Officially Detailed Firmware Updates: PS3 (v2.50) / PSP (v5.00)


Recommended Posts

You say the very same thing over and over to all of us about the Games/Services/Features of the PS3 etc.

Killzone 2 was prime example of that in previous threads.

Our discussion was on graphics, something pretty easy to compare from preview builds, and in general.

Graphics are graphics, a whole service/product has a lot more scope involved.

In the Bioshock thread you said something along the lines of "does this mean the PS3s power is being showen?"

I pointed you in the direction of KZ2, as technically it's more impressive than Bioshock on the PS3. Art direction is an opinion.

NXE has got way more chance of delivering than Home will, that's for sure.

Home will be one of the products which will be used intially for awhile, maybe even a week then dumped like yesterdays news.

NXE however, will be still used by the users.

Everything about the PS3 in terms of services/features is tacked on. Life with Playstation, Trophies, Home etc its all tacked on.

Um contradiction of what you're trying to call me out for?

You're telling me how both services will pan out?

Even on a pure "this is my opinion folks" based moral, it's still bold talk till we have release notes detailing everything/hands-on and community experience (product being on the market for "x" amount of time).

Don't think anyone knows that till we see them in the flesh and actually operating amongst the community.

Well NXE is obviously going to be carried on being used as it's the main GUI of the 360, Home is not - It's a supplement service to the main GUI of the PS3, XMB. One reason comparing them hits a hitch.

Edited by Audioboxer

NXE IS live.

Home isn't PSN, it's merely a 3D virtual social network thingy using PSN.

The only thing comparable is that NXE is a big product launch MS is using to push consoles, and Home is a big product launch used to push consoles.

but product wise there's nothing to compare.

it's still NXE/live(same product) vs PSN (and home isn't a part of PSN, it's just another producty using PSN).

Wich is why the versus thread was stupid. of course more peopel anticipate NXE, it's a major key upgrade of Live. Whereas Home is a sepaate product that doesn't, or at least shouldn't, add any features you can't get through the more accessible non 3D walking around my cool epeed apartment. Thoguh ufnortunatelythough I'm not sure) I beleve Sony is adding features in home such that you can't get without using home, to push it's usage, such as video sharing and possibly photo sharing... though I dunnp, maybe they are or will be in the regular PSN/XMB too..

NXE IS live.

Home isn't PSN, it's merely a 3D virtual social network thingy using PSN.

The only thing comparable is that NXE is a big product launch MS is using to push consoles, and Home is a big product launch used to push consoles.

but product wise there's nothing to compare.

it's still NXE/live(same product) vs PSN (and home isn't a part of PSN, it's just another producty using PSN).

Wich is why the versus thread was stupid. of course more peopel anticipate NXE, it's a major key upgrade of Live. Whereas Home is a sepaate product that doesn't, or at least shouldn't, add any features you can't get through the more accessible non 3D walking around my cool epeed apartment. Thoguh ufnortunatelythough I'm not sure) I beleve Sony is adding features in home such that you can't get without using home, to push it's usage, such as video sharing and possibly photo sharing... though I dunnp, maybe they are or will be in the regular PSN/XMB too..

Yeah I agree with most of that.

Although NXE is introducing new social aspects to Live, avatars/avatar uses, community games (like those that will be in Home), ect.

If it were just a simple graphical overhaul I'd be inclined to just say it merely ='s Live.

However it's more than that, it's not the same old live with a lick of paint anymore.

But you're totally right, comparisons should still be PSN vs Live, not solely Home vs Live, or Home vs NXE.

The comparison later this year will come down to the impact each updates makes for the overall services, not just the updates themselves, and then after some time for food for thought, you'll probably see the PSN vs Live debates rage up again.

The avatar ir just a 3D... avatar though.

Games have allready been using the gamerpic, now they'll use the avatar instead.

All the games using the avatar are second to the NXE itself. The avatars being stylised and such is also what helps with this.

The home avatars I don't see being used in too many games like this. Most advanced game that fall in the realisti style would rather use the atual main character of the game. then there's the omplexisty behind rendering the realistic avatar. It's render profile may only fall partially within or completely outside the render profile of the games, wich use a variety of game enignes and such.

And the simpler downloadable "arcade" style games, probably fall well below the visual style ar of the realistic home avatar.

The NXE/Live avatar is pretty much made to fit into any game, and to be usable by any of the games that are in the segment where using the avatar is a design cosideration at all. If the avatars had been realistic, like Home, then the rest of the game would have had to be as well, and developement cost and time would have inreased substantially, and we probably wouldn't have seen games like 1vs100 and such using them.

So it's not really a fair comparison either, The home avatar is your virtual presentation in home. The NXE avatar is your virtual avatar in everything. even older games using the gamerpic are supposed to have and avatar based gaerpic (at least as a possibility)

At least with BL ahed on features, PSN is constantly being updated to try and catch up, and as long as Sony tries to catch up, MS will keep developing to stay ahead. wich is good news.

Next generation will be more interesting though as then PSN will have a solid base, sony will have learnt from their mistakes and They'll know to set rules and limits on their developers and with a solid base they can concentrate on competing more tha just catching up. wich leads to more innovation from both sides.

The avatar ir just a 3D... avatar though.

Games have allready been using the gamerpic, now they'll use the avatar instead.

All the games using the avatar are second to the NXE itself. The avatars being stylised and such is also what helps with this.

The home avatars I don't see being used in too many games like this. Most advanced game that fall in the realisti style would rather use the atual main character of the game. then there's the omplexisty behind rendering the realistic avatar. It's render profile may only fall partially within or completely outside the render profile of the games, wich use a variety of game enignes and such.

And the simpler downloadable "arcade" style games, probably fall well below the visual style ar of the realistic home avatar.

The NXE/Live avatar is pretty much made to fit into any game, and to be usable by any of the games that are in the segment where using the avatar is a design cosideration at all. If the avatars had been realistic, like Home, then the rest of the game would have had to be as well, and developement cost and time would have inreased substantially, and we probably wouldn't have seen games like 1vs100 and such using them.

So it's not really a fair comparison either, The home avatar is your virtual presentation in home. The NXE avatar is your virtual avatar in everything. even older games using the gamerpic are supposed to have and avatar based gaerpic (at least as a possibility)

At least with BL ahed on features, PSN is constantly being updated to try and catch up, and as long as Sony tries to catch up, MS will keep developing to stay ahead. wich is good news.

Next generation will be more interesting though as then PSN will have a solid base, sony will have learnt from their mistakes and They'll know to set rules and limits on their developers and with a solid base they can concentrate on competing more tha just catching up. wich leads to more innovation from both sides.

To be completely fair Hawkman, while you make some good points, we have no idea how Home avatars are going to be integrated into XMB - If they won't be/if they will, and if they will, how?

Will there be Home gamer cards with your avatar/trophies?

Will Home avatars be replaceable for main characters in games?

Only Sony know the plans behind the service for smaller details like these so far.

Many assumptions being made about Home around these sections just now though.

Much more scope for change/unexpected things out of it, than NXE. It's an organic supplement service, as opposed to a tied in integral service.

Not saying that's good nor bad, we just know more about what NXE aims to establish from the get go, than Home.

Partly thanks to Sony delaying and rejigging the service countless times.

Partly due to the organic nature of services like these. Think WoW day 1, vs WoW year 2.

I also predict while it's a supplement service to XMB, Sony will do everything they can to encourage you to use Home, and tie it into XMB every way possible, without making mandatories where possible (Some people will just plain and simply want a 2D interface, end of).

Background Downloading - You now have the option to set the PS3 to turn off automatically after a background download or installation of content has completed. This option is available when you turn off the system from the button under [users] while content is being downloaded or installed.

This means we will be able to access XMB while we install stuff?!

Nice to see some updates there especially the turning off of the controllers :)

Being honest, it does all I need it to do. The whole comparison of machines gets a bit long in the tooth after a while. People will always have their favorites and always ask why they can't see 'Feature x on Console y' well chances are, if it's not already there it's because they are busy working on other things or already have it planned later down the line.

If all machines could do the same things and had the same things we would end up with 1 console :) Be happy with your purchase, you bought it for a reason.

ummm ?

Sucks and Still sucks ? :p

Hah, good try, but not about how enjoyable you find the game.

It's about how much content had been added/has changed since day 1.

You could probbly have picked a better eample than WoW for new content added though :p

as much as many peope hate SoE, most of their MMO have had mroe content added to them in 2 months, through free content updates than the average yearly WoW expansion :p

but.,.. off topic :)

Nothing in that update shouts at me and says "wow". I just look at that and think meh, why was it not already there. I mean only *now* getting auto off for the controller? Geez.

I just don't get posts like these, why should they of been there in the start? Because others already had them? Not every operating system has to be the same. Yes it's a great feature, that doesn't mean it should of been there in the start, it just would of been desirable. Being honest though, as the PS3 controllers use an internal battery that is charged through the system, it's not as 'essential' as on the 360 which uses standard AA batteries in my view.

I guess Sony have other things to be doing than updating their OS every time there is something they have missed off that someone points out they would like.

I just don't get posts like these, why should they of been there in the start? Because others already had them? Not every operating system has to be the same. Yes it's a great feature, that doesn't mean it should of been there in the start, it just would of been desirable. Being honest though, as the PS3 controllers use an internal battery that is charged through the system, it's not as 'essential' as on the 360 which uses standard AA batteries in my view.

I guess Sony have other things to be doing than updating their OS every time there is something they have missed off that someone points out they would like.

It really was an overlooked, yet highly wanted feature though, but hey it's there now. It shouldn't have taken almost 2 years to come, but your point about every controller being rechargeable does hold some ground. If my PS3 was chewing through AA batteries I'd be much more annoyed.

That would be costing me money, as opposed to just the effort of getting up to charge! Don't get me wrong though, I'm rather glad we have this update now. I watch a lot of films/tv shows through my PS3 and forget to turn off the DS3 every time, draining battery for hours.

The only thing I don't understand is people expecting every PS3 FW update to absolutely floor everyone :laugh:

Sony drip feed updates throughout the year, rather than 1 or 2 big updates, and EVERYONE should know that by now. Which is why I don't get some of the apparent complaining when there's only 3, 4 or 5 new features as oppose to say MS offloading like 20 at once.

It's a different way than MS do it, but it achieves the same end goal - adding new features to the console OS :yes:

Also we also know the PS3 does not equal the 360, and it's behind in some areas - But we don't really need reminded that every single time the PS3 gets updated with something the 360 has already :p

Edited by Audioboxer

i don't understand why some people think every update from sony has to be groundbreaking state of the art type stuff. i know some of the update are late, thats obvious and everyone knows it. no need to be so harsh about it.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!