Sony now 'considering' 80GB PS3
by Tony Carnevale 
{ Apr 16th 2007 at 1:56PM }
In a reversal of Sony's March assertion that they "don't have plans" to increase the PlayStation 3's hard drive size, Sony spokesman Satoshi Fukuoka now says the company is "considering" a version featuring a drive bigger than the 60GB existing model (and 20GB model that was discontinued in the USA five days ago). Does this mean a pending price drop for the 60GB PS3? Or will Sony blow our minds and bank accounts with a new $700 SKU?[Via Fragland]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Jack of No Trades @ Apr 16th 2007 2:00PM
Sony better fucking not do that! I just bought a PS3 three months ago
Konny @ Apr 16th 2007 2:04PM
At some point, it will simply make more sense to include an 80gn drive instead of a 60gn.. in the same way that you dont see 5gb HDD ipods anymore.
Nvr mind... bring on the xBots.
sheppy @ Apr 16th 2007 2:04PM
I think this is yet more evidence of a price drop.
jsn @ Apr 16th 2007 2:06PM
haha, boy did I call it right.. Does anyone really believe that Sony is going to dump a 60gb HD in favor of an 80gb model and NOT charge more? please.. they're losing their asses on the 60gb. I would be amazed if they didn't mark it more.. It would be so unlike Sony to not charge more.
So once again, where are the Sony fanboy losers who bashed MS for charging $80 more for an exponentially larger HD and HDMI w/ cable?
Aex @ Apr 16th 2007 2:07PM
I would die laughing if they introduced the 80gb HDD at a higher price point than the 60gb... DIE LAUGHING!
Stupidiot @ Apr 16th 2007 2:08PM
No doubt there will be people who will found something to whine about with this, like with the Xbox 360 Elite...
sracer @ Apr 16th 2007 2:08PM
Ah... that explains why they discontinued the 20GB model. They are going to include that drive in the 60GB model to make the 80GB. Crafty Sony...very crafty. :p
dsub @ Apr 16th 2007 2:08PM
My guess?
this fall, the 60 gig will fall to $500, and a new 200+ gig model will be unveiled for $600.
religiousjedi @ Apr 16th 2007 2:09PM
*thud*
Huge mistake if you do, Sony...
@Jack...gracias! :)
Ken @ Apr 16th 2007 2:10PM
As stated before, Sony is already losing money on their 60GB, why would they drop the price even more?
They'll make the 80GB, include a shitty Blu-Ray movie with it, and call it innovation*.
*Alright I made that last part up.
Tyler @ Apr 16th 2007 2:14PM
Xbox upgrade i can understand... but PS3? Comeon people... you could get the 20 gig model and stick a 250 gig HD in there if you wanted too
Zertoss @ Apr 16th 2007 2:15PM
My money's on the $700 SKU. 20GB = $100, right Microsoft?
El tonto @ Apr 16th 2007 2:15PM
My prediction for Fall 07:
60GB PS3: $500.00
80GB/w HDMI cable PS3: $600.00
Jason @ Apr 16th 2007 2:15PM
Are they adding something else to this 3rd SKU other than 20 extra GBs?? Please tell me, Sony, that you have something else to reveal with this product besides a moderate upgrade in HDD? The world is waiting for you to pull up from this nose-dive and regain control.
ShortFuse @ Apr 16th 2007 2:16PM
I think the xbox elite is better for the HDMI rather than the larger hard drive. My server has a 1TB of data storage and hooked up to my 42" 1080p over DVI so I won't be using the hard drive. I do care about the All Digital HD HDMI on the elite, as opposed to the analog Component, VGA and DVI-A HD on the other 360 consoles.
as for the 80gb news, let's just see what sony's going to do with 20gb more. maybe they're going to keep on SKU and just upgrade it to 80gb. 20gb isn't enough for a $100 difference
ShortFuse @ Apr 16th 2007 2:18PM
"As stated before, Sony is already losing money on their 60GB, why would they drop the price even more?"
Because they're losing even more money but people not buying them.
FOCUS ON GAMES NOT HARDWARE SONY! (unless... you're dropping the price, then okay)
samfish @ Apr 16th 2007 2:18PM
I'm sure a hard drive bump is inevitable (and it SHOULD be, for PS3, 360 AND Wii), but I don't see it leading to a price drop for the PS3 any time soon.
If Sony was losing so much money on the $500 version (about $250, I believe), why drop the $600 model- with all it's extra parts and features- down?
I could see Sony sucking up maybe a $50 dollar price drop, but no way in HELL are they dropping the $600 version by 100.
...especially if this new version is only going to be 80gb.
Jechtshot78 @ Apr 16th 2007 2:20PM
700? No. But I predict $600 80gb, and $500 60gb easy. It would definantly give Sony an edge (20 more bucks, you can get a Ps3 with blu ray, HDMI 1.3, wifi, and memory card readers)Assuming our Customer is looking at the Elite, that is.
Dansk @ Apr 16th 2007 2:23PM
Why do i want HDs in my PS3 again?
Seriously...i havent been following the next gen so much...
mushiking @ Apr 16th 2007 2:27PM
umm hello? why do they have been cutting production costs? they're trying to cushion the loss. of course a price drop is coming. it's just a matter of when.
Zertoss @ Apr 16th 2007 2:28PM
"700? No."
Why not? You could just get a 3rd job to pay for it. Maybe pawn off that engagement/wedding ring.
sheppy @ Apr 16th 2007 2:30PM
Who wants to bet this 80GB version may include the often rumored, often commented on, and never given a date TiVo like functions to the XMB?
"Why do i want HDs in my PS3 again?
Seriously...i havent been following the next gen so much..."
One of the main reasons I've discovered is installing games on the console dramatically reduces load times. Plus, I use mine not onlye as an mp3 jukebox for my living room but also an mpeg4 player.
Kye @ Apr 16th 2007 2:30PM
Company 1: Look how high up thi wall I can piss
Company 2: I can piss higher
Company 1: No you can't
Company 2: Yes I can
*pissing ensues*
Jack of No Trades @ Apr 16th 2007 2:32PM
80gb harddrive would be dumb. If they wanted to upgrade make it at least 120gb.
umm.....hello?? @ Apr 16th 2007 2:38PM
@20
what?! I haven't made a comment on this thread yet. = )
regarding sony's ps3 plans...I could care less, I have one already (60gig)...if I need more space, external HD's are fine, and I bought my HDMI cable online for about $15, which works great with my HDTV.
vidGuy @ Apr 16th 2007 2:37PM
Bumping to 80GB is such a small jump that I'd imagine it will be included in the regular sale version. If they bumped it to 120GB they may be able to squeeze another $50 out of consumers, but even that's pushing it given the cheap prices of hard disks.
Sony really needs to focus more on locking-in developers than their console's hardware. You could have a $1000 PS3 with twice the power of the 360 and it still wouldn't be a winner.
rfom @ Apr 16th 2007 2:41PM
Maybe Sony will just keep increasing hard disc sizes over time, as costs fall, with no change in price or other specs? Because the incremental cost is not much:
360's 20GB hard disc = USD43.
PS3's 60GB hard disc = USD54
Ryuukuro @ Apr 16th 2007 2:37PM
Whoever is in charge of the PlayStation unit, especially in regards to pricing, needs to be fired. These people are utterly incompetent, expecting that a larger hard drive will drive more people to buy a video game system they reject because it's too expensive. Sony is full of nonsense and incompetence.
h0mi @ Apr 16th 2007 2:38PM
Multiple SKUs on the 360 was a dumb idea because of the introduction of the core system that lacked a HD. On the ps3, all ps3s have HDs so the multiple SKus isn't so bad, but you've got to have something for the price differences. is 20 additional gigs really necessary? Is it worth $100? Not by itself.
If there was going to be a $500 ps3, Sony would've just bumped up the "basic" system to 60 gb, and bumped up the "premium" to 80gb instead of killing the basic entirely. And for good measure, they could've added the card reader/wifi as well to the "basic" system.
Neal @ Apr 16th 2007 2:43PM
I actually agree with Jack for once. 80 gig would be stupid.
Unless they did 80 gig with HDMI cable, and something else for 600, and the 60gb for 500, it would be silly to just add 20 GBs.
Chris Putnam @ Apr 16th 2007 2:43PM
A 20 gig difference really isn't enough to justify a second SKU. Maybe they're planning on replacing the 60 gig altogether, but that would be a big mistake - the focus right now desperately needs to be on dropping the price, not padding the features.
This might also be something they're planning for, say, a year from now, and it's not even worth talking about.
Personally, I really don't care about the PS3 HD size. Is everyone aware that you can replace your HD with any standard notebook-size drive? If the 20 gig model had been up to par in its other features, I would have been happy to snatch that up, wait a year, and replace the drive when I needed it with a cheap generic 200 gig model.
This is also why it's ridiculous for current owners to complain about Sony releasing an upgraded PS3, unless it has other new features besides the 80 gig drive (I'm looking at you, Jack of no Trades). You can upgrade your HD whenever you want, and probably for cheaper than Sony will charge. Allowing these upgrades is one of the really smart moves you don't often hear about that Sony made with the PS3 (and yes, there are a few).
RUSKULL @ Apr 16th 2007 2:44PM
it's already 60 gigs, how will another 20 make any real difference?
Triforceowner @ Apr 16th 2007 2:44PM
Pick a @#$%^&! SKU and stick with it!
Jack of No Trades @ Apr 16th 2007 2:46PM
The PS3 is just fine how it is.
Add rumble to the controllers & get the new games out then I will be happier.
Kye @ Apr 16th 2007 2:51PM
@ #13 Jason
Sony are going to add that thing, you know, that one thing they haven't included so far. You know! The umm... wireless-HD-expensive-blue-tech-... ummm...playerthatreadsyourmindthing. Just wait you see!
Seriously though.
Like I said about 2 years ago, MS and Sony are going at it tooth and nail like this is some kinda arms race. They are both after the same techno-savy (and demographically inferior)crowd. Meanwhile Nintendo are staying cheap and cheerful and pandering the the average Joe.
Allow me to use this analogy:
MS and Sony are like two huge Dinosaurs. Fast, powerful, but still power-hungry things. And both after the same hunting ground.
Meanwhile Nintendo is like the first mammals; Small, efficient, simple, knows better than to try and fight the big guys, and most of all it's thriving on small it's bits of meat.
We all know who survived the longest and came out on top*
*answer: The little guy.
James @ Apr 16th 2007 2:52PM
Sony already decided that 40 GB + Wi-fi + Memory card readers = $100 (20 GB vs. 60 GB models). There is no way in hell, I repeat, no way in hell they are even considering charging $700 just for the 80 GB hard drive. This is not Microsoft hard drive prices.
What's going to happen is that the 80 will replace the 60 and the 60 will simply go away. That's it. No multiple SKUs, no price drop, no price increase.
Kevin S. @ Apr 16th 2007 2:54PM
The only people who get pissed about these types of announcements are the ones who have already bought their system.
I love when people say "OOHH! Bad move Sony!" as if the people who already have a system are going to affect the sales of a new sku. Give me a break. Whatever Sony decides to do with this new sku, it's going to be for people who DON'T own the system already. They're not banking on 1 million existing PS3 owner's buying a second unit because it has a bigger hard drive. Early adoption sucks. When will people learn that?
Oh, and has anyone forgotten how easy/inexpensive it is to upgrade the PS3 hard drive? You can slap a 120GB HDD in there now and laugh at all the people who buy the 80GB when it comes out, if it makes you feel better.
Jack of No Trades @ Apr 16th 2007 2:56PM
Kye
I don't want Nintendo to come out on top. I want to be able to play Crackdown, MGS, FF, Gears, Halo, Mass Effect, Turok with "GOOD" graphics and "GOOD" AI.
If Nintendo wins we will be stuck playing the same ol Nintendo games with ok graphics. I want technology to be pushed to the maxed.
DBX00 @ Apr 16th 2007 2:58PM
120 - 160GB - $600
60GB - $500
Fall 2007 (right about the time Halo 3 comes out, maybe even the same day!!)
Jack of No Trades @ Apr 16th 2007 3:00PM
Kevin S.
Upgrading to a 120gb HDD would be cool as hell. Have you already done it?
Jonathan Tran @ Apr 16th 2007 3:00PM
An 80GB PS3 is just a 20GB and 60GB duct taped together.
OrganicShadow @ Apr 16th 2007 3:02PM
Sony will give Japan by the end of the year to snatch up any remaining 20gb units, and then cease production there, as well as in all other regions too. The cost reduction of a single SKU alone is too vital to getting close to profitability, seeing as they lose more money on each 20gb than the 60gb.
Plus I think a lot of people would rather it just be "PS3" instead of two different versions. Then again, streamlining the process into one unified product might actually slow production down to a ridiculously embarrassing drip, ala Wii style... ;)
Rob @ Apr 16th 2007 3:05PM
Microsoft: "Let's make things more expensive and not better the product."
Sony: "WOAH. Look at Microsoft. Let's go play with them. UP THE PRICE.
Nintendo: "What the F**K are those two halfshells doing? Time to ramp up production even more.
Vidikron @ Apr 16th 2007 3:05PM
This just seems totally pointless if there is no other differences between the 80 and 60 GB version. PS3 owners can already upgrade their HDDs at any time... no need to wait for an official upgrade like you have to with the 360. I don't really think it's a 'mistake'... just pointless.
Arlen @ Apr 16th 2007 3:09PM
Can we PLEASE stop using the term "SKU?"
blowstiq @ Apr 16th 2007 3:09PM
Christ almighty. What is it about Joystiq posters, that they can't resist the temptation to deliberately mis-characterize every single statment that someone from Sony makes?
While they have submitted certain paperwork which would be required by the FCC in advance of any change to the PS3, that did not irrevocably commit them to introducing the modified product. Therefore, if they stated that they had no definitive plans to do so, there's no reason not to take that at face value.
Likewise, now that they've issued a statement saying that they're "considering" doing so, that does not in any way conflict with previously having no concrete plans to do so.
Yet, Tony Carnevale characterizes this as a "reversal", and Sony Attack Squadron Alpha assembles to dance with giddy glee. Tony: you're not really Blake Snow, are you? This is the sort of thing he delighted in doing regularly, but we haven't heard much from him lately.
Dolla Dolla @ Apr 16th 2007 3:08PM
Jonathan Tran comment wins.
@Jack
You do realize that the NES and SNES won their respective console wars, and the systems just got stronger and better, right? If (read: when) the Wii wins, Nintendo's Blue Ocean Strategy will have come to fruition.
Nintendo: "Sony and Microsoft, you are allowed to have the hardcore niche market. We'll just be fun and cheap."
Unfortunately, the hardcore market will probably only sustain one of the HD systems.
And if you ask me, Sony is more concerned with making Blu-ray the next "DVD" rather than winning the console war.
Arturo @ Apr 16th 2007 3:13PM
@Arlen:
SKU SKU SKU SKU SKU!! SKUS for everyone yayyy! XD
Kye @ Apr 16th 2007 3:12PM
Jack #38
As much as I admire Nintendo, and would like to see them lead this generation, I would HATE it if the other two manufacturers dropped out.
It's no secret I think Playstation is ran by Beelzebub himself, but I do NOT want them to die.
Or Microsoft.
We need them. We need innovation, variety and choice. We need crazy ideas. All of these things come better when there's competition.
As much as I love Zelda and Smash bros. etc I don't want to play these games forever. I love and want to play Halo and Ridge Racer as well. Don't see my post as me hoping the other two guys die out. Just see it as my humble opinion of what could happen if this power/definition/storage space - race doesn't end.
Kevin S. @ Apr 16th 2007 3:16PM
@ Jack of No Trades:
I have not done it myself yet, but a coworker of mine has done it, and he said it's extremely easy. The PS3 has utilities in place to back up your saved data and format a new hard drive.
He got a 2.5" 120GB HDD off newegg.com for around $70.