Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
PlayStation (Games) Sony Entertainment Games

Sony Producing New PS3 Hardware, Slim Appears Likely 183

Posted by Soulskill
from the consoles-on-a-diet dept.
The Opposable Thumbs blog reports on a confluence of rumors and information leaks that suggest Sony will be unveiling a PS3 Slim sooner rather than later. Despite waning console sales, orders for PS3-related hardware have risen sharply. There's evidence to suggest that Sony is phasing out its 80GB model, which would help clear the way for a hardware revision. Some expect the official announcement to come as early as August 18th, during the gamescom expo in Germany.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Producing New PS3 Hardware, Slim Appears Likely

Comments Filter:
  • Do not want!! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Macthorpe (960048) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @11:38AM (#28996089) Journal

    Unless the price comes down to 360 levels. It's not like the PS3 has an exclusive I particularly want anyway.

    • Re:Do not want!! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by krou (1027572) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @11:47AM (#28996133)
      The summary doesn't mention it, but there are signs that they may announce a price drop for the PS3 at GamesCom as well. For example, they've doubled PS3 production since the cost of making the PS3 has dropped some 70% since launch, while Amazon reduced the cost of one of the 160GB bundles by around US$50. Probably won't be anywhere near Xbox360 levels though.
      • Yeah, don't price drops often coincide with "slim" versions? My impression is the slim versions of these things are a result of improved manufacturing of the chips and such, which often (though I suppose not necessarily) means that they're able to produce equivalently powerful chips more cheaply.

        I'd be happy if they just made a flat-topped PS3, so I could stack other things on top of it.

        • If the past is any indication, the old fat models' prices will fall while the slim models take their place at the top of the hill. Once the fat models are wiped from the shelves, then the slim slowly drops down to the fat price level.
          • by Toonol (1057698)
            I think this is more likely. Isn't there still a massive backlog of unsold fat PS3s? If a slim model was announced that was cheaper, the millions of units of old inventory will never sell. I'm sure the slim version, if released, would be the premium model, even though it would cost less to manufacture.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by jandrese (485)
              Apparently Sony has been starving the supply chain for the PS3 for a month or so now in an effort to work through the old systems before announcing the new one. I'd also expect stores to offer deals on old fat PS3s "while supplies last" to get them out of the door.
    • Re:Do not want!! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Davemania (580154) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @11:50AM (#28996159) Journal
      Comparing the price of a base PS3 to XBox360 is quite frankly ridiculous. The extra features of the base machine offered is completely different, if you get the Xbox 360 with the addtional attachment cost included, comparing the cost would than be more realistic. I do think that the PS3 price need to come to but not necessarily down to 360's.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Macthorpe (960048)

        The difference I see is - I can buy a 360 without the additional attachments. With the PS3 I have no choice.

        Not sure why my original post is a troll though - I guess that it could offend someone, though I'm not sure who.

        • Re:Do not want!! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by dank zappingly (975064) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @01:53PM (#28997003)
          Yeah you can buy a 360 without the additional attachments, but if you do buy them, they are going to hose you with their proprietary hard drives and wireless adapters. If you end up spending $130 for a 120gb hard drive and $77 for a wireless adapter and the PS3 isn't really more expensive, plus you get free online play. I'm sure not everyone needs a blu ray player(well aware of the people who still insist that it barely looks better than a regular dvd), or wireless, and that xbox live is superior to PSN, but I think that for the average gamer there really isn't much of a price difference once you take everything into account.
          • by master811 (874700)

            Not everyone may need a blu-ray player, but a lot of games do - you'd never get anywhere near the amount of content MGS has for instance on 1 DVD.

        • by ravenshrike (808508) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @02:10PM (#28997105)
          You can buy a 360 without the additional attachments sure, but only if you like playing in the same room as a jet engine.
          • I have a PS3 from about 6 months after release - it is a jet engine too... I'm hoping the slim has some minor flaws that create a market for the original with the PS2 compatibility chips, I really want to get rid of the fan noise - my PS3 is used 40% to play music, 55% to play videos, 3% to mess around with Linux, and 2% to play games, the fan noise is seriously annoying when you want to turn the volume down to "ordinary" levels.
        • Re:Do not want!! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Dutch Gun (899105) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @03:06PM (#28997479)

          Not sure why my original post is a troll though - I guess that it could offend someone, though I'm not sure who.

          Because there's way too many gamers who, for whatever reason, seem to have tied their sense of self-worth to whichever gaming platform they've chosen. I've never understood that, and likely never will.

          Myself, I don't want a cheaper, slimmed down PS3. I want a deluxe mode. I would likely pick up a new console if Sony would create a new PS3 with full hardware PS2 support. Yes, I already have a PS2, but I would love to be able to get rid of it and just play on the newer system. Oddly enough, my PS2 is still getting more gameplay time than my PS3 (I currently have a 20GB model) as I plow through a lot of the great older PS2 titles I missed (some JRPGs, Tales games, Ico & Shadows of the Colossus, etc).

          It feels like Sony hasn't had a clear direction with their hardware for a long time. They keep changing models and reducing features (except HD space in later models). I guess this economy is more conducive to less expensive systems, so they felt they had to cost-reduce at the expense of features.

          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by JoeMerchant (803320)
            I'd like a deluxe edition PS3 too - one with 2GB of RAM, and maybe a little clock-speed boost in the cell management unit (that Linux runs on...)
          • by ShakaUVM (157947)

            >>Oddly enough, my PS2 is still getting more gameplay time than my PS3 (I currently have a 20GB model) as I plow through a lot of the great older PS2 titles I missed (some JRPGs, Tales games, Ico & Shadows of the Colossus, etc).

            Try playing Shadows of the Colossus on your PS3 (with software upscaling turned on), then try to play it on your PS2. It's rough. The PS3 actually added a lot of life to games like FF12, which were so horrible looking on the PS2 that I had trouble playing them. It's not a w

            • by Dutch Gun (899105)

              Try playing Shadows of the Colossus on your PS3 (with software upscaling turned on), then try to play it on your PS2. It's rough. The PS3 actually added a lot of life to games like FF12, which were so horrible looking on the PS2 that I had trouble playing them. It's not a whole lot better, but it does help.

              Now you're just being mean. You need to re-read my post. ;-) Believe me, I'd love to be able to play those games with software upscaling to take the rough edges off. I have a 20GB PS3, so playing PS2 games on my PS3 is impossible. Sony has completely abandoned even software compatibility in their newer models, so I'd have to buy an older model, which may not even be supported in the future.

              It's a little strange. You'd think the PS3 should be powerful enough to simply run a PS2 emulator of the Emotion c

        • Why are some of these features optional though? It made sense, in 1998 to make the hard drive optional. in 2001, it made sense to mandate the harddrive on the xbox. Why is it now suddenly an "option?"

          You can't even have a decent selection of XBLA games or *any* disc installs with out a hard drive even with the onboard Flash. So one of the major features of the machine is now moot with out forking up big bucks for an out dated, undersized hard drive that uses a proprietary enclosure to even operate with

      • by tzhuge (1031302)

        Saying it's ridiculous is ridiculous :p

        It's a perfectly valid comparison for price of entry (the only thing that matters to the vast majority of consumers). Also, this should be obvious, people buy products, and not feature lists.

      • people don't care, they see they can get an xbox360 for alot less than the ps3 they don't care that:
        ps3 can run normal software and browse internet, watch DVDs, etc
        ps3 on-line gaming is free
        ps3 controllers are bluetooth and can be used on computers
        ps3 has much better hardware
        ps3 games can contain much more content .'. better graphics
        about a million reasons that ps3 is technically better, all they see is xbox360 is cheaper+ everybody else has then+ more friends to play online against

        • I bought my PS3 for Final Fantasy XIII, Metal Gear Solid 4, and Disgaea 3. The fact that Iron Man looks fucking sweet on BluRay is a bonus.
          • This may be a little off-topic, but the reason my wife eventually caved and said we should buy a PS3 is BluRay. When we paid $400 for a PS3, most BluRay players were still $500+, and the PS3 was routinely rated the best BluRay player on the market. Add in wifi-fi, gaming, streaming my movies from my PC to my TV, etc. honestly I thought it was a bargain at $400.

            If you have a big TV, standard resolution looks pretty crappy. A good upscaled DVD looks nice, don't get me wrong. But good BluRay releases are unfai

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by gbarules2999 (1440265)
          Not really. They've both sold quite a bit (about 30 million 360's to 24 million PS3's), so it's not like EVERYONE is flocking to one console. you exaggerate.

          I for one will not buy an Xbox 360 because they continue to fail and fry themselves. I'll save up for PlayStation 3.
          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Enderandrew (866215)

            And I'm honestly curious out of the 30 million 360 sales, how many were replacements for broken units? Everyone I know that has a 360 has replaced their unit at least once.

            I replaced my PS3, but it wasn't a fault of the hardware. My daughter just filled the optical drive slot with pennies.

            • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

              by gbarules2999 (1440265)

              I replaced my PS3, but it wasn't a fault of the hardware. My daughter just filled the optical drive slot with pennies.

              Hilarious. Let me guess; she overheard you saying, "Damn, I wish I could see some change in this machine!"

          • by Toonol (1057698)
            If you're concerned about the United States, though, the discrepancy between the two consoles is much more exaggerated. Still, Sony's done a lot of catching up over the last year or 18 months; for a while after launch, it seemed like the PS3 would be an absolutely tragedy. It's managed to stay competitive and gain some ground.

            Of course, the Wii blows both away.
      • Comparing the price of a base PS3 to XBox360 is quite frankly ridiculous.

        Features or not, they're both gaming platforms of the current generation with most of the same games. It's not like we're comparing a gameboy original to an alienware computer.

        And we're talking about him wanting it or not. It's entirely up to him. If he didn't want it because it had a "P" in the name, that might sound ridiculous, but it's all the criteria he would need.

      • by Waccoon (1186667)

        Consumers only [i]care[/i] about base cost. They don't keep track of how much money they spend. Hence, free phones with outrageous texting costs.

        People can easily end up spending $500 on a Wii if they get a bunch of the optional accessories. None of these people will admit the PS3 is a better deal in any given case. Hell, how many people beat that horse about DVD not being necessary, because they can just buy a $40 player separately?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Guspaz (556486)

        It all depends on what you want. The basic 360 has half a gig of Flash, like the Wii. That may not be ideal if you want to download XBLA games or demos, but is probably sufficient for saves, patches, and a bit of DLC.

        The 360 doesn't have wireless, which can be a major problem if your console isn't near a network jack. But you may not need it if it's close enough to a router (my TV is next to my computer, so wireless would be overkill to get network connectivity 3 feet).

        The 360 doesn't have an HD-capable opt

    • Unless it has PS2 game emulation, I have no reason whatsoever to upgrade to it from my 60GB model. A 60GB model which Yellow lighted and had to be repaired so I could save my saves. I'm still using the danm thing despite the imminent risk of another YLOD due solely to the fact that it plays PS2 games with upscaling. I don't want to go back to using a regular PS2 if I can help it. The difference is truly is like night and day.

      If there's no PS2 backwards compatibility (and ffs PS1 game texture smoothing), I see no reason for prefering the model to the cheaper 80/160GBs.

      • by Ironsides (739422)
        I'm going to 2nd this one, except I'm not going to buy it for the first time unless they put the PS2 functionality back in. If I'm going to get a PS3, I want to replace my PS2 with it. I don't want to have to keep both around.
      • Being on my 5th 360 and still on my launch PS3 means that your situation might be considered anomalous, and since the hardware is built better than the 360's... I think your PS3 will last for quite some time. So don't worry too much.

        As for PS2 compatibility, I find myself simply using my PS2 (fat) rather than using PS3's upscaling (on everything except Pinball Hall of Fame... it looks GREAT smoothed). I don't know how the PS1 smoothing is on the newer models, though. I figure if the slim comes out soo
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Being on my 5th 360 and still on my launch PS3 means that your situation might be considered anomalous,

          The YLOD is an unfortunately common problem on the 60GB models apparently. Other models are more reliable. Unfortunately, the 60GB model was one of the last which supported backwards compatibility for PS2 titles. Yoy.

          I don't know how the PS1 smoothing is on the newer models, though.

          No PS3 has ever supported texture smoothing for PS1 titles. It has supported HD upscaling, but that's hardly the same thing.

          • Yes, losing is a big issue with the HDD in the PS3. But I keep my original 20GB HDD in a box so if mine ever dies, I'll remove my 120GB drive and replace it with the original for repairs. :) Not everyone will do that, of course... The GOOD thing in all of that is the PS3 isn't like the 360 in that the DLC isn't tied to the console... so you can re-download without much hassle. (Though MS did make that available recently after many complaints, it's still not perfect...) Being a 20GB owner, I didn't know
          • There's an option for texture smoothing in the XMB, what the PS3 doesn't have is the PS2's ability to fast-load PS1 games. Funny thing is, the PSP does have that ability.

            And you're quite correct that some later PS1 games really benefit from that texture smoothing, IIRC it was released in the US after the PS2 came out in the US.

          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by bmatt17 (1494941)
            What a load of misinformation. "When a PS3 or 360 goes belly up, sending it back for repair means losing your save date entirely." This is 100% false for 360 as you keep your harddrive, once the new console arrives, you stick your harddrive back on and that's it. I've sent mine back 4 times and have not once lost my save data. DRM on live purchases is another story, but they have since fixed that. PS3 I lost my save data the 1 time it broke. Although I think the harddrive got hosed when it died as I coul
    • Unless the price comes down to 360 levels. It's not like the PS3 has an exclusive I particularly want anyway.

      Besides, this is just going to be another one of Sony's stupid box things that doesn't fucking do the thing it's goddamn fucking supposed to. Most of Sony's products are motherfucking time vampires anyway and are completely ass backwards as fuck, even if they do have more megabytes and megapixels than all the TV shit that I already have.

      Yes, I shamelessly ripped off the ONN. [theonion.com]

    • $100 off (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Enderandrew (866215)

      You can get $100 off a PS3 by applying for the Playstation credit card. When I did it, they gave me $150 off the 80 GB model, but apparently that deal has since expired.

      http://www.sonyrewards.com/en/gateway/?offerlink=srnowps3 [sonyrewards.com]

    • Re:Do not want!! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nutshell42 (557890) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @02:44PM (#28997321) Journal
      I won't buy a 360 due to the way MS treats the PC. It's not so much that they no longer release anything for the PC (although it's funny that Sony seems to make more games for MS fucking Windows than MS), that's their right. It's the sheer hypocrisy. The way they tout their efforts to "enhance" PC gaming while even their head honchos admit that they want to kill it because they have more control over the 360 - not to mention that they get their cut of every game sold. (see here [shacknews.com])

      If you're a smug 360 owner and don't give a fsck about the PC then remember the fate of the original Xbox. Sony's keeping the PS2 around forever and they'll likely do the same with the PS3, you're still gonna get new games years after the PS4 launch. MS killed the Xbox immediatly after the 360 launch. Oh, they say it's gonna be different for the 360 because they don't have to pay intel and Nvidia etc etc, which brings us back to all the crap they spout about their support for PC games.

      • MS killed the Xbox immediatly after the 360 launch.

        No kidding. And it wasn't just the consoles, but peripherals as well. Xbox controllers vanished within a month from everywhere, and original MS ones are now almost impossible to get in a decent nick. There are 3rd party controllers, but they are much much worse.

      • by brkello (642429)
        I think the problem is your are mixing politics with your gaming decisions. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. But if you are really paying attention, you would know that you can come up with reasons to pretty much not buy anything. All companies have and are doing some pretty crappy things. If you ignore the politics, you can just have fun. I really like my 360 and the games I have played on it. What some execs say and do don't really matter as long as I am having fun.
    • You better look over the list of exclusives, and then try a few. Seriously, alot of them were completely amazing for the PS2, and I bet the exclusive list for the PS3 will be just as good. If it can play blu-rays as good or better than the old one, then i'll get it for a dual-purpose player.

  • What it would take (Score:5, Insightful)

    by snarfies (115214) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @01:22PM (#28996745) Homepage

    1) Bring back HARDWARE emulation of the PS2. Not the software version (which isn't even offered anymore).

    2) Drop the price.

    That is all. Do that and I'll buy. Seriously.

    • Seriously! I want to play the exclusives, like inFamous, Uncharted, Resistance, Killzone 2 and Ratchet and Clank. I really want a system. But $400 is way too much, no matter how many wonderful features are inside of it. I'll stick with my old PlayStation 2 until then.
    • by Enderandrew (866215) <enderandrew.gmail@com> on Saturday August 08, 2009 @01:51PM (#28996987) Homepage Journal

      There have been reports that the software emulaation works better, so I'm not sure we need the hardware emulation.

      A price drop is a must. However, what many people weren't aware of is that Sony was doing a deal if you applied for the Playstation credit card, you got $150 off a PS3. When I purchased my second PS3, I did it through that deal and paid $250 for a PS3, which is the same price as a Wii, for an 80 GB model. That was a pretty good deal.

    • by tepples (727027)

      Bring back HARDWARE emulation of the PS2.

      There is a $100 accessory that will add PlayStation 2 emulation to any PLAYSTATION 3 console.

    • by Kumiorava (95318)

      1) Bring back HARDWARE emulation of the PS2. Not the software version (which isn't even offered anymore).

      I haven't used my PS2 hardware emulation, I tried couple games and then sold my PS2 and all the games with it. PS3 games are just so much better than PS2 games, also I have no intention of buying any PS2 games. If I still liked PS2 games too, then I would have kept my PS2.

  • There have been people who have hacked debug/service modes on the console showing backwards compatibility tests on the current hardware. And there was a European version that had backwards compatibility via software emulation.

    Is there any good reason to disable this and keep it from consumers paying big bucks for the hardware?

    My daughter broke my first PS3, so I have purchased two of them. I like the hardware. I really do. But I feel Sony is holding out on me.

  • by Millennium (2451) on Saturday August 08, 2009 @02:50PM (#28997365) Homepage

    Even if the Slim materializes, I strongly believe that it will retail for the same price as the current PS3 (which may get a fire-sale price just to get rid of the things). Sony can't afford any other move with all the red ink they're bleeding; they need to start making money now, and a Slim can only provide them a profit if the cost savings from making it are not passed on to consumers.

    I also doubt there will be any BC. While it would provide the PS3 with a source of good games -its own predecessors- Sony's own arrogance will block the move. They've spent too much time arguing that people don't want to play older games anymore.

  • Because if there was one problem keeping me from buying my very own PS3 it was that it was too wide! The price of the console, price and choice of games, price of the accessories, and online play had nothing to do with it. Now that there will be a skinny one though, I'll rush out to buy two!!! Anything that takes up more than a quarter of a cubic foot of space in my living room is out of the question, but I must have anything that is smaller than its functionally identical predecessor. Sony FTW again!!!

It's later than you think, the joint Russian-American space mission has already begun.

Working...