|
|
|
Opinions wanted - 80gb or 60gb??????
|
|
|
pspweazl
Junior Member
1 product review
|
24. August 2009 @ 12:53 |
Link to this message
|
So i am in the market for a PS3 right now. My question is this: would it be better to buy a 60gb (older version with full backwards compatibility) or an 80gb (which I understand is still backwards compatible with limitations)? I am not concerned about being able to play PS1 games as I know that most of the ones I like can be purchased from the PSN store, but I DO want to be able to play PS2 games, including the lightgun games (Pointblank, Time Crisis etc.). I am not sure which is the better choice, I can get the 80gb PS3 new for about three and the 60gb are ranging 350.00 or better for used ones.
Also is there a differance in the 80gb versions that limit the backwards compatibility? You know from older to newer models?
Thanks for your opinons!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
24. August 2009 @ 13:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
24. August 2009 @ 13:28 |
Link to this message
|
The 60gig has the PS2 Emotion Chip and will play everythnig. The 80 is Software Emulation and does not play everything. I would suggest, get the new slim 120gig for $300 and continue to use your PS2 for PS2 games. I have @ 40 PS2 games and never play them. I did try GranTurismo(Spelling, i know) to see what it looked like but after playing PS3 games, i never really cared about PS2 games anymore.
|
|
ooZEROoo
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
25. August 2009 @ 22:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
60 gig all the way.
|
|
DTN107
Member
|
25. August 2009 @ 23:16 |
Link to this message
|
60GB is know to have a higher chance of getting the dreaded ylod (yellow line of death).
Although I like to root for 60GB you can't go wrong with the 1st gen 80GB. There are few games that won't run on it but I doubt you will run into them.
Or you can just buy a new PS3 for the same price for the used PS3 that has BC and keep your PS2 around. At least you can mod the PS2.
|
Senior Member
9 product reviews
|
28. August 2009 @ 20:25 |
Link to this message
|
1. Buy a new Slim model for reliability.
2. Keep your PS2.
60GBs are starting to get killed off, most people are selling on eBay because of the YLOD problems. Seriously, the 60GB is equivalent to the RROD.
If you want to play PS2 games on your PS3 so bad, then buy the older 80GB model, which will definitely last longer than a 60GB but I doubt that it'll survive over 2 years.
Again, buy a Slim or the new 80GB but if you're absolutely desperate to play PS2 games on your PS3 (Why anyway, a PS3 is for PS3 games) then just get the old 80GB model.
Just avoid the 60GB altogether.
|
|
KajNrig
Senior Member
|
29. August 2009 @ 00:52 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Seriously, the 60GB is equivalent to the RROD.
Where are you getting this from? From what I've heard around here, the 60/20 models are the most stable of the bunch. That and I've had mine refurbished for well over a year now and haven't bothered cleaning it at all and it's still running smooth as a whistle.
...then again, I haven't been around for a while, so you might just be right.
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
a PS3 is for PS3 games
Yeah, which explains why it can play PSOne games...
Just like how the PS2 is for PS2 games... and PSOne games.
Just like how the Wii is for Wii games... and NES games... and SNES games... and N64 games... and Gamecube games... and even Sega games.
But you're right - pspweazl, you'd be best off buying a slim PS3 and saving your PS2 games for an actual PS2. 60GB PS3s are getting increasingly rare and therefore pricey, and for the price of one of those, you could probably get a slim PS3 AND a PS2.
A (working) 60GB PS3 = anywhere from $400-$1,000
A slim PS3 = $300
A new PS2 = $100
An old PS2 = as little as $20
What you would get from buying the single PS3, though, is simplicity - only one console to consider, only one video cable to connect, only one thing to worry about.
|
Moderator
16 product reviews
|
29. August 2009 @ 09:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KajNrig:
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Seriously, the 60GB is equivalent to the RROD.
Where are you getting this from? From what I've heard around here, the 60/20 models are the most stable of the bunch. That and I've had mine refurbished for well over a year now and haven't bothered cleaning it at all and it's still running smooth as a whistle.
...then again, I haven't been around for a while, so you might just be right.
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
a PS3 is for PS3 games
Yeah, which explains why it can play PSOne games...
Just like how the PS2 is for PS2 games... and PSOne games.
Just like how the Wii is for Wii games... and NES games... and SNES games... and N64 games... and Gamecube games... and even Sega games.
But you're right - pspweazl, you'd be best off buying a slim PS3 and saving your PS2 games for an actual PS2. 60GB PS3s are getting increasingly rare and therefore pricey, and for the price of one of those, you could probably get a slim PS3 AND a PS2.
A (working) 60GB PS3 = anywhere from $400-$1,000
A slim PS3 = $300
A new PS2 = $100
An old PS2 = as little as $20
What you would get from buying the single PS3, though, is simplicity - only one console to consider, only one video cable to connect, only one thing to worry about.
I absolutely agree. A 20gb/60gb is absolutely nowhere near equal in numbers to RROD. If you are going to post a claim like that you REALLY need to back that up with some proof...
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
29. August 2009 @ 21:16 |
Link to this message
|
Indeed, a lot more of my friends non 60gigs have crapped out compared to the 60's, and that one was due to the laser crapping out due to the 1.93-2.20 firmware fiasco.
|
Senior Member
9 product reviews
|
30. August 2009 @ 09:29 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Oner:
Originally posted by KajNrig:
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Seriously, the 60GB is equivalent to the RROD.
Where are you getting this from? From what I've heard around here, the 60/20 models are the most stable of the bunch. That and I've had mine refurbished for well over a year now and haven't bothered cleaning it at all and it's still running smooth as a whistle.
...then again, I haven't been around for a while, so you might just be right.
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
a PS3 is for PS3 games
Yeah, which explains why it can play PSOne games...
Just like how the PS2 is for PS2 games... and PSOne games.
Just like how the Wii is for Wii games... and NES games... and SNES games... and N64 games... and Gamecube games... and even Sega games.
But you're right - pspweazl, you'd be best off buying a slim PS3 and saving your PS2 games for an actual PS2. 60GB PS3s are getting increasingly rare and therefore pricey, and for the price of one of those, you could probably get a slim PS3 AND a PS2.
A (working) 60GB PS3 = anywhere from $400-$1,000
A slim PS3 = $300
A new PS2 = $100
An old PS2 = as little as $20
What you would get from buying the single PS3, though, is simplicity - only one console to consider, only one video cable to connect, only one thing to worry about.
I absolutely agree. A 20gb/60gb is absolutely nowhere near equal in numbers to RROD. If you are going to post a claim like that you REALLY need to back that up with some proof...
Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but the 60GB is the most unstable PS3.
People (on other forums and sites) have gone through the average of 3 PS3s within a year, with the 60GB.
I don't have solid proof but the amount of threads made in this other forums with the 60GB is just too far. They've even gotten Watchdog to investigate this.
@Kajnrig
The PS3 was made to play PS3 games. No one is going to buy a PS3 to play PS1 games only.
Sony are making PS3 games for the PS3. They didn't make PS1/PS2 games for the PS3.
Backwards compatibility is just a bonus. It's not necessary at all because if you want to play the predecessor's games, that means you already have the older console which were made to play the older games.
If you have a bunch of PS2 games, then you have a PS2.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. August 2009 @ 09:31
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
30. August 2009 @ 10:58 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but the 60GB is the most unstable PS3. People (on other forums and sites) have gone through the average of 3 PS3s within a year, with the 60GB.
I don't have solid proof but the amount of threads made in this other forums with the 60GB is just too far. They've even gotten Watchdog to investigate this.
I beg to differ and I'd like to see any information watchdog has gathered.
|
Senior Member
9 product reviews
|
30. August 2009 @ 13:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by canuckerz:
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but the 60GB is the most unstable PS3. People (on other forums and sites) have gone through the average of 3 PS3s within a year, with the 60GB.
I don't have solid proof but the amount of threads made in this other forums with the 60GB is just too far. They've even gotten Watchdog to investigate this.
I beg to differ and I'd like to see any information watchdog has gathered.
And here is the thread (I haven't looked into it much myself):
http://community.eu.playstation.com/play...scending&page=1
Your different opinion is that the 60GB is most stable/not the most unstable PS3?
Sadly, the PS3 Slim has just taken over that site, especially with trade-in questions but if you do a search I'm sure that you'll find multiple threads about the 60GB YLOD.
If you still do not believe me, you should sign up, create a thread titled '60GB YLOD', ask if the 60GB is most unstable and then you will either see replied saying 'yes' or replies saying 'use the search button'.
|
|
KajNrig
Senior Member
|
30. August 2009 @ 14:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
The PS3 was made to play PS3 games. No one is going to buy a PS3 to play PS1 games only.
Sony are making PS3 games for the PS3. They didn't make PS1/PS2 games for the PS3.
Backwards compatibility is just a bonus. It's not necessary at all because if you want to play the predecessor's games, that means you already have the older console which were made to play the older games.
If you have a bunch of PS2 games, then you have a PS2.
No one said anything about playing PS1/2 games only. Like you said, it's a bonus and not necessary at all, but consider that some PS2s are woefully decimated by nearly a decade of use, and PS1s even moreso. It would be much, much more cost-effective to purchase a console that can play both the new AND the old than to purchase a console that can only play the old. Imagine if you bought a computer that came equipped with a BD drive, but which had no DVD/CD playback capability whatsoever.
What's more, I'm sure you know of the hassle that comes with dealing with multiple pieces of equipment and a plethora of cords and inputs and power outlets and whatnot. It would be much simpler to have one console that did what you needed it to.
However, again, like you said, the backwards compatibility thing is just a bonus. It simply seems to me like it's a pretty important and valuable bonus, considering it's been implemented in some way, shape, or form in the past two console generations. And in this case, it is an essential requirement for purchasing the console.
|
|
najaboy
Junior Member
|
30. August 2009 @ 17:54 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Originally posted by canuckerz:
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but the 60GB is the most unstable PS3. People (on other forums and sites) have gone through the average of 3 PS3s within a year, with the 60GB.
I don't have solid proof but the amount of threads made in this other forums with the 60GB is just too far. They've even gotten Watchdog to investigate this.
I beg to differ and I'd like to see any information watchdog has gathered.
And here is the thread (I haven't looked into it much myself):
http://community.eu.playstation.com/play...scending&page=1
Your different opinion is that the 60GB is most stable/not the most unstable PS3?
Sadly, the PS3 Slim has just taken over that site, especially with trade-in questions but if you do a search I'm sure that you'll find multiple threads about the 60GB YLOD.
If you still do not believe me, you should sign up, create a thread titled '60GB YLOD', ask if the 60GB is most unstable and then you will either see replied saying 'yes' or replies saying 'use the search button'.
There's reasoning, and then there's what's called pseudoreasoning. Unfortunately, your points are based entirely on the latter. A handful of forum posts is what's called anecdotal evidence, and figures largely in faulty logic.
The bottom line is that your claim is refuted by empirical evidence, which has shown the failure rate of the launch PS3 to be less than one percent. Conversely, Microsoft has had to deal with a failure rate that peaked at about thirty percent. Basic arithmetic tells us that thirty is a far larger number than one.
|
Senior Member
9 product reviews
|
31. August 2009 @ 14:49 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by najaboy:
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Originally posted by canuckerz:
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but the 60GB is the most unstable PS3. People (on other forums and sites) have gone through the average of 3 PS3s within a year, with the 60GB.
I don't have solid proof but the amount of threads made in this other forums with the 60GB is just too far. They've even gotten Watchdog to investigate this.
I beg to differ and I'd like to see any information watchdog has gathered.
And here is the thread (I haven't looked into it much myself):
http://community.eu.playstation.com/play...scending&page=1
Your different opinion is that the 60GB is most stable/not the most unstable PS3?
Sadly, the PS3 Slim has just taken over that site, especially with trade-in questions but if you do a search I'm sure that you'll find multiple threads about the 60GB YLOD.
If you still do not believe me, you should sign up, create a thread titled '60GB YLOD', ask if the 60GB is most unstable and then you will either see replied saying 'yes' or replies saying 'use the search button'.
There's reasoning, and then there's what's called pseudoreasoning. Unfortunately, your points are based entirely on the latter. A handful of forum posts is what's called anecdotal evidence, and figures largely in faulty logic.
The bottom line is that your claim is refuted by empirical evidence, which has shown the failure rate of the launch PS3 to be less than one percent. Conversely, Microsoft has had to deal with a failure rate that peaked at about thirty percent. Basic arithmetic tells us that thirty is a far larger number than one.
The PS3 has a 10% failure.
The Xbox 360 has a 50% failure.
The thing about PS3 under even 5% of failure is just a load of nonsense made up, IMO.
And Sony have removed Continuous Play, part of the reason that people are abusing the system and the other, unannounced reason is that people with 60GB are replacing them more than the average of a 20/40/80GB models.
The 60GB is the most unstable version of the PS3.
This is based of pure logics and to think that I see these 60GB failures all across the internet.
Rarely have I seen any 20GB/40GB/80GB models fail - compared to the 60GB.
You may all continuously say that I'm incorrect but I for one will always stick to the idea that the 60GB is the most unstable PS3 - besides, it consumes the most of power out of all the PS3s and also the noisiest(average 60GB owners)/hottest.
I don't consider this an opinion, I consider this as a fact.
@Kajnrig.
I just wanted you to see my opinion and I'm glad that you understand.
Yes, PS2 emulation is a nice touch, wouldn't mind seeing it but again, there are lot more stuff in Sony's hands that comes before/after (don't know the correct term, lol) PS2 compatibility.
|
|
KajNrig
Senior Member
|
31. August 2009 @ 15:57 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
The PS3 has a 10% failure.
The Xbox 360 has a 50% failure.
The thing about PS3 under even 5% of failure is just a load of nonsense made up, IMO.
And Sony have removed Continuous Play, part of the reason that people are abusing the system and the other, unannounced reason is that people with 60GB are replacing them more than the average of a 20/40/80GB models.
The 60GB is the most unstable version of the PS3.
This is based of pure logics and to think that I see these 60GB failures all across the internet.
Rarely have I seen any 20GB/40GB/80GB models fail - compared to the 60GB.
Bold = source, please.
Italics = Opinions derived from observations ("I see these 60GB...") doesn't necessarily equal logic ("This is based of[f] pure logics").
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
You may all continuously say that I'm incorrect but I for one will always stick to the idea that the 60GB is the most unstable PS3 - besides, it consumes the most of power out of all the PS3s and also the noisiest(average 60GB owners)/hottest.
1.) "Idea" is the key word there. Not "fact."
2.) Source on "consumes the most power" and "the noisiest/hottest," as well.
3.) Not to be too on your case and everything. Just sayin'. Can't throw "facts" around without proving that they actually ARE facts.
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
I don't consider this an opinion, I consider this as a fact.
If I consider the 360 being an inferior machine to be a fact, does that mean that it IS a fact? No. It's an opinion.
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
I just wanted you to see my opinion and I'm glad that you understand.
S'all good. Your opinion's right... just not so cut-and-dry as you think it is, that's all. ;)
|
|
najaboy
Junior Member
|
31. August 2009 @ 18:32 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kikzm33z:
The PS3 has a 10% failure.
The Xbox 360 has a 50% failure.
The thing about PS3 under even 5% of failure is just a load of nonsense made up, IMO.
And Sony have removed Continuous Play, part of the reason that people are abusing the system and the other, unannounced reason is that people with 60GB are replacing them more than the average of a 20/40/80GB models.
The 60GB is the most unstable version of the PS3.
This is based of pure logics and to think that I see these 60GB failures all across the internet.
Rarely have I seen any 20GB/40GB/80GB models fail - compared to the 60GB.
You may all continuously say that I'm incorrect but I for one will always stick to the idea that the 60GB is the most unstable PS3 - besides, it consumes the most of power out of all the PS3s and also the noisiest(average 60GB owners)/hottest.
I don't consider this an opinion, I consider this as a fact.
At someone who actually studied logic and critical thinking, I find it sad that you claim your posts are based on "pure logic" when, in fact, they are devoid of logic. Likewise, it would behoove you to get educated about matters of fact versus matters of pure opinion. Thus far, you have presented opinions and misrepresented them as fact. Simply stating that your opinion is fact doesn't make it so, no matter how many times you restate it.
Now then, you've been asked more than once to provide empirical evidence to back up your claim, yet the best you can come up with are anecdotal forum posts and arbitrarily derived statistics. Once again, please provide factual evidence to back up your claim and not the same old intellectually dishonest rhetoric.
In the above reply you claim that the 360 has a 50% failure rate, which you previously alluuded equated to the PS3's 10% failure rate that you allege. I'm not even going to touch that fuzzy math, so let's move on to the meat of that statement. Please provide empirical evidence to back up your claims regarding each console's respective failure rate.
Your next claim is that any claim of a failure rate under 5% is fiction. Okay, once again please provide empirical evidence to back up your assertion. As of August '09, a tad over 9 million PS3s were sold in the United States and a bit over 23 million worldwide. Can you provide documentation that there have been a minimum of 450K defective units in the U.S., much less 1.15 million worldwide?
Next up is the claim of anunannounced reason is that people with 60GB are replacing them more than the average of a 20/40/80GB models." Unannounced, yet you are privy to the actual figures that prove this, right? If so, please share your empirical, not anecdotal, evidence. I would like to see documentation of the average, as well as the current rate of replacement.
Moving on to the restated but still unsubstantiated claim that the 60GB is the most unstable version of the PS3. The great thing about the veracity of an argument is that no matter how many times a faulty argument is repeated, the truth value remains unchanged. In other words, it's jibberish until backed up by factual evidence.
Again,y personal favorite was "This is based of pure logics and to think that I see these 60GB failures all across the internet." Far from logic... far, far, from it.
"You may all continuously say that I'm incorrect but I for one will always stick to the idea that the 60GB is the most unstable PS3 - besides, it consumes the most of power out of all the PS3s and also the noisiest(average 60GB owners)/hottest." Very few have come right out and said you're incorrect. Rather, you were asked to back up the claims that you made with empirical evidence. Logic, unfortunately, does not seem to be your forté, and your claims are dismissed as yuo are either unable or unwilling to provide the requested evidence to substantiate your claims. The rest of tat particular sentence has no bearing on the subject at hand and is what's referred to as a red herring.
Finally, A fact is something that's qualifiable or quantifiable. whereas an opinion is a subjective statement that may or may not be based on facts. No matter how many times you restate the same opnion, it does not become a fact.
A good beginner's text that you may want to check out is Critical Thinking by Moore and Parker.
|
|
KajNrig
Senior Member
|
31. August 2009 @ 20:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
...so yeah, pspweazl, you made a decision yet?
|
Senior Member
9 product reviews
|
1. September 2009 @ 11:38 |
Link to this message
|
Skipped all the reading from a hurry, sorry that I didn't read it all but I did use my logic :|
I understand what you're all talking about but that's completely irrelevant to my statement.
And it's the fact that there's no way you can prove that the 60GB is the most stable/ not the most unstable PS3 out there, yet I can easily give statements and such to prove that the 60GB is the most unstable PS3.
Kajnrig, later I will post some evidence and such to show that the 60GB consumes the most power of all the PS3 and is also the hottest, but I am in a rush right now.
And the 10% and 50% thing, I saw it somewhere I think on the PS Forums, not too sure.
I'll try to dig out that statement for you.
@Najaboy.
I'll read your post later if I have time. No doubt that you're opposing me and formally calling me a retard or such but yeah.
I'll try to reply.
|
|
najaboy
Junior Member
|
1. September 2009 @ 22:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
Nah, not calling you a retard, although the tenor of my reply probably comes across as overly condescending. Just bear in mind that what I had posted is directed merely at the quality of the statements you had made and not at your character or intellectual capacity, if that makes any sense. Besides, if I just up and called you a retard, then that would make me look rather silly when, sometime down the road, I agree with you on a different matter.
And I sincerely do recommend the book that I cited earlier... simply becauseof how informative it is regarding the pitfalls of logical fallacies.
|
|
ma_pee
Newbie
|
5. September 2009 @ 04:28 |
Link to this message
|
Wow... Talk about getting off topic... The 60GB has full hardware backward compatibility, the earlier versions of the 80GB has software backward compatibility. The later versions of the 80GB no longer has backward compatibility. The 20GB has full backward compatibility as well, but does not come with built in Wi-Fi. You can however buy the linksys game adapter and connect it to the PS3 to gain Wi-Fi this way, or create a bridge connection between your laptop (with Wi-Fi capability) and PS3. All versions of PS3 are able to play PS1 games. I hate to disappoint you but Point Blank was never out on the PS2, only on the PS1. To play shooting games, you'll need to purchase a PS2/PS1 USB control converter adapter as the guncon 1 & 2 uses the oldschool PS controller port. Also, don't waste your time trying to play loghtgun games on a plasma, HD, LCD, plasma, projection, LED, laser, TV. Guncon 1/2 technology will not work with these type of TV. You'll need to use the old CRT style TV's. If playing PS2 games are a MUST for you, then stick with the 20, 60, or earlier version of the 80GB. Use these model number as a keyword for your searching: "CECHB01" (20GB), "CECHA01" (60GB), "CECHE01" (earlier versions of the 80GB). Hope this helps.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
monkijin
Member
|
5. September 2009 @ 17:50 |
Link to this message
|
i have a launch 60gig console and it runs flawlessly, i have never had a prblem with it but i have had 3 xbox 360 consoles in the same time lol
normally pissed off
|
|
