Topic: The PS3 "Super Slim"

[tendoboy1984]

Most of Sony's 1st-party games are on the PlayStation Store, including the entire God of War series (GOW 3 and all the HD "remakes").

[Chozo Ghost]

Flash storage is significantly more expensive than a regular hard disc drive. Should Sony aim to lower the price, they wouldn't replace one of the console's least expensive parts with a vastly more expensive one.

What the hell are you talking about? Flash storage is cheap per unit. That's why Nintendo is going with that in the Wii U. Microsoft has been doing it for several years now with the 4gb 360 model. If that costs more than a hard drive then why is it sold at a budget price?

Now, if you are talking about using 500gb worth of flash memory to make it on par with a 500gb hard drive then you would be right that would be ridiculously expensive. Flash memory is a LOT more expensive on a per GB basis, but on a per unit cost it is by far the cheapest way to go.

It also wouldn't make sense with the file sizes.

Neither does it make much sense on the Wii U (or the 4gb 360). But correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you one of those people defending Nintendo's decision to go with 8gb of flash as opposed to a proper harddrive?

Of course flash storage isn't enough for ANY console, but Nintendo doesn't seem to give a ****, so why should Sony? Just strap a tiny 8gb internal flash module into it and ship it out and let consumers deal with it. That seems to be the way to do business these days. If you don't like it you can just go out and buy an external USB hard drive. Wasn't this the line you and others gave me when I said 8gb wasn't enough? Please explain this double standard to me because I don't get it. Why would it be wrong for Sony to go this route, but if Nintendo's doing it no one complains?

[Adrock]

Most of Sony's 1st-party games are on the PlayStation Store, including the entire God of War series (GOW 3 and all the HD "remakes").

I just checked the Playstation Store and God of War III is not on there.

What the hell are you talking about?

Now, if you are talking about using 500gb worth of flash memory to make it on par with a 500gb hard drive then you would be right that would be ridiculously expensive.

That, basically.

Neither does it make much sense on the Wii U (or the 4gb 360). But correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you one of those people defending Nintendo's decision to go with 8gb of flash as opposed to a proper harddrive?

I was. And I still think 8GB of flash memory is more than adequate if all you're doing with that memory is using it for save files rather than entire games. Please keep in mind the type of consumer I am. I'm getting the 32GB Deluxe Wii U set because it's a better deal to me. I could deal with only 8GB of storage because I don't typically download games or DLC. I like having physical media.

Wasn't this the line you and others gave me when I said 8gb wasn't enough? Please explain this double standard to me because I don't get it. Why would it be wrong for Sony to go this route, but if Nintendo's doing it no one complains?

It's not a double standard. You were specifically talking about a potential PS3 revision without a Blu Ray drive. The Wii U has a disc drive. If there was a Wii U model that couldn't play discs, then yes, 8GB or even 32GB would be unacceptable since that wouldn't be enough space for a download only console when there are potentially 25GB+ file sizes. You'd probably only get a few games on there if you're lucky. If downloading is the primary and only delivery method of games, I don't think forcing consumers to go out an buy more memory is the best way. You would absolutely have to buy an additional external hard disc drive since even expanding via SD Card is probably not adequate either. I suppose the disconnect here is that I interpreted your potential Blu Ray-less PS3 to have a small SSD. I hope this helps.

[Lithium]

IGN uk does some unboxing

I dont think it looks as bad as some people in this thread think it is but i'll probably opt for a regular ps3 slim when i eventually get one (im waiting for the next price drop)

[tendoboy1984]

IGN uk does some unboxing

I dont think it looks as bad as some people in this thread think it is but i'll probably opt for a regular ps3 slim when i eventually get one (im waiting for the next price drop)

That slide-door disc tray thing looks terrible and flimsy. That's why I hate it. For me, having a slot-loading drive is convenient and simple, you just slide the disc in and presto.

[Adrock]

I dont think it looks as bad as some people in this thread think it is but i'll probably opt for a regular ps3 slim when i eventually get one (im waiting for the next price drop)

I'm biased against glossy finishes. And I don't particularly like the corrugated top because it just makes it more difficult to clean/dust. Otherwise, the look is fine. It looks like an even smaller PS3 which I'm sure is the point. The lack of an HDMI cable is odd and the only bad thing about the package. I know why it's not included; it's still lame.

That slide-door disc tray thing looks terrible and flimsy. That's why I hate it. For me, having a slot-loading drive is convenient and simple, you just slide the disc in and presto.

Duly noted. One question: do you plan on getting a super-slim PS3 ever? If not, it shouldn't matter to you what it looks like. I mean, it shouldn't really matter either way since you don't play the outer shell of the hardware, but that's beside the point.

[tendoboy1984]

If the "Super Slim" PS3 was the only model available, then I wouldn't get a PS3 at all. If/when my PS3 dies, I won't be replacing it with the "Super Slim" model. I've used the PS2 Slim before and hated it; it was a piece of junk compared to the original fat PS2.

Sony always has to cut corners when they downsize their products, usually reducing the hardware quality in the process. That flimsy sliding disc tray cover is evidence of that.

Good thing Microsoft actually upgraded the Xbox 360 with the more reliable, and better looking, Slim model. I may just switch over to that.

[Adrock]

Sony always has to cut corners when they downsize their products, usually reducing the hardware quality in the process. That flimsy sliding disc tray cover is evidence of that.

And yet, the drive itself is sturdier. If anything, they made the PS3 better. I don't know how you're not getting this.

I hope for your sake that your precious slot-loading PS3 doesn't die so you can continue to enjoy all those games you have. I can't wrap my mind around dismissing an entire console just because it has a piece I disliked. That would be like refusing to buy a Wii because of those flimsy piece of crap bullshit GameCube slot covers (before Nintendo took it out).

[tendoboy1984]

Sony always has to cut corners when they downsize their products, usually reducing the hardware quality in the process. That flimsy sliding disc tray cover is evidence of that.

And yet, the drive itself is sturdier. If anything, they made the PS3 better. I don't know how you're not getting this.

I hope for your sake that your precious slot-loading PS3 doesn't die so you can continue to enjoy all those games you have. I can't wrap my mind around dismissing an entire console just because it has a piece I disliked. That would be like refusing to buy a Wii because of those flimsy piece of crap bullshit GameCube slot covers (before Nintendo took it out).

The flimsy disc drive cover is a big deal, because if it breaks, then the whole console is ruined.

[Adrock]

There's an eject button. It'll only break if you're careless or stupid about it which is true for just about everything that exists. You can break anything... unless it's made out of Dolemite, baby.

[Chozo Ghost]

For me, having a slot-loading drive is convenient and simple, you just slide the disc in and presto.

Until it fucks up and you can't get the disc out without breaking the system like Brandogg pointed out. Personally I don't care what a console looks like. It can look like a pile of dog **** for all I care. What I do care about is durability and reliability. A slot loader doesn't have that. It breaks easily, and dust and **** can get in there. Is this what you want to deal with just to have something that "looks cool"?

[Spak-Spang]

This conversation has gotten pointless except I want to know what Dolemite is.

[Fatty The Hutt]

This conversation has gotten pointless

Super Agreed
 

except I want to know what Dolemite is.

[Adrock]

Pointless or not, it's still on topic which is pretty impressive for a tendoboy thread. Also, I hope you guys appreciate the irony of making a pointless comment about what you consider to be a pointless discussion.

Also, my bad. I misspelled Dolomite. It's a Futurama reference. Dolomite is a fake mineral capable of withstanding lava. Fry's dog was encased in it for 1000 years and Bender is 40% Dolomite. See: Jurrassic Bark

[Fatty The Hutt]

@adrock - I thinkl the thread has become pointless because tendoboy just keeps repeating himself and won't give up his tired observations in the face of several folks making cogent counterpoints.
 
And I am pretty sure the sly folks that write Futurama deliberately chose the name "dolomite" from "Dolemite" the super awesome 1975 film about a bad-ass pimp of the same name.

[oohhboy]

I have stopped trying to correct Tendoboy. I can only smash his head in so many times to get rid of his brain cancer before I get too tried to swing. At this point I advocate outright ignoring his posts in an effort to reduce the number of man hours dealing with him.

[Lithium]

speaking of which does this forum have an ignore feature? I've been looking around and couldn't find anything.

[Louieturkey]

Today, a 128GB solid state drive is roughly $250 (it would be less if Sony bought it in bulk for production). That will undoubtedly drop over time, but so will regular hard disk drives. Today, you can get a 1TB hard disk drive for less than $100.

Actually, I think you have that wrong.  The cost of a 128GB SSD is closer to $80-$140 than $250 these days.  I just checked on Newegg and those are the prices I found.  The last couple of weeks, I've seen deals that got them down to $60 with rebates.  Unless you are getting enterprise quality SSDs, you rarely pay more than $1 per GB these days.

That doesn't change the fact that they are much more expensive than HDDs though still.  2TB drives are getting back down to below $100 again. $.05 per GB is much better than $.60-$1 per GB.

[tendoboy1984]

Why are those solid-state drives so expensive compared to regular hard drives? The only difference between them is that SSD's are flash-based, while hard drives have moving parts.

[ShyGuy]

memory chips are more expensive to produce than magnetic platters.

[NWR_insanolord]

Flash memory is newer tech, which usually means more expensive. They've come down in price a lot over the last few years, but they're going to be more expensive than magnetic hard drives on a per GB basis for a long time.

[Kytim89]

I have stopped trying to correct Tendoboy. I can only smash his head in so many times to get rid of his brain cancer before I get too tried to swing. At this point I advocate outright ignoring his posts in an effort to reduce the number of man hours dealing with him.

Kind of reminds me of myself in my early days on this forum. Anyway, I much prefer the PS3 slim that was released a few years ago. I find it be a lot more attractive that the older or newer model PS3s. I also look for Microsoft to come out with their own version of the super slim soon to compete with the Wii U and the new version of the PS3. 

[Chozo Ghost]

10 years ago I bought a digital camera and then I had to buy a memory card for it, and the flash memory card I got was only 32MB. Flash media has come a long way since then. Nowadays 32GB is about the price of what 32MB was way back then.

But in those days 32MB still kinda seemed like a lot, because floppy disks were still in use and those only held a mere 1.44MB

[Kytim89]

10 years ago I bought a digital camera and then I had to buy a memory card for it, and the flash memory card I got was only 32MB. Flash media has come a long way since then. Nowadays 32GB is about the price of what 32MB was way back then.

But in those days 32MB still kinda seemed like a lot, because floppy disks were still in use and those only held a mere 1.44MB

I used to own a 16MB SD card and the thing could barely hold two of my iTunes songs in the AAC format. Yes, flash storage has come a long way, and I look forward to what the future has in store for it. I want flash storage to get so cheap that a 128 GB SD card costs maybe $20 or $30 dollars at retail.

[Adrock]

I also look for Microsoft to come out with their own version of the super slim soon to compete with the Wii U and the new version of the PS3.

I don't, not anytime soon anyway and most likely, not ever. The entire point of the of the S Model was to negate the Red Ring of Death which it did very well in fact with the XCGPU, larger fan, and the console shutting itself of if it manages to somehow get too hot. It also had some other fancy additions like more USB ports and Wi-Fi built in among other things. It was a pretty solid update. I guess Microsoft could make it smaller; there's no real reason for them to. I'm surprised Sony is even introducing a 2nd full redesign.