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 17

post #481 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

As for lack of titles, can't say I have that problem. Sonys first party stuff is probably the only thing tieing me to them.

Definitely true for most of the generation. But GoW3 and UC3 were such major disappointments, and now they've lost Ueda (with The Last Guardian quickly becoming vaporware), so now even that claim to "great first party stuff" is in question for the next gen.
post #482 of 1994
Haven't got to U3 yet, it's sitting on my desk. I liked GOW3, even if the ending fell a bit flat, it was a good way to see the series out. I'd add that devs making games specifically for PS3 also seem to take chanced a bit more and try different genres.

TM is sick, but unfortunately Sony doesn't seem to want to really support it. Vita got in the way and TM's been left behind and not fixed.

Anyways, that's what next gens do, they shake things up.

Sony started off this gen really well, but seems to be faltering and holding back resources as the rest of the company crash and burns. PSN really needs a major redesign, and they need to force some sort of requirements on 3rd party dev's. The experience from one game to another, even 1st party, it way to drastic.
post #483 of 1994
You will have a better time with U3 than I did,it was terrible prepatch. The massive deadzone killed all the firefights, and the supernatural enemies actually made me drop the difficulty because of how bad it was. I was so put off by how poorly done the game was that I have yet to give it another chance.
post #484 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinoza_43221 View Post

$299 For PS4 ? Never happen, Ill totally eat my words if I'm wrong but current PS3 goes for $250 and you think brand new tech is going to come in at $299. Minimum $399 and its very plausible that it will be more than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

No doubt. My guess is Wii U comes in at $350, and the new Sony/MS consoles come in at $400/$500 (multiple sku's).

Ha! I probably shoulda said $400~ but apparently there's a part of my brain that wants to wait for that first price drop. Looks like I'll be a year out on the next one, too
post #485 of 1994
I hear that. I'm guessing that they go with the Ps3's original price, $600. I waited til the first price drop too, still $500 for 60g, but (knock on wood) still going strong!
post #486 of 1994
My price predictions

Wii U - $299
Everyone talking to insiders have been hearing this number for months. (will probably include a Wii Sports style pack in)

PS4 - $399
They can't afford to overprice the PS4 and risk it sitting on shelves, not with the shape they are in.

720 - $199
It will require a 2 year $16 a month Live subscription at purchase, standalone it will be $399 as well.
post #487 of 1994
If they do another $600 console they are out of their minds.

I'm still put off by this latest gen. High priced hardware with ridiculous fail rates. I've had 2 360s die and a ps3 die. In the previous gens combined I've had 1 failure and that was my dreamcast at the end of it's life. I'm going to wait things out as it is. If they go with insanely high prices I'll just build a pc to go along with the Wii U and say forget it.

Pen's prices above seem more realistic and what I'm expecting.
post #488 of 1994
Next generation graphics aren't cheap. Unless you are wanting Radeon 4000 level.
post #489 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

I'd add that devs making games specifically for PS3 also seem to take chanced a bit more and try different genres.

Early on, Sony was publishing some fantastic work by independent studios to beef up their PSN content. But then big publishers stepped into that market and forced a lot of the interesting stuff out. PSN had a reputation as the go-to place for innovative work. It was exciting for a while. Now that thatgamecompany's going multiplatform, it's truly the end of an era for PSN.

IMO Apple and Valve are benefitting from the hard work that Sony put in to make PSN so cool early on. Sony dropped the ball there.
post #490 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Yeah try 2 and having to purchase an almost full price slim. I didn't "have to", but with the investment I have in PSN and hard titles, it seemed like I did. $1000 on one system in a gen is unacceptable, and so is the way Sony is handling and obvious major issue with their old units.

I do game quite a bit, but it's a gaming system isn't it?

As for lack of titles, can't say I have that problem. Sonys first party stuff is probably the only thing tieing me to them.

Oh, I agree, and I see your point. What are you gonna do? Just sell off all your games and quit playing? I'm just pointing out that there's a variety of experiences. I think the PS3 has had a relatively low failure rate, especially relative to RROD. Having an experience like yours would leave a bad taste in the mouth, even if you know it isn't all that common.
post #491 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

My price predictions

Wii U - $299
Everyone talking to insiders have been hearing this number for months. (will probably include a Wii Sports style pack in)

PS4 - $399
They can't afford to overprice the PS4 and risk it sitting on shelves, not with the shape they are in.

720 - $199
It will require a 2 year $16 a month Live subscription at purchase, standalone it will be $399 as well.

That's a good thought for the 720. I'm betting that them trying that this late in the product's lifecycle for the 360 is a test of it for the 720.

I'm betting PS4 or 720 off-contract will be $499 at least for the full model (not counting a bare-bones 720 model that microsoft typically uses to lure in the uniformed that don't realize they now need to buy a proprietary hard drive, etc...) mainly because I don't think Sony can afford to bankroll another 2-3 years of losses on the hardware before they start to break even. Microsoft may be better prepared to do that, but they make it back by charging for online, so they can afford to. I'm guessing if people want the price lower for Sony (if that's what their research determines people want), then they will end up having to go with a subscription model for online as well. Even though the consumer will end up paying more in the long run...
post #492 of 1994
Sony just needs to make PS+ an even better deal. Currently it is worth having but not a must have. If they can change that then they won't need to force everyone to pay, because everyone will want to pay.

(like first party games are $20 off on release days for the digital version if you are a PS+ member)

As for the 720, it needs to be noticably cheaper without a contract than it is with a contract. That is why the $399 price is most likely. At $499 you only save $84 not that nice of a deal. (plus the cost of Live for the two years seperate from the contract, so another $120, $399 makes the most sense.)

That 24 months of Live will cost $384 total.
post #493 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

Early on, Sony was publishing some fantastic work by independent studios to beef up their PSN content. But then big publishers stepped into that market and forced a lot of the interesting stuff out. PSN had a reputation as the go-to place for innovative work. It was exciting for a while. Now that thatgamecompany's going multiplatform, it's truly the end of an era for PSN.

IMO Apple and Valve are benefitting from the hard work that Sony put in to make PSN so cool early on. Sony dropped the ball there.

I don't think it's so absolute. The echochromes and more recently Datura are SCE games. There's Pixel Junk turning out some gems, though they don't push the envelope as much. Eden and 4am are not your usual games and I'm sure PJ have more ideas coming soon. Dust 514, while not unique in gameplay, is a trailblazer for cross platform play. Thatgamecompany only did 3 games (good ones) but had a number of departures (one being the co-founder), not insignificant when your team consists of 15 people. The other platforms are getting Jenova Chen, not thatgamecompany.

Jenova Chen is an artist and will land on his feet because he's good at whet he does, but I think the days of Sony throwing endless money and time at developers is over. Thatgamecompany took 6+ years to make 3 very short games, and they had outside help on two of them. Last Guardian is another example: a game that has been in development for 5 years and was delayed again, then what happens? The studio head walks and SCE steps in to (hopefully) complete the game. I think Sony will keep with the quirky and different titles, but they want for more efficiency going forward.
post #494 of 1994
I would only upgrade if 4k playing capability built in
post #495 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Sony just needs to make PS+ an even better deal. Currently it is worth having but not a must have. If they can change that then they won't need to force everyone to pay, because everyone will want to pay.

(like first party games are $20 off on release days for the digital version if you are a PS+ member)

As for the 720, it needs to be noticably cheaper without a contract than it is with a contract. That is why the $399 price is most likely. At $499 you only save $84 not that nice of a deal. (plus the cost of Live for the two years seperate from the contract, so another $120, $399 makes the most sense.)

That 24 months of Live will cost $384 total.

I think PS+ is a good deal for new PS3 buyers. Just not so much when you already own the games they're giving away for free...
post #496 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoro View Post

I would only upgrade if 4k playing capability built in

LOL okay
post #497 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoro View Post

I would only upgrade if 4k playing capability built in

What if it has 4K (and can do 1080p/48fps/3D, ala The Hobbit), but it costs $600? and comparable 4K standalone players also cost about $600 and up?

Hard to imagine in this economy, but it would be a similar situation to the PS3 launch.
post #498 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Sony just needs to make PS+ an even better deal. Currently it is worth having but not a must have. If they can change that then they won't need to force everyone to pay, because everyone will want to pay.

My hope is that PS+ and XBLA start rolling in subscriptions to services like Hulu+, Amazon Prime, Netflix, Spotify, etc. That'd be absolutely brilliant. Even if it meant paying another $10-20/yr. If they can effectively replace or substitute cable (all while still supporting online play), I'm sold. For those providers, it would be assured subscribers--even if they're effectively paying less, there'd be a lot more of them. Or even if Sony teams up with just a couple of key providers, it'd still be great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash44 View Post

I think the days of Sony throwing endless money and time at developers is over.

Unfortunately, I agree. Sony's hurting financially. It's big development houses have gotten big, and so have development budgets. They can't afford to risk big losses anymore. Yet another problem that the next console generation will have to solve.
post #499 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoro View Post

I would only upgrade if 4k playing capability built in

If 4k comes to the consumer market within the next 5 years, it'll make 3D look like a runaway success.
post #500 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TornadoTJ View Post

If 4k comes to the consumer market within the next 5 years, it'll make 3D look like a runaway success.

Too true. 4k is the latest way for electronics companies to fool you into replacing your gear. Sony should spend money on as much ram as they can stuff into the PS4 before spending a dime on 4k.
post #501 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TornadoTJ View Post

If 4k comes to the consumer market within the next 5 years, it'll make 3D look like a runaway success.

No joke. The current infrastructure (in the US) can't even support broadcasts of 720p, 3D, and 5.1 at the same time. Not to mention what it would cost to develop and support for gaming. We're a long ways off from this.
post #502 of 1994
Yup. I'd much rather have 1080P locked at a solid 60fps w/ 4XAA for all their games than some niche marketing standard that won't be widely supported until after the PS4's lifespan is out.

Spend the money where it counts.
post #503 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash44 View Post


Too true. 4k is the latest way for electronics companies to fool you into replacing your gear. Sony should spend money on as much ram as they can stuff into the PS4 before spending a dime on 4k.

With the right components, couldn't they add 4k as an update in the future like they did with 3d?
post #504 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambesolman View Post

With the right components, couldn't they add 4k as an update in the future like they did with 3d?

AFAIK nothing's stopping Sony from supporting 4k on current PS3s. It's just a matter of system resources. Wasn't there a rumor of a firmware update for 4k stills?

Some of the more nuts-and-bolts-minded of you can probably clarify.
post #505 of 1994
You sure there's no limit in HDMI 1.4 ?
post #506 of 1994
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/4K.aspx

4K Support
The HDMI 1.4 specification adds support for extremely high video resolutions that go far beyond today's 1080p systems. 4K is shorthand for 4,000 lines wide by 2,000 lines high, or roughly four times the resolution of a 1080p display. The term actually covers two formats, both supported in the HDMI 1.4 specification:

3840 pixels wide by 2160 pixels high
4096 pixels wide by 2160 pixels high

4K displays will put high-end home theater systems roughly on a par with the state-of-the-art Digital Cinema projectors used in many commercial movie theaters. Staying true to its commitment to future-readiness, the HDMI standard can now support these systems with the extremely high bandwidth connectivity they will require.

How to Ensure 4K functionality in your Home Theater System

Look for devices that support 4K functionality.
All High Speed HDMI cables will support 4K functionality when connected to 4K devices. You can use your existing High Speed HDMI cables or choose a different cable type. (more)
post #507 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mounta1n View Post


Hard to imagine in this economy, but it would be a similar situation to the PS3 launch.

No. It wouldn't be a similar situation to the PS3 launch.

When the PS3 launched, BR (as well as 720p and 1080p) was an upgrade that had real world benefits for a lot of consumers, depending on their livingroom/TV setups. 4K doesn't offer that.

Personally, I'd much rather see more advanced filter being supported instead of just pushing pointless pixels for the sake of adding a useless marketing spec.

-Suntan
post #508 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntan View Post


When the PS3 launched, BR (as well as 720p and 1080p) was an upgrade that had real world benefits for a lot of consumers, depending on their livingroom/TV setups. 4K doesn't offer that.
-Suntan

Some. There was a lot of hard selling even in the transition from SD to HD, as a ton of consumers just didn't see the big deal between SD DVD and HD. To many, the differences were not very apparent at all.

HD to HD+ is going to be a bigger sell, and a bigger flop. TV manufactures are desperately trying to find a reason to get consumers to buy a display device every 2-3 years, and it's simply not going to happen.
post #509 of 1994
How about if we actually get a console generation that can consistently do modern visual effects at 1080p/60fps before we try to jump ahead to sub-par use of something fancier?

- Jer
post #510 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntan View Post

When the PS3 launched, BR (as well as 720p and 1080p) was an upgrade that had real world benefits for a lot of consumers, depending on their livingroom/TV setups. 4K doesn't offer that.

Many cable and content providers still broadcast sub-HD resolutions and call them "HD," not to mention their sub-par sound quality. And many consumers don't even notice.

Also, streaming content (Netflix, On Demand, Hulu, etc) is well below HD standards and its far outstripping the transition to Bluray. So clearly consumers don't care so much about the "jump" from SD to HD as much as they care about a "jump" in convenience.

Higher resolution isn't what consumers want. And it's not for a lack of trying on the part of manufacturers. It's an uphill (and perhaps futile) battle.
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)