What is all the hoopla surrounding consoles getting smaller?

help1

help1

CAGiversary!
Feedback
5 (100%)
Now, this isn't a troll of the PS3 slim, but really just some questioning about all this coverage it is getting.

Now, I can understand why people would care if portables get smaller, since that directly deals with the ease of use, but when it comes to consoles, I would think that the vast majority of people who play games on said consoles wouldn't constantly be moving their consoles from TV to TV, so what is the point? From what I have seen, the new PS3 slim doesn't significantly cut down the area that a PS3 lays down on, but rather the volume (the height). From what I have seen, it just looks like the height has been halved. Are people really using entertainment centers where they don't have enough space to accommodate PS3 "fats"? If so, I would think these people are cramming their consoles into area's where they can't even breathe, which could harm the console...

Also, I know someone is going to come in here and say "yea but I move my console all the time, so it will be a great investment for me" and I am happy for you, but I just don't see people moving their console that often. Also, isn't the most annoying part of moving consoles this generation the fact that component cables are usually plugged into the back of televisions, so it becomes a hassle to constantly stretch around your tv to remove and reattach these cables?

And then we will have the people who will say that that is looks better, but personally I think my PS3's glossy finish makes it look more elegant than that cheap hard plastic look of the PS3 slim, and I think most will agree with that sentiment.
 
The reduction in size is a result of the reduction of the size of the components.... this generally means a significant cost savings. The end user gets a smaller device that costs a lot less.
 
Trailer truck drivers obviously.

163_0906_2009_gwts_04z+1993_379_Peterbilt+interior_view.jpg


Seriously wish I gave this career thought when I was younger.
 
Sony does it alot.

PSOne? PS2 slim... PSP slim... PSP go... PS3 slim...

So far only the Nintendo handhelds have really shrunk....

Other consoles never really stayed long enough to get a redesign?
 
It's not a huge deal, but I prefer smaller stuff as its easier to fit in the home theater which for me is a 50" tv on a 3 shelf TV stand about the size (width wise of the TV).

My 360 is on the floor (hardwood) beside the stand as it won't quite fit on the shelf with the Blu Ray player (it would fit there before when I had a slimmer DVD player), which is the only place it could go give the size and heat out put of the surround sound receiver and the HD-DVR/cable box which are on the other shelves.

But yeah, it probably does get over blown in the hype when a smaller consoles comes out. But I do prefer smaller ones all else being equal for space reasons.

But I don't think smaller console is worth a lot of attention, or speculation that sales will go up (the price drop would be responsible for that). It's just a minor plus at best.
 
For me, the console size usually matters a bit. While I do have more than enough space left over in this entertainment center in order to house a PS3, I would much rather pop in a PS3 slim on the bottom shelf instead and save the significant room on top for something else that may be more useful. Certainly, no matter which model I choose it will have great ventilation and plenty of space, but I'd much rather opt for having more room in the future for whatever reason. Just my addled brain, I guess.
 
You own a PS3 and 360 and you don't understand the reasoning behind this? Both of those systems are huge, heavy, loud, and they get ridiculously hot. Getting smaller eliminates or reduces all those problems. Not to mention being cheaper. That says it all really.

I agree that the original's gloss looks nice, but it attracts fingerprints and dust (and in my house, dog hair) like a magnet. It DOES look very cool, it's just insanely big.

Finally I'd just like to note that a lot of the hoopla comes from the new low price and the beefy hard drive. The internet still hasn't gotten over whining about the PS3's price until now.
 
Greater energy efficiency and quieter system are bonuses, but what it really boils down to is saving money.

$300 is this magical threshold for consumers looking to buy a PS3.
 
I dont think the hoopla is over what gadget is smaller, or whether a console is getting a slimming redesign, but rather the fact the newer things ARE smaller, and people like having the NEWEST things.

"Small is sexy, because going small is new. And buddy, if you don't have the newest thing, then you're just not that cool..."

Okay, a little juvenile and even asinine, but that's just my 2 centavos (doesn't help that I'm kinda tripping on meds right now too... damn future flu).
 
For consumers, the size of the system isn't nearly as important as the recent price cut. Having a tinier PS3 on the market won't help the system's sales as much as scaling the price back by $100 USD.

At the same time, people generally like their electronics to be smaller. The smaller it is, the more impressive it is. Sony looks like they are properly positioned to have a much stronger Christmas season this year. The price drop as well as the slimmer hardware are coming out at the perfect time to ramp up for the holiday sales season. The August NPDs won't see much of a change. But going into September we will begin to see the PS3 gain ground.

I can't help but wonder if Microsoft or Nintendo will respond to this. The 360 is holding steady, but the enthusiasm surrounding the Wii is beginning to wane. It still has the strongest sales, but I can't see that continuing with its current price. A lot of older gamers who were fence-sitting on hardware will probably spring for a $299 USD PS3.
 
The original certainly looks better. The reduction is power usage is nice, but certainly not worth giving up my PS3-1 for, especially being as I have an original 60gb one. The only system I've ever owned that was really too big to deal with is my Pioneer Mega-LD player. That thing is about the size of 5 or 6 other systems put together. I'm from the generation where systems got bigger as they went along: Genesis to CD combo/Xeye (SP?) ; Turbografx-16 to TurboDuo; etc. The slimed down versions have almost always been crap. NES2, SNES2, Genesis2 are all worse than the originals. Don't know about the PSOne or PS2 Slim, but at least the 2 loses a significant feature (hard drive). So, yeah, short version, I've never understood it either. No one has even mentioned (that I've seen) the loss of an ethernet port. Sucks for those people without wireless networks...
 
Help1, your Location is New York, but you clearly don't live in New York City, or you would understand the need and desire for smaller electronics.

People who live in tiny, overpriced NYC apartments need smaller consoles, laptops over desktops, flatscreens over DLPs or CRT's, etc.

If you live in a modern home, with large living and family rooms, your experience may be different.
 
Sometimes I feel like companies could have made the "slim" version in the first place, and charged a cheaper price. There's a lot of R&D and designing that goes on before any hardware is released... I feel like these designs and "re-designs" are made before hand and just released in stages.
 
I seriously doubt that they had this designed ahead of time. More often than not, the technology to construct these smaller versions doesn't exist before release. As time goes by, the manufacturing for the various components becomes more efficient, and they are able to produce smaller, more effective components at a lower price.

You can be sure that Sony began working on this new design before the original PS3 ever hit store shelves. The PS3 had the highest production costs of any of the current consoles. So it isn't much of a surprise that it's getting re-designed hardware earlier than its competitors. Sony stands the most to gain by releasing a slim model.
 
Just personally, I have room in my entertainment center for a Wii and PS2. The Xbox 360 doesn't fit on the shelf so I store it elsewhere and literally have to go get it and plug it in anytime I want to play, then unplug everything and pack it away again when I'm done. Not the end of the world but it certainly would be nicer to have it all set up all the time. Granted, not everybody's wife probably relegates game systems to the smallest shelf there is. :)

But in general I guess I agree that console redesigns are less about practicality and more about having the newest, slickest thing. PS2 Slim is the king of this; even now I think there is something amazing about playing console games on something that is smaller and lighter than a hardcover book.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']Help1, your Location is New York, but you clearly don't live in New York City, or you would understand the need and desire for smaller electronics.

People who live in tiny, overpriced NYC apartments need smaller consoles, laptops over desktops, flatscreens over DLPs or CRT's, etc.

If you live in a modern home, with large living and family rooms, your experience may be different.[/QUOTE]

Agree... I live in Queens and while the rooms are bigger than the average Manhattan apartment, but still smaller than most other places. With dvds/Bds/games lying around the entertainment systems, smaller electronics are preferred (original dvd player anyone? That's crazy! Dvd players are so tiny now a day, the space actually got replaced by the Xbox 360 console). With sound systems and what nots, i barely have space to make room for proper ventilations).

After reading the slim PS3 fuss, it's actually not that "slim" as i originally thought it would be. However, if i have to get a PS3, i'll go with the slim one, but for now, i think the fat is okay.
 
I think others have hit this, I think it has as much to do with the fact that there really isn't a whole lot of gaming news right now. Also, one other fact is, I think most people in the gaming media are tech heads. These are the types of people who will run out and spend an extra $300 just because it's smaller.
 
[quote name='Richard Kain']I seriously doubt that they had this designed ahead of time. More often than not, the technology to construct these smaller versions doesn't exist before release. As time goes by, the manufacturing for the various components becomes more efficient, and they are able to produce smaller, more effective components at a lower price.

You can be sure that Sony began working on this new design before the original PS3 ever hit store shelves. The PS3 had the highest production costs of any of the current consoles. So it isn't much of a surprise that it's getting re-designed hardware earlier than its competitors. Sony stands the most to gain by releasing a slim model.[/QUOTE]

Exactly what "new" technology went into making the PS3 Slim..
 
[quote name='Thomas96']Exactly what "new" technology went into making the PS3 Slim..[/QUOTE]

The size of the Cell processor has been considerablly reduced in the intervening time. Producing a smaller CPU reduces the power requirements for the system, as well as the cooling requirements. This means that you can also reduce the size of the power supply, and the size of the heatsink. The original version of the Cell CPU required a larger system with a larger internal power supply, as well as a larger and more robust cooling system. Technological advances in production that were not available at the system's inception have made it possible to create a smaller system.

The same holds true for most aspects of the system hardware. Bluetooth adapters have become considerably chaper to produce, as well as taking up a much smaller footprint since the PS3 first launched. So the PS3 Slim's bluetooth adapter will be considerably smaller than the one they had to use in the PS3 Phat. (as well as costing Sony less to make) I have no doubt that they have been refining Blu-Ray drives to be quieter and smaller. The list goes on and on.
 
I'm still on the fence.. I personally would like to wait and give this new version some time to get out in the hands of people and see if there are any problems on a mass scale.. there is always a chance for things to go seriously wrong once in mass production, hate to be the one to wish I'd stuck with what was working great ..
 
[quote name='lordxixor101']I think others have hit this, I think it has as much to do with the fact that there really isn't a whole lot of gaming news right now. Also, one other fact is, I think most people in the gaming media are tech heads. These are the types of people who will run out and spend an extra $300 just because it's smaller.[/QUOTE]

Yep. A smaller model isn't going to have any appreciable impact on sales, the price drop is what will do that.

But it doesn't mean having a smaller unit that takes up less space, puts out less heat and uses less power isn't a nice improvement that new buyers who pick up a console because of the price drop and/or some future exclusive game release (God of War 3, GT5 etc.) will get to enjoy.

I'd definitely go for the slim if I ever bought a PS3--but I don't see that happening as I already have a Blu Ray player and don't game enough to even consider buying a 2nd console regardless of how many good games are on it since I don't even get around to most of the 360 games that interest me.
 
If you pay your own utility bill, a more energy efficient system is also a cheaper system month to month.
The environmental impact also has a value, even if it cannot be easily broken down into a cash value.
The heat it gives off, the noise it makes, moving it around, allocating space due to no BC, moving houses/apartments, or if it gets compact enough, bringing on a trip.

The smaller usually the better.
 
It also doesn't help that many media outlets get slims for free, which would prompt the writers to at least do an unboxing article to stay in Sony's good graces. I worked at TechTV back when it was around and several staff members on several shows got invited to the PSOne release party in 2000. The obligatory gift bag had the actual unit. The next day we had a 30+ person meeting with our editorial supervisor who ordered us to return all the PSOnes to Sony.

I kept my Sony PR contacts since TechTV shut down, so when I got the PS2 slim, to told them that I might not do a unboxing or any kind of article related to the slim, and she said that was ok, and that I should just consider it a 'thank you'. I haven't gotten a PS3 slim yet, but I'm having lunch with one of my Sony reps next week, so who knows?
 
[quote name='vherub']If you pay your own utility bill, a more energy efficient system is also a cheaper system month to month.
The environmental impact also has a value, even if it cannot be easily broken down into a cash value.
The heat it gives off, the noise it makes, moving it around, allocating space due to no BC, moving houses/apartments, or if it gets compact enough, bringing on a trip.

The smaller usually the better.[/QUOTE]

Smaller footprint, and smaller carbon footprint.
 
Strongly agreed with the OP. The internet has made way too big a deal of the slim, but whatever it's a slow summer. The most important part of the slim to most people out there is the fact that the PS3 now costs less than ever.

Personally, I don't get the buzz about the Slim itself and yeah, it's uglier but to each their own.
 
[quote name='DarkNessBear']Because, there is nothing else exciting going on in Gaming News and real news is just depressing and makes me hate life.[/QUOTE]

So true.

I'm probably one of the few who is getting the PS3 slim for the sake of being able to move it around better. Right now, my household only has one HDTV, which my dad uses 90% of the time, forcing me to use an SDTV. Considering how the PS3 has Blu-Ray, the whole family will probably use that, meaning I'll have to bring it downstairs. The less weight = the better.
 
I thought the hoopla was because not only was the machine getting an upgrade which ran cooler and more efficiently, but that it was going to cost $100 less.
 
Agreed. I doubt it would be getting nearly as much media coverage if it wasn't for the $100 price drop as it wouldn't be much of a story if it was just redesigned but still cost $399.99.

Being smaller and more efficient is a nice plus, but I couldn't see that getting much coverage if it wasn't coupled with the $100 price drop.
 
Smaller means cheaper, cooler temperatures, and if you have a family and your wife actually cares how the living room looks it's a lot more appealing. The 360 is quite the eyesore in the entertainment center...
 
The real reason:

People want the newest shit out. That's it, that's all. Same reason someone would get rid of their launch 360 using VGA on a 1080p tv and get a newer one with HDMI on their 1080p tv. Same shit just newer.
 
Major consoles that have gone through a smaller redisign (to my knowledge)
NES
SNES
Game Boy
GBA (x2)
PS1
PS2 (x2)
PS3
PSP (x2)
SMS
Genesis (x2)

Why not PS3?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top