US and European PS3 rumors set straight
By Jeannie Choe 
posted Mar 15th 2007 8:19PM
posted Mar 15th 2007 8:19PM
Just in case you hadn't already caught wind, our pals over at Joystiq shed some light on Europe's backwards compatibility crux and the 20GB PS3 "shortage" here in the States -- two bubbles of drama that have now been popped by Dave Karraker, Senior Director of Communications at SCEA. Let's start with the Engadget readers' of the woods: screw you Sony, for holding out on those 20GBs, right? Karraker deflates that accusation, pointing the finger at retailers who have requested more 60GB stock -- averaging at 80 percent 60GB and 20 percent 20GB, to be exact. And you can't really argue with that, can you? Now let's hop across the ocean where PS3s will make their (fashionably?) late first appearance in Europe come next Friday. Despite all the setbacks, backwards compatibility might not be a disaster after all. Karraker says that Euro PS3s just need a launch firmware upgrade, which will arrive on March 23rd, along with a legit compatibility list -- essentially what we thought would be the case. Simple as that (we hope).
Good job Engadget!
you were able to make an entire post about Sony without dissing them in any manner.
See if we can't get you to Lowest Ranked. =)
More attacks on Sony, it's a shame they keep deserving it, I can't say as though I've seen a more disastrous string of events for a console, makes you wonder when things are going to pick up.
If they update the compatibility as frequently as the Xbox360 one, then screw them. I still have a bunch of xbox games that are "incompatible" more than a year after they're released. They just don't care after you bought the system.
Not to defend sony, but why is it such a big deal if you can play old games? I know I didn't buy my Xbox 360 to play Halo, and I wouldn't buy a playstation 3 to play playstation 2 games. If it plays them, so much the better, but I think most people spend big money on next gen consoles to play next gen games, not the same old ones.
It's a bigger deal for Sony because the PS1/PS2 library is pretty large (and the PS2 library is even more extensive for Europe [2500] and Japan [4000]). Although, I do wish the 360 had more BC too...
There were some 20GB PS3s on Bestbuy.com last week. Was sold out relatively quick, but they are there if you look for them.
so if i run out to circuit city now, would the 20gb version have the "emotion" chip for backward compatibility??? all new shipment of ps3 lacks this chip? so they are working on software emulation?
it is a big deal for a lot of people cause its less clutter. especially for me in the dorm!
its the EURO ps3s that are lacking this chip, because they want to cut costs. The console is already over the 500 mark for the 20 gig, and the 600 dollar price point for the 60 gig (after exchange rates). They're selling the system w/out it so they dont have to raise the price even more. ONLY euro.
Does someone know what's the price of 20GB PS3s?
http://www.igolg.com
The 60GB PS3 will retail for about USD880/EUR670 (TAX incl) in Sweden, probably more in other places. I don't see how they cut any costs. :(
ok...picture the prices you just mentioned. then imagine if the sony added a chip that allowed all the older games to be "100%" compatible. it would probably boot the price up. so imagine this increased price price w/ the "100%" compatible chip i menaetioned...but then they somehow wanted to find a way to lower the cost a bit...voila, remove the chip. back to right where we left off...
Personally, I don't care about any of this, any updates on supply, updates on firmware, retailers ordering what, prices too high, JUST RELEASE SOME GOD DAMN GAMES FOR IT!!
Why we need compatibility. Anyhow I look at PlayStation now, PS2 is best offer of all: cheap (130€ for bundle with game), new games are released every week and overall are cheap (~25-35€).
Add here HDMI/upscaling problems of PS3, I do not see how it can out-compete PS2. Honestly I think Sony would drop PS2 soon. (Probably would pick one now - to save problem eBay'ing it later.)
PS2: cheap, many cheap games, compatible problem-free with any junk TV out there.
PS3: expensive, few expensive games worth buying, compatibility with TVs is poor.
[ Putting all the Wiimote hype aside, I think PS2 is even better offer than Wii. And that's me - owner of Wii - telling that. ]
What I'm missing from Sony's business plan for PS3?
> Honestly I think Sony would drop PS2 soon.
PS2 is still making huge profits for Sony, even on the hardware side. It doesn't make business sense to ditch the PS2. XBox and Gamecube -- those are different stories. XBox hardware is a money loser for MS; 3rd party devs have practically abandoned GC. That's why these other two previous gen consoles are basically dead by now.
> What I'm missing from Sony's business plan for PS3?
For PS2, Sony gets royalty for each PS2-based media (same business model for MS and Nintendo). DVD technology was not championed by Sony, so they don't get as much (if any) royalty as, say, CDs (which Sony co-developed with Philips). The success of Blu-ray means financial windfall for Sony in the coming years. For every PS3 game *and* every Blu-ray based movie, Sony gets royalty fee (as with other members in BDA).
That is not to say that Blu-ray is being forced on PS3 gamers (although most will contest -- I bet nobody will complain with the PS3's use of Blu-ray if the PS3 is priced just like the 360). No Playstation console ever used the same storage technology - every PS console uses the latest technology in both processor and storage. This is the same reason why the 360 was labeled as XBox 1.5 -- MS opted to use storage media that is approaching its end of life.