The Difference between the two models!!!! (PS3)

Wow, they really nerfed the less expensive version.

Looks like I'll pick up a PS3 when it drops to around $300 .... in about 3-4 years.
 
Woah. I thought we were just paying $100 more for an extra 20 GB. Though, none of those missing features really bother me at this point in time. Maybe in the future I will/would want one with all the extras.
 
wow, I thought it was just the 40gb's I would be missing out on...now it seems like if I dont get the expensive version there isnt any point of me getting a PS3 at all.
 
Okay, let's break this down.

--the 20 gig is purely for gaming. You use that space to save games and get DLC. it's what you need to game and can hold a decent amount of songs too. the one obvious disadvantage will be the lack of a memory stick port to put saves on.

--the 60 gig is extraneous. it'll store all that stuff for the one guy who'll get really into the whole karaoke thing and download everything off sonyTunes.


feel free to add.

seems like the difference between Sony and MS' package is that the more expensive version is the useless one ;)
 
[quote name='Apossum']Okay, let's break this down.

--the 20 gig is purely for gaming. You use that space to save games and get DLC. it's what you need to game and can hold a decent amount of songs too. the one obvious disadvantage will be the lack of a memory stick port to put saves on.

--the 60 gig is extraneous. it'll store all that stuff for the one guy who'll get really into the whole karaoke thing and download everything off sonyTunes.


feel free to add.

seems like the difference between Sony and MS' package is that the more expensive version is the useless one ;)[/QUOTE]

Did you even look at all the features the 499 one lacks?
 
And when the cheaper version boots up, instead of a chime or song the machine yells "why are you such a cheap ass? You should have worked move overtime."
 
[quote name='the3rdkey']Did you even look at all the features the 499 one lacks?[/QUOTE]
I agree with Apossum though, if someone is getting a PS3 just for games then the $499 version is the obvious choice. Now that I think about it the only missing feature I would actually use would be the memory stick slot.
 
Here's a thought. Since both versions carry USB ports. Would it be possible to use one for the mem cards? Logically it could be possible, but any thoughts?
 
[quote name='Psykodelik']Here's a thought. Since both versions carry USB ports. Would it be possible to use one for the mem cards? Logically it could be possible, but any thoughts?[/QUOTE]

Or even better, an extral hard drive.
 
Well if the $499 model would be just for gaming, that would be fine, if you dropped out the blu-ray drive and drop the price the 100-200 dollars and put games on dvd. There is no way I'm getting one till it drops to a reasonable price.
 
[quote name='the3rdkey']Did you even look at all the features the 499 one lacks?[/QUOTE]

yes

- No built-in Wi-fi -- fine by me
- No HDMI port -- don't care, can't afford an hdtv anyway and i wouldn't notice a huge difference (and i'd guess you'd have to buy an expensive HDMI cord seperate)
- No Memory Stick slot -- i won't use it as a media center anyway
- No SD card slot -- ditto
- No Compact Flash slot -- ditto
- 20GB hard drive -- more than enough to store game saves.

if all those features look good to you, then go for it. I just like playing games and watching the occasional DVD. the only reason why i'm considering a ps3 is because my favorite developers are on board with it and not the 360.
 
[quote name='WhipSmartBanky']"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced."

:rofl:[/quote]

That's not silence....listen carefully:

".........Wii-mote...........Wii-mote......Wii-mote......" :applause:
 
I forgot, but it is possible to go wireless if you didnt get the $600. But then again, depending how much you pay of the component you're better off getting the $600.

Sorry but what's Wii? That the Nintendo Revolution?
 
:lol:

"You dishonor your famary and shame your ancestors by buying anything less than the best."

[quote name='DualD']And when the cheaper version boots up, instead of a chime or song the machine yells "why are you such a cheap ass? You should have worked move overtime."[/quote]
 
instead of a PS3 splash screen, you just get this:

kutaragi_ken.jpg
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']dont u need hdmi for viewing some blueray dvds at its true quality?[/QUOTE]

I don't think so.

I thought that most (all?) of the BluRay content suppliers said that they wouldn't turn on the `Image Constraint Token' to make your player downconvert for a couple years. There are still a lot of people with older HDTVs that only have component imputs.
 
I guess I'll be buying a 360 this year. I do care about the HDMI outputs (though I don't have an HDTV yet) and I definatly care about the Wi-fi. But even $500 is far too expensive for me.
 
Well there's really no way I won't get the PS3, but the launch titles are really what matter to me. I know I'll end up getting the more expensive model though simply because it has the HDMI capability.
 
I must admit, I am disappointed. $499 and $599 are really expensive, Blu-ray or not. I mean, at some point I'll definitely get a PS3. But not at launch, I'm sure. With this price point, it looks like the only next-gen bandwagon I'll be jumping on at launch will be Nintendo's.

The exclusion of HDMI output from the cheaper version is definitely a strategic move by Sony. You will have to drop the extra $100 to get a full-fledged Blu-ray player, which is crap. The cheapest version should include everything needed to make full use of the packaged technology, while the more expensive version should just add extras. This situation, however, is really a low-ball move, because it makes you choose between getting a gaming PS3 only, or a media-centric PS3. Geezus, $600......that's double the launch price of this generation. Ridiculous.
 
the $100 difference is worster the the 360 package...

can they just skip blue-ray format & give everything else for $499
 
[quote name='CaptPete']I don't think so.

I thought that most (all?) of the BluRay content suppliers said that they wouldn't turn on the `Image Constraint Token' to make your player downconvert for a couple years. There are still a lot of people with older HDTVs that only have component imputs.[/quote]

you need that for 1080p
regular component cables will only give you 1080i
 
If the extra features on the $599 version were superfluous, they would have been better served going with one SKU, even if they kept a feature or two and launched at $549.

The HDMI port is a very big deal. Without it, the Blu-Ray player will be crippled. The studios have the option to make their movies play in a lower resolution unless its in HDMI, and while a few studios have commented that they won't use that initially, that is the key word here, initially. Its an optional feature, but so is Macrovision, and everyone and their mother uses that on their DVD's. Warner Brothers and Universal have indicated that they will definitely use it on their movies. Fox, Sony, and Disney will not use it right away.

What is the point of Blu-Ray when image quality won't be better than standard DVD? Standard, progressive scan DVD is 852x480. Blu-Ray with image constraint enabled is 960×540, not really any better. Certainly nothing compared to HD. You're better off just using a standard DVD player and not paying extra for Blu-Ray movies which won't look better.
 
I wonder whats going to be on the market a few years from now. That is, I wonder if MS/Sony are going to keep with the 2 different versions of their consoles or if at some point they are going to phase out the cheaper versions and have the only choice for buying new be the more expensive version. Either way 500 is still way more than I can spend on a system when I need to get a car >
 
What pissed me off the most, is Ken Katuragi and that stupid fucking smirk on his face when they were showing off the PS3 controller.

That, and that they didn't even bother to say there was an actual difference in SKUs. Isn't that bait and switch? I can't wait to see what Reggie and Peter have to say tomorrow.
 
All just so they can say the PS3 is under $500. Never mind the originally promised feature set if it lets the spokesholes make that claim.
 
[quote name='MrMaddness']That, and that they didn't even bother to say there was an actual difference in SKUs. Isn't that bait and switch?[/QUOTE]

Sony isn't going to actively voice that you're getting screwed over with the cheaper model. Microsoft's PR claimed that these watered consoles are for those only interested in the games. I imagine Sony will do the same.

Personally, I would have prefered them to take out the blu-ray player and offer a game console for $400.
 
[quote name='Masterkyo']The-magicbox website list PlayStation 3 w/ 60GB HDD - US$550 instead $600. I think gamespot is misleading a little.[/QUOTE]

dsc24570fn.jpg
 
Wow, that kind of sucks. At least with the Core 360 you could eventually add on all the stuff that came in the premium 360 (except the silver accents). In the PS3's case, you buy the cheaper one, you're getting F'd in the A permanently.
 
[quote name='Apossum']Okay, let's break this down.

--the 20 gig is purely for gaming. You use that space to save games and get DLC. it's what you need to game and can hold a decent amount of songs too. the one obvious disadvantage will be the lack of a memory stick port to put saves on.

--the 60 gig is extraneous. it'll store all that stuff for the one guy who'll get really into the whole karaoke thing and download everything off sonyTunes.


feel free to add.

seems like the difference between Sony and MS' package is that the more expensive version is the useless one ;)[/QUOTE]

What? Seriously, wow.
 
[quote name='peteyrose']What? Seriously, wow.[/QUOTE]


i forgot, memory card slots are important for....pictures and songs or something. and so is 1080p, which your tv can't do. don't forget the extra 40 gigs for karaoke songs off of sony's iTunes service. must have more more more useless shit :lol: :roll:

people get presented with 2 charts with prices and they automatically think the cheaper one is infinitely inferior...maybe sony isn't so dumb after all.
Look at the 360 core-- no hard drive. it's completely useless. That is inferior. Now look at the PS3 core-- it's same thing as the premium 360-- a 20 gig HD and hook ups, all you need to enjoy games on it, thus no reason to pay an extra $100.

is that hard to understand? you get bells and whistles for $100 more, but you don't need any of that crap to play a game. maybe i'm underestimating the public appeal of extraneous crap...
 
[quote name='Apossum']i forgot, memory card slots are important for....pictures and songs or something. and so is 1080p, which your tv can't do. don't forget the extra 40 gigs for karaoke songs off of sony's iTunes service. must have more more more useless shit :lol: :roll:[/QUOTE]

Yeah but the problem is you'll buy a cheaper model PS3 in '06 when 1080p is in a very few number of TVs. 3 years later when EVERY TV has 1080p, your stuck back in 2006 with no way to upgrade. Poor move Sony, poor move.
 
I just realized this.


If I'm correct, no memory stick = no connectivity to your PSP. No downloading original PS1 games off the internet to your PSP for you. No Riiiiiige Racer! And as far as I know, the cheap PS3 is always the cheap PS3, whereas you can just slap a hard drive into the core and its a premium 360.
 
I can't seriously believe this many people are even considering buying this POS. I'm sorry, for a PS3 WITH ONE GAME it will cost over 725 fucking dollars. I guess the people that spent $1200 on ebay for a 360 won't mind paying that, but unless you are loaded, that is just absurb. fuck, if I was going to spend that kind of money on a console, I'd go buy a Neo Geo. At least that would have lasting value. If the PS3 ever drops to say, $200 or so, I would probably pick one up, but since the PS4 (if such a thing ever actually exists) will probably be out by then, there most likely wouldn't be much point at that time. I don't really see the point in dropping THAT much more on a PS3 if you already have a 360. It has a VERY marginal amount of more processing power, but since the vast majority of games are going to be released on both systems, the PS3 will just be using the 360 version anyway. To each his own I guess, but I just don't see it. I was at least looking forward to nintendo's system until they changed the name to the most god-awful name in the history of gaming... I'm just wondering if microsoft's gyroscope controller will beat the PS3 to market. My guess is yes, because you KNOW they are going to make one now.
 
Damn sony is copying off of Microsoft and Nintendo. I'm glad there being creative here. No thanks Sony I will support M$ and Nintendo this round.
 
[quote name='Apossum']i forgot, memory card slots are important for....pictures and songs or something. and so is 1080p, which your tv can't do. don't forget the extra 40 gigs for karaoke songs off of sony's iTunes service. must have more more more useless shit :lol: :roll:

people get presented with 2 charts with prices and they automatically think the cheaper one is infinitely inferior...maybe sony isn't so dumb after all.
Look at the 360 core-- no hard drive. it's completely useless. That is inferior. Now look at the PS3 core-- it's same thing as the premium 360-- a 20 gig HD and hook ups, all you need to enjoy games on it, thus no reason to pay an extra $100.

is that hard to understand? you get bells and whistles for $100 more, but you don't need any of that crap to play a game. maybe i'm underestimating the public appeal of extraneous crap...[/QUOTE]

I don't think you've been paying much attention to the consumer base at large. This isn't 1995 anymore. Extraneous crap is what EVERYTHING is about. I mean, fuck, why does the video ipod even exist? It has, what, a 1.5 inch screen? But people buy it... for a large price... in large quantities. The bells and whistles are part of what makes the 360 so great, and I REALLY wish the HD had been larger than 20 gigs to start with.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']I just realized this.


If I'm correct, no memory stick = no connectivity to your PSP. No downloading original PS1 games off the internet to your PSP for you. No Riiiiiige Racer! And as far as I know, the cheap PS3 is always the cheap PS3, whereas you can just slap a hard drive into the core and its a premium 360.[/QUOTE]
USB sound familiar?
 
[quote name='mietha']I don't think you've been paying much attention to the consumer base at large. This isn't 1995 anymore. Extraneous crap is what EVERYTHING is about. I mean, fuck, why does the video ipod even exist? It has, what, a 1.5 inch screen? But people buy it... for a large price... in large quantities. The bells and whistles are part of what makes the 360 so great, and I REALLY wish the HD had been larger than 20 gigs to start with.[/QUOTE]

that's true.

than consider my original posts a plea for cheapass sanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top