[Official] $400 40GB PS3 To Be Released on November 2nd, $100 Price Cut for 80GB PS3

Depends on what games you like. For example, R&C is coming out soon, and it will probably be one of the better next-gen platformers available (or just one of the best games period).

Of course, as bladeage mentioned, UT3 and Uncharted should be released during that time period as well; Uncharted has started to look really good lately (not that it looked bad before):

As Mr Boo said, the higher compatibility percentage of the 60GB PS3 does make it an attractive option for some people. Of course, it is being discontinued, so it isn't like Sony is trying to place it in a position where it might be a more attractive option compared to the 80GB PS3. They did this after announcing the 80GB PS3, but just to get some of the 60GB PS3s off of store shelves.

No, that's pretty much right. If you want to be technical about it, the 80GB PS3 actually uses a combination of software and hardware emulation (PS2's Emotion Engine is emulated by Cell, the GS and RAM from the PS2 is still there though). PS1 games are emulated purely by software (no PS1 hardware). I'd imagine that eventually the 40GB PS3 (along with others) will use 100% software emulation as well.

He was probably referring to the fact that UT3 would be a PS3 title to look forward to during that timespan (UT3 for 360 won't be out until much later I suppose). That, or the fact that the 360 version might be gimped in some aspects, although it seems like Epic will try their best.

Wouldn't really put much stock into what he says. I think he gave some BS reason for Sony announcing the 80GB PS3. Of course, that's what he's suppose to do, although I wish he'd do a better job of it. I still think everyone at SCEI except for Phil Harrison or possibly Kaz Hirai should just not comment on these things; most of the time, they do more harm than good.

I wonder if Sony of Japan makes most of these decisions regarding hardware, and then they just leave the PR guys to come up with a reason for explaining it, w/o really giving them the facts as to why they're doing it.

Yeah, I suppose that's true. It seems like very few companies can keep up with Intel (and still profit), so I guess it may not be as bad as it seems. Still, I think this has always been a nice advantage for Sony, and I wonder how much it will affect them in the future.

As ymc said, they're not the same, but firmware updates help keep the 80GB BC with most PS2 games. I don't recall the exact number, but I think it was somewhere around 80%-85% last time I checked (compared to 98% for the 60GB PS3).

Yes.

That's a 3 character answer.

Sorry, but I can't really make that decision for you. I obviously went with the system that made sense to me, but I'm not going to act like it will also make sense for everyone. The only way I'd even attempt to really suggest one for you is if you gave me more info on what you wanted (very detailed as well). I know you said some things in the other thread, but I don't think I can really help you based on your hatred of Microsoft and your love of 360 games.

I'm sure they'll add it again at some point. They'll want to come up with a software solution to PS2 BC at some point (don't want to keep including PS2 hardware in PS3s, even if it is somewhat cheap), and I don't see why they wouldn't enable it for the 40GB PS3 (or other SKUs that end up with no BC with PS2 games).

 

That won't necessarily be the case. The PS3 and PSP both use software emulation to playback PS1 games, and a very high % of those games work (AFAIK anyway). Microsoft has the challenge of trying to emulate hardware they didn't design, and I don't think they were getting much help from the original designers either (Nvidia and Intel...mostly Nvidia though IIRC). Sony designed all the hardware themselves, so they probably have a better understanding on how to emulate it.

Of course, that's not to say Sony won't have any problems with PS2 software emulation. The PS2 hardware is pretty weird, particularly the GPU, so it will be hard to emulate 100%. IIRC, I think the Graphics Synthesizer can do some things that even modern GPUs can't, which obviously would make it hard for a modern GPU to emulate.

 

I don't know where pure software BC stands on the list of things to focus on at Sony. At this point, I think I'd agree that it would probably be better to focus on new features, especially depending on what those features are. In-game XMB, trophies, media streaming, Home features, etc., are all nice things that I wouldn't mind Sony working on instead of software emulation.

But I think there is (and should) be a strong desire to get software emulation working, at least at an acceptable rate. Even if the PS2 hardware didn't cost much, it is still a unnecessary cost that is multiplied by however many systems they make. Don't know what it costs to have a team of engineers and software developers working on this, but I doubt it would cost more to do this than include the hardware in the PS3 (at least the ones that do have it).

Then there is the whole idea of pushing PS2 downloads (like PS1 downloads), which can't really be done if a large number of PS3s can't even play PS2 games (might be more of a PS4 thing, although they'd still have to get software emulation working). Hmm...and if PSP2 uses a variation of the Cell architecture (and uses a Nvidia GPU?), they can probably use a lot of the same techniques to enable PS2 playback on it as they do on the PS3 (and future PS platforms for that matter). Assuming they want to do that of course.

Of course, I suppose Sony could just say screw you to all the people who buy 40GB PS3s, even if they do get software emulation working (you have to pay extra to "unlock" it, or something like that).