There is no firmware update that can change the hardware specs of an optical drive.

If there were, there never would have been a market for a 4x DVD drive, or 4x CD-ROM, saving manufacturers the trouble of having to constantly shuffle updated hardware stock and clear outdated older stock.

I think opinions on this issue are so polarized, most people are overlooking the obvious here: both the PS3 and the 360 have made the decision to increase the standard size of their HDD (long, long overdue for the 360) to support the additional functionality each platform offers.

They simply aren't ideal for the lower cost storage options (20GB, and 40GB SKUs).

XBL video store: this feature is of extreme limited use on a 20GB SKU, due to the amount of data juggling that must be done. Barring rentals, video purchases are something most users would prefer to keep on drive for immediate access. You can't store any sort of collection on 13GB of storage at all.

And that was the chief marketing point for the Elite: it had a practical amount of space for buyers interested in video store rentals/purchases, and then Xbox Classics, as well as any other large downloads to be introduced in the future, none of which are practical on the standard 20GB drive.

I really don't care what the apologists say regarding the 20GB drive, it has been one of the more nagging issues I've had with the 360 since I bought one and the premium being charged to fix the issue (120GB HDD) is excessive only because MS has consumers over a barrel on the issue (all proprietary peripherals).

Hence the decision to upgrade HDDs to 60GB standard, as well as offer a reasonably priced kit (mainly for Arcade/Core owners) that also includes a headset (standard for online gaming) and an extra 3 months bonus of XBL Gold. A much better deal than paying $99 for a 20GB HDD, which was an underhanded way of selling an overpriced peripheral to Core/Arcade owners who realized how the lack of an HDD severely gimped the 360.

With the PS3 mandatory installs, assuming the typical user has more than just a few games and has most likely downloaded quite a few demos, that does not leave a terrible amount of space for video store purchases, even with twice the space of the standard 360 20GB.

Hence the decision to upgrade the core model to 80GB. To push the media download angle, as well as PSN game purchases, while accounting for additional game installations.

The same arguments I hear from 360 20GB SKU owners in regards to having no issues with managing data (deleting demos, videos, etc.) will end up applying to some owners of the 40GB PS3, just not quite as bad.

Anyone who claims that every PS3 owner plans to keep every single game they own installed on HDD for the lifetime of their console (assuming a non-casual gamer who won't be buying dozens of games), is either exaggerating, or one of the people who upgraded their HDD to a considerably larger standard 2.5" drive and no longer have to worry about space again.

And that is the big difference between the two platforms. One is open, one is closed. Because of this, I will not be upgrading that 20GB clip on HDD and as a result, will not be making use of optimized installs, other than for games that severely need them (Mass Effect), will not be buying any Xbox Classics (buy used copies on Ebay instead) and will not be using the 360 as any sort of media player beyond game preview clips and movie previews.

In other words, all the things that make the PS3 more usable to me as a multi-platform gamer.

Nah, it's more funny really. To their credit though, it's still only optional on the 360.

I believe the 360 still requires the disk to confirm that you actually own the game. I mean, imagine what happens to the rental and second hand business if you didn't need the disk anymore, lol.

MS already officially clarified that the game disc must be in the DVD tray to play, just like Games For Windows.

I'm sure it won't take too long for a hack to be discovered, which may end up opening a can of worms for MS, considering those gamers who don't like to pay for games. At least MS will be able to sell these guys 120GB HDDs.

As for the optional install, the 360 will have to keep that no install required policy in effect unless they want to start mailing Arcade/Core owners free 20GB drives or allow developers to release games that specify "Requires HDD to play."

I understand the optional thing.

It's just that sony was lambasted for installs when they should "only be on computers", or "PS3 is turning into a PC", but now everyone's happy to install so the disc drive can spin less, and decrease load times.  Which is all good.  But doesn't that turn 360 into a PC too?  

It's just weird how things change when it happens to your console of choice. The same thing happened with FFXIII with some of the more colorful Sony Fanboys.  Now they're downplaying it to the nth degree.

I completely agree that the uproar over installs, considering that most of them seemed to be coming from gamers who don't even own a PS3, was a great case of platform nitpicking.

The same thing applied to the FFXIII situation on the other side of the fence. There were plenty of Xbox fans who either claimed that the importance of the FF franchise was overplayed, it wouldn't make a difference in hardware sales (same thing said about MGS4), not interested in the game, etc. etc. until it was announced for the 360.

And the Xbox is essentially a fixed spec PC, optimized for gaming at a reduced cost. Same as the PS3. You can run Linux on a PS3; does anything more even need to be said about that?

Regardless, it's still easier to set up and load up games on a console than a PC. No keyboard/mouse, folders, directories required. Most games are pop in and go. Or pop in, watch the install animation and go.

One other side note in regards to optional installs, games like UTIII and Time Crisis 4 had optional installations (full installations), which I did for both, and it may be that my expectations were a little too high, but I really didn't notice much of a difference for either post full install.

My guess would be that the vast majority of games on the 360 won't see a huge difference either, but I'll wait to see what the official (non MS claims) numbers are for a variety of commonly played games.

Are you absolutely 100% sure about all this? My average per week this year for 360 has been around 132k and 180k for ps3.

2007 360= 150k a week

2007 ps3 = 144k a week

are you actually comparing july only results!?!?

not only that but in the last six weeks they have been under that 132k average.

AND

whoever said ps3 games are all mandatory install?

does anyone have a list of install games, i thought it was less than 10 really big installs (over 1 GB) atm. i could be wrong tho.

MGS4, GTA4, Assassins creed...dmc4, hotshots golf, atta luca, bourne....

 The big problem I have with installs is you can't pop in a disc and start playing. You are forced to create an ever increasing amount of data on a limited storage device. Eventually you have to delete old games and that means you can no longer just pop in the game and then play it. This system is far better than that because it retains all the strengths consoles are known for while giving it the option for something else. Similarly I think optional installs are good.

 I think calling it an install is a bit of a misnomer though. The system is just creating a disc image so you shouldn't need to have the game in the system to play it (sadly you do need it though). Still, it is funny watching some fanboys flip-flop from "even optional installs are bad," to "using HDD to speed up my load times is the best!"

Pretty cool, seems like a very significant & useful update. Another step towards being a "full PC" ;)

Another reason why I want to see the Wii II go back to cartridges...

 GT:5 Prologue, Warhawk, Virtua Fighter, Skate, Dark Sector, Heavenly Sword and a few others. Squillam posted a list eariler and gave this link: http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?s=46e53d151e914134324e0ad3036a69de&t=182682