As expected, Sony has introduced a new model of Playstation 3. This model will have an MSRP of $349.99, and will come equipped with a 250GB hard drive, instead of the standard 120GB drive.
For $50, you get nothing more than some extra hard drive space – No “System Seller” games like Uncharted 2 are included, nor is even a second controller. Of course, an entire 250GB hard drive costs roughly the same anyway, so I really don’t see why this model even exists.
I guess something just didn’t feel right to Sony, not having the most expensive video game console. That won’t be the case for long though, as Microsoft will also be selling a 250GB version of their console. This one costs $399.99, but comes with a copy of Modern Warfare 2 and a pretty damn cool paint job (and an extra controller).
Off to update the PS3 Model Guide again.
Weak Sony… you fail.
Ummm, guys, I think you guys are struggling to put the pieces together. Sony has announced a deal with Netflix – Sony wants the PS3 to become the itunes of movies. You generally need pretty big hard drives to store HD quality movies. This is what that is about.
Maybe the title should be: “Sony Announces 250GB Playstation 3 Slim For Reasons I Haven’t Worked Out Yet”
You do not need a big hard drive to stream movies. You need just enough space to hold a single movie. PS3 Netflix uses BD-Live, so it won’t be saving movies or queueing them at all. You can choose a movie, watch it, and the data is deleted forever.
I think you’re the one that is struggling ;)
well the ps3 is better than the xbox360 the ps3 has blue ray the xbox360 doesnt the xbox360 always asks for credit card numbers the ps3 doesnt ask it only asks when u buy something
None of your points are factually evident in something being better. I prefer the PS3 because it suits me. The credit card info is input once (as long as the card is valid) and done. I have purchased things in the PSN Store and it has been easy. I have not used the Live Store so I cannot say what the difference is. I base my opinion strictly on the genre of games I play and the media options of the PS3. I am not a big DLC believer. I like to point out to all the gamers that think that Live is a far more advantageous way of gaming, trade it in when you are done. You can’t.
Of course this goes for PS3 as well. My point is that typically the ability to download full games on Live has been a selling point for many. I like hard copies that I can trade in. Most of the games out now take only a couple of hours to beat and then you are stuck with nothing or repetitive online play. To me trading it in is the way to go. I see it as you can get another online able game and continue to play storylines also. That way you are gaming for cheap as you get some money out of them games. Obviously, if you like a game, keep it. And if one of the online games you traded is cheaper than what you traded it back for, go get it if it was the bomb. Usually a game trades back around 40% what you paid for it and eventually is cheaper than that to buy after some time. You can expect price drops on good games to take several months giving you plenty of play time. Don’t take to long or you will miss the chance to trade it at a decent return.
You are right Carl. But you should browse some of the other chat on this site. A slew of the people comment about the great online download center of Live. If you are an avid gamer and like selection that 250 GB drive will be peanuts to you. I have a 320 in my PS3 and an external 1TB to hold save data and other files to prevent that drive from becoming overly stuffed thus adding problems with data management. Supposedly the PS3 does a defrag on shutdown. I do not believe it. If it does it is the quickest defrag of any HDD I have ever encountered. Then again it is true I have never run defrag on anything but Windows PC’s.
Looking at most of my games though, you need between 2-4 gb of data on HDD to run the game and that is with a disc. Now download one and that number is pretty big as well. Then add music, I have over a gig there, and then add movies which I have over 100 gig there. That puppy is full in no time. I think the idea is get a machine you can live with, be it big storage or not and enjoy that thing.
Happy Gaming to all and to all a good game.
My point about this release being mostly irrelevant is because the 250GB PS3 costs $50 more than the standard version. And that $50 is exactly what a 250GB drive costs anyway. Since they are not adding anything else to the package, it is pretty much pointless to have this model at this price point.
For the minuscule amount of people who need this much room on their console in the first place, that is.
If the cost is even then what is the problem with that. Some people are scared to open that panel up. I would say it is not a waste. Would you say it was a waste that they make a V6 and V8 version of a Camaro/Mustang. Sure you could put that V8 in there yourself but it sure is nice that they have a selection to suit people that is already done. Now for the Xbox it is a good thing to a point. I know that devs have to design games around a no hdd available approach and they could have a HDD option. This is how the PS3 can negate optical speed issues with the Blu-Ray drive. The XBox has the DVD limitation. You cannot compare a HDD to any Optical drive for transfer speeds.
I think PS3 is on the correct path and the XBOX is truly on the short end of the stick in the end. Certainly it can be argued that the 360 has a better GPU but even so it is not much better. All that hype about shared memory is moot when the game will require more active memory due to a lack of HDD options. So really I can’t see that being advantageous. I have seen FRAP tests on both and the PS3 usually has more issues in AA. That doesn’t mean it looked so much worse. I think Fraps is fun but it cannot indicate what the eye can see and what it cannot. I rarely notice the glitches. I also think if you are looking so hard to see them then you really are not playing the game. You are just picking a fight and are never going to enjoy either console.
I think you are missing the vision Sony has for the PS3 and the reason they stuck a blue ray drive in the first place. They want the PS3 to be the center of the home entertainment system. The netflix deal may only be for streaming, but there is a market to buy movies as well, not to mention games.
I would much rather just download a game over night buy it, right now it’s limited to demos and weaker games, but that will change and bigger hard drives will allow that to happen. Just like it does with Valve’s Steam service on the PC.
The second reason is to create some differentiation so they can claw back a bit of margin on the console. There is a class of customer that will always buy the top end, no matter what. Hence why they have tiered devices, like a 80Gb/250Gb. They don’t want to create performance tiers, as that would create problems for developers and impact user experience on the low end. A bigger drive is a great option for them to upsell and get a central position as the source of media in the home.
We may see bigger drives in the PS3 yet.
Bigger and faster my friend. Also I am awaiting the SSD to be in one. I am not sure if they are compatible as I have yet to get one. I think they would work but not sure. Time will tell. I am eagerly awaiting the next gen of consoles already. It will be nice to see a dual GPU PS4 with that cell. Then it will be able to show us what its made of for sure.
I’m confused about all these console options. How does the size of the HD matter?? My last console was a regular Xbox.
I never got the notice of this post so if you get it sorry for the delay. (Not that I am the ultimate in information or anything!) : )
The HDD will become a larger part in most of the games in the end cycle of these consoles. Most games are in need of memory that is not there. PS3 games are installing files in the upwards of 5 GB already. MGS4 actually installs a couple of times and removes the file once you have advanced to certain parts of the game. There could be as much as 12-15 GB of data there between all the installs (speculative). What they use it for is for data caching and quicker than disc read access points. Textures and maybe some of the CGI streaming on MGS4. Obviously save files, though you wouldn’t need 250 GB for that (I hope : ) ).
If you become a mega downloader like Silver over in the PS3 vs 360 posts, you may need a large amount on a drive and possibly several drives because each file can range 2 GB to 8 GB. It won’t take long for some people to overload their HDD. Also keep in mind that HDD’s struggle to defrag when you do not give them more than mirror room (better than 50% free space). You also will suffer seek time growth the more saturated the drive gets. This of course will only affect games that actually use the drive. I suppose this topic is another one of those “It depends on the user” situations.
So.. I’m going to buy a PS3 around this week, i think.. But there are still problems that make me might want to reconsider buying one yet..
First.. There are 2 models of 250 GB that I know.. One is the CHEC-2000B that is sold in Japan, and the other one is the CHEC-2006B.. I was just wondering, whether there is a possibility that the CHEC-2006B that is sold in my country is inferior to the one published in Japan.
Second.. PS3 has this amazing feature to play in HD 1080p.. The problem is, I don’t have an LCD which could play PS3 games at its best.. All I have is my old standard TV.. So, are the difference between standard TV and HD really that significant, or could you just ignore it? I heard that the PS3’s Graphic on a standard TV has the same Graphic Quality as the PS2’s, is that so?
Could anybody please answer my questions, thank you :D