Support NeoGAF

[njean777]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use. In the past this was a reasonable deal since the priceerformance made it a reasonably fair trade. You agree to be locked into their exclusive economy and in exchange they give you hardware that you couldn't get for that price anywhere else - except perhaps from a competing console.

This gen you're getting a console that under performs relative to PCs that can be built for comparable prices. You're agreeing to lock yourself into their exclusive economy and getting what in return exactly?

I am getting my preferred way to play and a decent console for 400$, so why does that make you so mad that I am happy? Oh right, because you have nothing better to do then complain about something that has no affect on you whatsoever. Also retail competes with digital pricing on these platforms, you act as if we can only buy stuff on the PS store/xbox store and nowhere else. I can go to any amount of retail stores or amazon and save money on games if I choose to. Do not act like you can only buy stuff on the PS store/xbox store.

 

[RadarScope1]

do you not understand how the market works? if said company goes bankrupt another company will rise and take its place.

Yes, with a different business model. MOBAs or Candy Crush for everyone.

Personally I think it's ludicrous to expect Sony to take a huge hit on every box sold when the overall company is in such a tough financial position. Next cycle might be different but to expect another PS3 style luxury box at this time is to simply live in an alternate universe of one's own imagination. I understand the desire for it (why wouldn't you want more power), but it ain't gonna come from Sony this cycle. Besides, to my eyes PS4 games look amaze balls and I trust what Cerny says about the design being super scalable.

Hopefully this helps them gain footing to keep making more TLOUs, Second Sons and The Orders.

 

[test_account]

Not true, which is the big issue this gen.

Even sites like Gamespot are running articles on this: http://www.gamespot.com/articles/can-we-build-a-gaming-pc-on-a-console-budget/1100-6418829/

They build a couple of systems that substantially outperform the PS4 for substantially inflated prices of around $550 each. I say inflated since they randomly decided to include tax, which most people will not pay when ordering online and $70 for a windows license which is silly if you do 10 minutes of shopping around, let alone if you already have an existing license you can transfer. They also randomly added in higher performance (and cost) things like a 7200 RPM HDD when the consoles use cheaper 5400 RPM drives.

The actual price is shockingly close to a retail PS4 price. It doesn't actually make any sense. First off those systems are not just pushing for parity, they're outperforming the PS4 and when Sony orders 5million units straight from the manufacturing line they are certainly getting a heck of a lot better deal than you or I do ordering items piecemeal from third party retailers. I shouldn't be able to get a PS4 comparable PC for a comparable price, but I can.

You have to keep in mind that the PS4 is a custom built unit, its not mass produced (relatively speaking) in smaller parts like PC parts are. Once consoles are produced in much bigger volumes, pricedrops usually follows as well.

I also dont see why you shouldnt be able to get a PC with similar performance compared to a console. Both things are hardware The days of where console manufacturer takes a big hit seems to be over.

They included a 3.5" HDD in that PC test while PS4 uses a 2.5" drive. I dont think the prices are that much difference. I see 500GB 5400RPM 2.5" drives at Newegg.com for around $50.

 

[Phades]

I think it is interesting how Sony imitated the Nintendo approach (minus the gimmick) by having moderate hardware without a complicated design that is profitable day 1 and allow the economics of scale to increase margins over time. It makes sense for the buisness to act in this manner after the PS3, in order to get profitable in the shortest amount of time possible.

This doesn't do much for me as a gamer, especially since I also game on a PC and I expect this generation to be a similar duration to the previous one with the continual spiral upward of inflated software costs/smaller content offerings on software, services and features.. I do find it interesting that they did this and still managed to be the most powerful (non-PC) console on the market currently and was initially less expensive than the Microsoft offering.

I think the (potentially) sad take away from this situation is that there will be no strong tech push going forward in the console market anymore. It wouldn't surprise me if the next generation is also conservative like this one and anything "pushing the bounderies" will be using older and more "well established" practices instead of experimentation and only making marginal steps outside of comfort zones. Things like VR, I almost expect to be sold as either an enthusiast add on or at a premium teir for the experience and intially segregating the market in the generation it is introduced with the following generation having a more blue ocean approach to implementation and adoption using established practices and a smaller tech leap than the previous generation made overal.

 

[phxxBullet]

You have to keep in mind that the PS4 is a custom built unit, its not mass produced (relatively speaking) in smaller parts like PC parts are. Once consoles are produced in much bigger volumes, pricedrops usually follows as well.

I also dont see why you shouldnt be able to get a PC with similar performance compared to a console. Both things are hardware The days of where console manufacturer takes a big hit seems to be over.

They included a 3.5" HDD in that PC test while PS4 uses a 2.5" drive. I dont think the prices are that much difference. I see 500GB 5400RPM 2.5" drives at Newegg.com for around $50.

For the HDD part, 7200RPM drives are usually cheaper by 10-20bucks, depending on the model tho. And I bet this is what he meant.

 

[gatti-man]

Yes, with a different business model. MOBAs or Candy Crush for everyone.

Personally I think it's ludicrous to expect Sony to take a huge hit on every box sold when the overall company is in such a tough financial position. Next cycle might be different but to expect another PS3 style luxury box at this time is to simply live in an alternate universe of one's own imagination. I understand the desire for it (why wouldn't you want more power), but it ain't gonna come from Sony this cycle. Besides, to my eyes PS4 games look amaze balls and I trust what Cerny says about the design being super scalable.

Hopefully this helps them gain footing to keep making more TLOUs, Second Sons and The Orders.

My year old pc stomps what I've seen in the ps4 so far except for some parts of killzone SF. It's been pretty underwhelming compared to 360/ps3 launch for me and I had an even beefier pc at that time. I don't fault sony but it does leave the door open for short generations or someone reseting the balance of power.

 

[Principate]

You have to keep in mind that the PS4 is a custom built unit, its not mass produced (relatively speaking) in smaller parts like PC parts are. Once consoles are produced in much bigger volumes, pricedrops usually follows as well.

I also dont see why you shouldnt be able to get a PC with similar performance compared to a console. Both things are hardware The days of where console manufacturer takes a big hit seems to be over.

They included a 3.5" HDD in that PC test while PS4 uses a 2.5" drive. I dont think the prices are that much difference. I see 500GB 5400RPM 2.5" drives at Newegg.com for around $50.

Retail parts have a large mark up in comparison to businesses it's entirely in comparable unless the product in question is bombing. The fact it's custom built doesn't come into it (especially since the architecture isn't that exotic.) Sony is buying those parts in bulk, economies of scale and all that. This is ignoring that Sony is a major electronics company to begin with and so it would cost them less due to contacts and potentially their own factories.

 

[Averon]

The days of console makers subsidizing consoles by hundreds of dollars are over. Given the amount of money lost last gen, they'd be grossly irresponsible to continues that model.

Hell, even MS isn't do it, and they can easily afford it if the wanted to. If even MS is no longer willing to lose hundreds of dollars on hardware, what makes you think Sony and Nintendo, companies that are in far more precarious financial straits than MS, would?

 

[SolarPowered]

I hope this puts to rest the notion that you can't make a powerful machine without drowning in red ink. If I had a nickel for every time someone brings that up in a Nintendo hardware thread I'd have a better PC than Evilore.

 

[pixelbox]

I think it is interesting how Sony imitated the Nintendo approach (minus the gimmick) by having moderate hardware without a complicated design that is profitable day 1 and allow the economics of scale to increase margins over time. It makes sense for the buisness to act in this manner after the PS3, in order to get profitable in the shortest amount of time possible.

This doesn't do much for me as a gamer, especially since I also game on a PC and I expect this generation to be a similar duration to the previous one with the continual spiral upward of inflated software costs/smaller content offerings on software, services and features.. I do find it interesting that they did this and still managed to be the most powerful (non-PC) console on the market currently and was initially less expensive than the Microsoft offering.

I think the (potentially) sad take away from this situation is that there will be no strong tech push going forward in the console market anymore. It wouldn't surprise me if the next generation is also conservative like this one and anything "pushing the bounderies" will be using older and more "well established" practices instead of experimentation and only making marginal steps outside of comfort zones. Things like VR, I almost expect to be sold as either an enthusiast add on or at a premium teir for the experience and intially segregating the market in the generation it is introduced with the following generation having a more blue ocean approach to implementation and adoption using established practices and a smaller tech leap than the previous generation made overal.

I mean...diminishing returns, though...

 

[Shin-Ra]

Because in order to be able to wobble the console must first be resting at an angle.

I have checked with a carpenters level.

You're right, this looks serious.

And the table that PS4's placed on.

 

[pixelbox]

My year old pc stomps what I've seen in the ps4 so far except for some parts of killzone SF. It's been pretty underwhelming compared to 360/ps3 launch for me and I had an even beefier pc at that time. I don't fault sony but it does leave the door open for short generations or someone reseting the balance of power.

May I see some comparison pics, please?

 

[Raist]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use. In the past this was a reasonable deal since the priceerformance made it a reasonably fair trade. You agree to be locked into their exclusive economy and in exchange they give you hardware that you couldn't get for that price anywhere else - except perhaps from a competing console.

This gen you're getting a console that under performs relative to PCs that can be built for comparable prices. You're agreeing to lock yourself into their exclusive economy and getting what in return exactly?

Games you'll never ever find on PC.
Not having to worry about drivers or shit optimization etc.
Not having to worry about having to upgrade stuff every now and then (more often than a console).

And so on and so forth. I don't know why it's so hard to understand.

 

[DieH@rd]

Its a great thing that they have managed to be profitable with basic box. Now they need to sustain great sales.

 

[Curufinwe]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use.

No, you don't. And you get to play lots of games that never appear on PC.

 

[Principate]

Games you'll never ever find on PC.
Not having to worry about drivers or shit optimization etc.
Not having to worry about having to upgrade stuff every now and then (more often than a console).

And so on and so forth. I don't know why it's so hard to understand.

Paying for online.

Next gen tax

Inability to mod games how you want them.

Games in general far more expensive than pc equivalents.

No Backwards compatibility.

Inability to upgrade outdated hardware

And so on.

I still like consoles but the more they become like weaker pc's without the benefits the less I'm starting to care outside exclusives (which are important mind you).

 

[Wynnebeck]

You're right, this looks serious.

And the table that PS4's placed on.

Damn Clockwork. You just got told son lol.

 

[gatti-man]

May I see some comparison pics, please?

I'm on mobile so can't oblige but Google bf4 ultra settings 1440p and there you go. It's starkly superior. I was so shocked by the difference I returned bf4 two days after I bought it for ps4.

Games you'll never ever find on PC.
Not having to worry about drivers or shit optimization etc.
Not having to worry about having to upgrade stuff every now and then (more often than a console).

And so on and so forth. I don't know why it's so hard to understand.

Yeah its mostly the exclusives and that consoles draw a different crowd than PC's do. I like having both and would miss the variety if one went away. Plus it's nice to have your apps, bluray, and game machine all in one small box.

 

[RadarScope1]

My year old pc stomps what I've seen in the ps4 so far except for some parts of killzone SF. It's been pretty underwhelming compared to 360/ps3 launch for me and I had an even beefier pc at that time. I don't fault sony but it does leave the door open for short generations or someone reseting the balance of power.

I think the problem with this thread is that you have some PC people here and some people (like me) who aren't PC gamers. And I am OK with a shorter console cycle. Shorter than 7-8 years like last time for damn sure. Let's go back to 4-5.

 

[Suzushiiro]

If Sony wanted to step on MS throat and put them away while they are reeling on the ropes, they would announce a $349 price point at E3, and destroy any momentum MS might gain.

It would be a bloodbath...

Historically, price drops this early only happen if your sales are sucking (obviously not happening here) or if a competitors' price drop forces your hand (see Xbox/Gamecube in early '02.) This does kind of fit in category 2, but GC wasn't outselling PS2 when PS2 dropped its price to match it.

 

[Jesb]

PS4 isn't exactly cutting edge tech so not surprising.

 

[SteveO1683]

What a turn around. Great job to all those I involved in making it happen.

 

[eznark]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use. In the past this was a reasonable deal since the priceerformance made it a reasonably fair trade. You agree to be locked into their exclusive economy and in exchange they give you hardware that you couldn't get for that price anywhere else - except perhaps from a competing console.

This gen you're getting a console that under performs relative to PCs that can be built for comparable prices. You're agreeing to lock yourself into their exclusive economy and getting what in return exactly?

$400?

 

[On Demand]

Why does every PS4 thread turn into a "PC is powerful" thread? This is about PS4 making money, the hell does PC have to do with anything?

 

[RPGamer92]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use. In the past this was a reasonable deal since the priceerformance made it a reasonably fair trade. You agree to be locked into their exclusive economy and in exchange they give you hardware that you couldn't get for that price anywhere else - except perhaps from a competing console.

This gen you're getting a console that under performs relative to PCs that can be built for comparable prices. You're agreeing to lock yourself into their exclusive economy and getting what in return exactly?

Exclusives that can't be found anywhere else.

 

[clutch.as.it.gets.]

Both - MS and Sony - changed the rules for the console game. Both went conservative with the difference that MS spend their conservative budget on the wrong stuff, while Sony didn`t.

360 and PS3 were far better and more advanced machines relative to their point of release than Xbone and PS 4 are.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

PS4 isn't exactly cutting edge tech so not surprising.

Your right but it has an amazing balance on tech and price.

Not too expensive and still great hardware.

 

[RadarScope1]

Why does every PS4 thread turn into a "PC is powerful" thread? This is about PS4 making money, the hell does PC have to do with anything?

.

 

[quetz67]

Games you'll never ever find on PC.
Not having to worry about drivers or shit optimization etc.
Not having to worry about having to upgrade stuff every now and then (more often than a console).

And so on and so forth. I don't know why it's so hard to understand.

Because he never played TLOU as his eyes can't stand the ugly textures and low resolutions. He may be missing out on something, but he'll never know as he rather plays games that have texture sizes, resolution and FPS as the most important measure of quality.

 

[Sid]

Not surprised whatsoever,PS4 isn't exactly cutting edge.

 

[Ishida]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use. In the past this was a reasonable deal since the priceerformance made it a reasonably fair trade. You agree to be locked into their exclusive economy and in exchange they give you hardware that you couldn't get for that price anywhere else - except perhaps from a competing console.

This gen you're getting a console that under performs relative to PCs that can be built for comparable prices. You're agreeing to lock yourself into their exclusive economy and getting what in return exactly?

I can't believe PC gamers are still hanging on to this bullshit....

 

[Suzushiiro]

$50 times 10 Million units sold for the coming year. Could be more.

That's the wrong way to think about it, though- first off, you're assuming that the people who would buy the console anyway at $400 wouldn't spend the extra $50 on something else that they get money from, such as an accessory, game, or PS+ sub. There's still a loss in that case, but it's less than $50. Second, and more importantly, over the long term they'll more than make up for the $50 in the case of someone who buys a PS4 instead of an XBone due to the price difference.

That said, I'm not sure if the second group is large enough to make up for the loss from the first group. The safe bet short term is to stay the course, the safe bet long term is a price drop.

 

[Phades]

I mean...diminishing returns, though...

I wasn't speaking in terms of fidelity only. Size, scope, and method of delivery are far more important.

 

[Rolf NB]

My year old pc stomps what I've seen in the ps4 so far except for some parts of killzone SF. It's been pretty underwhelming compared to 360/ps3 launch for me and I had an even beefier pc at that time. I don't fault sony but it does leave the door open for short generations or someone reseting the balance of power.

2005 high-end PC: 200W under load.
2005/2006 new consoles: 180W under load
2014 high-end PC: 800W under load
2013 new consoles: 180W under load

I've been saying this over and over and over again since 2009 or something. The age of consoles hanging with high-end PCs at the raw hardware spec level is over and will never come again. Nobody will build a closed-box CE device with that kind of power consumption.

 

[mreddie]

 

[J-Rzez]

Sony really killed it here, especially coming from the PS3. They made a device that's fantastic for the consumer, and also fantastic for the company. Good for them. $400 is well worth the asking price, especially considering the competition being on parity now price wise but with a distinct power deficit.

They could do a price drop if needed basically, but I doubt they'll need or want to do it anytime soon.

 

[RedHotChimiChanga]

You have to keep in mind that the PS4 is a custom built unit, its not mass produced (relatively speaking) in smaller parts like PC parts are. Once consoles are produced in much bigger volumes, pricedrops usually follows as well.

PlayStation screws for everyone!

 

[googleplex]

Hey look, another PS4 thread turned into a PC vs Console shit fest.

 

[weevles]

I'm glad at least the PS division is making money. Sony as a whole on the other hand...dey gotta lose dat Vaio division stat.

 

[TheRagnCajun]

Why does every PS4 thread turn into a "PC is powerful" thread? This is about PS4 making money, the hell does PC have to do with anything?

Its the same discussion happening over and over again for a year now:

- Topic posted Regarding PS4 power/cost
- Someone feels the need to remind everyone that PCs are more powerfull
- Someone else responds claiming that gaming PCs cost $2,000
- Someone else posts a build comparable to the PS4 in value (typically omitting a proper Windows liscence, or more)
- Someone else claims that PC of equivalent spec does not mean equivalent performance (Overhead, coding 'to the metal' etc.)
- ???

Anyways, glad to see PS4 is profitable

 

[Labadal]

They learnt a lot from the PS3.

Strange how Sony learnt from failure, but Microsoft didn't learn from success.

Sony fucked up initially after the success of the PS2. The PS3 had a great turnaround later in its lifetime.

 

[gofreak]

As a gamer you make an enormous sacrifice buying a console. You're essentially buying a PC with extremely heavy restrictions on what software and hardware you can use. In the past this was a reasonable deal since the priceerformance made it a reasonably fair trade. You agree to be locked into their exclusive economy and in exchange they give you hardware that you couldn't get for that price anywhere else - except perhaps from a competing console.

This gen you're getting a console that under performs relative to PCs that can be built for comparable prices.

The last article I read examining that idea - Digital Foundry, I think? - suggested that was not the case.

Anyway, the value of consoles has been and is the idea that you get a stable, 'guaranteed access' platform for x years for a relatively low upfront investment. Your $400 is guaranteed to get, and be a specific target for, the biggest games over the next 5 or 6 years. To put it another way, it will be a primary and (dev dependent) optimised target for the Call of Duties, the GTAs etc. etc. of the coming generation. There is no such guarantee that a $400 (or $500, or $600...etc.) PC built today will host those games in X years to a comparable standard. If it did I think it would be the first gen when this happened. It's a risk that isn't there with a console.

 

[Clockwork5]

You're right, this looks serious.

And the table that PS4's placed on.

Seeing is believing, I stand corrected, though I recall my digital level displayed a slight angle as I was curious when I bought it. Please, I am not hating or trying to hypebolize things. I see the expense saving features of the exterior design of the console. With the exception of the exterior casing, cheap may have been the wrong term.

Let me put it this way, I am not surprised that the console is profitable.

 

[JackDebian]

Will the PC master race please put your measuring tape away and stow your dicks please?

 

[Delusibeta]

Has MS harmed the industry or something?

Honestly? I'd argue that they did harm the industry (for consumers, at least) in popularising paying a subscription for online play and popularising DLC (although the latter probably would have happened without Microsoft's involvement).

 

[Raist]

Paying for online.

Next gen tax

Inability to mod games how you want them.

Games in general far more expensive than pc equivalents.

No Backwards compatibility.

Inability to upgrade outdated hardware

And so on.

I still like consoles but the more they become like weaker pc's without the benefits the less I'm starting to care outside exclusives (which are important mind you).

I was replying to someone asking, or rather implying that consoles have 0 advantages, and not exactly wanting a back and forth of lists with (supposed) advantages.

The fact is, people buy their $400 or whatever box every 5+ years, don't have to worry about anything in the meantime, get good looking games that will look better and better for sure over time, have an integrated and consistent service, etc etc. That's what they want.

Yes, it's in a way "closed" and "limited" but for many people it's actually a plus. They don't care about tweaking and modding and upgrading which is cool and all, but also comes with its shares of potential headaches and time/money investment. People like plug&play. That's the whole point of consoles (and closed systems in general).

 

[Wickerbasket]

Seeing is believing, I stand corrected, though I recall my digital level displayed a slight angle as I was curious when I bought it. Please, I am not hating or trying to hypebolize things. I see the expense saving features of the exterior design of the console. With the exception of the exterior casing, cheap may have been the wrong term.

Let me put it this way, I am not surprised that the console is profitable.

Maybe it's because the system is small and lightweight? That could easily be confused for cheapness, especially if you're used to the Xbox One.

As for the controller, it's one of the best I've used in my opinion, I'd hardly call it cheap.

 

[Coxy]

I hope they reinvest the profits in more games

 

[R10Neymarfan]

2005 high-end PC: 200W under load.
2005/2006 new consoles: 180W under load
2014 high-end PC: 800W under load
2013 new consoles: 180W under load

I've been saying this over and over and over again since 2009 or something. The age of consoles hanging with high-end PCs at the raw hardware spec level is over and will never come again. Nobody will build a closed-box CE device with that kind of power consumption.

Especially since all manufacturers want that green seal of approval logo now. So anything under 200W for any mainstream electronic is the common deal now. Mobile is in, hence why many companies are focusing on power consumption and low heat. The sacrifice is in computing power, but most consumers seem contempt with their "inferior" tech. It's just how it is.

 

[Damian.]

Which hilarity design choices?

Outdated hardware and planning on PC-esque games throughout the console cycle. It's hilarious.