Sony:PS4 will release prior to X-Mas 2013 in order to beat MS

[quote name='panzerfaust']can't believe it's been ~6 years, feels like this gen is only now starting to figure things out.[/QUOTE]

Publishers figured out all they needed to:
1) DLC is a great way to milk the consumer.
2) The average consumer is an idiot that's easy to milk.

I am almost certain that the video game market will crash in the next generation.
 
Sony didn't say that. A rumor/ source. I believe Sony once said GT5 would be a PS3 launch title. We all know how that went.
 
[quote name='6er']Sony didn't say that. A rumor/ source. I believe Sony once said GT5 would be a PS3 launch title. We all know how that went.[/QUOTE]

I assume you are talking to the OP and not me right? I know for a fact what the release date was supposed to be. I was around then and what not. I'm old. :(

Speaking of supposed launch titles, there were tons that they claimed were launch titles then delayed a few months then much much longer. They were stringing people along by lying to them and telling them those games would be there at launch then "just delayed to spring 2007". GT5 came out so much later, they fucking knew they were lying to the loyal customers. People thought they be getting it and a bunch of other games relatively soon so they bought those 500/600 dollar consoles. Sony played people for fools. I know not to buy consoles until there are plenty of games that I want already available and not "coming out soon". I made at mistake with the N64 thinking that Earthbound 64 was just around the corner. Constant fucking delays turned into vaporware.
 
[quote name='Blaster man']I assume you are talking to the OP and not me right? I know for a fact what the release date was supposed to be. I was around then and what not. I'm old. :(

Speaking of supposed launch titles, there were tons that they claimed were launch titles then delayed a few months then much much longer. They were stringing people along by lying to them and telling them those games would be there at launch then "just delayed to spring 2007". GT5 came out so much later, they fucking knew they were lying to the loyal customers. People thought they be getting it and a bunch of other games relatively soon so they bought those 500/600 dollar consoles. Sony played people for fools. I know not to buy consoles until there are plenty of games that I want already available and not "coming out soon". I made at mistake with the N64 thinking that Earthbound 64 was just around the corner. Constant fucking delays turned into vaporware.[/QUOTE]

I was at the press event in Atlanta where the Dreamcast was introduced. One of the demos was a really cool looking shmup that I don't recall whether it even got a title. At the time it had some effects that were very dazzling, obviously inspired by certain TV series.

By the next E3 Sega had completely forgotten the game had ever existed, although there plenty of inquiries about 'the cool shooter from the Atlanta press event.'


I don't buy launch systems anymore if there isn't some special incentive. There used to be when I was getting paid to be on top of such things but those days are long past. My last launch purchase was the PSP. As I get older the temptation is less and less, and the backlog more and more. There will probably be a new Vita model before I get done with all the PSP games I have piled up.
 
I figure Sony wants to get the system out by E3 2013 so they can give them out to show attendees.

If the PS4 isn't backwards compatible then I'm not going to be able to support the system. I do believe that Sony will release the system on time. But Im anticipating that they will release a virtually featureless system and then it'll take at least a year before they get the systems full compliment of features working via firmware updates. I don't want to early adopt and have to wait for FW updates before I can get basic system features online.

Also, if I invest in PS4 then all my psn games, and ps3 titles are null and void...... I wonder where all these rumors are coming from and if any of them will turn out to be true. I'm not going to judge the product until its been presented.
 
I doubt Christmas 2013 for a few reasons
  • 10 yr plan, and were only around a full 5, partial 6. i think around a full 8 to partial 9 would be more likely with firmware updates
  • hardware still isnt being fully tapped into (software coding is not calling on all resources)
  • with 3d gaming/3d bluray just starting to flower, they have a fresh market to test before fully investing in its nextgen form development
  • DLC is still a big market that will only really start to whither when amazing titles are no longer developed, and my guess is big titles will still be coming by the end of 2013, i mean mid 2010-end 2011 was a CRAZY 1.5 yr for games,especially the PS3, and a lot of the great stuff really came at the end of 2011. starting to turn the attention elsewhere now is kinda like a give away for sony on the hardware end because software developers arent going to lose, it would be liike a year end clearance for the current model year in February
  • PSN - they still need to iron that out a lot more. i doubt they would start playing around with a PS4 online network before they even solidify the PS3's
  • PC Gaming is more affordable than ever while providing a lot more options than consoles. Sony has to really streamline and economize their hardware manufacturing with the best performance rivaling PC power while keeping costs very low. People are getting a lot more computer savvy. In 2 years, people won't be afraid of PC gaming and stick to console when they have a more powerful machine sitting on their lap and know how to use it. The PS3 is just starting to hit $200 barely, so the PS4 is gonna have to be like a PC (yeah, sorta like the PS3 but even more powerful) at a very low introductory price.
In conclusion PS3 needs exclusive native code programming and/or titles to fully push the CPU/GPU and unlock the full power, a lot more development in the 3D market which is growing in order to test the waters before jumping into the deep end with a new console, and to really see what can be done in the online network both in terms of the playing community and the DLC/sales end of things. See, the PS3 is really the nextgen prototype and beta. They would be wasting a lot of money if they released something next year on top of diving into the unknown. The lab test results are just comin in if u know what I mean.

That's my rumor anyway....

(P.S. I wouldn't buy a PS4 until it had a 1/2 price drop like we saw in 2010, which means if it launched end 2013, i wouldn't have one until 2017 or so, and that's if I'd still be playing consoles then....)
 
If the rumor about no used games floating around now is anywhere near true, then I will NOT be buying a PS4 AT ALL. Sorry. But I like my games cheap/affordable and if it means I wait till they're $19.99 or less AND buy used, then that's what I'm gonna keep doing.

If I can't do that, then their new console has nothing for me.
 
[quote name='chrislisting']I doubt Christmas 2013 for a few reasons
  • 10 yr plan, and were only around a full 5, partial 6. i think around a full 8 to partial 9 would be more likely with firmware updates
  • hardware still isnt being fully tapped into (software coding is not calling on all resources)
  • with 3d gaming/3d bluray just starting to flower, they have a fresh market to test before fully investing in its nextgen form development
  • DLC is still a big market that will only really start to whither when amazing titles are no longer developed, and my guess is big titles will still be coming by the end of 2013, i mean mid 2010-end 2011 was a CRAZY 1.5 yr for games,especially the PS3, and a lot of the great stuff really came at the end of 2011. starting to turn the attention elsewhere now is kinda like a give away for sony on the hardware end because software developers arent going to lose, it would be liike a year end clearance for the current model year in February
  • PSN - they still need to iron that out a lot more. i doubt they would start playing around with a PS4 online network before they even solidify the PS3's
  • PC Gaming is more affordable than ever while providing a lot more options than consoles. Sony has to really streamline and economize their hardware manufacturing with the best performance rivaling PC power while keeping costs very low. People are getting a lot more computer savvy. In 2 years, people won't be afraid of PC gaming and stick to console when they have a more powerful machine sitting on their lap and know how to use it. The PS3 is just starting to hit $200 barely, so the PS4 is gonna have to be like a PC (yeah, sorta like the PS3 but even more powerful) at a very low introductory price.
In conclusion PS3 needs exclusive native code programming and/or titles to fully push the CPU/GPU and unlock the full power, a lot more development in the 3D market which is growing in order to test the waters before jumping into the deep end with a new console, and to really see what can be done in the online network both in terms of the playing community and the DLC/sales end of things. See, the PS3 is really the nextgen prototype and beta. They would be wasting a lot of money if they released something next year on top of diving into the unknown. The lab test results are just comin in if u know what I mean.[/QUOTE] The PS3 has been tapped fully. The hardware limits it's full potential, there is too much bottlenecking between the hard drive and the chipsets. The PS3 isn't competing any more, it's existing. It's clear from what's being pushed on the PC side that more power is being demanded for consoles. Goals and projected planning will take a backseat for the next best console because it doesn't take a lot to improve the PS3 well above and beyond what it can already do if they removed those limitations. They have to follow or lead the market because they're already pushing hardware that's obsolete currently.
 
There's still a rumor going around (despite MS's denials) that the next Xbox will be out Christmas 2012. Some folks are INSISTING that MS is going to throw a giant surprise in everyone's face this E3 and be like, "oh yeah, we're releasing this Christmas at the same time as the Wii U". If true, Sony's going to shit it's pants. I doubt it's true but we'll know in a couple of months.
 
I don't think your friends opinions really count as rumors.. Unless you have some actual articles where industry insiders are saying otherwise
 
[quote name='Thomas96']I figure Sony wants to get the system out by E3 2013 so they can give them out to show attendees.

If the PS4 isn't backwards compatible then I'm not going to be able to support the system. I do believe that Sony will release the system on time. But Im anticipating that they will release a virtually featureless system and then it'll take at least a year before they get the systems full compliment of features working via firmware updates. I don't want to early adopt and have to wait for FW updates before I can get basic system features online.

Also, if I invest in PS4 then all my psn games, and ps3 titles are null and void...... I wonder where all these rumors are coming from and if any of them will turn out to be true. I'm not going to judge the product until its been presented.[/QUOTE]

No, your PS3 games will keep working just fine. On the PS3. Which will remain in stores for several years to come if Sony sticks to their pattern. There is likely another major engineering revision in the works to further reduce the production cost.

You can still buy a PS2 today and most stores still have a token PS2 section, even though only a tiny portion of the PS3s out there will run any of it. Backward compatibility isn't a big driver for successful consoles. The biggest surprise in retrospect is that Sony ever bothered to do PS2 BC on the PS3, and that they went for such an expensive approach while managing such poor compatibility. Further, they haven't seen fit to go the emulation route, favoring HD remakes instead.

The PS2 was the one shining moment of BC in a follow-up to a successful console. But there was one big advantage in that they were able to make heavy use of the PS1 hardware as a operational portion of the PS2 design. The PS3 might have done similarly but they committed early on to a radical new design that didn't allow for that. (This was a box containing multiple CELL chips and no dedicated GPU, which was reflected in the early demos.) That design was later dropped for a more conventional CPU+GPU setup but it was too late by then to integrate the PS2 chipset. Newer feature demands were just too different to integrate it as easily as the PS1 fit into the PS2 design.
 
[quote name='Blaster man']There's still a rumor going around (despite MS's denials) that the next Xbox will be out Christmas 2012. Some folks are INSISTING that MS is going to throw a giant surprise in everyone's face this E3 and be like, "oh yeah, we're releasing this Christmas at the same time as the Wii U". If true, Sony's going to shit it's pants. I doubt it's true but we'll know in a couple of months.[/QUOTE]

Depends on how different the new hardware is. If it is a straight upgrade to more powerful versions of the same components, it could happen fairly fast. If they're doing a lot of new stuff and no detailed info has leaked out, then I doubt we'll see it this year.

We knew well in advance that the still-to-be-named Wii was just a die shrink and extension of the GameCube chipset. Nintendo denied it vehemently but it proved to be exactly what the early rumors said it would be. But those rumors were fairly detailed about how much the embedded RAM had been increased and other items.

The lack of such makes me think even Microsoft might be a bit iffy on certain variables still. Both Xbox generations didn't have their RAM amount frozen until fairly late in the cycle. The original Xbox was equipped to have 128 MB on the board but the cost was too high when decision time came. The 360 went the opposite way, getting its original 256 MB doubled at developer demand.
 
[quote name='chrislisting']I doubt Christmas 2013 for a few reasons
  • 10 yr plan, and were only around a full 5, partial 6. i think around a full 8 to partial 9 would be more likely with firmware updates
  • hardware still isnt being fully tapped into (software coding is not calling on all resources)
  • with 3d gaming/3d bluray just starting to flower, they have a fresh market to test before fully investing in its nextgen form development
  • DLC is still a big market that will only really start to whither when amazing titles are no longer developed, and my guess is big titles will still be coming by the end of 2013, i mean mid 2010-end 2011 was a CRAZY 1.5 yr for games,especially the PS3, and a lot of the great stuff really came at the end of 2011. starting to turn the attention elsewhere now is kinda like a give away for sony on the hardware end because software developers arent going to lose, it would be liike a year end clearance for the current model year in February
  • PSN - they still need to iron that out a lot more. i doubt they would start playing around with a PS4 online network before they even solidify the PS3's
  • PC Gaming is more affordable than ever while providing a lot more options than consoles. Sony has to really streamline and economize their hardware manufacturing with the best performance rivaling PC power while keeping costs very low. People are getting a lot more computer savvy. In 2 years, people won't be afraid of PC gaming and stick to console when they have a more powerful machine sitting on their lap and know how to use it. The PS3 is just starting to hit $200 barely, so the PS4 is gonna have to be like a PC (yeah, sorta like the PS3 but even more powerful) at a very low introductory price.
In conclusion PS3 needs exclusive native code programming and/or titles to fully push the CPU/GPU and unlock the full power, a lot more development in the 3D market which is growing in order to test the waters before jumping into the deep end with a new console, and to really see what can be done in the online network both in terms of the playing community and the DLC/sales end of things. See, the PS3 is really the nextgen prototype and beta. They would be wasting a lot of money if they released something next year on top of diving into the unknown. The lab test results are just comin in if u know what I mean.

That's my rumor anyway....

(P.S. I wouldn't buy a PS4 until it had a 1/2 price drop like we saw in 2010, which means if it launched end 2013, i wouldn't have one until 2017 or so, and that's if I'd still be playing consoles then....)[/QUOTE]

A new console doesn't have any bearing on the ten year lifecycle. This started with the PS2 and was more than fulfilled. The PS2 is still being developed for and doing a fair business in developing markets.

Keep in mind Sony never said ten years as the lead product in their console business. If a PS4 appeared in 2013 it would be comparable to when the PS3 hit in the PS2's career.

The bigger question to me is how far they can bring down the PS3's price. It becomes more of a problem in each generation as the feature sets increase. We still think in terms of the magic $99 price but $99 isn't what it used to be. IIRC, the SNES got down to $99 shortly after the N64 launch. $99 then is close to $150 today. But $150 doesn't have the same temptation value as $99.

One big challenge is the hard drive. The base cost of a hard drive, even as the capacity improves, hasn't changed in many years.

Still, a $150 PS3 should move a lot of units before calling the platform at an end worldwide.
 
Epobirs, also Sony's CORE processor design makes it more expensive to produce when compared to the xbox 360. Initial cost plus the ability to bring down prices faster are probably the reasons they're going with a more standard parts line up.
 
[quote name='epobirs']
The bigger question to me is how far they can bring down the PS3's price. It becomes more of a problem in each generation as the feature sets increase. We still think in terms of the magic $99 price but $99 isn't what it used to be. IIRC, the SNES got down to $99 shortly after the N64 launch. $99 then is close to $150 today. But $150 doesn't have the same temptation value as $99.

One big challenge is the hard drive. The base cost of a hard drive, even as the capacity improves, hasn't changed in many years.

Still, a $150 PS3 should move a lot of units before calling the platform at an end worldwide.[/QUOTE]You know Sony though they'll load up game bundles to ofset the $150 as usual. But with all the PS4 rumor regarding used games & stuff Sony maybe selling PS3's for alot longer than planned as the backlash combined with a $120ish price point could actually work. There's more game diversity on PS3 so gamers wouldn't get bored as fast & older titles with good online could be rejuvenated in the process(online passes +DLC would be capitalizing on this from savy companies)
 
[quote name='chrislisting']I doubt Christmas 2013 for a few reasons

10 yr plan, and were only around a full 5, partial 6. i think around a full 8 to partial 9 would be more likely with firmware updates[/QUOTE]

10 year hardware plan doesn't mean they will only sell the PS3 for 10 years. Their goal is to have PS3s on the shelves and selling, theoretically with games to support it, for 10 years. That has nothing to do with the next Sony console's arrival.

There is zero doubt in my mind that the 360's successor WON'T come out this year. I will eat poop if it does.
 
guys i didnt mean it would be like 10 years or 2016 for the ps4, i just meant next year (making it 7 yrs) was too soon.
 
Even if Sony had intended on a 8-10 year plan without a successor, the market forces are what will determine when the next console is released. All the consoles are losing sales YoY and you're seeing almost all of the series that started in this generation going to 3. Uncharted 3, Resistance 3, Killzone 3, Mass Effect 3, AC 3, Gears 3. Players are fatigued and don't want to see X game 4 in 2013. New consoles usually mean a lot of new IP if nothing else.
 
[quote name='KaneRobot']10 year hardware plan doesn't mean they will only sell the PS3 for 10 years. Their goal is to have PS3s on the shelves and selling, theoretically with games to support it, for 10 years. That has nothing to do with the next Sony console's arrival.

There is zero doubt in my mind that the 360's successor WON'T come out this year. I will eat poop if it does.[/QUOTE]

Consider where your food comes from and where it will go and how it will eventually, even if only a few molecules, find its way into your mouth again. We're poop eating cannibals already.
 
[quote name='chrislisting']guys i didnt mean it would be like 10 years or 2016 for the ps4, i just meant next year (making it 7 yrs) was too soon.[/QUOTE]

But it's exactly on schedule if the PS2/PS3 transition is the model.
 
[quote name='Blaster man']Epobirs, also Sony's CORE processor design makes it more expensive to produce when compared to the xbox 360. Initial cost plus the ability to bring down prices faster are probably the reasons they're going with a more standard parts line up.[/QUOTE]

I think you mean CELL. The biggest expense on CELL was Sony's share, along with Toshiba and IBM, of the development costs running over a $Billion for all of the new IP. And a major portion of that was for a function that never came to fruition. CELL was originally touted as being a big enabler of multi-processor systems, scaling up smoothly in a way that was considered very difficult for x86 gear back then. If you go back tot he earliest announcements, Sony made outlandish claims of being able to enlist networked appliances with CELL processors to supplement the PS3's processing.

Once you get past the dev costs, the working silicon isn't too bad after a few die shrinks. It was a very big die at the original 90 nm, just as the PS2 emotion Engine was a beast at 250 nm. (This was never intended to be a shipping product but the 180 nm process wasn't available in time to start production for the Japanese launch. The early Japanese units also had a PCMCIA Type III hard drive bay that was somehow chosen in a fit of madness.Not that it mattered in the long run due to Sony's fumbling of the PS2's hard drive support.) At the current 45 nm node it is pretty reasonable and larger chip exist in the same node. They'll probably get it down to 32 nm or 22 nm before they stop PS3 production.

Microsoft scored a real coup off of Sony's development investment. The Xenon CPU is essentially three of the CELL's PPE units, modified for dual threads, and no SPEs or ring bus. So Microsoft got the design very cheaply as so much of the work had already been done for Sony. The transistor count is a fair bit higher on the CELL side but when you go down a few nodes the difference becomes minor with the scale. A bigger advantage than the transistor count is the lesser complexity that lends itself to higher yields.

It took a long time but a long term payoff for the PS3 is the greater throughput potential finally being exploited, allowing for some extra pizzaz on exclusive titles and greater use of higher resolutions as more and more of the market has 1080p displays. It remains to be seen how much effort Microsoft puts into continuing the 360 once its successor is launched. They didn't have a choice last time around, so this will be their first time with two active platforms. If the new machine is backward compatible it gives them freedom to push for a higher cost of entry at launch, especially if they make the Kinect functionality standard rather than optional. Committing to Kinect in every unit offers some cost saving approaches but also means convincing those who didn't buy it this generation that they aren't being forced into a needless expense.

We may actually see a role reversal, where Microsoft has the higher cost of entry and Sony strives to keep cost of entry down. If Microsoft puts the bulk of the Kinect processing (and more of it) on the motherboard and integrates it into the CPU as part of dies shrinks it could work out pretty well in the long term in exchange for that higher initial cost.

Not that there would be many die shrinks. With 22 nm chips now shipping from Intel, the end of Moore's Law is in sight. New paradigms will need to kick in to continue advancing microprocessing.
 
I could see a PS4 being released in late 2014 but not 2013.
It still seems to soon to be upgrading consoles with all the firmware upgrades that have been done and will continue to be done to improve the PS3.
Other then better graphics that a new system would obviously have I don't really see a reason to jump again to a next gen system.
What more could they really do? give us 2 hdmi's this time? :(
 
For the first time in my gaming "career" I'll be sitting out the new console launches for quite some time. THere are too many games I still have to play that have come out this generation - more than enough to keep me busy for several years. I think all of the console manufacturers are making a huge mistake by releasing new systems in 2012 or 2013.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Not that there would be many die shrinks. With 22 nm chips now shipping from Intel, the end of Moore's Law is in sight. New paradigms will need to kick in to continue advancing microprocessing.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the problem is really not power but trying to fit the power in the same sized box. It used to be that console makers just add transistors to make the machine more powerful but we're reaching the end of how many transistors can be put in a box the size of Xbox 360. Unless consumers don't mind larger boxes, the next generation will likely be the highest we can go without a change in processor engineering.

Also, to note, no high polygon PS3 game is full 1080p. Even Uncharted is 720p and you can definitely see the polygons in that game even with all the normal mapping and stuff. Next gen should have enough power to at least make the polygons almost unnoticeable which can aid in the immersion quite a bit. Jaggies, polygon edges, and bad framerate makes you feel like you're wrestling with technology and they should all get better next gen (except Wii U).
 
[quote name='Ivanhoe']I could see a PS4 being released in late 2014 but not 2013.
It still seems to soon to be upgrading consoles with all the firmware upgrades that have been done and will continue to be done to improve the PS3.
Other then better graphics that a new system would obviously have I don't really see a reason to jump again to a next gen system.
What more could they really do? give us 2 hdmi's this time? :([/QUOTE]

There was an article in GI where they asked developers what they wanted. I was thinking most of them would say "better development tools" or "easier development", but nearly all said the same thing: more power.

Can't wait for the next generation. Buy a $60 game to get 50% of the original content. The other 50% is paid DLC because they have to re-coup development costs from all this power!:roll:
 
[quote name='Vinny'] Can't wait for the next generation. Buy a $60 game to get 50% of the original content. The other 50% is paid DLC because they have to re-coup development costs from all this power!:roll:[/QUOTE]There's always the LBP theory of letting gamers create levels too.
 
[quote name='Enuf']There's always the LBP theory of letting gamers create levels too.[/QUOTE]
They did that to some extent with inFamous 2, where there was some UGC(user generated content) that you could play through, if I remember correctly.
 
[quote name='techtonic']Yeah, the problem is really not power but trying to fit the power in the same sized box. It used to be that console makers just add transistors to make the machine more powerful but we're reaching the end of how many transistors can be put in a box the size of Xbox 360. Unless consumers don't mind larger boxes, the next generation will likely be the highest we can go without a change in processor engineering.

Also, to note, no high polygon PS3 game is full 1080p. Even Uncharted is 720p and you can definitely see the polygons in that game even with all the normal mapping and stuff. Next gen should have enough power to at least make the polygons almost unnoticeable which can aid in the immersion quite a bit. Jaggies, polygon edges, and bad framerate makes you feel like you're wrestling with technology and they should all get better next gen (except Wii U).[/QUOTE]

In the animation trade the term often used as a holy grail was 'polygon per pixel.' This stopped being a goal a long time ago but remains one for real-time interactive game play. If we were still targeting NTSC displays we'd be there but it made more sense to move to higher resolution. The maximized rendering for NTSC would still reveal the limitations of real-time animation and AI. Bumping up the resolution only required more horsepower rather than new techniques nobody has really worked out yet.

A funny thing about the PS3 is that developers are extracting better rendering at higher resolution because they have no choice. The Xbox 360's scaler makes some things pretty effortless, allowing devs to use oddball resolutions internally that provide the best balance of visual quality vs. frame rate. So there are games using a sub-720p resolution and being scaled. But on the PS3 to get scaling done without severe overhead you need to use the resolutions that lend themselves to it. You really need to hit 720p to get easy soft scaling to 1080p.

For similar reasons the new iPad model is exactly double the resolution in each direction. Existing material scales with very little overhead.
 
[quote name='Javery']For the first time in my gaming "career" I'll be sitting out the new console launches for quite some time. THere are too many games I still have to play that have come out this generation - more than enough to keep me busy for several years. I think all of the console manufacturers are making a huge mistake by releasing new systems in 2012 or 2013.[/QUOTE]

I think it happens to everybody eventually. If you're an avid gamer with strong CAG shopping habits, you end up with far too much stuff and not nearly enough time for it. How good could the new stuff be that it would justify paying the high prices associated with a new platform at launch?

If I found myself suddenly wealthy with no responsibility, I would indulge. But that is fantastically unlikely. The only possible scenario is winning the lottery, which isn't a life strategy I'm counting on.

I still don't own a Wii. I've plenty of GameCube games still waiting to be played fully. Until the Wii gets down to under $100 there just isn't much there I'm compelled to jump on sooner rather than later. I'll get to play the stuff eventually but might be just as happy to do it on a later Nintendo platform that offers enough to make me add it to the array.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top