109 replies to this topic

[Lain]

I just read the article, and that says nothing about power or how wide the power gap will be between the next generation consoles. To even assume that the Playstation 4 will be launched in 2016 is also a ridiculous conclusion based on Kaz Hirai's statement about E3 or any reveals. I expect a Playstation 4 announcement this year. Same with Microsoft and their next Xbox.

Personally, I expect the next Xbox and Playstation to be more powerful than the Wii U. They pretty much have to do that if they want to set themselves apart. But I also don't expect the power gap to be as wide as it was with the Wii and the PS360.

[Meelow100]

I just read the article, and that says nothing about power or how wide the power gap will be between the next generation consoles. To even assume that the Playstation 4 will be launched in 2016 is also a ridiculous conclusion based on Kaz Hirai's statement about E3 or any reveals. I expect a Playstation 4 announcement this year. Same with Microsoft and their next Xbox.

Personally, I expect the next Xbox and Playstation to be more powerful than the Wii U. They pretty much have to do that if they want to set themselves apart. But I also don't expect the power gap to be as wide as it was with the Wii and the PS360.

Sony already confirmed that they won't annouunce the PS4 this year, Microsoft will probably at least announce at E3 that the 720 is in development and shed some details on it.

[Lain]

Sony already confirmed that they won't annouunce the PS4 this year, Microsoft will probably at least announce at E3 that the 720 is in development and shed some details on it.

Nothing was confirmed.

If the plan is to keep the Playstation 4 announcement secret, then of course Sony will say no announcements will be made.

[Meelow100]

Nothing was confirmed.

If the plan is to keep the Playstation 4 announcement secret, then of course Sony will say no announcements will be made.

Here's a link to where they confirmed it

http://www.pcworld.com/article/247843/see_they_told_us_so_sony_confirms_no_ps4_at_e3.html

[Caius Casshern Sins]

The PS4 could still be announce at this year, but not at E3. That could be the TGS or a special conference. But only time will tell.

[Plutonas]

But of course everyone kept no they just they'll support the PS3 for 10 years and that a PS4 will come sooner but with their financial and the PS3 just starting to sell at a profit it doesn't seem like the case.

You cant say that, if a more powerfull machine is out there! Everybody is gonna buy the best. So ps3 sales will fall dramatically, when wiiU comes out. I wonder, is wiiU going to be that powerfull as we think it will be? I mean, power7 cpu with 4 cores and 16 threads, its a really strong cpu.. But on the net there is some articles, that state nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto said: may not be too much more powerful than PS3, Xbox.

I mean in hardware wii U have nothing to do with the other 2, I wonder why he said that (if he did), in matter of 3rd party support and game iq and gameplay, maybe yes he is right! Because developers dont want to create several editions of the same title and they normally give imports from system to system... (very bad for them).

Your thoughts about it?

About what Shigeru Miyamoto stated...

Edited by Orion, 21 January 2012 - 02:19 PM.

[Rubix87]

I have to say: power does not always equal sales. IF this were the case, the PS3 would be outselling the XBox and Wii by a margin of at least three to one. With that being said, I do believe the Wii U will have a successful launch if, and only if, (deductive logic) they have a good launch catalogue. IF they do not, then (inductive logic) they could have a potential disaster on their hands. However, in regards to the PS4, I don't think Sony is going to put themselves in a position to invest heavily in R&D for a machine that will put them further in the red than they would be by getting closer to the black with sticking solely to the PS3 for right now (I hope that last sentence made sense). Right now Sony is losing money in their Playstaion division (this year a loss of 449 million USD despites better sales), they sold their HDTV line (this year with a loss of 2.27 billion USD), and their music division is not doing too well (with losses of 132 million dollars in 2011). This is not good news for the gaming industry, the industry needs competition, therefore Nintendo needs Sony. This may sound like an oxymoron to some, but it makes plenty of sense. However, releasing the PS4 right now would be risky to say the least. Ever since 2006 Sony has lost approximately 4.7 billion USD in their Playstation division alone. I don't see there being anyway Sony would warrant the risks for such little reward. A lot of the humdrum, and nonsensical rhetoric within fandom, and the biased (not all) media like to distort the hard and true facts. With tht being said, I don't think Sony is going to reveal a full on console at e3. Maybe a teaser for future things to come, but not a full on console. IF they do, I pray that they will be successful, because the more competition the better an industry will function.

<http://www.reuters.c...ony-panasonic>.
<http://www.vg247.com...ls-financials>.
<http://topics.nytime...la/index.html>.

Edited by Rubix87, 21 January 2012 - 03:38 PM.

[Terrabyte20xx]

I have a very hard time beliveing that it won't come out until 2016, because at that point why not just skip the entire generation of consoles. And if they did that, they would be losing a ton of money since, you know, who wants to buy a PS3 when you can get a NeXbox or the Wii U?

[Lain]

Here's a link to where they confirmed it

http://www.pcworld.c..._ps4_at_e3.html

As I've already said, that doesn't confirm anything. Think about it for a second. The moment Kaz says the PS4 will be announced (at all) is the moment the PS3 sales may drop. Sony doesn't want PS3 sales to drop, especially since 2011 was the best year the PS3 had. The PS4 will be announced soon because Sony isn't going to let Nintendo and Microsoft have an early launch.

I have to say: power does not always equal sales. IF this were the case, the PS3 would be outselling the XBox and Wii by a margin of at least three to one. With that being said, I do believe the Wii U will have a successful launch if, and only if, (deductive logic) they have a good launch catalogue.

Power and potential never sold the console, you're right about that. It was always software that did anything. You have to admit though, that lack of power can be a problem. For the Wii, it's weaker architecture led to the loss of some important multiplat releases. I will admit that they did receive some Call of Duty games, but for the most part the Wii didn't get Street Fighter IV, Battlefield, Skyrim, Mass Effect, Dark Souls, and bunch of other good games. What's important is that the Wii U is powerful enough.

Right now Sony is losing money in their Playstaion division (this year a loss of 449 million USD despites better sales), they sold their HDTV line (this year with a loss of 2.27 billion USD), and their music division is not doing too well (with losses of 132 million dollars in 2011). This is not good news for the gaming industry, the industry needs competition, therefore Nintendo needs Sony. This may sound like an oxymoron to some, but it makes plenty of sense. However, releasing the PS4 right now would be risky to say the least. Ever since 2006 Sony has lost approximately 4.7 billion USD in their Playstation division alone. I don't see there being anyway Sony would warrant the risks for such little reward. A lot of the humdrum, and nonsensical rhetoric within fandom, and the biased (not all) media like to distort the hard and true facts. With tht being said, I don't think Sony is going to reveal a full on console at e3. Maybe a teaser for future things to come, but not a full on console. IF they do, I pray that they will be successful, because the more competition the better an industry will function.

A couple of things here:

• I believe Sony is actually profitting on each Playstation 3 sold now. It's been a while, but they're in better shape than previous years
• Sony actually loss 7 billion from the Playstation 3. Err, rather the profits they made off the first two Playstations.
• I agree that competition is good, but I don't find it necessary. I'll also add that the Wii never really got anything from the PS3 or the 360; or at least I don't believe it did. The PS3 did, however, benefit from the 360.
• Releasing the PS4 now would be risky in the sense that it'd be a hinderance to PS3 sales. I, however, feel that launching two or more years later is a bigger risk though because Nintendo (and maybe Microsoft) could potentially take control of next generation's third parties. Sony needs third parties to survive.

[Rubix87]

In regards to weaker architecture of the Wii, it is true that the system missed out on great third party content, but that's only because third parties did not want to work with motion gaming at the time. Take this into consideration as well: Sony already spent a ton of money on the Vita, if they try to rush another system to market for the sake of staying with trends, they are going to find themselves filing for bankruptcy. IF Sony wants the PS4 to be successful, they need to change their current business model. They need to be more creative and INNOVATIVE. I don't think they are in a position to call the shots this generation, and as for the financial figures, I got those from articles quoted in my last post. If Sony is in even greater debt (7 billion as was stated) then I think it only strenthens the argument that they may hold back until they are more even keeled. However, I could be wrong, but it would make more sense for Sony to wait for a product that could disrupt the market like the Wii did. They need something totally different, coming from a whole different perspective, but all we can do is wait and see at e3 2012.

[Deadly Virus]

In regards to weaker architecture of the Wii, it is true that the system missed out on great third party content, but that's only because third parties did not want to work with motion gaming at the time. Take this into consideration as well: Sony already spent a ton of money on the Vita, if they try to rush another system to market for the sake of staying with trends, they are going to find themselves filing for bankruptcy. IF Sony wants the PS4 to be successful, they need to change their current business model. They need to be more creative and INNOVATIVE. I don't think they are in a position to call the shots this generation, and as for the financial figures, I got those from articles quoted in my last post. If Sony is in even greater debt (7 billion as was stated) then I think it only strenthens the argument that they may hold back until they are more even keeled. However, I could be wrong, but it would make more sense for Sony to wait for a product that could disrupt the market like the Wii did. They need something totally different, coming from a whole different perspective, but all we can do is wait and see at e3 2012.

Sony's market has never been innovation, that's always been Nintendo's thing. The fact that the Vita is very much a standard handheld designed to play console style games shows that Sony has no intention of inventing some great new thing to revolutionize gaming, like the Wii arguably did. All that Sony needs for the PS4 is decent hardware and a good line up of games. I don't think they'll have trouble achieving either of those goals since they're a very big company that does infact have money to spend on these things. Plus Sony will gain third party support with PS4 much easier than Nintendo will with Wii U, simply because they have a much better history with developers. I don't think the Vita is doing as badly as people say either, seeing as it's only in Japan right now, where the PSP's entire reason for success was Monster Hunter which is now Nintendo exclusive. If Sony can get big western console games like CoD on the Vita, it could have much better sales over here.

[Tre]

Yes, Sony is a big company but they are running into money troubles. Awhile ago, Sony's CFO made a statement that they won't put the kind of money in the PS4 as they did with the PS3.
Link: http://www.industryg...estment-in-ps4/

Sony still may be powerful or the one with the most power of the Big 3 but it will not be by far. Just because Sony have many divisions, it doesn't mean they have endless money. If people would do some research on some non biased sites they would see what I mean and what other comm-enters have said.

Edited by Tre, 21 January 2012 - 06:19 PM.

[Link707]

@Rubix87--- the reason the wii didnt have many 3rd party games was because the architecture was completely different than ps/360 so devs had to rebuild the game from the ground up. This has been the same throughout its history. Also a side note.... The PS3 cost Sony 4.7 billion USD not 7

[PrimedMetroid]

Sony's market has never been innovation, that's always been Nintendo's thing. The fact that the Vita is very much a standard handheld designed to play console style games shows that Sony has no intention of inventing some great new thing to revolutionize gaming, like the Wii arguably did. All that Sony needs for the PS4 is decent hardware and a good line up of games. I don't think they'll have trouble achieving either of those goals since they're a very big company that does infact have money to spend on these things. Plus Sony will gain third party support with PS4 much easier than Nintendo will with Wii U, simply because they have a much better history with developers. I don't think the Vita is doing as badly as people say either, seeing as it's only in Japan right now, where the PSP's entire reason for success was Monster Hunter which is now Nintendo exclusive. If Sony can get big western console games like CoD on the Vita, it could have much better sales over here.

WOAH WOAH WOAH THERE. CoD, Killzone, Uncharted, and Wipeout selling the Vita? Unless the customer is a diehard Sony fan (note I didn't say fanboy), will those games be moving PSVs? Those games are better off on a 50" TV screen than a puny 5" screen. Also, handhelds like the PSV isn't really helf in high regard compared to the consoles.

[Link707]

Sony's market has never been innovation, that's always been Nintendo's thing. The fact that the Vita is very much a standard handheld designed to play console style games shows that Sony has no intention of inventing some great new thing to revolutionize gaming, like the Wii arguably did. All that Sony needs for the PS4 is decent hardware and a good line up of games. I don't think they'll have trouble achieving either of those goals since they're a very big company that does infact have money to spend on these things. Plus Sony will gain third party support with PS4 much easier than Nintendo will with Wii U, simply because they have a much better history with developers. I don't think the Vita is doing as badly as people say either, seeing as it's only in Japan right now, where the PSP's entire reason for success was Monster Hunter which is now Nintendo exclusive. If Sony can get big western console games like CoD on the Vita, it could have much better sales over here.

I hope you realize that the only reason the ps3 has 3rd party and wii not is because it has similar architecture to the 360, as most games are built first on the 360. Now that the wii u is as easy to develop for as the xbox360 and easier than the ps4 then there will be the same 3rd party games as the ps3 if not more due to the advanced power. On another note the psvita has only sold 500,000 units in a month... With over 320,000 being preorders and first week sales... It's now selling less than the original psp... So vita sales are sucking right now...

[Meelow100]

Sony's market has never been innovation, that's always been Nintendo's thing. The fact that the Vita is very much a standard handheld designed to play console style games shows that Sony has no intention of inventing some great new thing to revolutionize gaming, like the Wii arguably did. All that Sony needs for the PS4 is decent hardware and a good line up of games. I don't think they'll have trouble achieving either of those goals since they're a very big company that does infact have money to spend on these things. Plus Sony will gain third party support with PS4 much easier than Nintendo will with Wii U, simply because they have a much better history with developers. I don't think the Vita is doing as badly as people say either, seeing as it's only in Japan right now, where the PSP's entire reason for success was Monster Hunter which is now Nintendo exclusive. If Sony can get big western console games like CoD on the Vita, it could have much better sales over here.

WAIT...There are people that play COD on handles?.

[Lain]

In regards to weaker architecture of the Wii, it is true that the system missed out on great third party content, but that's only because third parties did not want to work with motion gaming at the time.

I disagree partially.

Motion controls probably don't contribute to the the lack of third party support as much as you believe. Tatsunoko vs. Capcom happened on the Wii. Call of Duty happened on the Wii. A bunch of other genres happened on the Wii. I kinda doubt remapping controls was the central issue with developers here. I'll consider it one of the problems, but the weaker hardware and different GPU were probably the bigger culprits in this area. Basically, if the power difference weren't so great, multiplatforming would have been very feasible for the Wii.

[Rubix87]

Don't misunderstand, I know that Playstation's forte is not innovation. What I meant was is that they NEED to do something innovative if they want to stay relevant. I've seen the trends for years and I know who the innovators are and the followers. Playstation has thus far been a follower and as such followed themselves into a money mire. I think maybe I need to be more clear on my posts because I get the feeling people aren't understanding my conjecture.

As regards the Wii support if a third party wanted to support it they had the choice, they simply chose not to. It's plain and simple. I understand the whole 360/PS architecture, but I think that's just cop out for third parties not wanting to think more out of the box.

@Link707: I put 4.7 billion in my initial post 7 billion was stated by someone else and I merely repeated that person's figure.

Edited by Rubix87, 21 January 2012 - 10:12 PM.

[Auzzie Wingman]

As regards the Wii support if a third party wanted to support it they had the choice, they simply chose not to. It's plain and simple. I understand the whole 360/PS architecture, but I think that's just cop out for third parties not wanting to think more out of the box.

This. In most cases, developers didn't want to lower the quality of their games just so a muddy port could work on the Wii's specs. Others, like Activision, are money whores looking to conquer everything, hence CoD working on the Wii. Even then, those ports were shoddy for the most part (although progressively better each time), and were really only giving Treyarch some work, and Activision an extra chance on the Wii.

Among other things, all developers were restricted to having to have a Wii Remote or Wii Remote+Nunchuk compatible scheme. This probably irritated a lot of devs hoping to make a game for the system, hence why the games that do appear on the Wii seem catered for it and less of a multiplatform design.

At least, Quality and Controls are my reasons for explaining what happened between the Wii and 3rd Parties.

[Lain]

As regards the Wii support if a third party wanted to support it they had the choice, they simply chose not to. It's plain and simple. I understand the whole 360/PS architecture, but I think that's just cop out for third parties not wanting to think more out of the box.

Honestly, weaker hardware, different GPU, and motion controls together is a legitimate excuse not to do multiplats. The fact is that the Wii had doubled its competition in terms of sales, meaning there was a huge install base to sell to. Unfortunately, a lot of that install base wasn't interested in a weaker Call of Duty, and that game ended up selling double the amount on the Xbox 360. I'm fairly certain third parties wanted to tap into the Wii sales, but their efforts never really profitted as much as they did on the HD consoles. It's things like this that discourage third party support.

I suppose you could bring up exclusives, but those rarely happened with third parties this generation. Everything was about multiplats, and that's where the Wii really fell behind. Even when it did happen, sales never encouraged further support.