PS3 to Launch with no HD?!?

[scooby_dooby]

Having a HD is a huge advantage.

My favourite part about it is the homebrew software, the fact I can install a media centre, nes emulators, snes emulators, an ftp server, all kinds of awesome apps that simply wouldn't be available without a HD.

For gamers a HD serves the immediate purposes:
- faster load times
- much more support for FFXI type games (mmo-rpg's)
- downloadble content for games (extra levels, characters, weapons etc)
- cheaper for the consumer (no memory sticks to buy)
- custom soundtracks (this shouldn't be underestimated, it's an AWESOME feature)
- developers don't have to worry about filesave size limitations,
- more options for game developers, in terms of innovative features not possible with memory cards

Basically it just makes life easier, memorysticks are so 90's!

 

[scooby_dooby]

If sony drops the HDD do you think that means they will be going with at least a 2x Blu-Ray drive?

The load times would be really bad with a 1x blu-Ray and no HD for caching. The 360 would be almost twice as fast, ignoring HD caches. I can't see em going with a 1x BluRay without a HD for caching.

Edit: IMO BR Load times don't really matter cause developers will probably use DL DVD's anyways, but if that's the case, there is pretty much no advantages for using Blu-Ray, except it will play a HD format that may not even be sold in stores.

Basically we'll all have to pay extra for something we're not going to use, all to further Sony Corp. goals in an essentially unrelated industry, and that's just retarded.

 

[jimpo]

Who needs a hard drive in a console anyhow?

It was not necessary in current generation, and nothing has made it more necessary for next generation.

 

[Acert93]

No HDD is bad for online game, it fragments the user base (i.e. it wont gain wide spread adoption and thus few games will really exploit it), and it pigeonholds games. And this also brings us back to load times, a HDD allows caching. A 1x BR is a lot slower than a 12x DVD. While you can use repetitive blocks containing redundant information in the BR, I do not think this alone will be able to outperform a 12x DVD + HDD content caching.

For functionality, a HDD is not a bad investment for the cost. You can find retail 80GB HDD for $45, 40GB for $35, and 20GB for $30. Retail is going to include both manufacturer and retailer profits. While I am sure profits on HDD are razor thin, ordering 40M+ of them (and shipping it with the console unit, therefore you are cutting out some shipping costs) makes me think it is a bad tradeoff. To me, the functionality of a HDD is valuable. Making it optional is as bad as not including it because it means all games wont use it by default (and will thus be further under utilized by games that do... bad move for developers to support something that only a % of users have), it means you need to buy some other memory storage medium, longer load times, and it probably means less online capabilities--or in the least, I am going to have to pay even more to get the same capabilities.

Every gamer is different, so a HDD is not a big loss to everyone. But I am looking forward to expansions, map/level addons, microtransactions, (mods?), and other online friendly content. If the platform natively has a HDD I see these being more common. A platform that does not embrace broadband and a large media storage device wont allow all developers to embrace these features imo. They will go under utilized. So as an gamer who wants to be online, I REALLY hope Sony changes their mind. I do know this: I will scoff at the idea of paying more for a PS3 if it does not include a HDD. A $300 console with a HDD and a $350 console without a HDD is a no brainer considering the games and features I want.

As for case design, the PS3 has a HDD slot. If the reasoning is that the Xbox 360 cannot have a slim design because of the HDD, the only way the PS3 can go with a slim design (as it also has a HDD slot) would be to remove this feature, ala PS2. And that killed HDD support. That said, both have slots for the HDD, I am sure more compact designs can be created and either repositioning the HDD or making an external type connection. So as far as console design is concerned it is a wash. Unless of course Sony does eliminate the HDD expansion slot, and in that case they are not serious about suppoting it to begin with and would be killing the addon. I do not see that happening (although they did just that with the PS2 :? )

I guess Sony wants people to buy their PS3 Brand Memory Sticks (TM) that will be sitting right next to the shiney PS3 display case. So far it looks like MS is going addon crazy (face plates, upgradable HDD, rechargable battery packs for the controller, wifi addon). Some of that is good (it means people do not have to pay for stuff they wont use), but others seem like a money making gimmik. Oh wait, they are all in it for the money...

 

[scooby_dooby]

It's the same catch 22 as always. If you don't bundle a peripheral it never really gets supported.

Developers don't make games that support because not enough people have bought it, and gamers never buy it cause there's not enough games that support it.

 

[Sean*O]

You really can't deny the value of a HDD in a console. If it's not there from the beginning as part of the original spec, I am afraid that very few games will ever be developed that will support the use of an optional add-on HDD.

 

[Carl B]

You really can't deny the value of a HDD in a console. If it's not there from the beginning as part of the original spec, I am afraid that very few games will ever be developed that will support the use of an optional add-on HDD.

Agreed there's absolutely no denying it.

But, from a costs persepctive over a ten-year lifespan w/redesign, you can't ignore the perceived drawbacks on Sony's end either. Either way, I hope that whatever happens, the HD is supported much more fully than it was this gen in PS3. And I agree that lack of off-the-bat inclusion would hinder that.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

One thing I haven't seen brought about about XBox360 hard drive....

Even though it is standard....is it required to be installed / attached for the console to operate?

In other words, can game devs assume that there will be a hard drive attached, or must they take into account the possibility of the hard drive not being attached?

 

[Johnny Awesome]

The HD costs about $20 in large quantities. It's totally worth it, because MS probably expects to make some of that back from micro-transactions with downloadable content.

It's funny that people attribute MS Xbox losses to HD costs. It's completely false. Even if the HD cost $30 for Xbox, with 20 million units this only amounts to $600 million. The losses on Xbox are closer to $3 billion. They just didn't sell enough games and got bad deals from the component suppliers like Intel and NVidia. The HD is barely relevant and will be less so as the Xbox Live adoption rate increases.

The other point to consider is downloadable demos of upcoming games. The hard drive will be an invaluable marketing tool for MS, especially since the Silver version of Live will be free. We're talking about 25-30% of the userbase able to be marketed to in this fashion. That's worth the $20 investment.

 

[Carl B]

It's funny that people attribute MS Xbox losses to HD costs. It's completely false. Even if the HD cost $30 for Xbox, with 20 million units this only amounts to $600 million. The losses on Xbox are closer to $3 billion. They just didn't sell enough games and got bad deals from the component suppliers like Intel and NVidia. The HD is barely relevant and will be less so as the Xbox Live adoption rate increases.

It's hardly 'barely relevent,' though I agree it's the deals with NVidia and Intel that throttled them the most. (and $600 million out of $3 billion would be roughly 20% of the total losses)

 

[AlNom]

Hm..........MS will have to make the smaller (future) X360 physically compatible with the launch HD. As it is right now, it looks quite snug in the current size of the console....

 

[Acert93]

The other point to consider is downloadable demos of upcoming games. The hard drive will be an invaluable marketing tool for MS, especially since the Silver version of Live will be free. We're talking about 25-30% of the userbase able to be marketed to in this fashion. That's worth the $20 investment.

Bringing demos and game trailers to the masses is a GREAT idea. I was always confused why they did not do more of that with Xbox, but I am glad they are pushing both. Simiarly I am excited about them pushing retro/card type games. Shoveling out trailers and free demos of new titles will increase sales. Percentage wise, very few gamers get gaming mags, and even fewer get online. And even though there have been demo disks before I have never received one. But pushing demos and trailers, for free, to customers is just a great way to increase sales and exposure. This is why I think Sony should do it, but it does not seem their online plans are as ambitious as Live.

With Live shipping with every console (unlike Xbox) and the continued growth of online (which far outpaces HD TV) I think overall the HDD offers a lot of features and value.

I really hope Sony changes their mind on the HDD. Online capabilities and features + VGA support are my two big hang ups this gen. I love my online PC games and I don't have a TV. No HDD would be a big bummer

 

[ralexand]

Hm..........MS will have to make the smaller (future) X360 physically compatible with the launch HD. As it is right now, it looks quite snug in the current size of the console....

Assuming there will be one.

 

[Acert93]

Hm..........MS will have to make the smaller (future) X360 physically compatible with the launch HD. As it is right now, it looks quite snug in the current size of the console....

Why?

New slimline SKU could use a smaller HDD, right? And for those who bought huge addon drives could either transfer their information to the new HDD or maybe there will be an external adapter.

Worse case scenario would be that customers who have large addon drives would need to stick with the larger unit. While some people do buy new slimmer units as repeat sales I do not see this as a big negative. Cannot place everyone unfortunately.

That said, what if they were to move the HDD to a different position on a slim unit? Maybe plugging in flush with the top in the horizontal position instead of the vertical?

Assuming there will be one.

Whether they make a slim model or not, Allard has already discussed shrinking and solidifying chips as they hit the 65nm and the 45nm processes. That will mean less heat and a smaller MB layout, which would allow them to make a slimmer version. Which, based on history, I think is a good possibility. People seem to like the smaller units.

 

[AlNom]

Assuming there will be one.

I'm only going by what Allard said to expect.

Worse case scenario would be that customers who have large addon drives would need to stick with the larger unit. While some people do buy new slimmer units as repeat sales I do not see this as a big negative. Cannot place everyone unfortunately.

That said, what if they were to move the HDD to a different position on a slim unit? Maybe plugging in flush with the top in the horizontal position instead of the vertical?

hmm.. yeah, I was only thinking about the repeat sales here. Nevermind.

 

[SanGreal]

You can find retail 80GB HDD for $45, 40GB for $35, and 20GB for $30.

Not a 2.5" drive, you can't.


As for size constraints, the HDD won't be the constraining factor in either system. A 2.5" notebook drive is about the size of an ipod and about half the thickness of a DVD case. If anything is hurting the PS3's size its the BRD drive.

In the future when cooling is less of an issue and parts merge in both systems I imagine the optical drives will be replaced with notebook sized drives.

 

[marconelly!]

Edit: IMO BR Load times don't really matter cause developers will probably use DL DVD's anyways, but if that's the case, there is pretty much no advantages for using Blu-Ray, except it will play a HD format that may not even be sold in stores.

You are badly mistaken if you think BR movie discs won't be sold in stores, but I agree that they should not be used for games unless the drive speed is at least 3x or 4x, since DVDs will be read faster in that same drive. However, if the drive speed is 3-4x, that's a double good for games - higher capacity and faster read time.

Basically we'll all have to pay extra for something we're not going to use, all to further Sony Corp. goals in an essentially unrelated industry, and that's just retarded.

What kind of statement is that? What if I really don't want HDD or a fast CPU in my consoles, or don't want to further anyone in their online gaming/chatting/videoconferencing solutions? Damn you Microsoft and Sony for making me pay for stuff I don't need!

No, you will have to decide for yourself whether certain system is worth your money or not based on everything that's in it and software for it. We will decide the same. Personally, I think the inclusion of BR drive is a huge cost saving measure for me. I can always buy a 2.5HDD for some cheap money, but BR drive is going to cost a lot more, lot longer.

 

[wco81]

Both PS1 and PS2 had longer load times than the competition.

Did it hurt sales?

Load times may not even be on Sony's radar.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Whether blu-ray will be the chosen HD media is very much up in there air right now. So while it may be sold in "some" few stores, that's not what I was referring too.

Blu-Ray may or may not turn out to be an HD movie player for the HD Movies to come.

You missed my point. Since the blu-ray won't be used for games, it therefore contributes nothing to the gameplay experience. Nothing. So if it won't result in better games, and it's costing the consumer MORE money, why the hell is it in there?

The answer is obviously because Sony has a vested interest in including it, despite the fact the consumer will have to pay more, and developers will not use it.

WHat if Blu-Ray isn't adopted as the HD-Movie format. What then? All those consumer dollars wasted on hardware that does absolutely no good.

It would be a different story if it's 3x or 4x and actually had some potential for imrpoving games.

 

[SanGreal]

While Blu-Rays future is still up in the air, you can rest assured that Sony and MGM (which Sony owns) titles will be released on Blu-Ray.