Rumor: 40GB PS3 shows up in UPC database [update]

I don't know, I bought a new PC to play Counter-strike and Heroes of Might and Magic 3, then I bought a new PC to play Heroes of Might and Magic 4 and CS1.6, then I bought a new PC for Heroes 5 and Counter-strike Source.

funny thing is I think it was worth it every time.

this doesnt count since it's a PC, but it would be worth it for me to have bought my PC just for Civilization IV, the only game I have installed (besides solitaire etc that come with it). I've probably logged like 400 hours on that game, so even though my PC cost like 1500, it works out okay per hour of entertainment. plus i get to use the internet too!

In response to what jsn posted at the top.

The PS3 is basically the Overton Window of sales. It starts off on the insanely unreasonable pricing end and when it moves to just completely unreasonable price territory, people think they're getting a deal.

Kinda like how $2.75 doesn't seem so bad for a gallon of gas nowadays, too.

The value of the USD has fallen to the point that even the Canadians have caught up. :P

$400-450 USD is affordable to me for a game console that will also occasionally be used to play HD movies.

"The value of the USD has fallen to the point that even the Canadians have caught up. :P"

Exactly.

$400 for a video game console today is a bargain considering what today's USD would have got you just a decade ago.

"$400 for a video game console today is a bargain considering what today's USD would have got you just a decade ago."

What cost $400.00 in 1996 would cost $511.91 in 2006. Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2006 and 1996, they would cost you $400.00 and $312.56 respectively.

What cost $600.00 in 1996 would cost $767.86 in 2006.
Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2006 and 1996, they would cost you $600.00 and $468.83 respectively.

What cost $200.00 in 1996 would cost $255.95 in 2006.
Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2006 and 1996, they would cost you $200.00 and $156.28 respectively.

"Anyone that says they wouldn't buy a PS3 at $400 or $300 is just making a knee-jerk emotional and irational response based on their missplaced fear of having made the wrong choice."

No, we're making a very reasonable response to the fact that they are selling a TOY with few compelling software products for more than any comparable toy for the last 20 years.

What you have is a knee-jerk fanboy reaction to our reasonable position of wanting to spend as little money on a luxury as possible.

What world are you in where the Wii has more games coming out than the PS3? Please don't respond with a bullet-point list of Galaxies, Metroid, Smash Brothers... I'm only trying to point out that the Wii is in the same boat as the PS3: Not enough games.

Could you please refrain from sounding like a fucking advert in the future? It's annoying and makes you seem completely brainwashed.

"This holiday season". Jesus christ.

Worst.

Fanboy.

Ever.

Home got pushed back to Q1 2008, last I heard. I know it at least got delayed significantly.

Man you are even pissing me off now.

Seriously. We all know what you get with the PS3. As a matter of fact, we probably all know it better than you do.

360 is just a better console for gaming. If you want a movie player, by all means, get a PS3.

Crono calling any console "better for gaming" is futile since people will choose the console that has the exclusives they want.

Except when price is involved, and we're talking about the overall state of gaming as opposed to the act of playing video games.

The Xbox 360 is better for the overall state of gaming (price, selection, features) than the PS3 is. Period.

"Except when price is involved"
A Wii costs 270 € here(around $380). People still buy it a lot.

"The Xbox 360 is better for the overall state of gaming (price, selection, features) than the PS3 is. Period."
True that currently, but it also had few years lead. Prices can change, selections widen and features upgraded.

That is just my view though.

Ok, I'm officially requesting that you envoke ban-hammer on this guy.

Can I get this seconded?

You just don't get it. Sony included the hard drive in the system from the get go. If they took it out at a lower price they would be accused for gimping the console for a critical feature. Secondly all of the developers know that they can use the hard drive for extra content, because everyone has a hard drive in their system. Microsoft's console does not have a hard drive in every one So the developers have to develop to the lowest common denominator X box 360 Core, not premium, and not the elite, the core. If they did not then you would have an outcry from those people who spent the 299 for their system and dont have the hard drive. All extra content for the popular games is done as an after thought.

This is also why the PS3 can get just online only multi-player games because developers know every one has the hard drive in their system.

Let me ask you one thing how would you do game saves or how would you get in game music or pictures for your background?
Let me guess if you don't have a card reader...... i think you need to have a hard drive.
My my that is brilliant! Give the guy who thought that up a bonus and a company car.

Oh screw the whole Hard drive sizes. If im not mistaken, i think that the 360 has 3 different hard drive sizes to choose from. So your whole hard drive argument goes out the window.

Secondly in order to use X box live to any usable extent you have to have ..... wait a minute it is coming to me.... A HARD DRIVE, how brilliant of Microsoft for actually having the fore thought to have that piece of tech to use the online function to its true extent. Same goes for downloading pictures and videos and game demos and trailers.

There would be no criticism over the whole hard drives thing if Microsoft just had hard drives in all their systems from the get go. They did with the original Xbox but for some reason they didn't with the 360.

One more thing if you don't like the hard drive that is in a ps3, go and get any 2.5 SATA laptop hard drive and stick it in there, or a usb external hard drive. In order to change a 360 hard drive you can one buy Microsoft's proprietary hard drive which is limited at 120 GB or plug in a usb external hard drive.

Like it or not game consoles will be more computer like going forward to the point that the lines will eventually get blurred.

Sorry for the rant!

Whine whine whine.

"not only do i get the fun gameplay these games will offer, but i get the pretty graphics too! the best of both worlds! also, note the new IPs in that list. not too many 20 year old franchises, old school game releases,"

You act like this is somehow a bad thing?
Honestly, for someone who,

"the truth is, there's more to play on it for a gamer like me, who's been playing video games since 1985 on the NES and Atari, than there is on the Wii."

I would think you would appreciate and enjoy those series which you imply are old and, thus, boring.

As for me? I've also been playing games since the Atari days and guess what?! There's not a SINGLE FUCKING GAME ON THE PS3 I WOULD BUY! I'm VAGUELY interested in Ninja Gaiden Sigma, but it's just a remake, so why bother?

You're targeting the wrong console Figboy. The reason to own the wii is motion and pointer controls and upcoming games like mario galaxy and smash brothers brawl. Nobody says you can't have both a Wii and a PS3, and you'll get totally unique experiences out of each.

What you need to be argueing is why the PS3 is so much better (150-200 dollars worth) than the 360. Before you begin, let me help you: it isn't.

You can get the exact same experience on the 360 as you do on the PS3 for cheaper. That has been and always shall be the PS3's biggest downfall. It has competent competition with a leg up on its market.

samfish: that's exactly the point: *BECAUSE i've been playing games since 1985, i'm not interested in what the Wii is offering! i've had my fill of Mario and his pals (though i still love the Zelda series, and Metroid Prime has always been a blast), but outside of, once again, Nintendo franchises, there *AREN'T many other games that do it for me.

you see how you can't find any game outside of Ninja Gaiden Sigma that interests you on the PS3? i can't find anything outside of Smash Bros that i'd play on the Wii, and Smash Bros isn't even using the functionality that makes the Wii so unique in the first place (the Wii Remote), so *WHY couldn't Smash Bros have been released on my Gamecube? tell me, what is Smash Bros, the one game that i'm really excited about for the Wii, doing on the Wii that *COULDN'T have been done on the Gamecube?

"motion con-- oh, wait, it's not supporting that."

to Crono: as for why i think the PS3 is worth picking up over the 360 (and believe me, for me personally, it was), here you go:

i own an HDTV. i like HD gaming and movies. the Playstation 3 comes with a built in Blu Ray drive, so i don't have to worry about buying an add-on, or buying a separate player all together, which would have, ultimately, cost me more money in the end.

not only that, but it has a lot of features that me and my fiance find very useful.

i *LIKE the fact that it surfs the internet.

i *LIKE the fact that it's compatible with practically *ANY USB device, like mice and keyboards, and external HDDs (my fiance's 80gig HDD is hooked up to it right now, actually).

i *LIKE the fact that it's compatible with *ANY 2.5" SATA HDD, so if/when the 60gig HDD isn't enough, i can swap it out for a larger one, without having to pay a premium for it (the 360 120gig HDD is $180. for less than that, i can get a 200gig HDD or more from newegg)

i *LIKE the fact that it has a built in Wi Fi adaptor. in my house, amongst myself, my fiance, and our two roommates, we have 2 Playstation 3's, 1 360, 1 Playstation 2, 2 X Boxes, 4 computers, and 3 PSP's. the fact that the PS3's have a wireless connection has been a godsend for us, as it saves us room on our routers and hubs.

i *LIKE the fact that online gaming is free. i'm not a huge online gamer, as the sound of screecher teenagers telling me to "suck their balls," and calling me a "noob" is akin to having someone drag their nails across a chalkboard, however i *DO enjoy Warhawk (a *LOT), and it's converted me a bit, but overall, i rarely play online. as a result, i don't feel the need to pay for an online gaming service. even at $50 a year, i don't play online enough to even warrant *THAT. hell, $50 is practically a *GAME. so, i should forgo *ONE gaming purchase a year, just so i can play Warhawk once a week? or Resistance? no thanks. thankfully, i don't have that concern for now, and i can get my Warhawk and Resistance on, *AND NOT give up a game purchase for the year.

and the most important reason why i chose a Playstation 3 over a 360, despite the price difference, is that i *LIKE Sony's first and second party games.

despite popular concensus, i enjoyed Lair (is it worth $60? of *COURSE NOT, but in truth, i don't think *ANY game this generation is worth $60. we've been bamboozled into thinking we should pay $60. the $50 price tag has stood for over 20 years, and games weren't even *WORTH $50 back in the day). i *LOVE Heavenly Sword. Uncharted looks awesome. i *LOVE the Ratchet and Clank series.

here's some other games not coming to the 360 that i can only get on the Playstation 3

Folklore
Sly Cooper (we know it's coming)
Team Ico's games (they're making not only 1, but *TWO games, and Ico and Shadow of the Colossus are two of my favorite games ever)
God of War 3 (as obvious as it is that that *OTHER GoW game is getting a sequel, GOW3 is an inevitability)
White Knight Story (looking great)
Final Fantasy XIII*
Metal Gear Solid 4*
Infamous (made by the Sly Cooper guys, so i'm confident in this title)
Jak PS3 (Naughty Dog has said that they'll go back to Jak, but needed a break, hence, Uncharted)
Rogue Galaxy 2 (Level 5 said that if RG sold well, they'd work on a sequel. RG sold *VERY well)

* - 3rd party, thus subject to going to other consoles at some point.

and those are just the ones i can think of off the top of my head.

i'm not saying you *ONLY have to own a Wii or 360, or Playstation 3. what i was saying is that the Playstation 3 is getting unfairly bashed for "having no games," when, in truth, it has some good shit to play, and for those that *DON'T own a 360 (ie, myself for now), there *IS product out there to enjoy.

it seems to be a popular assumption across the net that *EVERYONE who's a gamer owns an X Box 360. some of us have waited. either for games, or for more reliable hardware. for me, it's *BOTH. i've *PLAYED Gears of War, and nearly every worthwhile game released on the 360 so far.

Gears isn't for me, to be honest. and i *TRIED to enjoy it, but i couldn't get into it. i'm also not a Halo fan. i loved the first Halo, but lost interest after playing the 2nd, and since i have no interest in the story, the third doesn't appeal to me either, despite it's improvements.

Bioshock is *AWESOME.
Mass Effect is going to rock.
Alan Wake has me intrigued.

and that's it. there aren't any other 360 exclusives that have my attention.

Eternal Sonata is coming to the PS3.
Devil May Cry? PS3 too.
GTA4? yup, ditto.

as a sole Playstation 3 owner, i'm covered as far as multi-platform games go. and i get the cool Sony franchises.

sure, i miss out on gems like Bioshock and Mass Effect, but it's only for a little bit, as i *WILL get a 360 eventually, but for now, the PS3 suits *MY OWN PERSONAL TASTES.

*YOU think the $500-$600 price tag for the PS3 is too much, based off of your own personal tastes as a gamer. there is no wrong answer or choice when personal preference is involved.

like i stated in my first post, what upsets me, is when people try to pass of personal taste as universal opinion, such as "the PS3/PSP has no games," or even "the 360 is nothing but a shooter console." both are flat out untrue, and we *KNOW THIS, which is why it pisses me off when people ignorantly spout off such mistruths as gospel.