Zen_Arcade
Banned
If you're not going to believe the guy on twitter, or the people vouching for him, maybe you should go find out who he is yourself.
Kotaku Rumor: PS4 out in November, control with your phone/tablet, maybe $429/529
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
MikeE21286
Member
Ill pay for an improved service. No qualms bout it. I pay for XBL ill pay for PSN.
I also have 6 years worth of PlayStation plus cards so....
I also have 6 years worth of PlayStation plus cards so....
nckillthegrimace
Member
$430 and $530 are such bizarre prices. Why not round it up to the $50 mark or down to an even hundred?
Some of the cut off prices confuse me.
The white WiiU is 299. GTX670 is 390 and GTX680 is 480. Lowest size iphone is 549 (199 price for phone and 350 verizon instant contract termination fee). I understand that PS4 are sold at a loss, but come on and be realistic here. This is going to be the primary couch gaming device for the next few years.
The launch PS3 price in 2006 was $599... in today's money that is $682.18 (Latest US CPI inflation numbers). You guys expect the PS4 to be half the 2006 price? What kind of tech is supposed to be in this thing?
The white WiiU is 299. GTX670 is 390 and GTX680 is 480. Lowest size iphone is 549 (199 price for phone and 350 verizon instant contract termination fee). I understand that PS4 are sold at a loss, but come on and be realistic here. This is going to be the primary couch gaming device for the next few years.
The launch PS3 price in 2006 was $599... in today's money that is $682.18 (Latest US CPI inflation numbers). You guys expect the PS4 to be half the 2006 price? What kind of tech is supposed to be in this thing?
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
RamzaIsCool
The Amiga Brotherhood
So now were resorting to attacking aegies, okay.
Sony needs money. Putting multiplayer behind a $60 dollars a year paywall gives them a huge net gain. Say they aren't actually profitable with the system (which they won't be since since consoles aren't profitable for a few years after launch unless you're Nintendo) and they have a subscription service, now they are negating losses from the console, and making profit on royalties.
It's about the money. Microsoft has been doing it, and I will guarantee Sony execs have had many discussions to if they should make everything a paid service like Live.
Launch the system with 3 months included, then after that start charging $9.99 for a single month, $19.99 for 3, and $59.99 for a year. It's an instant money maker for Sony and it looks way better on those quarterly financial reports.
It's about the money. Microsoft has been doing it, and I will guarantee Sony execs have had many discussions to if they should make everything a paid service like Live.
Launch the system with 3 months included, then after that start charging $9.99 for a single month, $19.99 for 3, and $59.99 for a year. It's an instant money maker for Sony and it looks way better on those quarterly financial reports.
Pristine_Condition
Member
While I've been laughing at some of your more vitriolic posts, I agree with this completely. $399 is "priced to sell" as they say in retail. Anything over that is telling consumers to wait for a price drop. And anyone who thinks Microsoft won't want to repeat last gen's strategy of always being lower in price than PS just doesn't get it. When MS finds something that works, they hammer it and hammer it until it stops working.
I think Sony has proven they can make a PS+ service people are happily willing to pay for without holding online gaming hostage. I know if I still had a PS3, I'd be a paying PS+ member. The benefits are too good to pass up.
They should have even more compelling hooks to get people into paying for a PS+-style service with their new cloud integration and features.
Sticky
Evilore said:
illustrative right here.
Pristine_Condition said:
I know I was. PlayStation+ is the only subscription service I was actually glad to pay for in the end. I'm sure if they have a mandatory online subscription for online gaming, it'll include some of the benefits of PS+, but then it'd leave a bad taste in my mouth, as I'm sure it will for many others.
Manmademan
Member
eh, if it's anything like PS+ there's not really much of a complaint to be made.
That service throws so many free games at you (especially if you own a vita) that it easily makes the cost of the service worth it several times over.
Vita not charging for multiplayer online (and including party chat to boot) kind of makes me think Sony isn't going to charge for basic online play, but will for all the extra goodies like streaming, sharing, free games, etc.
JohnnySasaki86
Member
This part most definitely. No question about it. Sad.
Ozzykamikaze
Member
First thing I thought.
Can we have reasons why someone is reliable? I can just as easily say the opposite, and I have no sauce discrepancies in my past.
AZ Greg
Member
Because then it fragments things and makes finding a team even harder than normal. Similar to the lack of headsets you find playing online games on the consoles that didn't include a headset with the system.
I get where you're coming from, but there is no way Sony splits voice chat and gaming. Both will be paid or both will be free. Now maybe party chat can be split off...
MikeE21286
Member
Except those are everyday things you use and are considered "necessities" in life now-a-days. A gaming console is what it is, a gaming console first and foremost. It could come with all the features of an all-in-one entertainment center/hub, but it will be looked at as a gaming console. It isn't going to be nearly used as much as a tablet/phone. It's a correlation between the time you're going to use it, and the price. To most, a phone/tablet is a lot more valuable than a gaming console.
Your avatar goes perfectly with your reply.
Snowden's Secret
Banned
My county held a vote to raise a tax to build a library, it would have cost every taxpayer $0.02 per year. And it was defeated.
On topic, some things are more important than the money. I waste $15 on stupid shit everyday, but at least I'm wasting it on stupid shit and not giving it to a multinational corporation to render a service that costs them literally nothing and is available free mostly elsewhere.
yeah... source that has access to dev kits and PS4 pricing?
that would be almost impossible to combine.
Duxxy3
Member
I'd be more accepting of XBLG if it used dedicated servers. Paying for host based multiplayer is just dumb.
Infinite Justice
Member
i say basic online will be free
everything else that can really spice it up is on the paywall so you are enticed to pay for it anyway.
everything else that can really spice it up is on the paywall so you are enticed to pay for it anyway.
The idea will probably be that you aren't technically paying to play online, since that may still be free, but all of the juicy features that Plus and Live offer right now that make playing online fun will be a part of the sub. "Free online play" is a great phrase to be able to put on a box.
He's got a real point, Sony had some awful missteps that knocked them off the top of the Hill. Their profit margin disappeared and dove into the red. Really the only thing that amir0x is ignoring is that sony went to great lengths to at least attempt to win it's audience back through the course of the generation, and I'd argue, it's an endeavor that is largely successful. It's latter first party exclusives, consistant evolution of online services and features such as psplus, price reductions and increase of value, and even things like working with developers to overcome strange architecture choices under krazy ken; all these problems were adressed and forced sony to change for the better. So I agree that sony did dig a grave for itself early on in PS3's lifecycle, but has done a pretty damn fine job of crawling itself out and making the best of a debauched launch window and rough early years, passing through a fluid leadership and directions. No easy task for a corporation during widespread financial crisis. Financial impact to Sony aside, I do believe that PS3 proved itself to be an essential part of this generation of videogames for the consumers. (Which is what I would hope we all agree matters).
Don't want trouble like that, just redirection into addressing points is all.
Personally, the way the rumor is worded, I have to imagine it means either someone intentionally leaked that price to see what the reaction would be, or it's something that is no longer being considered (after all, didn't we hear in the UK of a price that, minus VAT, would be $400? And didn't we hear there would be only one SKU? Times seems like a much more reliable source to boot)
Awwwww.
The secret sauce thing was never my term. I said there was other hardware, some of which I named specifically, all of which has been shown to be true.
Falling back on the usual: you can believe me or not. Dent isn't generally talking out of his ass. I'm sorry if the thing he's saying/implying makes you really mad.
Baconsammy
Banned
Wait, we trusted Kevin Dent last week but not now? Come on.
I wish I could remember what he leaked last week that people approved of. Or he confirmed something. There's too many leaks to keep track of.
I wish I could remember what he leaked last week that people approved of. Or he confirmed something. There's too many leaks to keep track of.
gamergirly
Member
Might as well get the pricing over with. In no magical universe will the PS4 be $350 or lower. And Sony probably has an internal limit figured out as to the amount they will be willing to lose on the hardware. I don't see a drastic reaction to Microsoft's new system, which is positioned for $$$ and protecting third parties
Johnny Cage In The Shower
Member
I agree with this, plus who knows the amount of tech we are getting with this thing, technology has improved a lot since 2006, but nothing has really gotten cheaper, heck an iPhone on its own cost like 600-700 bucks today! Smartphones have been around since 2008, and they cost 500-600 bucks, same with a decent tablet, that does more than read ebooks and play Angry birds.
I agree it's not wise to overprice it, but I doubt Sony can afford to keep losing a large chunk of money on their hardware.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Seems like we're getting every possible price leaked except the most popular......$399
Version 3.0
Member
You kind of had me until this part. Sony really turned the PS3 around over the course of the gen. They can't afford another machine that sells 70+ million units? That's crazy talk. The market has changed. They're not likely to get another world-beating 150+ million-selling console that takes the lion's share of exclusive games. If they can sell as many PS4s as they did PS3s, they'll be doing fine. If they can sell more, they'll be doing great.
Oppo
Member
Well no one except their large base of PS+ subscribers.
I think they basically survived that whole thing intact. No one will remember in a year at all.
BruiserBear
Banned
Neuromancer
Member
They absolutely could. It's not like it hurt the 360.they wouldn't put MP behind a paywall, right? right?
mentalfloss
Banned
Too expensive.
It's going to be a slow burn for a couple of years before they finally get a decent library of games at an appealing pricepoint. Hopefully I'm wrong tomorrow, but otherwise Sony kinda fucked up.
It's going to be a slow burn for a couple of years before they finally get a decent library of games at an appealing pricepoint. Hopefully I'm wrong tomorrow, but otherwise Sony kinda fucked up.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
If they're going to charge, there going to charge for everything and not leave out feature they' know everyone will need. Otherwise why charge for all that superfluous shit when they know not that many people will pay for it.
They can't be seeing that added revenue Microsoft is getting an NOT want something for themselves.
They can't be seeing that added revenue Microsoft is getting an NOT want something for themselves.
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
Why?
No built in HW back compat, blu-ray tech is much cheaper now, and I imagine the R&D was also considerably cheaper than that of the PS3's, why should we expect the system to be so expensive?
If this is a penny over £349.99 then I'm out.
KefkaPalazzo
Member
Anything over $400 will turn off customers...over $500? Sony cannot be that stupid...anymore.
Yeah, I'm not convinced that things that are currently available now for free on both the PS3 and Vita are going to suddenly be pushed behind a paywall. I think the likeliest scenario is that Sony is going to be putting any new online feature they introduce with the PS4 behind the pay wall. In other words people who aren't paying are probably going to miss out on alot of new stuff Sony will put out, but if you don't give two shits about anything outside of online play, they'll be fine.
Deadly Joker
Member
Kevin Dent is the hero GAF deserves.