Support NeoGAF

[Lord Error]

Which of the three console of this generation has made the most money for the creators this generation?

Sony is not Nintendo. Their hardware and games have created different set of expectations, their target markets are not necessarily the same, and part of the market that likes Nintendo offerings probably won't ever be convinced to buy a similar Sony offering, simply for there being no Nintendo games on it. What I'm saying is that they can't now try and pretend to be Nintendo, hoping that people would buy their cheaper low-powered box that has Move+some EyetoyKinect thing bundled. By doing that they'd just create a product absolutely no one would be interested in.

PS1, PS2 were about half as powerful as the most powerful consoles in their generation, PS3 is the only system Sony released that changed that... (the mobile market has had stronger hardware, there is also stronger hardware than the vita in devices coming out this year)

PS1, PS2, PSP and Vita were/are the most powerful hardwares at the times of their respective launches, compared to reasonable competition. A year or more time it took the competition to change that, would let Sony build an image and a name for themselves based on that, creating enough mindshare that even when the stronger hardware eventually showed up, it didn't really matter anymore. Needless to say they've lost a lot of that goodwill now, so if they think launching weaker/cheaper hardware at the same time as their competition will do something for them, I think they are badly mistaken.

 

[Glorified G]

What I "want" to happen, is what this rumor points too, for instance that quad core is single threaded (all AMD cores are) meaning that both Wii U and 720 will have extra threads... There is plenty of reason to assume Sony isn't going cutting edge, so I am not sure why you know the future, when this thread doesn't support your assumptions.

If going by a rumor of a devkit 18 months before a console releases "plenty of reason" as opposed to the last 16 years of precedence Sony has provided regarding their philosophy towards their consoles. Then yeah, it's something that you WANT to happen.

Sony is not Nintendo. Their hardware and games have created different set of expectations, their target markets are not necessarily the same, and part of the market that likes Nintendo offerings probably won't ever be convinced to buy a similar Sony offering, simply for there being no Nintendo games on it. What I'm saying is that they can't now try and pretend to be Nintendo, hoping that people would buy their cheaper low-powered box that has Move+some EyetoyKinect thing bundled. By doing that they'd just create a product absolutely no one would be interested in.

Yup. It's wishful thinking at its best.

 

[shinra-bansho]

They plan to release before Microsoft, which should tell you that they aren't going to push tech as hard as Microsoft might.

They're both planning on late 2013 releases as per rumor.

So I've no idea on what basis you make such statement. Releasing a few months, if even that, before the Next Box is supposed to tell us that they're not going to push tech as much as Microsoft?

 

[MikeXXIeaf]

I need to see the console in action before I get excited. Period. All of this mindless speculation doesn't do anything but fuel console wars before the damn things are even released.

 

[z0m3le]

If going by a rumor of a devkit 18 months before a console releases "plenty of reason" as opposed to the last 16 years of precedence Sony has provided regarding their philosophy towards their consoles. Then yeah, it's something that you WANT to happen.



Yup. It's wishful thinking at its best.

The vita's specs were released something like 2 years early right? these are just what is in the dev kits, and I do believe that the console will have custom parts, but it won't drastically change if this rumor is true... and yes I do want the specs to not push bleeding edge, because PCs are always more powerful anyways, and them pushing super high end tech would mean more developer houses closing. (just like this last gen)

They're both planning on late 2013 releases as per rumor.

So I've no idea on what basis you make such statement. Releasing a few months, if even that, before the Next Box is supposed to tell us that they're not going to push tech as much as Microsoft?

Basically they don't want to be late, I assume because their hardware won't stand out against the 720s so they probably aren't shooting for higher specs then the 720, or a couple months would make no difference what so ever.

 

[Father_Brain]

Sony is not Nintendo. Their hardware and games have created different set of expectations, their target markets are not necessarily the same, and part of the market that likes Nintendo offerings probably won't ever be convinced to buy a similar Sony offering, simply for there being no Nintendo games on it. What I'm saying is that they can't now try and pretend to be Nintendo, hoping that people would buy their cheaper low-powered box that has Move+some EyetoyKinect thing bundled. By doing that they'd just create a product absolutely no one would be interested in.

You're right that Sony's ability to capture the casual market is questionable, but even speaking strictly in terms of the "core" market, I don't think the specs will matter that much. If PS4 has the same multiplatform games as the next Xbox (which is already guaranteed) and launches at a lower price (which will probably be the case, if there's really a significant performance gap), it has a very good shot at taking off faster.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Basically they don't want to be late, I assume because their hardware won't stand out against the 720s so they probably aren't shooting for higher specs then the 720, or a couple months would make no difference what so ever.

Who said anything about higher specs than the XBOX3? Your statement read as though one can infer the next PS would be underpowered compared to the next XBOX due to their prospective release schedules - which is nonsensical considering their release windows overlap.

Most people expect them to be roughly equivalent, as per the current generation of hardware.

If anything if they launch substantially weaker hardware as Microsoft in the same release window, without a unique differentiator, they may as well pack up and go home already.

 

[z0m3le]

Who said anything about higher specs than the XBOX3? Your statement read as though one can infer the next PS would be underpowered compared to the next XBOX due to their prospective release schedules - which is nonsensical considering their release windows overlap.

Most people expect them to be roughly equivalent, as per the current generation of hardware.

If anything if they launch substantially weaker hardware as Microsoft in the same release window, without a unique differentiator, they may as well pack up and go home already.

"They plan to release before Microsoft, which should tell you that they aren't going to push tech as hard as Microsoft might."

This is what I said, you did draw your own conclusions to this, but the way I see next gen coming, is actually that Microsoft's console is also similar to these rumors... I don't think Investors want to pay for another PS360 generation, and I think this plays a very large role in what companies do.

The PS2 generation didn't need hardware vastly superior to their competitors in order to be the market leader, and neither did the Wii, so I don't see why everyone believes that these specs which are about 5x(GPU wise) the PS360 wouldn't be enough to push a new console generation.

Edit: I also don't think we would be seeing new consoles before 2015 if it wasn't for Wii U, they forced Sony and Microsoft's hand, as their consoles were just hitting their stride and will now be cut short thanks to the PS4/XB3.

 

[Lord Error]

You're right that Sony's ability to capture the casual market is questionable, but even speaking strictly in terms of the "core" market, I don't think the specs will matter that much. If PS4 has the same multiplatform games as the next Xbox (which is already guaranteed) and launches at a lower price (which will probably be the case, if there's really a significant performance gap), it has a very good shot at taking off faster.

That's a big if, considering how tarnished their reputation is now compared to ten years ago, and could possibly work if they release significantly before MS. Otherwise they'd be facing similar, but maybe not as severe situation as their xperia smartphones vs. the more expensive iphones. They'd have a cheaper product that practically noone will want. On top of that, I can actually see MS willing to lose money if they need to match the price. Not to mention that Nintendo will be out before them, with potentially even cheeper hardware but still offering all those multi platform games that look just a tad worse.

and yes I do want the specs to not push bleeding edge, because PCs are always more powerful anyways, and them pushing super high end tech would mean more developer houses closing. (just like this last gen)

Why should I care what's in PCs in the context of this discussion? It's not like you'll be able to play any of the SCE published games on them. The irony of all this is that Sony's own dev teams thrive and pride themselves on graphics tech, and yet there's number of people here hoping they'd release a hardware that won't let their own teams do as good work as they otherwise could.

 

[Chuck Norris]

"They plan to release before Microsoft, which should tell you that they aren't going to push tech as hard as Microsoft might."

This is what I said, you did draw your own conclusions to this, but the way I see next gen coming, is actually that Microsoft's console is also similar to these rumors... I don't think Investors want to pay for another PS360 generation, and I think this plays a very large role in what companies do.

The PS2 generation didn't need hardware vastly superior to their competitors in order to be the market leader, and neither did the Wii, so I don't see why everyone believes that these specs which are about 5x(GPU wise) the PS360 wouldn't be enough to push a new console generation.

It isn't about offerring the weakest hardware either. It's about offering the right system that compels consumers to buy, Wii did that through an innovation and competitive pricing. PS2 did that through competitive pricing and leading software. Neither would have done it just by being cheap though.

Generally speaking, being weaker has nothing to do with it. Sony could come out with underpowered hardware, but just because they can offer it cheaper doesn't mean they'll be able to be competitive. Sony said it themselves awhile ago, cutting edge hardware is in their DNA. I don't see them going the cheap, underpowered route unless they have a totally innovative idea that would justify people buying it. Otherwise, brute strength will be the draw card.

 

[shinra-bansho]

"They plan to release before Microsoft, which should tell you that they aren't going to push tech as hard as Microsoft might."

This is what I said, you did draw your own conclusions to this, but the way I see next gen coming, is actually that Microsoft's console is also similar to these rumors... I don't think Investors want to pay for another PS360 generation, and I think this plays a very large role in what companies do.

The PS2 generation didn't need hardware vastly superior to their competitors in order to be the market leader, and neither did the Wii, so I don't see why everyone believes that these specs which are about 5x(GPU wise) the PS360 wouldn't be enough to push a new console generation.

Edit: I also don't think we would be seeing new consoles before 2015 if it wasn't for Wii U, they forced Sony and Microsoft's hand, as their consoles were just hitting their stride and will now be cut short thanks to the PS4/XB3.

So you're working on the assumption that no one is planning to offer a substantial generational leap and that consumers will simply buy things because they're shiny and new?

The PS2 was incredibly competent hardware for its time, it was considered powerful at the time of it's launch - as others have already mentioned. It was a successful loss-leader product.

No one is going to repeat the PS3, or the mistakes of the OG XBOX. That doesn't mean that no one is going to push tech - if and when they can do so in a smart and affordable way.

 

[z0m3le]

That's a big if, considering how tarnished their reputation is now compared to ten years ago, and could possibly work if they release significantly before MS. Otherwise they'd be facing similar, but maybe not as severe situation as their xperia smartphones vs. the more expensive iphones. They'd have a cheaper product that practically noone will want. On top of that, I can actually see MS willing to lose money if they need to match the price. Not to mention that Nintendo will be out before them, with potentially even cheeper hardware but still offering all those multi platform games that look just a tad worse.



Why should I care what's in PCs in the context of this discussion? It's not like you'll be able to play any of the SCE published games on them. The irony of all this is that Sony's own dev teams thrive and pride themselves on graphics tech, and yet there's number of people here hoping they'd release a hardware that won't let their own teams do as good work as they otherwise could.

That is a huge fallacy, they could release in 2014 with MUCH stronger hardware thanks to processor nodes shrinking in 2014... These tech for the sake of tech pushing is actually helping no one... And this is the first generation where no matter what the consoles put in their boxes, they will be no more than half as powerful.

So you're working on the assumption that no one is planning to offer a substantial generational leap and that consumers will simply buy things because they're shiny and new?

The PS2 was incredibly competent hardware for its time, it was considered powerful at the time of it's launch - as others have already mentioned. It was a successful loss-leader product.

No one is going to repeat the PS3, or the mistakes of the OG XBOX. That doesn't mean that no one is going to push tech - if and when they can do so in a smart and affordable way.

Yep, that and you know... GAMES... what exactly is the point of new consoles except for being "shiny (graphics wise) and new (new games coming for it)" of course there is Wii Remotes but I don't think your conversation is going that way, Xbox to xbox 360 saw a 6x GPU increase, so I think your expecting a bit too much, especially when PCs can get over 7000Gflops and can do even more with crossfire, what exactly is the point of consoles pushing more than 2000Gflops of performance? Especially when only a handful of studios can pay to make use of the hardware.

Also do we really want 4 year dev cycles? I know I don't.

 

[Lord Error]

That is a huge fallacy, they could release in 2014 with MUCH stronger hardware thanks to processor nodes shrinking in 2014.

I don't see how it is, and yes, I think that both Sony and MS should wait for 2014 if that's what it takes then. That, or not bother being in the hardware game anymore and just making games for PC/multiplat. I think you're probably thinking along the same lines actually, as people who don't care about the hardware power should have no problem with current consoles lasting a year more.

Especially when only a handful of studios can pay to make use of the hardware.

See, that is a huge fallacy. Every single studio could make use of that power, even the indie ones. If it takes one man and one artist to program/create this, then a game based on that kind of physics could be developed by a very small studio. Good luck having something like that fluid physics on a low spec hardware though. At the very least, anyone could just enable better image quality options and higher resolutions in their simpler looking games, at absolutely no additional dev cost incurred from it.

 

[phosphor112]

can they really continue to bleed as they have? that's the question...

A powerful console doesn't mean red ink. Last I checked Bluray drives aren't 300+ and diodes are plentiful. They'll be fine.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Yep, that and you know... GAMES... what exactly is the point of new consoles except for being "shiny (graphics wise) and new (new games coming for it)" of course there is Wii Remotes but I don't think your conversation is going that way, Xbox to xbox 360 saw a 6x GPU increase, so I think your expecting a bit too much, especially when PCs can get over 7000Gflops and can do even more with crossfire, what exactly is the point of consoles pushing more than 2000Gflops of performance? Especially when only a handful of studios can pay to make use of the hardware.

Also do we really want 4 year dev cycles? I know I don't.

Games, yes. Games that don't look or feel possible on hardware they already own - otherwise what's the selling point for a consumer.

The Wii did this with the Wiimote, while the other two pushed tech this gen.

XBOX to XBOX 360 gave consumers a easily visible perceptible generational shift. If they cannot provide that, they need to provide some other gimmick (personally I'm not particularly interested in gimmicks). Failing that the new generation of hardware is premature.

Not sure why you keep talking about PCs. The mainstream consumer isn't buying gaming PCs to chuck in their living room under their TV.

 

[Raistlin]

The PS2 wasn't out years before the GCN and Xbox, yet Xbox was roughly twice as powerful, making the PS2 hardly cutting edge if you actually look at how the tech of the time grew.

NGC and Xbox hit nearly a year and a half after PS2. That's pretty much an eternity for computing tech.

Let's do a little thought experiment.

Which of the three console of this generation has made the most money for the creators this generation?

Which has made the least?

So which, by the single measure of 'success' that companies care about, is the most successful?

So why are you blithely assuming that success = most powerful?

I'm not assuming they do have to be the most powerful. That's not what people are arguing.

 

[z0m3le]

I don't see how it is, and yes, I think that both Sony and MS should wait for 2014 if that's what it takes then. That, or not bother being in the hardware game anymore and just making games for PC/multiplat. I think you're probably thinking along the same lines actually, as people who don't care about the hardware power should have no problem with current consoles lasting a year more.


See, that is a huge fallacy. Every single studio could make use of that power, even the indie ones. If it takes one man and one artist to program/create this, then a game based on that kind of physics could be developed by a very small studio. Good luck having something like that fluid physics on a low spec hardware though. At the very least, anyone could just enable better image quality options and higher resolutions in their simpler looking games, at absolutely no additional dev cost incurred from it.

Actually, they could do physics like that with a small pc, heck even these rumored dev kits would be able to perform it with the extra GPU, the 6550D it is after all OpenCL capable.

Also there is plenty they can do to push graphics not possible on the PS360, but those platforms are pretty capable, so don't expect anything next gen that really makes you say "Wow, this is something I couldn't see possible on the PS360" just look at tech demos like from the people who did heavy rain, that robot had a lot of prebaked effects that ended up being very convincing.

Other then larger textures, and much better lighting/shadowing, I don't think we will see a graphical leap quite like last gen.

NGC and Xbox hit nearly a year and a half after PS2. That's pretty much an eternity for computing tech.

I'm not assuming they do have to be the most powerful. That's not what people are arguing.

I guess I remember buying my PS2 october of that year (owned a dreamcast, so I wasn't in a huge hurry, and forgot it released in march)

The difference between what you believe and what I believe is you think the consoles need to be bleeding edge, and I believe they need to be about half way there... Say you think the gpu for instance needs to be comparable to a HD7850 while I think something along the lines of an HD7750 would be fine (this rumor has 2 GPUs equaling somewhere around 1.2gflops, which I think is roughly enough, maybe 1.5gflops top end.)

 

[Death Dealer]

Xbox to xbox 360 saw a 6x GPU increase, so I think your expecting a bit too much, especially when PCs can get over 7000Gflops and can do even more with crossfire, what exactly is the point of consoles pushing more than 2000Gflops of performance? Especially when only a handful of studios can pay to make use of the hardware.

6x increase for xbox-xbox360 but it was only 4 years apart. PS4 will have a 7 year gap since the introduction of the PS3. The rumored 1.2 TFLOPs Orbis specs are just a little underwhelming IMO. I think it's got to be the worst case scenario. In 2013, they should be using something newer than a 7670, and something more advanced than a Llano APU. 1.5-2 TFLOPs could be attainable. I hope they are aggressive and go with a fat GPU. Something that will be expensive at first, but can be shrunk later to save costs.

 

[z0m3le]

6x increase for xbox-xbox360 but it was only 4 years apart. PS4 will have a 7 year gap since the introduction of the PS3. The rumored 1.2 TFLOPs Orbis specs are just a little underwhelming IMO. I think it's got to be the worst case scenario. In 2013, they should be using something newer than a 7670, and something more advanced than a Llano APU. 1.5-2 TFLOPs could be attainable. I hope they are aggressive and go with a fat GPU. Something that will be expensive at first, but can be shrunk later to save costs.

Oh, I do believe it will end up greater than 1.2Tflops, 1.5Tflops would be fine, these rumors are early specs, they don't take into account things like 28nm processing being avalible for these chips (both are currently 40nm) so you could push a few more Gflops, I would assume 1.7Tflops is the sweet spot, but anything around 1.5Tflops would look great, and Wii U will end up somewhere in half that power envelope.

 

[Lord Error]

Actually, they could do physics like that with a small pc, heck even these rumored dev kits would be able to perform it with the extra GPU, the 6550D it is after all OpenCL capable.

That thing runs at what seems like 5FPS or less on my somewhat weak PC that runs most today's multiplatform games at 60FPS in 720p resolution. If you read the text he wrote about that demo, he's very knowledgeable about the subject and he programmed it in such a way to exceed any existing SPH demo of year ago in terms of performance and hardware utilization (for example, Nvidia's own demo on their latest hardware was running at 2 times less particles at the time - on a hardware that's probably much faster than anything that has chance of being in next consoles). Even his demo doesn't offer quite enough particles, for realistic looking water on a larger surface that would be applicable to a game, you'd probably need at least 2-4x as much.

Other then larger textures, and much better lighting/shadowing, I don't think we will see a graphical leap quite like last gen.

If that's all there is to it, then they simply should wait until better/faster technologies are more affordable. As I commented before, you probably wouldn't mind current gen lasting more in the first place if chasing higher specs is not worth it for you. I linked to an example of something that current gen hardware can't do at all, and next gen machines will only be able to do very half-assedly if those rumoured specs are true. That's just one of the things that comes to mind instantly where higher tech opens up new game making possibilities, at no additional production cost.

 

[phosphor112]

...I still think a 2014 release is optimal... much better specs for much cheaper... There is no need for MS and Sony to try to compete with Nintendo. They've been a completely different market for years...

That's just my thoughts...

 

[shinra-bansho]

If that's all there is to it, then they simply should wait until better/faster technologies are more affordable.

Exactly.

(Setting Nintendo aside, as they're going to be using the tablet as their "next gen" feature.)

Does anyone think the mass market is going to buy a PS4 or XBOX3 if they simply run the same games as the PS3/360 but with slightly nicer textures and lighting?

If there isn't an perceptible shift in games, be that in control scheme or technology - graphics, physics, AI - then what need is there in the general populace to buy new hardware.

 

[Chuck Norris]

Whatever the specs are, Epic has already set my expectations for the minimum I want out of a high profile next gen game with Samaritan

Will be disappointed with any less

 

[Log4Girlz]

Whatever they do, Sony needs to make sure they are weaker than MS, its the only way to ensure victory.

 

[z0m3le]

Exactly.

(Setting Nintendo aside, as they're going to be using the tablet as their "next gen" feature.)

Does anyone think the mass market is going to buy a PS4 or XBOX3 if they simply run the same games as the PS3/360 but with slightly nicer textures and lighting?

If there isn't an perceptible shift in games, be that in control scheme or technology - graphics, physics, AI - then what need is there in the general populace to buy new hardware.

Microsoft is working with a tablet on their 720, I have a friend who works at microsoft's Xbox division and he said as much when we were talking about next gen consoles, he's interested in the Wii U, but thinks that it will end up about half as powerful as what they are targeting (don't know what specs he was comparing the 720's too, but he couldn't elaborate on his console)

That thing runs at what seems like 5FPS or less on my somewhat weak PC that runs most today's multiplatform games at 60FPS in 720p resolution. If you read the text he wrote about that demo, he's very knowledgeable about the subject and he programmed it in such a way to exceed any existing SPH demo of year ago in terms of performance and hardware utilization (for example, Nvidia's own demo on their latest hardware was running at 2 times less particles at the time - on a hardware that's probably much faster than anything that has chance of being in next consoles). Even his demo doesn't offer quite enough particles, for realistic looking water on a larger surface that would be applicable to a game, you'd probably need at least 2-4x as much.


If that's all there is to it, then they simply should wait until better/faster technologies are more affordable. As I commented before, you probably wouldn't mind current gen lasting more in the first place if chasing higher specs is not worth it for you. I linked to an example of something that current gen hardware can't do at all, and next gen machines will only be able to do very half-assedly if those rumoured specs are true. That's just one of the things that comes to mind instantly where higher tech opens up new game making possibilities, at no additional production cost.

"except we wanted to do it in realtime. on a consumer gpu. on vanilla directx 9. no cuda/compute, no geometry shaders." -from that video link you gave me. -basically you could probably do that with some OpenCL code to work right on the GPU, maybe you haven't heard of PPUs, but that is basically what I am talking about, it's not even a problem for these systems to have the compute cores, it's built into HD4000 series and up, and is really good in the HD7000 series cards.

As for the generation, what can a pc do that consoles can't do that I haven't covered? what magical graphical effects do you believe PS4 will achieve here? I mean it's obviously nothing I've seen on the pc games so far... I mean maybe you guys are getting me wrong, some Xbox games looked pretty good, 360 launch games looked better, but nothing on the 360 looked miles ahead @ launch in 480p... it was really the HD jump that makes the last generation jump look so drastic.

 

[jump_button]

...I still think a 2014 release is optimal... much better specs for much cheaper... There is no need for MS and Sony to try to compete with Nintendo. They've been a completely different market for years...

That's just my thoughts...

I think some one still in this gen mind set so I wouldn't write of Nintendo, if any think maybe MS or sony will go to far from 3rd partys will go with the biggest market. If anyone of them over powered or under it will be cut off and will have to relay on first party

 

[Chuck Norris]

I think some one still in this gen mind set so I wouldn't write of Nintendo, if any think maybe MS or sony will go to far from 3rd partys will go with the biggest market. If anyone of them over powered or under it will be cut off and will have to relay on first party

I agree, which is why I think it's no coincidence that both Sony and MS are working with the same partners

 

[z0m3le]

I agree, which is why I think it's no coincidence that both Sony and MS are working with the same partners

Nintendo and MS are actually working with the same partners, isn't MS using IBM again for the CPU? Sony is having AMD do the CPU, which is something quite a bit different from any other generation.

 

[NemesisPrime]

A powerful console doesn't mean red ink. Last I checked Bluray drives aren't 300+ and diodes are plentiful. They'll be fine.

Against a company that has a zillion more cash (MS) it does mean red ink TBH.

Sony should be smart and go for not-so awesome hardware and increase their focus on software and services and hope the exclusives from this gen will get them some followers. It is going to be a very though battle for them IMHO. Going to mega power hardware will just kill them. XBLA alone is a killer... they really need a much, much, much better PSN.

All IMHO ofc.

 

[CLEEK]

Microsoft is working with a tablet on their 720, I have a friend who works at microsoft's Xbox division and he said as much when we were talking about next gen consoles

Yeah, well my uncle works at Sony and he's already got PS4.

 

[Mario007]

Against a company that has a zillion more cash (MS) it does mean red ink TBH.

Sony should be smart and go for not-so awesome hardware and increase their focus on software and services and hope the exclusives from this gen will get them some followers. It is going to be a very though battle for them IMHO. Going to mega power hardware will just kill them. XBLA alone is a killer... they really need a much, much, much better PSN.

All IMHO ofc.

not true, I would say. That was maybe the case a few years ago but right now the services seem pretty much on par, and this is prior to PS Suite being launched as well.

 

[jump_button]

Against a company that has a zillion more cash (MS) it does mean red ink TBH.

Sony should be smart and go for not-so awesome hardware and increase their focus on software and services and hope the exclusives from this gen will get them some followers. It is going to be a very though battle for them IMHO. Going to mega power hardware will just kill them. XBLA alone is a killer... they really need a much, much, much better PSN.

All IMHO ofc.

<_< yeah everyone buy a high end console for low budget XBLA games MS still got the weakest first party of them all, If Wii U and PS4 are more or less the same and MS go with some over top they have to relay on Halo and Gears and ............Halo?

but still we dont know what everyone is doing so :/

 

[z0m3le]

Yeah, well my uncle works at Sony and he's already got PS4.

Yep, because what I said was completely unbelievable, Microsoft using a tablet controller, like that would happen, amirite?

Heck, I even know someone who worked on the operating system in Bill Gate's house and saw him regularly, and he knew about the xbox before it was launched, even got to play it. Crazy how small the world is.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012...20120410?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=71
Ouch

I really don't know if Sony can afford a next gen console like some of you are expecting...

Sony forecast a 520 billion yen ($6.4 billion) net loss for the year to end-March 2012. In February it had forecast an annual net loss of 220 billion yen. The additional loss is from write-offs of tax credits in the United States, which the company cannot use because of the losses it has racked up.

6.4Billion USD in one year is insane, that is something like ~1/25th of their entire value, investors will not play a loss leader strategy very easily...

 

[shinra-bansho]

It's 300B yen in tax asset losses, afaik, added to the already known fiscal full year loss forecast of 220B yen.

I don't know why you keep talking about investors caring about this or that with loss leading on the PlayStation. This is the fourth consecutive year of losses (which is why they forfeit the tax credits and need to write down that amount) and the Vita exists. The PS4 is under development, and presumably has been for some time.

Investors won't give a toss if they follow a traditional loss-leading model wherein software royalties make up negative hardware margins, provided they don't repeat the ridiculous losses per unit that they saw with the early PS3s that could never have been recouped by software sales. It's not like they have some sort of veto during the design process; or are even necessarily privy to the design process.

Sony's stakeholders want to know how they're going to fix the TV business; since that's the moneysink.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Continuing with onQ123 post and my post :


ConsoleWatch: PlayStation 4 "Orbis" CPU Specs Leak, But Likely Reflect Early Hardware

It's not just about the performance specs but about OpenCL allowing for forward compatibility as well as HSA efficiencies allowing performance within a game console power budget. AMD is also providing OpenCL and C++ next generation libraries to effectively use HSA designs.

If Sony is planning to use AMD hardware in a configuration similar to what IGN describes, we expect the shipping product will almost assuredly at least use Trinity and pair it with a 28nm HD 7000 chip. What's more likely is that the final product will be built around Kaveri; the architecture AMD expects to launch in 2013. Not only would a Kaveri-derived product put Sony on par with what's shipping in the mainstream market, the enhancements coming as part of AMD's Heterogeneous System Architecture would make it much easier for system programmers to exploit the CPU/GPU dynamic to extract maximum parallelism and performance.

So if Fusion designs (CPU-GPU) in the same package with HSA efficiencies are part of next generation consoles then the only economical off the shelf choice (we know about) is AMD. Nvidia is going with ARM-GPU fusion and IBM does not have advanced GPU designs to integrate. Sony can always design a custom fusion chip with huge R&D which I think unlikely, same for Microsoft. Early rumors appear to be supportable given this information we (royal we) did not have. Intel and AMD have a similar roadmap with similar fusion designs but from articles, Intel is not a candidate because they won't release IP for game consoles.

There is interesting talk in VG247's story about abandoned work on a next-generation Cell processor running with 24 SPU co-processors - AMD's APU (400 GPU elements) apx = to 24 SPUs (roughly 1 SPU = 13 GPU elements) but with AMD a larger economy of scale and AMD doing the work in providing libraries. (BUT no backward compatibility.)

If the above rumor is true then Sony is planning features that would need a CPU with 24 SPU co-processors and the AMD APU should be considered a OpenCL enabled CPU. Next generation has been said to be about the GPU with the CPU only needed for physics and AI; 24 SPUs would make for a HUGE CPU...that kind of CPU power could be used for Ray tracing. Should we consider it a foot in the door to a coming in PS5 technology. Edit due to following post: Ray tracing for lighting done in the APU would effectively use that extra power allowing the full 2TFLOPS performance figure for rendering. (Ray tracing for all rendering not just lighting is beyond the power available in the PS4.)

 

[z0m3le]

Continuing with onQ123 post:


ConsoleWatch: PlayStation 4 "Orbis" CPU Specs Leak, But Likely Reflect Early Hardware

It's not just about the performance specs but about OpenCL allowing for forward compatibility as well as HSA efficiencies allowing performance within a game console power budget.

Yep, I agree, though overall performance of the GPU would be shifted away so that the shaders can compute, leaving the main GPU to display the image and that APU's GPU unit to compute... You'd end up with whatever Gflops in the main GPU being the "specs" we think of, and allow developers to tap into the APU's gpu for extra power when needed in either the CPU or GPU field... OpenCL is pretty much the only thing that the PS360 can't really emulate in some way...

Not sure if the specs would change too drastically... at most it would end up 2x faster then the rumored specs, leaving you with the 2tflops people are expecting, but split in a way that is better used for physics and other cool effects, giving the effective Tflops performance at somewhere around 1.5Tflops... blah blah blah, this is probably not effectively communicated so sorry for that... but yes I can see this.

I don't know why you keep talking about investors caring about this or that with loss leading on the PlayStation. This is the fourth consecutive year of losses (which is why they forfeit the tax credits and need to write down that amount) and the Vita exists. The PS4 is under development, and presumably has been for some time.

It's because something like this loss will effect what goes into the PS4, it will need to make money faster, Sony still hasn't closed the wound, so they can still lose business (yes their TV side has lost them 10billion in the past 10 years I think it was, but it's not the only place they are losing, Apple has taken a bite out of Sony too for instance) Basically a lost like this could be the difference between using Trinity or Kaveri.

 

[jimi_dini]

I would be ok with a "under powered" console if they ditch the 5-7 year hardware cycle for a shorter 2 - 3 year incremental cycle.

People that want such thing should just buy a PC. It doesn't make sense to buy a new console just for 2-3 years full of games and then buying new hardware again. Also this situation would make the consoles even worth LESS, because no developer would try to really push the hardware.

Anyway, why stop there? Why not make the consoles upgradeable. Like putting in a new GPU, CPU and more RAM. Oh wait, then you got a PC.

 

[twobear]

Sony is not Nintendo. Their hardware and games have created different set of expectations, their target markets are not necessarily the same, and part of the market that likes Nintendo offerings probably won't ever be convinced to buy a similar Sony offering, simply for there being no Nintendo games on it. What I'm saying is that they can't now try and pretend to be Nintendo, hoping that people would buy their cheaper low-powered box that has Move+some EyetoyKinect thing bundled. By doing that they'd just create a product absolutely no one would be interested in.

I'm pretty sure that if you list the consoles in order from least to most powerful you get a list of the consoles from most to least successful.

Basically all I see is people wanting Sony to push another absurdly expensive console that they make a loss on with each sale just because they can't deal with anything other than the most cutting edge technology available.

From Sony's point of view, I think that's suicide.

 

[i-Lo]

I'm pretty sure that if you list the consoles in order from least to most powerful you get a list of the consoles from most to least successful.

Basically all I see is people wanting Sony to push another absurdly expensive console that they make a loss on with each sale just because they can't deal with anything other than the most cutting edge technology available.

From Sony's point of view, I think that's suicide.

Pushing for power doesn't mean going into the deep red. Vita has proven that. I don't understand why is it so difficult to comprehend that unlike last gen where Blu-ray drive and a bespoke product of massive R&D called Cell were the greatest contributors to manufacturing expenses, this time, Sony would be going for customized versions of existing or their derivative technologies. That pertains to both CPU/APU and GPU. And BD does not cost anywhere as much as it did to make when PS3 was launched.

 

[z0m3le]

Pushing for power doesn't mean going into the deep red. Vita has proven that. I don't understand why is it so difficult to comprehend that unlike last gen where Blu-ray drive and a bespoke product of massive R&D called Cell were the greatest contributors to manufacturing expenses, this time, Sony would be going for customized versions of existing or their derivative technologies. That pertains to both CPU/APU and GPU. And BD does not cost anywhere as much as it did to make when PS3 was launched.

So what do you expect this console's power to be? the early devkit rumor we have here points to 1.2Tflops, given improvements, we could see it increasing by something like 50%, do you think this isn't enough given that PS3's console was capable of .255Tflops?

 

[thuway]

My Recipe for PS4 Success:


1.Release in the Fall of 2014 and pray Microsoft does the same.
2.Use an 8000 or 9000 series AMD GPU with Tahiti level performance and a APU with Cape Verde performance. *By the Fall of 2014, these cards will be more power efficient and abundant.
3.Drop in 4gb of 3D stacked ram.
4.Once again- release in the Fall of 2014.
5.Slap a 49.99 a year PlayStation Plus Subcription.
6.Price at 349.99
7.Drop the PS3 Price down to 199.
8.Release Sony Smash, Little Big Planet, Uncharted, and Guerilla's new IP within the first year.

There is your meal ticket.

 

[z0m3le]

I don't know why people are suggesting anyone wants Sony to take a loss. The PS4 is Sony's gateway to profit.

A $399 system with a 8000 series Pitcairn/Tahiti level GPU and a Cape Verde level APU will make this thing an absolute beast if released in 2014. Slap on a $49.99 a year PlayStation Plus subscription and you have nothing but win.

There is your meal ticket.

It could very well use a Pitcairn level GPU, but that GPU is expensive, even a year from now, it would be quite pricey, it will definitely have an APU, just the benefit of OpenCL makes complete sense to me, but if these specs of the early dev kit is correct, Pitcairn could have been changed out for a weaker GPU, say a theoretical HD8750 which would perform somewhere between a HD7770 and a Hd7850 (Pitcairn)

But yes, the 1.7Tflops that Pitcairn could bring is the upper limit of what I think they are targeting, the APU however wouldn't be a full featured GPU, it would have trinity most likely, which gives it the 7660D somewhere close to 600gflops would be it's limit, but that would mostly be used as an OpenCL, especially early on in the consoles life...

The above specs would be possible, and are in line with what I'm basically saying, IF they were releasing a console in 2014, but they have been saying that they are releasing before Microsoft and we have quite a few rumors that say they are targeting 2013 holiday, besides you don't want to leave Wii U on the market for 2 years by itself, especially if it does hit the rumored 1.2Tflop GPU specs, that could really change Nintendo's tech imagine, which I imagine Sony and MS want them to carry for a few more gen cycles.

 

[Mario007]

My Recipe for PS4 Success:


1.Release in the Fall of 2014 and pray Microsoft does the same.
2.Use an 8000 or 9000 series AMD GPU with Tahiti level performance and a APU with Cape Verde performance. *By the Fall of 2014, these cards will be more power efficient and abundant.
3.Drop in 4gb of 3D stacked ram.
4.Once again- release in the Fall of 2014.
5.Slap a 49.99 a year PlayStation Plus Subcription.
6.Price at 349.99
7.Drop the PS3 Price down to 199.
8.Release Sony Smash, Little Big Planet, Uncharted, and Guerilla's new IP within the first year.

There is your meal ticket.

PS3 will be around 150 by the time PS4 comes. At the end of last year SCEE president kept on talking about how exciting this year will be for PS3 in regards family appeal, as well as mentioning that PS2 took off at 179 pounds so that seems to suggest a price cut this year and/or PS3 Slim proper this year.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

My Recipe for PS4 Success:


1.Release in the Fall of 2014 and pray Microsoft does the same.
2.Use an 8000 or 9000 series AMD GPU with Tahiti level performance and a APU with Cape Verde performance. *By the Fall of 2014, these cards will be more power efficient and abundant.
3.Drop in 4gb of 3D stacked ram.
4.Once again- release in the Fall of 2014.
5.Slap a 49.99 a year PlayStation Plus Subcription.
6.Price at 349.99
7.Drop the PS3 Price down to 199.
8.Release Sony Smash, Little Big Planet, Uncharted, and Guerilla's new IP within the first year.

There is your meal ticket.

You forgot

?
Profit

 

[Log4Girlz]

How many blockbuster exclusives/1st party titles does Sony have anymore? I'm talking about 5-10 million + selling titles? Is it just Gran Turismo?

 

[capslock]

My Recipe for PS4 Success:


1.Release in the Fall of 2014 and pray Microsoft does the same.
2.Use an 8000 or 9000 series AMD GPU with Tahiti level performance and a APU with Cape Verde performance. *By the Fall of 2014, these cards will be more power efficient and abundant.
3.Drop in 4gb of 3D stacked ram.
4.Once again- release in the Fall of 2014.
5.Slap a 49.99 a year PlayStation Plus Subcription.
6.Price at 349.99
7.Drop the PS3 Price down to 199.
8.Release Sony Smash, Little Big Planet, Uncharted, and Guerilla's new IP within the first year.

There is your meal ticket.

Releasing a year later with stronger hardware didn't help the PS3.

 

[jump_button]

Pushing for power doesn't mean going into the deep red. Vita has proven that. I don't understand why is it so difficult to comprehend that unlike last gen where Blu-ray drive and a bespoke product of massive R&D called Cell were the greatest contributors to manufacturing expenses, this time, Sony would be going for customized versions of existing or their derivative technologies. That pertains to both CPU/APU and GPU. And BD does not cost anywhere as much as it did to make when PS3 was launched.

when was that? looks to me like 3DS kicking it ass and Iam a sony/Big N fan really they need the right mix and right now bleeding edge not where can one should be

it all come down to game i dont think any devs want to do bleeding edge in a time where they dont want to take too many risks

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

How many blockbuster exclusives/1st party titles does Sony have anymore? I'm talking about 5-10 million + selling titles? Is it just Gran Turismo?

Uncharted, God of War, Gran Turismo.

 

[capslock]

I feel you bro. I am only 5' and so I know. I'll never be as "urbane and tall" as Hirai.

GDDR3 - 512MB

Still seems an odd comment. Why would the CEO's heigh, "urbaneness" and English matter?

Stringer's height hasn't helped much.

Iwata's short and speaks heavily accented English.

 

[i-Lo]

when was that? looks to me like 3DS kicking it ass and Iam a sony/Big N fan really they need the right mix and right now bleeding edge not where can one should be

it all come down to game i dont think any devs want to do bleeding edge in a time where they dont want to take too many risks

I am not talking about the sales volume rather that they aren't selling every unit at loss like they did with PS3 for a year or two after launch.