TheExecutive
Member
I would shit a brick at work tomorrow and fly my pig right home if they announced a price tomorrow. The price would have to be so good that it would drive Sony into bankruptcy.
-
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.
Kotaku Rumor: PS4 out in November, control with your phone/tablet, maybe $429/529
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
Problem is mass appeal... too expensive its going to bomb. What they need to do is make it affordable enough so the ps4 becomes something that can be bought as a present during the Holiday season... not an option between a house and an entertainment system
.Imitating the Neogeo model is not recommended
Valkyr Junkie
Member
Yes.
TheExecutive
Member
Yup that and no isometric analogs
MikeE21286
Member
I actually like the triggers from the pic.
They look like they would be comfortable to use.
They look like they would be comfortable to use.
But aegies said he's reliable!
iamvin22
Industry Verified
haha seriously. according to that mentality sony should have stocked up on ram during black friday deals.
Syphon Filter
Member
looks pretty similar to ps3,then again it is a prototype.
Yup that and no isometric analogs
Do you men asymmetric? I like symmetric sticks so I'm pleased with those, just surprised that the triggers aren't more like the Move ones.
Knux-Future
Banned
fucking Microsoft ruining it for everyone.
lol.
But I get that it makes business sense...it's just that it really will suck that people will have to pay extra for stuff that was free on the previous console..
which makes me think it would be dumb to do. I don't mind the "new" features and extra shit being behind a pay wall (not stuff like Netflix and other apps) but the ability to simply play gmaes online? nah.
This next gen gets shittier by the rumors. Always online. No used games. Pay to do fucking anything.
geez. Hopefully this shit is either false or not that bad...I doubt Sony will go over this type of stuff tommorow tho. There is no good way to tell people they will have to pay for online and can't buy used games and shit without it being really negative...then again this is the Five Hundred and ninety nine united state dollars guys.
Once again if any of this stuff is true..I'm buying a Wii U lol.
Uno Venova
Banned
I'm disappointed about no move triggers, but these still look better than the triggers now, and the most important thing anyway is that they don't have the mushy feeling of the PS3 triggers.
TheExecutive
Member
Officerrob
Banned
Unfortunately, yes
I was speaking with regards to pricing for services on the PS4 or whatever. But if Dent thinks we'll see prices tomorrow, I think there's a pretty good chance we will (even though I've specifically said I don't think we'll get a name or a price tomorrow).
Let's wait and see then.
The triggers look awful to me.
Yes. They kinda look like they are gonna feel like the snap on extensions that I have on my DS3 right now lol. It honestly looks like Sony is going for the "lets throw everything gimmick wise on this controller and see if something sticks" mentality that they had with the Vita. I do like that the handles look a little longer and more straight. Plus the fact that the sticks look farther apart is positive for me as well.
This plausibly is exactly what happened with the source who subsequently passed on the pricing info to Kotaku. $429 makes zero sense in terms of pricing structure. The basic SKU will probably debut for $399 here in U.S.
Chuck Norris
Banned
They look improved to me. PS3 triggers were flat on top, these seem to have more of a convex groove to fit the fingers and an outward lift on the end to give it a more trigger like appearance. If they get the springiness of the triggers right it will be much improved
Omnistalgic
Member
I like Sony to keep MP free, along with the more popular apps like Netflix youtube...
But EVERYTHING that is a luxury make a part of PS+...
This is already the case with PS3, I see no reason Sony needs to charge for MP, I think most fans will gladly subscribe to the service willingly if it matches Xbox Live and gives free games every month. Then you can still satisfy the casual/family PS4 purchases that only buy 5 games a year and uses it more as media/Netflix/Blu-ray player.
hopefully Sony can make some nice bang without having to put mp in PS+
Suppor the platform people! PS+ literally made me buy a Vita and introduced me into a wonder Virtua Fighter community, one of the best things to happen this gen.
But EVERYTHING that is a luxury make a part of PS+...
This is already the case with PS3, I see no reason Sony needs to charge for MP, I think most fans will gladly subscribe to the service willingly if it matches Xbox Live and gives free games every month. Then you can still satisfy the casual/family PS4 purchases that only buy 5 games a year and uses it more as media/Netflix/Blu-ray player.
hopefully Sony can make some nice bang without having to put mp in PS+
Suppor the platform people! PS+ literally made me buy a Vita and introduced me into a wonder Virtua Fighter community, one of the best things to happen this gen.
thehypocrite
Member
Don't expect Sony to charge for online gaming, do expect them to offer a service that enhances? the online gaming experience and charging for it.
They need to forget about their "half button/half trigger" compromise with L2/R2 and just go with full on triggers. Most games use those buttons for shooting anyways.
As far as paying for online, I feel like PSN being free on PS3 was largely to make the console's initial asking price more palatable. They'll charge for it this time around because they desperately need PS4 to be raking in profit from every angle, and because they won't be asking such a crazy price for the hardware.
As far as paying for online, I feel like PSN being free on PS3 was largely to make the console's initial asking price more palatable. They'll charge for it this time around because they desperately need PS4 to be raking in profit from every angle, and because they won't be asking such a crazy price for the hardware.
Dreamgazer
Member
Most playstation games uses L1/R1 for shooting.
The lower end PS3 was useless as well. 20gb and no wifi so you had to use ethernet (which wouldn't work for a lot of people's set ups). After a few years the game installs got to a point where you were basically required to get a new hard drive. There was literally no reason to not get the 60gb model unless there was only the 20gb available.
I expect the exact same situation to play out here and on the Xbox 720. Premium units are the only units worth buying unless you can't afford them. The lower price never makes up for the lack of functionality. I can afford a $500 PS4, it's just that that price is fucking ridiculous and not worth it at all. There's a reason the PS1 and PS2 were such hits when they had a more mass market price. They offered the complete package at an affordable price.
seattle6418
Member
I hear you, and as a fellow journalist, i understand. However, i think people are overanalyzing things, don't you think? I read the story and what i understood is that PS World would replace PS +, so it will include more services possibly like Gaikai streaming, but as a replacement for PS+ it shouldn't be affecting online multiplayer, because this was never on PS+, it was always free.
I find it hard to believe that a company that's trying hard to recover and do things right would make such a stupid mistake to put online gaming behind a paywall.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
You can fuck right off Sony.
Did you happen to mention to your source how interesting it is that what he's heard happens to be a straight currency conversion from the expected Japanese pricing that was previously reported? Any reaction, if so?
That's not actually in the article. The article only states that it'll put features behind the paywall, but does not go into detail on which ones it will be. Hell, multiplayer is never actually mentioned in the article, that's just been people here assuming features includes online multiplayer in that description.
Times have changed and the business model needs to adjust accordingly. The online playstation network requires thousands of servers that need to be maintained, upgraded and secured. They require an expensive electric bill, expensive bandwidth bill, and a staff of technicians.
These are new and ongoing costs of doing business and didn't exist with PS1 or PS2. Sony thought they could use the old model to support those costs with PS3... They figured a $600 price point and extra revenue on $60 would pay those bills. Well it only works if you're dominating the market and you can maintain a decent margin on the console.
Sony can't afford to carry a free network any longer. The company is hurting and revenue weighing heavily on their minds. The free lunch program is over and gamers need to realize it. It isn't MS's fault or Nintendo's fault... It's the world of having an online console.
MaulerX
Member
Or maybe they realized that as a business, perhaps the stupid mistake was to offer online gaming for free to begin with.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
You gotta be fucking shitting me. Pay to play online is bullshit no matter how much people try to justify it. I already pay for my internet.
BriseFlots
Member
It shouldn't be like this. It should be publishers paying MS/Sony/Nintendo to have access to theri online platform. Then deliver it freely to the consumer, who already paid internet access.
Yup, also the left analog is still not placed correctly.
We agree on almost all things. For this one however, I have to say it's best to wait and see. It does not look crappier than what the DS3 has. Plus, we have yet to learn whether it folds in like the current one or pushes in (most likely this one from looking at the design) or does a bit of both.
It does not mention online use specifically it just says features. Like the features that are locked to PS+
UberTag
Member
I don't see how Dent can vouch for both knowing that PS4 pricing will be disclosed tomorrow AND that both Durango/Orbis will launch concurrently with the sheer confidence he's exuding. It would be completely short-sighted on Sony's part to lock down either of those variables in February 2013.
Something smells.
It's far easier to get consumers to budge on pricing than it is greedy publishers.
Especially when Microsoft has rolled out the red carpet. Good luck getting Sony to enforce that.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
Online on the Vita is free and it has XGC, party chat.
The quote is pretty vague. It just says "most" it does not mention if you have to pay to play online. I think that Sony are just going to add more features to PS+. I hope I am right.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
Always online to play system?
No used games?
Subscription fee to play games online and access other services?
$450-$550 systems?
More expensive games?
More expensive accessories?
Nothing is confirmed yet, but I think I see this coming from a mile from the next generation for Microsoft and Sony. Hopefully, we will know more tomorrow.
No used games?
Subscription fee to play games online and access other services?
$450-$550 systems?
More expensive games?
More expensive accessories?
Nothing is confirmed yet, but I think I see this coming from a mile from the next generation for Microsoft and Sony. Hopefully, we will know more tomorrow.
Just wanted to say thanks for the info, rumor or not. It's been interesting so far. Glad to see more pictures of the controller too.
Always online to play system? Let's see about this and I don't think Sony will announce this tomorrow.
No used games? Let's see about this.
Subscription fee to play games online and access other services? Xbox.
$450-$550 systems? lol. not happening.
More expensive games? NO. But you will see microtransaction a lot more.
More expensive accessories? Console accessories were always expensive. where have you been past for 10 years?
No used games? Let's see about this.
Subscription fee to play games online and access other services? Xbox.
$450-$550 systems? lol. not happening.
More expensive games? NO. But you will see microtransaction a lot more.
More expensive accessories? Console accessories were always expensive. where have you been past for 10 years?
Who builds and maintains the infrastructure? When a new internet feature needs to be added to the console, its up to the publishers?
No.... The publishers need to focus on games... That's it. The console manufacturer has to build the APIs and maintain the network. They hire the staff and the programmers.
People gladly pay for cell phone service, cable, internet, music, Netflix, etc. at far higher rates than PS+ or XBL. I just don't understand the reluctance to pay a very reasonable fee to the manufacturer so that they can maintain, support, and upgrade the online infrastructure.
seattle6418
Member
It's not but we know what PS+ offers right now.
PS World replaces PS+, so you would assume it does what PS+ does and more.
Online multiplayer is not a part of PS+, that's why i think it's the other way around, people thought MP would be behind a paywall but the article doesn't make you guess this.
OR
Maybe i'm just refusing to believe this is a possibility.
Actually, there were a hundred reason not to get the 60gb, because with those 100 reasons, you could go out an outfit the 20 gb model with an hdd even larger than 60 gb *and* get yourself a wifi dongle if you really needed it. Money better spent.
Personally, I sank most of the money saved into a 120GB hdd and even that wasn't enough after a few years so the 60 gb model wasn't going to win the marathon in that regard either.
As for onboard wifi, it was a shitty decision not to include it in the 20 GB model, esp. with the PSP offering wifi OOTB a year earlier. But it also wasn't exactly unprecedented in the console space at the time, what with the "premium" 360 model not having it either.
All in all, a better decision to save the $100 and address those "crippling" omissions yourself.
RedRedSuit
Member
Because that infrastructure -- the one used to enable the actual online gameplay -- is (other than lobby functionality) peer-to-peer, doesn't go through the company's servers, and therefore has little to no bandwidth cost.
That's why it's free on PC and should always remain free.
They're not making you pay for something they provide... they're making you pay for something, just because they know they can make you do it if you want an essential feature.
Same with the utter silliness of charging an XBL fee to give you Netflix access. It makes no sense... the only cost to Microsoft, at worst, was for the development of that app. How does this justify putting it behind a paywall? It doesn't. It's just done because they can.
BriseFlots
Member
I don't.
I don't to payfor infrastructue for a simple reason: if the the game has an online feature, the cost of maintaining the said infrastructure should be included in the price of the game. so either the publisher pays it before, or a part of the game priceis sent back to the console manufacturer or whatever they decide.
If I pbuy a game that has an online mode, I want to be able to play it, not paying again for what I already bought.