The performance increases really won't be worth the difference in costs really. They have pretty much maxed out the potential of the 360 and PS3, so new hardware is just going to allow for more headroom development wise and will put less strain on the graphics processing early on. I really can't see them advancing hardware too much without risking extremely high costs to consumers. Sony certainly won't take that risk unless they know what is good for them, but both companies need to be looking at releasing new consoles in the 300-450 dollar price range if they expect to sell units at launch.
Where have you been when they released the PS3, or the PS2 for that matter? (20GB for $499, 60GB for $599 for the PS3, $299 for the PS2, which now doesn't seem much but back then it was *alot* to ask for)
Myyyyeeeaaah, depends on the features, really. If the 60GB PS3's sold for $600 then whatever they'll pack into the PS4 will sell too. Maybe not at launch, but eventually it will.
Well Sony has come a long way from the release of the PS3.
Second and Third Party (which develop exclusively for Sony plats)
Sanzaru Games - Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time
Eat Sleep Play - Twisted Metal
ThatGameCompany - Journey (PSN)
Giant Sparrow - The Unfinished Swan (PSN)
Developer TBA - Until Dawn (unannounced)
Ready At Dawn - Unannounced Title
Quantic Dream - Two unannounced Titles
Tarsier Studios - Exclusive 1st party agreement. Currently working on LittleBigPlanet Vita and other projects
Novarama Studios - Exclusive 1st party agreement. Reality Fighters and other titles.
Minority - Papo and Yo (PSN)
Armature Studios - Unannounced Project
Superbot Entertainment - PlayStation Title Fight (unannounced)
Double Eleven - LittleBigPlanet Vita
Lightbox Interactive - Starhawk
The Workshop - Sorcery
Nihilistic - Resistance: Burning Skies
Q Games - PixelJunk 4 A.M, other Pixeljunk titles
Idol Minds - Ruin
Fun Bits - Escape Plan
Mass Media Inc - Jak & Daxter HD Collection
HouseMarque - SuperStardust Delta
HoneySlug - Frobisher Says
Queasy Games - Sound Shapes
Studio Cambridge - Killzone Vita
Naughty Dog - The Last of Us
SCEJ Studio Japan - Gravity Daze/Rush
Team ICO - The Last Guardian
San Diego Studios - MLB: The Show, Modnation Racers: Road Trip
Zipper Interactive - Unit 13
Studio Liverpool - WipEout 2098
Evolution Studios - MotorStorm R.C
Guerilla Games Team 1
Guerilla Games Team 2
Naughty Dog (Uncharted Team)
Polyphony Digital
Evolution Studios (Main team)
Media Molecule
Santa Monica (GOW Team)
Zipper Interactive (PS3 team)
Sucker Punch Productions
Studio London
BigBig Studios
While Microsoft is busy practically ruining their second parties, Sony is going quite well.
I should have added that I'm a PS3/PSP owner, and rather than no games said "less games than what microsoft/nintendo has to offer".
PS3 has indeed now tons of excellent games, but still I find myself more playing with my NDS/3DS/Wii than my PS3/PSP recently.
I think there a lot of issues in this comment, but I will point out...
Nintendo is only a game company unlike Microsoft and Sony, and really I didn't see that benefiting them in the long run unless you mean
selling old games on other hardware like Sony is doing.
Even then the more things the giving product has that they couldn't get anywhere else (at least legit wise) the more
people want that product. Some would be like, why get the Next PS and Nintendo when I possible can just get
both on another hardware.
It kind like asking Sony to put Uncharted, GOW ,Jak & Daxter,etc on other platforms.
Some people buy certain hardware for exclusives. If they just throw
around their "exclusives" all around then it is most likely Nintendo
hardware sells will go down.
You pretty much saying they should go 3rd party.(Why them and not Sony and Microsoft
(I could say, "image support swinging more to Nintendo with less competition and their
new hardware.)
I whether not have that happen since really, they are the only ones fighting the Norm
and they said it themselves, if they go down, everything goes down with them.
(I didn't see that happening anytime soon.)
I personally don't care much about power. I care more about the games.
So far, Sony hasn't much disappointed me.
So far, Sony hasn't much disappointed me.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2009
- Messages
- 8,504
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 32
- Location
- London
- Website
- gbatemp.net
- XP
- 13,315
- Country
-
While it certainly wouldn't happen (the whole "multiplat" thing) due to one company wanting hardware sales more than software sales, one can dream.
As for Uncharted and such, at least when I buy them I also get like all the PS3/Xbox 360 multiplats. When you buy a Wii you basically are out of luck when it comes to all those multiplats. Sure, you get some of them, but they're mostly shitty downports.
Also, what is "the norm"? Call of Duty gamers? App games? Casual gamers? How is Nintendo "fighting" this? They still get CoD games on their platforms. What stopps eShop or WiiWare games from being labeled as "app games"? And they have been pandering to the casual audience for this whole generation. Even then, what makes the "norm" so bad? Maybe the norm has been like the last two generations, where consoles have generally focused on graphical and feature upgrades than on fiddling with the controls, back when "innovation" actually meant "do shit with your games" instead of "use a motion controller". Is that necessarily a bad "norm"? People rave over N64 games and PSX games. The PS2 is the best selling console of all time and the Xbox introduced a welcome feature of strong online gaming, and people go on about Gamecube games like Metroid Prime and Wind Waker. How is that bad? It's not like gaming was in a "Great Depression" where everything sucked, it was strong and really didn't need fixing.
Now look what we have. Companies are focusing so much on this "casual" or "broad" audience that they're dumping resources into stupid peripherals like the Move and Kinect. What happens if this whole "underpowered Wii" thing becomes a norm? Do you really want stagnation in graphical power? I'm sorry, but improvement in graphics is welcome, hell it's even expected. More power doesn't just mean better graphics. This "norm" of focusing on stupid controllers could just lead to a step back in everything else. Imagine if those resources were dumped into game design or console design. I hear so many people say that "gaming is in decline", and it wouldn't be all that wrong to point a finger at Nintendo as a culprit. They still make some great software but they really have some shit hardware design that basically cuts off a lifeline to a huge part of gaming now. So basically I'm stuck with "HD gaming" or "Nintendo gaming", except HD gaming is much larger. Mario and Zelda don't make up for tons of great HD titles, not at all.
D
Deleted_171835
Guest
OP
I fail to see the logic in your reasoning that exclusive titles are "ridiculous". Exclusive IPs give people a reason to buy one console over another. Do you really think the Wii or the DS would have sold so much if Pokemon or Mario was on the PSP and 360?
This doesn't just apply to Nintendo. It would be a cold day in hell before Sony releases a God of War game for the 360 or before Microsoft allows Bungie to release a Halo game for the 3DS. These games give people a reason to buy their respective consoles. It isn't just some superstition from the 80's that Nintendo clings to, it's standard industry practise.
The Playstation Suite only applies to devices made by Sony so they would still be making money off the software and hardware while providing a selling-point for their devices. Microsoft only releases some of their exclusive games on their Games for Windows Live platform so you're still tied down to their services. None of the aforementioned examples allow you to play said games on a competitors platform or service.
If Nintendo makes Smash Bros or Pokemon multiplatform, that would be an insanely stupid business decision that quite frankly, could potentially ruin the company. There are tons of people that buy Nintendo consoles solely because of the exclusive games. If they go multiplatform, what else will motivate them to purchase a Nintendo console? The platform's merits?
This is just a bunch of wishful thinking.
I agree that certain titles are the selling point of given consoles, I just dislike the practice. Halo was actually going to be released for the DS from what I remember.
Thing is, a hardware developer (in my honest opinion) should try to release consoles that are up-to-par, not "just rely on their IP's to sell them". I only mentioned Nintendo because it specifically applies to them moreso than other companies - their consoles (especially portables) tend to be "a generation backwards" compared to the competitors. Do I think that the DS or the Wii would sell if not for exclusive IP's? I think they wouldn't sell nearly as well - that is exactly my point.
Perhaps my thinking is "wishful", I tend to daydream like that from time to time.
What I meant about the PlayStation suite was that it extends the support of *some* products towards the *Android userbase* rather than any specific product owners. They're trying to reach different markets, experiment.
Thing is, a hardware developer (in my honest opinion) should try to release consoles that are up-to-par, not "just rely on their IP's to sell them". I only mentioned Nintendo because it specifically applies to them moreso than other companies - their consoles (especially portables) tend to be "a generation backwards" compared to the competitors. Do I think that the DS or the Wii would sell if not for exclusive IP's? I think they wouldn't sell nearly as well - that is exactly my point.
Perhaps my thinking is "wishful", I tend to daydream like that from time to time.
What I meant about the PlayStation suite was that it extends the support of *some* products towards the *Android userbase* rather than any specific product owners. They're trying to reach different markets, experiment.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 5,480
- Trophies
- 2
- Location
- Sacramento, California
- Website
- lazerlight.x10.mx
- XP
- 5,212
- Country
-
Funny you should mention experimenting in different markets, because isn't that what the Wii and DS has done with the different way of playing games? Microsoft and Sony may be experimenting their stuff on non Microsoft/Sony products with the same method of play, but Nintendo experiments with its own products for different ways to play, which in turn has led the other two companies to follow in their steps. As much as they, by your words, are "generation backwards", it seems many people don't really care, considering the success they had with inferior hardware because it really is about the games. Perhaps I should say games in conjunction with how they are played on the hardware, because from what I've seen since at least the N64 days, Nintendo doesn't just develop games around hardware, but they have also developed hardware around games a number of times. The N64 controller was originally designed without an analog stick, but development of SM64 proved that the D-Pad just wasn't enough, so the stick was added. You've got the DS with two screens with one being touch-sensitive, and the Wii with motion controls. The GC and GBA originally were going to be 3D-capable, but stepping into territory too early has its disadvantages. With doing both hardware and software, they have the flexibility to tailor games/hardware to what they feel should be done, and it has worked well for them so far. In all honesty, if Nintendo were to only make software, I feel their games would not have the same kind of tailoring that would hold up as well as they have with them making games and hardware.
Now, someone may say that Nintendo is out of touch and is doing things wrong from their standpoint, and while many people may voice that same opinion, those people are the minority as based on numbers, as people who are content have no need to make their voices heard. Same goes for people voicing their distaste with Sony or Microsoft.
EDIT
To go back on topic here, shouldn't there be a link to the source claiming the PS4 to be more powerful than the XB720? Now, I wouldn't put it past Sony to have a system more powerful than Microsoft's own offering, but that could be because Microsoft wants to stick with Kinect and their own motion-control gaming. R&D can take a plentiful amount of resources, so shifting some resources from one aspect to another can leave that former aspect with not as much to work with. Will the PS4 have its own other offering other than being technically more powerful? Will they continue with the PS Move?
In today's economy, anything over 450 won't sell well gaming wise. The PS3 launch was evidence enough that people couldn't justify those costs, especially when the console lacked a good launch window lineup of games as well. If the PS Vita and 3DS sales are any indication of what the market is currently willing to bear in terms of pricing, Sony and Microsoft will have to release their consoles below 500 dollars if they expect to move units.
Sorry but this all " PS4 to be more powerful than the XB720 " is so silly.
First of all, they don't even remotely exist.
And are you aware that the average human being can't tell the difference between and xbox360/PS3 games today ?
I mean by just looking at a video of a game ( without cheating by looking at action commands on screen like ABXY or XO[]/\ and so on ) do you think that the average person would be able to tell which one is which ?
The point is that only morons would care if one is slightly more powerful then the other, because in the end, we'll be playing " the same fucking games " as somebody else uncannily pointed a few posts ago.
Stop the madness.
On the Wii exclusives versus multi plat games and which is better and what not, I would say that Nintendo were always ahead or at least competitive in every generation before the Wii.
They just screw it up a little bit with the Wii ( which never the less has been the leading system at least sells wise ) because back in 2006 not everybody had HD TVs and they thought people would stick with SD TVs a few more years therefore made an SD system, that's all.
Now they are rectifying that mistake with the Wii U and will be back on track with the other console makers.
Rest assured, that whatever game will be produced in the next gen will be virtually identical on all three major systems, so bitching about the better Graphics won't get you anywere this time.
First of all, they don't even remotely exist.
And are you aware that the average human being can't tell the difference between and xbox360/PS3 games today ?
I mean by just looking at a video of a game ( without cheating by looking at action commands on screen like ABXY or XO[]/\ and so on ) do you think that the average person would be able to tell which one is which ?
The point is that only morons would care if one is slightly more powerful then the other, because in the end, we'll be playing " the same fucking games " as somebody else uncannily pointed a few posts ago.
Stop the madness.
On the Wii exclusives versus multi plat games and which is better and what not, I would say that Nintendo were always ahead or at least competitive in every generation before the Wii.
They just screw it up a little bit with the Wii ( which never the less has been the leading system at least sells wise ) because back in 2006 not everybody had HD TVs and they thought people would stick with SD TVs a few more years therefore made an SD system, that's all.
Now they are rectifying that mistake with the Wii U and will be back on track with the other console makers.
Rest assured, that whatever game will be produced in the next gen will be virtually identical on all three major systems, so bitching about the better Graphics won't get you anywere this time.
Similar threads
-
- Portal
-
- Portal
- No one is chatting at the moment.
