PS3's HDD

[Grandia]

I just heard that TES: Oblivion has been cancelled for the PS3 because it does not have a standard HDD. Now, I'm not the biggest fan of TES series, but after reading up on TES:Oblivion, I am really looking forward to this game. So this made me begin how many other titles we won't see because of the HDD situation. FFXI was the first, and now Oblivion. Is Sony going to realize this and maybe change their mind on the issue?

[Garfunkel]

any linkage?

[Grandia]

It's in the latest GI

[F089/H]

Remain calm!

They have a year.

We'll see how they do.:)

[rpgamer_2k5]

FFXI isn't on the PS3 because it is available on the PS2 but the chances of it going on the PS3 is very high though. Square-Enix will not dump Sony in the online sector, FFXI actually did impressively financially on the PS2 so don't expect that to change. I don't expect any 'testing' the market like what Capcom did with Resident Evil; the real money is coming from Sony's PS3, PSP or Nintendo's DS.

[Eidorian]

Any clue if it the PS3 has 2.5" or 3.5" drive capabilities?

[Metal Sphere]

The PS3 has a 2.5" HDD bay on the "bottom" or "side", depending on how you've set up the console. It's not coming to PS3 because they need to be able to develop the game knowing full well that the HDD needed to play the game will be in all the consoles.

[Eidorian]

The PS3 has a 2.5" HDD bay on the "bottom" or "side", depending on how you've set up the console. It's not coming to PS3 because they need to be able to develop the game knowing full well that the HDD needed to play the game will be in all the consoles.2.5" is nice and small but ouch it's a pain to purchase.

[KnightRiderX]

I think that the cancellation of Oblivion is a ploy to get Sony into including a HDD in the PS3 out of the box so that it'll make it easier on the developers (and more suitable to their liking) on creating online games.

[Garfunkel]

Put in a hard drive sony........... um........... please.

- Edited by Moderator- Don't do that again.........um........please.

[Mitri]

that was a waste of space as a post. i think it is somewhat dumb of sony to not put a hd in the ps3. but then again it is better for profits. because once you think about it. if they put one built in the ps3 then they will be losin more money than the already over 100usd per console. just like MS did with the Xbox. Sony is rich but they aren't MS rich.

[raVen]

Final Fantasy XI is on Ps3 since its backwords compatible

[O.D.S]

what if games come bundled with a hard drive, that way when you buy a game that requires a hard drive you have one!. this way the developer is sure that you as a consumer own a hard drive and can release some online updates and other 'stuff' etc.

(This is a stupid idea that has many flawes...i know...but its an idea)

[lshian]

Why online must be hard drive, nowaday the memory stick is cheap enough for a online games. Why people still want to follow the MS style or Windows style. Playing Everquest on PS2 without HDD work good and fine, and still I getting of a lot of updates with only 8 megs for PS2 only.

Think about it a 64mbs or 128mbs memory stick is good enough for a online games update or whatever changes. It is not necessary must include a hdd to play online.

[Z]

first off, I believe they are overwhelmed by the X2 and PC version. PS3 is too early for them at the moment. I truely believe Oblivion will come to PS3 after launch. the only case is if they made an exclusivity deal with MS.

as for the reason of not having an HD as standard, I have to points:
1- it isn't desided yet that PS3 will come with no HDD. so nobody can say for sure whether the HDD is in or out.

2- if the lack of space is the issue, then here is the funny thing; double layered DVDs are 9.4G. okay, say it was 10G for simpler math. now the standard X2 HDD is 20G. that is a total of 30G. BD is 27G single layer and 50G dual layer. so how in the world can capacity be an issue then?

I repeat that I think because X2 is brand new, and PS3 is at least a year away from launch, they want to focus more on X2 and PC for now. beside, I doubt they even got a PS3 devkit.

[Metal Sphere]

2.5" is nice and small but ouch it's a pain to purchase.

Yeah, but they haven't made it clear as to whether you can get your own 2.5" HDD and put it in, or if you need to buy one of Sony's with the Linux OS on it for it to work.

[Gounmckuber]

If the hdd is sold seprately i honestly believe that Sony will say that only their hdd is compatible. There is a ton of money to be made off stuff like this. They better make em pretty damn big if they are the only supplier

[Metal Sphere]

Kutaragi, though I dislike him and find what he says questionable, mentioned the smallest available HDD they'll have is 80GB.

[KnightRiderX]

what if games come bundled with a hard drive, that way when you buy a game that requires a hard drive you have one!. this way the developer is sure that you as a consumer own a hard drive and can release some online updates and other 'stuff' etc.

(This is a stupid idea that has many flawes...i know...but its an idea)

How about this:

What if u get a discount (like 25% to 30%) off a hard drive if u buy a game that lets the gamer benefits a lot when using a hard drive.

[raVen]

Im pretty sure they said any 2.5" hard drive i'll search for a link

[Gounmckuber]

Thats a pretty nice size i suppose. If its decently priced Im surely getting one. Also i wanted to say that the ps3 spec doesnt allow writeable blu ray discs. Surely youll need a hard drive for a game such as this. Doesnt this game allow you to customize your world?

[Grandia]

FFXI isn't on the PS3 because it is available on the PS2 but the chances of it going on the PS3 is very high though. Square-Enix will not dump Sony in the online sector, FFXI actually did impressively financially on the PS2 so don't expect that to change. I don't expect any 'testing' the market like what Capcom did with Resident Evil; the real money is coming from Sony's PS3, PSP or Nintendo's DS.
I believe I heard that Tanaka (the producer of FFXI) stated he would port the updated FFXI if the PS3 had a HDD. He also stated that without a HDD, we won't see too many MMORPGs on the PS3. (Like their upcoming new MMO that was the demo for the 360)

first off, I believe they are overwhelmed by the X2 and PC version. PS3 is too early for them at the moment. I truely believe Oblivion will come to PS3 after launch. the only case is if they made an exclusivity deal with MS.

as for the reason of not having an HD as standard, I have to points:
1- it isn't desided yet that PS3 will come with no HDD. so nobody can say for sure whether the HDD is in or out.

2- if the lack of space is the issue, then here is the funny thing; double layered DVDs are 9.4G. okay, say it was 10G for simpler math. now the standard X2 HDD is 20G. that is a total of 30G. BD is 27G single layer and 50G dual layer. so how in the world can capacity be an issue then?

I repeat that I think because X2 is brand new, and PS3 is at least a year away from launch, they want to focus more on X2 and PC for now. beside, I doubt they even got a PS3 devkit.
I hope you're right, I really want Oblivion. But if this is the case, why would GI say they cancelled the PS3 version, rather than delayed it? Maybe they might do a GOTY version for the PS3 at launch, that would be pretty cool. I mean, Bethesda has to notice that they wouldn't really have any competition on the PS3, and they can't turn their back on the possible sales they could have. Hopefully the HDD will be included though.

[Mitri]

2- if the lack of space is the issue, then here is the funny thing; double layered DVDs are 9.4G. okay, say it was 10G for simpler math. now the standard X2 HDD is 20G. that is a total of 30G. BD is 27G single layer and 50G dual layer. so how in the world can capacity be an issue then?

i'm sure that the company knows about the capacity of blu ray discs(i don't know who makes the game), it is the fact that you have the power to make the story yours. your unique story. i had Morrowind for the xbox and as you progress and change things the space that is needed becomes bigger and bigger on the hd. i don't think that sony will put in a blu disc writer into the ps3. it would be to expensive. and it would be a direction in the past. does anyone remember saving games to the n64 cartridges and trying to take the game over a friends house.

[Z]

I hope you're right, I really want Oblivion. But if this is the case, why would GI say they cancelled the PS3 version, rather than delayed it?

remeber that this is all guessing here ;)

a company does not want to be commetit if it doesn't have too. that is why we always hear the 'no comment' and 'can't say for now' all the time in gaming, movies and such. if they say 'delayed' then they are commiting themselves into making a PS3 game. if they don't make one, gamers and shareholders will be disappointed. but if they say 'cancelled' then they can work on their leasure. if a port is fairly simple to make, then a port be it. if a revamped PS3 version is a good idea then so be it. and so on and so forth.

in any case, I wish people won't pay much attention on 3rd party games that are anounced during this 'jumping' time. a new console is coming out at least 6 months before the rest, with a number of DevKits far more than the competition. what do you expects? but does this mean all the games that it will be getting are exclusives? of course not. and many devs already said that a ported game from Rev/X2 to PS3 may not have any significant changes in looks. think PS2 games being ported to Box and Cube. they don't look much better if there are any changes at all. my attention is drawn to first and second party games, to those 'exclusives' that suppose to take full advantage of their specified hardware without the headaches of considiring porting during the development.
besides, it is too early now. even devs are cautious of new hardware. X2 is supposed to be the most complete. heck, it'll go into full production in around 8 weeks. expect the same (and even greater, for many reasons) attention to PS3 when it becomes 3 or 4 months away from launch with many announcements and titles.

i'm sure that the company knows about the capacity of blu ray discs(i don't know who makes the game), it is the fact that you have the power to make the story yours. your unique story. i had Morrowind for the xbox and as you progress and change things the space that is needed becomes bigger and bigger on the hd. i don't think that sony will put in a blu disc writer into the ps3. it would be to expensive. and it would be a direction in the past. does anyone remember saving games to the n64 cartridges and trying to take the game over a friends house.
I never considered BD recording functions for PS3. I was pointing out that a BD has more capacity than X2's HDD plus a dual layer DVD. so if the 'lack of space due to lack of an HDD' is the reason, then they have much more space in a BD. I do not know about Oblivion and Morrowwind to tell you the truth, but doea any game save really require many Gigabites? if that is so, then you have a couple of ways to solve this:
Sony is talking about an 'online saving' function for the PS3 online Plan. that means you can securely save on servers (upload) all your saves on the net, if you may. another option is that you can use a number of memory card types in PS3. so you may have a digital camera SD card with around 512M of space, or a cell phone or PC flash card that you can use. you can even use memorysticks with both Pro and Duo types. also, like FF11 for PS2, the game can require and HDD.
Finally, and most importantly, it is STILL UNKNOWN whether PS3 will come with a standard HDD or not. why are people making it a fact that PS3 is coming out with no HDD? you can consider the possibility and have 'what IF' conversations, but never think it is a fact till sony 'officially' announce it.
you thing Sony is ignorant to the advantages and disatvantages of including an HDD and how it will effect various kinds of games and hoe Devs and Publishers veiw this issue? keep in mind that Sony has the most ambitious goals of all three console makers. if you remeber, PS2 was the first ever console to have online capability, HDD, DVD, broadband & narrowband support all in one.

if HDD is as vital as the general public think it is, then you can bet Sony is doing something about it.
to note, 'online play' is a very very small fraction of the console gaming demofraph. Cube doesn't have online play, nor an HDD and still it performed well.

[CrumCon]

too expensive to include HDD, we all know it.

people shouldnt complain and blame sony not include a HDD even a small one: 10-20GB for example.

it would be a waste to include 10-20GB of HDD cause to manufacture a 20 HDD would cost almost as many as manufacturing a 40 to 60GB HDD, not to mention there arent many making 20GB HDD anymore,

[Mitri]

i have a question about saving onto a server. if like you said that most people don't have internet access to the speeds that you would need for online gaming, then how can they save onto a server? or if you have to pay for that who would rather pay to save a game when they can buy a hd and save there? what happens to those who like to take their games over their friends house to show off? how would they access their character if the friend doesn't have the right connection? most of the US still uses dial up.

does anyone else think that buying all those memory sticks is a waste of money? to those of us who don't have very much money a 30usd memory stick to buy over and over again is kinda expensive. but to buy a one time ??hd (i don't know how much they run for) is better.

[Metal Sphere]

does anyone else think that buying all those memory sticks is a waste of money? to those of us who don't have very much money a 30usd memory stick to buy over and over again is kinda expensive. but to buy a one time ??hd (i don't know how much they run for) is better.

With the exception of a few games, the Memory cards for the PS2 were MASSIVE for the data needed to save games on it, and it was huge compared to the PS1 memory cards that came before it. With the inclusion of a memory stick port you could easily go out and buy yourself a gigantic 1 or 2GB stick and not have to buy another for a while.

Sony is right in not jumping into online gaming. It's extremely expensive for Microsoft and they have a massive amount of money to spend, but Sony has a much larger userbase. People say they want Sony to go online, but it's far harder for them to do so with more than 2x what XBL has.

[rpgamer_2k5]

too expensive to include HDD, we all know it.

We do not know that. The extremely high cost (manufacture price) was speculated by Merril Lynch Japan. We really shouldn't be holding such speculations as truth. The PS3 will be manufactured by Sony so expect the lowest price margins for all the components. The Xbox 360 on the other hand will be out-sourced to other manufacturers so MS will not be recieving such benefits. If both consoles cost the same, expect Sony to gain a profit much quicker especially when they go for a more advanced fab process and start placing the Cell and RSX onto a single die. The problem I see is huge speculation on the BDROM price and I personally believe that the cost will be equal if not lower to the DVD-ROM drive initial price. With that being the case, the PS3 will likely follow the PS2 price range than the $500 figure. The various USB ports and 5-in-1 memory stick readers will certainly not ramp the price up significantly. Also Blue-Tooth will be implemented at a far cheaper rate since it is Sony's technology.

What people do not understand is that there are individuals or groups trying to make Sony look very uncertain. It is obvious that Sony will follow the economic model used for the PS1 and PS2 and will aim to generate greater profits this time. Not only Microsoft is looking to do this, Sony and Nintendo are as well. Whether the HDD appears will be a matter of being worth the profit-hit or not.

[rev>thanu]

well if ps3 is not going to have the router function then at least they should include a 10gig HDD. You really have no idea how angry i was when sony officially announced that they dropped support of the HDD after i paid 100 bucks for it. Really the addition of an HDD as a standard with the console would guarantee developer support for it. That would also guarantee me that i could purchase a higher capacity HDD in the future and not have to worrie about sony dropping support for it. What sony should do is sell the standard console bundled with an HDD just like they did with the PSP bundle pack. really the higher price of psp compared to the DS has not really stopped the PSP's sales. so why paying an extra 30 -50 bucks for a ps3 would harm it's sales over xbox 360. Personally I want to have all functions of my console enabled right of the bat instead of having to gradually get add ons over the course of time.

if they bundle the HDD with the ps3 forcing the consumer to buy an HDD that would certainly state to developers that sony does care about MMORPGs and character and world growth. Anyways i hope sony reconsiders about the HDD.

[Metal Sphere]

Here's where I start dispelling fallacies. I'm sure you won't mind, especially since you'll be able to see through the negative spin everyone's putting on every action Sony's taken.

well if ps3 is not going to have the router function then at least they should include a 10gig HDD.

The PS3 never had router functionality. It was considered pre-E3 but dropped do to price considerations.


You really have no idea how angry i was when sony officially announced that they dropped support of the HDD after i paid 100 bucks for it. Really the addition of an HDD as a standard with the console would guarantee developer support for it.

Well, if this helps any, there's a rumor going around that the PS3 will likely be sold in bundles with the HDD or just the unit itself (with controller of course).


That would also guarantee me that i could purchase a higher capacity HDD in the future and not have to worrie about sony dropping support for it. What sony should do is sell the standard console bundled with an HDD just like they did with the PSP bundle pack. really the higher price of psp compared to the DS has not really stopped the PSP's sales.

Well, see my point above. If the rumor is true, we might just see factory bundles from Sony with the HDD.


so why paying an extra 30 -50 bucks for a ps3 would harm it's sales over xbox 360. Personally I want to have all functions of my console enabled right of the bat instead of having to gradually get add ons over the course of time.

if they bundle the HDD with the ps3 forcing the consumer to buy an HDD that would certainly state to developers that sony does care about MMORPGs and character and world growth. Anyways i hope sony reconsiders about the HDD.

The HDD might become standard if Sony's online plan is mature and they see the need for it.

[Loc]

You can understand why they consider 80gb to be the smallest for PS3, seeing as the Blue-ray discs range around 40gb. Also just give it some time because some new perpendicular way of making hard drives is amping up the size real quick, they already have some 500gb coming out using this method.

[Phryne Astynome]

Sony is right in not jumping into online gaming. It's extremely expensive for Microsoft and they have a massive amount of money to spend, but Sony has a much larger userbase. People say they want Sony to go online, but it's far harder for them to do so with more than 2x what XBL has.

LOL, you might be right on this. From what I've read, Sony won South Korea even though they didn't have a strong online plan. In case you didn't know, South Korea has the highest broadband penetration in the world. Also, not having a solid online plan is suicide in South Korea; yet Sony somehow managed to win that country even though it was Sony's first console in SK (Japanese gaming consoles were banned in SK until 2001 because they were supposedly a corrupting influence to Korean culture) and even though they lacked a solid online plan.

[Z]

@ Mitri; option like saving on servers are just that; options. you may not see it as useful, others will jump in joy for the idea. about paying for saves, it will be included with the online plan. if you pay for online gaming, then 'saving online' would be one of the options. if the online if free, you can bet that all the features are free as well including saving. or it can have multiple services like X2's online plan.

does anyone else think that buying all those memory sticks is a waste of money?

you absolutely missed the point of this wonderful feature. this feature saves you money. you see, by supporting so many formats, it almost guarantees you have one of those memory cards already. so you can immediatly use what you got. also, you aren't forced into buying a cetain type of memory. by that, one can have the option of, say, investing in a 1G or even 2G memory stick so he can use it for both PSP and PS3. maybe you are hungry for ditial camera memory, you can use one for both, and so on. in fact, Sony went so far as supporting memory formats out side of Sony for consumer satisfaction.

another thing to point out is that an HDD is always welcomed for us as gamers. we will always find a use for it. Devs will also have the choice of useing it as well. but what about the HDD effect financially both gamers and manufactorer (Sony)? if for us gamers this mean the PS3 will be THAT much different than X2, then no. if the cost will hurt Sony more than it will benefit them, then, again, no.

I am talking about geneal gamers. for me, I don't care if PS3 costs $500 with no controller, HDD or a game, I will still buy it for many reasons. but we have to consider the general public.

Anyways i hope sony reconsiders about the HDD.
reconsiders what? they haven't decided yet. and knowing Sony, they will leave the decision for last. we will only know the price and whether the HDD is in/out at the last moment. probably the last info about PS3 before launching.

[The_One]

Damnit... All these rumours. Makes me anticipate the PS3 even more than ever now... Grr... There better be some PS3 goods at the TGS!

[Forbiden]

Well, if the recent rumors are true( hopefully they are) sony will release a HDD bundle, and if so, we are in luck. Square Enix is like Sony's left hand, and even though they are making games for others, the mainstream keeps in PS, with Final Fantasy and dragon quest. FFXI is a possible for PS3, and if it comes out, bye bye 360.

[Mitri]

i have a small question. is it possible to have the ps2's hd. work wit the ps3? i mean if the ps3 is going to be backwards compatible with all ps2 and ps1 games shouldn't ff11 be considered one of them? so would that mean those of us who spent that 100usd on it would still be able to play?

[rpgamer_2k5]

Unfortunately, no. The PS3 will be using 2.5" HDD unlike the 3.5" counterpart on the PS3. It might be possible hooking up the PS2 into the PS3 and maybe use the HDD in that manner. The Playstation online service will also be offered to current PS2 users so the HDD wouldn't be left idle.

[Forbiden]

Well, as of now, the PS2 HDD is vaporware, as no developers are making games that are working with it, and it is not sold separatley(only with FFXI), so it is bloody unlikely that it will revive, unless like you said, Sony implies the online PS3 plan to PS2, then a few of the last gen titles for the PS2 might use the HDD.

[Z]

and it is not sold separatley(only with FFXI)

yes, the PS2 HDD is becoming a collector's item, but selling it seperately from the ONLY game that requires it to play is stupid. just throw away FF11 if you don't like it.

also, amny don't seem to realize this but Sony made the right move on making the HDD seperate. in case the add-on periphiral fails for any reason, the company can always cancel its production, or slowering/adding production as the demand changes. this way you can reduce losses to a minimun. MS is most suffering with Box on their HDD in every console.
what will happen next gen, only time will tell. PS3 could end up with a standard HDD, sold seperatly or even coming out with some internal memory ala Rev.
I repeat; keep in mind that the HDD issue is still UNDESIDED on. it shows little understanding when some consider it as a given on one possiblity or another at this early stage. this is like people saying Sony dropped the router function when this feature wasn't even announced in the first place.

[woundingchaney]

Im doubting the PS3 will come with a HDD seeing as to how they are trying to keep the cost down now as it is. I would like to see a HDD but I can live without it. Although without a HDD Im not sure how well Sonys Online plan will work out.

[Forbiden]

yes, the PS2 HDD is becoming a collector's item, but selling it seperately from the ONLY game that requires it to play is stupid. just throw away FF11 if you don't like it.

also, amny don't seem to realize this but Sony made the right move on making the HDD seperate. in case the add-on periphiral fails for any reason, the company can always cancel its production, or slowering/adding production as the demand changes. this way you can reduce losses to a minimun. MS is most suffering with Box on their HDD in every console.
what will happen next gen, only time will tell. PS3 could end up with a standard HDD, sold seperatly or even coming out with some internal memory ala Rev.
I repeat; keep in mind that the HDD issue is still UNDESIDED on. it shows little understanding when some consider it as a given on one possiblity or another at this early stage. this is like people saying Sony dropped the router function when this feature wasn't even announced in the first place.


No, not that i dont like it, i just think it became vaporware because
1. Not sold separatley
2. No games actualy suported it
3. Sony did not push developers to use it
I think PS3 WILL have a HDD, and possibly soon after launch, considering that Kutaragi mentioned the fact of running OS's in PS3.

[Z]

yes, you are obviously correct; PS2's HDD is vaporeware- hint my 'collector's item' comment. ;)

I believe online and HDD were in experimental phases on PS2. Sony will do what it thinks is best from what it learned from this gen. they also are considering Box's performance, Live, etc. obviously, companies learn from each other as well.

[woundingchaney]

With the exception of a few games, the Memory cards for the PS2 were MASSIVE for the data needed to save games on it, and it was huge compared to the PS1 memory cards that came before it. With the inclusion of a memory stick port you could easily go out and buy yourself a gigantic 1 or 2GB stick and not have to buy another for a while.

Sony is right in not jumping into online gaming. It's extremely expensive for Microsoft and they have a massive amount of money to spend, but Sony has a much larger userbase. People say they want Sony to go online, but it's far harder for them to do so with more than 2x what XBL has.


I understand that Sony is not wanting to invest heavily in online gaming but it really will play an integral role in the future of gaming itself. As far as their userbase. Your going to need highspeed connections for this next gen so there userbase will be cut from the numbers it is showing now. It could be harder for them since they dont have the (online) rescources MS has. But with Sony already being known for its ties to Squaresoft and other rpg developers they could quickly make their money back (at least faster than MS) in mmorpgs alone. I would hate for Sony to overlook online features this next gen especially with their already large userbase. Whether they do it this gen or next (preferably this one) its definetly an issue Sony will have to face.

[lilkoy123]

There is still a chance for HDD equipped with the PS3 at launch.
Here is a picture of the PS3 reference tool to be released on december:
http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/635/635630/ps-meeting-2005-sonys-ps3-schedule-20050721020716581-000.jpg
It shows that it will have HDD built in it. It doesn't say it will already be built-in at launch, but here's hoping.
Source:http://ps3.ign.com/articles/635/635630p1.html

[Gounmckuber]

Hmm.....So a dev could support custom soundtracks and stuff but if you dont have the hdd you wont get the features? Maybe, Sony will package MMORPGS with the 20gb version and sell an 80-150 version seprately. They could probaly just release at $360:heybaby: instead of the usual 300

[Z]

woundingchaney
I understand that Sony is not wanting to invest heavily in online gaming but

of course Sony realizes the importance of online and it is going full thruttle on it. they even have a dedicated section for online, SOE (Sony Online Entertainment). they are the makers of one of the biggest MMORPGs out there, EverQuest. Chitani also announced many online features, some unique only to PS3. PS2 was the first console to support both broadband and narrowband. and so on and so forth.

for more on Sony's online plan discussion go here: http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?p=634410#post634410

now, what does a 'reference tool' exactly mean? that pic looks like it is a disk player. a very thing disk player.

[solidus]

now, what does a 'reference tool' exactly mean? that pic looks like it is a disk player. a very thing disk player.
It's the Ps3 development kit that will be released/sent out in December.

This is the previous dev kit... (http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20050721/scei2_08.jpg)

...and this is the current dev kit (http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20050721/scei2_09.jpg).

[Forbiden]

That is what developers will get in December for creating PS3 games/actualizing/making better their PS3 games. The fact that it says HDD hints that Sony will be likely to include a HDD, for if developers have a HDD feature, they will most likely use it, thus having the game itself for the console to use it. (Unless Sony tells them not to use it for game contents wise)

[xbdestroya]

Well, really it's just easier for developers to work with a hard drive than without one, so even though I do think that might be part of the intent (maybe?), they would have included a hard drive anyway. For example, the PS2 'tools' have an HDD native to the hardware as well.

What's really awesome about the December time-frame PS3 dev kits though is that they seem to be rack-mountable.

[Forbiden]

Sony should just make a bundle with a hard drive like the value pack of the PSP with a pouch, MEm Stick and headphones, period. But then again, i have no clue at what Kutaragi means by "no matter how much space *the HDD* has, it is not enough* . What, do they plan to have all the games in the HDD or are game files gona be that big or what???

http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/635/635630/ps-meeting-2005-sonys-ps3-schedule-20050721020716581-000.jpg

Wait, I thought Microsoft and several MS bought developers stated taht
the memory(RAM) was better on the Xbox than on the PS3... SO if PS3 has 512 XDR, isnt that about the same as the Xbox?????

[xbdestroya]

Sony should just make a bundle with a hard drive like the value pack of the PSP with a pouch, MEm Stick and headphones, period. But then again, i have no clue at what Kutaragi means by "no matter how much space *the HDD* has, it is not enough* . What, do they plan to have all the games in the HDD or are game files gona be that big or what???

I wouldn't be surprised if they offered a bundle exactly as you have described, and have often voiced my opinion that they will. It just makes sense. As for Kutaragi's statements, they're in reference to the PS3's role as a possible high-def media server.


Wait, I thought Microsoft and several MS bought developers stated taht
the memory(RAM) was better on the Xbox than on the PS3... SO if PS3 has 512 XDR, isnt that about the same as the Xbox?????

Who said that? Anyway I'm honestly not sure what they're refering to with that 512 XDR thing; I believe they're saying 512 XDR main memory in addition to the 256 MB GDDR-3 graphics memory.

[Z]

they would have included a hard drive anyway. For example, the PS2 'tools' have an HDD native to the hardware as well
of course the devkits will have an HDD. devkits have higher specs in some areas as needed. after all, they are used to 'make' the games and not just play it. I expect it to have a large HDD and higher RAM amongst other things.

i have no clue at what Kutaragi means by "no matter how much space *the HDD* has, it is not enough* well, if you use your PC for multimedia storage, P2P, high-def content, etc. you know that you can never have enough memory. if you use PS3's HDD to save DVD movies, possible copy entire games and runnung them from it, High-def content and distribution via the HD camera, saving audio tracks, etc. then you will find your HDD is quickly filling up. but let us not be spoiled here, use your PC for your everyday downlads/saving. and leave PS3 for things like game extras, new game content, trailers, demos, etc.

[rpgamer_2k5]

Z: We should be allowed to get greedy. For the users that just want to use the HDD for game extras, trailers, demos, etc they could stick to the 20gb HDD. If we want to go further, a 80gb and larger should be available for such users to purchase. I will be going for a larger HDD for sure. :)

[woundingchaney]

Exactly especially with the high def going mainstream I dont know if 20 gb would hold me over either.

[Z]

Z: We should be allowed to get greedy
of course we should! that is why Sony will provide different capacity HDDs to suits everyones 'greedy' saving habbits :)
I was merely trying to explain the "never enough" part.

[Grandia]

I'm wondering one thing. I just read that the Xbox360 does not require a HD to play games. Now if that's the case, it would mean the games would have to be designed to play without a harddrive installed. Well, then, there should never be a reason for them to say that a reason for no PS3 version is because of the lack of a HDD standard, right? Because they can't depend on the HDD on the Xbox360 version.

[woundingchaney]

I'm wondering one thing. I just read that the Xbox360 does not require a HD to play games. Now if that's the case, it would mean the games would have to be designed to play without a harddrive installed. Well, then, there should never be a reason for them to say that a reason for no PS3 version is because of the lack of a HDD standard, right? Because they can't depend on the HDD on the Xbox360 version.


I think the option is left up to the devs themselves. Making the hdd standards allows for its use universally.

[xbdestroya]

I think the option is left up to the devs themselves. Making the hdd standards allows for its use universally.

Actually I think Microsoft has told devs that the game has to be able to run without the installed, though they can take into account additional features to implement with the hard drive in place knowing every 360 ships with one. I'm going to double-check though and make sure I'm not just in fantasy land though - because certainly for a game like Oblivion, it seems that the hard drive is more or less required. Well, if going by their statements.

[woundingchaney]

Actually I think Microsoft has told devs that the game has to be able to run without the installed, though they can take into account additional features to implement with the hard drive in place knowing every 360 ships with one. I'm going to double-check though and make sure I'm not just in fantasy land though - because certainly for a game like Oblivion, it seems that the hard drive is more or less required. Well, if going by their statements.


You may be correct, but with MS's large support from PC gaming developers it would be a mistake for them to tell devs not to use such a tool (imo). Sonys take on the hard drive doesnt seem that illogical to me, its basically if your going to use the console in certain ways (downloads online play) then you need to buy the hard drive, just if your going to offer such an upgrade/addition you need to push dev support (it shouldnt be to hard, I imagine many dev particularly next gen would want to incorporate it). Its a good way to keep price down without alienating and still giving a choice to consumers.

I dont know if I would take their statements to heart (they are kind of in bed with MS or so speculations state).

[xbdestroya]

Well we're both in agreement so it seems there's no need to drag it out, but indeed here's the specific information relating to the 360 and the hard drive, coming indirectly from the Holmdahl interview:

...Perhaps the most interesting comment concerns the hard drive, which Holmdahl indicates will not be necessary to play any games. He is cited as explaining: "Xbox 360 games do not require the HDD or a memory unit, but Xbox Live requires one or the other to save the gamers’ account information."...

link (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=5966)

[woundingchaney]

Well we're both in agreement so it seems there's no need to drag it out, but indeed here's the specific information relating to the 360 and the hard drive, coming indirectly from the Holmdahl interview:



link (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=5966)


Yeah thats just seems to be a mistake on MS's part to me and honestly I dont think thats going to be set in stone through the consoles life span.

Could this be an attempt to elleviate potential modding asking developers not to incorporate the hard drive in their initial game programming???? Even so with such influence and hopes being put on the success of live could it be possible. Say I wanted to download a patch (or something) for Oblivion then the game has to be programmed to access the harddrive and install the patch (am I way off basis here).

[xbdestroya]

Yeah thats just seems to be a mistake on MS's part to me and honestly I dont think thats going to be set in stone through the consoles life span.

Could this be an attempt to elleviate potential modding asking developers not to incorporate the hard drive in their initial game programming???? Even so with such influence and hopes being put on the success of live could it be possible. Say I wanted to download a patch (or something) for Oblivion then the game has to be programmed to access the harddrive and install the patch (am I way off basis here).

For a patch to a game, you are right, you would need the hard drive (unless the mem card can support that functionality as well- they may be large enough at this point).

I've heard a couple of things as to why Microsoft has done this, and one rumor is that Microsoft intends to sell a version of the 360 without the HDD down the line.

Who knows?

[Z]

you know something, I am still baffled as to why MS will, yet again, include an HDD. that was probably the most expensive in Box. the entire MS gaming division is at great loss. why wouldn't they simple make it an add on and save themselves alot of headaches? a game to load a little faster isn't reason enough.

you know what I think? I have a feeling that X2 will launch with no HDD. there maybe a reason for MS to announce an HDD this early, and that is to play chicken with Sony. but then again, Sony has around six months after X2's launch so there is pleanty of time to withdraw the HDD desision. I don't know anymore.

[Gegenki]

You know in England alot of people are under the impression that American's feel that they are the only country in existance.
We didn't even get final fantasy 11 for PS2 - I waited so long for it yo! and its only on PC.
So what if alot of america is still on 56k - In Europe, there was no option - you either have broadband or you don't play online.

Also someone was on about saving online and what if you went to a friends house and wanted to show off ure charaters - wouldn't it make more sense to save your online games online and your other games on whatever type of memory you have.

I think it is evident that Sony want to include a harddrive as it just came to be a useless artifact this gen. It doesn't matter what Microsoft do, because week by week Sony are working on bringing down costs of the machine, and whatever microsoft decide can be easilly changed in time for dev kit release.

Everyone talks like Sony is a baby that cannot work out what it needs and what it doesn't need, but either way, Sony are going to wait for as long as possible before deciding on the hard drive, because if they make a decision now, the devs will cater to that. If prices don't go down, they will end up with an extremely expensive console, or a whole load of games that don't work.
Why would the changing environment on your favourite online game save on YOUR hard drive? It would need to be done on the server. Essentially nothing too big has to go onto your hard drive. As far as I can see, it will probably be used to ease the loading pains on online games and cache data.
If we needed a hard drive to save games, then why would we have memory devices. It just shows that Sony wwant to use the PS3 for other things. If xbox 360 releases with a hard drive, PS3 will - its as simple as that. If xbox 360 doesnt release with a hard drive, PS3 probably will anyway just to outdo microsoft.

Way I see it, why release bundles, when you can send the console and the hard drive seperate to the shop. From there, people will buy the console, and chose a HDD size to go with it.

In terms of size i think sony want to out size microsoft. This is obvious otherwise they would annouce right?
Maybe, maybe not. The chances of any useful information coming out before Xbox 360 is out are low. Why? Because if Sony wait, then there is nothing Microsoft can do. If sony release a 40GB hard drive with Linux right from the off, Microsoft can't suddenly switch to a 40GB with windows on it. And don't say it isn't likely that they would make such a quick switch. With the original xbox, microsoft, made a change to the gpu after nVidia had manufactured them ready to go into the xbox meaning that they were left with useless chips. That is one of the key reasons MS is with ATI today - with so long between PS3 and xbox 360 launch, sony can wait.

Just think of it as another Ace in sony's big coperate sleeves

I think I rambled alot in an un organised order - but thats just me - "have a nice day" :crazy: .

FYI : PS3 has 256XDR linked to the CPU and 256DDR3 linked to the GPU but the GPU can access both pools. They say xbox 360 memory is better because the dev can resize memory as required. Maybe they don't neeed it split 256:256. maybe they need 400 for the CPU and 112 for the GPU at a particular point in a game. They rearrange the memory and its done. You can't do that on PS3 apparently.

[Z]

good post, I agree.

[woundingchaney]

you know something, I am still baffled as to why MS will, yet again, include an HDD. that was probably the most expensive in Box. the entire MS gaming division is at great loss. why wouldn't they simple make it an add on and save themselves alot of headaches? a game to load a little faster isn't reason enough.

you know what I think? I have a feeling that X2 will launch with no HDD. there maybe a reason for MS to announce an HDD this early, and that is to play chicken with Sony. but then again, Sony has around six months after X2's launch so there is pleanty of time to withdraw the HDD desision. I don't know anymore.


Really I think its all to push for Xbox live. Changes in membership services and free weekly membership is what makes me believe this. I believe if MS thinks they can get live to fly then profit/loss will equal out better (which is prob true, if they can push live). The choice of in box hdd had to be made to assure that everyone owning the console could download and play online (basically the "get them in the door and they wont leave theory")

[Mitri]

Also someone was on about saving online and what if you went to a friends house and wanted to show off ure charaters - wouldn't it make more sense to save your online games online and your other games on whatever type of memory you have.

because what if your friend doesn't have an internet connection. they may have an internet connection but as we all saw on the ps3 photos there is no dial up connection possible. so if they have dial up and your data is saved online then there is no way to retrieve it without a memory unit.

If we needed a hard drive to save games, then why would we have memory devices. It just shows that Sony wwant to use the PS3 for other things.

we need memory cards for portability. there is no way that u can take your ps3 over your cousins house just to use your custom car. i don't think the ps3 will fit into your pocket when your goin outside in the rain.

[raVen]

keyword: "detachable" hard drive - makes it portable as well

[Gegenki]

because what if your friend doesn't have an internet connection. they may have an internet connection but as we all saw on the ps3 photos there is no dial up connection possible. so if they have dial up and your data is saved online then there is no way to retrieve it without a memory unit.


If you are going round a friend's house, download your saves onto your memory unit and go.
It's like you said, we have memory units for portability. If you were going round a friend's house and wanted him to listen to a cool song, would you put the song on your ftp and access it at his house, or would you just put it on memorystick.

[Mitri]

keyword: "detachable" hard drive - makes it portable as well

i have a question about that. how many hd slots are there on the ps3 or the 360? and how would you retrieve data off of a hd with no slot to put it in? how will you exchange hd in the middle of a game to retrieve data from the other one? what about autosaves? if the hd has linux(ps3) wont it be coded for that specific ps3? so if it is how will you even use the hd on another one at all? have you ever played an rpg, where it saves everytime you level up? if so how would you save your data onto another hd, just to switch it back to your original hd?

[Gegenki]

i have a question about that. how many hd slots are there on the ps3 or the 360? and how would you retrieve data off of a hd with no slot to put it in? how will you exchange hd in the middle of a game to retrieve data from the other one? what about autosaves? if the hd has linux(ps3) wont it be coded for that specific ps3? so if it is how will you even use the hd on another one at all? have you ever played an rpg, where it saves everytime you level up? if so how would you save your data onto another hd, just to switch it back to your original hd?

Both consoles have 1 slot
Why would you want to move data from 1 hdd to another? Unless you wanted to move everything onto a bigger one. In which case your probably going to have a problem, but there are ways involving the pc. No doubt there will be USB adapters so you can hook them up to the PC. It's all about the 3rd party tools!


how will you exchange hd in the middle of a game to retrieve data from the other one?

Why would you do that? Let's say you have an 80GB hard drive. Why are you going to need to change it in the middle of a game?



if the hd has linux(ps3) wont it be coded for that specific ps3? so if it is how will you even use the hd on another one at all?

No because all the PS3's have the same hardware config. If i take linux out of my pc and put it in my dad's it will come up with a whole load of errors due to the hardware changes. I got this when I added a hard drive to my pc. Because every PS3 has 7 bluetooth controllers, 1 ethernet port, all the memory ports, they will always be there in any ps3 and so it wont matter.


have you ever played an rpg, where it saves everytime you level up? if so how would you save your data onto another hd, just to switch it back to your original hd?

im not sure what you mean with just to switch it back to your original hd and no I have never played an RPG like that, except maybe zelda on N64. Anyways, again why would you have 2 HDD's. Assuming that you and a friend did something incredibly strange iinvolving your game saves, lets say each HDD has linux on it. Boot up linux, access your HDD and copy the file onto memory unit, turn off ya console, switch the HDD boot up the other linux, take it off the memory unit. Chances are Linux won't even come into this equation because the PS3 will have to have a built in file manager as the PS2 did otherwise you would need a HDD just to access any memory unit files. e.g. if you take the hard drive out - you still need to be able to see your memory card

[KnightRiderX]

u keep dancing around his question, Gegenki.

Why would you want to move data from 1 hdd to another? Unless you wanted to move everything onto a bigger one. In which case your probably going to have a problem, but there are ways involving the pc. No doubt there will be USB adapters so you can hook them up to the PC. It's all about the 3rd party tools!

Why would you do that? Let's say you have an 80GB hard drive. Why are you going to need to change it in the middle of a game?

keep in mind that he is talking about the same situation at switching memery cards in the middle of gameplay. Now I don't think that the PS3 will allow u to do that with an hdd. so if Mitri is talking about showing a friend something that he has saved while playing and then wanting to switch back to the friends game save, I don't think that will be possible for that to happen with an hdd.

[Gegenki]

u keep dancing around his question, Gegenki.

keep in mind that he is talking about the same situation at switching memery cards in the middle of gameplay. Now I don't think that the PS3 will allow u to do that with an hdd. so if Mitri is talking about showing a friend something that he has saved while playing and then wanting to switch back to the friends game save, I don't think that will be possible for that to happen with an hdd.

I've never actually done that. But with the hard drives being removable, one assumes that you will be able to pull it out in the middle gameplay. There is nothing wrong with that, just so long as it isn't being accessed at the time, just like your regular portable hard drive. On your regular portable you have to stop it in the system before you take it out usually but if you set up right, you can yank it out at almost any time (im talking from windows xp here).

[Applefiend]

My opinion is...

HDD optional, but toss developers a 25 cent discount on their license fee for good HDD support.

My other feeling is an XBox live killer is way more important than the HDD.

Once you get to that $199 sweet spot you really start to shift product, nothing should slow you down getting to that spot for dubious advantages.

[Z]

My other feeling is an XBox live killer is way more important than the HDD.
ditto

[Mitri]

an xbox live killer could be free downloadable content and lots of it. i have xbox live and some of the downloadable content you have to pay for. not many people pay for it. they would rather wait until it becomes free a couple months down the line.

but the only problem i see with lots of downloadable content is space required and cost for that space. without a hdd that means we would have to save it to a memory stick of some sort. but to shell out (just a guess i don't really know how much they cost)60usd for a 1g memory stick is alot. then to fill it up and have to buy another one is even more. and imo no one will want to have their ps3 be hooked up to their computer jus to access their downloaded content. and if they're like me their ps3 will be their pc.

[Kensington]

Assuming that the PS3 doesn't ship with a hard drive (which we all know could change), does anyone know how much an 80gb HD woud cost?

[KnightRiderX]

but the only problem i see with lots of downloadable content is space required and cost for that space. without a hdd that means we would have to save it to a memory stick of some sort. but to shell out (just a guess i don't really know how much they cost)60usd for a 1g memory stick is alot. then to fill it up and have to buy another one is even more. and imo no one will want to have their ps3 be hooked up to their computer jus to access their downloaded content. and if they're like me their ps3 will be their pc.

Hey good point there. so if lots of free downloadable contents can be considered as a live killer and if i will require a lot of space, then its a win-win for Sony see as they will be beating M$ in the online aspect of it and also getting ppl to go buy hdds where do don't have to include it at launch.

talk about hitting two birds with one stone. :lick:

[woundingchaney]

Hey good point there. so if lots of free downloadable contents can be considered as a live killer and if i will require a lot of space, then its a win-win for Sony see as they will be beating M$ in the online aspect of it and also getting ppl to go buy hdds where do don't have to include it at launch.

talk about hitting two birds with one stone. :lick:


Not that simple, Live has a great amount of free downloads (some of it you have to pay for but not by any means the majority). I personally have no idea how Sony could beat MS in the online community issue, Xbox Live is very refined, well implemented, and growing vastly in use and services.

[KnightRiderX]

Not that simple, Live has a great amount of free downloads (some of it you have to pay for but not by any means the majority). I personally have no idea how Sony could beat MS in the online community issue, Xbox Live is very refined, well implemented, and growing vastly in use and services.

so if lots of free downloadable contents can be considered as a live killer

Mitri did mention that it can be a Live killer.

[woundingchaney]

Mitri did mention that it can be a Live killer.


Yeah my bad I quoted the wrong post. I main point was I dont think that alone is going to win Sony in the online department.

[Applefiend]

It's all down to money the HDD thing isn't it? And my feeling is the lack of HDD is completely central to Sony winning this generation on price point, all the way. This is the Sony strategy.

For a second, let's look at the components that make up both systems.

So they both have cases, wireless, etc etc, let's say they're all equal.

Well the XBox CPU and Cell roughtly cost the same per chip I imagine.

And RSX and the XBox GPU probably also cost the same. And no doubt will drop in price in a similar fashion.

And RAM, we'll say the same for that.

What's different is storage, it's the major price difference, it's why your PS3 is more expensive to make than an XBox.

So XBox has the cheapest HDD they could find, with the cheapest DVD drive they could find, so they work out cheaper.

PS3 has a new fangled, leading edge Blu Ray Drive, so it's more expensive. It costs more than a cheap DVD Drive part + the cheapest HDD you can find.

So where do these systems go in future?

The HDD and Drive in Xbox 360 is already as cheap as possible, they aren't really getting any cheaper. They're already at rock bottom.

But that Blu Ray Drive? That's going to rocket down in price, and continue to drop, until it's at DVD Drive levels.

So in 3 years, when you really start to shift units, the PS3 will cost less to make than an XBox 360.

Smart lot at Sony.

[Applefiend]

And obviously, quantity is everything, so if you outsell the competition 2 to 1, 3 to 1, or even 5 to 1, you get way better prices on components.

[woundingchaney]

I think that may be very over simplified.

[Applefiend]

Dunno, I think the price reduction curve for a Blu Ray Drive is way way better than than for a HDD + DVD Drive however you slice it.

Hardly anyone buys systems in the first year, you want to build your system to hit a sweet spot in late 2007/2008/2009.

Microsoft's business plan makes no sense to me, Sony's does.

[woundingchaney]

Dunno, I think the price reduction curve for a Blu Ray Drive is way way better than than for a HDD + DVD Drive however you slice it.

Hardly anyone buys systems in the first year, you want to build your system to hit a sweet spot in late 2007/2008/2009.

Microsoft's business plan makes no sense to me, Sony's does.


The business plan of having the next gen console that comes out first and has a lower sticker price than your major competitor, doesnt make sense to you????. Im sure the price reduction curve is greater, but imagine the drop in price of a DVD drive when a high def drive is widely available.

I think we all might be surprised how many consoles MS sells over this coming holiday season.

[Z]

price isn't the only thing that drives sales. so far, X2 game footage is horrible, with a couple that look disappointing and only two games that looks decent (decent as in high end PC today). so far, PS3 has knocked the socks out of everyone. fans have been dancing like crazy and apposed fanboyz have been calling them pure CG due to how amazing they are. so my question is, IF PS3 is all it ends out to be having a 'noticeable' graphics advnatage, plus the highest tech available plus the biggest fanbase, plus the most mega hit exclusives by far, and the price difference is a mere $50. with that price differen, you really think PS3 will suffer? keep in mind you don't buy a console everyday. that is why some see it as a small investment. that is why most gamers are trying to weigh their options, because initially at least, many can only afford one system. and it would be a bit hard to save up for another when AAA titles keep squeezing you wallet. now if the compettion isn't as good, why fork another small investment in that case? that if you even notice the compeition anymore.

that is with the average gamer in mind. most of them aren't crazy techies and hardcore gamers like some of us. most need to save up and think ahead.

finally, since it isn't decided yet, we should think of the HDD chances of becoming standard as 50/50 *changes threar title*

[Jasonps3]

And just imagine, we haven't seen Metal Gear Solid 4 yet. Metal Gear Solid 2 was an important game for the PS2 because it showed what this generation games can do. Metal Gear Solid 4 is probably the most important game for Sony right now, because of past history. If history repeats itself, watch out.

[xbdestroya]

On the price of the components, now and later:

It's definitely the case that a DVD-ROM drive will lose much less in terms of expense than will a blu-ray ROM drive during the next five years. Already as it stands now, a DVD-ROM drive is essentially the same price as a CD-ROM drive. Even to the average consumer, who is not going to be getting it as cheap as Microsoft or Sony, a CD-ROM drive can be had off of Newegg.com for $15, and a 16x DVD-ROM drive for $18. In the next five years, the 360's DVD-ROM drive will probably get all of $3 or so cheaper for Microsoft to acquire.

The blu-ray drive on the other hand will probably shed around 80% of it's initial cost by the end of the generation; by the time PS4 rolls around, it could very well be no more expensive relative to DVD drives than DVD drives are relative to CD drives today. Granted I think the differential will in fact be higher due to possible market fragmentation from HD-DVD and other factors - but even if it costs $10 or $15 more than a DVD-ROM drive to manufacture at the end of the gen the point remains the same: it's going to experience massive drops in it's cost to source/manufacture.

Hard drives are a similar boat; a 20 Gig hard drive is NOT going to be getting much cheaper from the beginning of the gen to the end. Not nearly the price drop an 80 gig hard drive will see; because after a point the main determiner of costs simply becomes the mechanical componentry that comprises the actual hard drive itself, regardless of size.

But this point in hard drive pricing is really moot to begin with since Sony likely won't be including one in the system but rather a bundle, and Microsoft will probably start selling 360 versions without hard drives after the initial console establishes itself and makes the hard drive more or less a fact of life for devs.

PS3 should be paying slightly more for RAM due to the XDR. For GPU costs - there's arguments I could make in either direction for the GPU costs.

The CPU's, the 360's should be a fair deal cheaper, but then again there will be a mark-up for being fab'd by an outside party. Cell will be more expensive to manufacture, but on the other hand won't experience a mark-up. In the end, the 360's CPU will probably be slightly cheaper on the same process.

[Applefiend]

I'd be interested to hear people's estimates for just how much that Blu Ray drive part is costing them. I've heard estimates (from crazy people) for as high as $400.

I wonder if Microsoft will be selling X360 without an HD. A lot of XBox1 games appear to make heavy use of virtual memory, caching etc. Pulling the HD rug from under them is no easy task. You put an HD in with a system, you're probably stuck with it for good.

If you've ever replaced the HD in your XBox with a noisy one, Halo 2 is pretty scarey, the racket the drive makes swapping out can drown out the game!

so far, X2 game footage is horrible, with a couple that look disappointing and only two games that looks decent

*cough* Project Gotham 3 is superb, it's everything you could want from a next gen title, I agree on the other titles though. I'm weighing up if I want to buy a console just to play this one game, because I'm having a cool gaming time right now catching up on retro stuff, why spoil it?

[Z]

*cough* Project Gotham 3 is superb
that IS the only one. but when looking at Ridge Racer car models, I wonder how good PGR really is. remeber, we don't have anything to compare it with. and don't for get the be all end all benchmark: GT! dare I say next-gen GT?! *faints*

speaking of comparing; look at PGR compared to PS3's car games so far: F1 and MotorStorm. no comparison really. the first is photorealistic and the other is just crazy!

[xbdestroya]

I wonder if Microsoft will be selling X360 without an HD. A lot of XBox1 games appear to make heavy use of virtual memory, caching etc. Pulling the HD rug from under them is no easy task. You put an HD in with a system, you're probably stuck with it for good.


Well not initially, but maybe eventually. Aftearall Microsoft is requiring of developers that all 360 games be able to run on the system without the hard drive installed. I don't know what the exact reasons for this would be, but I'm at a loss if it's not at least in part related to a plan to sell a hard-driveless version of the 360 down the line.

[Jasonps3]

Well, judging by the Microsoft Summit, the packaging included the HDD so who knows.

[xbdestroya]

Right yes, the 360 is initially being sold with the hard drive included; that is a fact. What I'm talking about is the fact that Microsoft has also told it's developers to write their games such that every single one will work without a hard drive installed. Now what me and some others are wondering, is why would they do this if every 360 will have a hard drive at launch? And my own theory is that 360 might be offered later in it's life without a hard drive at a (relatively) lower price.

This would cut out a major expense for Microsoft, turn into a profit generator from hard drive sales, and still give them all the credibility and hype generated by having launched with a hard drive installed.

[Jasonps3]

Right yes, the 360 is initially being sold with the hard drive included; that is a fact. What I'm talking about is the fact that Microsoft has also told it's developers to write their games such that every single one will work without a hard drive installed. Now what me and some others are wondering, is why would they do this if every 360 will have a hard drive at launch? And my own theory is that 360 might be offered later in it's life without a hard drive at a (relatively) lower price.

This would cut out a major expense for Microsoft, turn into a profit generator from hard drive sales, and still give them all the credibility and hype generated by having launched with a hard drive installed.

That could be a possibility. But do they need the HDD to run Xbox Live?

[Z]

Well, judging by the Microsoft Summit, the packaging included the HDD so who knows.
well, that could be for the 'premium' offer. I was baffeled about why MS will still make HDD standard when it cost them dearly the last time. as it turned out, it appeares that X2 will actually come without an HDD as standard. initially, all X2 will be sold with one. then immediately after (if not simoltaneously) another 'offer' will be available in the form of a 'standard' version. think US PSP. it is still being sold as a bundle only. when the standard version soon arrives, many will think PSP went through a price cut. I think this will happen with X2 as well.

That could be a possibility. But do they need the HDD to run Xbox Live?
actually no. you can use memory cards which come in a 64M to save simple things like settings, casual online game saves and what not. of course, for downlading large contents and playing some online MMORPGs then an HDD is required. PS2 has a larger online fanbase than Box and nearly all PS2 users do not have an HDD. only FF11 requires one.

P.S. SOCOM alone has more users than Live's entire subscribers. O_o

[woundingchaney]

that IS the only one. but when looking at Ridge Racer car models, I wonder how good PGR really is. remeber, we don't have anything to compare it with. and don't for get the be all end all benchmark: GT! dare I say next-gen GT?! *faints*

speaking of comparing; look at PGR compared to PS3's car games so far: F1 and MotorStorm. no comparison really. the first is photorealistic and the other is just crazy!


Ghost Recon

Oblivion

DOA 4

Gears of War

Prey

Kameo, Condemend (Ive heard mixed reviews but I think they look impressive)

Enchant Arm (almost forgot)

I did forget about Huxley (looks amazing)


and from the IGN article PDZ is supposed to be very impressive (cant state for sure bc nothing has been shown lately)

[woundingchaney]

well, that could be for the 'premium' offer. I was baffeled about why MS will still make HDD standard when it cost them dearly the last time. as it turned out, it appeares that X2 will actually come without an HDD as standard. initially, all X2 will be sold with one. then immediately after (if not simoltaneously) another 'offer' will be available in the form of a 'standard' version. think US PSP. it is still being sold as a bundle only. when the standard version soon arrives, many will think PSP went through a price cut. I think this will happen with X2 as well.


actually no. you can use memory cards which come in a 64M to save simple things like settings, casual online game saves and what not. of course, for downlading large contents and playing some online MMORPGs then an HDD is required. PS2 has a larger online fanbase than Box and nearly all PS2 users do not have an HDD. only FF11 requires one.

P.S. SOCOM alone has more users than Live's entire subscribers. O_o


I look for those numbers to drop drastically if


a) broadband is needed

b) there is a membership fee

but yeah those figures you stated sound (and probably are) right

[raVen]

Ghost Recon
Oblivion
DOA 4
Gears of War
Prey
Kameo, Condemend (Ive heard mixed reviews but I think they look impressive)
Enchant Arm (almost forgot)
I did forget about Huxley (looks amazing)

and from the IGN article PDZ is supposed to be very impressive (cant state for sure bc nothing has been shown lately)

Oblivion = Yes thats a given
DOA4 = looks like Xbox to me
Gears of War = One of the reasons Im considering a Xbox
Prey = Havent seen it
Kameo = graphics decent for next gen but I dont expect it to me a good game
Enchant Arm = your kidding...
Huxley = the leading reason Im considering a Xbox 360, graphically it doesnt match up to what ps3 has shown but Im interested to see how a million people can have a shoot out.

[woundingchaney]

Oblivion = Yes thats a given
DOA4 = looks like Xbox to me
Gears of War = One of the reasons Im considering a Xbox
Prey = Havent seen it
Kameo = graphics decent for next gen but I dont expect it to me a good game
Enchant Arm = your kidding...
Huxley = the leading reason Im considering a Xbox 360, graphically it doesnt match up to what ps3 has shown but Im interested to see how a million people can have a shoot out.


I thought Enchant Arm looked pretty good to me, also Im pretty impressed with DOA4 (I think Itagaki is the main reason that it does look similar to the Xbox version not the limits of the hardware). It is possible that my expectations arent as high as others.

Also are their any gameplay trailers of PS3 games, could someone provide a link plz. :heybaby:

[rev>thanu]

well not to sound harsh or anything but really out of everything i've seen from xbox 360 only

project gotham racing 3
Gears of War
Ghost Recon

are worthy to be truely called next generation titles, everything else looks too PCish for my taste.

PREY: looks like an improved DOOM 3 engine (but not greatly improved)
DOA4: looks ported from xbox
Oblivion: after seeing endless saga i can definetely say that this is not to be considered next generation material. it actually looks like the half life 2 engine was used and no graphical improvements were made.

i also don't want to sound like i complain too much but in PGR3 the cars have too many hard polygons edges something that i wouldn't have expected from a next generation title. also the cars consist of very little polygon numbers only 40,000 (or was it 80,000). anyway i think the guy said 20,000 for the interior and 20,000 polygons for the exterior of the cars. Truely i think they could have afforded to pull a little more power for the cars. considering how things looked in motorstorm and how great the backgrounds in PGR3 look in comparison to the cars but that's just me.

like Z said there really isn't a direct competitor to PGR3 right now so i can't really pass judgement yet.

[woundingchaney]

well not to sound harsh or anything but really out of everything i've seen from xbox 360 only

project gotham racing 3
Gears of War
Ghost Recon

are worthy to be truely called next generation titles, everything else looks too PCish for my taste.

PREY: looks like an improved DOOM 3 engine (but not greatly improved)
DOA4: looks ported from xbox
Oblivion: after seeing endless saga i can definetely say that this is not to be considered next generation material. it actually looks like the half life 2 engine was used and no graphical improvements were made.

i also don't want to sound like i complain too much but in PGR3 the cars have too many hard polygons edges something that i wouldn't have expected from a next generation title. also the cars consist of very little polygon numbers only 40,000 (or was it 80,000). anyway i think the guy said 20,000 for the interior and 20,000 polygons for the exterior of the cars. Truely i think they could have afforded to pull a little more power for the cars. considering how things looked in motorstorm and how great the backgrounds in PGR3 look in comparison to the cars but that's just me.

like Z said there really isn't a direct competitor to PGR3 right now so i can't really pass judgement yet.


I realize that Prey and Oblivion are PC ports but if the hardware can max them out like they are saying then I expect them to be very impressive. To each his own though. :twirl:

Also Im willing to bet that both consoles have their fair share of pc ports, which could and probably will be some of the best titles available. :twirl:

[rev>thanu]

well it's true most xbox 360 titles shown are mostlikely pc ports but really don't you think that if this is a next gen console shouldn't microsoft equally show an impressive amount of next gen titles too. i mean i'm not saying that those PC ports will not be impressive because they are and they definetely look better than anything on xbox or ps2 right now. compared to what Sony has shown i've seen more next gen material coming from sony's side.

all i'm saying is that microsoft needs to step it up and show me more real next gen content like sony has so that they can impress me. 3 games don't cut it for me, sony has gone out on a limb and shown new titles, reborn titles and sequels but definetely i've seen more new content from sony's side and content that definetely step it up in the graphics department. I wan't to see the same from xbox 360 now, even if it's too early, it's also very early for ps3 games to be shown and specially of this kind of quality. Sony has definetely convinced me that i should purchase their console because the content they have shown me definetely overshadows those PC ports. http://forums.e-mpire.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[KiLLA2006]

couldn't have said it better rev...
I got really excited when xbox announced the xbox 360, i thought to myself another chance for M$ to try to prove themselves, until i watched Sony at E3 it made me feel like i felt when i saw Playstation for the very first time, and it was a great feeling, i knew then thats the console i want, just like PS3 xbox360 is so much closer to launch then PS3 and Microsoft is already being overshadowed by PS3's lineup... M$ has got to bring better then this or they will be headed down that old dusty trail, if ya know what i mean...

[Z]

and to add insult to injury, most of the titles shown for X2 are multiplatforms. they will be coming on everything under the sun. EA titles? condemned? etc. look at Sony's. other than RE5, all the the titles are PS3 exclusives.

also, there look much much better than the X2's PC-like games. why arent' they showing something wild like sony? or is Cell that much more powerfull for the very first devkit to exceed all those devkits and updates MS has?

[KiLLA2006]

almost brings a tear to your eye when you think of how many good things PS3 has going for it, who wouldv'e thunk it, I know i had my money on M$ but then quickly moved it over to Sony after realizing that i put it on the wrong company :nono: :crazy:

[rev>thanu]

and to add insult to injury, most of the titles shown for X2 are multiplatforms. they will be coming on everything under the sun. EA titles? condemned? etc. look at Sony's. other than RE5, all the the titles are PS3 exclusives.

also, there look much much better than the X2's PC-like games. why arent' they showing something wild like sony? or is Cell that much more powerfull for the very first devkit to exceed all those devkits and updates MS has?

to add even more to your comment these so call developers had alot more time with power figures of what represented Xbox 360's power. Xbox360 dev even had more time than sony's developers with the alpha, beta etc.. (what ever you want to call them) dev kits to come with more PC ports than what ps2 probably ever had. Really how can they have been completely destroyed in presentation by a console that is more than 6 months away from the xbox 360 launch. i mean come on itakagi is the DOA engine the best he has. i mean isn't he the all mighty powerfull graphical guru whore of this world and he too comes with a fighter that looks identical to it's Xbox version. i mean the unreal 3.0 engine was definetely available for use back then. i mean even project force the least graphical impressive title looked fresh and new and definetely exciting.

I also highly doubt microsoft will show anything new at TGS other than what they have shown, it will all probably just be in playable form but i doubt they show anything new. if they didn't secure E3 with a strong show then i really doubt they'll get it at TGS. I really think that microsoft underestimated Sony quite a bit that they shot themselfs on the foot. Well then i guess is true then what kutaragi and analyst say the real next gen war starts when PS3 is out.

Microsoft thinks that by giving us sequels and ports they can guarantee their old fanbase back. well they are definetely wrong about that because next gen means new experiences( NEW GAMES). other than mistwalker studio's blue dragon, lost oddessy and gears of war i really haven't seen that much new content or impressive material for Xbox 360. I want new faces but i also want to see familiar ones. Sony has definetely shown old classics that are making a come back on ps3, but they have also focused more on how their new gems will look like and more than half of the content shown on these presentations have shown me the clear direction of were to expect the ps3 to go and i expect it to reach far beyond that of what was seen on ps2.

anyway enough about xbox i wounder how Wanda and the Colossus would look as a next generation title.http://forums.e-mpire.com/images/icons/icon5.gifhttp://forums.e-mpire.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Applefiend]

I think Tim Sweeney said it best when he said that he'd be crazy to show games on those dev kits Microsoft supplied. I got my E3 DVD and have been watching the XBox 360 demos at DVD quality and... Oh my God... Those framerates.

You and I know those games looked like crap because they were running on dev kits a third of the speed of the final XBox 360... The kids don't know that. :D

The question isn't "Why did Sony use a mixture of pre-rendered / doctored real time / or real time to represent the quality of PS3 games".

The question is, why in hell didn't Microsoft?

I think you want 3 things to be an early adopter of a console:

1 - A game unlike anything you've played or seen before in the home. A Mario 64, Tekken, Daytona, something like that.

2 - Playing all your old games, including the really obscure ones enhanced.

3 - Another use for the device thrown in for free, perhaps... Playing a new movie format?

[Z]

MS knows they can't face off Sony technologically. MS can buy technology, sure, but Sony 'makes' new ones. that is why since the very start, they have repeated the importance of launching earlier. I think anysystem after PS3's released will face serious trouble. the only thing it can go for is a noticealbe price difference.
I also still believe X2 will come without an HDD as standard. the thing is, they will market the bundled version first, thus giving the impression they launched with a standard HDD. just like N America's PSP. everyone thinks PSP actuall cost $250 when that is the 'premium pack price'. when the stadrad one is released, people will think it undergone a price cut.
i wounder how Wanda and the Colossus would look as a next generation title.
*brain crashes* ....

[Mitri]

if anyone knows what MS says. they say something like they don't build games to show them off. like at e3 they didn't build the games to show them off. they showed what they had. not like sony where they showed what they knew would impress the audience. what i want to see is if that is really what the games will look like, i don't believe that what was shown on killzone is what will be possible. maybe something close to it but not that.

[xbdestroya]

Well at the very worst, look at it like this: even if it is Microsoft you choose to trust in terms of what next-gen games will really look like - as has been pointed out above remember that a lot of those same titles will be coming to the PS3 as well, and probably looking no worse. So the gamble on the PS3 is nothing but upside potential. http://forums.e-mpire.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[KnightRiderX]

i also don't want to sound like i complain too much but in PGR3 the cars have too many hard polygons edges something that i wouldn't have expected from a next generation title. also the cars consist of very little polygon numbers only 40,000 (or was it 80,000). anyway i think the guy said 20,000 for the interior and 20,000 polygons for the exterior of the cars. Truely i think they could have afforded to pull a little more power for the cars. considering how things looked in motorstorm and how great the backgrounds in PGR3 look in comparison to the cars but that's just me.

actually it was 40,000 polygons for the interiors and 40,000 polygons for the exterior. but they could still have done better.

[rpgamer_2k5]

Well at the very worst, look at it like this: even if it is Microsoft you choose to trust in terms of what next-gen games will really look like - as has been pointed out above remember that a lot of those same titles will be coming to the PS3 as well, and probably looking no worse. So the gamble on the PS3 is nothing but upside potential. http://forums.e-mpire.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
And with Gundam, Ni-Oh, Lair, etc actually being announced to be running on the PS3 in real-time; it seems more likely that the PS3 is going to match what we saw at E3. Moreoever other games like Endless Saga, Heavenly Sword, Genji, Killzone, etc have yet been proven to be Computer Graphics rendered offline nor is such level unattainable on the PS3 in its first gen games.

This pre-rendered/doctored realtime/realtime BS seems to be dying as the days goes by...

[Raijin]

Is it me or why everyone wants a lot of polygons on objects? When I see 80.000 polygons for one car isn't enough or they have could done better, I just dont understand. Seems enough to me. In my mind, the power of the machine shouldnt go only on numbers of poly.

[rev>thanu]

well if you have more polygons then the bigger and the more detail you can put on any given environment or character, for instance look and the below pics:

http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/637/637197/endless-saga-20050727014438802.jpg

with more polygons you wouldn't have to use shaders to fool or make the eye believe that her hair is done with individual strands. look at her armor and her ear. the lack of polygons makes them look hard edge which looks unrealistic. so do you prefer the above image or the below image's graphical quality to which her individual hair strands are done one by one using polygons smaller than a pixel. that's what polygons do for you. so in graphics i would say that 40% belongs to polygons the other 60% belongs to shaders and lighting.

http://nicogold.free.fr/imgman/FFM-Aki_Ross012.jpg

Now take a look at PGR3

http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/614/614990/project-gotham-racing-3-20050517003046836.jpg

80,000 isn't enough considering how for ps3's nioh demonstration which had 4 on screen characters each sporting a whooping 1.5 million polygons. with that kind of power which is a total of 6 million polygons (for all 4 characters combined) you can have 100 on screen cars each one sporting 60,000 polygons. so far for PGR3 all i've seen is 4 at a time. 6 million polygons to waste on cars on the ps3, if you take that amount and divide it by 32 you will have cars on ps3 that can sport 187,500 polygons per car. that's two times the amount in PGR3 and then some.

[Jasonps3]

Is it just me, or does the cars in PGR3 look too glossy and doesn't fit the environment like Gran Turismo 4? By the way, I wonder how many polys does GT4 have.

[Mitri]

alright. if we all think about it. 6-8 cars all with 80,000 polygons each means about 480,000 polygons for 6 cars and 640,000 for 8. if we look back at the last pgr. we will see that there are roughly 10,000 polygons per car. which means 60,000 or 80,000 polygons per race. this is a leap from current day. the cars look good. it is best not to use all that can be used in the first game. then that means for the sequel it wont look any better. then with cars who needs all those polygons really? your not going to do anything but wreck it anyway. as long as you can see all the curves what else is there needed to see in a car on a racing game? i can see if this was something like a fighting game or something like that to use more polygons to give the characters better textures and stuff like that but this isn't neccesary for a racing game.

[KiLLA2006]

alright. if we all think about it. 6-8 cars all with 80,000 polygons each means about 480,000 polygons for 6 cars and 640,000 for 8. if we look back at the last pgr. we will see that there are roughly 10,000 polygons per car. which means 60,000 or 80,000 polygons per race. this is a leap from current day. the cars look good. it is best not to use all that can be used in the first game. then that means for the sequel it wont look any better. then with cars who needs all those polygons really? your not going to do anything but wreck it anyway. as long as you can see all the curves what else is there needed to see in a car on a racing game? i can see if this was something like a fighting game or something like that to use more polygons to give the characters better textures and stuff like that but this isn't neccesary for a racing game.

your right it really isn't necessary for a racing game, but it's nice to have leighway when your making a racing game, if you think one car can be tightened up, tighten it up, but think about it, doesn't it make more sense to have too many, then not enough???

[Z]

if anyone knows what MS says. they say something like they don't build games to show them off. like at e3 they didn't build the games to show them off. they showed what they had. not like sony where they showed what they knew would impress the audience.
and THAT'S there mistake.
Is it me or why everyone wants a lot of polygons on objects? When I see 80.000 polygons for one car isn't enough or they have could done better, I just dont understand. Seems enough to me. In my mind, the power of the machine shouldnt go only on numbers of poly.
in terms of polys, that amount is enough- at least for now. what they need to focus on is textures and shaders. the car models in PGR3 look good (they are still working on them) but the texture look off. look at NFS:MostWanted trailer (trailer not the playble demo). that trailer looks better than PGR3. they used incredible textures you can even soo the metal noise filter on the car! also, look at the car pics from Ridge Racer. in any case, they still have 4 months of work. So the gamble on the PS3 is nothing but upside potential.
ain't it the truth

[Mitri]

and THAT'S there mistake.

so what your saying is that they should waste precious development time making something that looks good for a 3 day show? or even some of the smaller meetings? that would be a waste of time which would put back the release date and make us consumers wait.

[woundingchaney]

so what your saying is that they should waste precious development time making something that looks good for a 3 day show? or even some of the smaller meetings? that would be a waste of time which would put back the release date and make us consumers wait.


Well they are good from a marketing stand point (look at the media KillZone brought)


Basically if you want to compare gameplay so far the compare the Gundam and I-8 footage with what MS is showing. So far none of Sony's gameplay footage trumps MS's gameplay footage.

[Z]

so what your saying is that they should waste precious development time making something that looks good for a 3 day show? or even some of the smaller meetings? that would be a waste of time which would put back the release date and make us consumers wait.
waste time? tech demos and great trailer are a waste of time? please do no let stupid fanbots drag you to their pathetic level of trying to find an excuse for anythign they lack- which is pretty much everything.

let me explaine, the point of tech demos is to show the potential of a system. nowbody can put together all the nombers andknowa system will really be like. tech demos are geared more toward devs and publishers than for general gamers like you and me. but even for us, they generate precious hype and interest. the other thing isfantastic trailers. these are targeted for both gamers and devs alike. for gamers, they can see what thier games will look like. it gives them a reason to buy this new system. for devs, it gives them amore detailed idea about how their own games will look like. finally, some demos , whether made by Sony or another dev, give precious data and experimentation and some sort of early hands-on experience with this new archetecture.
even Sony said at the PS Meeting that after E3, they got a huge order for PS3 Devkits. the impact was so great, Sony drove peole themselves to MS's conference. that was to make the people actually see the difference in performance. why do you think even straight out fanbot sites were disappointed with X2's show? and again in their meeting last week?

no matter how you spin it, demos and trailers are vital. why do you think MS used SO MUCH of it for Box? why do you think people bought Box in the first place? that is right, it is because of power. because those demos looked reat- little too great sometimes as some demos were never reached in-game, unlike PS2's. now, why do you think after having more than 2 whole years with devkits out, they shown absolutely no demo of what so ever? why do you think Epic refused to show ANY UE3 demos on X2? Sweeny said the result looked so horrible it would be bad for business-since they sell a game engine. yet they were the first game shown for PS3.

becareful not to be dragged to the sorry lower pits of fanboish stupidity. waste of time indeed- lol

[rpgamer_2k5]

becareful not to be dragged to the sorry lower pits of fanboish stupidity.
Totally agree. I'm so bored of it; it would be more effective ignoring the rubbish from these so called fanboys. When we see Killzone running with the same visual quality of the Killzone trailer like the Gundam realtime video which was actually created on the earlier SDKs (with dual 6800SLI). The SDKs with the Geforce 7800GTX and final Cell have yet been widely distributed. Expect the Gundam game to look very similar to the trailer.

[Domination]

It really troubles me how someone can believe something like the following is real-time footage for the 360, despite how silly the case is, but refuses to believe anything on the opposite side that may seem greater than the 360: HD-TV (http://media.teamxbox.com/dailyposts/xbox360/rumor/es_slide_02.jpg)

"Probably one of the most interesting slides if the following one, which shows what looks like an in-game shot of a Gladiator inspired character, that could either be a real game in the works based on the movie starring Russell Crowe or a simple concept image to showcase the Xbox 360 capabilities."

Where is the credit? I found this news to be very disturding.

[saxdawg00]

"Probably one of the most interesting slides is the following one, which shows what looks like an in-game shot of a Bruce Lee inspired character slappin' the snot out of an xbot that believes that "Gladiator" screen shot is realtime and simply lies about the Xbox 360 capabilities."
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/9516/ohara6es.gif (http://imageshack.us)

When will it stop?