PS3 capacity boost claims are claptrap, says Sony UK
No more storage for you
Sony has dealt a blow to any storage-hungry PlayStation 3 gamers by officially denying that it’s planning to introduce either a 120GB or a 160GB version of the console into the UK.
European PS3s aren't getting more storage capacity now - or tomorrow
This week, rumours have been flying around that the company’s due to phase out production of its 80GB PS3 in the US to replace it with either a 120GB or a 160GB model for the same price. UK gamers hope that the sale of a larger capacity PS3 in the US would be mirrored in over here.
Well, no it won't. A spokeswoman at Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) today told Register Hardware that it “has no plans to bring either a 120GB or a 160GB PS3 into the UK”.
It's been suggested that the higher capacity hard drive might appear alongside the anticipated PS3 TV tuner, the PlayTV, which Sony announced in August 2007 ahead of the product's scheduled "early 2008" launch. PlayTV contains two tuners to allow the PS3 to operate as a full digital video recorder (DVR).
In a double blow, the SCEE spokeswoman also denied that any larger capacity machine will include a DualShock 3 controller, as also rumoured yesterday. She instead stuck to her guns and reiterated Sony’s 2007 speech that the rumble-enabled controller will appear in the UK and US at some point during 2008.
lowly english scum
sony has always treated the usa with kid gloves as if the sun shines out of their **** in stead of them just talking out of it, lol.
your a fool if you think that sony would give you something for nothing, like the other reviews say if you want a bigger hd fit it your self. the ps3 is ok for playing blueray disks but a second rate for games, no vibration and on most games only 720 res instead of 1080p on the 360.
As others have said, they'll do it if they've absolutely denied it. Sony tend to ignore rumours when they are about things NOT in planning and deny those that they are actually doing. There are lies, damned lies, statistics, and Sony statements so it seems.
That may be true.
But what about all the games that don't come out for the PC?
What about say in 2 - 3 years time when PS3 programmers are streamlining their games to take full advantage of it's capabilities. By that time new games coming out for the PC will require the latest £450 graphics card to run with all guns blazing, will have been optimized for however many cores is then standard, rather than single or dual core etc etc etc.
Last year, not including my monitor I spent £1400 on a PC. I still had to spend ages tweaking certain games (oblivion, FSX) in order to get them playing smoothly. I pretty much assume that spending £1400 should give me around 3 years of relatively grief free gaming (no upgrades needed to play at decent settings). I fully expect to have to do a major upgrade at that point (i know, it's a lot of dosh, but it's my hobby :) .
Given the choice of spending £700 and £1400 I would take £700 every time. But playing games maxed out on my nice 24" monitor at 1900x1200 I need a top notch graphics card.
On the other hand, my £299 PS3 on the same monitor at 1080p looks superb.
Not forgetting I can also run a load of other software on it, such as loading Linux etc