You were on a good streak until the last bit. Sony is trying to look for ways to spread the "PS brand" around but putting it directly on MS? Not really. I can see different android devices but not on a direct competitor like xbox.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
vg247-PS4: new kits shipping now, AMD A10 used as base, final version next summer
- Thread starter Globox_82
- Start date
You were on a good streak until the last bit. Sony is trying to look for ways to spread the "PS brand" around but putting it directly on MS? Not really. I can see different android devices but not on a direct competitor like xbox.
Angelus Errare
Banned
The crashing of reality when they announce the specs and they're not a 16core 8GB machine with the kitchen sink thrown in will be awesome.
Agreed but this isn't what you originally presented. Your original argument was Sony never made money from hardware. That statement was false.
Agreed but this isn't what you originally presented. Your original argument was Sony never made money from hardware. That statement was false.
GarthVaderUK
Banned
Bear in mind that MS has bundled lots of different things into its Entertainment and Devices Division over the years (many of which were not very successful), it's not just Xbox numbers on that chart. This comes up every time these misleading charts are posted.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
The reality is that their Gakai streaming service is based on web streaming.
Xbox 720 is bound to have a web browser that you can pull up in-game.
Playstation is instantly compatible with ANYTHING that has a web browser.
Sony doesn't care that it's running on 720 hardware -- all they care about is having an audience that is able to buy and stream content.
iamvin22
Industry Verified
is it even possible to ban a device from streaming a game over the web?
phosphor112
Banned
MS wouldn't allow it either...
Yea on THEIR terms, There wouldn't be a point to even making next gen hardware at that point. They aren't even at that level of desperation.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
The point of making next-gen hardware is to have the highest possible fidelity, with no lag or any other issues, with locally played content.
The point of streaming is that you don't need next-gen hardware at all. Want to play PS4 games on my iPad? No problem, plug in a Bluetooth controller and open up a web link or press a playstation app to access content.
Why would Sony or Microsoft be against their services on rival platforms?
Microsoft shut down cross platform play between 360 and PS3 users on several games during their development, including CoD4.
I think Sony sells its movies on XBL but there's no way in hell either company will let the other run games on their system.
I was thinking it would be a brilliant situation for Sony if Microsoft users are playing
Sony branded games. It is a fantastic strategy to infiltrate and co-op the competition.
Thats why MS would be against it.
Then what would be the point in having hardware for your services when people can get it somewhere else?
Also like others stated, MS shuts down the thought of cross gaming in most cases.
phosphor112
Banned
That's too much for him to grasp.
I'm fairly certain that MS is also working on a streaming game service and I would be shocked if they didn't port it to every platform under the sun (PC, Mac, Android, Direct to Television.) The opportunity cost of limiting services to a closed-platform is only going to increase as (if?) hardware becomes less relevant.
Melchiah
Member
What would be the possible negative and positive effects of the PS4 solution in comparison to those X3 specs?
dragonbane
Member
It is not confirmed, but highly likely that Quantic Dream has two teams as well. David Cage hinted a while back, that they are working on two projects simultaneously, the first artwork for Beyond was already completed in 2009 and they have almost the same amount of employees than Naughty Dog (200 as of March 2012).
Also this:
Iced_Eagle
Member
Gaikai still uses a web browser plug-in though. The Xbox browser doesn't support user installed plug-ins AFAIK so you won't be able to bring up Gaikai within the browser I'd wager. I also doubt that Sony would allow that as the Xbox is a direct competitor. Sure, you would be using Sony's service and so they might be able to make some money, but I think they would rather push you to get a Playstation console instead, as that is where they can make a lot more money from you (as you would then be more inclined to buy additional Sony hardware and software than if you were using a streaming client on the Xbox).
Giant Panda
Member
Sony streaming playstation games to other hardware would cause them to lose most of the profits they get from video games I bet and here is why: 3rd Parties would have little incentive to play along with Sony's streaming mechanism as the software would become platform agnostic so Sony would lose a big chunk of their royalites. Add to that that Sony's 1st party games don't make much money and it sounds like a bad idea.
Sony's power derives from the fact that they control hardware. If Sony was just a publisher they would gradually decline like Sega. Sony will have to solve this problem though as the industry is moving in this direciton.
Sony's power derives from the fact that they control hardware. If Sony was just a publisher they would gradually decline like Sega. Sony will have to solve this problem though as the industry is moving in this direciton.
Evolution_1ne
Banned
that's a load of bullshit I'd love to see some stats on....
yurinka
Member
Yes, since every browser has its own id, and the IE of the 720 will have its own.
But if Sony puts Gaikai inside PS+ and they sell games inside it, I'd say they won't care where do you play these games because they would be still getting profit from you.
3rd parties release games on Sony platforms because they have a big userbase. If the userbase of the PS platform also reaches handhelds, PCs, tablets, smartphones, tvs and other consoles then it would be really huge. This means more potential customers without no ports needed so more potential profit. So they would support more the PS platform. Sony 1st party games combined sold a lot so they always made money, and would made more if users who doesn't own the console can buy and play it. Imagine a 720 who wants to play The Last of Us but can't afford a PS3 or PS4. He may buy it to play it using streaming in his 720/PC/tablet/whatever.
Do you think that streaming sucks with your internet connection? In this case buy a PS4 to play the games directly without streaming and with better quality.
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
That they blocked at first.
Was there a real reason why that happened? Or was it sony actually saying FU?
thehypocrite
Member
Back from a social gathering. I never thought you had an agenda mate, I just thought you didn't wanted to concede being incorrect. Bro hug as you've proved to be a rational poster.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
so, they keep on making new games (for years), studios are expanding and yet they're not making "much" money. yeah, sure.
They have to be profitable since they keep investing in new games.
Back from a social gathering. I never thought you had an agenda mate, I just thought you didn't wanted to concede being incorrect. Bro hug as you've proved to be a rational poster.
Cool. =D
Any guesses on whether we'd be seeing the same power draw statistics akin to first gen PS3 for PS4 (during peak times)?
Where might I find a source for this bomb-esque news because to me, it reeks of BS.
Where might I find a source for this bomb-esque news because to me, it reeks of BS.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
You're wrong.
Sony still controls the hardware in the streaming scenario. What exactly do you think the streamed content comes from? It comes from servers that Sony owns and operates for streaming gaming content.
They will still get royalties off streaming content because it's their service.
I believe those links say about HTML5 and WebGL as a platforms for future gaming development which would be independent from the host platform. That's a completely different thing than streaming, which in the end is nothing more than playing an interactive (controlled by the viewer) video.
Still, it's very interesting - I can see SCE's logo there, but not Microsoft's? Would be great if new consoles had a proper browser / environment HTML5-compliant so that they could also support such games.
N2O from B3D decided few new messages from AMD China guy. Here is the most juicy one:
#1 AMD china guy another new hint
http://club.tgfcer.com/viewthread.php?tid=6593085&page=2#pid15931245
"嘿嘿,我家有块APU,可是384BIT总线的哦"
He said Durango APU will be 384bit
#1 AMD china guy another new hint
http://club.tgfcer.com/viewthread.php?tid=6593085&page=2#pid15931245
"嘿嘿,我家有块APU,可是384BIT总线的哦"
He said Durango APU will be 384bit
Just prior to acquisition they demoed a webkit client at Google IO that requires no plugin on webkit browsers. They're working on a straight html5 client also.
I think if there was a straight html5 client, and it thus worked on a Xbox browser, it would very probably get shut down - but by Microsoft, not Sony.
The power of any platform holder is that they facilitate, nurture and provide access to markets.
Proprietary hardware is a good way to ensure consumer lock-in on a platform, but it is not necessary for the emergence of a controlled platform that takes a slice of publisher revenue and that commands the attention of publishers. See: Steam - a software platform built on a commerce engine, marketing and player community/network services.
A quality streaming service would be a more difficult thing to get up and running than a Steam equivalent, yet even in that publishers have been finding choppy waters, and most continue to put their games on Steam because a large audience gravitates around that platform despite no proprietary hardware. Even where they have their own PC digital portals. You can make a platform sticky without hardware lock-in, command audience share and thus publisher support.
But putting aside a far future where the audience is mostly or entirely on streaming clients, and the competitive environment is flat wrt hardware, the foreseeable future will still see large chunks of the audience playing on proprietary boxes bought at stores. When a publisher submits a Playstation game, they may be accessing players via PSCloud that they theoretically could compete for with their own service, but also still tens of millions of others accessing through Sony's own box and retail presence.
I'm also putting aside the competitive pressure to make this step. If Sony doesn't others will and could entirely disrupt a business hinging solely on proprietary boxes in the long run. As I keep saying, Sony (or MS or Nintendo) may be in a position of disrupting first or being disrupted down the line. Microsoft will undoubtedly go this route too.
A nice piece of the puzzle is a gamepad API though.
That being standardised would obviously be useful here.
It's already emerging in some browsers though. And it's possible to identify the type of controller so that you could - for example - require a dualshock on a PSCloud client.
Giant Panda
Member
The software definitely has to be profitable for the games division to be making money these last few years but there is a difference between being profitable and very profitable. From what I can tell only GT5, GOW3, UC1-3, and LBP1 have really sold enough to be considered big sellers, with the biggest of those games (GT5) experiencing development hell. Most other Sony 1st party games are only moderate successes (Killzone, inFamous) or bombs. Sony is certainly no Nintendo.
so what does it mean?
POWAH
phosphor112
Banned
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html
9.19 million copies of GT5
5.35 million copies of GT5
rologueNot all of their titles sell this well, but GT5 is a huge seller, regardless of it's development hell.
This doesn't imply anything.
Buss speed is important but this alone don't make GPU fly. GTX680 has 256bit buss and it is 2x faster (in Tflops) than 580 with 384 bit buss
correct answer above GTX580 have 384 bit buss
Wide I/O DDR probably, if they want 8 GB of RAM they are not going to put GDDR5 in there unles the console is the size of a small fridge
You should learn more about stacking which will probably in next gen consoles
Proelite
Member
Stacking GDDR5? Really?
That is pretty much bullshit especially GT5 part. PD is like 100-140 people. they sold about 20 mln coppies of their games this gen ( 5,5mln GT5
, 9 mln GT5, 4mln+ GT PSP)680 is a more advanced card though. 384 bit bus would let them clock it slower, might save heat?
But isn't a 384 bit bus unusual for AMD?
I thought you mean DDR4. 8 GB GDDR5 is fantasy because cost not size.
Why it is unusual for AMD ? It's more like cost preference rather than technology problems.
I agree, cost and heat I believe
Hmm this makes me to think...
What are chances of consoles being cooled by liquid rather than fan radiator combo ?
How do you know this though? We would have to have budgets and sales figures to determine what you're claiming.
What would be easier... to create emulation of CELL/RSX on common X86 hardware, or port 20 best selling PS3 games to x86 and call it a day?
The latter... by far. Most of them are 3rd party titles, available on PC.
Insane Metal
Gold Member
None?