More $399 PS3 Evidence

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Shacknews has a bit more information, including a photo from a Target store, the seems to confirm the recent rumors of a $399 PS3. Yeah, it is lacking some of the bells and whistles of the original 60GB units but that price will definitely help Sony sell a few units.

A listing for the rumored $399 40GB backward incompatible PlayStation 3 SKU has appeared in Target store scanners, according to images from Gaming Bits. The news comes after documents that surfaced earlier this month from fellow retailer Best Buy referencing the $399 model as retailing on October 28.
Click to expand...
 
Methadras said:
So when is it safe to say that the PS3 is a monumental failure?
Click to expand...

I've been saying that ever since it came out. I mean, honestly, console is made by its games, and PS3 has zip, zero, nada. (No one will buy a $650 console for Resistance, or Lair, or (LOOOOL) Gundam)
 
Sony failed in my book when they hired Smedley brought about the CU in SWG (don't get me started on the NGE).

Yes I know Sony Electronics and Sony Online Entertainment are two different companies of the same parent company, but they're both crap.
 
btw some site had the market caps for Sony and Nintendo
Nintendo is worth 2x as much as ALL of Sony
i love to see a hostel take over lol:eek:
 
Too bad it won't drop to $199.99-249.99 by Christmas. :p
Then again it should have been that low at launch and Blue Ray dropped.
 
Kibbles said:
Too bad it won't drop to $199.99-249.99 by Christmas. :p
Then again it should have been that low at launch and Blue Ray dropped.
Click to expand...

Yeah right, blu-ray has been a failure since its inception and now with the possibility of the $399 Sony P*****S***3 SONY is finally starting to realize that the 50GB Blu-Ray disk's only possible market should be MASS STORAGE. But wait, aren't 1TB hard disk drives on the market already? So who really needs a 50 GB or even a 25 GB mass storage media?
 
Yeah, my PS3 has been collecting dust ever since I beat Heavenly Sword in 5 hours. Only use it every now and then to watch Blu-Ray movies from netflix.

Also, isn't the $399 model lacking the chip to be backwards compatible with PS2/PS1 games? Or is that only the PAL version?
 
albert6719 said:
Yeah right, blu-ray has been a failure since its inception and now with the possibility of the $399 Sony P*****S***3 SONY is finally starting to realize that the 50GB Blu-Ray disk's only possible market should be MASS STORAGE. But wait, aren't 1TB hard disk drives on the market already? So who really needs a 50 GB or even a 25 GB mass storage media?
Click to expand...

hmm for back up said 1TB HDD id hate to have to back up 1+TB with DVDs
 
Am I in the minority since I still don't see value in this? Paying $399 (which is a lot of money, in my opinion) for a watered down version of the real "game console" is a rip off. If they added wireless and PS2 backwards compatibility with this, then I would probably buy one.. but $399 for barebones is lame.
 
Well Sony gets what it pays for when it shoots for the whole proprietary thing. Having a massive storage device is all fine and dandy , but if all it's for is for eye candy without any real depth to the games it'll be a big ol' flop, what did the one guy say, he beat Heavenly Sword in 5 hours? Geezus, that's more than $10 an hour for playing it!
 
Was wondering when others would notice how bad Sony bit the bullet on the PS3. They are stubborn though I have a feeling they'd let the PS3 bankrupt them before they gave up on the console.
 
Vorazan said:
I've been saying that ever since it came out. I mean, honestly, console is made by its games, and PS3 has zip, zero, nada. (No one will buy a $650 console for Resistance, or Lair, or (LOOOOL) Gundam)
Click to expand...
Same thing was said, by many people, regarding Xbox360. Does your comment mean that now, anybody wanting to purchase a new game console shoud go buy Wii, because the al;ternatives are both 'monumental failures'?

Time will tell.

Was wondering when others would notice how bad Sony bit the bullet on the PS3. They are stubborn though I have a feeling they'd let the PS3 bankrupt them before they gave up on the console.
Click to expand...


IMO Sony couldn't really give a shit about PS3 in any other sense than as a means of promoting BluRay, and consider that the 'Playstation die-hard fan base' is big enough to serve as a launching pad toward that end.
 
Why don't they just sell the full version minus the hard drive for ~$300 so I can buy my own damned hard drive and still have PS2 backwards compatibility. :eek:
 
At first glance it looked a bit interesting, 40g ok,2usb fine, no flash slots NOT OK,NO backwards compatible NOT OK.

Put back the flash slot and the backward compatibility and it looks like a decent idea for a Blu-ray player(does it burn?) especially if it burns as well and there is real drop in media
 
I'm not sure how you can call it watered down. It still has more integrated features than the 360 does.
 
I really dont get why they cut Backwards compatibility. I understand they wanted to remove the actual hardware and go software emulation. Fine and good.

But this move of releasing a PS3 that has no compatibility what so ever gives me the feeling that sony is just going to drop it all together. The lower price is just a ruse.

The software BC costs them almost nothing to enable on the hardware.


My bet, they want to drop it all together and this is the beginning. Looks like it was a good thing to buy one that had built in hardware for PS1 and PS2.
 
Vorazan said:
I've been saying that ever since it came out. I mean, honestly, console is made by its games, and PS3 has zip, zero, nada. (No one will buy a $650 console for Resistance, or Lair, or (LOOOOL) Gundam)
Click to expand...

I guess that makes the 360 a failure too huh? The PS3 has just as many good games as the 360 had around this time... none. The first year for every console is terrible, even the Wii has nothing but garbage out. If you have a fully functioning memory you should know that, unless youre 11 years old and this is your very first console war.
 
idividebyzero said:
I guess that makes the 360 a failure too huh? The PS3 has just as many good games as the 360 had around this time... none. The first year for every console is terrible, even the Wii has nothing but garbage out. If you have a fully functioning memory you should know that, unless youre 11 years old and this is your very first console war.
Click to expand...

Actually by this time in the Xbox 360's life cycle Gears of War had been released, along with one of my all time favorites, Dead Rising. The Xbox 360 was doing pretty well going into it's second holiday season, while the PS3 is still sucking going into it's second holiday season.
 
Apparently the so called "software" backwards compat ps3's still had the RSX graphics synthesizer and only the Emotion Engine chip was being emulated. Thus the new PS3's don't have that either to save money. Apparently the PS3 just isn't powerful enough to emulate the ps2's hardware (remember emulation often requires a far more powerful processor if the architectures different). However the new ps3's apparently still do old PSX games. Which is great since most of the classics I play are old PSX games.

Too bad there still isn't any PS3 game that makes me truly interested in getting one.
 
idividebyzero said:
I guess that makes the 360 a failure too huh? The PS3 has just as many good games as the 360 had around this time... none. The first year for every console is terrible, even the Wii has nothing but garbage out. If you have a fully functioning memory you should know that, unless youre 11 years old and this is your very first console war.
Click to expand...

I am not even much of a console gamer anymore and I know this to be false.

I bought a Wii for 1 game, Mario Kart. So far, i have played both Metroid and Zelda and both are A+ titles. The Wii is the first system I have owned in numerous years, I just find PC gaming to be much more fun.

The 360 had a nice library of games after it's first full year on the market.

The PS3 is horribly lacking. Their roll out of this system is by far the worst since the Sega Saturn.

All this said, the PS3 does have some nice games coming out soon(many of which are also on other consoles and/or PC). Assassin's Creed looks really awesome.

I am a huge home theater nut, own an HD DVD player and have planned on getting a BluRay player once they started meeting some of the higher specs. The PS3, despite NOT having IR features to go with my Harmony 880 remote, is still at the top of my list to get.
 
This $399 won't sell worth crap. Only the idiotic consumer will buy it or their grandmothers who don't know anything about it.

Removing PS2 compatibility? Biggest bone headed move they could have made. You can make due without the 2 extra USB ports and flash reader but PS2 compatibility is critical if you ask me.

Also, this nonsense about different hardware configurations? Ummm that's beyond stupid. Isn't the whole point of console gaming is everyone has the same hardware specs?

Now they're software emulated PS2 and hardware emulated PS2 and no-PS2 compatibility? I'm confused beyond hell now which I would get when the time comes to get one.

I have a Wii and it's been an awesome purchase and despite some what some people said by the time I got it, about 6 months after release, there were MORE than enough titles worth owning and the big thing people seem to forget regarding the Wii is it's selling not because it has A+ titles such as Zelda or Metroid but in spite of it because of the titles non-gamers can play. Not to mention the ability to download and play all those old classic games.

Sony really shat the bed with the PS3, they aimed too high and we all gave them the benefit of the doubt at the time because they did the same thing with the PS2 and succeeded in the end. But then this time around Microsoft had the 1 year lead and while the Wii was initially intriguing at best on paper, (new controller? everyone thought about the Power Glove debacle) but Nintendo then drilled a high fastball out of the park. If the Wii Remote didn't work like it does, PS3 would be doing a lot better, but the bottomline is technology caught up enough to allow them to bring their vision to fruition. Those two things, a 1 year lead for XBox 360 and the Wii delivering on everything it promised spells failure for the PS3.

They could have overcome one but not both.
 
Don't say us in the UK actually got something before North America!!!???!!! These watered down 40GB PS3's have been in stores here for a few weeks now and are not selling in all honesty due to the 60GB software emulates PS2 compatiable version being £50 more with a better games bundle! Sony have also said that there are plenty of 60GB versions in stock in the shops and warehouses in the UK, so I cannot see anybody in their right mind buying the 40GB version.
 
gimpyviper said:
This $399 won't sell worth crap. Only the idiotic consumer will buy it or their grandmothers who don't know anything about it.

Removing PS2 compatibility? Biggest bone headed move they could have made. You can make due without the 2 extra USB ports and flash reader but PS2 compatibility is critical if you ask me.
Click to expand...

But some will not care about PS2 compatibility. I sure wouldn't. I don't see how only idiotic consumers would buy it. Idiotic would be people assuming that if they want PS2 compatibility then everyone else does.
 
himmy said:
But some will not care about PS2 compatibility. I sure wouldn't. I don't see how only idiotic consumers would buy it. Idiotic would be people assuming that if they want PS2 compatibility then everyone else does.
Click to expand...

Correct.
I have never owned a PS2, my brother did but sold it a few years ago, so we have not had one for many years. Even when we did I only played one game MGS, so if/when I buy a PS3 I do not need to worry about backwards compatibility.

Though overall it is a feature that really does define the Sony Playstation in the past years and how well they have done with it.
 
JethroXP said:
Actually by this time in the Xbox 360's life cycle Gears of War had been released, along with one of my all time favorites, Dead Rising. The Xbox 360 was doing pretty well going into it's second holiday season, while the PS3 is still sucking going into it's second holiday season.
Click to expand...

Its Novemeber where you live? Quick, give me the lotto numbers for October! Either way it doesnt matter, fall is fall whether its Sept or Nov, its when the good games come out. The PS3 has several good looking games coming out this fall, and then in early 2008 which is usually a dead time for games.

The first year of the 360 was full of PC games, almost every single game worth playing was a PC game. And aside from Oblivion (another PC game) it really didnt have a single "really good" game until a year later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top