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 33

post #961 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post


Sony really blew their shot at cross-play/cross-buy.

Twice now. Remember remote play in the PSP?
post #962 of 1994
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by americangunner View Post

I just don't see that happening. A lot of people are specualting that it will be $400, $450 at the most.

Then a lot of people are smoking something. There is just no way in the world that the PS4 will come out at $400. The deluxe PS3 was $600 at launch and still sold for a loss over the next few years. The rumored specs of the PS4 puts it at 8-10 times more powerful than that one (along with a high tech controller scheme of some sort), and there is the obvious desire by Sony to sell as close to cost as possible to minimize the per-unit-sold revenue loss this time around.

Putting aside all of the rumors of a subsidized option for a moment, we'll be lucky to see a $450 PS4 on the shelves at launch. My guess is that $500 will be the initial price. No way it will be $400.
Edited by joeblow - 2/1/13 at 3:51pm
post #963 of 1994
https://us.playstation.com/meeting2013/

It could be something else, but Sony will probably announce the PS4 on the Feb. 20th.
post #964 of 1994
Thread Starter 
^^^ It's been posted twice a few pages back. smile.gif

I'll update the first post and thread title.

~~~
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mounta1n View Post

Even if they don't eat the cost, I'd rather pay $50 more and have the 8GB, rather than sacrifice game quality and UI functionality for the next 6 years with only 4GB.

I think you significantly underestimate what 3.5 GB of GDDR5 RAM can achieve, even if the PS4 has a shelf life of 10 years like the PS2 & PS3. If the rumors are true, the UI get.s .5 of of the 4 GBs, which is a tremendously high amount. The Vita uses half of that for the UI, and you can easily go in and out of the game to the desktop to run some utility if you want before going back to gaming.

As for the games themselves, I posted a few pages back a real time demo from SquareSoft showing next gen graphics in action:


The amount of RAM needed for this eye-popping visual stunner is roughly half of the 3.5 GB rumored to be available for gaming in the next Playstation. The main thing to appreciate, if the rumors are true, is that the type of RAM being used is turbo fast GDDR5, which means developers can pack in a LOT more juicy visual detail and effects than would otherwise be possible. If Sony chose to use 8GB of this turbo RAM, I'd be a bit worried because it would likely force the price of the machine to rise more than people may be comfortable with.

I mean, two sticks of 2GB GDDR5 RAM is expensive, but doable. Would they expand that to four sticks? That forces some tech adjustments to physically fit them all, which drives up the cost. Would they go with two sticks of 4GB each? I don't think that even exists yet, or is only now being put into production, which again means more $$$.

No PC game I know of uses more than half of 4GB of GDDR5 RAM. I strongly doubt the Edge article is right about 8GB of GDDR5 if that is what they are implying (it isn't clear). But 4GB is plenty awesome (especially with a low .5GB OS overhead) should that be the case.
post #965 of 1994
Keep in mind Joe that rendered != playable. Games can throw a lot out / render a lot more when they control the FOV and do cinematic. Fidelity goes down when you have to all freelook and gameplay in realtime.
post #966 of 1994
So what's everybody's magic number to day one purchase this thing? I've got a ridiculous backlog of games to complete and told myself I wouldn't be getting a next gen system until Summer/Fall 2014 at the earliest but we all know about the temptation of the shiny new hotness. If it's $400 I'm definitely buying day one, $450 I'd have to sleep on it and above that I'm just going to wait.
post #967 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

Then a lot of people are smoking something. There is just no way in the world that the PS4 will come out at $400. The deluxe PS3 was $600 at launch and still sold for a loss over the next few years. The rumored specs of the PS4 puts it at 8-10 times more powerful than that one (along with a high tech controller scheme of some sort), and there is the obvious desire by Sony to sell as close to cost as possible to minimize the per-unit-sold revenue loss this time around.

Putting aside all of the rumors of a subsidized option for a moment, we'll be lucky to see a $450 PS4 on the shelves at launch. My guess is that $500 will be the initial price. No way it will be $400.
I am sure they don't want to take a huge loss either, but they were killed by coming out with a really high entry price. I just don't see them doing that again.
post #968 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamouflage View Post

So what's everybody's magic number to day one purchase this thing? I've got a ridiculous backlog of games to complete and told myself I wouldn't be getting a next gen system until Summer/Fall 2014 at the earliest but we all know about the temptation of the shiny new hotness. If it's $400 I'm definitely buying day one, $450 I'd have to sleep on it and above that I'm just going to wait.

I wouldn't even blink at $600.
post #969 of 1994
I think a lot of what contributed to the high cost of the original PS3 was due to Blu-ray being new, separate components for backwards compatibility, and the complex Cell processor. All just wild guesses that I pulled out of a magic hat.
post #970 of 1994
Thread Starter 
^^^ I agree, but the cost of manufacturing it was way more than the $600 they charged for the deluxe unit. If they can get costs down to, say, $550 for the PS4 and sell it for $500, they will have improved over the PS3 launch financially, and still have an attractive price point for early adopters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by americangunner View Post

I am sure they don't want to take a huge loss either, but they were killed by coming out with a really high entry price. I just don't see them doing that again.
$600 in 2006 vs. $400 in 2013. That is a huge reduction you are asking for.
post #971 of 1994
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Keep in mind Joe that rendered != playable. Games can throw a lot out / render a lot more when they control the FOV and do cinematic. Fidelity goes down when you have to all freelook and gameplay in realtime.
I realize that, but the demo was in real time. Of course adding game play elements reduces resources, but visual pop is the main eater of those resources. A.I. and such don't need the other 2 gigs of RAM remaining. So with an unoptimized real time demo like in the Agni video from SquareEnix being possible before the PS4 specs were even finalized, you can expect awesome results in games made directly on the console as the machine (and development tools) matures - especially 1st party games. RAM won't be a bottleneck.

Look at it this way... check out what the "lowly" 0.5 GB of (split) RAM allows the PS3 to do today:









So God of War: Ascension's amazing visuals are being done on a system with 256MB XDR Main RAM and 256MB GDDR3 Video RAM. The video RAM bandwidth transports the data at 25 GB/s. The PS4 rumors say its memory is unified this time unlike the PS3 split, and the 4 GB of RAM it has moves data at 176 GB/s. So you are looking at 8x the amount of PS3 RAM on the new console that is unified and moves data 7x as fast!

That is a HUGE upgrade over a current gen system that is still producing top tier graphics like the pics above reveal; imagine what Santa Monica Studios and the like can do on the PS4 early on and beyond. If 0.5 GB of slow RAM didn't hold them back, then 4.0 GB of turbo RAM certainly won't.
post #972 of 1994
Yup, a unified, set in stone architecture is pretty sweet! Every nook and cranny can be utilized, knowing hardware will never change, and the implementation will always work!

I just wish 3rd party Dev's still had the time and resources to optimize to each consoles strengths. Unfortunately, I think those days are long past us outside of Sony sponsored IP's and 1st party titles.
post #973 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Yup, a unified, set in stone architecture is pretty sweet! Every nook and cranny can be utilized, knowing hardware will never change, and the implementation will always work!

I just wish 3rd party Dev's still had the time and resources to optimize to each consoles strengths. Unfortunately, I think those days are long past us outside of Sony sponsored IP's and 1st party titles.

If they really are both using basically the same
CPU and GPU architecture....they basically will be, for both at the same time.
post #974 of 1994
Ugh... my PS3 just YLOD'd tonight. I don't really want to buy a new one with just 9 months left (assuming Nov. launch) till the PS4 comes out. mad.gif
post #975 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I wouldn't even blink at $600.

No way on God's green Earth that Kaz Harai would utter these words again:



599 US DOLLARS!!!!




They just won't go there. It's going to be $499.99. You can bank on it.
post #976 of 1994
There's absolutely no way in the world any console company can afford to sell a new console for more than $400--considering the state of the industry and of the economy at large. If they do it, they're dooming themselves before they've even started.

If it's really going to be that expensive, they will have to do something to avoid sticker shock (subscription contracts, etc.).
post #977 of 1994
I would agree with that price point ($499). $650 was pretty high for the PS3 launch. Now consoles have to compete with tablets and smart phones which really weren't in the picture last time around.

I don't think $500 is sticker shock. Again I think the age demographic has moved up and we're not only buying these consoles for us, but also our kids. Although I don't think Sony set this scenario up, but even coming in at $500 most of us will probably think that's a great deal considering we paid $650 at the PS3 launch.
Edited by eclipz - 2/1/13 at 10:37pm
post #978 of 1994
Thread Starter 
It certainly isn't. He's probably just setting up an excuse to start wailing at how terrible the price is when we find out what it will cost. More doom and gloom; pay it no mind.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

If they really are both using basically the same
CPU and GPU architecture....they basically will be, for both at the same time.
Yeah, there have been no rumors of some exotic new tech that developers have to jump through hoops to figure out. Just straight-forward, raw power. Based on the rumors at this time, any significant gimps with multi-platforms will likely come down to developer laziness and/or payola.
Edited by joeblow - 2/1/13 at 11:56pm
post #979 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMonMan View Post


This is why I haven't bought a Vita as well- Don't see enough free time/dead time when out of the house and would prefer the big tv/console when I am gaming in the house.. I do think a power house can still work in a console- and as MS proved (and Sony with PS+ to an extent), most "hard core" gamers do not mind paying monthly fees... If it means a more powerful console without an outrageous up-front cost- I wouldn't mind paying a contract-type monthly fee for a couple years
I use it when the wife watches American Idol or HGTV. She loves it because I stay in the room.

It's also a powerful enough system that you feel like you're playing a console title. I never played my PSP, but I've finished Gravity Rush, Mutant Blobs, platted Sound Shapes and Assassin's Creed Liberation, and have over 70 hours in P4G. I got it in December. Granted, I rarely sleep, but that's a lot of game time. I was also reluctant to get it since I had never played the PSP. I was worried I'd have enough very expensive paperweight on my hands.
Edited by frankthetoad - 2/2/13 at 5:41am
post #980 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankthetoad View Post

I use it when the wife watches American Idol or HGTV. She loves it because I stay in the room.
That may be the difference and might explain why I never really used it. Neither my wife nor I really watch TV. The few shows we watch, we usually watch together. And I watch more movies than she does. So there's no time where I need to play a game while she uses the TV. And if that's Sony's target play time, that's pretty a darn slim demographic! wink.gif

"Wives, tired of having no one around to share in your Idol chatter? Get him a Vita, and complain loudly about Johnny Pretty Face losing to Betty No Talent, and he'll be there to nod and grunt along with you!"
post #981 of 1994
If they get maybe 5-10 more solid PSN cross buy games, I'll prob buy one. Not buying specific games for a portable though. It needs to be an extension of my console.
post #982 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

That may be the difference and might explain why I never really used it. Neither my wife nor I really watch TV. The few shows we watch, we usually watch together. And I watch more movies than she does. So there's no time where I need to play a game while she uses the TV. And if that's Sony's target play time, that's pretty a darn slim demographic! wink.gif

"Wives, tired of having no one around to share in your Idol chatter? Get him a Vita, and complain loudly about Johnny Pretty Face losing to Betty No Talent, and he'll be there to nod and grunt along with you!"

Or get a kid and watch all that evaporate.
post #983 of 1994
I don't think matching the PS3's price of $500 would be a good idea. The Wii U might drop to $250 for the lowest model by the time the new systems are out and if that happens, that would be a huge difference. Still, for $500, they better have 8GB of GDDR5 and then release GT6 soon and that "might" be a different story. I'm expecting $400 for the lowest model and $450 would really be pushing it. As mentioned elsewhere, Sony could release a PS3 attachment for backwards capabilities for something perhaps $100. On the other hand, Sony might feel that they might loose too many PS3 sales.

The PS3 had 2 launch models, $500 and $600. It was never "retailed" for $650.
Edited by Paulo Teixeira - 2/2/13 at 11:13am
post #984 of 1994
Thread Starter 
Prices for console launches have never gone down compared to the previous gen that I can recall, and if the PS4 does so this time it really is unlikely to be so extremely drastic as to go down to $400. That is just wishful thinking.

Other possibilities that are plausible include taking a greater loss at $450 and/or offering the cell phone option being rumored of allowing it to be purchased for, say, $300 but you make 2-3 years of payments in some way. This would be either a long-term PS+ membership or some other arrangement that would push up the net price paid higher than if you bought it in full day one.
Edited by joeblow - 2/2/13 at 11:28am
post #985 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

Still, for $500, they better have 8GB of GDDR5 and then release GT6 soon and that "might" be a different story. I'm expecting $400 for the lowest model and $450 would really be pushing it.
More likely is a "vanilla" version for a high entry cost with everything packed in, and a stripped down "subscription" version that costs less upfront, but that has to be filled out with an aftermarket HDD, AV cables, charging cables, and a 2-year sub. I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I really don't think they can launch a new console without a cheaper way to buy in. The market's simply too different compared to the past two decades.

Impossible to guess what that spread between sku's and payment plans might actually look like. $100 difference? $200?
Quote:
As mentioned elsewhere, Sony could release a PS3 attachment for backwards capabilities for something perhaps $100.
BC isn't the system seller people think it is. That was one of the expensive lessons Sony learned. More likely is that we see limited BC for certain downloadable titles. There may even be a "license transfer fee" similar to what Nintendo's doing for virtual console releases on Wii U, and similar to what Sony did for UMD trade-ins in Japan. All just guesswork, but there is more precedent for limited/pay BC than for 100% BC.
Edited by confidenceman - 2/2/13 at 4:00pm
post #986 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

BC isn't the system seller people think it is.

I disagree to an extent. If they come out with the better specs of the two consoles, BC doesn't matter. BUT- if the two consoles are about equal in specs or MS's console is slightly better, then BC DOES matter. I think that most people, in that situation, that have invested in PS3 games (and even PS1 and PS2 games) would choose the PS4 over the MS console if it has BC. Why wouldn't you? Just like if someone has a stack of Xbox 360 games, and the nextbox has BC, they are going to choose the nextbox over the PS4. If one console is ages ahead of the other, BC isn't going to matter much. BUT if both consoles are pretty equal in real-world specs (like current gen are, and next gen are rumored to be), BC will pretty much guarantee that owners of previous console will stay with that brand. are those customers worth the cost of BC? I don't know. If one console offers something exceptionally better then the other, no- it doesn't matter.... but both consoles being basically equal- BC will keep current gen owners loyal to their brand.. That's my opinion however good it is.
post #987 of 1994
The majority of gamers don't care about games they've already played. They just want the latest and greatest and prettiest. Old games look "old" to most people.

You and I may disagree with this sentiment, but that doesn't change the very real business fact that the overwhelming majority of people feel this way. Having BC is expensive (licensing, hardware, software QA, etc.), and it also limits your ability to resell souped-up re-releases of old content. Weighed against relative consumer indifference to BC, and there's just not much reason to bother. Early adopters care, but that's about it.
post #988 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by confidenceman View Post

The majority of gamers don't care about games they've already played. They just want the latest and greatest and prettiest. Old games look "old" to most people.

You and I may disagree with this sentiment, but that doesn't change the very real business fact that the overwhelming majority of people feel this way. Having BC is expensive (licensing, hardware, software QA, etc.), and it also limits your ability to resell souped-up re-releases of old content. Weighed against relative consumer indifference to BC, and there's just not much reason to bother. Early adopters care, but that's about it.

I side here. PS4 will land in the living room unless they charge for Netflix like Xbox does, PS3 will move to the office and setup shop next to my PC.
post #989 of 1994
Backwards compatibility matters more and more as we move into the digital age. If all those purchases suddenly don't work on the new hardware, people will be livid. Apple has set the standard as has Steam, people expect their digital content to move with them to new hardware.

Even Nintendo did it right with both the 3DS and Wii U.
post #990 of 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Backwards compatibility matters more and more as we move into the digital age. If all those purchases suddenly don't work on the new hardware, people will be livid. Apple has set the standard as has Steam, people expect their digital content to move with them to new hardware.

Even Nintendo did it right with both the 3DS and Wii U.

Actually the opposite is true. Things are moving fast in the digital world, so much that they are impacting industries that were longer term products, like appliances. 20 years was expected from consumers due to reliability. Now it is about form and bells and whistles and that means 2-5 years max. You can thank cell phones Apple, etc.
Confidence man is right. Who has the time or want as things move faster and faster and we are subjected to more faster and are expected to adopt and move on faster. And as tech gets even more advanced...you already know you will be looking back less and less.
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)