Super Slim PS3 set for October Launch

[Deleted_171835]

I'll probably get this if it's cheap enough ($150 hopefully).

Oh, come on Sony! I thought you're better than this. 12GB? Are you kidding? Don't go the Nintendo path - that path's stupid.

I'm going to wait for an official announcement, mmm-hmm.

The difference with the "Nintendo Path" is that you can use external hard-drives and SDHC/SDXC cards. With the PS3, you can't use external hard-drives for games.

 

[DiscostewSM]

12 gb? I think I can't even download gta 4 or assassin's creed or get any updates really lol. But it hasn't been confirmed by sony so idk.... and I just bought a ps3 a while ago and that broke. I have an backup and it's unopened so I think I can still take it back and get my money back so I can get this .

PS. PS3 FAT: Dad
PS3 SLIM: Mom
PS3 SS: Son or daughter? Nvm its Solid Snake.

Nope. Chuck Testa.

 

[Foxi4]

I'll probably get this if it's cheap enough ($150 hopefully).

Oh, come on Sony! I thought you're better than this. 12GB? Are you kidding? Don't go the Nintendo path - that path's stupid.

I'm going to wait for an official announcement, mmm-hmm.

The difference with the "Nintendo Path" is that you can use external hard-drives and SDHC/SDXC cards. With the PS3, you can't use external hard-drives for games.

The Nintendo Path also doesn't have DVD support or BluRay support, and with a small drive like this one, Sony's sort of expected to release a firmware update to enable that function, much like last time when they adopted Cloud Storage. Besides, I already said I'm not happy with the size of the internal storage for the Super Slim. Moreover, I maintain that - such a small drive is not acceptable by any standards and is not the way to go for any video game console.

Let's not make this a console war - that's completely unnecessary, not to mention silly. Bad features are bad, it's simple as that.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Let's not make this a console war - that's completely unnecessary, not to mention silly. Bad features are bad, it's simple as that.

Don't go the Nintendo path

If you so insist there not be a console war, then don't be the one firing the first shot.

 

[Foxi4]

Let's not make this a console war - that's completely unnecessary, not to mention silly. Bad features are bad, it's simple as that.

Don't go the Nintendo path

If you so insist there not be a console war, then don't be the one firing the first shot.

By the "Nintendo Path" I meant using extremely small internal drives, which is what Nintendo is doing at the moment. soulx is the first person who found this offensive, while it's merely constructive criticism. I don't like this "feature" - neither coming from Nintendo nor from Sony. Stupid design decisions are stupid, regardless of who makes them. It's not bias speaking, but reason.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Maybe they'll add external storage support, because we all know that is very little storage to begin with.

 

[Deleted_171835]

The Nintendo Path also doesn't have DVD support or BluRay support, and with a small drive like this one, Sony's sort of expected to release a firmware update to enable that function, much like last time when they adopted Cloud Storage. Besides, I already said I'm not happy with the size of the internal storage for the Super Slim. Moreover, I maintain that - such a small drive is not acceptable by any standards and is not the way to go for any video game console.

Let's not make this a console war - that's completely unnecessary, not to mention silly. Bad features are bad, it's simple as that.

Most of the people that use DVDs/Blu-Ray discs already own a player for them considering pretty much every device supports it.

In terms of the Wii U, a small drive is fine as it's expandable through a number of ways. Right now, the Wii U's storage space situation benefits Nintendo and consumers. Nintendo in that they don't have to deal with repairs of unreliable drives and the consumer in that the console doesn't cost more thanks to the addition of a drive.

If they add external drive support to this PS3, then honestly I'm fine with 12GB.

 

[Foxi4]

...the console doesn't cost more thanks to the addition of a drive.

Yes it does, how many times do I have to say that? 8GB SSD drives cost just about as much, if not more, than 500GB standard HDD's, and not just "any" HDD's - we're talking Western Digital over here. Flash-based storage is *expensive*.

They made a choice of medium and that choice is both expensive and wrong for the purpose, case closed, thank you very much.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

Let's not make this a console war - that's completely unnecessary, not to mention silly. Bad features are bad, it's simple as that.

Don't go the Nintendo path

If you so insist there not be a console war, then don't be the one firing the first shot.

By the "Nintendo Path" I meant using extremely small internal HDD's, which is what Nintendo is doing at the moment. soulx is the first person who found this offensive, while it's merely constructive criticism. I don't like this "feature" - neither coming from Nintendo nor from Sony. Stupid design decisions are stupid, regardless of who makes them. It's not bias speaking, but reason.

Omg, once again:

HDD =/= SDD

SDD is just the internal storage it has. And let's be honest, Nintendo ware on the shop don't usually take up a lot of space anyways.

 

[Foxi4]

An SSD drive *is* a drive (which is what I meant, but I can rename it to storage for your comfort), it's just in Solid State technology. A built-in HDD is also internal storage, the term doesn't only apply to built-in Flash storage, it applies to any storage that's internal.

 

[Deleted_171835]

...the console doesn't cost more thanks to the addition of a drive.

Yes it does, how many times do I have to say that? 8GB SSD drives cost just about as much, if not more, than 500GB standard HDD's, and not just "any" HDD's - we're talking Western Digital over here. Flash-based storage is *expensive*.

They made a choice of medium and that choice is both expensive and wrong for the purpose, case closed, thank you very much.

You realize that the cost to Nintendo and the cost to consumers is very different. I'm sure a 500GB HDD is more expensive to them than 8GB of flash storage.

The choice that they made is just fine and you've said nothing that convinces me otherwise.

Nintendo gets less repairs (long-term cost for them is down), you get a cheaper console as well as the option to add as much space as you want (not to mention the ability to bargain-search so you can get a good drive for cheap).

 

[Clarky]

"blah blah blah, I expect everything I do and don't need" etc

 

[Foxi4]

You realize that the cost to Nintendo and the cost to consumers is very different. I'm sure a 500GB HDD is more expensive to them than 8GB of flash storage.

No. That's not how it works. Nintendo doesn't get a lower price on SSD's, but magically the consumer price for HDD's - they get a lower price on both, and if you are trying to say that they would not be able to achieve higher capacity of storage using HDD's, you can't be serious.

Nintendo gets less repairs (long-term cost for them is down), you get a cheaper console as well as the option to add as much space as you want (not to mention the ability to bargain-search so you can get a good drive for cheap).

...it's not a given that they will receive less repairs - the failure rates of SSD's are a delicate matter.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Understand. Flash memory is used in SSDs, but when integrated in this manner like the PS3 SS and the WiiU, they don't need all the extra components (and quite frankly, the speed) that make up an SSD. That in itself helps lowers the cost quite a bit.

 

[raulpica]

Oh, come on Sony! I thought you're better than this. 12GB? Are you kidding? Don't go the Nintendo path - that path's stupid.

I'm going to wait for an official announcement, mmm-hmm.

I'll just chime in something. Nintendo may place small Flash memories in their system (4GBs or 8GBs respectively, if you're talking about Wii/WiiU), but at least the 60% of the games out there on Wii (and for WiiU I guess too) won't require you a darned 12-minutes long install to HDD, which will occupy you from 2GBs to 6-7GBs or even more.

If there is someone pulling something out there, it's Sony.

...I can still painfully remember me waiting 15 minutes for MGS4 to start, eager as I was to play it

 

[GameWinner]

...I can still painfully remember me waiting 15 minutes for MGS4 to start, eager as I was to play it

We all feel this pain...

 

[Foxi4]

I'll just chime in something. Nintendo may place small Flash memories in their system (4GBs or 8GBs respectively, if you're talking about Wii/WiiU), but at least the 60% of the games out there on Wii (and for WiiU I guess too) won't require you a darned 12-minutes long install to HDD, which will occupy you from 2GBs to 6-7GBs or even more.

If there is someone pulling something out there, it's Sony.

...I can still painfully remember me waiting 15 minutes for MGS4 to start, eager as I was to play it

True, but how big was the Data Install again? Several GB's? Ah, that's right. And from a slow BluRay drive? Yes, it was. That's the reason.

And what kind of a drive the WiiU has...? Oh, a BluRay derrivative... And it will most likely require what...? Ah, Data Installs again, surely... And what do you need to use several GB's large Data Installs? Ah, storage... storage you won't have.

So, picture this... Installing the same install over a slightly faster BluRay drive and... bottlenecking it with the USB external drive.

Have fun.

Y'see, I don't mean this maliciously - I genuienly worry that the WiiU will have to use temporary installs or mandatory external storage. This is bad for the consumer, for you guys.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Oh, come on Sony! I thought you're better than this. 12GB? Are you kidding? Don't go the Nintendo path - that path's stupid.

I'm going to wait for an official announcement, mmm-hmm.

I'll just chime in something. Nintendo may place small Flash memories in their system (4GBs or 8GBs respectively, if you're talking about Wii/WiiU), but at least the 60% of the games out there on Wii (and for WiiU I guess too) won't require you a darned 12-minutes long install to HDD, which will occupy you from 2GBs to 6-7GBs or even more.

If there is someone pulling something out there, it's Sony.

...I can still painfully remember me waiting 15 minutes for MGS4 to start, eager as I was to play it

As mentioned earlier this model (if it even exists) is most likely catering towards the media-oriented side of the PS3. I mean it's still a Bluray player and it has access to Netflix, Hulu Plus, etc. It can also do some gaming most likely or there's some option for expanding memory.

Try to step away from the whole "Playstation" branding and think of it as a Sony media player instead.

 

[raulpica]

As mentioned earlier this model (if it even exists) is most likely catering towards the media-oriented side of the PS3. I mean it's still a Bluray player and it has access to Netflix, Hulu Plus, etc. It can also do some gaming most likely or there's some option for expanding memory.

Try to step away from the whole "Playstation" branding and think of it as a Sony media player instead.

It rings a bell. A bell of failure named PSX, but oh well, who am I to judge Sony's decisions.

I seriously hope for Sony that they've got a way for it to expand its memory, otherwise I can already foresee hordes of angry moms and dads asking why their son can't install the latest PS3 game which requires a 13GB install

I'll just chime in something. Nintendo may place small Flash memories in their system (4GBs or 8GBs respectively, if you're talking about Wii/WiiU), but at least the 60% of the games out there on Wii (and for WiiU I guess too) won't require you a darned 12-minutes long install to HDD, which will occupy you from 2GBs to 6-7GBs or even more.

If there is someone pulling something out there, it's Sony.

...I can still painfully remember me waiting 15 minutes for MGS4 to start, eager as I was to play it

True, but how big was the Data Install again? Several GB's? Ah, that's right. And from a slow BluRay drive? Yes, it was. That's the reason.

And what kind of a drive the WiiU has...? Oh, a BluRay derrivative... And it will most likely require what...? Ah, Data Installs again, surely... And what do you need to use several GB's large Data Installs? Ah, storage... storage you won't have.

So, picture this... Installing the same install over a slightly faster BluRay drive and... bottlenecking it with the USB external drive.

Have fun.

Y'see, I don't mean this maliciously - I genuienly worry that the WiiU will have to use temporary installs or mandatory external storage. This is bad for the consumer, for you guys.

Wait, why are we pulling the WiiU again in this?

The PS3 was flawed in design as it used a slow-ass BluRay drive as the technology was way immature for it as a gaming support back then.

Nowadays there are way faster BR drives (and cheaper) which probably don't require ANY install at all.

As for the PS3 SuperSlim... If they're still using the slow-ass BR drives they've always used, I'm sure that USB2.0 will keep up with the transfer rates without problems!

 

[p1ngpong]

Oh, come on Sony! I thought you're better than this. 12GB? Are you kidding? Don't go the Nintendo path - that path's stupid.

I'm going to wait for an official announcement, mmm-hmm.

I'll just chime in something. Nintendo may place small Flash memories in their system (4GBs or 8GBs respectively, if you're talking about Wii/WiiU), but at least the 60% of the games out there on Wii (and for WiiU I guess too) won't require you a darned 12-minutes long install to HDD, which will occupy you from 2GBs to 6-7GBs or even more.

If there is someone pulling something out there, it's Sony.

...I can still painfully remember me waiting 15 minutes for MGS4 to start, eager as I was to play it

I deleted my Gran Turismo 5 install/patch data the other day when I was clearing up my PS3's hard drive, I traded it in a while ago because I found it really boring. The total size of the data was 16GB and that was out of date, it is probably bigger now. Games like LBP also use loads of space due to patches and updates. It defies logic that Sony would go with such a small amount of storage when some of their top exclusives require so much HDD storage space just to work.