GAMES: GameSpot GameFAQs MOVIES: Metacritic Movietome Comic-Con
Wednesday, Apr 11, 2007

When will Japan follow?  Afterall, stores there were discounting the 20GB model within the first two months.  Maybe this was too soon. 

 http://kotaku.com/gaming/top/sony-the-ps3-20gb-is-dead-251567.php

Chikahiro pointed out iSuppli's esitmate of the component costs, and the 20GB was the bigger vaccum of currency.  But, was there really no demand for the 20GB model in NA or was it because SCEA didn't ship that many to begin with?  Yours truly got a 20GB model simply because I thought the extra money could be better spent on a 120GB HDD instead, and so I did.  In fact, that cost me $85.  I still have no use for Wi Fi or the card readers, and I use USB memory sticks to transfer movies and save data.  Also, seems that I got a better bargain since you're paying an extra $100 with the 60GB model for $35 worth of extra components.

Alas, one could argue that the existence of two SKU's was pure rubbish given the minimal differences between the units AND SCEI's mocking of MS's somewhat similar strategy.  Kotaku jokingly pointed out that the PS3 is down to one SKU, while the 360 got bloated to three. 

So about that price drop.... down to $500 this fall?  That would still make it a far more robust system compared to the Elite 360, but will gamers care?

Comments

Page 1 
« prev  |  next »
Next Gen coverage also.

And personally, I'd consider the harddrive space to be more attactive than wi-fi or the flash reader, but that will vary from player to player. Now, a VGA adapter for the PS3 would be nice.
Posted Apr 11, 2007 3:19 pm PT
So Chika was right, and I didn't know that you already had a PS3. Right now the 20gb system is a much better deal than a 60gb system, so you may have gotten a steal. That is of course if the price does not drop this fall (which includes a bundle at the same price). You also have a 360? That's very hardcore. When I get a PS3 we'll all have to play each other online.
Posted Apr 11, 2007 8:28 pm PT
I have a 360 that's not currently working.. will trade it for an Elite sometime soon when my budget allows me to. I'm looking for a Wii in light of the Chronicles announcement, but having a hard time.
Posted Apr 11, 2007 9:08 pm PT
With the 20bg taken out, that will be less cost on Sony, maybe it was a step in the dirrection of a price drop. Not making that system is less money spent by Sony.
Posted Apr 11, 2007 10:05 pm PT
Yeah - I still think the 20g PS3 was thrown out just so they could keep close to the 360 Pro price wise. Looks like Japan is going to be keeping theirs for the time being, which I don't quite expect to last. Kinda sucks, though, since they lose the most money per 20g PS3 in Japan (they pay $80 less than we did). It would be interesting to see if it sticks around much longer; I'd expect it to be phased out completely whenever the price-drop hits at the latest. Last I heard Sony expects profitability by 2010 or 2011 (gah - long haul); this is a good, logical step towards that.

Good move for Sony. Here's hoping we see the 60g turn into a $499 80g before the end of the year

I really do wish MS would drop the core 360 and send all the core owners rebate coupons towards the 20g or 120g harddrives... something. That, to me, is the biggest thing holding the 360 back (unlike the PS3, where I feel RAM is the issue).
Posted Apr 11, 2007 11:45 pm PT
RAM isn't an issue, and neither is the core's exclusion of the HDD. The latter hardly affects games unless we're talking about loading times. And while there is more RAM reserved for the OS in the PS3, the GDDR3 VRAM is significantly faster. Memory management is the issue since it lacks a UMA, but ultimately, it's always been about Cell's higher learning curve.

The tables have turned this time, and the PS3 isn't great for multiplatform games. I think most of the 360 ports out there prove that.
Posted Apr 12, 2007 9:04 am PT
The RAM is faster, but even then won't shuttling information between the slower RAM, HD or disc incur *some* sort of performance penalty later on? All those giant textures and all... And I recall memory being cited as being a problem for RFOM (and the reason the game isn't in 1080p) and VF5's development (which Sega eventually got around).
Posted Apr 12, 2007 11:38 am PT
Probably a penalty that's as minimal as running 4X FSAA on the 360 at 720p. It's basically a memory management issue, where a UMA solution would've been more effecient (though on the downside, it would've had some latency issues).

It hasn't been long since launch and we're seeing a lot of 1080p supporting games, even something like NGS which has far more detailed textures than Resistance. But the FPS genre by itself is more taxing, which is why we haven't seen any 1080p supporting ones on either platform.

Developers will always more RAM anyway. In AM2's case, Lindbergh does have more RAM than any of the consoles out right now.
Posted Apr 12, 2007 12:17 pm PT
Page 1 
« prev  |  next »
  • UmonDaisuke
  • Level: 1 (0%)
  • Rank: Mogwai
  • Forum Posts: 116
  • Messages Read: 0


advertisement
Click Here

Friends

My Friends