Would it make sense for Sony to add an UHD drive in 12 months?

[Mr Puggsly]

Kerotan said:

Mr Puggsly said:

Its not a tangent, teh Cell was really expensive. PS3 would have benefited from getting rid of that more than Bluray. It was a useless expensive piece of tech in the PS3, a less expensive x86 would have made more sense then getting rid of Bluray. The Cell is also the biggest reason PS4 doesn't have BC.

Not having Bluray would have been best for Playstation 3, but would have slowed down Bluray's adoption rate. In retrospect, maybe Bluray was a bad idea PS3 given Playstation matters more to Sony. But people will argue getting Bluray off the ground was very important. Either way, if UHD was expensive it wouldn't be in X1 S.

Sony is saving money, not you. More value doesn't always come with a higher price for consumers.

Again, a tangent. It doesan't matter what other reasons you bring up. Fact is blu ray added a lot to the cost and it took away a lot of the cost of the 360. If they had swapped the blu ray from the 360 to the ps3 the adjusted prices would have made a big diffference. 

I'm not arguing whether getting blu ray was a good thing for sony or not. we were talking about Sony were the guys who pushed the cd, the dvd, the blu ray. Microsoft did none of these. it's only fair they push UHD. They're long overdue. 

No you're wrong. I am saving a consumer. I get a ps4 pro for the amazing price of $399. I don't want to be paying extra for things i don't want. 

The 360 didnt have a super processor like the Cell or Bluray because they very expensive. The entry model didnt even have a HDD.

But the X1 S does have UHD because it appears to be a relatively cheap part. You would think Sony would add UHD for at reason.

People arent paying extra for UHD in the X1 S though. I feel like youre missing that simple point. If Scorpio is more than 399, its because of that sexy beastly GPU. But you'll probably argue consumers dont need all those tflops.