But at the same time, it isn't like consoles get updated every year like iProducts do (and many keep their iProducts for 2-3 years before upgrading to a new one or something different). So again, I don't see why it's so bad that some people would rather wait when it comes to consoles.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Sony on PS4: "We've never been first [or] cheapest. It's about being the best."
- Thread starter PaulLFC
- Start date
But at the same time, it isn't like consoles get updated every year like iProducts do (and many keep their iProducts for 2-3 years before upgrading to a new one or something different). So again, I don't see why it's so bad that some people would rather wait when it comes to consoles.
ThatStupidLion
Member
"Ideally, in a perfect world, you want the best machine that ships first that's cheapest. But the number one goal is to be the best machine and that's what we're always focused on."
so basically xbox? damnit sony, im pulling for you to stay alive but come on. honestly i woulndt mind sony keeping up the ps3 support as they introduce ps4
so basically xbox? damnit sony, im pulling for you to stay alive but come on. honestly i woulndt mind sony keeping up the ps3 support as they introduce ps4
The what? Rumors usually have some basis of info behind them, even if it isn't dead on. I'd like to see them release a high spec system and go against the rumors. I think they need to if they want to markedly differentiate themselves with hardware. They were far too similar this gen, making it redundant to own both.
SolsticeZero
Banned
They did for PS2, so I can see them doing it for PS3 also
-Pyromaniac-
Member
either MS takes a big hit, or it won't be sold for less?
That and stupid contract thing they have going on.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Am I reading this right? The consoles that don't even exist yet last twice as long as the ones we have now, and have more features?
I completely agree. And I'm glad they do this because I bought my PS3 5 years ago and I'm still getting mileage out of it. Games like Last of Us are still blowing my mind in terms of graphical capability with this thing, and I'm still getting games out of it. And it was the first thing I owned that could play almost all my media in one spot. I love it. Sure it was an expensive decision at the time, but it's more than paid off.
If they can wait a bit longer and maybe even get better components for cheaper to make a cheaper powerful console, I'd like that even more.
If they can wait a bit longer and maybe even get better components for cheaper to make a cheaper powerful console, I'd like that even more.
SolsticeZero
Banned
Didn't you know, man? Everyone on the internet knows exactly how the next console generation is gonna play out! It's like they have some god damned crystal balls or some shit.
iNvid02
Member
my situation has changed, i game primarily on my PC now and nearly all my favourite series are multiplatform, bar the few exclusives sony and microsoft have (right now they are the only reason i haven't sold my console).
to be able to enjoy those odd exclusives i'd be willing to spend £200 on the console, maybe £250 if something is bundled in - but north of that and i'll keep playing on my pc, and wait a few years for a price cut
i can see the PS4 coming in at £350
to be able to enjoy those odd exclusives i'd be willing to spend £200 on the console, maybe £250 if something is bundled in - but north of that and i'll keep playing on my pc, and wait a few years for a price cut
i can see the PS4 coming in at £350
I don't mind them going for another high tech route, but they need to ensure that dev tools, OS implementation, and features are up to snuff come launch time. They need to at least have things working as smoothly as the competition. It doesn't matter to me whether the theoretical power is greater when the majority of software coming out doesn't seem to support that claim.
MrCunningham
Member
Nintendo - pulling another Wii with Wii U
Sony - "We don't need cheaper hardware than MS. Let them go first."
It's like these two companies are living in Groundhog Day. But instead of repeating the same actions day by day, they're both stuck in a 6 year loop.
But where does this leave MS?
Sony - "We don't need cheaper hardware than MS. Let them go first."
It's like these two companies are living in Groundhog Day. But instead of repeating the same actions day by day, they're both stuck in a 6 year loop.
But where does this leave MS?
Only way that's happening is if kinect 2.0 is optional.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
I was referencing that the 360 and PS3 do way more now then they did at launch.
A 360 is now an entertainment hub of the living room. Encompassing Movies, TV, Music, Games, and Web..
In 2005 this was not the case, but we still bought into the $400.00 price.
Are you implying that the Xbox 720 will suddenly remove all these features?
That is an idiotic viewpoint.
And yes, the 360 lasted much longer than anyone at launch expected. The majority of people in line to buy a 360 premium at launch in 2005 for $400, assumed they would be doing it again in 2010 at the latest. This gen lasted way longer than that.
It is only logical to assume that Next gen will last even longer, because they now know how to make consoles even more "future proof" and updateable via firmware and such.
The next gen will last 10 years before the iteration after that is released. No reason for it not to.
I honestly have zero problem with Sony charging $499 for their console. It will sell virtually every single unit the first year. If they were smarter, however, they would launch at $449 with $50 subscription to PlayStation Plus.
The bigger question is how can Sony capsize Vita costs so it becomes the PlayStation's facsimile of the Wii U Tablet.
EDIT:
THE BIGGEST question is can Sony find a GPU/architecture that is suitable for a next generation console and won't burn the house down? I want GTX 680 performance, but I'm not delusional either
. The damn high end PC's these companies are building tech demos on are running GTX 690s for sure.
The bigger question is how can Sony capsize Vita costs so it becomes the PlayStation's facsimile of the Wii U Tablet.
EDIT:
THE BIGGEST question is can Sony find a GPU/architecture that is suitable for a next generation console and won't burn the house down? I want GTX 680 performance, but I'm not delusional either
. The damn high end PC's these companies are building tech demos on are running GTX 690s for sure.SolidSnakex
Member
It seems that people still refuse to take into account the cost of the Blu-ray when talking about the PS3's original price. Even at $600 it was the cheapest and best BR player on the market. They aren't going to be dropping BR for the PS4, so they aren't going to be adding that heavy price onto the PS4. It's certainly possible to build a very powerful machine without a $500+ pricetag.
Anyway, this is great news. The reality is that Sony's biggest franchises rely a lot on having fantastic tech behind them. They can't abandon that now.
Anyway, this is great news. The reality is that Sony's biggest franchises rely a lot on having fantastic tech behind them. They can't abandon that now.
I don't have a problem with the quote in the OP. And yes, it does sound very similar to what Sony's said in the past.
As far as predictions go, I expect the next Xbox in mid-2013 and PS4 in Q4 2013. Both being priced around $400, and possibly a $200 subsidized SKU with a 2yr contract (like cell phones).
Indeed. Seems like he rushed to post the best PS3 screenshot he could find without realizing what it actually represents.
As far as predictions go, I expect the next Xbox in mid-2013 and PS4 in Q4 2013. Both being priced around $400, and possibly a $200 subsidized SKU with a 2yr contract (like cell phones).
Indeed. Seems like he rushed to post the best PS3 screenshot he could find without realizing what it actually represents.
Fuck I keep forgetting about this. That's going to dig into graphics hardware budget.
I've said this for years. Even just recently.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=38429442&postcount=152
As long as I've been buying electronics I've never known sony products as being cheap. And this gen in many ways started off for sony the same way the ps2 started off as far as negative forum and stock articles.
Sony's mistakes were elsewhere. lack of ram, lack of online vision, focusing and funding the wrong titles (the millions that went into killzone should have gone into a proper socom), lack of developer tools and developer relationships.
Had that all been in place things would be different. Even after the ps3 price and developer difficulty MS still had to pay developers to get those exclusives into multiplatform status. The name playstation still held weight even at $599/$499.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=38429442&postcount=152
As long as I've been buying electronics I've never known sony products as being cheap. And this gen in many ways started off for sony the same way the ps2 started off as far as negative forum and stock articles.
Sony's mistakes were elsewhere. lack of ram, lack of online vision, focusing and funding the wrong titles (the millions that went into killzone should have gone into a proper socom), lack of developer tools and developer relationships.
Had that all been in place things would be different. Even after the ps3 price and developer difficulty MS still had to pay developers to get those exclusives into multiplatform status. The name playstation still held weight even at $599/$499.
This couldn't be any truer. In order to effectively have a fighting chance next generation Sony needs to make sure all bases are covered. I would really like them to take a no-nonsense approach to the console for the hardcore gamer. Give me the console, a wired headset, and that't it. I should have the option to buy any "gimmicky" add-on camera/wand/tablet.
Absolutely true. Well Said
Nintendo - pulling another Wii with Wii U
Sony - "We don't need cheaper hardware than MS. Let them go first."
It's like these two companies are living in Groundhog Day. But instead of repeating the same actions day by day, they're both stuck in a 6 year loop.
But where does this leave MS?
Xbox Bing.
seattle6418
Member
That´s all people wanted here ever since the PS3 was announced.
If you look at the cold hard facts, the PS3 started off badly but made a 180 and now is an asset to a struggling Sony.
Repeating PS2 was just not possible. Even if they didn´t had screwed up on anything, the price was right and all, they would sell 140 million units and have 70% of the market share.
Microsoft was a really strong competitor and they would gain ground no matter what. It would be impossible to think they could mantain the marketshare. Same goes for the Wii. Nintendo created a niche for themselves and ended up doing something new, of course they gained marketshare.
PS2 had no real competition. Gamecube was a turd, Microsoft was just getting started and Sega... was Sega. Easy to have the market for yourself this way.
Everybody inside the industry knew this current gen would be much more equal. Sure they dropped the ball with the bluray delay and pricetag, but in the long term, this would be what? 20-25 million different?
It wouldn´t change as much as some here believe, like they had the whole market for themselves and just gave it away due to being stupid.
In a sense, the same crowd that says "Sony went from having 70% of the market to having 30%, they are dumb, stupid and will go bankrupt" are the same ones that say the PSP was a failure, despite having 35% of the handheld market, compared to the 0% they had before.
The whole process of analyzing sucess and the transition between PS2 and PS3 leads many to believe in a series of BS.
People were mad at them for killing Dreamcast, all the bullshit from the 2005 E3 press conferences, and for shoving Blu-ray down our throats.
I'm sure people hate them for other things too.
Hey I wasn't too thrilled about any of that either, but I have a PS3 and I'm happy with it.
I really need to play Metal Gear Solid 4! In the end I got the PS3 as a gift.
I know it wasn't required to buy all the following 360 accessories but 599$ for what was included in the launch PS3(HDMI, 60GB, Wireless, Blu-Ray) is very impressive compared to the launch 360 ($399, 20 GB, no HDMI), Wireless Adapter(60$, 100$?), and HD DVD adapter ($199).
I respect Sony for that a lot. It cost them a larger market share, but I respect them for giving all of that at reasonable price despite the fact that 599$ sounds bad.
I respect Sony for that a lot. It cost them a larger market share, but I respect them for giving all of that at reasonable price despite the fact that 599$ sounds bad.
SirButterstick
Banned
I'm so happy I went back to PC gaming.
I'm so happy for you too. Awww.
Oh no now we're stuck in the six year loop!
Steve Youngblood
Member
I'm pretty sure a sense of sanity ultimately prevailed so as to conclude that, loss or no, $599 was already really expensive by console standards and anything more than that would have been absolutely insane. I don't necessarily know why they deserve respect for that. They certainly weren't being charitable with that price.
Ultimately, I agree though that -- if you wanted all of those features -- then $599 for that hardware wasn't a bad deal. However, at the time, the market responded resoundingly that they did not, in fact, desire all of those features.
And heck they even took out features. Two Ethernet ports? Two HDMI ports? 2005 was a crazy time.
2006 we were brought back down to earth with giant enemy crabs.
Yeah sure, you got good value, but the company was also really full of shit in my opinion. (at the time anyway)
It's cool , I enjoy the system now.
Is something wrong with what I said?
My point is back then, at the price everyone still mocks to this day, that was a really damn good piece of hardware and worth the price.
I live in 2012 where Microsoft hit Sony hard, HD DVD is dead, wireless and HDMI are included in the 360, both consoles have better hard drive capacities, etc.
SolsticeZero
Banned
Companies in worse positions have come back. And Sony is a major company. What they really need to do to save money is drop their TV line. That's where they're really being hit hard.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
But it's not all about art either. The PS3 is a powerful console considering that it came out in 2006.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Everything you mentioned wasn't required to play games. They were extras and not everyone needed everything or anything.
Th biggest disappointment for me was that even at $599, the PS3 wouldn't work on my 1080i only HDTV where as the 360 did in 2005 and still does today. There was no add on for the PS3 I could have bought.
Vermillion
Banned
...Wasn't the raging success of PS2 due to the exact opposite parameters?
There's nothing wrong with what you said. I thought it was funny that someone a few post earlier mentioned Sony and Nintendo were in a six year loop, and then I read your post and it reminded me of all the cost comparisons repeated ad nauseam back then.
Punchpudding
Member
The PS3 filled the spot that the original Xbox filled (higher end, hardcore) and all marketing talk coming out from Sony will always be along the lines of "That's what we meant to do all along". Whatever happens next gen will be similarly explained... it doesn't mean that's how they actually want things to turn out.
Anyone think Sony wouldn't mind switching places with MS right now? I think they would do it in a heartbeat.
Anyone think Sony wouldn't mind switching places with MS right now? I think they would do it in a heartbeat.
PS2 was hyped to be the most powerful super computer in the world. And..it could play DVDs!
Hey it worked.
The next time around....not so much.
Sony is in trouble if they think this will be a recipe for success. Even if the PS3 and the 360 are now head2head worldwide even with a one-year head start by the 360, the 360 is dominant in the US and hence has become the lead platform for western games. Heck, the 360 is selling much better than the PS3 even without MS developing any first party games anymore. And Sony has to use 360 screenshots and trailers for their blog on a couple of 3rd party games (shameful).
And even if the PS3 is the best console, the 360 is easier to develop for and being the lead platform and giving PS3 only ports means that most multi-platform games look better on the 360. So the average user probably does not think the PS3 is superior.
The PS4 needs to release at the same time as the 360 and be similar priced. Otherwise Microsoft will just release the console, Halo 5 and Gears of War 5 and the latest Madden and CoD and will be already a couple of million ahead of the PS4 in the US.
At least it seems like the PS4 will be easier to develop for, if rumors are true.
And even if the PS3 is the best console, the 360 is easier to develop for and being the lead platform and giving PS3 only ports means that most multi-platform games look better on the 360. So the average user probably does not think the PS3 is superior.
The PS4 needs to release at the same time as the 360 and be similar priced. Otherwise Microsoft will just release the console, Halo 5 and Gears of War 5 and the latest Madden and CoD and will be already a couple of million ahead of the PS4 in the US.
At least it seems like the PS4 will be easier to develop for, if rumors are true.
I agree the market didn't want to spend that much back then, no one knew blu-ray would win, a lot don't care about blu-ray now, I just have a lot of respect for a launch console being so amazingly future proof at a price that was definitely reasonable.
It's a shame that making something that would literally last the whole life span of the PS3 without buying a revision hurt them so much.
A lot of manufacturers take advantage and rely on revisions to pump more life into the platform, even Sony with the PSP.
We all expect a 3DS revision. We all wanted a Wii HD(Wii 1.5) before the Wii U.
Edit: I guess mobile devices need more revisions to upgrade the screens, but yeah.
Lion Heart
Banned
You mean going forward into next gen? Nah, Sony has better worldwide support, they just have to regain the US, heck they just have to be even in the US and will sell more worldwide.
professor_t
Member
As exemplified by the introduction of Move.
Okay, I don't want to be a dick, but let's not pretend anything is about guts or "caring about true gamers" among companies that report to shareholders. They want to be successful as a business operation. Period.
I do like my PS3, but how is it any more future proof than the 360 other than the ability to play Blu-rays? Despite GAF's hatred for MS' revamp of the dashboard and Kinect, they were able to radically change their platform mid-gen and increase it's functionality.
I believe the PS4 and 720 will both be powerful consoles, and it's pretty obvious that both will be the go to platforms for the "hardcore" games. I imagine at least one (if not both) will have a $399 launch price for one SKU with another either $499 or $599.
Honestly, people who have trouble spending $500 are weak sauce. Yes, the job market sucks... but guess what, where there is a will there is a way. I just spent $590 on a force feedback wheel for racing simulators (Fanatec CSW). I sold my paintball guns, did some side jobs (even though I do not currently have a full time job), and I came up with the money in 2 months (still being able live and pay college bills). It is hard, but it can be done. Cut lawns/landscaping, do office work, whatever.
That being said, I think Sony will face a media shit storm if it is $500. $400-450 is a much safer bet. Really, all they have to do is match within $50 whatever MS is doing. As long as the can accomplish this, I think they will be safe.
That being said, I think Sony will face a media shit storm if it is $500. $400-450 is a much safer bet. Really, all they have to do is match within $50 whatever MS is doing. As long as the can accomplish this, I think they will be safe.
God damn Kutaragi was right.
edit: PS3: "for consumers to think to themselves 'I will work more hours to buy one'. We want people to feel that they want it, irrespective of anything else.
I can't wait for 720 and PS4 but I'm just looking at the launch PS3 vs launch 360. Let's say in 5 years you find a launch ps3 and a lunch 360 in the original packaging. Only one is able plug into your TV with an HDMI, play blu-ray, use a cheap high capacity hard drive from new egg, and connect to the internet wirelessly. And the original price was reasonable.
I respect that foresight even tho it hurt them badly.
And again, I know the market didn't give a hell about future proofed hardware, it was just great hardware for the price. And I love great hardware.
The current 360 is great hardware no doubt.
Similar threads
- Poll