PS3 Super Slim announced at TGS

Super Slim.

This isn't shocking news, since there has been evidence already.

But also, Sony's done the same thing with the PS One and the PS 2.

Wow, pretty impressive memory size for such as small console. Kinda makes me wish there was a way to transfer over my old save data and installs over to this new one cause right now it's full...

Hope this helps out Sony a bit. Gamegod knows, they need it.

@Sgt Ricko: there is.

the PS 3 has a utility which copies the whole of the system data at once and formats the receiving system.

All save data and installs are copied over.

edited 18th Sep '12 11:00:46 PM by Enkufka

Really? How exactly is it done? Is there any equipment I'd have to buy, or do I just plug a USB cable between the two and that's it?

I remember doing that when I upgraded my fat to a slim. Don't take my fuzzy memory for it, but I think you plugged an ethernet cable between them, not a USB. There's an option under one of the settings. Probably system settings.

edited 19th Sep '12 1:15:15 AM by Ryuhza

Hmm. Guess I'll have to boot it up and see if I run into that option, see if it's even available for my version. But then again, I play most of my games on the PC nowadays, so it's not like I'm gonna be getting a huge new library of DLC and games for the PS 3 soon.

edited 19th Sep '12 1:21:27 AM by SgtRicko

Just in time for me to buy a PS 3, awesome. I guess I can endure buying a bundle with Fifa 13.

edited 19th Sep '12 1:33:47 AM by Lemurian

PSN may get an overhaul as well.

Well, the store, they say, not the entire network.

This is a bit more expensive than the current PS 3 base price.

@Sgt Ricko: you need a network cable to bridge the two systems, and I think that's it.

Does it play PS 2 games?

Never mind that. Read the bit about the dirty unwashed Europeans only getting a 12GB entry level version rather than the 250GB version elsewhere. For what works out as the equivalent price in dollars.

What the hell are they on?

Why would it?

What a surprise, Sony's still bad at money. That thing looks pretty fancy, but releasing it starting at the same price without additional features isn't an incentive to upgrade. Sure, it looks cooler, but it isn't a laptop. The only reason for a slim version is to take up less space, and the top loader only works upright without anything on it, which makes it less convenient.

edited 20th Sep '12 10:53:28 AM by Swampertrox

For starters, it is probably the number one most desired feature to be (re-)added to the PS 3.

I don't know how PS 2 sales are doing right now, but I do know that stores like Gamestop are going to stop carrying them and the games to make space for the Wii U. The financial reasons they pulled PS 2 support from the PS 3 are making less sense.

edited 20th Sep '12 12:38:44 PM by ccoa

...Ok, so maybe I shouldn't make the upgrade if they're gonna take my ability to play PS 2 games...

Most requested feature from the vocal minority on the internet, maybe. IIRC, Sony removed that capability before not just to decrease costs and the size of the system, but also because their own market research said people were buying the PS 3 for PS 3 games, not PS 2 games. The infrastructure differences between the two systems is one of the things that made the original PS 3 so large to begin with, and even then it wasn't perfect at playing PS 2 titles.

If you want to play PS 2 games, you buy a PS 2. They aren't expensive. Seeing as, as you yourself have said, the PS 2 games available at retail are on their way out, what would the point be?

edited 20th Sep '12 3:57:48 PM by burnpsy

Really? Then why does "ps3 slim backwards compatibility" pop up as an autocomplete suggestion when google searching?

I wouldn't know about "on the internet", since I don't hang out at those sorts of places. I do know that the people I speak to all seem to want it. Most people who don't already know are baffled that it doesn't have it and wish it did. I'm curious what's led you to the conclusion that the majority don't want it. After all, backwards compatibility is one of the first things console manufacturers tend to talk about when announcing a new console, so the idea that no one really cares about it seems... off.

If it's not one of the more desired features, what features are desired above it?

The problem is that the PS 2 is being phased out. It's getting more difficult to find and old ones are dying. It's becoming increasingly difficult to get the hardware to play PS 2 games whilst you can still play X Box, Gamecube, and even PS 1 games on your current gen system.

Their market research showed that people were opting to buy P S2s with their more robust library over the more expensive P S3s (and that's tiny library). They chose remove the competition for the PS 2 it was more profitable at the time (the reasoning being that people looking for PS 2 games would buy a PS 2, those looking for PS 3 games would buy a PS 3, and those looking for both would have to buy both). The situation has changed - people can no longer run out and buy a new PS 2 in many places, and soon it will be true everywhere.

Long post short: if they want to entice people to "upgrade", then giving them backwards compatibility would have been a smart idea. I'd love to save some shelf space and stop buying a PS 2 every 6-15 months, personally.

As to what the point would be: are people's game libraries going to magically disappear? Because P S2s break. Quite frequently, in my experience. People have to replace them. Sony would be smarter to entice them to replace them with a new, more expensive console.

edited 21st Sep '12 7:24:10 AM by ccoa

Well, Sony's still heavily supporting the PSP, with a price drop and new colored units.

Problem is, why buy a Vita when many games released for the handheld are for PSP and Vita? No incentive to purchase a Vita at all.

I did play Little Big Planet for Vita at Pepcom yesterday. It was nice.

Funny thing about the PS 2 units: a lot of the original launch versions are still alive and kicking. I've still got my PS 2 that I bought during launch, and it's never suffered any issues or freeze-up errors. Can't say the same for my PS 3 though. It hasn't broke down yet, but it's beginning to freeze up frequently, boot up more slowly, and at one point a save file became corrupted for no apparent reason (though to be fair it was a file for TES IV: Oblivion, and that game had a reputation for glitchiness as well...)

Heh. My Slim PS2 has been running for a dog's age and its still fine. My PS is fine too, actually. I just had to fix the peg in the back that tells it the lid is closed once. In fact, the only game system I've ever had die on me is the Sega Saturn and the original Genesis, and that's because I manhandled them as a child.

lucky. I've had to replace a 360, PS 2, PS 3, and Wii, the last two within a few months of each other. >:/

...Do you guys leave them next to the freaking window, heater, your pets, cut off their ventilation, or something?! The only system that's ever died on me was my PS 1, and that's because that thing had a reputation for scratching any discs as well as it's optic lens cooking itself if played for over several hours straight!

• NOTE: They did fix that issue with the later models though. And after a point, the PS 1 became sturdy enough that you could run it for hours with no issues or damage to either the discs or system.

edited 21st Sep '12 10:54:15 AM by SgtRicko