Nope.
So the PS2 BC really didn't cost much at all. $27. Hopefully this will quiet all the people who said they removed BC to cut costs. It must even be cheaper now, they should make a new PS3 sku that has the BC put back in.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Sony originally wanted to include camera at $399
- Thread starter artist
- Start date
So the PS2 BC really didn't cost much at all. $27. Hopefully this will quiet all the people who said they removed BC to cut costs. It must even be cheaper now, they should make a new PS3 sku that has the BC put back in.
PaulKersey
Member
I agree 399 is a great price. I am super excited to get mine. Just saying I'd rather not be forced to get a camera and would rather have a lower price of entry.
Opus Angelorum
Member
It would have been interesting for sure.
The effort put into this gif is staggering, kudos to the creator.
$27 is a lot of money, actually.
They even removed the sd card slots, they cut everything they could.
Yeah, nah.
The PS3 is no good example.
Something that is never used is inherently a zero-value proposition, hence the resistance toward Kinect in the Xbone package.
I would expect the PS4 camera to be bundled in as the first "price drop". This way maybe the first 10M don't have the camera standard but everyone else will, and with compelling software they could be able to coax the first 10M people who are early adopters and have no problem paying for tech, to spring for that camera.
Opus Angelorum
Member
It shows they have learned, greatly.
SolidSnakex
Member
They lost hundreds of dollars per PS3. Now they're losing less than a hundred. I'd say that's a big difference and it shows that they've learned.
If you're going to make a powerful console then you're going to lose money per unit if you're going to try to target a mainstream audience, but the key is to lose as little as possible.
Don't forget the PS2's CPU & GPU were also in the launch PS3, which definitely drove up the cost.
ebullientprism
Member
I am not saying they wanted to go with 499. I am saying they would have been under more pressure to include the camera @399 if MS had priced the X1 @399.
If they could afford it, it would have been free, so it would have still been the right choice.
Yes, but not the chip per se, they've invested 4 billion $ afair, into R&D
With 80 millions sold, it's about 50 bucks per console.
No money wasted like that this time.
Nope.
I think it's also a good strategic decision not to include it as well as a financial one:
They knew the camera wouldn't be as good as the Kinect 2. By not including it, they are basically encouraging every multiplatform dev to treat camera-specific features as low-priority 'bonus' content, thus severely diminishing the value of the Xbox One's differentiator.
They knew the camera wouldn't be as good as the Kinect 2. By not including it, they are basically encouraging every multiplatform dev to treat camera-specific features as low-priority 'bonus' content, thus severely diminishing the value of the Xbox One's differentiator.
bleachrude
Banned
So you're saying that developers are going to basically develop for the least common denominator?
Er..wouldn't that ALSO apply to graphics and actual games with regard to the PS4 and Xboxone?
How is this a good thing?
killatopak
Member
Good choice,
Pirzolaman
Banned
"...but pressure from above..."
You are the man Kaz, you are the man.
You are the man Kaz, you are the man.
BeastLeeAdams
Banned
Im calling BS.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
I'll likely never use the camera.
They were locked in at that point, it's not like the Xbone conference was two days before for them to do any last minute changes.
HammerOfThor
Member
If they included the camera everyone would have just been like "boo take out the camera and make it $349" or something.
That's just the estimate for the chip.
Having it in there required a lot of motherboard real estate too.
Taking it out simplified and shrank the motherboard significantly IIRC. So the knock on effect on cost was beyond just the cost of the GS or GS/EE chip.
Sort of like the WiiU gamepad?
And piss off customers in the process?
Free? What?
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Yep same here.
No it's not free - that's money that won't be invested into games by Sony...
Makes sense - they'll either leave the camera out depending on how the market goes or start bundling it in when they get HW costs down a notch at some later point.
I mean I obviously wouldn't care if the camera was in there if the price didn't change but it they had to make choices I'd rather it was out vs any other option.
I mean I obviously wouldn't care if the camera was in there if the price didn't change but it they had to make choices I'd rather it was out vs any other option.
um, yes, that's how it's always been; not a lot of effort is going to go into something that's exclusive to a version, unless it's additional paid content (like exclusive DLC or something). I'm not saying it's a good thing for customers, I'm saying it's a known practice that makes sense so there might be more behind the choice not to include the camera than just costs.
Spartacus073
Neo Member
As were a lot of people and that is why Microsoft dropped that requirement. Now it is just included with every XB1 sold.
Takamura-San
Member
Glad they didn't.
No matter what. Even if it was free or not. People would argue that they would rather have the machine cheaper than have the camera.
Basically is just asking the internet for "Take the camera out and make the system $349". Even if the camera is free.
No matter what. Even if it was free or not. People would argue that they would rather have the machine cheaper than have the camera.
Basically is just asking the internet for "Take the camera out and make the system $349". Even if the camera is free.
SkoomaSuckinSwit
Member
I wonder how many Kinect 2.0 devices will be on eBay once the XboxOne releases?
The machine will still function without it, right?
If a person could fetch $150 for the sophisticated NSA/advertising device, it would make the XboxOne a more attractive deal.
(Not saying I'm buying one, but if someone were to gift it to me for Xmas for instance.)
It would still be underpowered compared to PS4, and there's still the fact that XBL isn't as rewarding as PS+.
But then I'd still get to play CoD with all my XBL cronies, enjoy Titanfall now and not later, not to mention try out that sweet headset & lighter controller.
The machine will still function without it, right?
If a person could fetch $150 for the sophisticated NSA/advertising device, it would make the XboxOne a more attractive deal.
(Not saying I'm buying one, but if someone were to gift it to me for Xmas for instance.)
It would still be underpowered compared to PS4, and there's still the fact that XBL isn't as rewarding as PS+.
But then I'd still get to play CoD with all my XBL cronies, enjoy Titanfall now and not later, not to mention try out that sweet headset & lighter controller.
I'd assume none - unless people start selling the X1 piece meal after launch, lol.
Why would anyone buy it if they didn't already have an Xbox One (that comes with a Kinect) ?
PoweredBySoy
Banned
But we have yet to see any significant gameplay feature that uses a camera. It's either gimmicky, tacked on bullshit or Dance Dance Something....
As a gamer who spends a lot of money on gaming stuff, I have no desire for a camera on my console.
Even if the beloved Sony included a camera, there would be the cry of a thousand fanboys that would be saying "take it out and make it $350! consumer choice! some other trendy thing that makes sense of me wanting to spend less!"
Me too, the hardcore guys that don't want a camera on launch and will buy it day 1 have the option. But after a few months/years it can be mandatory and then devs can focus on it because of the wider (Casual?) audience.
Sony have made all the right moves imo.
Maybe, but maybe they'd look at the xb1 at $499 and go "wtf?" and realize it was actually free for the consumer and not just a hidden cost.
Suzushiiro
Banned
More generally speaking I think they'd have been pressured to throw the camera in and take the hit to maintain parity with Xbone's Kinect if they thought Xbone was going to be a bigger threat- Kinect is almost certainly why they were even considering throwing it in in the first place. But then MS started doing everything wrong between February and E3, so Sony decided they didn't need it.
The price difference certainly justifies the decision, though- had they dropped the camera and Xbone was the same price, they'd have created the impression that Xbone offered more for your money. With Xbone being $100 more the narrative has become that MS is charging $100 for a peripheral that most people (most of the day-1 buyer crowd, at least) don't care about.
you're speaking rationally. i don't expect that from 99% of people.