BlueFalcon said:
Big difference. The maximum power consumption a PCIe 3.0 slot can provide is 75W. That means if you cram a PS3 into an external module, it needs its own power supply too. Ok now how can you sell a $70-100 module with PS3 components when PS3 costs more than $200? Even without BluRay and HDD, I doubt this module will be cheap. How do you propose this module will be cooled exactly? You are going to end up with a PS4 and PS3 massive module stacked on top of it like a giant hardware sandwich? I think this would be awkward. Why would a PS3 owner go out and spend $70-100 extra to play PS3 games if they still have a PS3? If Sony follows along a similar strategy as they did with PS2, PS3 will fall in price to attract gamers who cannot afford a more modern console. I think Sony will try to push PS3 itself closer to $149-179. The module just seems like an added expense that will hardly be a convenient solution. Instead, just like Sony pushed BluRay to become a successor to DVD, they should push Cloud gaming as the next big thing in console gaming. They should just make all PS1, 2, 3 games on the Cloud for PS4 owners. If they take it a step further and remaster PS3 games in FullHD, people might spend $ to replay GT5, Uncharted, GOW series in FullHD on PS4 as well. |
Did you actually think about what you just said? I didn't think so.
You somehow believe you can scale down the price of a PS3 to $179 or $149, yet you can't offer a PS3 BC module for $100. So, without a power supply, without the controllers for USB, WI-FI, Bluetooth, or SATA, and without the Blu-Ray drive and all the excess plastic and metal involved, you don't think it could cost $100?
The PS3 module wouldn't be for someone who still owns a PS3. Anyone with half a brain would understand that. The PS3 module would be for anyone who doesn't already own a PS3 but wants PS3 compatibility with the PS4 they do own. Those people who own a PS3 and a PS4, but want the PS3 module would simply be a bonus.
