Sony comments on the PS4

I'll put my money on Nov 2014.

Both of these machines still have a lot of life left in them. As long as both companies keep updating and improving the media content/features, there's no reason to force us into a new console cycle. Honestly, the big reason why one company might want to kickstart the next gen in 2013 is because both of the HD consoles are growing more and more alike as they age. That's great for consumers, but that's not good for business.

Whats not good for buisiness on the Dev side, is a new console anytime soon. It took them most of them 2.5 yars to get a handle on the tech for both systems and to create engines that worked well. Hell, Bethesda is finally releasing it's next gen engine in 2011.

They're not going to be clamoring to do all that R&D again anytime soon. And even when it happens, well get that lag time as they gear up.

I'm in the camp that thinks a few more years can be squeezed out of this gen. Maybe I'm just easily impressed, but these current consoles don't feel archaic to me yet. With my gaming habits nowadays, I seriously doubt I'll be getting any next-gen consoles anywhere near their launch window. I'm much more patient and content to wait it out now, same with software. Can't tell you the last time I purchased a game at $60.

I just don't see anything they could add at this point to make it really scream "next-gen!" We already have motion controls and 3D in this gen, so although I'm sure an incremental increase in graphics would be possible, I think they'd like to wait for whatever the "next big thing" is before they release a console. At this point, I don't need better graphics. I need better games. I do bet the 3D aspect taxes the current processors. I'm looking forward to seeing what a top-notch studio can do with 3D on this gen though, via BF3, R3 and UC3.

Unfortunately for everyone, though, the way the console business is set up is that things can get stale on the hardware side. And like I said, the PS3 and 360 have gotten more and more alike with time; same games, same features, same media content, and so on. At some point soon, one of them will try to get the jump on the other by announcing new hardware. Doing nothing may end up being more costly than doing something.

Everyone seemed to think that Move and Kinect would usher a mini-jump to the next gen. But that hasn't happened. The games aren't there for either device. Truly, the thing really standing between this gen and next isn't motion control. It's media streaming and downloadable titles.

Even more unfortunate for console gamers is that Apple's tapped into a very sweet model where they can refresh the hardware once a year (because hardware costs are subsidized by phone companies rather than by Apple). The HD consoles can't really compete with that. They need to release new hardware to stay fresh and relevant, but it's still too costly because they foot the hardware bill. It's a standoff, and there's a comfortable peace agreement between the two console manufacturers. But Apple could screw the whole thing up. And if the Vita launch is successful, Sony could find themselves in a very happy situation where ATT is helping subsidize new hardware. E3/WWDC in 2012 could be very interesting.

Looking at the release schedule for 2011 and early 2012, it really feels to me like this is the last big wave of great games for this gen. This is the time when we'd ordinarily be seeing the real technical showpieces, just as the next gen's early titles are getting going. Bioshock Infinite could be the swan song of this gen just like God of War 2 was for last gen. 2013 seems a reasonable guess all around for new hardware of some kind.

I don't think this generation compares to the previous. This generation brought a lot to the table (HD, blu-ray, 3d, streaming, etc.) and there may be little incentive for the majority of users to purchase a new gaming system since their display/audio technologies haven't caught up. It's funny to see gaming systems that are still quite a bit more advanced than what the average person owns since in times past all you needed was a standard TV and you were optimized. I would guess new systems with minor changes and lower entry prices may work for everyone.

I think there is going be diminishing returns from here on out. Much like another format has never replaced compact discs for music. DVD-Audio, SACD were certainly better but they never took hold. For most peoples needs mp3 or cd is still good enough.

Unless there's a major breakthrough in technology, true virtual reality, holograms, interactive projections. I believe we will be looking at upgrades along the lines of the Iphone. Meaning higher resolutions, better GPU, faster CPU, and other improvements like cross game chat, but nothing mind blowing or earth shattering like going from 2d to 3d.

they better beat microsoft out of the gate or they can expect to enjoy the same misery they did in the early days of the ps3. and i've also decided to go with whatever console comes out first. i see no point in waiting this time since most of the popular games are available for both systems anyway.

So many things wrong with such a small post.

1. $600 has nothing to do with being first or second
1a Sony will not have a new difficult architecture or poor dev tools this time
2. Popular != good, play all the COD you want, but you won't be playing the best franchises.
3. Rushing to the market == RRoD, so there is a point to waiting

Sony is not going to rush another console out just to be first or to compete with xbox. Sony is still selling ps2 in some markers which is ridiculous. It expects to sell ps3 for many years to come.

Ps3 had blu ray. Xbox had hd DVD. What are the new consoles going to bring to the table?? 4k resolution which is not even on the everyday market yet and nobody cares about it? Better graphics like all games in 1080p 60hz?? Not enough to spend another $600 on a new console.

I can see xbox coming out soon bit not Sony.

Absolutely. That's exactly it. In terms of "high fidelity" formats, most people have been backpedaling over the past five years. Instead of moving into high def audio formats, music went backwards to lower quality mp3 formats for most people. Movies and games are following a similar backwards path. Convenience is winning out over higher definition video and audio.

The next consoles won't be pushing the processing power; they'll be pushing the media services and fast, easy, cheap, small gaming services. But that doesn't mean we won't see a new console. It just means the next consoles will be incremental upgrades that focus much more on the service and UI upgrades.

The next big battle is over content delivery, not processor speed.

Could that happen with existing consoles? Sure. But people eventually want a new device. A thing. Even if it doesn't really do anything more than the current thing. If MS or Sony redefines their packaging and content delivery enough, they could easily justify a "new" console to go along with it. All they would need is some small hardware justification (new UI, multitasking, DVR, broader cloud access, whatever). The current consoles are such Frankenstein monsters with peripherals and media packages; they'll have to start from scratch at some point to simplify things again.

Yeah I've been saying this for a while now...or at least from this gen to next gen. I suspect with the economy in the crapper, there's going to be some reluctance to invest tons in some real cutting edge tech. I suspect the difference between PS3 and PS4 is going to be smaller than PS2 to PS3. What else is there except improving on what we have now? Bigger processors, more ram, better textures, yadda yadda, but these are expected, incremental upgrades.

Heck for all we know, these consoles may be with us for quite a while longer until the economy gets back on its feet( not anytime soon) and there's something real cutting edge to make people want to upgrade. Frankly at this point I'm not dropping another $500 just to play prettier graphics. I'm past that point of where graphics are the end all, be all.

As someone else said, this gen has broken away from normal gaming trends, so we can't really judge what's going to happen from here on out based on what happened previously.

They could ante up streaming FLAC and Bluray .ISO playback and bring back SACD compatibility. Those are the reasons I'm removing the PS3 from my home theater duties. The Oppo players do all that now.

To be honest, it's not just graphics that get an improvement with a new console. It's the number of things on screen at once, higher framerate, larger environments, larger multiplayer games, improved physics, faster loading times, etc the list just keeps going on. Game companies are already starting to feel the age of the tech. Battlefield and many games that will be coming out have pushed the absolute limit of this generations consoles and still have to really cut back on graphical fidelity. Battlefield alone will be limited to 24 players on console as opposed to 64. Rage will require a massive install for the 360 to be decent.

New tech means new innovation which translates into greater immersion. And isn't that the whole point of a game, to immerse? Besides, i think that PS4 will be cheaper at launch than the PS3 because Sony learned their lesson. Also because they don't need to shoehorn a brand new disc format into it. However, i think that they could take a page out of the N64 book and have some sort of expansion slot for memory or something to give it a little bit more kick halfway through the life of the console.

Completely disagree. Look at WoW. Look at Farmville. Look at Plants vs. Zombies. Hugely "immersive" experiences running on relatively low tech. Immersion has much more to do with good design than with cutting-edge tech.

I mean, how quickly after a new tech leap occurs do we start taking it for granted and not really notice it? Clearly it doesn't matter much in the ability to "lose ourselves" in an experience. That's one of the big benefits to the casual gaming revolution; game makers are focusing much more on design than on tech these days.

I'm aware of this. I'm just saying that all that isn't a reason for ME to rush out to buy the next system. I am content with this current generation, and taking into account my gaming habits changing the past few years, I'm simply not in a rush to get to the next gen. Which is not to say I don't support them going to the next wave, I'll simply be taking my time joining the party. As it is, I have a huge backlog of games that will last me the next few years even if all the companies stopped making games today.

Yeah, immersion is a big part of it, but I'm the kind of gamer that can switch from Uncharted to Super Mario World on the SNES without blinking an eye. Upping the onscreen visuals and all the other candy you described earlier, doesn't hold the appeal it used to. YMMV, as always...

+1

I don't see any reason why to push a new console out in the next couple of years.

Devs are now truly understanding the PS3 and a developping nice engine for it. I know I won't be buying a new console so soon in 2014... except if the game I want are only on this console

I feel the same, but on the other hand, you look at something like BF3 on PC, which you just cannot do on the 360 and PS3.

Better hardware does often mean different games and concepts. Dead Rising was probably the first on 360. A PS2 couldn't draw all those zombies on screen like that.

I realize that, but more characters and all the other technical mumble jumble that improves what's on onscreen doesn't matter much to me anymore. A game like Uncharted impresses me more for its gameplay mechanics and story than its graphics and the number of characters onscreen at one time. To be frank, I don't remember the last time I was GENUINELY wowed by any game. Maybe I've been playing for too long....

Demon's Souls floored me.

I guess I failed to convey my point.

Yes Dead Rising has a lot more zombies on screen but it's also a critical gameplay element, and we end up with a game not possible on an old system. It's not always used to show off.

Not really, maybe I misread it.

For the record, I did play Dead Rising and didn't personally see what the extra onscreen zombies offered as far as a 'critical gameplay element'. Yeah it's not something possible on prior generations, but the game didn't leave me with the feeling that I'd experienced some revolutionary, out of this world gameplay. I was pretty underwhelmed by that game to be frank, but that's just me. And when I say I don't recall the last game that WOWED me, I'm not merely referring to graphics, but in gameplay as well. Most of the games I've played this gen have a familiar feel to me, only with a nice coat of glossy hi-def paint, maybe a new wrinkle or two but nothing earth-shattering.

You're right, but it goes both ways. Without having the lower tech limitations of the iOS platforms, we wouldn't have gotten Infinity Blade or Angry Birds.

Being a good game designer is about understanding the constraints of a given platform and designing a game that turns constraints into possibilities. Doesn't matter whether it's a blazing fast new console or a tiny little 1" screen beeping machine. Constraints are constraints.

The determining factor isn't faster, better processing speed. It's simply good designers knowing a given platform's limitations.

Almost nobody cares about SACD. Even the golden ear magazines say they can't hear the difference between CD and SACD.

Besides which, the consumer standard now is well below CD standards, let alone SACD. There's just no support out there.

This is the lesson that Sony learned the hard way this generation. They jumped too far ahead, only to realize that most of those hardware features were consumer dead ends. They've scaled the console back to meet consumer demand; they're really not in the business of "taking things away." And they definitely won't add SACD for the next generation. Hardware-wise, Bluray looks like the only thing they were able to get to stick. Everything else fell by the wayside.

3D is Sony's next big hardware push, but they've got some major hurdles there that go well beyond just the problem of display adoption. We'll see how well their gaming-oriented $500 display package sells in the next year. If that helps 3D to finally catch on, that could be the next big tech leap. But I'm still not sold. Maybe if they package their next console with a 3D display at $500?