we will only get regular controller at first. Gimmicks come later, or separate. Sony is not going Wii route - it won't work for them.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
vg247-PS4: new kits shipping now, AMD A10 used as base, final version next summer
- Thread starter Globox_82
- Start date
we will only get regular controller at first. Gimmicks come later, or separate. Sony is not going Wii route - it won't work for them.
Agreed. Sony will do one later on if they think it's worth it. Launch will just be a standard controller. I wonder if they'll update the design at all. I would love to see proper triggers with good placement. A middleground between the Nav trigger and the Move trigger would be perfect. I'd also like to see the bumper buttons below the triggers instead of above. Your middle fingers would rest there and I think it would be really comfortable.
Canis lupus
Member
I just don't want Sony to continue with Move, I'd rather see something like an evolved Kinect(Leap). PS4 SKUs should include a cheap headset, 50% of the people I meet on PSN don't have one.
I highly doubt it's that simple. I have it but I don't like to use it - don't use it. When I play COD 70%-80% of people use it. I am sure many have it but don't use it.
That said I agree it should be bundled, as should HDMI cable.
or put a headset socket on the controller and let people buy their own.
jeff_rigby
Banned
The assumption in the article is high performance (fast CPUs 3.2+ Ghz), with a move to Jaguar CPUs (1.6 Ghz) LPM (Low Performance Mobile) silicon can be used which in the Roadmap advances the possibility of 20nm from 2014 to 2013. On this page in 2014 it appears to be pointing to a "Low Power core" (Jaguar's replacement) replacing "Performance Cores" @ 20nm and beyond.http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20120608_538586.html said:
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2009/0226/kaigai492.htm
Feb 2009 : Sony investigating two PS4 options Super CELL and Larrabee
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20091224_339258.html
Dec 2009 : Sony picks Super CELL option for PS4.
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20100309_353492.html
March 2010 : Additional Description of Super CELL. Interestingly, Sony was most serious about going Larrabee.
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20120608_538586.html
June 2012 : Super CELL plan died by the end of 2010. SCEI picks AMD in 2011.
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
So everything went downhill (power wise)? 
iceatcs
Junior Member
So everything went downhill (power wise)?
Not really, I think many are disappoint than the power wise will be like 360 vs PS3 again. I would love to see all 3 very different power wise each other for the sake of completion.
But I'm looking forward how it will going on because it seem will be first time to have two systems has very eerie similar architecture.
Iacobellis
Junior Member
PS4 still has a chance of coming out in 2013. I was listening to an old 1UP Podcast episode Wario64 tweeted and at around 13:45, they mention that final PS3 dev. kits don't go out until Summer 2006.
The Podcast.
The Podcast.
Are you implying the PS4 will run on a 20nm node and ship in the summer of 2014? If this is the case, than I assume they will run on a chip similar to the 9770 or 9850? That is certainly one way to reach 3 TF and provide 8 GB of RAM.
Did you know that it's a guy's modified face that went into making the pretty girl in your avatar? RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDGE RACER!
And oh yes, thank you for the podcast. It'll be interesting if they really keep to the schedule given they still aren't sure with their RAM specs.
The first next gen games it seems may become true dinosaurs when the mid life of next gen rolls on.
This certainly seems like the best solution for Sony. They do not have the advertising dollars of Microsoft. Launching in 2014 will assure Sony a few things:
1. Better Ram Densities that are Cheaper
2. A 20nm GPU/CPU that can give the performance of the 2.5-3.0 TF we desire.
3. Give it a slight power edge over the next Xbox and still be relatively cool and competitive in price.
Not really assured of density or 20nm if the difference is a matter of under 6 months.
GDDR5 RAM densities are to shrink in early 2013. The initial printing of those RAM chips will be very expensive, and the process will be immature, so expect delays. By the tail end of 2013, the process will mature- just in time to release it into a console by 2014.
Also, a 20nm AMD GPU Will be a 9000 series chip. Which will give the PlayStation a modest bump in its performance while running cooler if they manage to stay on par with the next Xbox
.Move is better for Games & you don't need a headset if you have the PlayStation Move because the mic on the PlayStation Eye works just as good & I'm sure that it will be even better on PS4.
The 360's final dev kits didn't go out until a couple of months before launch - heck they still were using G5s at E3 05 for demo purposes if memory serves me well. So it isn't unusual for devs to recieve final dev kits only a couple of months before launch.
Iacobellis
Junior Member
Launching in 2014 would still be bad for business. Being first has generally shown that that company is the winner in sales. Waiting six months for better hardware doesn't mean anything if you don't have killer apps for people to play. Sony made that mistake with the PS3 in its early days and cannot repeat it again.
GDDR5 RAM densities are to shrink in early 2013. The initial printing of those RAM chips will be very expensive, and the process will be immature, so expect delays. By the tail end of 2013, the process will mature- just in time to release it into a console by 2014.
Also, a 20nm AMD GPU Will be a 9000 series chip. Which will give the PlayStation a modest bump in its performance while running cooler if they manage to stay on par with the next Xbox
Realistically, I don't think yields would be sufficient to allow that. Still I am not in the know so I can't be certain.
I do however, don't also believe that we'll be seeing GDDR5, unless one of the console maker isn't going for unified architecture. I do, however, expect RAM stacking of some sort utilizing either DDR3 or 4 (hoping for the latter) to be the system RAM (and RAM for GPU with eDRAM for the system that chooses to use unified memory).
McHuj
Member
People really need to the fantasy that any of the next consoles are going to be on 20nm out of their heads. In 2015, 20nm may be mature enough for a shrink.
But in 2014, the process won't be mature enough and the volumes/capacity won't be there. First dibs for 20nm volume production will go mobile companies like Apple, Qualcomm, Broadcomm, etc. Good luck competing with that.
But in 2014, the process won't be mature enough and the volumes/capacity won't be there. First dibs for 20nm volume production will go mobile companies like Apple, Qualcomm, Broadcomm, etc. Good luck competing with that.
20nm is just too risky, which is why both Sony and Microsoft will base their architectures on 28nm.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
that's just not true.
snes, ps1, ps2, wii weren't the first consoles to launch in their generations.
IMO, the minimum is 4GB. Under the amount and the console is dead before starting.
why would they need to? People can already use any bluetooth headset right now.
People keep saying this but it is not true at all. As long as they come out within 6 months of each other then it don't matter. PS3 had a bad start for many reasons, such as price, shitty ports, no big exclusives early on, worse online than Live and extra. I think many of these things will improve with PS4. Price should be competitive due to no new disk format or new architecture like cell. No more shitty ports due to off the shelf components being used, and finally the OS and PSN should be much better the PS3 was limited in this due to no planning but they have showed they have learnt apt about this with the new store new features and even how the Vita OS and features are. Also Sony have the most first party studios now so they should have stuff ready for the PS4 early on.
Maybe stick a touch screen in there too.
StealthGoblin
Banned
I don't think Sony will put out a console without motion gaming available out of the box now. They can't afford to let Microsoft and Nintendo take away that entire market from them.
Microsoft are still investing heavily in Kinect. It'll be at the center of their next console.
Microsoft are still investing heavily in Kinect. It'll be at the center of their next console.
Graphics Horse
Member
Sixaxis, dude!
Those recent patents look like they might be up to something with a split controller though.
360 and PS3 both sold less than 6m in their first year, Next Xbox could easily have a better start too.
It's be relatively cheap and simple for Sony to upgrade the sixaxis to include the move motion sensors. Not sure how they deal with the LED bulb though.
Not sure about MS - are they coming out with core games that benefit from kinect? Kinect seems like something you roll out mid-gen as a way to bring in a broader audience. Not something you roll out right from the start whets mostly core gamers willing to pay the price for new consoles.
Same can perhaps be said for move too, but that seems simpler to build in.
I agree with this. I also think many people are underestimating the strenght of the PlayStation brand. Looking back at the launch of the PS3, not many things could have been worse. It arrived much later than the 360 at a higher price and it had no system sellers at that moment. The 360 was even getting games that looked better than anything the PS3 had at that moment (GeoW) and Sony had lost a lot of exclusives. And still the PS3 managed to sell on par or even better than the 360.
For the launch of the next gen systems I think it can go either way. The next xbox will probably be more powerful, but can MS take the risk of selling it at a higher price? And while MS is making a lot of profit, I don't think the xbox division can afford taking a huge loss on each console to keep the price lower than the PS4.
And while the PS4 is getting tougher competition than ever, the launch lineup will probably be a lot better than the PS3. Franchises like Uncharted, LittleBigPlanet, MotorStorm, Killzone, GT6 Prologue and maybe even The Last Guardian are possibly released near the launch of the PS4. I also think PS Plus is becoming a big selling point for Sony.
StealthGoblin
Banned
The next Kinect will be much more precise and will be integrated across the whole system. Microsoft have set up a lot of studios that are focusing on Kinect games for the casual and the core. They have more teams focusing on Kinect content than Sony have development teams overall in the EU.
If I were Sony I'd release a PSeye that tracks in 3D and has integrated functions across the system. I'd have it in every box.
Then I'd sell move separately on top of that.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Kinect will be bundled because it's central to the whole entertainment experience Microsoft is aiming for.
I think people are underestimating Sony. With PS3, the loss of marketshare took them by surprise. They lost most of their exclusives they used to have like Devil May Cry, so they didn't have any exclusives early on as they usually rely on 3rd parties. The PS3 was extremely expensive due to BluRay and Cell, and 3rd party games were looking much worse due to the Cell architecture. PS3 just had poor management and planning, even the OS and PSN was lacking compared to 360 OS and Live. However Sony managed to turn that around, though the OS and PSN can't be improved much due to how much memory they had to work with the PS3, they didn't plan ahead like Microsoft did with 360 and Live. However I think Sony has learnt this and they tried with what they got, PSN has improved slightly as well as many new features on the OS being added, but a new console is needed with more memory for the OS. The Vita has shown that they have learnt a lot about OS, with features like cross chat, Near, LiveArea and etc. With the loss of 3rd party exclusives that PS2 always had, it really hurt the PS3 early on, but Sony have now got a good amount of 1st party studios compared to what they had early on with the PS3 (as back then they relied too much on 3rd parties).
So in conclusion, I think Sony have a lock on everything that made the PS3 fall behind
- Price (no more new disk format or cell to make it expensive in comparison to 360)
- Shitty ports (Ps4 will likely use of the shelf components)
-OS and PSN to be vastly improved (no more limitation from the PS3 system OS memory)
- Big Exclusives (no doubt Sony has a lot of 1st party studios to what they had before)
Cheaper? Dunno really, just throwing it out there
You can buy a Bluetooth headset for 10 bucks. I don't know how much cheaper you need to get.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Actually, Sony owns the exact same number of studios they did at the start of the generation. They bought Sucker Punch, Media Molecule and Evolution, but they closed Zipper, SCE Liverpool and Incognito.
In any case, you're confusing the potential Sony had at the start of the generation with the extent to which they took advantage of it. They were in a far better position in 2006 - they were owherwhelming leaders for the past two generations (with 70% of the market, PlayStation practically was home console gaming), they had much more mindshare with gamers, better relationships with third parties and loads of money from two profitable generations. Being late and expensive was their own fault because they decided to use PS3 as a trojan horse for Blu-ray. Now, after PS3, PSP and Vita, PlayStation is not a huge, spotless brand that it once was, they don't have a choke hold on third parties, and their coffers have been nearly emptied through the struggle to keep PS3 afloat.
Psychotext
Member
In terms of building in, there's basically no real terms difference between Move and Kinect. They're basically both a camera with some microphones. Sure, the Kinect tech is more expensive, but only slightly (much of the extra expense is software related, and that's a sunk cost).
yurinka
Member
Novarama (Invizimals) is now a 1st party studio. Not a big deal for home consoles, or for handhelds outside southern Europe, but it's somehting.
They lost several 3rd exclusives during this gen, but excluding Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest (both key for Japan) all of them are still in Playstation too so for the western users isn't a too important deal.
They got a number of good 1st party exclusives during this gen, their main studios now have 2 teams, got experience with 3D, improved their motion sensing efforts with Move, made a huge leap during the gen regarding digital services and embraced the small, indie market with Minis/PSM/publishing small "indie" projects like TGC ones/Unfinished Swan/Escape plan/etc.
So if they have more or less similar power and price than 720 I think that this next gen Sony will have a bigger market share. Because with all they learned with the things I stated above and seeing how they learned from past mistakes with Vita I'm pretty sure that it will be the case.
We also have to remember that PS3 still has pricecuts to come, emerging markets like China or Brazil to reach this year and Vita/WiiU to get extra games during some few years more in addition to several top notch exclusive AAA games to be released and PS+ to provide great extra value with 'old' games. So now that it's profitable with these coming years it may be end the generation with a bigger profit and market share that it has now. It won't be exactly the case, but remember that PS2 sold 50 millions after the 360 release in more or less the same time than PS3 and 360.
Wii wasn't 1st ,
PS1 wasn't 1st
PS2 wasn't 1st
NES wasn't 1st
SNES wasn't 1st
Atari 2600 wasn't 1st
so when has what you just said been true?
I hear this narrative alot but it would be more believable if PS3 sales started off great then went down but they started off horribly and then went up. So the Playstation name didn't help them in the beginning. The took their product and made it more appealing to the masses. While the brand isn't what it once was I don't think branding is as important as people think. Each generation the console that offered the most abundant game catalog won the generation didn't matter what the logo on the case was. And in the generations where games were spread more evenly there wasn't a clear cut runaway winner such as this generation or the snes/genesis generation.
yurinka
Member
That's a good point. To release PS4 6 months of more won't hurt it in the long run.
well yes and no. if you go by number of studios I believe you (I am not going to count). HOWEVER most of their big studios have TWO teams now, something that is going to give fruition next gen (even if we see it this gen with The Last of US).
SSM - two big team(Stig confirmed he is working of something new fresh and awesome), one smaller that helps other devs (co develepoed twisted metal, starhawk, journey, unfinished swan, etc.
Sucker Punch - rapid increse in nr of staff since sony acqusition, former Bungie designer joined them, doubt to work on Infamous 3. So probably 2 teams there as well. Still hiring 19 positions open on their site, was 22 last week.
Naughty Dog - confirmed two teams
GG - two big teams(confirmed new IP) in Holland, plus co developing Killzone Vita with Sony Cambridge.
MM - confirmed second project alongside Tearaway, more ambitious then LBP - two teams?
Then rumor that Ready at Dawn is working on new IP for PS4.
And so on, can't go over all of them again.
But we see that these 5 studios have two teams, or at least in the case of 4(MM,SSM, ND,GG) that's potentially 8 games. I would rather these studios to have two teams then sony having 8 studios just for the sake of saying "They have 8 studios".
Sony is set to do the best out of the 3, it all depends if they deliver great system. If nextbox is superior then MS wins because in the end 3rd party matters the most and they will support MS. But if they are on par, and they get equal support then sony wins.
It takes YEARS to build first party, MS can't get there over night.
statham
Member
first to 10 million dude.
Graphics Horse
Member
Indeed, although 2nd has historically been a good bet, and Wii U was 1st.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
All things being equal, I see them doing equally as well. But it all depends on what both Sony and Microsoft do, there are far many important factors at play than just power and price.
PS3 can by no means be directly compared to PS2, and it won't have as long legs. Most things you listed are also applicable to the 360, so while PS3 will make Sony some more money (it will probably never recoup all the losses it's caused up to this point, however), I sincerely doubt that we'll see any drastic changes to the current/last gen market share distribution. Not that it matters much, with the next gen already having started.
They went up primarily because some severe sacrifices have been made, which is neatly reflected in all the quarterly losses PS3 has been accumulating up to relatively recently.
Yes, that's why they spent past several years rebuilding it. Unlike Sony, they have far more studios now than they did at the start of this generation, and many of them are hiring so they're growing in that capacity as well.
gaming_noob
Member
Since Wii U released first, would you say PS4 has a 75% chance over NextBox in terms of being number 1 overall in sales?
Yup Ignorance is bliss, I agree
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
Why even try to predict a winner? Any of the companies can come out on top.
Re Ps3's legs, Sony has a huge distribution network in the emerging markets, something neither MS or Nintendo has. In these markets people pretty much know only Playstation. PS2 was the best selling console in India last year, as far as I know. The Super Slim is pretty much made for price cuts next year and for going into those territories. Think of it as a new launch with PS3 coming off the strong PS2, except right now they are not hindered by price or lack of games. PS3 has a potential to sell 20-25 million in these territories in the same timeframe as PS2 and that's me being conservative with my estimates.