PlayStation 4 General DiscussionPS4

[Spagetti69]

It's not like the only crowd that bought a PS3 at launch was the GT players, heck, there were people that bought a PS3 to get a JRPG that came out in 2010 :/

People buy consoles because they know more or less what to expect, plus the new games that will show up

I know what your saying and I agree. My statement was to the ones who whilst waiting for a release date for GT, Pulled the "I bought my PS3 for this game, where is it" brigade.

Believe me a lot around here said that. Well it's GTplanet so yeah.

My question to those people was don't you feel silly paying launch prices when they could have saved money buying a newer cheaper PS3 when GT actually released?

Generally the answer was " I don't care, I bought a PS3 for GT..... Where's the game Sony?

Etc etc. I suppose it was there divine right to expect the game on launch, did Sony ever promise a GT PS3 launch title?

 

[Luminis]

I think your missing something there...

GT1: 11.15 million copies sold.
GT2: 9.36 million copies sold.
GT3: 14.88 million copies sold.
GT4: 11.36 million copies sold. GT4prologue: 1.51 million copies sold - 12.87 million total copies sold
GT5: 7.41 million copies sold. GT5prologue: 4.09 million copies sold - 11.50 million total copies sold and still selling

Why would you lump the sales for the Prologue titles together witht he main games? I hardly doubt that those who bought GT4 did not buy GT4. Same for GT5. And the point was to illustrate that the user base is not growing as it gets older, as has been claimed.

It's cool that 4 million people bought GT5 in early 2007, but that hardly means that there has been a larger audience for GT5 than there was for GT3.

and if you count the fact that Forza has been around since 2005 (after GT4 was released) I think they are doing pretty good and maintaining sales more or less with an average of 12 million games sold per release wich by coincindence is the total of all Forza games sold.

Nobody's saying that PD is not doint well in the sales part. They surely have the largest audience and probably the highest individual sales in the racing genre. The fact that T10's Forza franchise sold about as much copies in total on the 360 as PD's GT franchise did on the PS3 will show, though, how important a shorteer development cycle can be.

I know what it looks like, but I'm sure it's not what most people think, I don't think GT series is losing ground

I, quite frankly, do not care about what people think about the GT franchise. It was claimed that the sales of the GT franchise will increase further as the audience gets older, and there's absolutely nothing to back that claim up.

What I am basically getting from this whole thing is the following message: "We all love Gran Turismo, so it's going to be the saving grace for Sony, yay!"

And it has been losing ground compared to the previous generation. Simply because: a) It's actually competing with something that offers a close gaming experience and b), and this is the important point, because Sony, as a whole, lost huge amounts of ground during this generation. GT6's sales will hardly increase if Sony doesn't manage to get the Orbis to sell significantly better than the PS3 did, at least in the first one or two years. That's a time frame where I can't see GT6 getting things along. Because I consider it unlikely that it's ready by then.

There's also one more point to consider: Should the Durango really be noticeably more powerful and, thus, produce better looking games than the Orbis (and that is what the rumours are indicating), it'll be quite hard for Sony to go up against that, especially if we're comparing genres that rely on eye candy.

A launch Gran Turismo 6 would probably sell as many copies as consoles

Looking at PD's track record, though, they'll never release a GT game in time. Never. At best, it'll release a year or so afterwards, like GT3 did. But I wouldn't be suprised to see another Prologue title getting released around that time, as opposed to a full game.

 

[Robin]

I feel the series is losing steam and the sales show this, people are not going to keep being resold the same old formula over and over again with some jazzed up graphics (and only 20% at that!). Add to that the massive emergence of casual gaming and most cannot be bothered to grind through a game like GT. It might well have the highest PS3 exclusive racing genre sales but that's because there is no equivalent competitor on the system, put Forza on PS3 and GT would get knocked off massively.

Forza truly innovated because it brought in other gamers who might just want to paint cars all day for example plus it has mostly dream and exotic cars rather than 'soccer mum' stuff which brings instant gratification and makes it very accessible (much like NFS). Plus the games come out twice as fast.

Most of GT's sales today I feel come from the diehards because you really have to be committed to the up and down relationship PD put you through to wait 6 years and be over the moon with what you received. That or they don't want to buy a 360!

 

[sikbeta]

Sony, as a whole, lost huge amounts of ground during this generation. GT6's sales will hardly increase if Sony doesn't manage to get the Orbis to sell significantly better than the PS3 did, at least in the first one or two years.

This is the point I was making about GT5 and PS3, if someone says that GT5 underperformed, it's not the game fault, but the Platform

That's a time frame where I can't see GT6 getting things along. Because I consider it unlikely that it's ready by then.

By the rumors, this time they're going for off the shelves parts to make a PS4, AMD APU+GPU will be miles easier to develop games for than CELL could ever be, easy to develop = less time to create a game and since the -300k models are done, the only thing needed for GT6 will be more Tracks (Bathurst anyone?)

Should the Durango really be noticeably more powerful and, thus, produce better looking games than the Orbis (and that is what the rumours are indicating), it'll be quite hard for Sony to go up against that, especially if we're comparing genres that rely on eye candy.

Sony really can't go for an arms race, they should focus on their console like they did with PS1 and PS2, most people think PS2 is a weak piece of HW, but the reality is that it was top notch by time it was released, then the other consoles came out and were more powerful, but that's what happen with tech every year, heck every month

For the eyecandy they have specialized Studios that can make wonders with "weak HW"

Santa Monica Studio - SCEA - God Of War Developers, GOWII is said to be the best looking PS2 game

Naughty Dog - SCEA - Arguably one of the best Developers in the Game Industry, they were the first to take full advantage of the PS3 capabilities back in 2009 with Uncharted 2 = Game Of The Year 2009 -> over 200 Game of the Year awards

Guerrilla Games - SCEE - Killzone Developers, KZ2 and KZ3 are one of the Best Graphical Showcases in the PS3, along with GOWIII and Uncharted Series

Polyphony Digital - Relative to SCEJ - GT Series are a Graphical Showcase everytime a new game comes out

They have their Strenght in their Developers, they shouldn't rely on super cutting edge tech, avoid another PS3 situation, although PS3 like case will never happen again, this time they're not going for a fancy but crazy CPU Chip that they only understand and the Media Format they'll use does not even cost a third of what it did at PS3 launch

Right now I'm in the same discussion about next gen consoles in another Forum and some guys like "hell no! with that kind of tech Sony should wait a year and launch in 2014 to get better tech in their console"

What's the point when you know tech always evolve, it's not like 2014 specs will stay frozen until another gaming generation

Also, these rumored specs are not the final specs


The rumored dev kit is made to simulate the average* (this is important) performance and features of the final machine, not the hw power, it's made with the current tech available, so it can't be an exact copy of the final machine that will be in stores next year

*By this I'm talking about engine optimization for games in closed systems that can't be compared to PC, in a console, a Developer can squeeze much more power out of the specs in the console for the simple fact that it's same architecture for 6 straight years with no changes

A developer can't do the same thing for PC games for the simple fact that PC can be upgradeable and there are thousand of different components, so he can't optimize his engine for a game, because it needs to be playable in every piece of different HW available in the market, and optimization for every piece of HW it's out of the question to even think about doing it for every GPU-CPU-APU available, let alone the money they'll need to spend to do it, but the time it'll cost to do it

In resume, even if those specs are real, you can count on the fact that games will look much better compared to a PC with similar specs

 

[Luminis]

This is the point I was making about GT5 and PS3, if someone says that GT5 underperformed, it's not the game fault, but the Platform

It goes hand in hand. On the one hand, the PS3 didn't allow for increasing sales on GT5's part, that's true. But GT5 didn't seem to ensure that the PS3 started to fly off the shelves by the time it was released. Hence me saying that, by the time it was released, GT5 was not enough of a system seller to be the saving grace for the PS3. And neither am I am going to believe that GT6 is going to be much different.

By the rumors, this time they're going for off the shelves parts to make a PS4, AMD APU+GPU will be miles easier to develop games for than CELL could ever be, easy to develop = less time to create a game and since the -300k models are done, the only thing needed for GT6 will be more Tracks (Bathurst anyone?)

From what PD said (which isn't very much), it's the modelling that took so long. And the models are done? Wait, what? 200/1000 cars are premium. That's a lot of work to be done there, if they don't want to release a game that's filled with aging assets - or a singificantly smaller number of cars.

Sony really can't go for an arms race, they should focus on their console like they did with PS1 and PS2, most people think PS2 is a weak piece of HW, but the reality is that it was top notch by time it was released, then the other consoles came out and were more powerful, but that's what happen with tech every year, heck every month

The reality is that the PS2 was sold with losses, too, and that the GameCube and the Xbox were only insignigically less powerful. Add to that that Sony had a huge installation base from the get go, and the initial situation was quite a bit different. Furthermore, third party support was a bit different when going from the PS1 to PS2.

The PS1 went out as the dominant console, selling more than 100 million units as compared to the N64's 30 million. Sony's situation is nowhere near as good as it was when they launched the PS2, nor as it was when they launched the PS3.

For the eyecandy they have specialized Studios that can make wonders with "weak HW"

Uh, yeah... Now, imagine this: The competition has the same specialized studios, which can use hardware to its fullest as well. Imagine what they can do with better hardware...

Santa Monica Studio - SCEA - God Of War Developers, GOWII is said to be the best looking PS2 game

Naughty Dog - SCEA - Arguably one of the best Developers in the Game Industry, they were the first to take full advantage of the PS3 capabilities back in 2009 with Uncharted 2 = Game Of The Year 2009 -> over 200 Game of the Year awards

Guerrilla Games - SCEE - Killzone Developers, KZ2 and KZ3 are one of the Best Graphical Showcases in the PS3, along with GOWIII and Uncharted Series

Polyphony Digital - Relative to SCEJ - GT Series are a Graphical Showcase everytime a new game comes out

Kinect Adventures - 16 million copies sold. Halo 3 - 11.5 million copies sold. No game made by Sony's first party studies matches that.

They have their Strenght in their Developers, they shouldn't rely on super cutting edge tech, avoid another PS3 situation, although PS3 like case will never happen again, this time they're not going for a fancy but crazy CPU Chip that they only understand and the Media Format they'll use does not even cost a third of what it did at PS3 launch[/qoute]
The point isn't that they might repeat a PS3 scenario. The point is what's happening due to:
1) The PS4 launching with significantly weaker hardware than the Durango for a similar price.
2) Sony largely missing trends like interactive games, forgoing things like Kinect.
3) Sony not having the huge installation base they had with the previous generations.

Right now I'm in the same discussion about next gen consoles in another Forum and some guys like "hell no! with that kind of tech Sony should wait a year and launch in 2014 to get better tech in their console"

What's the point when you know tech always evolve, it's not like 2014 specs will stay frozen until another gaming generation

It won't stay frozen, but the difference between the PS4 and the Durango might change for the better.

Also, these rumored specs are not the final specs

Not necessarily, but that's the sole thing to base this discussion on. Aside from, well, "I sooooo want Sony to release the bestest console ever so they will release the bestest console ever because that#s what Sony does because Sony is the bestest and I heart them."

The rumored dev kit is made to simulate the average* (this is important) performance and features of the final machine, not the hw power, it's made with the current tech available, so it can't be an exact copy of the final machine that will be in stores next year

Uh, what? You make it sound like a dev kit isn't made to develop games for the console on it?

*By this I'm talking about engine optimization for games in closed systems that can't be compared to PC, in a console, a Developer can squeeze much more power out of the specs in the console for the simple fact that it's same architecture for 6 straight years with no changes

A developer can't do the same thing for PC games for the simple fact that PC can be upgradeable and there are thousand of different components, so he can't optimize his engine for a game, because it needs to be playable in every piece of different HW available in the market, and optimization for every piece of HW it's out of the question to even think about doing it for every GPU-CPU-APU available, let alone the money they'll need to spend to do it, but the time it'll cost to do it

Why the gell are you rambling on about PCs now? How does that have anything to do with the situation of the PS4 and the Durango?

In resume, even if those specs are real, you can count on the fact that games will look much better compared to a PC with similar specs

I can also count on the fact that another console with better hardware will produce better looking games than the PS4.

 

[Spagetti69]

If PSN does not become free next time around I wonder how many will ditc?.

I've read plenty comments around these forums of how some are not prepared to pay for online.

I wonder how long Sony can sustain free to play?

 

[occasionalracer]

A bit late to reply, didn't have time yesterday anymore for this.

I don't fail to see the impact. I know that the game is a system seller and has been for a long while. A system seller has a lot less merrit, though, when the first full release happens about four years after the console launched. The problem isn't that Gran Turismo doesn't have much impact, the problem is that it's just plain stupid on Siny's part to not abuse it more.

Obviously Sony will be in big trouble if the game releases with such a ridicules delay again, no question. However I'm banking on the fact that Sony is putting major pressure on PD to have the game done so it can be included it in their advertising campaign in the months leading up to the Orbis release. Abuse it?? One could say they sort of have with 5 mi. copies of Prologue sold and recently making extra change of DLC, thankfully they have not become real thieves, like others out there taking advantage, so far PD's DLC has been justifiable.

That's the first thing, and the second things is that you probably misunderstood me, anyways. The point isn't that sims will never be able to move consoles, the point is that Sony does habe its prime simulator, which is Gran Turismo. Getting another one out there isn't going to accomplish as much. The simple fact is that, no matter how big GT is, a good FPS game is, in the current market, bigger. If you want proof, look at Halo, for example.

Yes, I know, and you remind us all with every post of yours, a good FPS is essential in the video game market, how stupid would I be to deny that? Nowhere in my post did I make direct comparisons of importance between GT and "BIG FPS", don't worry I understand most "gamers" want to go blowing things up instead of turning laps on a sim. None of the less, the success speaks for itself, and it sells because it HAS been the most realistic racing title, and clearly it IS something even non-simracing fans can connect with.

Did you bother too check how the sales of GT developed? In case you haven't:

GT3: 14.88 million copies sold.
GT4:11.36 million copies sold.
GT1: 11.15 million copies sold.
GT2: 9.36 million copies sold.
GT5: 7.41 million copies sold.

If your theory was correct, we'd see GT's sales increase as the audience gets older. It doesn't. And while I agree that an older demographic is more likely to have first-hand driving experience, I disagree that this will in any shape or form translate to how many people are going to buy a console racer.

sikbeta made a good reply to your cheap assessment of copies sold in relation to it's current success, here are other couple other considerations:

1. By the time GT5 comes off shelves, I guarantee that it will be sitting at the 10 mil. mark, "XL Edition" can now be had for half the price, so it will definitely keep selling slowly but surely.

2. For all the millions that owned a GT title on PS2 or GT on PS3, there is without a doubt a massive chunk who know what "type" of racing game GT is... many thought it's rather boring and would rather play traditional action-packed racing games, so millions of "first time" buyers of GT3/4/5 have lost interest, it's understandable.... however the 7.5 mil copies is still very respectable so far.

3. My theory of older gamers being more likely to be customers of GT6/Orbis is still very valid, because point number 2 would dictate that a lot of the "one-off" buyers have been weeded out, so what we now have is more realistic crowd of actual GT owners. Let's not forget the amazing advancement in graphics and physics/FFB wheels now, which give sims much much more reason to play since PS2 days. The older crowd will respect that and be in the market for new hardware, more so than mommy and daddy are for bobby's Birthday/Christmas present.

I'd say that there are actually more people who are loyal GT5 fans. Because, frankly, I doubt that being an enthusiast sim racer is intrinsically tied to being a GT fan. I'd actually say that those who are truly dedicated sim racers are more at home on the PC, anyways.

PC sim-racing, as you've said is a tiny crowd really, maybe 500,000 at most around the world, sure, if they don't want to convert to a console, even if GT/Forza pump out a highly respectable physics engine, so what, PD/ Turn 10 are still laughing.

But, the point is: Sony gets some of those 7.5 million GT buyers again. Microsoft, on the other hand, is going to get somewhere around the same percentage of the 11.5 million Halo buyers out there. And while I get that, on a website like GTPlanet, most people will have a bias for racing games and especially GT5, it should be obvious that there are games that have more impact than GT5 does. And, most importantly, and that has been the main point of my argument, that GT does what it does not because the racing sim market is this profitable, but because it is GT and comes with the GT badge on the cover.

Damn, I know and do you know that half of Halo buyers are children who got it as a present? The love will end when bobby asks for the new console, this is why I'm not being biased towards GT, it's just a simple fact that the most popular racing franchise attracts a much more mature crowd... which again, means the likely hood of purchases from this crowd at launch prices is 10-fold...

Who'll care about iRacing, and an iRacing-like physics engine in 2015, though? More importantly, by that time, the next generation "console war" might already be over.

Do you know that PD is working alongside the Playstation guys to create the Orbis? PD has a huge advantage here to be ahead of the game, they've opened a second office and hired a bunch more staff, I don't doubt for a minute that they are pushing this game for release day... more than half the game is already modeled, they'll have the core of the game complete by the end of this year. If your 2015 holds true, then yes, they can just pack up now. And again, obviously the "average GT-buyer" doesn't care if PD pulls off an iRacing-like physics engine, but believe me it can only help the excitement, as long as the whole package is still fun for everybody.

Race Pro didn't. It was on the 360. GTR didn't. It was on the 360. Both games are far more of a sim than GT5 and/or Forza, and both sold next to nothing. So, no, it's not only due to being on PC.

Lol, I haven't heard of either, obviously they were flops to begin with... an all-out sims doesn't have to be stale and boring, it should be as exciting as real-life racing, for that you need amazing graphics and physics, that's it, and we now have decent range of wheels to connect us physically to the physics these days... Logitech has sold insane amounts of DFGT's and G25/7 due to GT5 alone.

Sigh... For the umpteenth time: You could probably slap the most realistic or the most arcady physics engine ever onto GT5 and I'd say that it would hardly impact its quality as a system seller. GT is, in that regard, the Call of Duty of racing games. Sadly, as it gives PD the freedom to do whatever whithout getting a bloody nose when they do bad, but that's a different topic all together. The thing is: You're not going to sell many more Orbits by creating another sim racing franchise, or another racing game in general. The market is quite well catered for, with GT5 as well as the "crappy" games that cater to target audiences that GT5 doesn't cater to. Going with the biggest market, right now, is a much safer bet and will get more consoles sold than that. That's the whole point.

I wouldn't dream of saying that Sony should drop Gran Turismo. They just shouldn't make a carbon copy of GT, as some other members have suggested. If you are going to try and profit from a market that's already close to saturation, go with the biggest one.

Never did I say Playstation needs other sim-like racers, to be honest I don't think Sony would allow EA or Codemasters to release a GT rival. Sony wants Gran Turismo to be a name to goes hand in hand with "the best racing simulation" on a console... that's always been their aim, and they'll want to make sure it stays that way...

As if your average Joe actually gave a damn about how realistic the game is...

Yes, obviously the average Joe could give two flying banana peels about physics, but you have to understand that the physics engine and the washed out online-physics has been the weak point of GT5 by far, it can only help sales IF solid physics are produced for GT6.

GT is popular. That's why it's a system seller. It doesn't habe to be very realistic or even very good to do that. PD could release GT6 in a state that's even more unfinished than GT5 was, and it would probably still sell 5+ million copies.

Ummm, no way, obviously everyone will keep playing on PS3 then or move to the Durango or PC, no way PD will sleep anymore, they know the competition that exists in the sim-world lately.

Will GT6 outsell a given Forza game? Definitely. Will it move many Orbits? Not if it, like GT5, releases four years into the generation. Not if, by that time, MS have shown that the Durango comes with more powerful hardware. And especially not if MS was clever enough to abuse franchises like Gears of War and Halo to draw in more potential customers than GT ever could. Factor in that MS actually took notice of trends like interactive gaming and pushed out Kinect in time, and you'll understand my point:

It's nice to have GT5, but that's just not good enough if something like Kinect Adventures sells about as many copies as GT5, GT5rologue and Metal Gear Solid 4 combined. Also, don't get me wrong: I wasn't very satisfied with Sony during this generation, but I am not gleeful or happy to seem them in the sorry state that they are in. Microsoft dominating the market with the Durango like Sony did with the PS2 isn't what I want to see. Because, well, it might lead to the successor of the Durango going downhill as much as the PS3 went downhill compared to the PS2.

You do like comparing apples to oranges... you somehow believe that games like GoW and Halo are in direct competition with GT... easily half of all those sales are kids and young teens because they all have to have it to play with their friends. Of course it's highly important for Sony/Microsoft to have some really cool games at release other that racing, I never denied this, however GT has a much older crowd... I guarantee that 10's of millions kids between 5-14 who tried GT/Forza almost immediately say "This Sucks" and move on to something more fun.

So again, my only real argument here anyway, all those millions of kids will not be so lucky to have parents buying them a new console, whereas GT/Forza fans are usually at least 14-30 years of age, so one can make a fair assumption, they are earning their own money and will take the plunge on launch prices....

At the end of the day I think both systems are going to be much more than just a gaming console with cheap internet browsers, I think they'll be masters of everything... with endless apps and so on basically taking away the need for a PC. Who will have what it takes to be the coolest "must have" console? Right now we need to hang in there for a while to see what exactly each party has in store, it will be very interesting what happens, because a wonderful 50-50 market share will probably never exist... one system will have much more success than the other.

 

[sikbeta]

It goes hand in hand. On the one hand, the PS3 didn't allow for increasing sales on GT5's part, that's true. But GT5 didn't seem to ensure that the PS3 started to fly off the shelves by the time it was released. Hence me saying that, by the time it was released, GT5 was not enough of a system seller to be the saving grace for the PS3. And neither am I am going to believe that GT6 is going to be much different.

5 Years into the console life cycle can't make it easy for any game, was too late for the game to help the PS3, heck, MGS4 (2008) helped the PS3 more than GT5 ever could when it comes to sales

From what PD said (which isn't very much), it's the modelling that took so long. And the models are done? Wait, what? 200/1000 cars are premium. That's a lot of work to be done there, if they don't want to release a game that's filled with aging assets - or a singificantly smaller number of cars.

You'll not see 800 cars Premiums + the current 200, unless they outsource all those models to other companies and it's not like there must be +1k cars in the next game, it's a bullet point for sales and stuff, but they can pretty much ditch them and use the current Premium ones and the ones they're currently doing (guessing here), they really should focus in more tracks though

The reality is that the PS2 was sold with losses, too,

Sony's Strategy with everything, they know they lose money with the console, but they'll recoup and profit from software sales

and that the GameCube and the Xbox were only insignigically less powerful.

You say GC and Xbox were less powerful than PS2? Eh, NO! the opposite, PS2 was the weakest console last gen (excluding Dreamcast) it launched first and 1 year later GC and Xbox came out, in HW power:

Xbox > GC > PS2

It's said that Xbox is more powerful than the wii

Add to that that Sony had a huge installation base from the get go, and the initial situation was quite a bit different.

Like every PS console, on launch skyrocket and then went down (upgrade or not upgrade dilema), but with the release of games, it came back on top and never stopped

Furthermore, third party support was a bit different when going from the PS1 to PS2.

Third Party became huge thanks to the PS1, those third party game sold great, so the support of the next console was a no brainer, even in this gen where PS3 is in third place, Third Party Games keep selling great and no dubt they'll supporting the new console as well, if not, they'd only rely on XBX3 or wii-u, but third party games on Nintendo platforms have performed awfuly since the N64, like 3 generations ago

The PS1 went out as the dominant console, selling more than 100 million units as compared to the N64's 30 million. Sony's situation is nowhere near as good as it was when they launched the PS2, nor as it was when they launched the PS3.

Third Party will maximize profits no matter what, there is no way they'd ditch Sony when the only substitute is a console from a brand that only sell their games, look a N best seller games, almost everything is Nintendo

Uh, yeah... Now, imagine this: The competition has the same specialized studios, which can use hardware to its fullest as well. Imagine what they can do with better hardware...

MS doesn't have many studios, their top franchises are Halo and Gears and Gears is not owned by MS, it's from Epic, if they wanted they could spin-off Gears IP and would be a Multiplatform title, I said spin-off because even if they can do whatever they want with Gears IP, they sure have some respect to their buyers, aka, don't want to piss them off

Forza is there as well, but it's pushed with Console Bundles

Kinect Adventures - 16 million copies sold.

Kinect is backed by huge ad campaigns, no surpises there, it's the new hot gimmick like the wii-mote was in 2006

Halo 3 - 11.5 million copies sold. No game made by Sony's first party studies matches that.

Can't deny that, Halo is the savior of MS, it has a huge community and it's the major flagship title from MS, even though COD has surpassed it

And what you quoted was about Eye-Candy -> Quality =/= Sales

The point isn't that they might repeat a PS3 scenario. The point is what's happening due to:
1) The PS4 launching with significantly weaker hardware than the Durango for a similar price.

Why you'd assume that?, weaker hw = affordable price, like always have been, wii is basically a GCx2 and sold for $250, Nintendo made huge profits from it

It's obvious that IF Sony is not going to shoot for the sun, they'll make sure is affordable

2) Sony largely missing trends like interactive games, forgoing things like Kinect.

They can add a waggle-controller and call it a day, as long as it has games for it, they're OK, since the day they decided to enter the gaming market, they aim at the 15-35 years range, maybe next gen they'll go for the casuals as well, but the core gamers have been their source for years, now with the raise of mobile and tablets gaming, go look at Nintendo, they're aiming to the core this time with the wii-u (granted the tablet-controller is another atempt to get casuals again, they're not stupid to not try for a sencond time), they're aware that they can lose those casuals that bought those wii 5 years ago, if they didn't lost them already

The gaming industry as a whole keeps shooting at the sun, always up there, they want to compete with films and all that, that's why they know that casuals are not reliable, one day you have them and the other they found something else to adore until a new thing comes out and the cycle repeats

The Core Gamers will never leave as long as they get what they want 👍

3) Sony not having the huge installation base they had with the previous generations.

It's all about price and games, PS3 without that fancy CELL and Blu-Ray could have been a PS2 situation all over again, this gen Sony went crazy, PS3 could have a PS2 like success by supporting Blu-Ray alone, but 2 new things that were difficult to manufacture back in 2006/2007 at the same time? heck no! and they know that now

It won't stay frozen, but the difference between the PS4 and the Durango might change for the better.

Launch First is what they need for the simple fact that they can retain the newcomers with their offering, it's not just PS4, it's PS4 + PSN, when people jumped to X360, they didn't leave because they have already paid for Live, once the investement was done, you can't simple let it go, now IF Sony launch first with a better PSN infrastructure and people find it appealing, they'll not leave, they'll invest time in it and decide to stay

Thing is, they have better chances by launching first, new fancy tech will not help at all, I don't see people complaining about X360 not having games with the Graphics of a PC games, because they're OK with what they have

Not necessarily, but that's the sole thing to base this discussion on. Aside from, well, "I sooooo want Sony to release the bestest console ever so they will release the bestest console ever because that#s what Sony does because Sony is the bestest and I heart them."

People want cutting edge tech but then complain about the console being so expensive, they can't have both, either best HW at higher price or affordable console with not insanely expensive tech inside

Uh, what? You make it sound like a dev kit isn't made to develop games for the console on it?

You do know Dev Kits don't have the same HW configurations, right? it's a "upcoming console simulator" = "take this kit until final specs are set in stone, will tell you if it's going to be more powerful or not and we will hand you a new Dev Kit with similar specs of the final product"

Right now, that dev kit could be an obsolete unit and a newer version can come out with better hw

For reference, search X360 dev kits, it said to be like a dozen with different configurations, even some of them came with 2 gpus

Why the gell are you rambling on about PCs now? How does that have anything to do with the situation of the PS4 and the Durango?

Rambling? really? I just showing the difference between the advantages of a closed HW configuration in which a dev can develop further and squeeze out more power compared to a PC in which there are thousand hw configurations that makes it impossible to do it

Same can be said about Orbis/Durango, Sony will make their devs push the console to the limit, MS will make Halo and Gears dev push it as well, 343 Studios will do it, Epic uses their UE middleware engines, they have a limit and don't think they'll push as hard

I can also count on the fact that another console with better hardware will produce better looking games than the PS4.

OK, I don't know if you understand why I'm trying to say with the PC vs Console comparison

for Consoles you have a box with:

·GPU = the same in every box
·CPU = the same in every box
·Ram = the same in every box

Devs aknowledge that and tweak, optimize their tools or create specific engines to take full advantage of what they have in that box

for PCs you have:

·thousands of different GPU Cards from 256MB VRAM to
·Hundred of different CPUs from P4 to Quad-Core
·from 256MB to 8GB of Ram

Devs can't tweak their tools to take full advantage of a PC, because there isn't a PC with the same specs in every home

Devs would tweak the tools to take full advantage of the PC with higher specs, but that will negate the other PCs that don't have those specs, so what Devs do in reality is aim for the middle-ground or lower, so games can be playable in every PC, now you get it?

and yeah, in 2020 PS9 will be more powerful than PS4, that's how tech works, amazing right

 

[Luminis]

Obviously Sony will be in big trouble if the game releases with such a ridicules delay again, no question. However I'm banking on the fact that Sony is putting major pressure on PD to have the game done so it can be included it in their advertising campaign in the months leading up to the Orbis release.

I'm not questioning that the game will be ussed to advertise the Orbis. Remember how GT PSP was advertised as an upcoming launch title of the PSP? I hope you are right, though.

Abuse it?? One could say they sort of have with 5 mi. copies of Prologue sold and recently making extra change of DLC, thankfully they have not become real thieves, like others out there taking advantage, so far PD's DLC has been justifiable.

Matter of taste, I suppose. I'd still say that a full release would get far more consoles across the table than any Prologue game.

Yes, I know, and you remind us all with every post of yours, a good FPS is essential in the video game market, how stupid would I be to deny that? Nowhere in my post did I make direct comparisons of importance between GT and "BIG FPS", don't worry I understand most "gamers" want to go blowing things up instead of turning laps on a sim. None of the less, the success speaks for itself, and it sells because it HAS been the most realistic racing title, and clearly it IS something even non-simracing fans can connect with.

That's all well and good, but do you remember why this whole debate started? How Sony should make more games like GT? How that'll make them sell PS4s like hotcakes? Dunno the big deal with this, all I ever said was they shouldn't, as the GT franchise, no matter how succesful, is not something that can be easily replicated with another racing game. And that there are more important things to do.

I don't get why everyone has to defend Gran Turismo like their mother, really.

1. By the time GT5 comes off shelves, I guarantee that it will be sitting at the 10 mil. mark, "XL Edition" can now be had for half the price, so it will definitely keep selling slowly but surely.

See, that's what I mean. You guys are now so hellbent on defending GT's success, that the whole point of the discussion is entirely being missed. It's great that you guarantee what sales GT5 will have achieved in, dunno, two years from now. How, exactly, does that relate to the point that I made?

2. For all the millions that owned a GT title on PS2 or GT on PS3, there is without a doubt a massive chunk who know what "type" of racing game GT is... many thought it's rather boring and would rather play traditional action-packed racing games, so millions of "first time" buyers of GT3/4/5 have lost interest, it's understandable.... however the 7.5 mil copies is still very respectable so far.

And that supports the claim that GT's audience is growing as it gets older, on which way?

3. My theory of older gamers being more likely to be customers of GT6/Orbis is still very valid, because point number 2 would dictate that a lot of the "one-off" buyers have been weeded out, so what we now have is more realistic crowd of actual GT owners. Let's not forget the amazing advancement in graphics and physics/FFB wheels now, which give sims much much more reason to play since PS2 days. The older crowd will respect that and be in the market for new hardware, more so than mommy and daddy are for bobby's Birthday/Christmas present.

So, losing the "on-off" buyers makes the audience grow?

PC sim-racing, as you've said is a tiny crowd really, maybe 500,000 at most around the world, sure, if they don't want to convert to a console, even if GT/Forza pump out a highly respectable physics engine, so what, PD/ Turn 10 are still laughing.

It's not only PC sim racing. Sims on consoles habe failed as well, aside fromm the simcade GT and FM.

Damn, I know and do you know that half of Halo buyers are children who got it as a present? The love will end when bobby asks for the new console, this is why I'm not being biased towards GT, it's just a simple fact that the most popular racing franchise attracts a much more mature crowd... which again, means the likely hood of purchases from this crowd at launch prices is 10-fold...

Do I know that? Or rather, do you know that? Or are you just making assumptions? Because, to me, it looks like you're just pulling that out of thin air.

Do you know that PD is working alongside the Playstation guys to create the Orbis? PD has a huge advantage here to be ahead of the game, they've opened a second office and hired a bunch more staff, I don't doubt for a minute that they are pushing this game for release day...

Sure. There track record shows that PD has never been late to the party, right?

more than half the game is already modeled, they'll have the core of the game complete by the end of this year.

We'll see. Remember how long they worked on GT5 and how far they got with the assets? Sorry for not having blind faith in them just changing their ways.

If your 2015 holds true, then yes, they can just pack up now. And again, obviously the "average GT-buyer" doesn't care if PD pulls off an iRacing-like physics engine, but believe me it can only help the excitement, as long as the whole package is still fun for everybody.

Exactly, it doesn't matter. All that counts is the hype.

Lol, I haven't heard of either, obviously they were flops to begin with... an all-out sims doesn't have to be stale and boring, it should be as exciting as real-life racing, for that you need amazing graphics and physics, that's it, and we now have decent range of wheels to connect us physically to the physics these days... Logitech has sold insane amounts of DFGT's and G25/7 due to GT5 alone.

Am I the only one that sees a conection between the need to have amazing graphics and the competition having potentially superior hardware? But, anyways, yes, neither of the games did anything on the consoles, obviously.

Never did I say Playstation needs other sim-like racers, to be honest I don't think Sony would allow EA or Codemasters to release a GT rival. Sony wants Gran Turismo to be a name to goes hand in hand with "the best racing simulation" on a console... that's always been their aim, and they'll want to make sure it stays that way...

I know you never said that. Someone else, though, did. And I disagreed with that, pointing out that it's entirely pointless because, as it is, racing games aren't the market to go for. And how even GT itsself was a bit lackluster during this generation, compared to other system sellers. And here I am, a few posts later, arguing about how GT is important for Sony (which I never challenged), arguing over GT being successful (which, again, I never challenged).

Yes, obviously the average Joe could give two flying banana peels about physics, but you have to understand that the physics engine and the washed out online-physics has been the weak point of GT5 by far, it can only help sales IF solid physics are produced for GT6.

For the hell of it, just venture into the "FM vs. GT" thread and see how money people are saying that GT5's physics are excellent. You'll be suprised.

Ummm, no way, obviously everyone will keep playing on PS3 then or move to the Durango or PC, no way PD will sleep anymore, they know the competition that exists in the sim-world lately.

Wasn't it Kazunori who said that he doesn't look at what the competition does?

You do like comparing apples to oranges... you somehow believe that games like GoW and Halo are in direct competition with GT...

You know, it's hard to not compare those games when I'm using their sales figures to support my claim that the FPS genre is what you should go for if you want to create a system seller.

easily half of all those sales are kids and young teens because they all have to have it to play with their friends.

Let me raise you an argument with as much evidence to back it up as yours: The percentage of Halo or GoW players that aren't kids is higher than the amount of simracers among the GT5 buyers.

Of course it's highly important for Sony/Microsoft to h

ave some really cool games at release other that racing, I never denied this, however GT has a much older crowd... I guarantee that 10's of millions kids between 5-14 who tried GT/Forza almost immediately say "This Sucks" and move on to something more fun.

So again, my only real argument here anyway, all those millions of kids will not be so lucky to have parents buying them a new console, whereas GT/Forza fans are usually at least 14-30 years of age, so one can make a fair assumption, they are earning their own money and will take the plunge on launch prices....

So, your "real argument" is basically just you saying "those FPS gamers are all kids". Awesome.

At the end of the day I think both systems are going to be much more than just a gaming console with cheap internet browsers, I think they'll be masters of everything... with endless apps and so on basically taking away the need for a PC. Who will have what it takes to be the coolest "must have" console? Right now we need to hang in there for a while to see what exactly each party has in store, it will be very interesting what happens, because a wonderful 50-50 market share will probably never exist... one system will have much more success than the other.

Well, we habe a case of the PS3 and the 360 being tied at nearly 50-50. The Wii's obviously hit a homerun, anyways, but still.

5 Years into the console life cycle can't make it easy for any game, was too late for the game to help the PS3, heck, MGS4 (2008) helped the PS3 more than GT5 ever could when it comes to sales

Precisely.

You'll not see 800 cars Premiums + the current 200, unless they outsource all those models to other companies and it's not like there must be +1k cars in the next game, it's a bullet point for sales and stuff, but they can pretty much ditch them and use the current Premium ones and the ones they're currently doing (guessing here), they really should focus in more tracks though

That's actually what I said PD should've done with GT5. The problem with recycling the current car models, though, is the same thing we've had with the standard cars. Anyways, I'm wondering whether PD will drop their bullet point with the car count. They went to great lengths to get it onto GT5's box, after all.

Sony's Strategy with everything, they know they lose money with the console, but they'll recoup and profit from software sales

Which is perfectly common in the industry. It's Sony that's changing that, though, and I can hardly see how making a console that#s not sold at a loss is going to help them keep or increase their market share.

You say GC and Xbox were less powerful than PS2? Eh, NO! the opposite, PS2 was the weakest console last gen (excluding Dreamcast) it launched first and 1 year later GC and Xbox came out, in HW power:

My bad, I meant to say that the PS2 was only insignificantly less powerful. The important point is the "insignificantly".

Like every PS console, on launch skyrocket and then went down (upgrade or not upgrade dilema), but with the release of games, it came back on top and never stopped

Erm, what? Sony had about 100 million PS1s out when the PS2 launched and even more when the PS3 launched. Having less than 70 million PS3s out isn't going to be the greatest help to sell the PS4 in comparison, is it?

Third Party became huge thanks to the PS1, those third party game sold great, so the support of the next console was a no brainer, even in this gen where PS3 is in third place, Third Party Games keep selling great and no dubt they'll supporting the new console as well, if not, they'd only rely on XBX3 or wii-u, but third party games on Nintendo platforms have performed awfuly since the N64, like 3 generations ago

The point is, it's not going to be like it was in the PS2 days, when Sony got exclusive third party games that acted as system sellers, like Final Fantasy, for example.

Third Party will maximize prfits no matter what, there is no way they'd ditch Sony when the only substitute is a console from a brand that only sell their games, look a N best seller games, almost everything is Nintendo

Imagine, for a second, the launch of the Durango reversing the situation of the PS2. The PS4 being outsold by a larrge enough margin that MS is able to gather third parties to create exclusive titles. That's why I think Sony has to stay on its toes and prevent that.

Kinect is backed by huge ad campaigns, no surpises there, it's the new hot gimmick like the wii-mote was in 2006

Exactly. And who missed the party in 2006 and is missing it again?

Can't deny that, Halo is the savior of MS, it has a huge community and it's the major flagship title from MS, even though COD has surpassed it

CoD pretty much surpassed anything. And, yeah, Sony needs a saviour like Halo themselves.

And what you quoted was about Eye-Candy -> Quality =/= Sales

You think eye candy isn't helping to sell stuff?

Why you'd assume that?, weaker hw = affordable price, like alwasy have been, wii is basically a GCx2 and sold for $250, Nintendo made huge profits from it

Sigh...

PS4: Sold at 250$, Sony makes profit.
Durango: Sold at 250$, MS loses 100$ with every console sold. Consumer gets more powerful hardware, though.

Which console, do you think, is better value, hardware wise, for the customer? The big point is that Sony isn't going to sell the PS4 at a loss. MS, though, might. And that could very well be a huge advantage for them. Selling better hardware for the same money might enable them too capture even larger market shares.

It's obvious that IF Sony is not going to shoot for the sun, they'll make sure is affordable

Problem is, MS making their console affordable while aiming for the sun. Because they can afford to do so.

They can add a waggle-controller and call it a day, as long as it has games for it, they're OK, since the day they decided to enter the gaming market, they aim at the 15-35 years range, maybe next gen they'll go for the casuals as well, but the core gamers have been their source for years, now with the raice of mobile and tablets gaming, go look at Nintendo, they're aiming to the core this time with the wii-u (granted the tablet-controller is another atempt to get casuals again, they're not srupid to not try for a sencond time), they're aware that they can lose those casuals that bought those wii 5 years ago, if they didn't lost them already

So, what you're saying is that losing all the casuals to Nintendo and MS isn't a big deal?

The gaming industry as a whole keeps shooting at the sun, always up there, they want to compete with films and all that, that's why they know that casuals are not reliable, one day you have them and the other they found some thing else to adore until a new thing comes out and the cycle repeats

So, instead, they should just ignore the market that offers huge profits if catered to properly? What good is the fact they might not stick with the same style of games for years when you can easily make a few million dollars along the way?

The Core Gamers will never leave as long as they get what they want

So, MS is catering to the casuals anyways, as does Nintendo. That leaves Sony, who are, as I understood you, not supposed to cater to them, to fight with MS over the core gamers. Now, if I offered a core gamer two consoles for the same money, one with better hardware and a similar portfolio of games, I wonder which one he's going to take...

It's all about price and games, PS3 without that fancy CELL and Blu-Ray could have been a PS2 situation all over again, this gen Sony went crazy, PS3 could have a PS2 like success by supporting Blu-Ray alone, but 2 new things that were difficult to manufacture back in 2006/2007 at the same time? heck no! and they know that now

The PS2 was insanely expensive as launch as well. The situation with the PS2 was quite different. And the inception of the PS3 was quite different, still. But I've made that point often enough by now.

Launch First is what they need for the simple fact that they can retain the newcomers with their offering, it's not just PS4, it's PS4 + PSN, when people jumped to X360, they didn't leave because they have already paid for Live, once the investement was done, you can't simple let it go, now IF Sony launch first with a better PSN infrastructure and people find it appealing, they'll not leave, they'll invest time in it and decide to stay

I doubt that launching first alone is going to be the key to success. Not by itself, and right now, that's the only advantage I'm seeing that Sony has. It didn't do the Dreamcast much good, though.

Thing is, they have better chances by launching first, new fancy tech will not help at all, I don't see people complaining about X360 not having games with the Graphics of a PC games, because they're OK with what they have

Sure, because PCs are quite a different animal all together.

People want cutting edge tech but then complain about the console being so expensive, they can't have both, either best HW at higher price or affordable console with not insanely expensive tech inside

In comparison, and I've said that before, they can. They can habe the PS4 that's being sold with a profit or the Durango which might be sold at a loss. Both similar in price, one more cutting edge than the other.

You do know Dev Kits don't have the same HW configurations, right? it's a "upcoming console simulator" = "take this kit until final specs are set in stone, will tell you if it's going to be more powerful or not and we will hand you a new Dev Kit with similar specs of the final product"

Wrong. The dev kits are exactly that, hardware to develop on. The hardware configuration isn't exactly what's going to be in the final product, as has been evident on the 360. The dev kits were slightly less powerful than the retail cconsole. but the difference is nowhere near as dramatic as you're making it sound. Basically, Sony wom't go from a four-core AMD CPU and a seven-series AMD GPU to somethign that matches a sixteen core PowerPC CPU and a double seven series AMD GPU.

Rambling? really? I just showing the difference between the advantages of a closed HW configuration in which a dev can develop further and squeeze out more power compared to a PC in which there are thousand hw configurations that makes it impossible to do it

The CPU comparison is pointless, however, as we're talking about two consoles.

OK, I don't know if you understand why I'm trying to say with the PC vs Console comparison

for Consoles you have a box with:

·GPU = the same in every box
·CPU = the same in every box
·Ram = the same in every box

Devs aknowledge that and tweak, optimize their tools or create specific engines to take full advantage of what they have in that box

for PCs you have:

·thousands of different GPU Cards from 256MB VRAM to
·Hundred of different CPUs from P4 to Quad-Core
·from 256MB to 8GB of Ram

Devs can't tweak their tools to take full advantage of a PC, because there isn't a PC with the same specs in every home

Devs would tweak the tools to take full advantage of the PC with higher specs, but that will negate the other PCs that don't have those specs, so what Devs do in reality is aim for the middle-ground or lower, so games can be playable in every PC, now you get it?

I got that from the get go. Just remind me, though, how this exactly has anything to do with me claiming that the Durango, which is an equally closed system, might generate better graphics due to better hardware.

Because, if you didn't understand this, in the Durango you have

·GPU = the same in every box
·CPU = the same in every box
·Ram = the same in every box

Just that the components are, according to the rumours, more powerful than that was is rumoured to end up in the PS4. Console with better haredware = better graphics.

and yeah, in 2020 PS9 will be more powerful than PS4, that's how tech works, amazing right

You've got quite the condescending attitude for someone who's starting to talk about how a console can be better optimized than a PC when the topic at hand is about comparing two consoles.

 

[occasionalracer]

I'm not questioning that the game will be ussed to advertise the Orbis. Remember how GT PSP was advertised as an upcoming launch title of the PSP? I hope you are right, though.

I think at Sony it's always been a matter of good intention, which then turns into some technical difficulty behind closed doors, I don't think Sony has ever had the intention to rev a hype on release dates knowing they will never meet their promises. I think there's been a certain amount of bad luck at Sony.


Matter of taste, I suppose. I'd still say that a full release would get far more consoles across the table than any Prologue game.

No doubt.


That's all well and good, but do you remember why this whole debate started? How Sony should make more games like GT? How that'll make them sell PS4s like hotcakes? Dunno the big deal with this, all I ever said was they shouldn't, as the GT franchise, no matter how succesful, is not something that can be easily replicated with another racing game. And that there are more important things to do.

I don't get why everyone has to defend Gran Turismo like their mother, really.


I actually never said that, nor do I want any sim like games to appear on Playstation, must of been somebody else.

There's a difference between defending something crappy and having an optimistic view about something that has valid potential for the future, I've had a lot fun hours with Gran Turismo and I want that to continue on PS4, that's all.

See, that's what I mean. You guys are now so hellbent on defending GT's success, that the whole point of the discussion is entirely being missed. It's great that you guarantee what sales GT5 will have achieved in, dunno, two years from now. How, exactly, does that relate to the point that I made?

Whatever.


And that supports the claim that GT's audience is growing as it gets older, on which way?

The numbers of copies pushed might not be higher as previous consoles, but likely more than half the copies were collecting dust and never played at all.


So, losing the "on-off" buyers makes the audience grow?

Of course the game has to maintain appeal to everybody, including the one-off buyers next gen, and those who may have skipped GT5 altogether.


It's not only PC sim racing. Sims on consoles habe failed as well, aside fromm the simcade GT and FM.

That's because they were slightly stale, and yes, it is pretty crazy how GT 1-4 sold THAT many copies, because the average Joe, like you say doesn't care for sims, I believe it was good marketing and a lot of parents bought it for their kids. I mean I basically didn't know anybody during my years growing up that was into GT, although for some reason everybody had a copy. Definitely a bit of a gold mine. But again times have changed and gamers are older and racing hardware does make a big difference in the genre.


Do I know that? Or rather, do you know that? Or are you just making assumptions? Because, to me, it looks like you're just pulling that out of thin air.

Completely realistic assumption, are going to counter that with "Oh no kids own these games" ... millions of kids have these games...


Sure. There track record shows that PD has never been late to the party, right?

I'm optimistic they wake up.


We'll see. Remember how long they worked on GT5 and how far they got with the assets? Sorry for not having blind faith in them just changing their ways.

Bad luck I suppose, I think they were in serious trouble a long while trying to their game to run smooth on PS3, they were probably pulling each other hair out for a couple years... optimistic that they learned a few tricks to avoid disaster again.

Exactly, it doesn't matter. All that counts is the hype.

Kind of, but it's not as easy as it used to be, these days internet discussion and reviews are major part in decision making.

For the hell of it, just venture into the "FM vs. GT" thread and see how money people are saying that GT5's physics are excellent. You'll be suprised.

Ya I know, but wouldn't it be wonderful if all those laughing at the physics and FFB, to have a much better sensation of feeling the car as the PC sims, obviously the better the wheel the better the experience, it's of huge importance they get it right this time.


Wasn't it Kazunori who said that he doesn't look at what the competition does?

That's what anybody says that's confident, I know he knows what he has to do, the guy is running at the ADAC 24 Stunden Nürburgring for the last few years, no brainer to him GT5 is still off by a bit.


You know, it's hard to not compare those games when I'm using their sales figures to support my claim that the FPS genre is what you should go for if you want to create a system seller.

I mean I agree. But there's lots of people like me, who aren't into shooters much and play mostly racing and/or sports games.

Let me raise you an argument with as much evidence to back it up as yours: The percentage of Halo or GoW players that aren't kids is higher than the amount of simracers among the GT5 buyers.

Definitely agree, but in relation to sales, FPS scoop of mass amounts of kids compared to a sim-like game such as GT/Forza.

So, your "real argument" is basically just you saying "those FPS gamers are all kids". Awesome.

No.


Well, we habe a case of the PS3 and the 360 being tied at nearly 50-50. The Wii's obviously hit a homerun, anyways, but still.

You know that is quite remarkable, which is why both Microsoft and Sony are almost on even terms with brand recognition, but I'd still say that Playstation has the overall upper hand if you were to take a worldwide poll. No matter what, I think the mass majority will not jump on the first system that releases (unless they're majorly offset like PS3 was), it will be a pure all out battle, nobody wants to loose this.


^^Hmm, that turned out funny, I guess I don't know how to use forum quoting tools correctly.

 

[Luminis]

I think at Sony it's always been a matter of good intention, which then turns into some technical difficulty behind closed doors, I don't think Sony has ever had the intention to rev a hype on release dates knowing they will never meet their promises. I think there's been a certain amount of bad luck at Sony.

That'd be an awful amount of bad luck. Anyways, I dom't want to judge that, I just have a nagging feeling that it will be like GT3, GTPSP and GT5 all over again.

I actually never said that, nor do I want any sim like games to appear on Playstation, must of been somebody else.

Yup, it was indeed someone else, and I think I said as much. Thing is, I brought most of the things I said up in refference to said. And since that's what you (and some others) have been answering to, I still like to state why I initially brought those points up.

There's a difference between defending something crappy and having an optimistic view about something that has valid potential for the future, I've had a lot fun hours with Gran Turismo and I want that to continue on PS4, that's all.

It's not like I was trying to say that isn't going to be the case. The whole point I'm making is that, by all I've seen from PD, GT hasn't been as good a system seller as it could've been during this generation and that I hardly see any indication that it's about to change for the next.

The numbers of copies pushed might not be higher as previous consoles, but likely more than half the copies were collecting dust and never played at all.

And that's diffferent now because...?

Of course the game has to maintain appeal to everybody, including the one-off buyers next gen, and those who may have skipped GT5 altogether.

Yup.

That's because they were slightly stale, and yes, it is pretty crazy how GT 1-4 sold THAT many copies, because the average Joe, like you say doesn't care for sims, I believe it was good marketing and a lot of parents bought it for their kids. I mean I basically didn't know anybody during my years growing up that was into GT, although for some reason everybody had a copy. Definitely a bit of a gold mine. But again times have changed and gamers are older and racing hardware does make a big difference in the genre.

And that's what I fail to see. You've got GT selling immensely well. And what else? Forza does well in regards of overall sales if we're looking at all its released games combined, but I can hardly see it doing anywhere near as well as the best-selling games on the 360.

Both MS and Sony have exactly one single racing game in their top twenty best selling games on their respective console. That's not exactly what's hinting at racing games being a very important genre right now. GT and Forza are a bit of an exception.

Completely realistic assumption, are going to counter that with "Oh no kids own these games" ... millions of kids have these games...

Well, I suppose it's impossible to actually settle that matter with facts. Suffice to say, claiming that Halo and Gears of War are played mostly people who can't afford a next-gen console right away seems a bit, well arbitrary.

I'm optimistic they wake up.

Let's hope so.

Bad luck I suppose, I think they were in serious trouble a long while trying to their game to run smooth on PS3, they were probably pulling each other hair out for a couple years... optimistic that they learned a few tricks to avoid disaster again.

Well, GT4 didn't take much less time. And GTPSP didn't go smoothly as well. Let's just say that's an awful lot of bad luck, then, I feel that's it#s not just coincidence.

Kind of, but it's not as easy as it used to be, these days internet discussion and reviews are major part in decision making.

Sure. Being scarce with information, especially negative information, helps a lot in that regard, though. It's all about using the internet to your advantage.

Ya I know, but wouldn't it be wonderful if all those laughing at the physics and FFB, to have a much better sensation of feeling the car as the PC sims, obviously the better the wheel the better the experience, it's of huge importance they get it right this time.

It would indeed be a good thing to do and it can never hurt the game to be more realistic, I suppose. But the importance in terms of sales, I'd think, is rather low.

That's what anybody says that's confident, I know he knows what he has to do, the guy is running at the ADAC 24 Stunden Nürburgring for the last few years, no brainer to him GT5 is still off by a bit.

Whether that's a sign of confidence or overconfidence would be up for debate, in my opinion.

I mean I agree. But there's lots of people like me, who aren't into shooters much and play mostly racing and/or sports games.

Given how much I advocated FPS games as the thing to do right now, this may come as a suprise, but I absulutely loath shooters
I'd rather play a nice RPG, a racing game or even a platformer than a shooter. I'm just trying to not go by what I prefer myself and am looking at what sells well.

Definitely agree, but in relation to sales, FPS scoop of mass amounts of kids compared to a sim-like game such as GT/Forza.

I still don't quite get what you're basing that argument on, personal bias aside.

You know that is quite remarkable, which is why both Microsoft and Sony are almost on even terms with brand recognition, but I'd still say that Playstation has the overall upper hand if you were to take a worldwide poll. No matter what, I think the mass majority will not jump on the first system that releases (unless they're majorly offset like PS3 was), it will be a pure all out battle, nobody wants to loose this.

See, that's the important point. An all out battle. And Microsoft is entering the battle with much more resources than Sony does. Neither should hold back as they're fighting for market share right now. However, Sony isn't in the position to go toe to toe with Microsoft, if MS is really going to try and deal a major blow to Sony.

And since it's Microsoft we're talking about, it's exactly what I expect them to do.

 

[sikbeta]

WTF? I never said any of this! someone knows my password, I'll check this right away

Ah... Oh... you were quoting occasionalracer I thought the worst

OK, I was making a great post but page reloaded and I lost everything, don't want to do it again, I only going to say that no matter how powerful one console is, third parties will not fully take advantage of the console, they aim for parity because they want to sell more games in every platform

If that wasn't the case, Xbox ports should have been much better than PS2/GC in terms of graphics but it didn't happen, heck, in this gen even though PS3 and X360 are almost the same, First Party Devs showed how much power they can squeeze out of the PS3, didn't see any third party dev doing the same and it's ok, why put more time, money, resources and effort to get a better port when they can release equal copies and gamers be happy with them

Also the times of Third Part Exclusives are over, devs want to make cash on every console (PS360) that doesn't make them work more for less (wii), unless they are paid for 6/12 months of exclusivity, you'll not see third party exclusives anymore, budget are to the roof, so they need to maximize profits, it's happening already, that's why there are so many sequels, they want to kill used sales and release DLC instead of add everything on the disc from day one of release

About Sony in the need of a Halo equivalent, they're working on it, next gen they'll not make and release many games the same year, they'll release a couple and advertise them well to sell more

The President of the SCE World Wide Studios said it already, it's better to release a few games, market them well and sell more copies than release too many games, have poor ads and sell based on that, I don't like this because the majority of games I played on the PS3 were so good

And about the last sentence in my previous post, it wasn't condescending, I thought you were trolling, so I said that, but nothing against you mate, everything cool

 

[occasionalracer]

^^ Hey, my quotes came up as sikbeta's...

It's not like I was trying to say that isn't going to be the case. The whole point I'm making is that, by all I've seen from PD, GT hasn't been as good a system seller as it could've been during this generation and that I hardly see any indication that it's about to change for the next.

I see an indication in that PD is supplying Sony with a hardware intensive game content and physics. This should result in a better outcome this time around, plus they're not starting from scratch either.

And that's diffferent now because...?

... the 7.5 mil. copies are not one-off purchases/gifts, a lot more have been bought by people who know what to expect from a game like GT (obviously my opinion)

And that's what I fail to see. You've got GT selling immensely well. And what else? Forza does well in regards of overall sales if we're looking at all its released games combined, but I can hardly see it doing anywhere near as well as the best-selling games on the 360.

Both MS and Sony have exactly one single racing game in their top twenty best selling games on their respective console. That's not exactly what's hinting at racing games being a very important genre right now. GT and Forza are a bit of an exception.

OK, that might be true, at the end of the day racing is racing, and once one developer has a sim mastered (and I'm talking MASTERED) and there's nothing anybody can do after that. In the case of consoles we have our clear winners and that's the way it should stay, there is no need for more.... Even the best real life drivers in motorsport get bored at one point or another... racing is just one of those things you need to have an epic match of drivers and cars, and obviously the line is soooo fine. Major part of GT's focus needs to be a real good and easy online matchmaking system and many more user selectable race environments for the more hardcore racers.

Well, I suppose it's impossible to actually settle that matter with facts. Suffice to say, claiming that Halo and Gears of War are played mostly people who can't afford a next-gen console right away seems a bit, well arbitrary.

I never sayed mostly... I just said your favorite quotes of total copies sold mean nothing when many of them are still very young and will not have the privilage of getting a new system, I know the older crowd playing FPS is still MAJOR in comparison to racing-sims. It's not like PS3/X360 are going anywhere, they'll be sold until at least 2014, but like always that the most awsome/trend-setting games will be next-gen exclusive.

It would indeed be a good thing to do and it can never hurt the game to be more realistic, I suppose. But the importance in terms of sales, I'd think, is rather low.

I don't know, because besides all the real sim-racing lovers out there, look at how many guys around the world are directly involved in motorsports, who are of average age between 25-60, 10's of thousands, a lot of them probably own a Playstation with GT5 already at home for fun, but if GT6 turns out to much more intuitive the word will spread and purshases will be made, because I doubt most of the older gentlemen will want to get into PC sims, that's the beauty of why consoles work, it's just the ease of use, nothing to worry about, just hook the thing up to a TV... anyway I still think nailing physics is an absolute key to get hype out there... and with wheels like T500RS and CSR Elite, it can be fun for all, young and dumb, to old and experienced.

Whether that's a sign of confidence or overconfidence would be up for debate, in my opinion.

Well, overconfidence has been shown to backfire, I'm hoping Kaz is looking at the whole picture.

Given how much I advocated FPS games as the thing to do right now, this may come as a suprise, but I absulutely loath shooters
I'd rather play a nice RPG, a racing game or even a platformer than a shooter. I'm just trying to not go by what I prefer myself and am looking at what sells well.

Now THAT... is the most shocking statement you've made... I was wondering if you've lost your life savings on Sony stocks, or invested heavily in Mircosofts?? You do seem very very Microsoft biased....

I still don't quite get what you're basing that argument on, personal bias aside.

I just KNOW this, ALMOST no 5-14 yr. olds are having fun with a racing sim game, their brain is still too underdeveloped for understanding physics properly... of course there are the exceptions... maybe those who are karting will get it more. It's like ALL games, almost all guys on top of the leaderboards are 18+, it does take maturety/tons of experience to be on top, and in head-to-head online gameplay the young guys get killed, in any game.

See, that's the important point. An all out battle. And Microsoft is entering the battle with much more resources than Sony does. Neither should hold back as they're fighting for market share right now. However, Sony isn't in the position to go toe to toe with Microsoft, if MS is really going to try and deal a major blow to Sony.

And since it's Microsoft we're talking about, it's exactly what I expect them to do.

I must admit, I haven't read every single page of this thread... what significant resources does Microsoft have access to that Sony doesn't after being in the buisiness since '95? I'm sure Sony has a vast amount of resources. What significant technological advancement could Microsoft pull out of their hat for Durango... an amazing operating system? Windows for Durango compatible fully compatible with PC's??

 

[Luminis]

^^ Hey, my quotes came up as sikbeta's...

Probably my bad

I see an indication in that PD is supplying Sony with a hardware intensive game content and physics. This should result in a better outcome this time around, plus they're not starting from scratch either.

This wasn't any different for GT3, GT4 and GTPSP.

... the 7.5 mil. copies are not one-off purchases/gifts, a lot more have been bought by people who know what to expect from a game like GT (obviously my opinion)

And you come to this conclusion because...? Is it as factual as your claim that Halo and GoW are played mainly by people who can't afford a next-gen console? See, this is getting a bit annoying. I'm trying to go by facts (such as sales figures and how they've developed over the course of three generations) and you're just throwing stuff like that out there. It gets frustrating.

I never sayed mostly... I just said your favorite quotes of total copies sold mean nothing when many of them are still very young and will not have the privilage of getting a new system, I know the older crowd playing FPS is still MAJOR in comparison to racing-sims. It's not like PS3/X360 are going anywhere, they'll be sold until at least 2014, but like always that the most awsome/trend-setting games will be next-gen exclusive.

The only thing that's rubbing me the wrong way is you claiming that the percentage of kids among FPS buyers is higher than among GT buyers. Which I see no evidence for, whatsoever.

I don't know, because besides all the real sim-racing lovers out there, look at how many guys around the world are directly involved in motorsports, who are of average age between 25-60, 10's of thousands, a lot of them probably own a Playstation with GT5 already at home for fun, but if GT6 turns out to much more intuitive the word will spread and purshases will be made, because I doubt most of the older gentlemen will want to get into PC sims, that's the beauty of why consoles work, it's just the ease of use, nothing to worry about, just hook the thing up to a TV... anyway I still think nailing physics is an absolute key to get hype out there... and with wheels like T500RS and CSR Elite, it can be fun for all, young and dumb, to old and experienced.

So, you're basically saying that the people who are into racing are more likely to have a PS3 at home. That goes in the same direction as the whole "audience gets older --> GT sells better" argument. Which, again, is backed by nothing. And I am, actually quite tired of dealing with these non-factual arguments.

Now THAT... is the most shocking statement you've made... I was wondering if you've lost your life savings on Sony stocks, or invested heavily in Mircosofts?? You do seem very very Microsoft biased....

I actually enjoy a wide rangee of Sony products: Two sets of headphones, my cellphone, my PSP, my MP3-Player. I bought a fat PS3 with the GT5 bundle and replaced it after it broke (with a rather large gap, though) with a 250gb PS3 Slim. Microsoft, though... Well, I've got the 360.

But I guess it's hardly suprising that I come off as someone who's hating Sony, given that a critical stance towards Sony's current situation and the resulting strategie for the next generation is usually met with arguments that suggest that Sony never, ever could get into trouble. This isn't a GTPlanet thing, though. I've seen this in a lot of different forums and message boards. Whenever someone, me included, suggests that Sony is facing a lot of trouble in the next years, including their entertainment department, the answers are usually non-factual stuff that seems to be hellbent on defending Sony.

I just KNOW this, ALMOST no 5-14 yr. olds are having fun with a racing sim game, their brain is still too underdeveloped for understanding physics properly... of course there are the exceptions... maybe those who are karting will get it more. It's like ALL games, almost all guys on top of the leaderboards are 18+, it does take maturety/tons of experience to be on top, and in head-to-head online gameplay the young guys get killed, in any game.

Uhm... After turning on all the assists in GT5, including Skid Recovery Force, it was perfectly playable for any kid I ever had to keep entertained - as long as I had it, anyways. Same with Forza, by the way. Those games can be dumbed down to the point that even a six year old kid could play and enjoy them.

I must admit, I haven't read every single page of this thread... what significant resources does Microsoft have access to that Sony doesn't after being in the buisiness since '95?

Money. If you haven't read up on Sony's situation, they've been losing billions of dollars for four years in a row and announced further 2.9 billion dollar losses for the FY 2012.

They lost a billion in 2008, they lost 1.1 billion in 2009, they lost 3.2 billion in 2010, 3.1 billion in 2011. All of that can easily be googled, if you want to check it yourself. And that's just as far back as I have bothered going in the last three minutes.

I'm sure Sony has a vast amount of resources. What significant technological advancement could Microsoft pull out of their hat for Durango... an amazing operating system?

I even answered to that point more than once, but again: Sony has already announced that the PS4 is supposed to generate profits on hardware sales from the moment it launches (as opposed to the PS2 and PS3, and likely PS1). Microsoft doesn't need to concern with that, as they haven't been losing billions of dollars over the last five years.

Windows for Durango compatible fully compatible with PC's??

A 16-core CPU and a dual GPU at the same retail price as the PS4 would be quite the technological advancement. As would be Kinect 2.0 being bundled with the Durango, which has also been rumoured.

To summarize:
Sony lost huge amounts of money over the last few years.
Sony's system sellers aren't selling as much as the competitions system sellers.
Sony's next console is rumoured to launch with weaker hardware than the competition.
The competition can afford to sell the console at a loss, Sony says themselves that they won't.
Sony missed out on the market that MS now got ahold of with Kinect.

And you guys are actually wondering why I'm pessimistic about the PS4's future, and that of Sony as a company?

 

[occasionalracer]

My friend... As far as the whole "GT crowd are on AVERAGE older in RELATION to copies sold", yes, I do not have any factual numbers/official statements I can point to (only Sony has these statistics through online activity, which will never be released to the public)....

I've given enough examples and theories of mine that are perfectly plausible, and the point remains that I believe sim-racing games can attract, to a certain extent, an entirely different type of crowd than FPS lovers. It's a fact GT is successful and it's not so far fetched that older guys are having the most fun with THIS racing game. I know kids/younger teen love racing games, but they're not likely to have as much FUN as with more action-packed arcade racers. How am I wrong here? Anyway, again I never made direct comparisons to the MASS amount of older FPS lovers around the world (who can afford the next systems at launch), I'm just sure Sony knows Gran Turismo is a racing game everybody knows, and WOULD be stunning launch title. I know I'm praying....

But I guess it's hardly suprising that I come off as someone who's hating Sony, given that a critical stance towards Sony's current situation and the resulting strategie for the next generation is usually met with arguments that suggest that Sony never, ever could get into trouble. This isn't a GTPlanet thing, though. I've seen this in a lot of different forums and message boards. Whenever someone, me included, suggests that Sony is facing a lot of trouble in the next years, including their entertainment department, the answers are usually non-factual stuff that seems to be hellbent on defending Sony.

While I'm a general Sony supporter, I'm not here to defend them, I have had many many Sony gadgets, including launch model PS1, 2 & 3... I just find it hard to except that they will falter because of unexpected sales figures with PSP GO & Vita, Cellphones and their LCD panels recently due to unbelievable competition in home electronics over the last ~5 years...

Clearly nobody knows better than Sony themselves. According to reports Sony will be undergoing BIG restructuring changes this year, they will be laying off 10,000 employees (6% of Sony's worldwide employees), but often times when companies go in these direct restructuring phases much higher numbers of factories/offices are closed than initially reported... we'll have to wait and see what they have done by the end of the year, but sometimes billions in losses doesn't translate directly to a complete crisis, especially a company like Sony who have assets that run in the 10's of billions...and yes employees are assets too, unfortunately many of them will be victims, hopefully they can all find other jobs..

There are some brilliant guys at Sony who've been around long time to know what they have to do, but the company has all the potential in the world to rebound... let's just hope the world economy remains at a semi-stable point in this decade...

Uhm... After turning on all the assists in GT5, including Skid Recovery Force, it was perfectly playable for any kid I ever had to keep entertained - as long as I had it, anyways. Same with Forza, by the way. Those games can be dumbed down to the point that even a six year old kid could play and enjoy them.

I still stand by the fact that kids do not have the overall maturity to comprehend proper car balance and racing etiquette to have fun ONLINE, sure if everybody is around the same age, ya, they'll probably have fun, but it won't be long before they get bored... however there are exceptions... anyway we need a much better online gaming structure, it's pretty important for everybody's fun.

Money. If you haven't read up on Sony's situation, they've been losing billions of dollars for four years in a row and announced further 2.9 billion dollar losses for the FY 2012.

They lost a billion in 2008, they lost 1.1 billion in 2009, they lost 3.2 billion in 2010, 3.1 billion in 2011. All of that can easily be googled, if you want to check it yourself. And that's just as far back as I have bothered going in the last three minutes.

Really sucks to say the least, it's a combination of unexpected competition and bad luck... I would only go as far as saying they made SOME bad decisions, they're not totally stupid, maybe they need to concentrate on specific projects, instead of... EVERYTHING that has to do wit consumer electronics.

I even answered to that point more than once, but again: Sony has already announced that the PS4 is supposed to generate profits on hardware sales from the moment it launches (as opposed to the PS2 and PS3, and likely PS1). Microsoft doesn't need to concern with that, as they haven't been losing billions of dollars over the last five years.

A 16-core CPU and a dual GPU at the same retail price as the PS4 would be quite the technological advancement. As would be Kinect 2.0 being bundled with the Durango, which has also been rumoured.

To summarize:
Sony lost huge amounts of money over the last few years.
Sony's system sellers aren't selling as much as the competitions system sellers.
Sony's next console is rumoured to launch with weaker hardware than the competition.
The competition can afford to sell the console at a loss, Sony says themselves that they won't.
Sony missed out on the market that MS now got ahold of with Kinect.

And you guys are actually wondering why I'm pessimistic about the PS4's future, and that of Sony as a company?

Pessimism gets nobody nowhere, right now, all we know Sony is in the game to play for the next round of consoles, it would be absolutely stunning if they went for a "middleman" position in the market, Nintendo will do their thing, but IF Sony TRIES to create their own market (mid-range performance/price), I see dark days ahead. It would make no sense for Sony to not take a risk with high production costs, they should just aim to break even on the consoles themselves, Microsoft has to do the same.

This is not just about 2013, it's about being a a well built machine that will last up until 2020, Sony would have to be mighty stupid not to do something special performance-wise and let Microsoft have a "high-end console market".

PS. I don't know why I'm having trouble quoting specific sentences with the quotee's name... ya I'm not too intelligent apparently.

 

[Luminis]

My friend... As far as the whole "GT crowd are on AVERAGE older in RELATION to copies sold", yes, I do not have any factual numbers/official statements I can point to (only Sony has these statistics through online activity, which will never be released to the public)....

You know, I just don't want to go there anymore. Fine, GT's audience is so much more mature and older and has much more money at their fingertips.

While I'm a general Sony supporter, I'm not here to defend them, I have had many many Sony gadgets, including launch model PS1, 2 & 3... I just find it hard to except that they will falter because of unexpected sales figures with PSP GO & Vita, Cellphones and their LCD panels recently due to unbelievable competition in home electronics over the last ~5 years...

Clearly nobody knows better than Sony themselves. According to reports Sony will be undergoing BIG restructuring changes this year, they will be laying off 10,000 employees (6% of Sony's worldwide employees), but often times when companies go in these direct restructuring phases much higher numbers of factories/offices are closed than initially reported... we'll have to wait and see what they have done by the end of the year, but sometimes billions in losses doesn't translate directly to a complete crisis, especially a company like Sony who have assets that run in the 10's of billions...and yes employees are assets too, unfortunately many of them will be victims, hopefully they can all find other jobs..

Kaz Hirai said that Sony is aiming to make about 1 trillion Yen with their gaming department in 2014. That just doesn't allow for a console that's being sold at a loss, like previous PlayStations or previous Xboxes. The corresponding statements can be found basically everywhere, but here's a source that even comes to the same conclusion that I came to.

There are some brilliant guys at Sony who've been around long time to know what they have to do, but the company has all the potential in the world to rebound... let's just hope the world economy remains at a semi-stable point in this decade...

I'm not going to deny that Sony has some brilliant folks working for them, but I'd also say that they've not shown very much of their brilliance as of late. Otherwise, Sony wouldn't have gotten in so much trouble on the cellphone market and the TV markt, among others.

Pessimism gets nobody nowhere

Sometimes, optimism is uncalled for, though.

This is not just about 2013, it's about being a a well built machine that will last up until 2020, Sony would have to be mighty stupid not to do something special performance-wise and let Microsoft have a "high-end console market".

Exactly. And going by previous generations, it's far easier to get a long-lasting machine out that still sell well if you are willing to make losses with it for the first few years. Which Kaz Hirai doesn't want to happen. That's the decisive point why I'm saying that Sony is in quite a bit of a dilemma.

They can hardly start to sell the PS4 at a loss like they did with the PS3, as the gaming devision has to generate profits for them to not lose even more money. On the other hand, releasing a console that generates profits from the get go would mean to either ask a higher price than the competition for similar hardware, or to release weaker hardware for a similar price. Either way, the customer always gets better hardware in comparison if the company is selling it at a loss.

This is also reflected by the rumours about the Durango's and the Orbis hardware, which suggests that the Durango will habe a signifcantly more powerful CPU, for one. Earlier rumours also stated that it would feature a dual GPU, somewhat along the lines of two AMD 7000 series GPUs.

 

[ch3ng]

5 Years into the console life cycle can't make it easy for any game, was too late for the game to help the PS3, heck, MGS4 (2008) helped the PS3 more than GT5 ever could when it comes to sales

Well Thats difficult. I think GT, Uncharted,... was a huge Game seller. More than MGS4.

You say GC and Xbox were less powerful than PS2? Eh, NO! the opposite, PS2 was the weakest console last gen (excluding Dreamcast) it launched first and 1 year later GC and Xbox came out, in HW power:

Xbox > GC > PS2

It's said that Xbox is more powerful than the wii

Indeed.

MS doesn't have many studios [...]

Well Thats Not True. They created 6-8 New Studios and Sony Closed 2 studios. Turn10, 343,.. are much bigger than Sony Studios. We will See the result with the New Generation.

Same can be said about Orbis/Durango, Sony will make their devs push the console to the limit, MS will make Halo and Gears dev push it as well, 343 Studios will do it, Epic uses their UE middleware engines, they have a limit and don't think they'll push as hard

The Halo Franchise Never pushes the 360 to the Limits. We will See what 343 can do on next Gen console.

 

[Sier_Pinski]

I don't exactly know what will happen with the PS4 or the future of Sony's gaming division, but I can guess at this point that the inevitably approaching new generation of gaming may not go too well for Sony. Again.

"The Downfall of Sony"

 

[LaBounti]

^so what does linking to a non ps4 post have to do with the inevitable PS4? No know one knows what the future holds.

Forbes Doomed the PS2, Psp and the Vita..... now they just shoot for the top. Unrelated until they doom PS4. Thats what your linked topic if for.

 

[Luminis]

It has a lot to do with the PS4. A company that is in severe financial trouble can't afford to sell hardware at a loss, like Microsoft could. They can hardly go all out on possible licensing deals. They can hardly try to undercut the competition's pricing.

In fact, it limits Sony in a lot of ways, regarding the PS4: No monster hardware, no super cheap price, probably no 80 million dollar budget first party games. That is what I've been saying all along: Don't expect the same bang-for-your-buck-hardware from the PS4 as you got it from the PS3. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that. Granted, a bit of market analysis and sales strategy is part of my job, so it's relatively easy to spot such things, but the overall situation should be obvious to anyone.

Also goes hand in hand with the rumours that suggest that MS is shooting for powerful more hardware than Sony, as I said earler. By now, I fully expect the PS4 to release with weaker hardware than the Xbox720, but to be sold somewhere around the same price. Problem is, that could cause even more trouble for Sony.

It just sucks that the few Sony products I care about are likely going to take a hit from other departments, despite branches like Sony's gaming devision actually doing well, right now

 

[Sier_Pinski]

^so what does linking to a non ps4 post have to do with the inevitable PS4? No know one knows what the future holds.

Forbes Doomed the PS2, Psp and the Vita..... now they just shoot for the top. Unrelated until they doom PS4. Thats what your linked topic if for.

Well, what Forbes is basically saying is that Sony as of current has ditched their era of innovation that made them so special. That's part of why the PS1 and 2 succeeded and the PS3 did not. Since the PS3's launch, Sony has been focusing on less innovation and more quantity and lower price. Some examples that Forbes mentioned are the Vaio computer and the Ericsson phone; others include the SIXAXIS motion controls and PS Move, both of which copied Wii's controls. All of those did not innovate, and were not too popular or successful compared to the competition as a result. This is why we're no longer seeing any third-party PS3 games touting SIXAXIS control features or centering around Move support.

So, If Sony continues this current policy of sacrificing innovation to increase sales, then it's likely that the PS4 will have no big features or advantages going for it. That lack of innovation may help it lose to the more innovative Nintendo or Microsoft.

Furthermore, Forbes mentioned that Sony is currently burying itself in a deep financial pit:

With its heritage, it is hard to believe that Sony hasn’t made a profit in 4 consecutive years, just recently announced it will double its expected loss for this year to $6.4 billion, has only 15% of its capital left as equity (debt/equity ration of 5.67x) and is only worth 1/4 of its value 10 years ago!

According to Japanese equity laws, Sony cannot go bankrupt even when under negative equity, but with the massive amount of debt and recent layoffs they're facing, they will not be popular with new employees, stock investors, and most importantly, other game developers who would be willing to work for the PS4.

 

[ch3ng]

^so what does linking to a non ps4 post have to do with the inevitable PS4? No know one knows what the future holds.

Forbes Doomed the PS2, Psp and the Vita..... now they just shoot for the top. Unrelated until they doom PS4. Thats what your linked topic if for.

Luminis Said Almost everything.

They want to Focus on Gaming department, but Closed 2 First Party studios. Hell it will affect the SCE.

The Next Generation will be extremely Hard for Sony. It is realistic that MS, Nintendo will habe more Impact and MS will have the better Hardware. And they created 6-8 more Studios. So maybe the exclusiv advantage of the PS will disapear towards MS.

Very Hard future 4 sony. I Hope they dont have to close Sony

 

[Emman1984]

I hope not either cause I don't wanna switch up I want to get a PS4

 

[CrackedTrigger]

I think it's about time we either heard more about the Orbis or stopped talking about stuff to which we have no reputeable source. Stop all the scare mongering. Sony will hit out with an anouncement sometime which will confuse all of you, and you'll wonder why were we all talking about that stuff. PS4 will be better than PS3, this is what we are all certain of... Fact! And this is what we all want. If the xbox is uber powerfull, it'll be a long time before dev's get close to building games which max it. If ps4 is less powerfull than xbox we'll end up with the same situation as before, dev's making games compatable with both consoles. And as of now, the xbox exclusives, IMHO, have'nt been better than ps exclusives, with only a couple of them even worth mentioning. So loads of studios or not, they'll still produce the same stuff. In any case with PS4, the playstation world will get better, and that's all I ask. I'm not one for this "OMG..... Microsoft is trying to turn me."

 

[Sanji Himura]

Well, what Forbes is basically saying is that Sony as of current has ditched their era of innovation that made them so special. That's part of why the PS1 and 2 succeeded and the PS3 did not. Since the PS3's launch, Sony has been focusing on less innovation and more quantity and lower price. Some examples that Forbes mentioned are the Vaio computer and the Ericsson phone; others include the SIXAXIS motion controls and PS Move, both of which copied Wii's controls. All of those did not innovate, and were not too popular or successful compared to the competition as a result. This is why we're no longer seeing any third-party PS3 games touting SIXAXIS control features or centering around Move support.

So, If Sony continues this current policy of sacrificing innovation to increase sales, then it's likely that the PS4 will have no big features or advantages going for it. That lack of innovation may help it lose to the more innovative Nintendo or Microsoft.

I disagree. Sales figures show that people have not adopted Microsoft's Kinect and the Playstation Move as fast as Sony and MS would want. Motion controls may be the future according to the Gaming press, but when you get games like Star Wars Kinect where you have a dance off with Darth Vader instead of a Saber battle, is it no wonder that all gamers really want is a controller in his hands?

Another advantage to having a "simple" console is that it would force developers to start thinking of having more money put into market research. A good example of this is Irrational Games support of Playstation Move in BioShock Infinite. Now seriously, how many of you would actually use that glowing ball wand in a FPS?

A third advantage is the trend of third party developers to have yearly releases on their major franchises like Call of Duty and Madden.

If you take all of these into consideration, you may find that a simple console is just what the doctor ordered this next generation.

 

[Luminis]

I'm not one for this "OMG..... Microsoft is trying to turn me."

So, what you're basically saying is that you're going to stick with the PS4 anyways? I mean no offense, what's your point, then? Doesn't matter if MS and Nintendo offer better products for a better price because Sony has die hard fans that will buy an inferior product because of the Sony badge?

Aside from that, it's not scare mongering, it's a fact that Sony's pretty much going down the drain right now. That's capitalism for you; you screw up, you go down. I know that some people in here just want to read that Sony is all good, but it just isn't. Face reality. Same goes for the PS4. You'd better not expect big jumps from a company that can hardly afford to do so.

I disagree. Sales figures show that people have not adopted Microsoft's Kinect and the Playstation Move as fast as Sony and MS would want. Motion controls may be the future according to the Gaming press, but when you get games like Star Wars Kinect where you have a dance off with Darth Vader instead of a Saber battle, is it no wonder that all gamers really want is a controller in his hands?

All gamers want game pads in their hands? Explain to me, then, why Kinect Adventures is the best selling Xbox360 game to date, even outselling Call of Duty by more than three million units.

Another advantage to having a "simple" console is that it would force developers to start thinking of having more money put into market research. A good example of this is Irrational Games support of Playstation Move in BioShock Infinite. Now seriously, how many of you would actually use that glowing ball wand in a FPS?

Misusing a feature doesn't mean it's bad. I know that I could put my little cousin and his friends in front of a game like Dragon Ball Z kinect and they'd be all over it. Seriously, you, as quite a few others in this thread, are making the mistake of assuming that your taste equals the taste of the mass market.

A third advantage is the trend of third party developers to have yearly releases on their major franchises like Call of Duty and Madden.

Again, I'd like to point out that Kinect Adventure outsold all of those. With ease.

If you take all of these into consideration, you may find that a simple console is just what the doctor ordered this next generation.

Why would I buy the simple console when the 'complex' console can do all of what the simple one can, and then some? All the while looking better, due to better hardware?

 

[sumbrownkid]

I think the PS4 won't be as expensive to develop as the PS3.

I doubt they are gonna ditch the cell processor after one generation and so much money and work went into it.

What I think it's gonna be: cell 2.0 + off the shelf NVidea card.

 

[Luminis]

Sources claim it’s currently called Orbis (and that might be the actual name) it uses both an AMD CPU and GPU, [...]

Source: http://www.officialplaystationmagaz...s-already-features-anti-used-games-mechanism/

New information suggests that the PS4 is codenamed Orbis, will be built around an AMD x86-64 CPU and GPU, and will require all new games to registered with a PSN account.

Source: http://hothardware.com/News/PlaySta...ill-Feature-AMD-Hardware-Lock-Out-Used-Games/

The source said that “Orbis” will be powered by an AMD x64 CPU, and will use an AMD Southern Islands GPU. Southern Islands is AMD’s 28nm chip used in the Radeon 7970 card.

Source: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/new-rumors-suggest-playstation-4-to-be-named-orbis-use-amd-chip/

The new console will use an x64 CPU and a "Southern Islands" GPU provided by AMD, according to Kotaku's sources, which would represent a significant change in architecture from the Cell-based hardware inside the PS3.

Source: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...2013-ties-retail-games-to-online-accounts.ars

Yeah, yeah, I know, just rumours. But still. I just love how people go "I think it's going to be this and that" when everything we know suggests otherwise.

 

[Sanji Himura]

All gamers want game pads in their hands? Explain to me, then, why Kinect Adventures is the best selling Xbox360 game to date, even outselling Call of Duty by more than three million units.

Where is your source on that? Besides, I pointed out third party titles because they have taken to the multiple console strategy with few exclusives(a notable title that falls under this is MGS 4, a traditional Playstation title anyways) this gen because they know that to get the maximum amount of profit out of a title, they have to pander to both the PS3 and the 360 fan boys. Combine the sales of all versions of the game(PS360, PC) and it will outsell your little first party title just like that.

Misusing a feature doesn't mean it's bad. I know that I could put my little cousin and his friends in front of a game like Dragon Ball Z kinect and they'd be all over it. Seriously, you, as quite a few others in this thread, are making the mistake of assuming that your taste equals the taste of the mass market.

I never said that it was bad. You bought into the line that motion controls are the future when in truth it was in its infancy when it got rushed out the door. It is the basic principles of a motion controller that really gives it away. Developers and publishers are printing Kinect, and to a lesser extent, Move, games like the US Government is printing money and half of the time the games turn out to either appeal to little children, or are garbage. Innovation does not need to come at the expense of gaming tradition.

Again, I'd like to point out that Kinect Adventure outsold all of those. With ease.

Again, pointing out that Kinect Adventure is a first party title and it came with the Kinect sensor.

 

[Sier_Pinski]

Again, pointing out that Kinect Adventure is a first party title and it came with the Kinect sensor.

^This.

Kinect Adventures sold well only because people were forced to have it bundled with each Kinect sensor purchase. This part of Luminis' argument is clearly invalid, if anything else.