HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Lathentar said:
Yeah, even if you maybe have the tech, very few would have the time, budget, and resources for such a thing.
-
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.
Could this be the first real PS4 info? (pc.watch.impress.co.jp)
- Thread starter camineet
- Start date
Yeah, even if you maybe have the tech, very few would have the time, budget, and resources for such a thing.
Poimandres
Member
Lathentar said:
Unless they come up with some seriously powerful tools to simplify the graphical process. At the moment, it's absolutely painstaking stuff. But- through investing in alternative development methods, I wouldn't be overly surprised if easier and potentially less power hungry methods arise in the future.
Surely necessity will drive innovation in this area once costs/development time are too high?
McHuj
Member
People really need to chill out. Even if the article's SPECULATION is based on some sources, one can interpret many ways.
First, the article mentions that in terms of the CPU (the cell) it would be roughly 2x the current version. IMO, that's absolutely fine. The article makes no mention of the GPU and memory.
PS4 can still be cutting edge and have a roughly only a 2x more powerful CPU and a kickass bleeding edge GPU.
To really know what PS4 will be, one has to know what Sony's financial plans are. A. What is their initial target price: 299, 399, or 599 again? And are they willing to sell the hardware at cost or at a loss?
One of the biggest differences between the Sony that developed PS1-3 and the one that will develop PS4 is Howard Stringer. What will he push for? Will he follow their traditional model or is he really interested in emulating Nintendo.
Also, I saw this point discussed on Beyond3d, that Sony has to take cost reductions into account. PS4/Xbox720 will likely ship with 32nm parts. Who really knows how quickly the next couple nodes will be developed. I really doubt that creating new process after 32nm will be as easy as 90nm->45nm->32nm was (Not that that path is/was easy). So if it will be difficult to reduce the cost of PS4 in the first 3-4 years of it's life, will they be willing to stuff it with expensive technology. Or maybe that's an argument for delaying it until 2012 when we'll have a clearer picture of the manufacturing road map.
Personally, I'd love to see a PS4 that's roughly 3-5x more powerful (in reality, not bogus theoretical numbers) than the current version for about 299. Something that can do graphics at 1080p @60 fps with nice AA.
First, the article mentions that in terms of the CPU (the cell) it would be roughly 2x the current version. IMO, that's absolutely fine. The article makes no mention of the GPU and memory.
PS4 can still be cutting edge and have a roughly only a 2x more powerful CPU and a kickass bleeding edge GPU.
To really know what PS4 will be, one has to know what Sony's financial plans are. A. What is their initial target price: 299, 399, or 599 again? And are they willing to sell the hardware at cost or at a loss?
One of the biggest differences between the Sony that developed PS1-3 and the one that will develop PS4 is Howard Stringer. What will he push for? Will he follow their traditional model or is he really interested in emulating Nintendo.
Also, I saw this point discussed on Beyond3d, that Sony has to take cost reductions into account. PS4/Xbox720 will likely ship with 32nm parts. Who really knows how quickly the next couple nodes will be developed. I really doubt that creating new process after 32nm will be as easy as 90nm->45nm->32nm was (Not that that path is/was easy). So if it will be difficult to reduce the cost of PS4 in the first 3-4 years of it's life, will they be willing to stuff it with expensive technology. Or maybe that's an argument for delaying it until 2012 when we'll have a clearer picture of the manufacturing road map.
Personally, I'd love to see a PS4 that's roughly 3-5x more powerful (in reality, not bogus theoretical numbers) than the current version for about 299. Something that can do graphics at 1080p @60 fps with nice AA.
Pistolero said:
Good points, I agree with you for the most part. I would be very happy with Toy Story graphics in realtime games. If we get that or not probably won't depend on the PS4 version of the CELL, assuming CELL technology doesn't change drastically, but only increases in power. It will depend on what GPU Sony goes with, which was not addressed in the article. Certainly we are not hitting a wall in realtime graphics yet. Look at where Nvidia & ATI have gone, well beyond 360/PS3 now, and it's only 2008. The threat of Intel's Larrabee is forcing Nvidia to do their best to advance realtime graphics combined with physics processing and overall computing, whatever they and ATI are working on, must be much more impressive than their current GPUs. I think/hope that by 2010 (w/PCs) and 2011/2012 (w/consoles) that mid 1990s offline rendered CGI will be possible in realtime.
McHuj said:
Good points, exellent post, I agree all around.
Dali said:
Hey, I want MOAR too.
Now all you have to do is add 4 moar PPEs to the 4 you already show with 64 SPEs, to get the 72-processor / 72-core CELL which was reported 5 1/2 years ago by The Mercury News. Hehe
When gamers talk about how they remember that Sony's "original" plan was to have two or three CELLs in PS3 to handle everything, including graphics, they don't realize or remember it was not two or even three of the CELLs like the one currently in the final PS3. But more like 8 of them, on either one or two chip/dies.
The graphics solution changed several times, if not many times.
Some of those plans, the ones I remember, were:
-Graphics Synthesizer 3 (circa 1999-2000) probably based on the work done with GSCube
-'Visualizer' (s) CELL-based GPU(s) with fixed function hardware (circa 2002-2003)
-some Toshiba GPU with Pixel Shader 2.0 (circa ????)
-Nvidia GPU (circa 2004, finalized with RSX)
side note: Is it so hard to realize that a future console, PC/computer, arcade board, set-topbox, or whatever, could be designed with a very advanced graphics processor that would be capable of much more graphical complexity/detail, pixel-shading, far better image rendering quality thanks to post-processing, and with hardware/tools/software/etc to maintain higher framerates (60-120 fps) but only render & output at native 480p resolution, yet still blow 360/PS3 game graphics away in everything except screen resolution?
What I am trying to say is that HD resolution does not = graphics.
I'll give another example. Take one of those very graphically simple XBLA or PSN games that are rendered at 720p or 1080p native resolution. Then for comparison, take one of the most graphically impressive games from last gen DC-PS2-GCN-Xbox, and tell me what has "better graphics". It will be the last-gen game, assuming you picked a good one.
So my point is, we could have next-gen XB3,PS4 games rendered at 720p resolution, with much more advanced graphics (assuming thos consoles have advanced GPUs for 2011-2012) and they''ll blow away any of the few 360,PS3 games that are rendered at 1080p.
My whole point is, seperate resolution from actual graphics.
What I am trying to say is that HD resolution does not = graphics.
I'll give another example. Take one of those very graphically simple XBLA or PSN games that are rendered at 720p or 1080p native resolution. Then for comparison, take one of the most graphically impressive games from last gen DC-PS2-GCN-Xbox, and tell me what has "better graphics". It will be the last-gen game, assuming you picked a good one.
So my point is, we could have next-gen XB3,PS4 games rendered at 720p resolution, with much more advanced graphics (assuming thos consoles have advanced GPUs for 2011-2012) and they''ll blow away any of the few 360,PS3 games that are rendered at 1080p.
My whole point is, seperate resolution from actual graphics.
camineet said:
Yeah. For some reason, people can't understand this. X360 / PS3 can easily do PS2 / Xbox graphics with 1080p @ 60fps, but would anyone want such a thing? People are going to expect Xbox 720 / PS4 games to have much better graphics than X360 / PS3 and do 1080p @ 60 fps. PS4 with 2X PS3 won't be enough.
knitoe said:
Yeah I agree.
While I would be fine with XB3,PS4 doing games at SD 480p or even HD 720p resolution *if* they had 8x or 16x anti-aliasing running @ 60fps with graphics that look more detailed through higher model & scene complexity combined with better/more image post-processing (AA is just a part of that) so all together graphics look more CGI-like, most gamers are just gonna want 1080p resolution @ 60fps thinking that's all that matters as far as graphics.
inpHilltr8r
Member
...they are hallucinating shit that never happened. What actually did go down, is still not public knowledge.camineet said:
Shockgamer
Banned
I'd say that if the next console isn't going to make for a significant leap over the PS3, then they should just keep trucking with the PS3 until it's viable to do something better.
I imagine that we're going to have to slow graphical progression down for a while anyway, so we can let the tools and the mid level developers catch up. That is, unless gamers want developers not named EA and Activision to be banished to small downloadable games and portables.
I imagine that we're going to have to slow graphical progression down for a while anyway, so we can let the tools and the mid level developers catch up. That is, unless gamers want developers not named EA and Activision to be banished to small downloadable games and portables.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Fuck No! I ain't ready for a new console :/
If it were for me, I would gladly wait another 5 years. PS3 is not even 2 years old, and most of the developers are lagging behind in terms of understanding the architecture, playing with its strenghts and getting around its weaknesses. The power hitters (GT5, Killzone 2, GOW III...) have not been published yet, and the opportunities opened by some significant price reduction aren't even in sight...
Shockgamer said:
I agree with you there.
I disagree on that. I think that CPU progression will slow down for awhile, but GPU/graphics progression should probably greatly increase again for next-gen. The potential in semiconductors, at least, is probably there. Epic, id and Crytek expect this with UE4, Tech 6 and next CryEngine.
Intel Larrabee, the next all new architectures from Nvidia & ATI (not the next few card releases but the next-gen DX11 GPUs) all point to far better graphical potential than what 360/PS3 can currently do with Xenos/RSX.
The developers that cannot handle the new technologies will get left behind. Companies like EA can handle it though. EA had like 100 people working on then-nextgen graphics in 2003-2004.
This current generation was disappointing in graphical advancement, because SO much of 360's/PS3's graphics processing power, RAM and bandwidth resources went into running most games at HD 720p. There was not that much power left over, after that leap to HD, to really blow away what the original Xbox could do in terms of actual graphics.
I am hopeful that since HD has already been reached (even if most games are on the low-end of HD) that NEXT gen can see a significant increase/improvement in graphic complexity & quality (and framerate) using the same HD resolutions that we have this gen. Also because of the gap in time. The 360/PS3 came out 4 & 5 years after original Xbox, the last of the last-gen consoles to launch. XB3,PS4 should be coming 6 years after 360/PS3 assuming 2011/2012. Thus allowing more time for technology & tool improvement, for a bigger leap forward.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Vinzer Deling said:
yes, me being "born in 1999 or stupid or both" certainly is the argument against my reasoning.
you're assuming just as much as sony that they will fail as they think it will succeed.
but dali already conveyed all the points i'd bring up anyway. there's just not enough examples from the past to prove that Sony will drop the ps3 like a paperweight once the PS4 rolls around. if anything is to be extrapolated from their past marketing of consoles, its that they'll support it, or keep making it, as long as it sells.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Fuck you Sony if you release your fucking PS4 before 2011. PS1 and PS2 will have lasted longer each.
Ether_Snake said:
Calm down.
Sony is *not* gonna release PS4 in 2010. It'll be 2011 at the very soonest. Probably 2012.
5 or 6 years is normal.
It would be almost the same amount of time between PS1 & PS2
(5 years, 3 months in Japan -- 5 years, 1 month in the U.S.)
or PS2 & PS3
(6 years, 8 months in Japan -- 6 years, 1 month in U.S.)
Ninja Kn1ght
Member
Yup, 2011 is looking like a big year. I don't think this is a bad way for Sony to go, 2x PS3 is still very powerful and considering how much they've spent on PS3 R&D it makes sense to make use of that over a longer period of time. Combining two cells with whatever type of GPUS we'll have then could produce some mind-blowing stuff.
2x would only be on the CPU side, and even then I doubt it would be so little. As for the GPU, I can't even fathom what a 2011 GPU will be able to do, even if it's a mid-level one. I sincerely doubt they'd go with 2008/09 stuff. Nintendo can make a large leap with the "Wii HD" while keeping behind the performance curve and still hold the casual market, that will see it as an upgrade to the Wii they already have and it'd be difficult for Sony to steal that market. Microsoft would then just have to push a bit harder in terms of performance and Sony wouldn't win in either market... /amateur speculation
Anyway, a 2011 GPU aimed at Full HD should be able to awe even the most jaded graphics whore.
Anyway, a 2011 GPU aimed at Full HD should be able to awe even the most jaded graphics whore.
Didn't the Far Cry developer recently say Sony refused to tell him the release date of the PS4 or was that the specs? It'd be a marketing blunder for Sony to say, "Hey, PS4 in a couple of years guys!" That'd kill much of the market for PS3s. People will just say, ah let me just wait for the ps4 to come out. It's right around the corner.
FirewalkR said:
Agreed.
Better than the best of 2008 (GTX 280 - 4870X2)
Very much agreed.
Very true. Even a low-end GPU by 2011 standards *could* potentially be on par with say, SLI GTX 280 (2 gpus)
or CrossFire 4870X2 (4 gpus) even the pace of advancement and die shrinks (32nm or 22nm). The graphics industry is surging ahead as far as advancement and AMD/ATI has got a great cost/performance ratio right now. Nintendo could do well with low-end tech that's still a massive leap beyond GCN & Wii.
Microsoft might probably have the highest-end console of next-gen, while still keeping to a $399 price at most (and having a $299 SKU).
Anyway, a 2011 GPU aimed at Full HD should be able to awe even the most jaded graphics whore.
pretty much, I would think
forgot to include this more recent CELL roadmap
It seems the middle track would be relevant to both PS3 and future PS4.
I now really do not believe Sony will go for anything less than a CELL with 4 improved PPEs
and 32 eSPEs.
It seems one of the main difference between that concept CELL, PowerXCell 32iv on the upper track, and (not shown) a similar, consumer CELL for PS4, is that the consumer CELL would not need the double-precision floating point enhancements that PowerXCell 8i has and will continue to have with the 32iv.
It seems the middle track would be relevant to both PS3 and future PS4.
I now really do not believe Sony will go for anything less than a CELL with 4 improved PPEs
and 32 eSPEs.
It seems one of the main difference between that concept CELL, PowerXCell 32iv on the upper track, and (not shown) a similar, consumer CELL for PS4, is that the consumer CELL would not need the double-precision floating point enhancements that PowerXCell 8i has and will continue to have with the 32iv.
kevm3 said:
They would not tell him the specs.
They are developing the engine, which takes a couple of years. Then that engine is given to the developers a couple of years before the console release to make games. So about 3-4 years before launch of the console, the engine developers need to know the specs (which is 2008-2009).
Think of the Unreal engine. The PS3 optimized version was not finished until around or after the console release, so initial Unreal games did not take advantage of the PS3's strengths and were crap. Fully optimized Unreal games for PS3 are just starting to show up.
That's what they are trying to prevent with the Crytek 2 engine. Make sure they know the specs so they make the engine to be ready a couple of years before the console release, so that games can be ready for release.
I don't understand why everyone is wishing for 60 FPS.knitoe said:
Developers will use 30 FPS as an alternative way to get better graphics, and as long as its butter smooth and locked (i.e. Resistance), I couldn't really care less if they use 30 or 60.
But personally I would like 1080p, or at least the console to upscale EVERY game to 1080p. Metal Gear Solid 4 is upscaled 1080p isn't it? Despite 'only' being upscaled, the IQ is very, very good, and looks like a 1080p game to me.
I can definitely notice the difference between 720p and 1080p games on my LCD but with upscaled games such as MGS4, I don't see the difference between upscaled and native (GT5 is another example which looks razor sharp).
-viper- said:
60 FPS framerate, framerate in general,
is one of the few things that impacts *both* gameplay & graphics.
60 FPS not only makes everything look better in motion, more importantly it provides far better response time (thus it is part of gameplay, not just visuals).
From 1993 forward, since Namco's release of the original arcade Ridge Racer, (and then in early 1994 with Daytona USA on the SEGA side) the vast majority of arcade games were 60 FPS. Namco, SEGA and a few other developers kept their arcade games at 60 FPS, while at the same time, had incredible graphics, better than what home consoles & PCs could do.
Why is it, with todays consoles & PCs which have 100s (or at least dozens) of times more power than old arcade boards from 1993-1996, can't we have 60 FPS *and* great graphics? Answer, we can, but developers, publishers and gamers are all GREEDY. They want more & more & more better graphics. So framerates not only are not 60fps in most cases, they are often lower than 30fps, at least part of the time. This is a worse situation than even last-gen (DC,PS2,GCN,Xbox1).
The move to HD resolutions, even 720p and even sub-HD as some games are i.e 6XXp whatever, has badly hurt framerates. the current HD consoles do not have enough pixel fillrate & memory bandwidth to handle 720p + 60fps or even 30fps at all times PLUS "next-gen" graphic detail all at the same time, in the majority of games.
God I hope next-gen XB3, Wii HD, PS4, etc changes that. Or at least to the point where ALL games are ALWAYS locked at 30 FPS and have lots of motion blurr, for a CGI-like effect.
Otherwise I do care about 30 FPS vs 60 FPS. I know I am not alone
I'd rather have native 720p w/ 60 FPS, than native or upscaled 1080p w/ 30 FPS.
While there is certainly a difference between 720p and 1080p, for me it is not nearly as noticable as the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS at -any- resolution be it SD or HD.
My point is, framerate is, and should be, a priority over screen resolution.
65536 said:
Very much agreed.
It's so sad that so many games (last-gen & current-gen) are sub-30 FPS,
even if only in certain parts.
It's even more sad know that arcade games of 5, 10 and 15 years ago, were mostly 60FPS.
tahrikmili
Member
If Sony are going for a waggle-ified PS3.5 they might really get demolished when Microsoft bring on a technically superior Xiii.. They did not invest in a money sink like Cell, they aren't as squeezed for profit as Sony are and they aren't the last this time around.
As likely as this whole thing sounds, it has disaster written all over it.
As likely as this whole thing sounds, it has disaster written all over it.
PuppetMaster
Member
tahrikmili said:
You are just seeing want you want to see. Your eyes are clouded by your xbox avatar.
tahrikmili
Member
andydumi said:
Yeah bu how relevant will Cell be in 2011, considering that (afaik) even today Intel dual/quad core chips can outperform it in daily applications?
When has Cell been relevant anyway, except before PS3 launch? It has promised 4D and delivered.. ?
Everyone keeps saying: "Ooh, PS4 Cell will have a GPU from 2011 and you'll see it's unlocked potential!" but that just sounds like listening to Ken at 2005 E3. People defending Sony in this thread sound like they believe Microsoft's XBOX3 will come equipped with a GPU from 2004. Wake up and smell the coffee, if you will, for two generations in a row Microsoft has put more accessable and more advanced video hardware in their consoles.
Come on..
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
msdstc said:
This.
tahrikmili
Member
Sirolf said:
Partial much ???
I'm sorry, I'll change my avatar to a SIXAXIS right away and then my post will have more credibility. <_<
I don't think PS4 is gonna be PS3.5 Waggle, that's what many people are expecting, and we all know things turn out differently than expected.
based on my feelings at this moment (which change from hour to hour)
I expect PS4 in 2011 or 2012 might be:
*4-5x PS3 in terms of CPU (not as big a leap from PS2, but still significant)
*10-20x PS3 in terms of GPU (thus 2-4x stronger than GTX280 since GTX280 is already 5x RSX)
remember PS2 was a 300x leap over PS1 in graphics so 10-20x PS3 for PS4 is not that much really....
*8-16x PS3 in terms of RAM (PS1 to PS2 to PS3 was 16x both times so why not again)
*Faster Blu-ray, thus cheap
*Sony's own "Revolution" in terms of control interface that goes well beyond Wii Remote and MotionPlus, Sony needs to not aim at Wii controls, but those of Wii2
The CPU won't be cutting edge but more than enough. The GPU gets a nice bump. Sony isnt spending a ton on CPU R&D, CPU fab or Blu-ray next time, so PS4 can launch for $299~$399 and be a very significant leap in power, enough to do 90s television-show quality CGI in realtime (i.e. not Toy Story or FF:TSW but still better than current PCs).
enough to be a generational leap over PS3 and not struggle with HD resolutions like both 360 & PS3 do. the real effort will have been put into the control interface and keeping costs reasonable compared to this gen, where things got out of control.
okay now go ahead and laugh at me, tell me i'm totally wrong. :lol
based on my feelings at this moment (which change from hour to hour)
I expect PS4 in 2011 or 2012 might be:
*4-5x PS3 in terms of CPU (not as big a leap from PS2, but still significant)
*10-20x PS3 in terms of GPU (thus 2-4x stronger than GTX280 since GTX280 is already 5x RSX)
remember PS2 was a 300x leap over PS1 in graphics so 10-20x PS3 for PS4 is not that much really....
*8-16x PS3 in terms of RAM (PS1 to PS2 to PS3 was 16x both times so why not again)
*Faster Blu-ray, thus cheap
*Sony's own "Revolution" in terms of control interface that goes well beyond Wii Remote and MotionPlus, Sony needs to not aim at Wii controls, but those of Wii2
The CPU won't be cutting edge but more than enough. The GPU gets a nice bump. Sony isnt spending a ton on CPU R&D, CPU fab or Blu-ray next time, so PS4 can launch for $299~$399 and be a very significant leap in power, enough to do 90s television-show quality CGI in realtime (i.e. not Toy Story or FF:TSW but still better than current PCs).
enough to be a generational leap over PS3 and not struggle with HD resolutions like both 360 & PS3 do. the real effort will have been put into the control interface and keeping costs reasonable compared to this gen, where things got out of control.
okay now go ahead and laugh at me, tell me i'm totally wrong. :lol
Cell is done and dusted now though - developers are more familiar with it, costs and production should be relatively easy. So they can push that hard with relatively low cost compared to getting the PS3 out of the way. bluray drive will be peanuts, as will HDDs.
And what about all that talk of CPUs replacing GPUs? perhaps sony still think that is valid and may not opt for a big ass GPU and just fill PS4 full of CELLs. cheaper as they've sunk the costs of development already, more flexible for devleopers to do different rendering methods - possibly more in line with where PC gaming is in a few years?
And what about all that talk of CPUs replacing GPUs? perhaps sony still think that is valid and may not opt for a big ass GPU and just fill PS4 full of CELLs. cheaper as they've sunk the costs of development already, more flexible for devleopers to do different rendering methods - possibly more in line with where PC gaming is in a few years?
Sony will launch its next generation home console when developers are unable to improve the games they make, a senior executive at the company has said.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-08-22-when-sony-will-seriously-consider-ps4
Sony will launch its next generation home console when developers are unable to improve the games they make, a senior executive at the company has said.
When that happens, Sony will have to "seriously consider" launching the PlayStation 4, worldwide studios boss Shuhei Yoshida told Eurogamer.
"Looking at the platform cycle, when the platform becomes something game developers are not able to improve their creations with, that's the time we have to really seriously consider shifting to the next generation," Yoshida said.
While Microsoft is rumoured to be preparing to launch its new Xbox in 2013, we've heard little about Sony's next home console.
Sony has insisted its focus is on the PS3, which recently enjoyed a price cut, and the PS Vita, due out in Europe early next year.
Game publishers, generally, agree that the introduction of the next generation is not needed. In January THQ core games boss Danny Bilson told Eurogamer the introduction of new hardware now "would be horrible".
A number of developers, however, have told Eurogamer they are reaching the limit of what the current generation can do in terms of technical performance, and would love the opportunity to work with more RAM.
Yoshida explained to Eurogamer why now is not the right time to launch the PS4.
"As far as we are concerned, we have no desire now to do that [release a new home console]," Yoshida said.
"Gamers always need something new and more exciting. If they're seeing just similar types of games coming year after year, they will quickly lose their interest.
"Looking like that, when you see games coming out on PS3, both the traditional type of games as well as new kind of games using PS Move, there is a lot more we can do from the game development standpoint.
"So as long as we and our developers can create new experiences that are more exciting to consumers, I see no need to transition into newer generation."
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-08-22-when-sony-will-seriously-consider-ps4
Sony will launch its next generation home console when developers are unable to improve the games they make, a senior executive at the company has said.
When that happens, Sony will have to "seriously consider" launching the PlayStation 4, worldwide studios boss Shuhei Yoshida told Eurogamer.
"Looking at the platform cycle, when the platform becomes something game developers are not able to improve their creations with, that's the time we have to really seriously consider shifting to the next generation," Yoshida said.
While Microsoft is rumoured to be preparing to launch its new Xbox in 2013, we've heard little about Sony's next home console.
Sony has insisted its focus is on the PS3, which recently enjoyed a price cut, and the PS Vita, due out in Europe early next year.
Game publishers, generally, agree that the introduction of the next generation is not needed. In January THQ core games boss Danny Bilson told Eurogamer the introduction of new hardware now "would be horrible".
A number of developers, however, have told Eurogamer they are reaching the limit of what the current generation can do in terms of technical performance, and would love the opportunity to work with more RAM.
Yoshida explained to Eurogamer why now is not the right time to launch the PS4.
"As far as we are concerned, we have no desire now to do that [release a new home console]," Yoshida said.
"Gamers always need something new and more exciting. If they're seeing just similar types of games coming year after year, they will quickly lose their interest.
"Looking like that, when you see games coming out on PS3, both the traditional type of games as well as new kind of games using PS Move, there is a lot more we can do from the game development standpoint.
"So as long as we and our developers can create new experiences that are more exciting to consumers, I see no need to transition into newer generation."
I would make new threads for all the stories I post but when I try to make a new post I get this message.
"NeoGAF Message
mocoworm, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation."
This means I have to find a relevant thread and tag the new news on the end. Sorry about that. Does anyone know why this is ? I also can't see my post history in my UserCP. I get the same message as above.
"NeoGAF Message
mocoworm, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation."
This means I have to find a relevant thread and tag the new news on the end. Sorry about that. Does anyone know why this is ? I also can't see my post history in my UserCP. I get the same message as above.
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
Edit: Oh, old thread.
Similar threads
- Locked