40gb PS3 $399, no bc - 11/2, $499 80gb, limited bc, now. 56,877 new skus rumored

[quote name='PenguinMaster']Sony has no excuse for not being able to emulate a PS2 entirely using software on a PS3. Microsoft was able to emulate an Xbox (which is much more powerful than a PS2, so presumably harder to emulate) fairly well on an Xbox 360.[/QUOTE]Sony can do it, however, the EE/GS is much more complicated compared to the Intel CPU and nVIDIA graphics chip in the Xbox. MS couldn't include the parts due to lacking the rights to them (anyone remember how their relationship with nVIDIA fell apart?). For 360 to run Xbox games, every single game has to be emulated individually as a driver and put on the HDD (which is why part of the HDD is already reserved for BC). Also, just how many percent of Xbox games run on 360?? It certainly isn't over 50% (not even close to 85%, when Sony emulated the EE on the 80GB/Euro 60GB).

Sony on the other hand has a much more massive library games to emulate in all territories (Like 2X more) and with the EE/GS emulating already being much more difficult than the Xbox CPU/GPU combo, it would probably be no more than 10% emulated. That's why only the EE was emulated, while the GS remained. Comparing development of the Xbox vs. PS2 emulator is basically the same as comparing PS1 and Saturn (Saturn had a more more difficult architecture to emulate, which is why there's still no good Saturn emulator that runs games very efficiently). Xbox may have been a more powerful console, but being a more powerful console doesn't mean it's harder to emulate. A CPU/GPU combo with a more complex architecture is definitely harder to emulate. You can have the most powerful hardware in the world and still have issues emulating it properly. Also, you have to take into the fact, MS is a software company afterall.

People are just trying to find more excuses to bash Sony, when I remember some people clearly said, they don't want to buy a PS3 to play PS2 games. They rather use or buy a PS2 for cheaper if they want to play PS2 games. They want to use their PS3 for PS3 games. Okay, you have that option then. If you want BC, pay an extra $100 and you got it. If you don't want it, you can save $100.
[quote name='daroga']Ah, ok. And do we know that the GS was in the PS3 before and now is not in these 40 Gigers?[/QUOTE]20GB/60GB U.S./Japan PS3 have EE/GS.

Euro 60GB/80GB U.S./Korea have just GS (EE is software emulated). The 80GB SKU which will be dropped soon in price (as more 60GB consoles are gone, since they will be phased out due to its high internal cost) to $499.99.

It will come down to paying $100 more for BC, if you want it. Whether anyone wants to hear it or not, removing BC and card readers especially is the best way to get the PS3 price down. They can't remove blu-ray (although now it only cost $8 more to use blu-ray due to the diode dropping from $100 to $8 over two months ago or something), Bluetooth, USB ports are still needed (but they can cut back), HDMI (there goes DVD upscaling (due to the HDCP) and the FULL HD experience in some games and movies), and removing the HDD would just be plain stupid (most all games do need it and PS3 games cannot be directly saved to an SD Card, Memory stick, USB flash, etc.). The big cost factors that keep PS3 high are the Cell/RSX price. Sony could remove WiFi, but the only way that can be upgraded in a non-WiFi model is using a wireless ethernet adapter (like a gaming adapter or wireless bridge). It comes down to no BC or no WiFi (I believe the new WiFi is slightly cheaper than GS), to bring out a cheaper PS3. In the short term, removing BC made be a bad thing, but as soon as the PS3 library increases (kind of like how the 360 library has), BC will become much less important and having a PS3 with WiFi out of the box will just be much more important (those who say WiFi isn't important, are just like me initially, until I realized just recently how important it is. That's why I'm kicking myself for getting a 20GB model and want a new PS3 badly).
 
what's funny is that this is now at a price point that I would buy one, but without BC, I won't. I want to play the God of War games and Shadow of the Colossus and few others (haven't had a PS2 in like 4 years). hopefully a PS3 with BC will hit $400 by the time MGS comes out.

still very tempting though...
 
if the 40gb isn't going to have BC then it needs to be cheaper than 399, it needs to be dirt cheap, because its essentially missing the main thing that makes a playstation a playstation -
 
[quote name='Weedy649']OK so if the $400 ps3 did have bc, who in their right mind would buy the 80 gig with motorstorm?

Its not a matter of taking it out because they lose money on that ps3, its a matter of taking it out so that it doesnt fuck up their other SKUs. Its made many of us double guess the value of the $400 ps3, and so yes it has worked.

The old bait and switch, come in to get the new $400 ps3 and then find out for only $100 more u can get more hard drive space and bc! What a steal![/quote]This is the only way this makes any sense. There's no reason for them to leave BC out of the 40 gig, other than it gives their higher-end model another bullet-point for the box. It's not that it's not able to handle it, it's that it's purposefully crippled to make the more expensive one look more attractive.

The irony I find here is that I thought Sony, if you're going to do the multiple SKU thing, did it well. Now, the PS3 SKUs are a spattering of features all over the place. Even someone who follows this stuff can easily become confused as to what they're getting.
 
On the box for the 60GB, the 60GB is in white text in a white rectangle.

On the box for the 80GB, the 80GB is in red text in a red rectangle, with a note on the front about the recduced compatibility.

What'll be on the 40GB, the 40GB in hot pink in a hot pink rectangle, with a note on the front saying "PS2 games? fuck no."? :whistle2:s
 
[quote name='daroga']This is the only way this makes any sense. There's no reason for them to leave BC out of the 40 gig, other than it gives their higher-end model another bullet-point for the box. It's not that it's not able to handle it, it's that it's purposefully crippled to make the more expensive one look more attractive.[/quote]Is the consumer willing to always pay the extra price just to get the BC. I guarantee that if this PS3 would have had BC, it would have been $440. $440 is STILL too expensive to the average consumer.

The irony I find here is that I thought Sony, if you're going to do the multiple SKU thing, did it well. Now, the PS3 SKUs are a spattering of features all over the place. Even someone who follows this stuff can easily become confused as to what they're getting.
Click to expand...
MS has done the same thing, so I don't see the difference unless the person is an Xbot who likes to kiss Microsoft's butt. It's so simple, but people make it hard.

40GB PS3 = no PS2 BC, but PS1 BC.

80GB PS3 (which will be the future main SKU) = has PS1 and PS2 BC for $100 more.

It's so simple. It's not exactly brain surgery or trying to calculate a Fourier series.
[quote name='CAG 79']I guess I'll be getting a 60GB PS3 now.[/QUOTE]
If you can find it when you're ready. I seriously wouldn't be surprised (and I'd somewhat support Sony to do it) would be to completely remove the 60GB PS3 from the shelves and use it as a replacement console or server (like Warhawk does).

Why do I say remove the SKU?? For one, Sony knows that SKU is somewhat a mistake now, because it really burns their pocket, containing the EE/GS combo (at around $50-$60), Original blu-ray disc diode, original cell size (at 90nm), the most components (like capacitors and such), and many other parts which have reduced price significantly now. The problem is pricing that SKU in the mix, because they are already losing way too much money on it, and if the 80GB with MotorStorm was the same price (which it will be soon), how could Sony sell the 60GB??? Oh course, those who read messageboards daily and know the differences will buy it up, but the majority wouldn't touch it. They aren't exactly going to do some massive pricecut to ditch it when it already got a pricecut. With the 60GB gone, Sony can be down to two SKUs costly an estimated $500 and $580 to produce (Sony might be breaking even, but all I know is that the cost doesn't exceed those amounts), compared to the 60GB costing around $700-$800 to produce.
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']MS has done the same thing, so I don't see the difference unless the person is an Xbot who likes to kiss Microsoft's butt. It's so simple, but people make it hard.

40GB PS3 = no PS2 BC, but PS1 BC.

80GB PS3 (which will be the future main SKU) = has PS1 and PS2 BC for $100 more.

It's so simple. It's not exactly brain surgery or trying to calculate a Fourier series.[/quote]Not quite. Microsoft hasn't messed with the core functionality of the unit. The big bonehead thing they did with the Core was to not put any memory unit in the box. Aside from that, the only differences are color and harddrive space (and bundled cables).

The PS3 has messed with WiFi, Cardreaders, Limited Backwards Compatibility and No Backwards compatibilty. Having now 4 different models (5 counting the 60 GB no EE for Europe) with pretty serious differences (and no way to make up for most of those differences with optional accessories down the line). Even with a core 360 I can make it fucntionaly like an Elite if I out the cash for the HDD, cables, etc. If you get a 40 GB PS3 and think, I wanna try that PS2 game I missed now..." you're SOL.

Neither is ideal in any way, shape or form. But Sony's is a major hose job right now.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']Maybe they should have cut out the Wifi instead, of BC... but for 400.00 dollars, i still feel that its missing.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. The WiFi is more a matter of convenience than functionality. I'd rather have BC and have to run a cable from my router, personally.

[quote name='Weedy649']OK so if the $400 ps3 did have bc, who in their right mind would buy the 80 gig with motorstorm?

Its not a matter of taking it out because they lose money on that ps3, its a matter of taking it out so that it doesnt up their other SKUs. Its made many of us double guess the value of the $400 ps3, and so yes it has worked.

The old bait and switch, come in to get the new $400 ps3 and then find out for only $100 more u can get more hard drive space and bc! What a steal![/QUOTE]

Good call. That's pretty much the only thing that makes sense, so far.

[quote name='The Mana Knight']MS has done the same thing, so I don't see the difference unless the person is an Xbot who likes to kiss Microsoft's butt. It's so simple, but people make it hard.[/QUOTE]

Not everybody sees the hobby in black and white, champ. It's perfectly possible to not like how Sony and Microsoft are handling multiple SKUs. What, are there four versions of each system now? It sucks across the board.
 
[quote name='daroga']Not quite. Microsoft hasn't messed with the core functionality of the unit. The big bonehead thing they did with the Core was to not put any memory unit in the box. Aside from that, the only differences are color and harddrive space (and bundled cables).[/quote]Yes, but it was heavily gimped. You just couldn't get the same experience with the 360 buying it as you would the Premium. With Sony, you can get the same awesome experience with the PS3 with the 40GB for gaming related things, but you just can't play PS2 games (card readers are meaningless for games).

The PS3 has messed with WiFi, Cardreaders, Limited Backwards Compatibility and No Backwards compatibilty. Having now 4 different models (5 counting the 60 GB no EE for Europe) with pretty serious differences (and no way to make up for most of those differences with optional accessories down the line).
Click to expand...
Okay, so now let's take a look at how many different SKUs MS
has had:
Xbox 360 Core
Xbox 360 Core XBLA pack w/ HDMI
Xbox 360 Premium
Xbox 360 Premium with HDMI
Xbox 360 Elite
Xbox 360 Halo 3 set

Now that's 6 SKUs there.

Even with a core 360 I can make it fucntionaly like an Elite if I out the cash for the HDD, cables, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes you can, but you gotta pay $180 for a 120GB HDD, wireless controller for $50, and component cables for $40. And don't forget, if you want a WiFi adapter, that's $100. :lol:

If you get a 40 GB PS3 and think, I wanna try that PS2 game I missed now..." you're SOL.
Click to expand...
$130 for a PS2 (which might be dropping to $100 soon) is cheaper than paying $170 for a 120GB HDD to make it like an Elite.

Neither is ideal in any way, shape or form. But Sony's is a major hose job right now.
Click to expand...
Sony isn't hosed right now. Only in a Wii60 fanboy's wet dream they are. :lol:
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='Thomas96']if the 40gb isn't going to have BC then it needs to be cheaper than 399, it needs to be dirt cheap, because its essentially missing the main thing that makes a playstation a playstation -[/QUOTE]It costs around $80 less to produce. How does that actually equal more than $100 less in price tag??? Sony has already taken a big loss already and are not about to increase it more.
[quote name='trq']
Not everybody sees the hobby in black and white, champ. It's perfectly possible to not like how Sony and Microsoft are handling multiple SKUs. What, are there four versions of each system now? It sucks across the board.[/QUOTE]
Oh course multiple SKUs suck and I agree, but the problem is that when you release a console with a lot of features, it will be expensive and you somewhat have to find ways to release a cheaper version, appealing to certain people.

Also daroga, I will admit (and Sony's knows this too) their initial two PS3 hardware SKUs were a mistake 20GB/60GB, because they were expensive to make (due to 20GB/60GB HDDs being more expensive in bulk and have to be special ordered, price difference between the two is $30-$40, which is too close). Initially the price difference was going to make more sense with HDMI not in the 20GB initially, but once it was added (since Japanese wanted it in that Q&A session Ken K. had), the pricing became messed up. So, in reality, Sony does want to forget these two SKUs exists by starting all over again, with two SKUs priced about what they should between each other (meaning manufacturing costs and retail price difference is about the same). With the 40GB and 80GB SKU (and let's say 80GB is $500 soon, like it should be), then Sony is right where they want to be because the 80GB is has no EE (which they wanted at launch, but it wasn't ready in time and the PS3 could not stand to be two Holiday seasons behind in the U.S. and Japan), and there's a cheaper 40GB model. Sony will be taking much less loss for these models in the future, and it will be much easier for Sony to continue reducing the price (the problem with the EE/GS is that the price of them isn't going down anymore really). Both have WiFi (which is gone because upgrading to that is a pain), and the HDDs are in 40GB increments (which is industry standard and cheaper to get).
 
[quote name='shrike4242']On the box for the 60GB, the 60GB is in white text in a white rectangle.

On the box for the 80GB, the 80GB is in red text in a red rectangle, with a note on the front about the recduced compatibility.

What'll be on the 40GB, the 40GB in hot pink in a hot pink rectangle, with a note on the front saying "PS2 games? fuck no."? :whistle2:s[/quote]
nochrome.jpg
 
everyone should just stop complaining about the no BC.
just buy a fucking ps2 to play those ps2 games then jesus christ.

everyones complaining about how lost sony is on marketing it, but people complain it doesnt play ps2 games, but arent u buying a PS3 to play PS3 games? its 400 dollars now, a great deal for a next gen system that plays PS3 games and blu-rays. if i didnt already have one i would jump all over it.
 
I am very excited. After not biting on the 410 dollar 60 gig from meijers, I was pretty mad at myself(though my credit cards are happy with me for it...). I don't care about BC, as I've owned my PS2 since launch and played everything I've wanted to play. I was going to put my own HDD in the thing down the road anyway, so 40 won't matter. Hurray, Looks like I'll be getting a PS3 this fall.
 
Mana Knight, you have convinced me of one thing - I'm going to wait indefinitely until Sony can get their shit together and release a nice, single, stable system. (Not stable in the sense of lack of RRoD but stable in the sense of feature changes). If all these components are changing and things are going from 90 to 65 nm, and different chips are going in or out or whatever, then I'm just going to wait. Maybe by the time they come out with a PS3 slim things will have settled down. And I'm certainly no 360 fanboy, but I really don't think the situations compare, as Daroga has already expressed. The only big addition to the 360 SKUs is HDMI, and that's being phased into all models not offered in one and not the others (at least in the long run once all the current models are sold out).

Let's also not forget that they STILL haven't fixed the compatibility issues with 1080i only HDTVs. I've heard from many in the SDF that all new games will come out with scaling options to support 1080i since Sony had finally "opened that up". Last I read, the latest big first-party published release (Heavenly Sword) did no such thing. And don't tell me to shell out $1500 for a new TV when I have a perfectly functional one that looks great playing 360 games ;).

As for the whole multiple SKU/feature creep issue, look at the one system that is outselling the others. I see only one version of those being sold - makes it real simple.

FWIW, backwards compatibility is not a big issue for me. I do have a PS2, and would use that for PS2 games just like I used the Gamecube now even though I have a Wii. The only system where it is important to me is the 360 since I never had an Xbox, While they aren't anywhere near full compatibility with it, they've pretty much covered all the games I might ever want to try out.
 
[quote name='Furashu']everyone should just stop complaining about the no BC.
just buy a fucking ps2 to play those ps2 games then jesus christ.

everyones complaining about how lost sony is on marketing it, but people complain it doesnt play ps2 games, but arent u buying a PS3 to play PS3 games? its 400 dollars now, a great deal for a next gen system that plays PS3 games and blu-rays. if i didnt already have one i would jump all over it.[/QUOTE]I agree.

If you want to play several PS2 games, I just recommend getting a PS2 if anything. Reasons are that games with accessories (those which aren't already USB) won't work on PS3 (some do with an adapter), and many games themselves have some small issues (from sound clipping in Sonic Mega Collection +, Kingdom Hearts II having some glitch on PS3 causing you to not be able to advance I hear, some games have weird sound problems (like FFX), and so on. Yeah it may lack the upscaling and you need memory cards, but they'll work just fine without any issues (I'm even talking about the 60GB PS3 with EE).

Yeah, I understand what Sony is doing. There are around 120 million PS2 consoles out there. There's no way any game console will outsell that (including PS3). With that number sold, most people who will buy a PS3 probably had a PS2, so it's not like they have PS2 games and no PS2 (unless they sold it long ago and kept the games). For the casuals who just want upgraded versions of Madden, Pro Evolution Soccer, GTAIV, etc., this PS3 is perfect for them. Those who just want a blu-ray player and maybe play a few PS3 games, this will be the perfect SKU for them. There's STILL a SKU with BC, so I don't see why everyone is bitching. I just think everyone wants to bitch because it's Sony, and they want to see them die.
 
[quote name='Furashu']everyone should just stop complaining about the no BC.
just buy a fucking ps2 to play those ps2 games then jesus christ.

everyones complaining about how lost sony is on marketing it, but people complain it doesnt play ps2 games, but arent u buying a PS3 to play PS3 games? its 400 dollars now, a great deal for a next gen system that plays PS3 games and blu-rays. if i didnt already have one i would jump all over it.[/quote]

Are you a sony employee? They would know that BC was one of the things that sold the PS2 when it first came out ( along with the DVD player). The xbox 360 is 350 and is atleast somewhat BC. There's really no excuse. I find it crazy that you'd have to pay more just to play older, cheaper games.


PS2's huge library should be one of the selling points for a console that really doesn't have any *hott* games out now.
 
[quote name='Punk_Raven']Are you a sony employee? They would know that BC was one of the things that sold the PS2 when it first came out ( along with the DVD player). The xbox 360 is 350 and is atleast somewhat BC. There's really no excuse. I find it crazy that you'd have to pay more just to play older, cheaper games.


PS2's huge library should be one of the selling points for a console that really doesn't have any *hott* games out now.[/quote]

no im not an employee, but u dont buy a next gen system to play ps2 games, maybe one or two on the side but are u really going to play 10+ titles or something? u dont buy a wii to play gamecube games, u dont buy a 360 to play xbox games, u buy the system to play the NEXT-gen games, yeah its a "selling point" but sony finally delivered a $399 system that plays PS3 games and blu-rays. im just tired of people criticizing sony.


how many kids wanna open a xmas present getting a ps3 and a buncha ps2 games? common now.

if ud REALLY wanna play ps2 games THAT badly, just buy a ps2. all the game are 100% compatable, u get rumble and a dvd player.
 
[quote name='Punk_Raven']Are you a sony employee? They would know that BC was one of the things that sold the PS2 when it first came out ( along with the DVD player). The xbox 360 is 350 and is atleast somewhat BC. There's really no excuse. I find it crazy that you'd have to pay more just to play older, cheaper games.


PS2's huge library should be one of the selling points for a console that really doesn't have any *hott* games out now.[/QUOTE]

Good posting.

I like BC and the majority of gamers WANT BC. This has been shown and worked with PS2 and was a reason why it was put into the PS3 to begin with.
The ONLY reason to remove it from th PS3 is so they can offer a cheaper price.
I dont agree with the strategy because it once again seperates ps3 owners.

Just like the xbox core does vs the premium.


I for one say BC is one of the best things to happen to videogames.


I'm happy I can still play RE 4 on my PS3 and MGS3 and random RPGs from my PS1 and PS2 days.
It was a big reason why I could justify laying down 500bucks for the 20 gig at launch.
 
damn, hearing about no BC in this new 40gb system really makes me want to just get a 60gb system before they are all gone. do you guys think its worth?? i love the fact that consoles are BC but idk if its worth it to spend all that money on a ps3 with such exclusive few games
 
[quote name='anarchyburger']damn, hearing about no BC in this new 40gb system really makes me want to just get a 60gb system before they are all gone. do you guys think its worth?? i love the fact that consoles are BC but idk if its worth it to spend all that money on a ps3 with such exclusive few games[/quote]


get the 60gb if u really care about BC.
the irony of all of this is shouldnt the more options people have the BETTER?
 
[quote name='Furashu']get the 60gb if u really care about BC.
the irony of all of this is shouldnt the more options people have the BETTER?[/quote]

Not really, not if yer not gonna USE them. Otherwise, it's wasted space on the system. Hell, the USB ports on all my PS2's had dust caked on em, cause I never used them, not even once. Same deal with the IR receiver port on the 50001 model I had, since I NEVER used my PS2s for playing movies. I have a DVD player for that.

I mean, it's nice to have extras n everything, but if it means that only the videophiles and technophiles are gonna truly appreciate yer system, it means you gotta scale it back SOMEHOW. But, taking away BC completely, which may be the ONLY source of entertainment for some if there's no good PS3 games coming out they WANT, well, that's just plain stupid.

Things they definitely could've kept off the system to begin with(imo):

WiFi
Card readers
HDMI port(no hdtv here, so don't need it)
etc
etc
etc

Things they could've USED from the get go:

Controller and memory card ports for the PS1/PS2 peripherals people already HAVE from prior gens

Cheaper price

I mean, it only looks like they were trying to one up MS by adding in MORE functions to their system, which they're now CUTTING to reduce their costs, to be able to lower their system price to a REASONABLE level that the casuals will be able to adopt the system at. $399 is CLOSE to tolerable for me, but maybe another $100-150 might push me off the fence on the 'i want one' side.
 
[quote name='dallow']Just buy the one you want IO.
Don't let SKUs scare you.[/QUOTE]

I guess I wasn't clear - I don't want ANY of them at the current price/feature combo (especially if those change month-to-month). I'll wait for a slim PS3. By then things like FF XIII will be Greatest Hits and I can get games cheap too ;).

Just to hedge my bets (or cover my bases? not sure of the right cliche here), though, I will probably end up getting one sooner than I should just like I did with the 360. I wish I had waited another 6 months on that for sure.
 
LOL That's my attitude, IO. I mean, people continually say about 'all the things you get in the PS3', but not using all those functions means they're worthless to me and adding to the price. And now, Sony is finally getting smart and cutting out all that junk.
 
BC was a huge part of the reason I bought a PS3 over a 360. I only had an xbox last generation, and wanted to check out a lot of ps2 games that I had missed.

There are a lot of ps2 gamers who still play their ps2 games regularily. Having 1 less system sitting on the shelf is nice. As well as upscaled graphics, wireless controllers, seeing friends on XMB, etc.

On top of that, I really fee it will hurt sony's credibility. Right now they have a good BC reputation, which MS's is really just lip service. They lose that advantage by doing this... also they lose potential customers for ps2 games. I know of ps3 only people who have picked up ps2 games. I for on picked up the PS2 versions of Rugby 08, and Champions League.

~S

~S
 
A lower price is the right move, but software BC costs sony NOTHING and they're removing it why? Why can't anybody just do things right in the game industry? there's always gotta be some ass backwards part to ruin things.. 360 hardware breaks, Wii doesn't have enough internal storage, etc etc.

Mana Knight is working damage control overtime in this thread. Thank God I'm not a Sony Fanboy.
 
While removing all backwards compatability (even software which I thought was "costless") undermines Sony's seeming goal to have a "do everything wonder console," with the continued mass availablity of the PS2, is this really that big of a deal? That is, those who want to play PS2 and PS games have brand new consoles sitting on the shelves right now (soon to be $99).

Then again, without the lure of being able to play these legacy games, I guess the PS3 starts looking much less attractive to such players.
 
It's amazing to me how Sony continues to drop the ball. With everyone's 360 shitting the bed, Sony could've been welcoming those ready to jump ship with open arms. Too bad their console was too expensive and they had no system-selling software... and still don't.
 
Upscaling on PS2 games was a bigger deal than just being able to play those games. I've seen screenshots of the Guilty Gear and SF3 games that just look amazing upscaled. I won't have a PS3 till I have an HDTV though, which is to say not for a long time. I'd absolutely avoid this lowest price sku because of the BC issue, though.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Upscaling on PS2 games was a bigger deal than just being able to play those games. I've seen screenshots of the Guilty Gear and SF3 games that just look amazing upscaled. I won't have a PS3 till I have an HDTV though, which is to say not for a long time. I'd absolutely avoid this lowest price sku because of the BC issue, though.[/quote]Ah, good point.
 
Ok NOW I'm convinced Sony is run buy a guy who literally has his head stuck up his ass.

Not kidding, the guy walks around all bent over and his head threaded through his zipper.
 
This just in: Sony still sells a PS3 that is backwards compatible! I'm being told they're known as "every goddamned PS3 except for the 40GB model."

I think it's a foolish move, and changing things up on the console is creating a lot of anxiety and confusion. Nevertheless, some of y'all just CAN'T be pleased. You want the PS3 to have everything it did in it when it was $600 and Sony was STILL taking a loss on it (less than a year ago, for the record). Now you bitched and bitched about how it was too expensive. In one year, the MSRP has dropped 33%. That's unprecedented among consoles. The PS3 can now be bought for $400 and has full functionality except for PS2 BC, in addition to giving you 5 free Blu-Ray movies via mail-in (6 if Spiderman 3 is included).

So, you know what? Shaddup. Really. I know you want to buy a PS3 for $150, have it clean your car, fuck your mother, play Blu-Rays and Saturn games...but you know what? Y'all were cryin' "WE WANT TO HAVE OUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO!" Sony's idea of a compromise was to take out PS2 BC and offer a console at $400. Don't like it? Here's my sound advice for you: don't fuckin' buy it. Wait. Go enjoy your 360, Wii, PS2, and whatever else you own. The PS3 won't be $400 and $500 forever. Just shut up and wait a year; hell, wait 2 years. I bet you can get a PS3 for $250 by late 2009. That's nice, isn't it?

In the meantime, they're giving the consumer options. They can't really afford to take a greater loss on the console relative to what it was before. So, given two options of compromise: (1) keep the minimum one $500 until they can reduce their losses and sell the same item for $400, which sure won't happen this year and (2) sell one with a handful of options fewer for $400 in order to sell a lesser-featured one to consumers, they opted for the latter.

One thing Sony seems to have right: y'all WANT a PS3. You do. Otherwise you wouldn't be pissed about this. But guess what? If you want it cheap, and you want it to have all the functions included in it, you're not going to get it that way right now. So shut yer clam and wait, like a good cheapass should.

That said, my biggest concern about the omission of BC from the 40GB is that, unlike the 360 Core, there appears to be no way of changing your PS3 console, or adding something, in order to make it BC. That is an unfortunate and potentially major mistake (in the sense that these changes create confusion among dumbass consumers who won't buy one on account of uncertainty over what's in the box).
 
While I agree with most of what you said, being the contrarian that I am:

[quote name='mykevermin']In one year, the MSRP has dropped 33%. That's unprecedented among consoles.[/quote]
Xbox 1 Price History::)

I couldnt find specific, dated price histories for the 3DO or Saturn, whom I suspected would be good candidates for such a thing as well, since they started out so high.
 
This funny so now we have 20 GB, 40 GB, 60 GB, and 80 GB. The only one that is actually worth owning is the 60 gig and they don't even make it anymore. Sony make up your fucking mind on which setup you are going to sell so we can get some actual games to play on your system.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Eh, someone's gotta pay for bringing the world HP Sauce and Lady Sovereign.[/quote]

I know we can never make this right, but on behalf of the UK I offer my sincere apologies for Lady Sovereign. May her foulness rot in Hell.

Also thanks for the advice, sub $200 PS3 and $20 Little Big Planet FTMFW !!
 
So, is it confirmed that there will be absolutely no BC in the 40GB (including no software BC)? Just seems like an odd thing, seeing as how the BC is strictly software based, it should be completely free to keep in. The only reason I could see for them to take it out would be to make the 80GB more appealing.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
That said, my biggest concern about the omission of BC from the 40GB is that, unlike the 360 Core, there appears to be no way of changing your PS3 console, or adding something, in order to make it BC. That is an unfortunate and potentially major mistake (in the sense that these changes create confusion among dumbass consumers who won't buy one on account of uncertainty over what's in the box).[/QUOTE]

That's an easy fix, just offer the BC on the PSN at a big fat upgrade price.
 
[quote name='dpatel']So, is it confirmed that there will be absolutely no BC in the 40GB (including no software BC)? Just seems like an odd thing, seeing as how the BC is strictly software based, it should be completely free to keep in. The only reason I could see for them to take it out would be to make the 80GB more appealing.[/quote] LAAAAAAMMEEE

if i hadnt already bought one w/ that sony credit card deal that made it $350, this would make me boycott it. that reminds me, i gotta cancel that credit card :no:



Imo this is why

  1. They can continue selling more PS2s. some people who already have one will buy another because they're scared if it breaks and they stop making them they cant play all their old games.
  2. They want people to buy the more expensive, much higher profit margin unit. because its such a "bargain"
  3. It was part of their deal w/ the devil.

 
[quote name='-Never4ever-']That's an easy fix, just offer the BC on the PSN at a big fat upgrade price.[/QUOTE]

If it were that easy, they'd offer it in the box, I'd imagine. If they left BC in, they'd come out smelling like roses with a $400 console (thought the usual gang would find something to bitch about, as it were). I think there's some credence to them omitting the graphics chip needed for software emulation, otherwise it's a damnfool move to leave it out (if it is indeed all software).
 
Sony just killed the only advantage the PS3 had going for it. They should have at least waited until there were some decent games out for the PS3 before dropping a neutered system on the market. Especially since to play anything at all you're going to have to drop another $60 on a game at purchase.

I'm glad I'm not a Sony shareholder. What a bunch of arrogant, bumbling idiots.
 
I'd be inclined to agree with the whole "don't fucking buy it" argument except that BC was part of Sony's whole 10-year plan. Heck, even Phil Harrison mentioned that it was one of their core values when developing consoles. They've got PS2 games still coming down the pipeline (whether they're ports or not) and they still have a lack of killer apps in their PS3 catalog. The entire PS2 catalog is probably the biggest selling point of the PS3 in terms of it being a game console. Sure, there's the BD player, but 2 hour movies can only take up so much time. Hopefully SCEA will learn from the negative reception that SCEE's announcement has received and actually manage to leave in something that even they themselves have deemed a vital part of their long term plans. If not, they better bundle in a PStwo with each 40GB PS3, for the same price of course.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']If it were that easy, they'd offer it in the box, I'd imagine. If they left BC in, they'd come out smelling like roses with a $400 console (thought the usual gang would find something to bitch about, as it were). I think there's some credence to them omitting the graphics chip needed for software emulation, otherwise it's a damnfool move to leave it out (if it is indeed all software).[/quote]
credence my ass. it saved them all but $12 according to isuppli. and im guessing its cheaper now than it was when they priced the chips. chips get smaller, they still make an assload of ps2s, they have no licensing fees to pay any1.

they did it to get people to buy the more expensive console and get them to continue buying ps2s. pure & simple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top