Support NeoGAF

[Mit-]

Being the more powerful system doesn't matter anymore, especially if it's only by whatever small margins the consumer could reasonably afford.

Sony is going to have seriously step up their game when it comes to online and OS functionality. Xbox users are going to buy the next Xbox because they know it's going to feature the same things they love about Xbox Live and how they're able to interact with their friends. Making the PS4 more powerful will do absolutely nothing to change that.


Sorry if this has been said a million times :V

 

[Sapiens]

Being the more powerful system doesn't matter anymore, especially if it's only by whatever small margins the consumer could reasonably afford.

Sony is going to have seriously step up their game when it comes to online and OS functionality. Xbox users are going to buy the next Xbox because they know it's going to feature the same things they love about Xbox Live and how they're able to interact with their friends. Making the PS4 more powerful will do absolutely nothing to change that.


Sorry if this has been said a million times :V

I was under the impression that one of the reasons the PS3 does not have as much as XBL is because the hardware simply can`t handle it and it was not designed as well as the XBOX was (in terms of network features).

Hardware counts for a lot, but I get what you are saying as well. PSN does not feel as essential as XBL does Sony just need to think forward more. What they have now is simply a reaction to MS.

 

[KageMaru]

I was under the impression that one of the reasons the PS3 does not have as much as XBL is because the hardware simply can`t handle it and it was not designed as well as the XBOX was (in terms of network features).

Hardware counts, dude.

This really has little to do with the hardware and much more to do with MS having years of experience developing OS.

 

[onQ123]

I was under the impression that one of the reasons the PS3 does not have as much as XBL is because the hardware simply can`t handle it and it was not designed as well as the XBOX was (in terms of network features).

Hardware counts for a lot, but I get what you are saying as well. PSN does not feel as essential as XBL does Sony just need to think forward more. What they have now is simply a reaction to MS.

I remember reading something about a Linux environment for the PS4 online.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Hardware counts for a lot, but I get what you are saying as well. PSN does not feel as essential as XBL does Sony just need to think forward more. What they have now is simply a reaction to MS.

Indeed. I think Sony can still turn this around and outlast the upcoming generation, but they'll need to be very clever, the smartest they've ever been. Releasing a powerhouse console and hoping for the best for the third time in a row (Vita included) would be extremely stupid. If that happens, if they still haven't learned anything, then they deserve whatever is coming to them.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

You mean just like the PS3 is more powerful than 360? The only advantage the PS3 had over 360 was Blu-ray and even that had disadvantages with it's slower read speeds, lots of PS3 games had mandatory installs because of it. Now with both using Blu-ray it's really going to be about who had the extra cash lying around to invest.

There were other differentiators. I think the PS3 had a far superior CPU (Cell) for example.

 

[KageMaru]

There were other differentiators. I think the PS3 had a far superior CPU (Cell) for example.

His point is people are so willing to fall for the hyperbole again just like they did with the ps3.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Indeed. I think Sony can still turn this around and outlast the upcoming generation, but they'll need to be very clever, the smartest they've ever been. Releasing a powerhouse console and hoping for the best for the third time in a row (Vita included) would be extremely stupid. If that happens, if they still haven't learned anything, then they deserve whatever is coming to them.

Why would that be stupid? They can release a powerful console which does not cost much, if they concentrate on gaming. It seems like Microsoft is doing something different, which means they can probably release a console with a moderate price and more power. And please stop with this nonsense "they failed before with this strategy". The PS3 was not so successful because 1) the first hardware version had too many features / exotic hardware (= too expensive), 2) the PS3 was hard to develop for and 3) the PS3 was too late. This has nothing to do with power, the Xbox 360 had comparable power.

 

[Glorified G]

Indeed. I think Sony can still turn this around and outlast the upcoming generation, but they'll need to be very clever, the smartest they've ever been. Releasing a powerhouse console and hoping for the best for the third time in a row (Vita included) would be extremely stupid. If that happens, if they still haven't learned anything, then they deserve whatever is coming to them.

Sony released a powerful console twice in a row (ps1/ps2) which were true generational leaps and it worked out for them just fine. There are reasons why the ps3 didn't work out for Sony as well as they thought they would *cough* Blu Ray *cough*, which goes beyond just raw power.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Why would that be stupid?

Because that's simply not enough in this day and age, there's gotta be way more on offer, especially when you're faced with such strong competition.

They can release a powerful console which does not cost much, if they concentrate on gaming. It seems like Microsoft is doing something different, which means they can probably release a console with a moderate price and more power.

Microsoft is doing the same thing they've been doing since they announced the 360 and the same thing Sony's been doing since at least the PSX days. They've never released a console that solely concentrates on gaming, with the possible exception of the original PlayStation. The ironic thing is, Sony are the ones who introduced the whole concept of consoles being more than just gaming machines, and now it may come to bite them in the ass.

 

[2MF]

There were other differentiators. I think the PS3 had a far superior CPU (Cell) for example.

Saying that the Cell is far superior to 360's CPU is like saying that a GPU is superior to a CPU (since the Cell is something in between a PC/360-like CPU and a GPU in terms of the flexibility/throughput tradeoff).

The 2 CPUs used different architectures and it would seem that the 360's was the one better designed for running a game engine. The Cell, however, is great for scientific applications, codec processing and the like...

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Because that's simply not enough in this day and age, there's gotta be way more on offer, especially when you're faced with such strong competition.

And what would that be? A tablet? Kinect? Wonderbook? That's not needed. They should make a powerful console with slightly improved multimedia capabilites (BDXL, a few additional apps, better browser, voice chat, ...), scrap all unneccessary features (backwards compatibility, ...) ,at most mabye a partnership with Google ("Do you want to have 65 million Google TV devices? Join us."). That's it. But they should try to sacrifice as little hardware power as possible for this.

Microsoft is doing the same thing they've been doing since they announced the 360 and the same thing Sony's been doing since at least the PSX days. They've never released a console that solely concentrates on gaming, with the possible exception of the original PlayStation.

Not true. There was almost no sign of multimedia in the Xbox 360. No DVD playback (confused this with first Xbox lol). No HDMI. No HDD. ... The leaked concept from MS goes way beyond that.

The ironic thing is, Sony are the ones who introduced the whole concept of consoles being more than just gaming machines, and now it may come to bite them in the ass.

The ironic thing is, Sony failed with this strategy. They tried to make a console which was powerful and a multimedia beast. The result was a very expensive piece of hardware.

Microsoft has now two options, if the choose a way which was indicated by the leaked documents: 1) Make a console with moderate power and many multimedia features for an average price or 2) Make a console with much power and many multimedia features for a high price. Both ways are very risky, because consoles already have multimedia capabilites which are enough for most users, and Sony can easily counter the first option with a powerful console which concentrates on gaming.

 

[Majanew]

I'll be buying both the next Xbox and PS4, but whichever delivers the better graphics/performance with multiplats, that's where the majority of my money will go.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

And what would that be? A tablet? Kinect? Wonderbook?

I don't know. They should.

That's not needed. They should make a powerful console with slightly improved multimedia capabilites, scrap all unneccessary features (backwards compatibility, ...) ,at most mabye a partnership with Google ("Do you want to have 65 million Google TV devices? Join us."). That's it. But they should try to sacrifice as little hardware power as possible for this.

There's a very limited audience for that kind of device, most people who value power over everything else are PC gamers anyway.

Not true. There was almost no sign of multimedia in the Xbox 360. No DVD playback. No HDMI. No HDD. ... The leaked concept from MS goes way beyond that.

DVD playback was there, HDD was there as an option, and a lot more was envisioned through Live. Just remember the crazy speeches by Moore and Allard when Xbox 360 was introduced, it was all in the planning stages.

 

[mrklaw]

Yeah, I agree. I would be surprised if any next gen system didn't have some flash storage. I don't think they'll have SSD, which is what I was replying to.

Games are getting bigger though, and I'd expect all retail games to be available digitally next gen. I'm not sure you could manage with a small SSD or flash. Unless its just for OS and saves, and they sell you expensive HDDs. But then that is a barrier to being games from their digital services.

 

[Mit-]

I don't think it's fair to say Microsoft's focus isn't on gaming. The reason why they don't constantly reveal new gaming-related features is because they already have that down.

The reason why Xbox gamers will buy the next Xbox, even if the PS4 is more powerful, is because of their Xbox Live account (which I'm sure will carry to the next Xbox), their friends, party chat, and all the other gaming-related networking and connectivity features they've grown used to that you just don't get with Playstation. Playstation still lacks the ability to voice call people while doing anything besides idling on the XMB, and face it, does anyone really feel like they're connected to anything substantial with PSN? The only thing people use it for is to send text messages to each other. That's it. Everything else networking-related is done by developers inside the actual games.

Smartglass? Kinect? All that stuff is extra to gamers. They keep making that new stuff to raise appeal and bring in more casuals, and to further their vision of your Xbox being your central media device.

But an Xbox gamer leaving Xbox because the PS4 has slightly better specs? Not gonna happen.

Games are getting bigger though, and I'd expect all retail games to be available digitally next gen. I'm not sure you could manage with a small SSD or flash. Unless its just for OS and saves, and they sell you expensive HDDs. But then that is a barrier to being games from their digital services.

IMO games are still too big even for HDDs, and our internet speeds aren't fast enough to support an all-digital model either. I'm sure most games will be offered digitally as well as on-disc, but I don't see it becoming the primary distribution method in the next generation.

 

[dragonelite]

Games are getting bigger though, and I'd expect all retail games to be available digitally next gen. I'm not sure you could manage with a small SSD or flash. Unless its just for OS and saves, and they sell you expensive HDDs. But then that is a barrier to being games from their digital services.

Cant you use a small something like 20gig ssd as a hdd cache for a 300GB~2TB one.
20 gig ssd should make streaming in content much better.

Im not even sure if something like that is possible not up to date on the subject but i did hear some companies doing it but could be some vague memory.

 

[i-Lo]

Any0ne??1

I recently noticed that the memory interface for RSX (GDDR3) was 128 bit. Are we to see a repeat of that once more or will we be finally seeing 256 bit?

Also, the number of ROPs were cut down from 7800 level to 7600 at 8 units. Is it going to be the same story this gen as well? For ref: Pitcairn 7850 has 32 ROPs.

Also, how do ROPs affect what's rendered on screen? (sorry, I'm the n00b)

I have heard it here that apparently the type of flash storage that is rumoured to be in PS4 has limited writes and rewrites allotted to it. I was wondering, "well, hey, how is that any different from a normal hdd and its MTBF?". Somehow I got the impression that the number is smaller for that kind of flash storage and therefore would not be conducive for it to be used as an intermediary fast buffer between optical media/HDD and RAM.

So, what's the truth behind reliability of this flash memory?

 

[AlStrong]

I recently noticed that the memory interface for RSX (GDDR3) was 128 bit. Are we to see a repeat of that once more or will we be finally seeing 256 bit?

Currently, the highest density GDDR5 is 2Gbit, and the DRAMs can be configured for x16 or x32 I/O, so you can have 2GB on a 256-bit bus, but you would definitely require it for 4GB.

8 x 2Gbit chips = 2GB, either 8x16 or 8x32 I/O (128-bit or 256-bit)
16x 2Gbit chips = 4GB, 16x16 or 16x32 I/O (256-bit or 512-bit)

Planning for 2GB for a retail unit makes it rather simple to double up the RAM for a devkit whilst maintaining the same bus width (using 2Gbit DRAMs).

Also, how do ROPs affect what's rendered on screen? (sorry, I'm the n00b)

They determine the raw number of pixels (or depth values) you can render per second (includes overdraw/transparencies/multiple passes/shadows), though of course there will be other bottlenecks in determining framerate.

Note: TMUs will determine texel throughput i.e. filtered (INT8 or FP16)/textured pixel throughput.

You'd probably want around 3x the throughput of current gen for various reasons if you want to think about 1080p in the first place.

All of that will have implications to bandwidth, of course.

 

[Glorified G]

Currently, the highest density GDDR5 is 2Gbit, and the DRAMs can be configured for x16 or x32 I/O, so you can have 2GB on a 256-bit bus, but you would definitely require it for 4GB.

8 x 2Gbit chips = 2GB, either 8x16 or 8x32 I/O (128-bit or 256-bit)
16x 2Gbit chips = 4GB, 16x16 or 16x32 I/O (256-bit or 512-bit)

Planning for 2GB for a retail unit makes it rather simple to double up the RAM for a devkit whilst maintaining the same bus width (using 2Gbit DRAMs).

Is this feasible in a retail unit in late 2013?

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

Saying that the Cell is far superior to 360's CPU is like saying that a GPU is superior to a CPU (since the Cell is something in between a PC/360-like CPU and a GPU in terms of the flexibility/throughput tradeoff).

The 2 CPUs used different architectures and it would seem that the 360's was the one better designed for running a game engine. The Cell, however, is great for scientific applications, codec processing and the like...

That's not really true. It depends on the game. For a deferred render, or a game that is doing a lot of post processing, Cell is superior. One of the big advancements in graphic engines for this generation has been post processing. Look at games like Killzone2/3 or Battlefield 3.

The general consensus is the PS3 definitely does have the superior CPU, while 360 has the superior GPU, as well as having about 20mb more memory cause of a lower OS footprint.

 

[specialguy]

Is this feasible in a retail unit in late 2013?

Depends how much money they want to spend.

My guess is no.

 

[Glorified G]

Depends how much money they want to spend.

My guess is no.

So it's technically possible, but really expensive. I figured.

 

[LastNac]

Is it possible we might see a PS1-PS2 size jump?

 

[Respawn]

You mean just like the PS3 is more powerful than 360? The only advantage the PS3 had over 360 was Blu-ray and even that had disadvantages with it's slower read speeds, lots of PS3 games had mandatory installs because of it. Now with both using Blu-ray it's really going to be about who had the extra cash lying around to invest.

I know that most people think it's best to stick with cheap, but people are willing to pay for quality, the issue with the PS3 was more than just the high price, if the PS3 performed as well as it was hyped in 2005, it would've killed regardless of the price, but there was too much negative press surrounding the PS3, negative press that would kill an Apple product, which brings me to my next point, you build something that people want and they will buy it at a high price.

Look at MS Surface, did MS try to build a cheaper iPad in order to compete? no, they're competing by investing on a solid product and it's my belief that MS will build a cutting edge console that's just as efficient as Xbox 360 was in 2005

Not trying to burst your bubble or pick sides but find out about the tick of the tech before replying [Even though what your replying to is up in the air] and I'm sure you've seen PS3 best to 360. Even to this day Forza cannot have weather and all those cars on track compared to GT. The machine does have an edge in quite a few areas. Both machines great for gaming

 

[i-Lo]

Currently, the highest density GDDR5 is 2Gbit, and the DRAMs can be configured for x16 or x32 I/O, so you can have 2GB on a 256-bit bus, but you would definitely require it for 4GB.

8 x 2Gbit chips = 2GB, either 8x16 or 8x32 I/O (128-bit or 256-bit)
16x 2Gbit chips = 4GB, 16x16 or 16x32 I/O (256-bit or 512-bit)

Planning for 2GB for a retail unit makes it rather simple to double up the RAM for a devkit whilst maintaining the same bus width (using 2Gbit DRAMs).



They determine the raw number of pixels (or depth values) you can render per second (includes overdraw/transparencies/multiple passes/shadows), though of course there will be other bottlenecks in determining framerate.

Note: TMUs will determine texel throughput i.e. filtered (INT8 or FP16)/textured pixel throughput.

You'd probably want around 3x the throughput of current gen for various reasons if you want to think about 1080p in the first place.

All of that will have implications to bandwidth, of course.

Wow, that was quite comprehensive and easy to digest. Thanks!

 

[Death Dealer]

A 256bit memory bus width is more probable than 128 bit.

 

[CadetMahoney]

scrap all unneccessary features (backwards compatibility, ...)

If I can't play my games designed for cell architecture I bought on PSN and retail I'm simply not getting a PS4 if the competition has flawless account migration and BC at similar price point.

 

[charsace]

I don't think it's fair to say Microsoft's focus isn't on gaming. The reason why they don't constantly reveal new gaming-related features is because they already have that down.

The reason why Xbox gamers will buy the next Xbox, even if the PS4 is more powerful, is because of their Xbox Live account (which I'm sure will carry to the next Xbox), their friends, party chat, and all the other gaming-related networking and connectivity features they've grown used to that you just don't get with Playstation. Playstation still lacks the ability to voice call people while doing anything besides idling on the XMB, and face it, does anyone really feel like they're connected to anything substantial with PSN? The only thing people use it for is to send text messages to each other. That's it. Everything else networking-related is done by developers inside the actual games.

Smartglass? Kinect? All that stuff is extra to gamers. They keep making that new stuff to raise appeal and bring in more casuals, and to further their vision of your Xbox being your central media device.

But an Xbox gamer leaving Xbox because the PS4 has slightly better specs? Not gonna happen.



IMO games are still too big even for HDDs, and our internet speeds aren't fast enough to support an all-digital model either. I'm sure most games will be offered digitally as well as on-disc, but I don't see it becoming the primary distribution method in the next generation.

Most games will carry over to the next xbox. MS bought the GPU tech for the xbox and made sure devs used the API. It will be easy for them to get the stuff built for the 360 running on the nextbox.

The xbox and the 360 were just their first trials. The next console will be the one where they finally implement all the things they've been planning since before the first xbox.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

So it's technically possible, but really expensive. I figured.

They could use this for a short time (first 6 months?) until higher density chips become available. This would of course cost a little more at the beginning, but maybe they think it is worth it. The price for 2GB additional GDDR5 RAM would be about $26 for the chips alone. Considering the increased complexity of the motherboard, it will probably be a little bit more, but I don't think this is excessive / unrealistic.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Not trying to burst your bubble or pick sides but find out about the tick of the tech before replying [Even though what your replying to is up in the air] and I'm sure you've seen PS3 best to 360. Even to this day Forza cannot have weather and all those cars on track compared to GT. The machine does have an edge in quite a few areas. Both machines great for gaming

Forza and GT are two different franchises developed by two different developers, and they do a number of things differently. In other words, you could just as easily say that even to this day GT can't have a consistent frame rate, good looking transparencies and Forza's extensive customization. But yes, both PS3 and Xbox 360 are great gaming machines and as hardware power goes, each of them is generally better at certain things and worse at others. If PS4 and Xbox 3 end up being that close, it'll be good for everyone, including the developers.

 

[specialguy]

The price for 2GB additional GDDR5 RAM would be about $26 for the chips alone.

Source?

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Source?

According to this link from 2011, you can get 1 GB GDDR5 RAM for $11.83 (Geforce GTX 460):

http://www.investorvillage.com/mbthread.asp?mb=476&tid=11143553&showall=1

 

[AlStrong]

According to this link from 2011, you can get 1 GB GDDR5 RAM for $11.83 (Geforce GTX 460):

http://www.investorvillage.com/mbthread.asp?mb=476&tid=11143553&showall=1

Note that prices are different for different speed grades and densities.

 

[systemfehler]

Note that prices are different for different speed grades and densities.

2GB GDDR5 modules are available at 40nm since 2010 - 60nm 1GB modules since 2007 and 50nm modules with 1GB have been around at 2008. So either Hynix and Co are working on the next refresh or there will be a really good price - at least I would imagine so. Don't think 4GB would be that far of a stretch.

 

[AlStrong]

2GB GDDR5 modules are available at 40nm since 2010 - 60nm 1GB modules since 2007 and 50nm modules with 1GB have been around at 2008. So either Hynix and Co are working on the next refresh or there will be a really good price - at least I would imagine so.

Sure, I'm just pointing out that you can't single out the cheapest price per GB there because the costs are subject to other factors. It's not that hard to see if you look at the whole list of cards that do sport GDDR5 and at different speed ratings, not to mention the possibility of different suppliers.

Don't think 4GB would be that far of a stretch.

Well, I'll believe it when 4Gbit chips are announced, until then, there's little point speculating on the specific cost of non-existant material.

 

[iamshadowlark]

Sure, I'm just pointing out that you can't single out the cheapest price per GB there because the costs are subject to other factors. It's not that hard to see if you look at the whole list of cards that do sport GDDR5 and at different speed ratings, not to mention the possibility of different suppliers.



Well, I'll believe it when 4Gbit chips are announced, until then, there's little point speculating on the specific cost of non-existant material.

I would wait to see more of the custom solution coming from Micron, for whichever system they are working on.

 

[systemfehler]

Sure, I'm just pointing out that you can't single out the cheapest price per GB there because the costs are subject to other factors. It's not that hard to see if you look at the whole list of cards that do sport GDDR5 and at different speed ratings, not to mention the possibility of different suppliers.



Well, I'll believe it when 4Gbit chips are announced, until then, there's little point speculating on the specific cost of non-existant material.

I assumed a 4GB solution with 2GBit modules - since Quimonda, Elpida, ... struggled and prices are rather low in the memory market I think it is feasible that Sony will take the risk (or rather the money) and put more memory into the PS4. Micron just bought Elpida, Samsung, Hynix are left and I doubt their investments will be big in the future without a stable partner - they need the console business aswell so they accept a "low" price in exchange of a stable business/production situation. Of course this is all pure speculation

 

[jeff_rigby]

Sure, I'm just pointing out that you can't single out the cheapest price per GB there because the costs are subject to other factors. It's not that hard to see if you look at the whole list of cards that do sport GDDR5 and at different speed ratings, not to mention the possibility of different suppliers.



Well, I'll believe it when 4Gbit chips are announced, until then, there's little point speculating on the specific cost of non-existant material.

Micron Stockholder meeting August 2011:

Graphics and consumer. Fair to say, a little bit of a slowdown here, specifically in the DTV segment. I'll speak more about what's happening in game consoles as well. A pretty good push for more memory coming up in the Game Console segment as a level of redesigns. We'll start to hit it over the next couple of years.

And talking about consumer again here. I thought it'd be beneficial to show you across a couple of key applications how this looks in terms of megabyte per system. On the left, what we have are game consoles. This is a space that's been pretty flat for a number of years in terms of the average shipped density per system. That's going to be changing here pretty quickly. I think everyone realizes that these systems are somewhat clumpy in their development. The next generation of system is under development now and that because of 3D and some of the bandwidth requirements, drives the megabyte per console up fairly quickly. So we're anticipating some good growth here.

We've worked with a number of these vendors specifically on both custom and semi-custom solutions in that space.

Gives us nothing definitive but we can't assume the same packaging. For sure higher density - fewer chips which results in less motherboard complexity and shorter total trace lengths. Maybe buffered interface for less drive current from the SOC but that is just a guess.

 

[Globox_82]

how much spying do you folks think it's going behind the scenes? For example between MS and Sony. Do they have moles that sell info? And how much could that affect final specs?

 

[i-Lo]

According to this link from 2011, you can get 1 GB GDDR5 RAM for $11.83 (Geforce GTX 460):

http://www.investorvillage.com/mbthread.asp?mb=476&tid=11143553&showall=1

Wow, I didn't know the innate speed of the modules caused such a variation in the price despite being the same quantity and density.

 

[jeff_rigby]

From BY3D:

some new info , legit or not decided by yourself

MS constantly give devkits for allready many years for their partners. Our studio developer got the first one 3 years ago. That was 6xxxxSLI GPU and they been told to fully load them and be sure it will be much better.

Durango PPC CPU allready sampled 2 iterations. The last one was in December'11 - Jan 2012. So they are in closing stages.

But the new big question about PPC to AMDx86 possible change inside ALU.

Anyway IBM is respobsable for packing all chips and energy effectiveness with their PPC or without.

AMD is responsible for APU design and GPU part.

MS make this design for allready 6 years and tryed many many desisions.

I even say this: MS money allowed AMD already design their 2015++ PC architecture. And that is all started with the idea of APU = CPU + GPU runs the same code without bottlenecks and high level of parralelism. That idea comes straight from MS's game developers i think who need to create huge worlds without pain in one place.

So AMD have two architectures now - their current and console. Console is much more effective and will not be available some time because there is no need for that and PC market isn't ready.

"Seems like it's awfully late in the game for a CPU switch."

I agree and again, there is confusion because there is a Xbox361 coming with PPC and a Xbox 720 with X86 Both inside a AMD APU/SOC (my opinion). Nothing else makes sense and we have a PPC Xbox 361 coming from 4 different cites. No mention of it because everyone is making assumptions it's Xbox 720. Durango=Xbox361 Yukon=Xbox720 (from XBox 720 powerpoint)

 

[USC-fan]

I'll be buying both the next Xbox and PS4, but whichever delivers the better graphics/performance with multiplats, that's where the majority of my money will go.

2x

I really really hope it the ps4 so I don't have to buy live.

 

[dragonelite]

2x

I really really hope it the ps4 so I don't have to buy live.

I dont think sony will offer free online next gen.
Not sure what is the psn+ conversion rate.

 

[i-Lo]

I dont think sony will offer free online next gen.
Not sure what is the psn+ conversion rate.

They will keep it free. It's been one of their biggest selling points. We should be seeing some great improvements in the PS+ department, however.

 

[Globox_82]

I dont think sony will offer free online next gen.
Not sure what is the psn+ conversion rate.

I hope they don't make it free. Free = shit!

Make it fast for MP, with fast downloads and I will subscribe. All that free games nonsense, they can keep it. I am not PS+ subscriber and will never be. But if they offer what I want. Day1

 

[dragonelite]

They will keep it free. It's been one of their biggest selling points. We should be seeing some great improvements in the PS+ department, however.

Not convinced yet considering microsoft is earning like what was it 0.5 billion each year on this userbase. And with next gen that will keep on rising. Because life will be on both platforms 360 users that can't make the step and next gen early adapters.

But time will tell and free is always better the paying for a gamer but if you want some of the services life is actually quit cheap.

 

[kuroshiki]

Indeed. I think Sony can still turn this around and outlast the upcoming generation, but they'll need to be very clever, the smartest they've ever been. Releasing a powerhouse console and hoping for the best for the third time in a row (Vita included) would be extremely stupid. If that happens, if they still haven't learned anything, then they deserve whatever is coming to them.

Dude vita was smartly designed console Sony ever produced. Uses all the common library available, can be easily manufactured.

Truly it is not the hardware that is causing the problem.

 

[i-Lo]

I hope they don't make it free. Free = shit!

Make it fast for MP, with fast downloads and I will subscribe. All that free games nonsense, they can keep it. I am not PS+ subscriber and will never be. But if they offer what I want. Day1

Air you breathe must be sh!t then

Anyway, I'd definitely like to see them make the dl speed faster. However, free means no barrier to entry. Given that these next gen consoles are also to host more F2P multiplayer games, it'd be only wise to keep it free for long term benefits.

Not convinced yet considering microsoft is earning like what was it 0.5 billion each year on this userbase. And with next gen that will keep on rising. Because life will be on both platforms 360 users that can't make the step and next gen early adapters.

But time will tell and free is always better the paying for a gamer but if you want some of the services life is actually quit cheap.

They have done a great job incentivizing people to get PS+. For PS4 they'll need to continue with their efforts and ensure there is more exposure. Free PS can also host ads (yea, I know it isn't the best thing but it's a source of revenue that can be earned without prohibiting anyone who buys a PS4).

With things like Vita cross-play, netflix etc, adding a fee would also complicate things far too much.

But we'll wait and see. My vote still says free.

 

[Cyborg]

PSN is just great, people like to bit*c I dont wanna pay for online......Didnt pay on the PC aint gonna pay for it on consoles! Ill stick with Sony but only if the PS4 is stronger or as strong as X720.......