Support NeoGAF

[iamshadowlark]

To be fair, PS2's were still selling after Xbox360 released.

Hell the PS2 has sold about 50mill since PS3 launched.

 

[Stoffinator]

I think they are waiting to see what Microsoft and Nintendo are doing.

 

[Nizz]

Whatever the case may be, I really hope the PS4 releases within months of the next X-Box. To me, even six months is too much of a gap. Two-three month gap isn't too bad imo.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Was GAF around back in 1999? I can only imagine...

Sega's Dreamcast getting a year head start on PS2? Epic fail Sony, they might as well pack it up.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Was GAF around back in 1999? I can only imagine...

Sega's Dreamcast getting a year head start on PS2? Epic fail Sony, they might as well pack it up.

Sizable difference between then and now.

Sony was hot off the back of the highest selling home console ever. Sega releasing their last console.

This time around Nintendo and MS are the big game, and Sony their worst selling console.

 

[Marco1]

I personally think that PS4 will make a great arrival.
Sometimes companies need to make a great fall to bring them back down to earth and with all of the changes within Sony and the arrival of vita, it shows how much they treasure and depend on the PS brand.
There's no doubt PS3 has been a disaster and I really do think that is why they need PS4 to be such a mind-blowing success. The more successful PS4 is then the easire it will be to kill PS3 off early.
The world has changed a lot since the PS2 days, I just hope Sony realises this and the recent changes prove this.

 

[StevieP]

I dont think any reasonable person can claim PS3 is hitting it's stride. The software lineup is starting to get pretty thin, The Last of Us, Twisted Metal, nothing that compares to the games of 2011, at least that has been announced so far. It looks to me more like a console winding down. The sales continue to be OK but nothing special, the price cut to $249 didn't exactly light the world on fire and how may price cuts are left? A pretty clear picture to me seems that all 3 consoles are winding down.

There are a couple price cuts left in the PS3 but... I agree with you. Some bizarro world! There has to be a catch... Wait...

If anything 360 has the most life left with Kinect and sales that are the least bad. I think next gen plans should start to move into full swing and all three next gen consoles will probably be out by 2014. Two bad NPD months in row for all consoles with Dec and Jan could accelerate things if it continues. It's not like this gen didn't last longer than ever, going hard in year 7, but it's luck may have finally run out.

That said, it's unlikely Sony would make a PS4 announcement in 2012, just as it's unlikely (perhaps less so, but still unlikely) MS would make a next gen announcement this year imo. So it's natural for Tretton to deflect that question.

No, MS will be doing a Wii-U-esque reveal of the 720 this E3. I think pretty much everyone outside of yourself can see it coming like a freight train.

Biggest misnomer. PS3's biggest thorn was the loss of 3rd party exclusivity, even if just timed. Picture GTA VI, RDR, COD as exclusives or even timed exclusives and you have a foundation for some console domination. Arrogance in putting too much stock in their own IPs is what hurt them the most

You're not getting exclusives of those nature. None of them. Not even timed. The amount of money involved would not be feasible. Besides, multiplatform is the 3rd party way now.

For what its worth, I doubt we are getting a Xbox 3 reveal either this year. Not even a Wii U esque reveal.

I'm up for some bets

Well I can concede that. If Sony follows a model of profitability over hardware superiority, then they can very well make do with second or even last place.


The only problem is Sony as a company has traditionally competed with hardware, which tends to be the most expensive. Following a profit model means they either release to late to be relevant, or with hardware that isn't significantly better than the competition, abolishing the main reason to buy a Sony product in the first place over another. First party studios will only take you so far.

In this thread, we rewrite history.
People, it's the software. The software. The PS1 and PS2 and the DS and the Wii, and etc etc because they all had software people wanted to buy. Console hardware power has and always will mean next to nothing. You have to give people (as in, regular people) incentive to buy your hardware for software that they want. Regular people aren't going to buy *anything* unless they feel the need to do so. You need to give them that need. It has nothing to do with power, never did.

If Sony launches 6 months or more later than Microsoft then they better have a system that is significantly more power (just throw in a better videocard and more RAM perhaps), and have first-party games that can instantly showoff the difference in visual fidelity at launch.

Again, people confusing GAF/"hardcore"'s needs with the public at large.

If rumors are to be believed, the PS4 will likely be the only "hardcore console".

Or it could go the complete opposite way.

They see me striding, they hatin'.

Patrollin, they tryin to catch me wagglin dirty

The RSX isn't "weak" at all. If we are gonna get technical the RSX has a bit more horsepower overall than the Xenos.

lol

 

[iamshadowlark]

lol

I don't see anything funny. Care to actually look at the specs?

 

[Special J]

I don't see anything funny. Care to actually look at the specs?

even if specs were which they arent, you cant obviously think that. multiplatform games which go head to head with gpu, its obvious which one has more performance.

Tbh with how the situation looks like - wouldn't it be better for Sony to wait 2-3 years after WiiU/X720 and hit them in the middle of the generation? They could offer something x1.5, x2 more powerful with way better price. I simply don't think Sony is in a position to handle PS4 launch just yet.

i have actually pondered this hypothetical where instead of having a generational race. having console lifespans staggered i wonder how that would impact console gaming. i'd say the closet generation to have this was during N64/PS1/Saturn

|-----xbox-----|-----xbox-----|-----xbox-----|
.........|--playstation--|--playstation--|--playstation--|

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I don't see anything funny. Care to actually look at the specs?

Theoretical and effective power are two very different things. The GPU on paper is more powerful than Xenos of that much you are right. It ends up being a wash though when the entire system design stops that from being noticeable.

edit: Part of the reason I'm adamant that there won't be a split RAM pool in any console. Which puts the current limit at 2gigs.

 

[iamshadowlark]

even if specs were which they arent, you cant obviously think that. multiplatform games which go head to head with gpu, its obvious which one has more performance.

Except the specs do say that.

Theoretical and effective power are two very different things. The GPU on paper is more powerful than Xenos of that much you are right. It ends up being a wash though when the entire system design stops that from being noticeable.

edit: Part of the reason I'm adamant that there won't be a split RAM pool in any console. Which puts the current limit at 2gigs.

Which is basically what I said if you read the full quote.

The RSX isn't "weak" at all. If we are gonna get technical the RSX has a bit more horsepower overall than the Xenos. Due to a combination of poor design/bottlnecks from sony & damn effencient design from MS, the Xenos will typically outperform the RSX.

Im just sick of the untruth that Nvidia somehow screwed sony over with the RSX. Its a good part.

 

[Marco1]

There's no doubt Sony need to launch same time as MS. and they will and next-gen will continue the same, even more games being released multi-platform so it will be interesting to see how MS and Sony will differentiate themselves from each other.
I think Sony will look towards more vita and PS4 cross-compatibility, the only problem there is that if PS4 is a lot more powerful then how will that work? Maybe vita shows that PS4 will not be as powerful as we think.
MS are the wild-card here I think as nobody knows how much they will integrate kinect or how much they will invest the first-parties but personally I think as long as they have their halo and forza, they're happy enough to try and keep the third parties happy. Nextbox I think will strive for that magic all-in-one box that damaged the PS brand they set out to accomplish.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Im just sick of the untruth that Nvidia somehow screwed sony over with the RSX. Its a good part.

I agree with that.

It was much more Sony's fault. The split RAM pool in particular. A necessity at the time yes, but has caused nothing but trouble.

 

[Marco1]

Would the proof of the more powerful console be the ability to play an open-world game such as GTA, RDR or Skyrim which the 360 out-performed the PS3 in all 3 ?
A game were the dev doesn't really know what the gamer is going to do next.
The biggest problem between the 360 and the PS3 is that the 360 became the devs choice with better tools was it not ? Surely something that Sony will set out to fix with PS4 if they're smart.

 

[DarkChild]

Specs do not say that and Xenos is about 50% faster from what I read from a couple presentations. And when it comes to vertex pushing(draw calls) RSX sucks so bad its not even funny. Really, Xenos has serious architecture advantage being unified shader GPU(95+% of efficiency and RSX ~60%)

If you are about FLOPS than Xenos is still stronger GPU between these two. Than you have eDRAM and its bandwidth advantage...

RSX was certainly not a "good" part. It was best of shelf GPU with old architecture in 2005 but thats it.

 

[Kazerei]

Was GAF around back in 1999? I can only imagine...

Sega's Dreamcast getting a year head start on PS2? Epic fail Sony, they might as well pack it up.

IMO timing is one of many factors in a console's success. Dreamcast had alot going against it, and the advantage of launching first just didn't help.

Sony simply can't afford to let Microsoft get a year's head start on them. It's going to be a tough battle and they can't just give Microsoft this advantage.

 

[Vaporizer]

I agree with that.

It was much more Sony's fault. The split RAM pool in particular. A necessity at the time yes, but has caused nothing but trouble.

Split RAM is not the issue. The issue is that ps3 operating system takes a huge chunk of memory compared to the 360. The different speeds between main memory and video memory is another issue.

If sony had 512 MB of ram each way instead of 256MB with no bottlenecks in access speeds between both memory slots, there would be no complaints. This is one fuck up ken made. He got the processor right. He got the hard drive right. he got the storage right. He got the fast bandwidth memory the cell needed. But he fucked up the other side of the equation.

That's what happens when you rush an unfinished console to market. They rushed the ps3 to make it in the holidays when the specs needed another 4-6 months of touching up.
So sony taking their sweet time to build a next gen console might be their smartest decision yet.

 

[Marco1]

I imagine what stopped Sony buying a better GPU was the rising cost of PS3 hardware already.
I suppose they bought with what they had left in the kitty. CELL certainly screwed Sony in more ways than one.

 

[DarkChild]

Would the proof of the more powerful console be the ability to play an open-world game such as GTA, RDR or Skyrim which the 360 out-performed the PS3 in all 3 ?
A game were the dev doesn't really know what the gamer is going to do next.
The biggest problem between the 360 and the PS3 is that the 360 became the devs choice with better tools was it not ? Surely something that Sony will set out to fix with PS4 if they're smart.

360 had much better tools at start of gen, now both have great tools. 3rd party developers are already on their 3rd games, and while games are getting better in parity, thats mostly because in last 2 years developers started to lead on PS3 or have dedicated teams on both consoles(Crytek, Rockstar, DICE). 360 is rarely lead platform and MS is mad about it.

Sony wasn't stopped from buying better GPU, they bought the best Nvidia had to offer. What fucked them up was the fact that architecture of that GPU was old, and next generation was just to be released(Xenos style).

 

[iamshadowlark]

Specs do not say that and Xenos is about 50% faster from what I read from a couple presentations. And when it comes to vertex pushing(draw calls) RSX sucks so bad its not even funny. Really, Xenos has serious architecture advantage being unified shader GPU(95+% of efficiency and RSX ~60%)

If you are about FLOPS than Xenos is still stronger GPU between these two.

Um no.


RSX
- 550 MHz
- 8 vertex units
- 24 pixel pipelines
- 24 texture units
- 48 pixel ALU\'s + mini ALUs

Xenos
- 500 MHz
- 48 dynamic(pixel/vertex) ALU\'s
- 16 seperate texture units

RSX : 136x550= 74.8 billion shader ops per second.

Xenos : 96x500= 48 billion shader ops per second.

 

[Marco1]

Um no.


RSX
- 550 MHz
- 8 vertex units
- 24 pixel pipelines
- 24 texture units
- 48 pixel ALU\'s + mini ALUs

Xenos
- 500 MHz
- 48 dynamic(pixel/vertex) ALU\'s
- 16 seperate texture units

RSX : 136x550= 74.8 billion shader ops per second.

Xenos : 96x500= 48 billion shader ops per second.

Was RSX not reduced to 500MHz ?

 

[DarkChild]

Um no.


RSX
- 550 MHz
- 8 vertex units
- 24 pixel pipelines
- 24 texture units
- 48 pixel ALU\'s + mini ALUs

Xenos
- 500 MHz
- 48 dynamic(pixel/vertex) ALU\'s
- 16 seperate texture units

RSX : 136x550= 74.8 billion shader ops per second.

Xenos : 96x500= 48 billion shader ops per second.

Wikipedia is wrong. Math is wrong too.

 

[KageMaru]

I think they are waiting to see what Microsoft and Nintendo are doing.

Nah that's not it. Sony already have their plans in motion, just like MS and Nintendo. Sure they could alter their plans to a degree, but there is a limit to how much you can adjust according to what your competitors are doing.

Um no.


RSX
- 550 MHz
- 8 vertex units
- 24 pixel pipelines
- 24 texture units
- 48 pixel ALU\'s + mini ALUs

Xenos
- 500 MHz
- 48 dynamic(pixel/vertex) ALU\'s
- 16 seperate texture units

RSX : 136x550= 74.8 billion shader ops per second.

Xenos : 96x500= 48 billion shader ops per second.

RSX is not 550MHz.

 

[iamshadowlark]

Wikipedia is wrong. Math is wrong too.

Well 50Mhz isn't that much of a difference.

You should check this thread

forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=40458

 

[RiverBed]

Theoretical and effective power are two very different things. The GPU on paper is more powerful than Xenos of that much you are right. It ends up being a wash though when the entire system design stops that from being noticeable.

edit: Part of the reason I'm adamant that there won't be a split RAM pool in any console. Which puts the current limit at 2gigs.

Plus Cell helps the GPU which gives PS3 that 'edge' seen in their exclusives.

 

[DarkChild]

Well 50Mhz isn't that much of a difference.

You should check this thread

forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=40458

Not talking solely about mhz. At any given time, 360 will be able to put shaders on vertex or pixel work, depanding what is more needed. If vertex work goes higher RSX won't be able to handle it whatever you do since it only has 8 vertex shader pipelines while Xenos will just allocate more pipelines to whatever is more needed. Thats why its much more efficient and ultimately faster. It also has bigger theoretical power, thats pretty well known thing since beginning of gen.

I checked that thread 6 years ago, that discussion was pretty hot. In the end Joker was definitely right. RSX is vertex limited, and that is not only thing its bad at.

 

[DarkChild]

Plus Cell helps the GPU which gives PS3 that 'edge' seen in their exclusives.

Its more about asset quality than technology in this case.

 

[Melchiah]

360 revealed may 2005, release November 2005.

And where did the rushing lead them? The RRoD fiasco.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

And where did the rush lead? The RRoD fiasco.

I doubt the tech in it is going to be as advanced in comparison. Again the 360 launched on the tail end of the manageable heat output and power usage era of the GPU.

Fusion will have none of those problems because they can't shoot for the top.

 

[KingJ2002]

That's a long stride the PS3 has been hitting.... but i agree. They just launched PlayStation Move.. that should give the PS3 2-3 years of additional life before a new system comes along

So I think the PS4 won't be announced / revealed till next year. It will give Sony time to look at what the Wii U does and plan accordingly. After all... first-gen Wii U will have visuals comparable to what is currently out... if Sony can deliver CG quality (i know, i know) visuals with better motion controls... they can attack Nintendo's Wii U brand head on.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

And unless the PS4 is really launching in 2014 or later (this side of impossible) they won't be able to shoot for too much higher than WiiU or Fusion either.

 

[Melchiah]

Nonsense. I give Sony a lot of shit, but even they aren't that stupid. With the Xbox brand gaining so much momentum compared to the previous generation, Nintendo both remerging as the go-to brand for causals, regardless of how much the wii eventually dropped off and the dark horse of apple potenitally entering the home console space with an APTV it would be suicide to even think of releasing a console later than Microsoft. Even a graphical powerhouse that outperformed the wiiu and 720 combined, at a cheaper price point and better launch titles wouldn't be enough.

It's just simple fact, the Sony brand in general, never mind playstation, is nowhere near as strong as it was in 2005-6. Their products are increasing seen as overpriced, with negligible improvements over mass market offerings by competitors, at least in practical terms, to anything but the enthusiast, and even then only a subsection. There is no doubt they still make beautiful products, but I give the analogy that any of football-GAF can understand. They are the Arsenal of consumer electronics......play a beautiful game, but don't win anything.

Vita is a good effort, but it's in a dying market. It will match psp's success, nothing more. The longer Sony waits to release a new home console, the less likely it will even achieve that. It matters little now how well ps3 does in the future..the damage to the playstation brand by Nintendo and microsoft is irreparable. Buying a playstation console no longer guarantees the premier gaming experience it once did for most. Sonys next entry needs to reflect that and grab the bull by the horns. A 2013 launch is essential.

Edit: I also forgot to mention services such as onlive, although held back by broadband speeds and penetration, are an effort that could potenitally have an impact in the future. Ultimately it boils down to this:- if you are a gamer, or even if you are just slightly interested in games, you are spoilt for choice on who to buy from to have a great experience. What is the compelling reason to buy a PS4 over any other brand, or even ironically enough, buy a next gen model at all? To beat its competition Sony has to learn from each and everyone of its mistakes this generation, something historically they are incapable of doing. One step forward, three steps back should be their motto.

I think you inadvertently answered the question why Sony doesn't necessarily want to release a new console yet. The majority of the more casual gamers are probably perfectly happy with their PS3/360 for the time being. Many of my friends have just recently bought one of them, why would people like that want to buy a new one? The hardcore segment alone isn't going to carry Sony/MS very far.

 

[quest]

I think you answered the question why Sony doesn't necessarily want to release a new console yet. The majority of the more casual gamers are probably perfectly happy with their PS3/360 for the time being. Many of my friends have just recently bought one of them, why would people like that want to buy a new one? The hardcore segment alone isn't going to carry Sony/MS very far.

This happens every generation. The casuals buy systems near the end of the generation. The hardcore gamers always carry a new system the first year or 2. Then other gamers adopt as prices drop. We are talking holiday 2013 which is 18 months away. By the time the first price drop happens we are looking at 3 years from now. If Sony waits till after 2013 they are basically screwed. With how crucial online gaming is in the west Sony needs to launch the same time as MS. Because if they wait more and more people will buy the next xbox to play with friends who already have a next gen xbox. This is what happened this generation. It is basically a snow ball effect and impossible to over come. Sony has done a ton right the last few years but because of the slow start they were never able catch up in NA.

 

[Melchiah]

What you know is wrong. There is a massive generational deficit for Sony. Sony has lost more this generation (over the course of the past 6 years) because of the PS3 than they've earned.

Certain profits are profitable, yes. But they don't make up for the HUGE losses incurred at the start of the generation.

...

You say this because you lack genuine perspective. You're a Sony fan, and that's alright, but it's clouded your judgement and perspective on the business side of things greatly.

Perhaps you should focus the same judgement and perspective on Microsoft as well. Microsoft's game division is still on the minus side due to the 3.7$ billion loss on the 1st XBox, and the 1.3$ billion loss for the RRoD fiasco. If you take the 1st Xbox into the equation, as you should, they've lost more than they've earned.

 

[CadetMahoney]

I don't really get all this 'PS3 just hitting its stride talk.'

As soon as the Wii U and next Xbox are released, who's going to go for a PS3?

Better to release the next console in a timely fashion to keep the momentum going, rather than wait until a year or two after the next consoles are released to release the PS4, and end up in the same situation as the PS3, only getting momentum in the late game.

Better to have lots of sales early in a life cycle than late.

The common consensus is that PS4 will release 6 months later than the 360. Sony aren't that stupid to release any later.

 

[JonathanPower]

double post.

 

[JonathanPower]

So it's been hitting its stride for almost 4 years now?

Also, 10 year plan.

Well, considering that there is like one of the worst financial crisis of all times and considering all the money and effort it takes to have a big enough user base in order to make money with the games, considering that the xbox360 and PS3 games still look amazing today and there is a lot more that can be done to maximize the hardware, i just don't think that Sony or Microsoft have any desire to rush out a next generation console just because fanboys want a next generation console...

 

[Baki]

The PS4 has to (and I mean absolutely HAS to) release in one market by Spring 2013. Anything later and we'll see a repeat of this gen but worse. The reason being MS could either launch (but unlikely to) by this fall and no later than spring 2013. Sony should by all means in the very least be one quarter behind - if not - day and date release with the next Xbox.

I already said back in 2010 that launching significantly later would be the final nail in the coffin for the Vita and now we are already seeing what that has done to Sony. The Vita is lagging in its strongest market, 3rd partys are moving their games to the 3DS. All this because Sony gave time to Nintendo to put themselves together and aggressively cut the price of the 3DS making the Vita look like an expensive mantle piece with no way near the library to compete with a 6 month old 3DS.

Unfortunately is a slow, reactionary company that has great ideas but fails to execute them in a timely fashion. The Vita & PlayStation Suite is the best example of this (with the latter still yet to be launched). If they had launched both products when they should have, Sony would be in a competitive position in both markets.

The common consensus is that PS4 will release 6 months later than the 360. Sony aren't that stupid to release any later.

6 months is too late. A maximum of 3 months delayed launch is what Sony can get away with. (e.g if MS launches November 2012, Sony should atleast launch by March 2013 or if MS launch March 2013, Sony should atleast launch by September 2013 etc..)

 

[Castor Krieg]

The PS4 has to (and I mean absolutely HAS to) release in one market by Spring 2013. Anything later and we'll see a repeat of this gen but worse. The reason being MS could either launch (but unlikely to) by this fall and no later than spring 2013. Sony should by all means in the very least be one quarter behind - if not - day and date release with the next Xbox.

I already said back in 2010 that launching significantly later would be the final nail in the coffin for the Vita and now we are already seeing what that has done to Sony. The Vita is lagging in its strongest market, 3rd partys are moving their games to the 3DS. All this because Sony gave time to Nintendo to put themselves together and aggressively cut the price of the 3DS making the Vita look like an expensive mantle piece with no way near the library to compete with a 6 month old 3DS.

So what you are saying is that Sony should sacrifice the Vita and make the same mistake it did with PSP to push PS4? Sorry, we all know how that one ended.

 

[TGO]

Nah that's not it. Sony already have their plans in motion, just like MS and Nintendo. Sure they could alter their plans to a degree, but there is a limit to how much you can adjust according to what your competitors are doing.



RSX is not 550MHz.

link?
according to.....I don't know IGN, GS, official press releases and everywhere else it is??

Back on topic, even if Sony announces the PS4, we ain't getting it next year, if we did it'll be late next year with a shitty launch lineup of better looking PS3 games with better textures running in 1080p, I rather a proper launch then rushed one.

 

[Byakuya769]

So what you are saying is that Sony should sacrifice the Vita and make the same mistake it did with PSP to push PS4? Sorry, we all know how that one ended.

We get it, you love vita. However, a console release doesn't mean they have to pull away development on the vita.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

So what you are saying is that Sony should sacrifice the Vita and make the same mistake it did with PSP to push PS4? Sorry, we all know how that one ended.

I think it's fair to say the PS4 is much more important to Sony than the PSVita could ever hope to be.

 

[TangoAlphaLima]

July 2008: PlayStation 3 is "hitting its stride".

February 2010: PlayStation 3 is just hitting its stride.

June 2011: PlayStation 3 is only just now hitting its stride.

Wait, practically the only year he didn't say the PS3 was "hitting its stride" was 2009, which was widely considered to be the "Year of the PlayStation" with the releases of Demon's Souls, Killzone 2, Uncharted 2, and inFamous combined with a massive price drop on the system?

 

[ghibli99]

We get it, you love vita. However, a console release doesn't mean they have to pull away development on the vita.

Most will, though, I think, especially with anything multiplatform. If you're a company looking at developing something across a few, it stands to reason that 360, PS3, and possibly PC are going to be the ones left standing, while Wii and handhelds get dropped (hopefully in favor of exclusives).

 

[Castor Krieg]

Most will, though, I think, especially with anything multiplatform. If you're a company looking at developing something across a few, it stands to reason that 360, PS3, and possibly PC are going to be the ones left standing, while Wii and handhelds get dropped (hopefully in favor of exclusives).

I like my handhelds, and no - iOS will not cut it, sorry.

 

[strem]

I need to make some popcorn. This is going to be good.

 

[Baki]

So what you are saying is that Sony should sacrifice the Vita and make the same mistake it did with PSP to push PS4? Sorry, we all know how that one ended.

1) I did not say that
2) The PS4 is infinitely more important a platform than the PSVita.
3) Sony has enough studios to support both platforms, if they can't then they should not have ventured into the handheld marketplace to begin with.

At the end of the day, Sony has no choice but to respond to an impeding 720 launch. Launching too late will be throwing the PS4 under the bus.

Unrelated but.. 4) Sony kind of already has thrown the PSVita under the bus by launching too late.

 

[JonathanPower]

The PS4 has to (and I mean absolutely HAS to) release in one market by Spring 2013.Anything later and we'll see a repeat of this gen but worse. The reason being MS could either launch (but unlikely to) by this fall and no later than spring 2013. Sony should by all means in the very least be one quarter behind - if not - day and date release with the next Xbox.

What if MS has no intention to launch a next xbox in 2013 ? No one force Microsoft to launch a new console in 2013 when they are making so much money with the xbox360, you talk like they are forced to launch a new console just because they have to please you, but you forget that those companies want to make money and both MS and Sony want this generation to last as longer as possible, and a possible Wii U launch really is not going to change anything in this regard.

 

[TAS]

Sony has taken a financial beating..is it really surprising that they want to delay this generation to make up for losses?

 

[Baki]

What if MS has no intention to launch a next xbox in 2013 ? No one force Microsoft to launch a new console in 2013 when they are making so much money with the xbox360, you talk like they are forced to launch a new console just because they have to please you, but you forget that those companies want to make money and both MS and Sony want this generation to last as longer as possible, and a possible Wii U launch really is not going to change anything in this regard.

All industry chatter and trends point towards an Xbox successor being launched in the very near future. And if you look at recent NPD results - the market needs a new platform.

Sony has taken a financial beating..is it really surprising that they want to delay this generation to make up for losses?

You are assuming a loss leader model. Or a model with a significant negative margin on hardware.