Playstation 3 + Linux = ???

[Evil Avatar]

Gamespot is reporting (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/09/news_6127219.html) that Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi has announced that the optional Playstation 3 hard drive will be equipped to run the Linux operating system.

In an interview with Impress PC Watch, Kutaragi disclosed that he plans to install the Linux operating system on the PS3's hard disc drive (HDD) so it will be recognized as a computer, rather than a mere console.

But while Linux would require a hard drive to run on, Kutaragi told Impress PC Watch, "We're not going to equip [the PS3 with] a HDD by default, because no matter how much [capacity] we put in it, it won't be enough."Pretty cool if they do something with it, like release a keyboard/mouse and some decent software.

[Goronmon]

We're not going to equip [the PS3 with] a HDD by default, because no matter how much [capacity] we put in it, it won't be enough.
So...instead of not enough, there is none...

Good compromise :rolleyes:

[ElectricMonk]

didn't they say they'd do this at the ps2 launch as well?

it did eventually arrive but not for mainstream consumers.

[falak]

Bollocks. No default HDD is a terrible decision. There was me thinking removable HDDs could be replaced with bigger ones. It doesn't have to be built in, Ken, as long as everyone who buys a PS3 also owns a HDD for their system. This is going to fuck up everything. The Linux decision is very cool, though.

That's enough italics for one post, I think.

[darkwarrior]

IDIOT! PUT IN THE GOD DAMN HDD BY DEFAULT!

If its not default, no developer will utilise it. Simple as that. In all of the PS2 I think only FFOnline used it.

[Deadend]

Don't forget Resident Evil Outbreak.

It used the hard drive to shorten loadtimes from Forever to Too Long.

[Cha-Ka]

So...instead of not enough, there is none...

Good compromise :rolleyes:

This is sad. Shipping hard drives in all the consoles on the market is the only plan that will lead to software that supports the hard drive. I still haven't forgiven them for re-designing (http://www.fortek.nl/docs/games/ps2_screen001.jpg) the PS2 to prevent use of the hard drive. That was about the meanest trick since Sega's tower-of-junk fiasco (http://www.game-machines.com/consoles/syspics/segacd32x.gif) back in the day.

[Kamalot]

I remember all the claims from the PS2 launch, about how you could download movies, music and game demos to the optional hard drive.

Four and a half years later, the hard drive launches. No other promises were kept. The hard drive lives for about 6 months before Sony kills it with the new PS2 design.

I'm not falling for any more lies.

[Goronmon]

That was about the meanest trick since Sega's tower-of-junk fiasco (http://www.game-machines.com/consoles/syspics/segacd32x.gif) back in the day.
ROTFLMAO...I forgot about all that crap back in the day. Man, Sega had some terrible ideas.

[Kamalot]

You know what though?

His smoke-up-teh-ass spiel about having an interface like Minority Report and all this BS about running multiple OS' isn't going to convince us. What it will do is put a specter of doubt into common-Joe’s head about buying an Xbox 360. That's all it needs to do.

Once MOST people buy a console, they aren't ready to turn around and get another one within the next year. If Kenny can convince people that the PS3 is a godsend of power (he's already equated it to a BMW with a Ferrari engine inside) then those people won't buy an Xbox 360 and Kenny has earned his pay.

I find these kinds of brash, pie-in-the-sky promises VERY frustrating because i don't like LIES.

[bone_matrix]

Its been covered, but I'll add it anyway:

But while Linux would require a hard drive to run on, Kutaragi told Impress PC Watch, "We're not going to equip [the PS3 with] a HDD by default, because no matter how much [capacity] we put in it, it won't be enough."

Yeah, because the 120 gigs I have in my REAL computer that I use to INSTALL games to play them and have other things installed still isn't enough :rolleyes:

I don't see how one can fill up the HDD in a GAMING SYSTEM. A modded Xbox? I could understand that, but I have all that on my computer, why put it on the Xbox? Linux on my PS3? Cool enough, but I'm not going to be putting the stuff on my computer on it.

[Kamalot]

ROTFLMAO...I forgot about all that crap back in the day. Man, Sega had some terrible ideas.

Look where it got them though. Nobody wanted to try their later products cause too many people bought into the dream of "add-ons". It ruined their credibility. Even though the Dreamcast was a completely sweet and ass-kicking system, people held off their purchases based on wild speculation of the PS2 and the new digital future it would bring into people's living rooms.

It worked for Sony then, spouting lofty promises about how the PS2 would be the digital media center of the whole house. They hyped the power so much by saying Sadam Hussein was going to use to create Weapons of Mass Destruction. Thanks G. W. Bush, for invading Iraq and proving once and for all that Sony's marketing department is full of the shittiest shit that ever was shat.

Now, will this backfire for Sony the same way it did for Sega?

[entropy123]

My money is on the console maker who allows me to put/use external hard drive. If I want 10 gb great, 100gb great. Let me buy the drive at market prices to determine how much stuff I want in my personal entertainment center.

[Cha-Ka]

My money is on the console maker who allows me to put/use external hard drive. If I want 10 gb great, 100gb great. Let me buy the drive at market prices to determine how much stuff I want in my personal entertainment center.

Fair enough, but that's no reason not to ship with a 20GB HD in the PS3, while still allowing users to replace it with a larger capacity HD or utilize other forms of USB storage devices in addition to it.

[kokyunage]

Fair enough, but that's no reason not to ship with a 20GB HD in the PS3, while still allowing users to replace it with a larger capacity HD or utilize other forms of USB storage devices in addition to it.

Unless it adds to the cost. I'd rather them not ship with a harddrive, save me a few bucks, and then use that money for the good sized harddrive.

[falak]

Speaking of Iraq, Kenny boy is starting to remind me of another bullshitter (http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/).

"Yes, yes, our console will destroy the American infidels. No, they have not taken any of our market share. We have taken Japan and Europe with ease. It is only a matter of time before their Redmond Fortress falls to the iron fist of the mighty PS3. We do not need Hard Drives. Every PS3 is linked to a planet we built, made completely of solid-state memory, utilizing our race of hyper intelligent Space Owls as system administrators. No, latency is not an issue...."

Edit: Unless it adds to the cost. I'd rather them not ship with a harddrive, save me a few bucks, and then use that money for the good sized harddrive.

This is just the four ports/multitap issue all over again. Everyone wanted four ports built in so it became a standard. Instead, Sony proclaimed that the multitap saves money. Buying a multitap seperately or paying more for a console, either way no-one is saving any money. It's the same with the hard drive. I'd pay more for a console if I knew that most games would support the built-in or bundled hard drive. Equally, I won't be buying the HDD if it's not supported (because it wasn't available as default). Either way, money is a non-issue.

[Chandler]

Unless it adds to the cost. I'd rather them not ship with a harddrive, save me a few bucks, and then use that money for the good sized harddrive.

yeah too bad about 90% of gamers wont be thinking that....

BUT to me, I think harddrives are overrated, they are essential to MMORPGs, but ones who go and play MMORPGs are probably hardcore gamers who would buy the optional HDD or use "network hard drive" instead.

Linux is so that they can send PS3s to some country (UK?) without import taxes.

[Paranoia]

I rather spend extra on the HDD option than to buy tons of 8MB memory cards.

[entropy123]

Fair enough, but that's no reason not to ship with a 20GB HD in the PS3, while still allowing users to replace it with a larger capacity HD or utilize other forms of USB storage devices in addition to it.

No arguments here.

[Cha-Ka]

Unless it adds to the cost. I'd rather them not ship with a harddrive, save me a few bucks, and then use that money for the good sized harddrive.

That's not going to lead to innovative use of the PS3's HD by software devs. I view making a HD optional for a console as the #1 way to marginalize that peripheral. XBox's included HD has opened the door for patching games and adding new content. By contrast, PS2's optional HD has supported very few games (required for FFXI and required to use the new maps for SOCOM 2). C'mon Sony...do the math!

[lurker4hire]

What's the point of a big hdd for a console gaming system? The whole media centre functionality requires lots of hdd space, but what do games designed to run directly off of disc need hdd space for?

Cacheing, save data, persistent info regarding online profile ok... but can't all of that be taken care of with a 4gb micro hdd like in an ipod mini?

Regardless, it's all smoke and mirrors until you can actually get a unit.

[Goronmon]

Unless it adds to the cost. I'd rather them not ship with a harddrive, save me a few bucks, and then use that money for the good sized harddrive.
Yeah, but by having the HD optional, you are effectively killing any chance of its use being widespread and for more than just game saves.

[crashedout]

I think we have established the following from console history:

-default HD = devs use it, you can store your saves and updates, create your own soundtracks, costs more

-optional HD= most devs ignore it, if you install it offers limited fuctionality, potentional for it to become redundant later in console's life, costs less

I beleive nothing Sony says at this point....when we get closer to next spring I will pay attention. I hope MS marketing starts fighting back with facts so maybe Joe Six-Pack will suprise us and make an informed purchase...HAHAHAHH

[*Legion*]

So I guess Kutaragi should call this system the "PS 2.5"...

[novicius]

HD or no HD, it's whoever has the biggest display in Walmart will win the American market. All other considerations are secondary.

Sad but true.

[Goronmon]

HD or no HD, it's whoever has the biggest display in Walmart will win the American market. All other considerations are secondary.

Sad but true.
I would say false. XBox will be the only one on the shelf for a substantial amount of time, however Sony will still beat MS out for sales.

[Dirty Harry]

All i know is the playstation is the best game system ever and all of your opinions that arent praising sony like the Demi-god they're. WELL U GUYS R WROONG.

[Zanzibar]

So I guess Kutaragi should call this system the "PS 2.5"...

Muhahahahahahahhhahahahahhahahha! Well done.

Seriously, did you guys read the article? Ol' Ken thinks he's making a PC.

[Mrbunchypants]

Another reason why Sony is shying away form a HDD is that you can crack and copy games easyer.
The Xbox is close to a PC and look at how fast they where able to copy games for it. a little software update and your done. If theres not HDD then its harder to do that. Sony is thinking about copy rights and such. Smart for then bad for us.

[Reanimated]

No standard HDD is a terrible move. I believe it's because of the cost of the BRD that they're not including one.

[Goronmon]

No standard HDD is a terrible move. I believe it's because of the cost of the BRD that they're not including one.
Yeah, although having Blu-Ray player will be sweet, I keep getting this feeling that Sony is making a big mistake with it...

[Cha-Ka]

Yeah, although having Blu-Ray player will be sweet, I keep getting this feeling that Sony is making a big mistake with it...

Agreed. Blu-Ray isn't proven technology like DVD was when it was included in the PS2 design. With HD-DVD/Blu-Ray both contending to be the next standard in video media, it's virtually guaranteed that one format will go the way of Betamax when the other gains popular support. Unless Blu-Ray movies are going to be produced quickly and cheaply enough to gain significant shelf-space before PS3 ships, supporting Blu-Ray playback isn't much of a selling point.

[RichardTowler]

Sony are just thinking of the memory card situation, everyone that bought a PS2, had to buy a memory card, which is, alot of money to get to the point, if they sold an HD with the PS3, like the XBOX, mem cards only become something only a small amount of people would buy.

[Kamalot]

It is pretty telling that, in the EvilAvatar poll recently conducted, the two lowest scoring options for must-have next-gen features were the blu-ray player and the ability to hook up multiple displays.

On another note, has anyone else noticed that Blu-ray looks like it could be mistaken for "Blurry?"

[Goronmon]

Unless Blu-Ray movies are going to be produced quickly and cheaply enough to gain significant shelf-space before PS3 ships, supporting Blu-Ray playback isn't much of a selling point.
That point alone could make or break the PS3.

[Reanimated]

Agreed. Blu-Ray isn't proven technology like DVD was when it was included in the PS2 design. With HD-DVD/Blu-Ray both contending to be the next standard in video media, it's virtually guaranteed that one format will go the way of Betamax when the other gains popular support. Unless Blu-Ray movies are going to be produced quickly and cheaply enough to gain significant shelf-space before PS3 ships, supporting Blu-Ray playback isn't much of a selling point.





I believe two things will kill Blu Ray - price and timing. Blu Ray discs are going to cost significantly more to produce and that's going to translate to purchase prices. HDDVD is going to come in at basically the same price as DVD and will be on the market almost a full year sooner.

Since the capacity argument has gone out the window for Sony (HDDVD now has tri-layer 45GB discs), I really don't see how Blu Ray will get off the ground.

Now some will argue that the PS3 will give Sony a huge Blu Ray install base to work from, but that argument is a farce. The install base is not going to be the number of people who own a PS3 - it's going to be the number of people who own a PS3 and an HDTV. Also consider the fact that it will take at least 2 years for the PS3 to get any significant sized install base, and you've got a situation where Blu Ray being in the PS3 is next to meaningless. Then you've got the fact that HDDVD players will be on the market this fall while PS3 and Blu Ray players won't hit the US until fall of 06, and that PS3 "install base" advantage goes to absolute nil. All this and I haven't even gotten to the fact that Robbie Bach has all but confirmed that later versions of Xbox 360 will ship with HDDVD drives (when/if the market takes off).

I would say that Blu Ray is already in a pretty weak position. I mean HDDVD will be launching this fall with titles like Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Matrix, and Batman Begins. That's enough to convince me that I need a 500 dollar HDDVD player right there.

BUT HEY, who knows, maybe Blu Ray won't be Betamax 2.

[Mrbunchypants]

I would say that Blu Ray is already in a pretty weak position. I mean HDDVD will be launching this fall with titles like Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Matrix, and Batman Begins. That's enough to convince me that I need a 500 dollar HDDVD player right there.

BUT HEY, who knows, maybe Blu Ray won't be Betamax 2.


Your not going to catch me spening $299 on the xbox 360 first gen only to have to by a HDDVD player for another $500. Even if they offer to replace my xbox for one that had that tech in it theres going to be some price (maybe 150 to 200 ) for the replacement. do you really think people are going to pay that?

Unless they take the xbox 360 back to the shop and start now putting the HDDVD drives in, it's going to be a while befor you see any Xboxs with that. This gives sony time to catch up with it's out of the box Blu-ray support.

Then you have to think of the Dev that are makeing the games. all of a sudden they are going to be able to use HDDVDS for games this means new dev kits plus codeing the games to run off that type of disc.

The longer the wait the less likely they will be used.

[Zanzibar]

Your not going to catch me spening $299 on the xbox 360 first gen only to have to by a HDDVD player for another $500. Even if they offer to replace my xbox for one that had that tech in it theres going to be some price (maybe 150 to 200 ) for the replacement. do you really think people are going to pay that?

Unless they take the xbox 360 back to the shop and start now putting the HDDVD drives in, it's going to be a while befor you see any Xboxs with that. This gives sony time to catch up with it's out of the box Blu-ray support.

Then you have to think of the Dev that are makeing the games. all of a sudden they are going to be able to use HDDVDS for games this means new dev kits plus codeing the games to run off that type of disc.

The longer the wait the less likely they will be used.

I think I may be missing your point, you know that X360 will not carry HD-DVD, right? They're using standard DVD as their media of choice. They're avoiding the media-center angle for this go-round, which is fine by me. The only thing I would have liked to have seen for the X360 would be a TiVo attachment.

[Goronmon]

I think I may be missing your point, you know that X360 will not carry HD-DVD, right? They're using standard DVD as their media of choice. They're avoiding the media-center angle for this go-round, which is fine by me. The only thing I would have liked to have seen for the X360 would be a TiVo attachment.
I think he was responding to the comment that later versions of the 360 may contain a HD-DVD player.

[Babbster]

Then you have to think of the Dev that are makeing the games. all of a sudden they are going to be able to use HDDVDS for games this means new dev kits plus codeing the games to run off that type of disc.

No, actually, you don't. The vast majority of DVD games that have been released so far have been 4.7 GB (single layer) or less. They haven't even started stretching to the limits of the capacity of the current DVD tech. By the time they (game developers) are truly concerned about disc space again, it'll be time for yet another round of console wars pitting the PS2.75 against the Xbox 129600 against the Nintendo Happy Fun Time Joy Machine.

[Kamalot]

The vast majority of DVD games that have been released so far have been 4.7 GB (single layer) or less.

Even the Tiny GameCube discs are rarely exceeded. I think Babbster makes a good point. While having an HD player sounds great, not having one isn't going to be a killer.

By the next round of consoles, in 5-6 years, the market penetration of HD TVs MAY have reached the point where it makes sense to bundle HD-DVD (or bluray) disc players in the consoles.

At this point in time, I'd rather buy a game machine and games and not throw some money into what could be the next BetaMax or Laser Disc.

[Goronmon]

By the next round of consoles, in 5-6 years, the market penetration of HD TVs MAY have reached the point where it makes sense to bundle HD-DVD (or bluray) disc players in the consoles.
Exactly, the PS3 is just coming out way to early to consider the Blu-Ray player that big of an asset. Maybe if it was being released in 2007 we would have a better indication by then.

I just don't see Blu-Ray dominating the DVD market the way DVD dominated the VHS market by next year.

[Mason]

We're still in the pre-game here. Just wait until the XBox 360 launch, and the PR blitz that Sony will be pumping out to divert attention. Like two samurai on a moonlit night, I think that everything will be decided by that single pass.

At this point, I think that Sony will succeed with their campaign of FUD. Game journalists still rarely call Sony on their various E3 shenanigans. And gamers are by nature imaginitive and future-oriented; hype is so important to most of us because often the anticipation of playing games is more fun than the game itself. So once the new XBox is a measured quantity, and Microsoft's in-game screenshots are competing with Sony's pre-rendered cinema, things will get pretty ugly.

Just remember, shipped consoles can have flaws, drawbacks, the occasional disappointing games, and technical issues. Unshipped consoles reside in the perfect realm of the forms. That's hard to compete with.

[Blue]

I have four times - nearly five - as many games for my PS2 as my Xbox and Cube combined (not including PS1 games in that mix). Not a single one of those uses the HDD. I know I'm (clearly) in the minority here, but I could really care less whether or not Sony includes it as standard with the PS3 or not. No, the PS2 doesn't fully hold up in the graphics department, but I think their games do which is much more important. And the load times aren't even what I would consider terrible, so that too matters little to me.

I suppose I just can't see how having a HDD or not having one would make or break Sony's chances. I barely use my Xbox and the fact that it comes with a built in HDD doesn't really affect what I do with it either way. The ability to download maps, save stuff to the box itself is more a perk to me than anything else. I consider myself a gamer which more or less means I own and/or play a system based on what games they put out, not what's under the hood. The NES was fairly crap-powered by today's standards and I would argue it's still the best system ever made. Under-powered or lacking this or that doesn't mean anything. If they have the best titles, it will still be the best system to own.

[Reanimated]

PS3 games are most likely NOT going to be on Blu Ray discs due to the cost of the media. I doubt there are many developers out there that are going to be willing to pay the extra 3-5 dollars to put their games on Blu Ray discs when they could easily fit the game onto a DVD9 and put that money in the bank. If they DO put the games on Blu Ray discs, then that cost is most certainly going to be passed on to the consumer. Let's also not forget that if Sony forces devs to use Blu Ray, it's going to cut all of the smaller developers out of the loop because they won't be able to afford it. You couple the cost of using Blu Ray with the already skyrocketing cost of next-gen development, and you could have a lot of developers jumping ship to a more friendly platform.

No, I forsee 99% of PS3 games shipping on standard DVD9s.

At the end of the day, this whole Blu Ray thing is more of a liability than an asset. DVD just recently overtook VHS in US rentals, so I don't see an HD format overtaking anything anytime soon.

[Goronmon]

I suppose I just can't see how having a HDD or not having one would make or break Sony's chances.
Of course its not going to make or break their chances, but it still sucks since you will be forced to pay a premium for small memory cards instead anyways, not to mention that it doesn't have any of the "perks" of having a harddrive thats included with the system.

I guess I just see too many advantages over having a HD included as to not having it.

[Goronmon]

PS3 games are most likely NOT going to be on Blu Ray discs due to the cost of the media.
Either way, you are still paying the (probably substantial) premium of having a console with the Blu-Ray player built in.

[Blue]

Of course its not going to make or break their chances, but it still sucks since you will be forced to pay a premium for small memory cards instead anyways, not to mention that it doesn't have any of the "perks" of having a harddrive thats included with the system.

I guess I just see too many advantages over having a HD included as to not having it.

Agreed. I suppose though I'm of the camp that I'd be paying even more for the HD than I would be the memory card. And the memory card I can take to a friend's house instead of having to haul my entire game system.

[Goronmon]

Agreed. I suppose though I'm of the camp that I'd be paying even more for the HD than I would be the memory card. And the memory card I can take to a friend's house instead of having to haul my entire game system.
If I need a card to move files around, I'll buy one. But having 3 PS2 cards, like 7 GC cards, etc...just gets to be a bit much.

[Kamalot]

Just remember, shipped consoles can have flaws, drawbacks, the occasional disappointing games, and technical issues. Unshipped consoles reside in the perfect realm of the forms. That's hard to compete with.

Damn! You are SO right!
And when you are right, you are RIGHT!

How can the Xbox 360 compete with people's own perfect imagination of a supercomputer PS3 that magically ages your videos like a fine wine into HDTV-quality Minority Report fantasy interfaces running Lindows and OSX Tiger into the mystic PS3 Liger OS?

Seriously.
How can any company compete when their opposition is peddling pure fantasy?

[Kamalot]

I have four times - nearly five - as many games for my PS2 as my Xbox and Cube combined (not including PS1 games in that mix). Not a single one of those uses the HDD.

I think it is painfully obvious why none of your games use the Hard Drive.

It was promised before the launch of the PS2 but came out 4.5 years into the console's life.

It was only around about 6 months before Sony killed the HD with the redesign of the PS2.

Who in their right mind would bother building a game with Hard Drive support when such a TINY percentage of the installed base has the hard drive?

As such, Sony is setting up the same scenario this time around. They are promising a Hard Drive but who knows When or If it will come out. What incentive will developers have in utilizing the Hard Drive if 1% of the installed base actually purchases and installs it? How do developers or consumers know that Sony won't kill the HD attachment by redesigning the PS3 to not have a drive bay?

The whole thing is downright dumb.

[Ernst_Jager]

What better way to not piss off the rabid geeks that actually care if it has a Hard Drive or not than to 'say' it will be extra later on but include Linux.

[Blue]

I think it is painfully obvious why none of your games use the Hard Drive.

It was promised before the launch of the PS2 but came out 4.5 years into the console's life.

It was only around about 6 months before Sony killed the HD with the redesign of the PS2.

Who in their right mind would bother building a game with Hard Drive support when such a TINY percentage of the installed base has the hard drive?

As such, Sony is setting up the same scenario this time around. They are promising a Hard Drive but who knows When or If it will come out. What incentive will developers have in utilizing the Hard Drive if 1% of the installed base actually purchases and installs it? How do developers or consumers know that Sony won't kill the HD attachment by redesigning the PS3 to not have a drive bay?

The whole thing is downright dumb.

My point is, however, that I don't need to have a HD to have good games and having said drive won't really hurt the console's chances either way. I could care less if someone utilizes the HD or not. I was simply saying that the PS2 had little to no HD and - in my opinion - still had the better of the game libraries available and that's easily what's more important. So sure it's obvious why the games I own don't utilize it, but my point is, I don't care that they don't. Doesn't hurt my gameplay nor my fun-factor one bit.

[Furious Wang]

My Xbox and Ps2 sit side by side.

When I use my Xbox I am able to manage vast playlists of music on the harddrive to use as custom soundtracks for my games. I cannot do so on my Playstation and must abide by whatever horrible music the developers force me to listen to.

When I use my Xbox I am able to store save game files of all 100+ games I have played on the system on the harddrive without ever having to delete a single one. I cannot do so on my Playstation. The memory card only holds around 13 or so game saves and I've had to delete many many saves over the years. I would have needed to spend an additional 200 dollars on memory cards to keep all my saves for eternity.

When I use my Xbox, for most games, I create and save a profile and that's it. From that point on the game saves for me after every advancement without the need for me to stop playing. The experience is superfluous. On the PS2, I must endlessly search for Memory Cards, Choose a Memory Card, Manage Space on a Memory Card, and save the game myself. The experience feels antiquated. Like using a dot matrix printer.

A 20 gigabyte harddrive wouldn't cost Sony 10 dollars to add to the PS3. Sony is making a collosal mistake.

[Reanimated]

Either way, you are still paying the (probably substantial) premium of having a console with the Blu-Ray player built in.




True. Kuturagi has already hinted at a 400 dollar PS3. I can't imagine that they'll come in at 300 with the BRD in it. I'd be shocked.

[Kamalot]

My Xbox and Ps2 sit side by side.

When I use my Xbox I am able to manage vast playlists of music on the harddrive to use as custom soundtracks for my games. ...

When I use my Xbox I am able to store save game files of all 100+ games I have played on the system on the harddrive without ever having to delete a single one. ...

When I use my Xbox, for most games, I create and save a profile and that's it. From that point on the game saves for me after every advancement without the need for me to stop playing.

So, would you say that having a hard drive in the console makes the experience better?

Could the things you mentioned be accomplished with a bit of onboard flash memory?

[Kamalot]

True. Kuturagi has already hinted at a 400 dollar PS3. I can't imagine that they'll come in at 300 with the BRD in it. I'd be shocked.
PS3 will launch at the same price as the PS2. Anything else will be suicide.

Until they actually announce a price, Sony will do everything in its power to make you THINK the console will be super expensive. That way, when they announce the price, people will feel like they are getting a deal!

They will also make you think that they are loosing lots of money on each console. That way, people again feel like they are getting a deal.

It is all a mind game with Sony. Reminds me of my ex-wife. :eek:

[Reanimated]

Sony can do whatever they like, but the FACT of the matter is that Blu Ray drives are going to cost a FORTUNE to manufacture until it hits critical mass (if ever). Look at how long it took DVD players to come down in price from when the first players hit. Now apply that same timetable to BRD. Sony already has like 80 Billion in debt, so they can't really afford to be giving away Blu Ray drives for peanuts.

All their bullshit doesn't mean much to me. The fact that it's priced high doesn't mean that it's a premium product... it just means that they've put in a bunch of worthless BS in an attempt to grab the next gen DVD market. I'm just looking at the plain facts of what the parts are going to cost. Estimates put the cost to manufacture X360 at about 375 dollars and that's with a standard el cheapo DVD player. Plus PS3 has a built in wireless NIC and Blue Tooth for the controllers, whereas MS is selling the wireless NIC as an addon.

Like I said, I would be utterly shocked if they came in at under 400.

[Zanzibar]

Wasn't it YESTERDAY that Kutaragi said that the PS3 would be a fabulous digital-video-editing/photo-enhancing home media entertainment machine? How exactly are you going to store videos etc without a HDD?

[Babbster]

How will PS3 be an amazing all-in-one home entertainment center/PC/graphic&video editing suite? That's simple...The Cell is magical. Every time a device with a Cell processor is powered on, magical links form with all the other Cell devices within 50 miles. Then, all these processors use these magical links to share their power for the good of all users. The magical links also allow everyone to share the memory connected to the Cell and it is dynamically allocated instantaneously according to need. When more non-PS3 devices with Cell are released, this phenomenon will increase exponentially and eventually the magical Cell network will encompass everything from your PC to the muffler on your car. It's even suggested that Cell will eventually form the material of which everything is constructed, turning the entire planet into one magical, shared network with infinite processing power.

[bobbler]

Oh, the drama...

[Furious Wang]

So, would you say that having a hard drive in the console makes the experience better?

Could the things you mentioned be accomplished with a bit of onboard flash memory?

Absolutely. To both questions. That is, of course, if the onboard flash memory is large enough to hold some 1000s of mp3s and 100s of game saves/patches.

Do they have something like that standard for the PS3?

[Karmakaze]

Bit of a tangent, but my money is on the 360 having a button to remove the DVD-ROM drive (similiar to a laptop, but probally custom shape/DRM'ed/whatever) hidden under the swappable faceplates so that it can be upgraded to a HD-DVD down the road.

edit: Oh, and no HDD is lame. Say what you want about ps2 having better games than xbox, but xbox spanks the ps2 on load times, and I'm pretty sure that's because of the HDD. When the ps3's been out for 4 years, load times will again be horrendous, but no devs will spend the time optimizing for an optional HDD.

[Furious Wang]

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs32&d=05236&f=KUTARA~3.jpg

Behold! The VS3!

[mister_slim]

So, what, another 18 months of this? I don't think I can afford the medication need to survive that long.

Time for a liquor store job?

[rpdillon]

No, actually, you don't. The vast majority of DVD games that have been released so far have been 4.7 GB (single layer) or less. They haven't even started stretching to the limits of the capacity of the current DVD tech. By the time they (game developers) are truly concerned about disc space again, it'll be time for yet another round of console wars pitting the PS2.75 against the Xbox 129600 against the Nintendo Happy Fun Time Joy Machine.

Not when you suddenly start demanding that all sound be in 5.1 and all graphics be ready for High Def. That'll triple (quadruple?) the amount of storage almost immediately. Making the games we have now with those new requirements would require a ton of space, nevermind the pre-rendered videos being entirely high-def, and storage for the better models, animations, etc. that make having high end hardware worthwhile.

I think we'll easily be looking at launch games using 10-15 GB, and maybe triple that before the life of the console is over.

[TrackZero]

Absolutely. To both questions. That is, of course, if the onboard flash memory is large enough to hold some 1000s of mp3s and 100s of game saves/patches.

Do they have something like that standard for the PS3?

100s of saves/patches? Yowza. Personally I think the revolution will be fine with 512MB of flash. No reason they can't have an add-on later for additional memory if you need it (as I doubt every person would).

On topic though, it's a real shame the PS3 HDD isn't standard. As has been noted, this fucks over the developers as they can't plan around the user having a HDD and/or they will have a harder time convincing management that time should be spent adding HDD capable features to their games.

[Babbster]

Not when you suddenly start demanding that all sound be in 5.1 and all graphics be ready for High Def. That'll triple (quadruple?) the amount of storage almost immediately. Making the games we have now with those new requirements would require a ton of space, nevermind the pre-rendered videos being entirely high-def, and storage for the better models, animations, etc. that make having high end hardware worthwhile.
Pardon? PC games that go up to 1600x1200 (sometimes higher with the "crazier" people) are still distributed on six CDs or less (that's less than 4.2GB, less than a single-layer DVD). Between nicer compression schemes (console developers aren't locked into one standard) and the fact that in-game graphic data aren't usually stored on discs in their final form, I still think that 9.4GB is enough for the majority of games. In the worst-case scenario, I suppose it's POSSIBLE that we'll end up with a couple (maybe a few) two-disc games by the end of the Xbox 360's life. Me, I never had issues with two-disc games - three plus is the point where I started getting antsy.

[bobbler]

One quick note, Babbster (and others):

This is where streaming comes in handy -- a well made game done on BR (or DVD for that matter) can have load times that are just as fast as a game made with an HDD.

There is a lot of power in increased space. Being able to repeat segments of the game many times on the disc to reduce seek times is quite a bonus (the block of info you need on the disc could be the next block, even if it is repeated multiple times in the game). With increased space, I'd argue that you can do just as much to reduce load times as with an HDD. (the small HDDs going into the consoles will be like 20-25mb/s max average read, a high speed DVD/BR drive can get that too -- especially with repeating data, so seek times are cut down substantially).

I think some of you overestimate the importance of HDDs on load times and actual game play -- I, however, fully agree that an HDD is important once you connect your console online -- for normal games, it's not though (outside of save games). I would have liked an HDD for ps3 standard, but I'll grudgingly buy one if it isn't a stupidly high price (~$50 maybe?) and not make a fuss about it.

Look at Xbox, some of the worst load time games are on it, yet it has an HDD standard. In contrast, there are games on PS2 that have almost no load times at all and these aren't just some cheesy little game, either. Not that either of those situations are the standard, but implying that HDDs instantly make for reduced load times or only having a disc drive means sucky load times. It has more to do with the abilities of the team creating the game than it does the HDD. Thinking outside of the box helps if you are working with defined hardware.

Besides, if load times weren't that big of a deal... I'd probably never play PC games. All consoles, in comparison, are speed demons. It seems when you give them an HD they load a bunch of shit on it and then you have to hit the HDD every other time you move. PC games are a perfect example of what's wrong with HDDs being standard -- with a big enough disc you could make any PC game work and reduce the load times substantially; it seems, over time, PC games load times have only grown in their load times. I got one of those WD740 drives (10krpm, sata) and I still see load times on PC games much higher than console games. I digress...

[resikel]

Playing with the next-gen "entertainment supercomputer" PS3 using memory cards is like saving all of my computer files on 3.5" floppy discs.

Playing with the PS2 using memory cards is like saving all of my computer files on 5.25" floppy discs.

Now if only I can find my hole puncher. . . . ;)

[Babbster]

One quick note, Babbster (and others):

This is where streaming comes in handy -- a well made game done on BR (or DVD for that matter) can have load times that are just as fast as a game made with an HDD...
One quick note: I never advocated a hard drive for its effect on load times, nor would I deny that it's POSSIBLE (depending on the game) to have decreased load times with a Blu-Ray drive with no hard drive. Heck, when it comes right down to it I'm completely in favor of having a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD drive in a new console.

My arguments go a little something more like this: If the choice is between having a hard drive and not having one, I'd rather have one. I don't, however, think that it's a critical component. On the removable situation, I would rather have Blu-Ray/HD-DVD instead of just a standard DVD. I don't, however, think that a higher-capacity drive is a critical component.

In other words, I think both the Xbox 360 and PS3 are going to be solid gaming systems. Indeed, I'll probably end up having to get a Revolution, too. In yet another set of words, I'll advocate almost any hardware design choice because, as long as they support HD resolutions and continue making good games, I'm very flexible on everything else. :)

[Reanimated]

I'm getting pretty tired of the following conjecturefied terms:

"well made"
"possibly"
"if done right"
"tricks"
"supposedly"
"I would imagine"
"any real advantage"
"essentially"
"if"
"I think"



Cut the bullshit please.

[Kamalot]

I'm getting pretty tired of the following conjecturefied terms:

"well made"
"possibly"
"if done right"
"tricks"
"supposedly"
"I would imagine"
"any real advantage"
"essentially"
"if"
"I think"



Cut the bullshit please.
Are you asking Sony to cut the bullshit?

Oh yes, please!

[B_Money]

What I really don't understand is why include linux on the hard drive? Does sony have some bizarre fetish to give hackers an easier time of finding a way to play pirated/homebrew games on thier PS3?