of not including storage, that's only two conosles worth of history, neither of which had downloadable content or need for greater storage. PS3 has need of storage if Sony really want to keep selling people stuff (and $5 downloads are excellent impulse buys as they barely register on the cost radar of consumers). A different strategy for a different machine with different prospects makes more sense than sticking with what they did for their last consoles which launched with little broadband availibilty in the world.

It could be the SCEE info from Yahoo is a report following a post-brief decision to commit to the HDD, or represents the stronger desire to incorporate HDD though there is some resistance at the top. I see lots of reasons to think HDD will be standard, though of course no gaurentees.