97 replies to this topic

[Play4Fun]

rob_shadows

In terms of power: PS2 < GC < XBox.The gap was small so the differences in graphics weren't huge.

It's like how the differences between PS3 and 360 games are small graphically although PS3 is a bit more powerful. Xbox and GC exclusives looked just a bit better than PS2's .


And we're not going to get any consoles over $450 next gen. They might not even pass the $400 mark.

Sony and MS's consoles are going to be more powerful since they will come out after Cafe, but the gap will be small and all 3 consoles will be able to share ports unlike this generation.

Sony and MS lost alot of money this gen. Sony even threw away their profits from PS1 and PS2 generations. They're not going to release a big, hot super expensive console next gen and neither are MS.

Edited by Play4Fun, 22 May 2011 - 11:43 AM.

[Wertville]

The Gamecube wasn't "vastly superior" to the PS2, the CPU was faster, more efficient, etc...but all you have to do is look at the games from both to know that obviously that didn't matter in terms of graphical power. Not a single gamecube game came out that touched some of the titles released on the PS2. And that's despite the fact that the system was described as being easier to program for.

Resident Evil 4. All that is needed to be said. If you want more examples, look at the prime games and Rogue Squadron. A LAUNCH title. (Also, PS2 was much more difficult to program for. Ask anyone who tries to Emulate it :/)

Heck the Gamecube even had some aspects of it's architecture that were above the Xbox but no one will ever claim it was more powerful than or vastly superior to the Xbox.

...No one is claiming that... The Xbox was much closer to the gamecube than the PS2 was, though.

In reality when you consider the fact that the Gamecube was still cheaper than the PS2 at it's launch despite coming out after the PS2 it actually helps my argument which is simply that a higher price point doesn't mean anything.

Actually, it means that the Cafe could get a 2 year head start, be inferior to the competitors and still charge more. That's 2/3s the opposite of your argument.

And no, things won't change next generation. Western Action Adventure/RPG's and Shooters will still dominate the market, that's not going to change anytime soon, and companies like Bethesda, Bioware, Epic, Infinity Ward, etc...will continue to push games to their limits to try to blow people away, even the most infamous JRPG company in Square is a company that has always and will continue to try to push games to the limits.

Shooters and RPGs dominating the market probably won't change, no. But that really doesn't make a difference. Due to the price of making games, the industry has become a port industry. During the first year of the PS490, do you think any non-first party developers would be stupid enough to ignore a console with 20 million+ users? Also, if MicroSony doesn't make some sort of innovation in their consoles, the touch-screen on the Cafe will guarantee exclusives that they won't get, and it will never be the other way around.

[Sphinx]

Exactly how did they learn that "fact" from this generation? By selling out every single console shipped for the first few months of production like they both did? By the 50+ Million consoles sold? The 360 sold over 10 million copies within it's first two years (only using the first two years because after that you need to start taking larger drops in price into consideration due to price cuts) the PS3 did the same, selling over 10 million units within it's first two years.

You truly believe Microsoft and Sony weren't/aren't happy with over 10 million sold in the first two years and over 50 million sold to date? Sure the Wii has sold more but since we're talking about price lets say the "average" price of every Wii sold was $200 and the average price of every PS3 and 360 sold was $300, in reality the Wii number is likely a bit lower and the PS3/360 number a bit higher but this will provide a fine example. Now, go ahead and do the math 70 Million Wii's x $200, 50 Million PS3's or 360's x $300. You may be surprised by just how small the difference in revenue is. Now factor in the fact that everything for the consoles right down to games and peripherals have those same price differences and you start to understand that while the Wii has sold more, it doesn't necessarily mean it's earned higher revenues.

And as far as this mythological shifted market, it's a complete fallacy. What proves it? Slower sales causing console price drops years after they are released just like every other console generation has had? Surely your not referring to the argument industry "experts" claim that Iphone games are replacing console games, no one is leaving their Wii, 360, or PS3 for Iphone games...your simply seeing people that would never normally get into console games playing Iphone games because they are so cheap and a good way to pass time wherever you are. Iphone apps will NEVER directly cut into the console market, personally I highly doubt they'll ever even cut into the handheld market.

Sorry, but you're simply wrong. Sony's Playstation division was operating at a loss during their 2006-2009 fiscal years. Their losses were pretty atrocious, and would've been much worse had it not been for the resilience of the PS2 and continued success of the PSP. Also, your Wii numbers are not correct. The Wii has sold approximately 85 million worldwide, not 70 million.

The shifted market I'm referring to is increased consumer demand for cheaper and inferior gaming that emphasizes innovation over processing power. No one would have guessed in 2006 that the Wii would take nearly 50% of the console market share, because no one believed that gamers would be attracted to the Wii's lackluster technical specs and performance. Personally, I'm not happy with the market shift myself, but it most certainly exists nonetheless.

This is another statement already proven wrong by the current generation of consoles. Were Move and Kinect not extremely obvious "me too" products to capitalize on what Nintendo started with Motion gaming? How bout the implementation of Netflix into all three consoles after seeing it debut on one? Were trophies not a direct answer to achievements? These companies could care less if people thing they are "ripping off the competition", if it will improve their consoles, thus improving their sales, you can bet they'll gladly rip anyone off. That's not even something that only applies to the gaming world, it applies to literally every industry and is commonplace, once a company establishes "innovation" it WILL be copied by their competitors.

Kinect was most definitely not a "me too" product, and instead offered a unique experience. Playstation Move on the other hand did not sell well at all because it offered nothing new, and bundling it with the Playstation 3 increased the price to nearly $400. People don't buy products that they can easily purchase for a much lower price.

Netflix on the other hand is a service that doesn't require millions of dollars in research and development, manufacturing costs, etc., so it's irrelevant to this discussion.

Again, this ties in to the first statement and the last statement but to elaborate further, people said the same thing about the PS3, there was no way at $600 it would be sell at the same level as the 360, go ahead and look up the numbers of the 360 from '05 to '07 (it's first two years) and the PS3 from '06-'08 (again, it's first two years). You might be a bit surprised that the console outrageously priced $200 higher (the PS3) than it's closest competitor (the 360) was stride for stride with the 360 during the two consoles first two years on the market respectively.

You also need to look back at the previous generation. The Playstation 2 sold nearly 140 millions units, while the Xbox sold a mere 20 million or so. The Xbox userbase was tiny, and gamers trusted the Playstation brand. The fact that the Xbox 360 sold at the same level as the Playstation 3 is actually a testament to the DRAMATIC shift in market share between the two companies that resulted from the Playstation 3's lackluster performance and high price. Sony was dominating the market from 1996-2006, but they completely blew it during the Playstation 3's first few years.

If your asking yourself why I always leave the Wii out of the PS3/360 discussion it's because the PS3 and 360 do NOT target the same core demographic and thus are NOT direct competitors with the Wii, just because they are all video game companies doesn't mean they view them as direct competition. The PS2 and Xbox did not contend directly with the Gamecube, the 360 and PS3 do not contend directly with the Wii and the 720 and PS4 will not contend directly with Project Cafe.

That's ridiculous. If the PS3 and 360 weren't competing with the Wii then they never would have released Move or Kinect in order to attract the casual market.

The same is true in the video game world and has been for over a decade now, Nintendo took the role of the cheaper company that produced the cheaper product starting with the Gamecube and Sony and Microsoft take the role of the "luxury" manufacturer making the fancy high end models starting with the PS2 and Xbox respectively. Don't forget that Sony ALWAYS priced themselves $100 ahead of Nintendo ever since entering the market with the original PS and the PS2 debuting at $299 (higher than the Wii at it's launch) while still managing to dominate both generations.

The very key difference is that back then the Gamecube offered absolutely nothing innovative. It was merely an inferior product that didn't catch the consumer's eye.

Hopefully all of this helps illustrate the point that being priced significantly higher than Cafe would mean squat for Sony and Microsoft, even with higher prices and lower sales revenues can be even and gamers have already proven they are willing to pay for the bells and whistles.

Except revenues have NOT been even. I don't know where you're getting your info from.

Edited by Sphinx, 22 May 2011 - 09:13 PM.

[rob_shadows]

"Sony and MS's consoles are going to be more powerful since they will come out after Cafe, but the gap will be small and all 3 consoles will be able to share ports unlike this generation."

That's one area where I have to disagree, I don't even view Cafe is truly ushering in the next generation of consoles because of the fact that according to most reports it's barely superior in power than the PS3...which to me makes it Nintendo's offering of a console finally worthy of the current generation whereas the Wii is more comparable to the systems of the previous generation just attaching motion controls. If Cafe truly is barely beyond the level of the PS3 that would mean that for the gap between the PS4/720 and Cafe to be minimal than Sony and Microsoft would have to make minimal advances to the power of their consoles...something I just don't see happening.

If Cafe is barely more powerful than systems that were released 5 and 6 years ago than it shows that Nintendo obviously did not attempt to capitalize on advances in technological capabilities, something that Microsoft and Sony are both well known for doing and I just don't see any way that they don't do so for the 2014 consoles.



"Shooters and RPGs dominating the market probably won't change, no. But that really doesn't make a difference. Due to the price of making games, the industry has become a port industry. During the first year of the PS490, do you think any non-first party developers would be stupid enough to ignore a console with 20 million+ users? Also, if MicroSony doesn't make some sort of innovation in their consoles, the touch-screen on the Cafe will guarantee exclusives that they won't get, and it will never be the other way around."

Do I think they'll ignore Cafe? No, however...using the userbase as an example isn't the best way to go here. Look at the userbase of the Wii yet it can't be denied that 3rd party developers HAVE largely ignored the Wii in favor of the PS3 and the 360 and your kidding yourself if you believe that the 360 and PS3 having far superior power than the Wii isn't part of the reason for that.

It certainly isn't anything to do with ease of development for the consoles because it's well known that the PS3 is by far the most complex console to develop for yet the PS3 still has vastly superior 3rd party support (including exclusives) than the Wii.

I've seen arguments against the super powerful systems claiming development costs will scare away developers but if that's the case, why does the PS3, the most expensive system to develop for have a line up of 3rd party exclusives superior to that of the cheaper to develop for Wii? Your obviously overestimating the effect of development costs on a companies decision on what console to make AAA titles for.

The reason is the exact same reason behind your statement that Cafe's touchscreen will lead to games the other consoles won't have. The AAA titles on the 360 and PS3 can't be on the Wii, the system simply doesn't have the power to support them. So who's to say the same won't happen again? With Cafe being barely above this generations most powerful console it would be easy for Microsoft and Sony to create consoles much more powerful than Cafe for a 2014 launch. If it happens we could once again see the power differential force developers into a position where games on the consoles from Microsoft and Sony could not be done on Cafe.

And even the touchscreen may not make as much of a difference as your stating, it COULD but there is no guarantee. How many quality titles were exclusive to the Wii because of the motion control innovation? Did it ensure the PS3 and 360 couldn't get some of the biggest games of the generation? In fact the exact opposite occured, 3rd party developers focused on developing AAA titles that took advantage of the raw power of the 360 and PS3 instead of focusing on titles that took advantage of the innovation of the Wii.



"Kinect was most definitely not a "me too" product, and instead offered a unique experience. Playstation Move on the other hand did not sell well at all because it offered nothing new, and bundling it with the Playstation 3 increased the price to nearly $400. People don't buy products that they can easily purchase for a much lower price."

Kinect was indeed a "me too" product because if it wasn't for the Wii Microsoft would have never developed and released it.

And I don't know where you got the idea that Move didn't sell well from because Move was a MASSIVE success for Sony, they couldn't even keep up with demand for the first 5 months after release and has sold over 8 million units so far, certainly behind Kinect which has sold over 10 million but still not bad for a product that "offered nothing new" (when in fact it was the first and STILL the only product in console gaming to offer true 1:1 motion capture).

[Blarg]

I think it'sdead cert that it'll be outdated- I fear thet'lll then need to make ANOTHER system to catch up.

[Play4Fun]

"Sony and MS's consoles are going to be more powerful since they will come out after Cafe, but the gap will be small and all 3 consoles will be able to share ports unlike this generation."

That's one area where I have to disagree, I don't even view Cafe is truly ushering in the next generation of consoles because of the fact that according to most reports it's barely superior in power than the PS3...which to me makes it Nintendo's offering of a console finally worthy of the current generation whereas the Wii is more comparable to the systems of the previous generation just attaching motion controls. If Cafe truly is barely beyond the level of the PS3 that would mean that for the gap between the PS4/720 and Cafe to be minimal than Sony and Microsoft would have to make minimal advances to the power of their consoles...something I just don't see happening.

Oh really? Rumours say Nintendo is using an ATI 4850/4870 and a 3-core IBM CPU. That would make it much more powerful than PS3. So I don't know what you are talking about. There is NO feasible tech MS and Sony can use to blow away that tech especially when they'll be looking to launch at least a year after Cafe so it doesn't get two or more years on the market by itself.

If Cafe is barely more powerful than systems that were released 5 and 6 years ago than it shows that Nintendo obviously did not attempt to capitalize on advances in technological capabilities, something that Microsoft and Sony are both well known for doing and I just don't see any way that they don't do so for the 2014 consoles.

Maybe MS is well known for powerful tech, although this is only their second generation.

But Sony has never had the most powerful console in any of their previous gens. Both N64 and GC (plus XBox) were more powerful than PS1 and PS2.

This is Sony's first gen being the most powerful and it didn't end as well for them as the last ones.

Do I think they'll ignore Cafe? No, however...using the userbase as an example isn't the best way to go here. Look at the userbase of the Wii yet it can't be denied that 3rd party developers HAVE largely ignored the Wii in favor of the PS3 and the 360 and your kidding yourself if you believe that the 360 and PS3 having far superior power than the Wii isn't part of the reason for that.

It certainly isn't anything to do with ease of development for the consoles because it's well known that the PS3 is by far the most complex console to develop for yet the PS3 still has vastly superior 3rd party support (including exclusives) than the Wii.

The Xbox 360 was the base console for building games (due to the architecture) before porting to PS3. PS3 was similar in power to 360 so it was easier to port to it than Wii. Plus the combined userbase of the 360 and PS3 are more than Wii's alone.

The Wii's architecture was out-dated and almost required building the game from ground-up for it. That's why devs didn't port to it. It was too much of a hassle.

Nintendo is said to be using an easy-to-port to architecture, so Cafe won't be facing that problem. The architecture will similar to the one used for PC games and the 360, so ports will be easy.

why does the PS3, the most expensive system to develop for have a line up of 3rd party exclusives superior to that of the cheaper to develop for Wii? Your obviously overestimating the effect of development costs on a companies decision on what console to make AAA titles for.

Erm...3rd party exclusives are paid for by Sony. Devs get money to build those games. Nintendo doesn't really money-hat with 3rd parties for exclusives. They rely on their first party.

The reason is the exact same reason behind your statement that Cafe's touchscreen will lead to games the other consoles won't have. The AAA titles on the 360 and PS3 can't be on the Wii, the system simply doesn't have the power to support them. So who's to say the same won't happen again? With Cafe being barely above this generations most powerful console it would be easy for Microsoft and Sony to create consoles much more powerful than Cafe for a 2014 launch. If it happens we could once again see the power differential force developers into a position where games on the consoles from Microsoft and Sony could not be done on Cafe.

It won't happen again because, like I said before, Nintendo is using a familiar architecture and there won't be an HD gap nor a huge power gap between the consoles like this gen.

Games on 360 and PS3 CAN be put on Wii. It's just that it requires ALOT of scaling down and rebuilding from the ground-up. That's just too much of a hassle for third parties and not worth the investment.

And even the touchscreen may not make as much of a difference as your stating, it COULD but there is no guarantee. How many quality titles were exclusive to the Wii because of the motion control innovation? Did it ensure the PS3 and 360 couldn't get some of the biggest games of the generation? In fact the exact opposite occured, 3rd party developers focused on developing AAA titles that took advantage of the raw power of the 360 and PS3 instead of focusing on titles that took advantage of the innovation of the Wii.

The motion controls did make a difference. That's why Wii is highest selling console this gen and why the others brought out their own motion hardware.

Nintendo didn't make motion controls to get 3rd parties. They made it to get the new audience.

Kinect was indeed a "me too" product because if it wasn't for the Wii Microsoft would have never developed and released it.

And I don't know where you got the idea that Move didn't sell well from because Move was a MASSIVE success for Sony, they couldn't even keep up with demand for the first 5 months after release and has sold over 8 million units so far, certainly behind Kinect which has sold over 10 million but still not bad for a product that "offered nothing new" (when in fact it was the first and STILL the only product in console gaming to offer true 1:1 motion capture).

Kinect was not as much of a 'me too' product as Move was. Move was too similar to Wii-mote while Kinect differentiated itself.

Kinect also moved hardware for MS, and a good number of software. Move didn't do much of that for PS3.

Edited by Play4Fun, 23 May 2011 - 12:09 PM.

[rob_shadows]

Oh really? Rumours say Nintendo is using an ATI 4850/4870 and a 3-core IBM CPU. That would make it much more powerful than PS3. So I don't know what you are talking about. There is NO feasible tech MS and Sony can use to blow away that tech especially when they'll be looking to launch at least a year after Cafe so it doesn't get two or more years on the market by itself.

I apologize if I was incorrect on the potential power differential between the current systems (360 and PS3) and Cafe. I am in no way whatsoever an expert on computer or graphical tech and just went by what I've seen most media outlets reporting which is that the core components of Cafe are "similar" to the build of the 360 but "a bit more powerful" and "slightly more powerful than the PS3". On a side note, if it really does have 512MB of ram won't that limit just how much more graphical detail is capable on the machine regardless on the GPU? 512 is what the 360 and PS3 are already using, it seems like it should be higher but that's just me. Although it is possible it could be more since the reports do usually say "at least 512mb of RAM", either way while as I've stated before I doubt we'll see Microsoft or Sony packing 8GB of ram in the next systems as some developers requested I do expect at least 2GB, wouldn't the difference between 2GB and 512MB (or even as high as 1GB if Cafe was to have that much) be considerable as far as potential capabilities go? (legitimate question)

Either way, it's my understanding that Sony with the PS4 will continue using the Cell processor by simply improving it with modifications, reports of which I've seen stating that the capabilities of the enhancements expected should double the raw power of the processor. So the real question I guess is how does the supposed components in Cafe compare to what would be the result of doubling the capabilities of Cell. The answer to which I can completely admit I have absolutely no idea on and am actually quite curious if anyone else here knows more on that kind of stuff. It's also my understanding that strictly utilizing GDDR3 RAM in the PS4 as rumored instead of the PS3's current combination of GDDR3 and XDR will also cut production costs and increase performance, though again that's just what I've heard others speculate, I do not know what kind of actual effects that has on performance.

Another question I'd have is doesn't utilizing an improved (modified) Cell processor for the PS4 allow Sony to save a ton of money on development? It's well known that over $600 Million was spent on development of Cell (although Sony did not bare the burden of the costs alone as it was a joint development project) and if using an improved Cell processor would save a lot of money in the R&D phase of the console, couldn't that allow them a higher budget for the GPU and other areas? I'd like to clarify these are not expectations but rather actual questions, I truly have no idea about that kind of stuff, it just seems like using a modified Cell would be very cheap compared to what they spent actually developing the cell and if that's the case it would make sense that they could reallocate some of those funds to improving other areas of the tech (or researching new innovations). Also, wouldn't using an enhanced version of the current Cell processor also keep production costs down considerably allowing for additional improvements and advancements while still keeping the target price in a respectable range?

Since we're discussing the PS4, Sony execs have recently officially confirmed funds are currently being spent towards it's development (not that we didn't already know that but it's confirmation nonetheless)

The Xbox 360 was the base console for building games (due to the architecture) before porting to PS3. PS3 was similar in power to 360 so it was easier to port to it than Wii. Plus the combined userbase of the 360 and PS3 are more than Wii's alone.

The Wii's architecture was out-dated and almost required building the game from ground-up for it. That's why devs didn't port to it. It was too much of a hassle.

Nintendo is said to be using an easy-to-port to architecture, so Cafe won't be facing that problem. The architecture will similar to the one used for PC games and the 360, so ports will be easy.

Just for the record I was referring to the differences in graphical power, not difficulty in actually porting but rather decisions against doing so because of the hassle of downscaling games to do so.

It won't happen again because, like I said before, Nintendo is using a familiar architecture and there won't be an HD gap nor a huge power gap between the consoles like this gen.

Games on 360 and PS3 CAN be put on Wii. It's just that it requires ALOT of scaling down and rebuilding from the ground-up. That's just too much of a hassle for third parties and not worth the investment.

Again, I was referring to the scaling hassle you mentioned, not difficulties in porting due to architecture.

There won't be an HD gap but I'm still skeptical on just how little a power gap there may or may not be, ultimately we won't know the answer to that question for quite a while yet as it's highly unlikely we'll get any indications of the capabilities of the next Microsoft and Sony offerings anytime soon (aside from the rumored increases in processing power of an enhanced cell processor).

Kinect was not as much of a 'me too' product as Move was. Move was too similar to Wii-mote while Kinect differentiated itself.

Kinect also moved hardware for MS, and a good number of software. Move didn't do much of that for PS3.

I don't know about that, the PS3 did see a pretty good increase in console sales numbers after Move was released. Not as much as the 360 but it was still a notable increase

[Play4Fun]

I apologize if I was incorrect on the potential power differential between the current systems (360 and PS3) and Cafe. I am in no way whatsoever an expert on computer or graphical tech and just went by what I've seen most media outlets reporting which is that the core components of Cafe are "similar" to the build of the 360 but "a bit more powerful" and "slightly more powerful than the PS3". On a side note, if it really does have 512MB of ram won't that limit just how much more graphical detail is capable on the machine regardless on the GPU? 512 is what the 360 and PS3 are already using, it seems like it should be higher but that's just me. Although it is possible it could be more since the reports do usually say "at least 512mb of RAM", either way while as I've stated before I doubt we'll see Microsoft or Sony packing 8GB of ram in the next systems as some developers requested I do expect at least 2GB, wouldn't the difference between 2GB and 512MB (or even as high as 1GB if Cafe was to have that much) be considerable as far as potential capabilities go? (legitimate question)

I'm no expert on tech either. I just know a few things here and there. =p

Yeah. 512 MB RAM would be extremely crippling for the machine but if Nintendo is trying to cater to 3rd parties like the rumours say, they'll put at least 1 GB to 1.5 GB in it hopefully.

Either way, it's my understanding that Sony with the PS4 will continue using the Cell processor by simply improving it with modifications, reports of which I've seen stating that the capabilities of the enhancements expected should double the raw power of the processor. So the real question I guess is how does the supposed components in Cafe compare to what would be the result of doubling the capabilities of Cell. The answer to which I can completely admit I have absolutely no idea on and am actually quite curious if anyone else here knows more on that kind of stuff. It's also my understanding that strictly utilizing GDDR3 RAM in the PS4 as rumored instead of the PS3's current combination of GDDR3 and XDR will also cut production costs and increase performance, though again that's just what I've heard others speculate, I do not know what kind of actual effects that has on performance.

Yeah, Sony will most likely continue with the Cell. Devs are more familiar with it now, so it won't be as hard to develop for next gen.

The rumoured tech in Cafe would be more than double the cell's so we can expect much more than double the increase in power from Sony .

Also, I don't think Sony will use GDDR3 RAM. More like GDDR5.

Another question I'd have is doesn't utilizing an improved (modified) Cell processor for the PS4 allow Sony to save a ton of money on development? It's well known that over $600 Million was spent on development of Cell (although Sony did not bare the burden of the costs alone as it was a joint development project) and if using an improved Cell processor would save a lot of money in the R&D phase of the console, couldn't that allow them a higher budget for the GPU and other areas? I'd like to clarify these are not expectations but rather actual questions, I truly have no idea about that kind of stuff, it just seems like using a modified Cell would be very cheap compared to what they spent actually developing the cell and if that's the case it would make sense that they could reallocate some of those funds to improving other areas of the tech (or researching new innovations). Also, wouldn't using an enhanced version of the current Cell processor also keep production costs down considerably allowing for additional improvements and advancements while still keeping the target price in a respectable range?

I'm sure since they're not developing a new architecture like last time, that should save them a ton of money in R&D.

Since we're discussing the PS4, Sony execs have recently officially confirmed funds are currently being spent towards it's development (not that we didn't already know that but it's confirmation nonetheless)

Yeah. Next gen will be upon us before we know it.

It seems you want a noticeable increase in PS4's power. If NGP is anything to go by, Sony will be packing some powerful tech in PS4 even if they're more Conservative than PS3. They don't have a disk format to bring up expenses this time, so that means more money for the actual console.

[Mukkinese]

I think Sony and Microsoft will be happy to wait and see how the market accepts Nintendo's new innovations, before they commit themselves to massive spending. If the hook for Cafe is a huge draw and grabs peoples imaginations in the way the Wii did, or even half as well as the Wii, then the other two will want to take that into account with their new machines.

Having said that, I think it is a given that their next consoles will be significantly more powerful than Cafe is, maybe not in delivering blisteringly different graphics, so much as allowing a better version of whatever Ninty does with Cafe. Perhaps they might even come up with some innovations of their own?

Seems like the next step is a seamless integration of home and mobile gaming, who looks best set to take that route?

[rob_shadows]

It seems you want a noticeable increase in PS4's power. If NGP is anything to go by, Sony will be packing some powerful tech in PS4 even if they're more Conservative than PS3. They don't have a disk format to bring up expenses this time, so that means more money for the actual console.

I'd love to see a noticeable increase in all three systems power, well ideally I'd like it to be more than just "noticeable" I'm just a sucker for fancy/flashy new tech.

I agree that if the NGP is any indication Sony will likely be putting some big time stuff in the PS4, that thing is insane...if anyone had told me two years ago that we'd see a handheld soon that rivaled the PS3 in graphical capabilities I would have lmao...yet here we are (albeit the background detail isn't as capable). Had you then told me all the different control options they've used would be put in and they'd add 3G connectivity...I would have had you committed, lol.

I'm still skeptical with it though, it does look simply amazing and they've already confirmed some major games for it but until they announce the official price I'll have reservations. The 3DS launched at $250 which actually surprised me in itself considering that's as much as the Wii launch price and IMO more than it's worth and I would imagine that NGP has a much higher development cost, with all that's in it I just don't see how it releases under a price around $400...which is way too much for a handheld.

This is one of those areas that demonstrates me being a sucker for fancy tech, I love drooling over the NGP and what it can do yet it's highly unlikely I'll ever buy one because I've never really been into handhelds. I just can't help but drool over fancy tech though, even if I'll never use it, lol.

[rob_shadows]

And of course just because I said that now I just read the new rumors that Sony has cut the RAM on the NGP in half and removed the 16GB internal storage to cut costs closer to that of the 3DS. The internal storage isn't *that* big of a deal I guess considering most handhelds don't have any anyway but 256MB of ram instead of 512 is a big deal.

[prizzaparty]

My link
Who knows. If ps3 engineers are working on project cafe i think we will have a powerful console that will be able to keep up with current and next generation.

[rob_shadows]

It is interesting if Nintendo really did hire the man responsible for the Cell processor and RSX GPU, the article seems to hint that Nintendo may have went all out on R&D for the console, which in all honesty I personally expected which was one of the reasons I was shocked by the rumors of the system not being that far ahead of the PS3, with all the money Nintendo made off the Wii and DS this past generation they have plenty to splurge a bit on R&D, hopefully the article is true and they indeed did and all the rumors of Cafe's hardware being similar to the 360 are false.

We'll find out in about a week and a half (barring any major leaks as we get nearer to E3 but Nintendo is usually much better preventing them than Microsoft or Sony)

[Sphinx]

Some news on the PS4.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/34869/Sony_Reduces_Investment_Cost_For_PlayStation_4.php

"It is no longer thinkable to have a huge initial financial investment like that of the PS3," he said, allegedly in response to a question about whether the games division would retain its profitability.

The company spent significant amounts of money designing the PS3's Cell processor from the ground up with IBM, and more on the plants to fabricate it.

"Significant cost reductions" for PlayStation 3 hardware was fingered as a major contributing factor to the division's approximate $435.5 million profit during the fiscal year ending March 31, up from a loss of $1 billion the prior year.

Like I said before, Sony has learned its lesson. They rightly aren't going to spend massive amounts of money on R&D, and will make sure that their console is reasonably priced.

[Wertville]

Some news on the PS4.

http://www.gamasutra...ayStation_4.php



Like I said before, Sony has learned its lesson. They rightly aren't going to spend massive amounts of money on R&D, and will make sure that their console is reasonably priced.

In that case, the Cafe has no competition, IMO.
Comparing this to the GC era, if the Cafe has the strength of the gamecube as well as the head start and third-party support of the PS2, there's no way Sony can even scratch it. And Japan hates the Xbox, so without that large portion of the market Microsoft won't be able to do much either.

I'm going to love this generation
I'll actually be able to play the vast majority of games that come out

[rob_shadows]

Like I said before, Sony has learned its lesson. They rightly aren't going to spend massive amounts of money on R&D, and will make sure that their console is reasonably priced.

The more rumors I read the more I don't think they'll need to spend massive amounts to stay ahead of Nintendo as far as power goes, the Cell reportedly has a ton of potential above what it currently produces for the PS3. After looking into it a lot lately it seems that this was part of the plan all along, the extremely high costs for BD and Cell we're meant to last multiple generations, this time around they won't have the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on development of the new storage format and microprocessor architecture that they did with the PS3 (and that's not sarcasm, Sony literally spent over half a billion dollars on R&D for blu-ray and Cell), they can increase the power of the cell significantly for pennies compared to that cost, it also needs to be noted that the Cell processor if used properly eliminates the need for a GPU which also saves a ton of money (given that the GPU and CPU are the most expensive components of a system, obviously if you eliminate the need for a separate GPU you've saved some money), there were rumors of Sony developing a 4PPE, 32SPE variation of Cell...the capabilities of which would be...well...even I highly doubt that rumor is true let's just put it that way, however it's not a stretch by any means to think that there could be a 2PPE 12-14SPE variation of Cell in the PS4, to put that in perspective the current processor has about half that and has yet to be pushed to 100% of it's full limitations by anyone, not Naughty Dog (Uncharted 2), Quantic Dreams (Heavy Rain), Square (FFXIII), no one...though I believe I saw reports from Naughty Dog claiming that with Uncharted 3 they have pushed the PS3 to it's limits. However, that does not push the current Cell processor to it's limits...odd as that sounds, it's potential is beyond that of the PS3 because of Sony only utilizing 512MB of RAM in the system which limits the capabilities below what the current Cell processor's potential is (while each SPE does have it's own memory, it's not enough to eliminate the need for a solid amount of RAM).

You also have to remember that actual production of the PS4 likely won't even start until late 2013 at the earliest (if the 2014 launch window is accurate) and generally speaking (and this is usually pretty accurate) any costs related to PC tech (which also applies to console tech) will be cut by about 50% in a two year time frame, meaning that Sony could spend the same amount that Nintendo did for initial production while still having noticeably more powerful hardware.

In that case, the Cafe has no competition, IMO.
Comparing this to the GC era, if the Cafe has the strength of the gamecube as well as the head start and third-party support of the PS2, there's no way Sony can even scratch it. And Japan hates the Xbox, so without that large portion of the market Microsoft won't be able to do much either.

I'm going to love this generation
I'll actually be able to play the vast majority of games that come out

While I do think your right about Nintendo getting a considerable better library of games this upcoming generation than they did with the Wii, your reasoning is highly flawed. The Xbox not selling in Japan will have little effect on 3rd party titles, the gaming industry has shifted westward as far as AAA developers and AAA titles go, the vast majority of AAA releases nowadays come from Western developers, and the Japanese console market will not have a major impact on their decisions. (Heck even most of Sony's major studios are based in the U.S and Canada despite them being a Japanese company)

[Biohazard]

It is interesting if Nintendo really did hire the man responsible for the Cell processor and RSX GPU, the article seems to hint that Nintendo may have went all out on R&D for the console, which in all honesty I personally expected which was one of the reasons I was shocked by the rumors of the system not being that far ahead of the PS3, with all the money Nintendo made off the Wii and DS this past generation they have plenty to splurge a bit on R&D, hopefully the article is true and they indeed did and all the rumors of Cafe's hardware being similar to the 360 are false.

The French publication (01.net) initially reported that Project Cafe will have a "similar architecture" to the 360, yet the article also reported that it will use ATi's R700's series. Some of the posters, particularly Jikayaki, assures us that it will surpass the 360 and PS3. Personally, I think the "similar architecture" phrase could allude that Nintendo's hardware is more sophisticated than recycled, or they just don't know how the graphics cards really work.

[rob_shadows]

The similar architecture statement was in regard to the CPU not the GPU, the CPU reportedly is similar to the Xenon CPU in the 360 (which in itself is a toned down modification of the Cell processor) but the GPU is considerably better (as would be expected). That's my understanding anyway, it's all really kind of irrelevant considering it could all be b/s and the real hardware could be completely different...but as Nintendo themselves even said "where there's smoke, there's fire"

[Wertville]

While I do think your right about Nintendo getting a considerable better library of games this upcoming generation than they did with the Wii, your reasoning is highly flawed. The Xbox not selling in Japan will have little effect on 3rd party titles, the gaming industry has shifted westward as far as AAA developers and AAA titles go, the vast majority of AAA releases nowadays come from Western developers, and the Japanese console market will not have a major impact on their decisions. (Heck even most of Sony's major studios are based in the U.S and Canada despite them being a Japanese company)

Accidentally exited the tab, so I'll just summarize what I was typing before...


Anything outside of First-Person Shooters and WRPG(Obviously), the West does not have any control of the market. All others are even at best (Platformers), non-existent at worst (Visual Novel).

[rob_shadows]

That's just the thing, FPS and WRPG are dominating the market and that's not likely to change. The west also dominates the sports and rhythm game markets as well. Even most Japanese developers have openly admitted that the failure of Japanese developers to evolve with the west has severely hurt their ability to remain competitive. Obviously there are some Japanese developers who have been able to remain competitive (Capcom, Konami and Nintendo being 3 major examples) but even those companies have admitted that titles will have to evolve if they want to remain relevant (with the exception of Nintendo who will always be able to sell on name alone with Mario, Zelda, DK, etc...) and when you look at upcoming games like Capcom's "Dragon's Dogma" it's very clear that they are indeed taking notes from western developers.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I like the fact that the balance of power has shifted but there is no arguing or denying that it indeed has. Personally I love RPGs be it Western RPGs like Fallout, Elder Scrolls, ETC...or JRPGs like Final Fantasy, Suikoden, etc...and in fact I absolutely HATE what some Japanese companies are doing with JRPGs nowadays (mainly Square who has absolutely ruined Final Fantasy, my all time favorite game series).