With the slow Blu-Ray games in the future will have no choice but to be installed on the PS3 hard drive so 40 gig is only big enough for 5 or 6 games at the current install size (DMC4). so if sony's current and past stupidity is to be overlooked they need to offer consumers an actual good deal seems hard drive prices for sony amount to less than $1 difference between the 40 and 80gig drives.
then they should stop making backwards compatibility a buy time decistion and introduce the software emulation across the range and not make ppl purchase titles they already own via the PSN.
why don't Sony allow you to time shift i wonder.....
Long time ago, oh, say a year and a half ago, Sony director Phil Harrison called backward compatibility a "core value." Here's what he told GamePro in May 2006.
"Backwards compatibility, as you know from PlayStation One and PlayStation 2, is a core value of what we believe we should offer. And access to the library of content people have created, bought for themselves, and accumulated over the years is necessary to create a format. PlayStation is a format meaning that it transcends many devices -- PSOne, PS2, and now PS3."
I have a copy of Sony's January 23 "PlayStation in Review" press release sitting in front of me. Among other things, it devotes two of six bullet points to "PlayStation total [hardware and software] revenues." Clearly part of this company wants us to see the value of "PlayStation" as a brand, not a singular ailing third generation console.
Another part -- the one making decisions about what configurations of the PS3 ought to be put to market -- would apparently prefer you kindly forget its second generation product. Forget it, that is, despite a library of some 1,500 games, December sales of 1.1 million units (beating the PS3, with 798k) and more software unit sales than any other console on the market.
Why, if an unverified memo turns out to be correct, will Sony really drop its $600 80GB PS3 and the only currently available version that lets buyers play PS2 games?
Maybe they aren't. Maybe they're planning to introduce a $300 model and add PS2 compatibility to the $400 model. Maybe they're in fact planning to discontinue a really dumb idea (making PS2 compatibility a buy-time decision) and add software compatibility to the $400 model. Maybe they'll even offer a system update to buyers of the existing 40GB model that up-flashes their systems.
You know PS2 compatibility is just a software trick in the 80GB model, right?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
cannonfodder @ Feb 21st 2008 5:12AM
With the slow Blu-Ray games in the future will have no choice but to be installed on the PS3 hard drive so 40 gig is only big enough for 5 or 6 games at the current install size (DMC4). so if sony's current and past stupidity is to be overlooked they need to offer consumers an actual good deal seems hard drive prices for sony amount to less than $1 difference between the 40 and 80gig drives.
then they should stop making backwards compatibility a buy time decistion and introduce the software emulation across the range and not make ppl purchase titles they already own via the PSN.
why don't Sony allow you to time shift i wonder.....
http://blogs.pcworld.com/gameon/archives/006378.html
FTA:
Long time ago, oh, say a year and a half ago, Sony director Phil Harrison called backward compatibility a "core value." Here's what he told GamePro in May 2006.
"Backwards compatibility, as you know from PlayStation One and PlayStation 2, is a core value of what we believe we should offer. And access to the library of content people have created, bought for themselves, and accumulated over the years is necessary to create a format. PlayStation is a format meaning that it transcends many devices -- PSOne, PS2, and now PS3."
I have a copy of Sony's January 23 "PlayStation in Review" press release sitting in front of me. Among other things, it devotes two of six bullet points to "PlayStation total [hardware and software] revenues." Clearly part of this company wants us to see the value of "PlayStation" as a brand, not a singular ailing third generation console.
Another part -- the one making decisions about what configurations of the PS3 ought to be put to market -- would apparently prefer you kindly forget its second generation product. Forget it, that is, despite a library of some 1,500 games, December sales of 1.1 million units (beating the PS3, with 798k) and more software unit sales than any other console on the market.
Why, if an unverified memo turns out to be correct, will Sony really drop its $600 80GB PS3 and the only currently available version that lets buyers play PS2 games?
Maybe they aren't. Maybe they're planning to introduce a $300 model and add PS2 compatibility to the $400 model. Maybe they're in fact planning to discontinue a really dumb idea (making PS2 compatibility a buy-time decision) and add software compatibility to the $400 model. Maybe they'll even offer a system update to buyers of the existing 40GB model that up-flashes their systems.
You know PS2 compatibility is just a software trick in the 80GB model, right?