Router functions dropped from PS3 spec

[rm19]

gi.biz - Router functions dropped from PS3 spec

The router function was deemed too expensive. So now no router and no HDD. Looks like reality is slowly eroding Sony's E3 paper hype.

 

[HHunt]

It kind of looks like they're planning to use ethernet like others use USB. Strange, but with interesting possibilities.

 

[IceWindus]

Would you like some cheese to go with that whine?

 

[ryanrule]

not really sure why it was in there to begin with

 

[rm19]

not really sure why it was in there to begin with

I thought it would have been a cool feature to be able to network a few PS3s together with no additional hardware. With my Xbox I have a five port switch that adds a bit more hassle with its power block.

 

[Terpfen]

So now no router and no HDD. Looks like reality is slowly eroding Sony's E3 paper hype.

The HDD was never going to be included in the first place, because the idea is to let the user pick whichever size s/he wants. Look for the PS3 to sell as a bundle: you buy the console, you buy the slot-loading HDD, but you get to pick which size HDD you want. I like that idea, instead of buying a console with an included HDD, which may or may not be large enough for all the stuff I want to put on there.

As for the router functions being tossed out, this is good too. It means the PS3 will cost less. Most people with broadband--and therefore most people who will play games online--already have a router. I don't see what the big deal about losing this functionality is.

Looks like reality is slowly eroding anti-Sony fan-boys' paper hype.

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

The HDD was never going to be included in the first place, because the idea is to let the user pick whichever size s/he wants. Look for the PS3 to sell as a bundle: you buy the console, you buy the slot-loading HDD, but you get to pick which size HDD you want. I like that idea, instead of buying a console with an included HDD, which may or may not be large enough for all the stuff I want to put on there.

As for the router functions being tossed out, this is good too. It means the PS3 will cost less. Most people with broadband--and therefore most people who will play games online--already have a router. I don't see what the big deal about losing this functionality is.

Looks like reality is slowly eroding anti-Sony fan-boys' paper hype.

ok so ps3 already being $400 you wanna add a $100 harddrive to that as well?have fun i hope your rich

 

[Tiny]

They are looking to dump the gigabit nic too. Sticking with the 10/100 standard.

I don't understand the "eroding anti-Sony !!!!!!" comment.

I don't see how dropping features and no concurrent drop in rumored price is a good thing.

 

[Techx]

Would you like some cheese to go with that whine?

wow, and thats so original too!

 

[eastvillager]

Good, all i want is a game console.

Acme can sell the version with all the unneeded features to the coyote.

Oh and gig-ethernet on a console makes as much sense as z-rated tires on an amc pacer.

You do it for bragging rights, or you do it because commodity pricing for gigabit controllers isn't significantly higher than 10/100mb controllers. I don't think were quite there yet, so this one bullet point on the ps3 marketing chart was probably a fairly expensive proposition.

Expect the E3 specs for all consoles to be reduced by the time they hit market. Nintendo is about the only one who doesn't qualify---and that is because they didn't give out any real specs.

 

[ryanrule]

Good, all i want is a game console.

[cough]revolution[/cough]

 

[eastvillager]

[cough]revolution[/cough]

I'll be getting one of those, no doubt in my mind. I have all 3 of this generation(well, I don't have a dreamcast).

I don't think I'll do that next generation. Looking at my game library, there was no reason whatsoever for me to have gotten an x-box. Everything I really enjoyed on that was a port, or later ported to pc.

Probably just revolution and ps3 for me, this time around.

 

[rm19]

I don't understand the "eroding anti-Sony !!!!!!" comment.

I'm not anti-Sony as I'm totally getting a PS3. I just hope they retain as many of the features as possible that they announced at E3 by the time launches.

 

[Tiny]

Expect the E3 specs for all consoles to be reduced by the time they hit market. Nintendo is about the only one who doesn't qualify---and that is because they didn't give out any real specs.

So far Sony is the only one to drop something from the specs. Unless you count the rumored "spec" of the Xbox360 having support for Xbox controllers.

 

[S1nF1xx]

They had it setup to be a router? That makes as much sense as putting a blender in it. Leave it to Sony though.

 

[rm19]

They had it setup to be a router? That makes as much sense as putting a blender in it. Leave it to Sony though.

Remember Ken Kutaragi's comments that it's not a "gaming machine", it's a "media supercomputer". I think Sony's reigning him in now.

 

[7718]

If the cell is full of synergistic co-processors why does it make it expensive to have the ps3 be a router? Couldn't one of the cells co chips just do the routing in the background? I thought the cell processor had the power of 300 p4's? If you listen to Kutaragi it seems like the ps3 can do incredible next gen graphics/physics/sounds and tivo+routing/skynet style AI. Thats only if its being held back by not being able to "share" computing data by linking with the cell chip in your reciever/tv/coffee pot etc.

If the cell can stream 16 640x480 FMVs at one time why can't it be a router?

 

[Terpfen]

ok so ps3 already being $400 you wanna add a $100 harddrive to that as well?have fun i hope your rich

I'm shaking my head here. Where to start...

First: just because a Merill Lynch analyst says the PS3 will cost $399 does not mean it will actually cost $399. I'd rather hear what Sony has to say about the price of their product, instead of hearing Merill Lynch take a stab in the dark.

Second, low-capacity 2.5'' HDDs are not $100. If they were, I doubt Microsoft would be bundling a 20GB drive with the Xbox360, given that your magic $100 figure would total to 1/3 the cost of the system just for a peripheral.

Third, yes, I do have money. Given that I plan to buy all three next-gen consoles, and own all three current-gen consoles, that kind of eliminates any price-based grudges I may hold against a Company X or Brand Name Y. You and a couple of other posters here can't seem to reconcile facts with your wallet, and thus you go off bashing Sony or whoever based on an unknown MSRP.

Way to go.

They had it setup to be a router? That makes as much sense as putting a blender in it. Leave it to Sony though.

Yes, the PS3 was planned to have router functions. It was probably one of those ideas that made sense at the time they came up with it, but I'm glad it's gone. I hope Sony doesn't feel the need to "replace" the router function with something equally useless.

 

[PRIME1]

They had it setup to be a router? That makes as much sense as putting a blender in it. Leave it to Sony though.

A blender? That would be awesome, Margarita GT5 night!

Sony does need to ease up a bit on the all-in-one box concept. (Although I do want it to play movies at 1080p)

 

[ScreamingBroccoli]

the point isn't that its not going to have a router per say, it's the fact that they are dumbing down the console's specs as they have always done in the past!

 

[heatsinker]

the point isn't that its not going to have a router per say, it's the fact that they are dumbing down the console's specs as they have always done in the past!

I don't remember any dumbing down of the PS1 and PS2, unless you can enlighten me.

The PS3 isn't due out for practically a year, so changes are just to be expected.

 

[ScreamingBroccoli]

I'll have to do a lil research, but I'm sure I can dig up some specs about how it was gonna be the most amazing piece of hardware ever and it was gonna rip the dreamcast a new one and make it obsolete with the number of polygons and speeds it could push, anyone else remember this? I do! Then it came out and it = meh

 

[heatsinker]

I've been saying the same thing about the Xbox launch; there wasn't an ad where they didn't compare the specs yet here we are with graphics that can be described in words. Not the PS2 killer they made us imagine.

But of course, people love making their own conclusions without having ever seen or played with the actual final product.

I'm going to reserve my opinions for the Xbox360, PS3, and Revolution when they see the light of day.

 

[Terpfen]

I'll have to do a lil research, but I'm sure I can dig up some specs about how it was gonna be the most amazing piece of hardware ever and it was gonna rip the dreamcast a new one and make it obsolete with the number of polygons and speeds it could push, anyone else remember this? I do! Then it came out and it = meh

I think you're confusing Sony marketing with "why are you buying a Dreamcast? The PS2 is going to kick ass" drones.

Though developers' usage of the DC as a port repository didn't help.

 

[FanATIc]

The HDD was never going to be included in the first place, because the idea is to let the user pick whichever size s/he wants. Look for the PS3 to sell as a bundle: you buy the console, you buy the slot-loading HDD, but you get to pick which size HDD you want. I like that idea, instead of buying a console with an included HDD, which may or may not be large enough for all the stuff I want to put on there.

As for the router functions being tossed out, this is good too. It means the PS3 will cost less. Most people with broadband--and therefore most people who will play games online--already have a router. I don't see what the big deal about losing this functionality is.

Looks like reality is slowly eroding anti-Sony fan-boys' paper hype.

Not sure you're making much sense. You're saying an included HD in the cost of the package, lets say 20gig, and allowing upgrades for storage later, such as larger hard drives, is inferior to not giving one at all and making it a seperate accessory? No. Most people arent going to give a damn as long as they have one, but if Sony goes and makes storage a requirement for games, they're basically forcing you to get the HD, with the Xbox and 360, its one less thing to worry about. Thats a good thing.

If the cell is full of synergistic co-processors why does it make it expensive to have the ps3 be a router? Couldn't one of the cells co chips just do the routing in the background? I thought the cell processor had the power of 300 p4's? If you listen to Kutaragi it seems like the ps3 can do incredible next gen graphics/physics/sounds and tivo+routing/skynet style AI. Thats only if its being held back by not being able to "share" computing data by linking with the cell chip in your reciever/tv/coffee pot etc.

If the cell can stream 16 640x480 FMVs at one time why can't it be a router?

Cell is proving to be pretty weak and a nightmare to realistically code for anymore then 2 of the processors. Problem is you believed the hype. Go watch the PS2 launch video from E3 and realize that Sony lies.

 

[Conker]

Cell is proving to be pretty weak and a nightmare to realistically code for anymore then 2 of the processors. Problem is you believed the hype. Go watch the PS2 launch video from E3 and realize that Sony lies.

Finally someone smells the coffee. I knew sony was lieing since the beginning along with microsoft since they lied totally last year. Sony has a track record of lieing a lot and many people still beleave them.

 

[heatsinker]

Not sure you're making much sense. You're saying an included HD in the cost of the package, lets say 20gig, and allowing upgrades for storage later, such as larger hard drives, is inferior to not giving one at all and making it a seperate accessory? No. Most people arent going to give a damn as long as they have one, but if Sony goes and makes storage a requirement for games, they're basically forcing you to get the HD, with the Xbox and 360, its one less thing to worry about. Thats a good thing.




Cell is proving to be pretty weak and a nightmare to realistically code for anymore then 2 of the processors. Problem is you believed the hype. Go watch the PS2 launch video from E3 and realize that Sony lies.

Considering you've probably never touched a PS3 devkit (hell even the developers probably don't have them yet) I don't see how you're making any of these conclusions. I think the problem here is that you're using the Jump to Conclusions mat again.

 

[sfc]

Good, all i want is a game console.

Acme can sell the version with all the unneeded features to the coyote.

Oh and gig-ethernet on a console makes as much sense as z-rated tires on an amc pacer.

You do it for bragging rights, or you do it because commodity pricing for gigabit controllers isn't significantly higher than 10/100mb controllers. I don't think were quite there yet, so this one bullet point on the ps3 marketing chart was probably a fairly expensive proposition.

Expect the E3 specs for all consoles to be reduced by the time they hit market. Nintendo is about the only one who doesn't qualify---and that is because they didn't give out any real specs.

We're there. Find me a new dell that comes with anything BUT a gigabit controller. Even the cheapest of the cheap have gigabit broadcom NIC's nowadays.

 

[sfc]

I thought it would have been a cool feature to be able to network a few PS3s together with no additional hardware. With my Xbox I have a five port switch that adds a bit more hassle with its power block.

Doesn't have to be a router to network more than one together, just has to have more than one port on the back and however they choose to set it up. A router is a completely different beast.

 

[Ballz2TheWallz]

im sorry was it not confirmed ps3 would be $400 at launch in japan at this point i see NO purpose of a huge harddrive

 

[rm19]

A router is a completely different beast.

My mistake. For some reason, I was thinking "switch". Guess I'll still need one of those.

 

[Terpfen]

Not sure you're making much sense. You're saying an included HD in the cost of the package, lets say 20gig, and allowing upgrades for storage later, such as larger hard drives, is inferior to not giving one at all and making it a seperate accessory? No. Most people arent going to give a damn as long as they have one, but if Sony goes and makes storage a requirement for games, they're basically forcing you to get the HD, with the Xbox and 360, its one less thing to worry about. Thats a good thing.

No, you're completely missing my point. I'm saying that the entire reason an HDD isn't preinstalled in the PS3 is because Sony is going to make them available in a separate box, but sell the PS3 and HDD as a bundle purchase (similar to how many PSP purchasers had to buy the PSP and a two-game bundle.) This means that every PS3 owner will have the HDD, but at the same time, they will have a certain amount of control over the final price, since obviously a 20GB HDD would cost less than a 60GB HDD. This is just my guess based on reading between the lines in Kutaragi's various interviews, but I see no reason why it wouldn't happen.

This is as opposed to shipping the HDD preinstalled on the console, ala Xbox and Xbox360. Same idea--get an HDD on the console for caching and media center capabilities--but two different implementations. Microsoft is the one shipping their console with the HDD preinstalled, and making larger-size versions available separately, thus increasing costs to the gamer. Sony isn't--so far.

Cell is proving to be pretty weak and a nightmare to realistically code for anymore then 2 of the processors. Problem is you believed the hype. Go watch the PS2 launch video from E3 and realize that Sony lies.

One, Anandtech pulled their "Xbox360 and PS3 CPUs suck" article, and we have contradictory accounts of that article due to the fact that Factor 5 switched development to the PS3, specifically citing the Cell as the reason why they switched.

Two, the PS2 launch videos were all pretty accurate. Most people cite the FF8 ballroom render as proof that the PS2 videos were lies. Well, if you go back and watch the thing, and compare it to FFX, you'll see that FFX looks better. I think most people get this "PS2 demo videos were made up" impression based on the system's launch titles. Developers were matching the promo videos 18 months into the PS2's lifespan, and have definitely surpassed those things now.

im sorry was it not confirmed ps3 would be $400 at launch in japan

No, it was not. First IGN PS2 reported that a Japanese newspaper quoted an anonymous source as saying the PS3 would cost "less than 50,000 yen," which is about $450 USD. Then a week or so later, another story was run that the PS3's price would be "less than 40,000 yen," which is about $360. Then Merill Lynch released an analysis saying that they think the PS3 will cost $399.

Nowhere in any of these reports is an official confirmation from Sony regarding the PS3's MSRP in any territory. None.

at this point i see NO purpose of a huge harddrive

Then you can just get the smallest HDD size available for the PS3 and save some money.

 

[FanATIc]

No, you're completely missing my point. I'm saying that the entire reason an HDD isn't preinstalled in the PS3 is because Sony is going to make them available in a separate box, but sell the PS3 and HDD as a bundle purchase (similar to how many PSP purchasers had to buy the PSP and a two-game bundle.) This means that every PS3 owner will have the HDD, but at the same time, they will have a certain amount of control over the final price, since obviously a 20GB HDD would cost less than a 60GB HDD. This is just my guess based on reading between the lines in Kutaragi's various interviews, but I see no reason why it wouldn't happen.

This is as opposed to shipping the HDD preinstalled on the console, ala Xbox and Xbox360. Same idea--get an HDD on the console for caching and media center capabilities--but two different implementations. Microsoft is the one shipping their console with the HDD preinstalled, and making larger-size versions available separately, thus increasing costs to the gamer. Sony isn't--so far.

You're still not making sense. If they have PS3 + packages with different size HD's, the larger the HD the more expensive the package. You're still gonna be paying for it if they do it that way, which i highly doubt. They'd make more money making it an after market upgrade like such as the DVD kits. But benefit of the doubt to you, you're still paying extra for that HD, MS is going 1 price, you get this basic package, and upgrade what you want, with sony you're saying mutltiple packages at higher prices, so wheres the benefit in that? No HD, pay basic price, HD pay basic + X amount for package, or simply pay one cost and everyone who gets a console gets the damn HD right off. MS is superior in this regaurd since someone who just wants a Hard Drive for save games and online content doesnt have to then upgrade to a at least a 40 dollar more package, which it will be if its done that way. They dont do small price increases in things like these.

Considering you've probably never touched a PS3 devkit (hell even the developers probably don't have them yet) I don't see how you're making any of these conclusions. I think the problem here is that you're using the Jump to Conclusions mat again.

Actually Aandtech article came to that conclusion about both the PS3 and the triple proc in the Xbox360, stating that if either company went with X2s or Pentium D's they'd of been much more powerful. And i do know something about programming, you do not want to fuck with a 6 threaded program or even a 3 threaded one. Its an amazing pain in the ass. We'll see realistically, games for the console using 1 or 2 of the cells processors so developers arent "developing" games into the next century. It boggles my mind why either company had to incooperate multi-core processors into these systems. The Xbox runs of a 733 Celeron and the PS2 was some amazing peice of crap at something like 300mhz. They did not need to boast this BS when im positive a nice 3.0 pentium or equivilant AMD would of done wonders, been easier to code for, and quite possibly would of been faster.

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/8504/Steve-Jobs-Not-Impressed-with-the-Cell-Processor/

Steve Jobs is problably an idiot too though right? Im sure Cell will pump 1 bajiliion teraflops

Two, the PS2 launch videos were all pretty accurate. Most people cite the FF8 ballroom render as proof that the PS2 videos were lies. Well, if you go back and watch the thing, and compare it to FFX, you'll see that FFX looks better. I think most people get this "PS2 demo videos were made up" impression based on the system's launch titles. Developers were matching the promo videos 18 months into the PS2's lifespan, and have definitely surpassed those things now.

What in the heck are you talking about? Man, go look at the E3 vid for the PS2, NOTICE THE POLY COUNT THEY BRAG, then look at its realistic performance, its no where near what they said! They lie, just like microsoft! However at least Microsofts E3 presentation wasnt a bunch of fluff, sony showed off absolutly nothing but pre-rendered bull shit. Not to mention the RSX joke, they gave Nvidia about 8 months heads up so its amazing, i know, but the "reality synthasizer" is a faster clocked G70 made for consoles. All of a sudden bleeding edge tech looks pretty un-amazing.

 

[ScreamingBroccoli]

Ok, lets start off with routers and hard drives are cheap as hell now a days. You can pick up a wired router for as low as $5 with rebates (some one has em on sale this week, D-Link Brand) and HDDs get cheaper by the second! Jesus, just throw in a gig of flash memory, it's better than nothing. It's not like the PS3 is striving to be small or anything... Somebody was nice enough to PM this article which depicts sony's slanderous marketing techniques first hand, and how it was directly attacting the dreamcast's so called inferior hardware. Here ya go http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php?date=2000-05-22 too bad the link to the original article still isn't there, because I do remember reading it a while back!

 

[ScreamingBroccoli]

And to all those bitching about gigabit nic, there probably is no use for it, 10mpbs is probably fast enuff for gaming, let alone 100mbps, but seriously, gimme a break, the gigabit nic cards aren't that expensive, I could have bought brand new ones off of the FS/FT forums for $20 a month or 2 back, and the price sony pays for all of this equipment is substantially less.

 

[7718]

When your talking about prelaunch specs fan boys of console groups are always going to have different perspectives. And they change depending on the console manufactures stance. For instance, before nintendo dropped HD support for the revolution most nintendo fans probably would have liked HD support, but now it would seem as if they love 640x480. And Microsoft seems wishy washy about backwards compatibility, its in, its just per game emulators, etc. Fans say " I already have an xbox, and nobody played PS1 games on their ps2!". Now Sony drops the router feature from the ps3, in an effort to make it more affordable. For most gamers this probably didn't matter anyways, honestly. But for the fans of Sony, its like "Wow Sony is gonna make the console more affordable by dropping this pointless feature! Ken is the smartest dude eva! I hang a picture of him over my cot in my parents basement!" etc. What will they say when Sony quitely reduces the clockspeed of the Cell chip, and then says "We reduced the clockspeed of the cell because it makes the system quieter , and the cell cpu was far to powerfull from the begining." Fans will jump for joy, even though it means the ps3 would be less capable , and that the pre rendered tech demos at E3 will NEVER HAPPEN , even after Sony develops a PS3 analyser.

Brand loyalty is for stupid-heads. Unless your talking Sega. Sega!

 

[heatsinker]

Brand loyalty is for stupid-heads. Unless your talking Sega. Sega!

Exactly my sentiments. If you base your decision on anything other than the machine's upcoming games and developer support; then you're quite the ignoramus.

 

[Tiny]

Exactly my sentiments. If you base your decision on anything other than the machine's upcoming games and developer support; then you're quite the ignoramus.

Features and services count too.

 

[illig]

I don't remember any dumbing down of the PS1 and PS2, unless you can enlighten me.

The PS3 isn't due out for practically a year, so changes are just to be expected.

IIRC it was supposed to be able to render Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within in realtime... and do something like 80M polygons a second, etc. etc. etc.

And getting rid of the HD is a stupid move... now you will have some people who buy it, and some who don't, and force all game manufacturers to make ONLY games which can run w/out the hard drive... no one will approve a game that requires a hard drive if some users (probably most users, since console buyers rarely buy add-ons) dont' have one

it's the same damn reason that the sega CD, 32X, etc failed

so now the HD in the ps3 will be a useless trinket, that stores game saves (IF you bought it), and a couple other useless things

meh

 

[heatsinker]

Features and services count too.

All it needs to do is play games. The Gamecube is doing fine and it hardly has any online games. All of that other stuff is just icing on the cake so they can say "our console is different". It's the same thing with the hard drive on the Xbox; the only real use it had was when people modded the thing and used it to copy games and run homebrew apps.