or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › PlayStation Area › PlayStation Meeting 2013 (PS4 unveiling - conference replay in first post)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PlayStation Meeting 2013 (PS4 unveiling - conference replay in first post) - Page 39

post #1141 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post

Why would you think that this is indicative of all gaming systems?
I don't. Like I said, it's a tough call. But MS and Sony would be acting out of sheer hubris if they ignored Nintendo's current struggles. The industry has changed. The next cycle won't be a simple battle between MS and Sony. The field has exploded with unexpected competition.
post #1142 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

I don't. Like I said, it's a tough call. But MS and Sony would be acting out of sheer hubris if they ignored Nintendo's current struggles. The industry has changed. The next cycle won't be a simple battle between MS and Sony. The field has exploded with unexpected competition.

The road to their success is to do what they do well, and take it to the next level. To not get distracted by every trend, by trying to be everything to everyone. Sony sold 150 million PS2s, and all that thing did was play core games. The casual game as we know it today didnt exist. The only thing they need to learn from Nintendo is that you can't phone it in, and fads don't last. If your new gimmick isn't as compelling as your last, you lose. But basic quality will always stick around.
post #1143 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Sony sold 150 million PS2s, and all that thing did was play core games.
For many, the PS2 was people's first DVD player. Much like the PS3 was many people's first blu-ray player.

But otherwise, yes, I agree. Sony needs to refocus on what people want from a gaming console. The rumored specs speak well for Sony having their eyes on the ball.
post #1144 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

For many, the PS2 was people's first DVD player. Much like the PS3 was many people's first blu-ray player.

But otherwise, yes, I agree. Sony needs to refocus on what people want from a gaming console. The rumored specs speak well for Sony having their eyes on the ball.

Yeah, the main distinction being that people bought a PS2 and got a DVD player thrown in, but at launch it seemed like a lot of people bought a PS3 as blu ray player first. Traditional games are what drove the PS2 from start to finish. Same with the DS. (although nintendogs and brain training didnt hurt.). Free to play, social, casual, insert trend here, etc....a console can sell 150 million units just playing gamey games well. I hope they stop chasing butterflies and just make a damn good gaming console.
post #1145 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I hope they stop chasing butterflies and just make a damn good gaming console.

I believe we are all with you there. I could care less what ELSE it can do, so long as it rocks at playing games. Period.
post #1146 of 1994
I just think that tons of people want to play games like Battlefield, Assassin's Creed, and Witcher 3. You can't get those on Ouya or iPhone. The Wii U isn't pushing the ball forward on those types of games. You can get them on PC, but a gaming PC is very expensive, too expensive for most people. So as long as MS and Sony understand this and build a system that makes it very easy and convenient to make and play those games, without a bunch of annoying cruft in the way, they will do fine.

I think Sony gets it. I don't know if Microsoft does.
post #1147 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post

I think Sony gets it. I don't know if Microsoft does.

That's what it looks like to me too. I'm sure some interesting stuff will come from the other guys, I'll own all three consoles eventually. But from what we already know....it looks like the PS4 is going to be the gamer's choice.
post #1148 of 1994
A gaming PC isn't expensive, pretty much anyone needs a PC so the base cost is already covered, you just got to make a few adjustments to make a good gaming PC (e.g the PSU and GPU). Considering the insane deals on digital game downloads from places like steam, you'll easily save costs compared to having a console.

Bleeding edge gaming PC is expensive for sure, but you don't Need it to enjoy PC gaming, a mid range gaming PC will give you far better FPS and resolution than what consoles are offering these days.


About PS4, I heard that they're going to change the name similar to how they named PS Vita instead of PSP2, if that's true, anyone else thinks that's a bad idea? It just feels wrong to me after all these years to call my beloved Playstation with something other than PS#..
post #1149 of 1994
Gaming PCs introduce variables that consoles don't deal with. Driver pak updates for video cards to address performance game to game, etc. Gaming on a PC is remarkably rewarding, but you have to know what you're doing in order to get the most of it. Or even a average experience.

I hope Sony keeps it simple ala PS4 as well.
post #1150 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Yeah, the main distinction being that people bought a PS2 and got a DVD player thrown in, but at launch it seemed like a lot of people bought a PS3 as blu ray player first. Traditional games are what drove the PS2 from start to finish. Same with the DS. (although nintendogs and brain training didnt hurt.). Free to play, social, casual, insert trend here, etc....a console can sell 150 million units just playing gamey games well. I hope they stop chasing butterflies and just make a damn good gaming console.
Pretty much. In their day, there weren't many pieces of hardware in the living room that could do what PS3 and 360 could do in terms of media (streaming, networking, etc.). But now, there are dozens upon dozens, and many are more integrated than the consoles (TVs, AVRs, DVRs, etc.). And more are on the way. It's absolutely a fool's errand to keep going down that path.

It's good to see that at least Sony seems to understand that. But in the meantime, I'm fine waiting on the sidelines for a year or two after launch. With the expense and media focus of the consoles over the past few years, PC has taken up a lot of the slack in terms of innovation in game design, pricing, and marketing tactics. It remains to be seen if the console platforms recognize those innovations or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by number1laing View Post

You can get them on PC, but a gaming PC is very expensive, too expensive for most people.
They're really not, and that's one of the big problems that the traditional console platforms could be facing. Console-like PCs and console-like mobile platforms are coming, and they could easily underprice the consoles. The big question everyone's wondering, though, is whether these console alternatives will be a genuine threat, or just failed evolutionary paths.
post #1151 of 1994
I've said it in other threads, but you can't escape the PC-stuff with a PC, and that PC-stuff makes the platform both good and bad. A "SteamBox" will still be a PC and all that entails. It will still require tweaking, it will still become outdated, it will still run newer games worse than it ran older games. It has strengths but it isn't for everybody.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metallicaband View Post

A gaming PC isn't expensive, pretty much anyone needs a PC so the base cost is already covered, you just got to make a few adjustments to make a good gaming PC (e.g the PSU and GPU). Considering the insane deals on digital game downloads from places like steam, you'll easily save costs compared to having a console.

The average PC these days is a $400 laptop, that's what most people use. So going from that to a gaming laptop is a big jump and comes with significant trade-offs. Or you buy a totally different desktop PC, that just happens to be way more expensive than a console.

The days of most PCs being these squat rectangles that sit in the computer room with a monitor are pretty much gone.
post #1152 of 1994
I don't even own a PC anymore. I have an aging mac mini in my office that barely gets used. 95% of my posting here is done on my phone, the other 5% on my tablet. Used to have an HTPC but the little $59 streamer box does it better, faster, more reliably. I used to be a huge PC gamer when it was all I had in a dorm, wifi wasnt really a thing, and all it took was a new 3D card every few years.

To reintegrate a PC back into my life for just gaming would be a huge expense with marginal benefit. And consoles still set the agenda for the industry. The same games might be smoother or sharper on PC, they might have an extra coating of effects, but they're still the same console games. And that'll hold just as true next gen.
post #1153 of 1994
I just hope the PS4 plays SACD. I mean, Sony owns all the licenses, any necessary hardware is there, how expensive could it possibly be for them to just include it. Otherwise, I will need to get an extra device since my recently demised PS3 was also my SACD player.
post #1154 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I don't even own a PC anymore. I have an aging mac mini in my office that barely gets used. 95% of my posting here is done on my phone, the other 5% on my tablet. Used to have an HTPC but the little $59 streamer box does it better, faster, more reliably. I used to be a huge PC gamer when it was all I had in a dorm, wifi wasnt really a thing, and all it took was a new 3D card every few years.

To reintegrate a PC back into my life for just gaming would be a huge expense with marginal benefit. And consoles still set the agenda for the industry. The same games might be smoother or sharper on PC, they might have an extra coating of effects, but they're still the same console games. And that'll hold just as true next gen.

I'm with you, with the exception of MMOs and true strategy type games.

I do miss:

Starcraft & Starcraft II
Diablo
EQ/WoW

There are still some reasons why only a PC will do .... at least as it stands right now.
post #1155 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by s1njin View Post

I'm with you, with the exception of MMOs and true strategy type games.

I do miss:

Starcraft & Starcraft II
Diablo
EQ/WoW

There are still some reasons why only a PC will do .... at least as it stands right now.

Fortunately those blizzard games run on just about anything, you don't need a "gaming PC". Played D3 on integrated intel HD graphics, ran at 60fps at lower resolutions.
post #1156 of 1994
True, you don't need a gaming PC for them. However, you do need SOME sort of PC. :P
post #1157 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

To reintegrate a PC back into my life for just gaming would be a huge expense with marginal benefit. And consoles still set the agenda for the industry. The same games might be smoother or sharper on PC, they might have an extra coating of effects, but they're still the same console games. And that'll hold just as true next gen.
PCs are fertile ground for independent and small-scale development. It isn't just about horsepower. I keep hoping that console manufacturers will get the hint and open themselves up to more of that stuff. It's cheaper, more abundant, and more innovative than most of what's currently available on consoles.
post #1158 of 1994
Anybody thinking of pre-emptively selling their PS3 now, use the money towards PS4 ?


Sure, it might be a bit of a gamble to sell the PS3 now, and not have any Playstation to use until potentially November. Still, think how much the value of a used PS3 is going to plummet, as soon as the PS4 is widely known.
post #1159 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

Still, think how much the value of a used PS3 is going to plummet, as soon as the PS4 is widely known.
Depends on the backwards compatibility situation.
post #1160 of 1994
Sony makes its money off software. They will make you pay for games for the new system. BC would spell doom (like it appears the Wii U is facing now).
post #1161 of 1994
Sony has some great exclusives coming up, unless you're a very casual gamer, it would be a pretty bad idea to sell the PS3, specially considering how often console launches get pushed back again and again.
post #1162 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by metallicaband View Post

Sony has some great exclusives coming up, unless you're a very casual gamer, it would be a pretty bad idea to sell the PS3, specially considering how often console launches get pushed back again and again.

The ps3 won't lose as much resale value as you'd think.
post #1163 of 1994
post #1164 of 1994
Well, the PS Vita for developers does have an HDMI port so it could be for those units that are already out although theirs always the possibility that Sony might have wanted to either save that feature for a future PS Vita hoping that people would double dip or people might need to use a PS4 to export an image. Wirelessly streaming PS Vita footage to the PS4 is one thing (if possible) but the PS Vita does have an extra accessory port so you can either have a custom HDMI plug so you can hook it up directly to an HDTV or a plug that hooks up to the PS4. Basically you'd need a PS4 to watch your PS Vita games on a TV in that case.

With all that said, I think AT&T have hinted in the past that the PS Vita will get 4G so we might still get a successor eventually. I guess we'll find out more info on the 20th. I do hear reports that the patent includes 4G. Where in this article, does it say that?
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=559772.APN.&OS=APN/559772&RS=APN/559772

I guess if it's not on that link, people might be getting the 4G info from here:
http://gamerxchange.net/2013/02/04/rumor-4g-vita-plus-firmware-update-to-be-revealed-soon/
Edited by Paulo Teixeira - 2/12/13 at 11:30am
post #1165 of 1994
Kotaku left out the 4g part. One of the comments pointed it out to them.
post #1166 of 1994
Thread Starter 
A 4G upgrade makes sense, but as mentioned, the HDMI port is possibly for the developer units only.
post #1167 of 1994
Aren't you already supposed to play vita games through the ps3 or is it the other way around? I just remember seeing a game being played on the tv and then taken on the go and continued playing on vita.
post #1168 of 1994
I wish I could come up with enough reasons to buy the Vita. It looks like a good piece of equipment, but I never have time to game on the go, and when I am home I would rather play on the big screen.
post #1169 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambesolman View Post

Aren't you already supposed to play vita games through the ps3 or is it the other way around? I just remember seeing a game being played on the tv and then taken on the go and continued playing on vita.
Their is cross play in which you physically need the game on both systems and uses each other's save file on a few games and their is remote play that allows PS3 games to be streamed to the PS Vita which again works with only a few games. As far as streaming games from the PS Vita to the PS3, it's not possible on any game.
post #1170 of 1994
There is also a new thing that I don't know what they call it but you play the game on the PS3 using the Vita as the controller. On the screen of the Vita can be additional gaming info.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PlayStation Area
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › PlayStation Area › PlayStation Meeting 2013 (PS4 unveiling - conference replay in first post)