Kotaku Rumor: PS4 out in November, control with your phone/tablet, maybe $429/529

Coins said:
I will be buying a PS4 on day 1 and I think they should charge for online. I want Sony to make as much money as possible to reinvest back into gaming.
Click to expand...

You assume charging online will make them more money, I assume the lost customers as a result of charging for online would be disastrous.
 
You know as long as the actual online play is free I'd be ok with locking everything else behind a paywall. All I care about on my console is playing the game anyway.
 
SneakyStephan said:
So, will there be any accountability for all the sites (with all their wildly varying rumors) claiming to have legitimate information and sources?

I hope we see some new banned sites when this is all said and done.
Clickbait is diluting game 'journalism' to the point where it's impossible to find any information, even if you go look for it on a compilation forum like gaf.



Well do feel free to share your findings and publicly shame him.
Click to expand...

I still dont understand why rumors are bad for video games but with almost every other industry you have highly respected journalists who have made a living by reporting rumors.

Just tune in to ESPN or pick up any sports related newspaper/magazine around the MLB trade deadline or right before the NFL draft.
 
Coins said:
I will be buying a PS4 on day 1 and I think they should charge for online. I want Sony to make as much money as possible to reinvest back into gaming.
Click to expand...

Why will you be buying a console you know nothing about on day 1?

God, it's statements like these that cause these console production companies to think that they can do anything they want and people will still buy the god damned devices.

Honestly, paying for online will just mean that I buy none of the next gen consoles -- which is already enticing anyway.
 
mentalfloss said:
Like PS2 DVD playback.
Click to expand...

tell me you're not really ignoring how the ps1 was assumed to be "dead on arrival" until a plethora of games started to be released for it?

Games such as FFVII and Metal Gear Solid.

Tell me you're not really ignoring how the ps2 was assumed to be a massive failure until a plethora of games started to be released for it?

I do remember a "welcome to the 3rd place" ad for it...


And before you say the same words about the ps3 let me remind you how it's considered a failure since it's in 3rd place despite having a better line-up of games...
 
I assume not all about the PS4 will be revealed, there has to be enough information to talk about at E3. I assume the specs as well aren't locked, they're probably waiting for Microsoft to announce theirs then they'll increase the specs to be much better.
 
Mr.Wreckless said:
I still dont understand why rumors are bad for video games but with almost every other industry you have highly respected journalists who have made a living by reporting rumors.

Just tune in to ESPN or pick up any sports related newspaper/magazine around the MLB trade deadline or right before the NFL draft.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Of course neogafs banning of certain blogs/sites has always struck me as terribly weird in the scheme of things.
 
UberTag said:
If Microsoft offers a $199 subsidized upgrade path for Durango on contract and/or locks down an exclusive "Xbox as enhanced cable box" contract with Comcast at launch
Click to expand...
...which will probably not happen. Too much of a pipe dream. Plus, I'd love to see them try this in their favourite continent, Europe. You'd think MS would learn, but eh.

As for the whole contract thing, would that include Live Gold or whatever they choose to call it next gen? Nonetheless, it'd be a huge ripoff - this is Microsoft - and people would indeed be wise to it. Plus the whole "no used games" thing would make it a huge no-no for most of us in the UK, at least - unless they started renting out older games with the contract, kinda like PS+. But nah, MS would never be that cool.

EDIT: 1000 dew Points wat
 
3rdamention said:
I agree...The people saying Sony should charge for online are people who have zero interest in buying a PS4.. Also its interestin who all have come out of the woodwork today...
Click to expand...
As a PS3 and Vita owner (chances are you're probably not in the 2nd category), I have a vested interest in Sony's ecosystem.

I know as a dedicated gamer that wants to see them not only survive this next generation but thrive, Sony needs to be far more adept at generating revenue than they have been in the past in order to fix their marketing, keep their first-party studios afloat and counter the aggressive subsidized purchase plans Microsoft will be rolling out for Durango this fall.

Microsoft generates over a half-billion dollars in revenue in LIVE subscriptions annually (I'm actually low-balling that number - it's probably well over that). This is revenue Sony could sorely benefit from having.

Frankly, I would argue that YOU have no interesting in supporting Sony by saying they shouldn't charge for online. Because instead of showing an appreciation for Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Polyphony and Sony's rich development culture and IPs, you're only coming across as being cheap because you don't want to cough up the equivalent of one game purchase/year to support their online infrastructure.

(Having an additional revenue stream in place could also help to stave off attacks like the one that took their entire network offline for a month and compromised thousands of accounts back in 2011.)
 
I'm surprised many of you aren't expecting $499. Next gen hardware, evolved controller, camera, and possibly 500GB-1TB HDD. Non turd pack 360's and PS3's still go for 200+. PS3 bundles go for 300+. $399 would be the sweet spot. $299 would be straight up robbery. But yeah, I'm expecting $499. $450 would be nice..
 
Zephyrus said:
tell me you're not really ignoring how the ps1 was assumed to be "dead on arrival" until a plethora of games started to be released for it?

Games such as FFVII and Metal Gear Solid.

Tell me you're not really ignoring how the ps2 was assumed to be a massive failure until a plethora of games started to be released for it?
Click to expand...

I think you're misreading my comment.

Obviously games sell consoles, but other features can also exist on platforms and there's nothing wrong with that.

Also, PS2 was not considered to be a massive failure at any point in time and I don't know anyone who considered the PS1 DOA when it came out.
 
3rdamention said:
I agree...The people saying Sony should charge for online are people who have zero interest in buying a PS4.. Also its interestin who all have come out of the woodwork today...
Click to expand...
Some of us realize that anything that helps Sony bring in more money is good for Sony, and good for us with Playstations. I won't pay for the service as I don't play console games online (don't pay for Live either), but I'll be picking up a PS4 day one assuming it's around $399.
lol51 said:
You assume charging online will make them more money, I assume the lost customers as a result of charging for online would be disastrous.
Click to expand...
If the service is as good as Live is, why would that be? Why would it work for Microsoft but not Sony?

Serious question.
 
Zephyrus said:
tell me you're not really ignoring how the ps1 was assumed to be "dead on arrival" until a plethora of games started to be released for it?

Games such as FFVII and Metal Gear Solid.
Click to expand...

This isn't correct at all. The PS1 put the saturn and 3D0 in an early grave, by showing better looking titles like Toshinden at launch (vs. Virtua fighter 1) and undercutting the saturn by $100 out of the gate. It was the early success that helped land FFVII, not the other way around.

Tell me you're not really ignoring how the ps2 was assumed to be a massive failure until a plethora of games started to be released for it?
Click to expand...

the PS2 sold out immediately and stayed that way, with very few games. it killed the dreamcast in a matter of months long before Metal Gear was even released.

And before you say the same words about the ps3 let me remind you how it's considered a failure since it's in 3rd place despite having a better line-up of games...
Click to expand...

The PS3 has sold the same amount of systems as the 360 with a year less on the market. it's considered a failure only because of the amount of money sony sank into it, not total consoles sold. even at 100 million consoles, it still won't make that money back.
 
If it launches at $399 and $499 and the Xbox 3 launches at the same price points (i think it will) both systems are going to be in a world of hurt. That's too expensive.
 
I hope they really aren't shipping it with Playstation Eye. That's just going to inflate the price and make the barrier to entry higher.
 
$430 for the lesser skew is too much for me to get in before a price drop. I don't think I'm getting either console on launch (pending some groundbreaking game) but no way on that. Lets hope these prices are rumors.
 
Coins said:
I will be buying a PS4 on day 1 and I think they should charge for online. I want Sony to make as much money as possible to reinvest back into gaming.
Click to expand...

Holy shit I wish we had that kind of customer in my industry.

"Man, my bank is releasing this new structured finance product next month, I'm totally gonna get it day 1, hope they charge an extra fee so they can reinvest into their profitable and socially responsible mortgage portfolio."
 
Gannd said:
If it launches at $399 and $499 and the Xbox 3 launches at the same price points (i think it will) both systems are going to be in a world of hurt. That's too expensive.
Click to expand...

It's doable.

They're just giving Nintendo the lead again while the payoff on their respective platforms will not come for a few years.
 
Gannd said:
If it launches at $399 and $499 and the Xbox 3 launches at the same price points (i think it will) both systems are going to be in a world of hurt. That's too expensive.
Click to expand...

399 is too expensive for a game console? Cell phones are more than that. Cell phones people dont keep for 5+ years.
 
Mr.Wreckless said:
I still dont understand why rumors are bad for video games but with almost every other industry you have highly respected journalists who have made a living by reporting rumors.

Just tune in to ESPN or pick up any sports related newspaper/magazine around the MLB trade deadline or right before the NFL draft.
Click to expand...

Because games "journalists" are fucking terrible at their jobs.
 
Sakura said:
I hope they really aren't shipping it with Playstation Eye. That's just going to inflate the price and make the barrier to entry higher.
Click to expand...

Matching Kinect 2.0 I presume.

I don't really care about the price of the system. It's all about the games. I'd like for it to be as cheap as possible, but unless Gran Turismo 6 is a launch title, I won't be buying one until 2014 anyways.
 
I have a feelin if my cat, Kitty Marie, said something seemingly negative about the PS4, a few people in this thread would vouch for her credibility and call her reliable..
 
This thread is hilarious, I want wait till next year when all the ps fans will be saying that ps world is great and worth it but xbl is crap even though xbl will have more features.
 
Zephyrus said:
There's a reason this is by far the worst gen ever.
Click to expand...

I've been gaming since the early 1980s and you're talking complete crap. There have been negatives to this gen for sure but the wealth of games available (pretty much all that really matters) has been ridiculous. Especially thanks to the growth of services like PSN / XBLA and indie developers on the PC.
 
Puppet Shadow said:
Some of us realize that anything that helps Sony bring in more money is good for Sony...
Click to expand...

A strong competitive Sony results in a much more innovative Nintendo and balls out Microsoft. Right now Sony is still on it's heels on the recovery process, they need whatever lines of income they can get. We as gamers should want Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo on level playing fields, because that's when console innovation gets the most interesting.
 
Puppet Shadow said:
Some of us realize that anything that helps Sony bring in more money is good for Sony, and good for us with Playstations. I won't pay for the service as I don't play console games online (don't pay for Live either), but I'll be picking up a PS4 day one assuming it's around $399.
If the service is as good as Live is, why would that be? Why would it work for Microsoft but not Sony?

Serious question.
Click to expand...
Because people on Xbox are used to the price for online play. One of the advantages of PS3 was that there was free online play. So people that have a PS3 and are switching to PS4 might not take the change as well.
 
Mr.Wreckless said:
399 is too expensive for a game console? Cell phones are more than that. Cell phones people dont keep for 5+ years.
Click to expand...

Their not too expensive at that price; but phones do other things and are generally far more important in terms of basic functions to modern life.

The fact phones are multiplied in price across the board only means people are spending hundreds more on something that is not a games console.

You can't compare the prices of entirely different products.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Medal of Honor: Allied Assault’s Scuttling the U-529 Mission made in Unreal Engine 5.5
Trailer 
49
307
crackajack replied
FInal Fantasy IX Remake still the works, release maybe in 2026 according to NateTheHate
Rumor  2
53
3K
Oberstein replied
  • Poll
Do you game with your phone on you? (POLL)
25
1K
GinSama replied
Sources tell Kotaku both Microsoft and Nintendo are still working on getting Call of Duty on Switch 2 and will announce something in the future
Rumor Platform 
18
68
Kerotan replied
GeForce RTX 5060 Ti launching April 16th, 8GB/16GB $379/$429
News Drama  2 3
112
5K
Insane Metal replied
Top Bottom