f13.net

Fucking fuckers (http://forevergeek.com/games/sony_playstation_3_shipping_without_hard_drive.php).  I hated it when I had to pay to turn on the Xbox's built in DVD playing capability, and I'm going to hate it if the PS3 wants to reach into my wallet for a second helping to add a feature that should have been in consoles 10 years ago and will be a deciding factor in whether I migrate to consoles completely and therefore give them a bunch more money.  It's like they're getting a bulk discount from the Idiot Factory.

However the company has never said that a hard disk would be bundled with the unit at launch, and Chatani's comments this month seem to suggest it's erring toward not including one - and perhaps offering the peripheral optionally in the same way it currently sells Memory Card units separately from PlayStation 2.

Edit: Duh, PS3 not PS2.  PS2 hard drives definitely cost extra.

I'm not sure how this matters. You will be paying for that hard drive either directly (if it's not bundled) or indirectly (if it is bundled). E.g. would it make you happier if you had to pay $399 for the PS3 with the hard drive bundled or $349 without the hard drive and have to cough up another $50 for the hard drive?

To be honest I would prefer if the PS3 came standard with a harddrive so making balance patches and additional content for online titles would be more viable.

I'd rather get it all in one package. I get service plans on my system so I can break them and get a new one further down the line. I like everything being covered and not having to buy more than one service plan. Just sayin.

It matters if you assume it's going to be priced competitively with the 360.  If they're using the scheme as a way to make the PS3 $20 less than the 360 but oops you need to spend $50 on a hard drive later, that's ass.  If they're going to drop the drive but buying it separately brings the price up to 360 range. . sure, whatever.  I predict the former.

And you'd probably be right.

But how long until the Hard Drive is practically required by every PS3 game? Then, you end up giving Sony two margins of profit, instead of them passing on some savings to you by bundling it all up in one unit. Screw that.

Alternatively, they go the PS2 route, where hardly anything uses the hard drive because it's an add-on, therefore no one buys it, therefore no devs make games that require it.  It's a big enough issue, they need to either include it, or don't.  As an add-on doesn't cut it.

Not that I'm likely to buy one either way, mind you.  My most recent home console is an SNES... I also have a titanium-colored GBA(not an SP), which is probably more powerful than the SNES.

Alkiera

Or: The only people who buy it use it with HDLoader to play pirated games. Not exactly Sony's wet dream, that.

I will second the Fucking Fuckers comment. It's 2005, bitches. The games need some kind of rewriteable storage and MEMORY CARDS SUCK ASS. One of the big advantages of the X-Box for me was the hard drive, so I never had to futz with fucking memory cards. Bundle the goddamn harddrive, charge me for it and move on with your fucking lives. Things like a hard drive, which can significantly improve gameplay, should not be optional add-ons.

As for piracy, that's a shitty excuse, but it's never stopped companies before.