$349 C'mon Sony
If they did this price point they would win the console war that fast.
$349 C'mon Sony
1) The light bar on the controllerI don't get it, Why people thinks the Pseye will be bundled in the first place?
I wonder if it is even a good idea to not include the camera since the controller needs it for the light bar. I can see people bitching about needing to buy the camera in order to utilize all of the controllers functions.
For some reason I always read your posts in Gary Busey's voice. :|1) The light bar on the controller
2) A separate input for the camera. USB3 can support both the Kinect2 and PS4 Eye. A separate input is needed only if a low power and/or separate processing path is needed.
3) Skype
4) Voice and Gesture control for XTV. Top end Samsung Smart TVs have stereo cameras and microphones in a special remote for voice and gesture commands as well as Skype.
We are left with there are serious plans to to use the camera, when though? Optional Camera but eventually (within a year) a must for the Casual user.
Stock Analysts are saying that the Xboxone had a better showing because of the Kinect and Voice control with an emphasis on a all in one TV set top box that plays games. Sony needs to also mention their STB plans and I suspect that they include the Camera/Move as seen in most of the Sony XTV patent drawings.
Kinect2 is a more expensive camera with lots of processing in the camera case. PS4 camera is simpler with I suspect the separate path to the low power second chip as southbridge that has System memory and may have a GPU (For low power STB functionality) that has compute ability to process the video for the AMD APU that has it's own memory, CPU and GPU.
Is this really a good thing? How required will it be by games and the system? Is it like not including a memory card with the Vita?
Developers can choose to either have PSEye support or Remote Play. I think the vast majority with go with the latter.
The biggest problem with that choice is that it'll have the same fate as PSMove. No one remembers PSMove anymore or cares about it anymore.
+1000Only the poors are celebrating. This thing will be DOA if it's not packed in.
+1000
Not packed in = never taken seriously by developers.
Yeah? And? The new PS Eye is designed with the Kinect in mind, not the Wiimote.
So instead of working with the camera which every PS4 owner would potentially own they'd expect people to purchase a Vita to play the same games they have on the telly box?Developers can choose to either have PSEye support or Remote Play. I think the vast majority with go with the latter.
I agree. They are killing Move's chances before it even comes out.
So instead of working with the camera which every PS4 owner would potentially own...
Exactly. Whatever they're brewing won't be experienced by many if it's not bundled.Disappointing, camera's clearly aren't helping the core games we play today but I was hoping/certain that if everyone had them next gen we'd see some new experiences that were amazing. I thought what Media Molecule did was pretty incredible.
If it's not included I would expect less than 10% of PS4 owners to buy it, just like Move on the PS3.
Given the relative prominence they've given it alongside DS4 to date, I'd be surprised if a premium SKU didn't include it, vs being sold entirely separately.
Of course, who knows what ratio of standardremium SKUs they might have at launch or going forward.
As for game support, I guess the need to bundle it with every unit or not might depend on what kind of game support they want. If they see it supporting a niche of games (dance, fitness, sports etc.) maybe it doesn't need to reach the entire userbase.
I'm kind of neutral on it. I think if cost allowed it, why not include it in every box? It's no harm really. It might promote a wider array of gimmicky use in earlier titles if it was in every box, and some people might not like that, but that would probably decline over time.
I'm not sure the video in the OP tells us very much. That line is the best one to take if you haven't yet decided to bundle it or not, and as of the Feb meeting they apparently had not.
If it's just an accessory it will be ignored by most developers and users.
The Move controller (and by extension the camera) haven't been utilised by any game in such a way that suggests their cost should be absorbed by the console price. If a game is released which makes genuinely compelling use of the add ons, then they will have no problem selling well. Kinect, Eye Toy (PS2), Guitar Hero and Wiimote + are all proof that you can sell peripherals succesfully if the software is there and the price is right (or the message is delivered well enough).
I would rather not have to pay a higher default price for a console. If they make a game/service which makes great use of the camera, then I'll happily consider a separate purchase.
And that here, is actually a good thing. Crummy gimmicks need to go away.
But it's because they were peripherals to begin with which is why you haven't seen anything decent.
I turn the nice big group of all the people who own a PS4 into two groups. All the people who own a PS4 and a subgroup within that that own a PS4 AND a Move sensor. As a publisher that isn't being paid any money to utilize the controller in some way I know I'd choose the larger group.
If it was part of the console and didn't segregate the audience into two groups I bet some clever devs could make something great with these things.
The Move controller (and by extension the camera) haven't been utilised by any game in such a way that suggests their cost should be absorbed by the console price. If a game is released which makes genuinely compelling use of the add ons, then they will have no problem selling well. Kinect, Eye Toy (PS2), Guitar Hero and Wiimote + are all proof that you can sell peripherals succesfully if the software is there and the price is right (or the message is delivered well enough).
I would rather not have to pay a higher default price for a console. If they make a game/service which makes great use of the camera, then I'll happily consider a separate purchase.
While your point is a bit blunt (although I do accept the logic of it), you're working on the assumption that devs would indeed take advantage of the move in ways worth stumping up the money for if it was ubiquitous. I'm maybe less confident that this would be the case.
Also, while your point is perfectly valid for 3rd parties, it doesn't excuse Sony who (IMO) are still to show any genuinely compelling reason to own a Move/camera setup and you can extend that to Nintendo, who had an entire generation of success to prove this kind of kinetic input, which for the most part they failed to do (again, IMO).
Maybe its a failure of my imagination (a possibility I'm totally willing to accept), but I don't expect that camera to be useful to me, and so if given the choice, I would prefer a cheaper console SKU sans camera.
The chances any devs will take that risk for such a low install base are well, low.
We'll likely never see that game you speak of.
Nor did we on Kinect or Eye Toy
Wiimote+ had ONE noteworthy game and that was Zelda- and core fans didn't enjoy the motion focus as much as you might think.
PS Move 2.0 is DOA
My point about those other peripherals was more to highlight that it is possible to find success with the right software, price and marketing - rather than to argue the perceived/critical quality of the software.
+1000
Not packed in = never taken seriously by developers.
GDDR5 memory will drive the price of the PS4 higher than that of the Xbox One, regardless of camera peripheral.
Or maybe they'll even out if the PS4 doesn't have the camera since the XOne has Kinect 2.
The production cost of including the camera would be a lot less than people are making out.
Would be better if included with all PS3 systems for install base parity.
No way that's true, GDDR5 will not be cheap to manufacture, its not as widely manufactured as dinky camera components. I don't think 8GB of GDDR5 equates to a 1080p camera at all. My graphics card alone costs more than a PS4 or Xbox One will cost, and it has a fraction of the PS4s RAM.
No way that's true, GDDR5 will not be cheap to manufacture, its not as widely manufactured as dinky camera components. I don't think 8GB of GDDR5 equates to a 1080p camera at all. My graphics card alone costs more than a PS4 or Xbox One will cost, and it has a fraction of the PS4s RAM.
The GDDR5 isn't going to cost anywhere near as much as you seem to believe it is; BOM estimates peg it at around $110~140. Dedicated GPU prices are what they are on the PC because there's a distinct lack of competition in the market.