440°

The PS4 and Xbox 720 need to have at least 16GB of RAM to be relevant

It is without doubt that RAM or memory is about the most important item in a console. When there is enough RAM in a system it allows the developers to try different kinds of tricks and do many things there want to do. With enough RAM in a system developers can do better graphics, physics, AI and a lot more. But RAMs are very expensive these days and console makers have to keep the cost down to be able to make a console that is affordable for the consumers. Console makers will have to choose between a powerful console and an expensive one. In the end something has got to give.

Read Full Story >>
infobarrel.com
SynGamer4138d ago (Edited 4138d ago )

The cost of RAM will most likely prevent this from happening. If anything, we'll be lucky to get 8GB, and I fully expect Sony and MS to announce their new consoles have 4GB.

The thing to remember is these new consoles will likely have dedicated OS RAM, and then RAM that can be used for games. Personally, 4GB seems like more than enough if it's ONLY being used for the game/textures. We're still going to need at least a 12X Blu-ray drive to try and fill those 4GB up. a 12X Blu-ray drive is capable of roughly 54MB/s, so we're looking at roughly 19 seconds to fill 1GB...1GB.

So yeah, I expect 4GB to be completely honest. That said, I would love to see 8GB of RAM just to shut up some of the devs :P

darthv724137d ago

The phrase: "you can never have to much" doesnt apply to consoles.

There is a limit based on the balance of everything else in the system. you cant just throw gobs of memory at something and expect the performance to be increased proportionately.

it depends on the overhead. What sort of resources are required for everything else to run in the background. 16gb...I dont even have a PC that uses that much nor do i know of any gaming PC that uses that much.

Not saying they dont exist, im just saying I personally have never seen one nor any of my extreme PC friends with one. 8gb max. Maybe 10 if you add in a 2gb video card.

Me, I have 4gb and a 1gb video card. yeah, im behind the times but it does what i need it for. As to the topic at hand, we know it wont be any LESS than 4gb which puts it possible at 4-8 maybe a little more but 16....not happening.

Especially considering the performance of games like Last of Us are demonstrating at 512mb, split in fact.

SynGamer4137d ago

I forgot to continue my initial post, but I wanted to mention that PCs are completely different from consoles. on a PC, 4GB of RAM is being shared between the OS/programs and the game, etc. On a console 4GB of RAM is going solely to the game (hopefully Sony and MS give the OS it's own memory to run off of). That's a HUGE difference. That's 4,096 MB that the developers can (potentially) use, compared to about 480 MB on the current systems (PS3 and 360).

And as I pointed out in my first post, the developers will need to fill that 4GB of RAM. Yes, it should allow games to store far more in memory; world size, objects, NPCs, etc. But if they can't use 4GB solely for the game, then I personally feel they are doing a terrible job at optimizing their games.

Ju4137d ago

The OS won't grow that much. So, whatever it takes it most likely will use then. Maybe a little be more they'll ad a more sophisticated UI.

Also, PCs have dedicated graphics cards (at least gaming PC). They hardly use 4GB shared (1 or 2GB VRAM is common now).

And lately, next gen consoles will probably run more OS services in parallel to the game, e.g. apps on top of a game (like a browser, video call??? system menus, even the store fronts) so, there will be a need to have more memory available for apps not only the game(s). I still believe those apps will be lean and 4GB is plenty in such an environment (hell, it runs usually in a phone with 1GB incl. the OS). More than 4GB is hardly imaginable for cost reasons. Even if RAM would be cheap, the least amount which gives the most features will make it in the machine; what ever is most feasible to fit the needs.

rainslacker4137d ago

There's not a single game out on PC that requires more than 4GB's of system RAM. This is because it's the most common configuration in new PC's. It's not to say that some games may use more memory if it's available, but most of the time that extra memory is used for OS and background tasks, and not a particular application.

I personally have 12GB's of RAM, but upgraded from 4 because I work with some super high poly models in 3DS Max which does take up any available memory, and 4 wasn't cutting it.

I'd be surprised if the next gen has more than 2 GB's of memory, and maybe some for the OS similar to the Wii U, and possible a separated architecture for the video memory. It comes down to that consoles are much more efficient than a general purpose computer for the things they do. It would be nice to have 4GB's for long term viability, but given the need for profitability I don't see it happening. Those few extra dollars add up over millions of units.

blackbeld4137d ago

16GB very nice but it not gonna happen.

4GB is more likely.

16GB is overkill the console price will be sky high.

Tsar4ever014137d ago (Edited 4137d ago )

Come'on, The Crytek CEO was only speaking hypothetically, I don't believe he really meant consoles should get 32gb, But he was clearly referring to the future, there no telling how much video/graphic memory will be needed to run
the highest end PC & console games 7-8 yrs from today. We don't know what were going to see or know for sure how much of video/graphic memory or the type of hardware will needed to run them properly.

But 16gb to 32gb whatever how crazy it all sounds, but hypothetically speaking, I'm with crytek all the way with this, I've seen crytek's work on high-end pc and I'd want very much to see the same visual quality in graphic capability achieved on consoles, and if petitioning hardware designers to push harder on video/graphic MEMORY is the way to do it, I think us gamers should get on board help push too.

darthv724137d ago

yeah i know he was speaking in a hypothetical manner. Yet do we really think things will be coded the way they are now....7 years from now?

The idea that we will need such amounts of memory only shows the short sighted view that thing will stay the same in regards to programming techniques but the size of the renderings will get larger.

Just as with technology getting smaller and faster so will the programming techniques in taking what amounts to a huge open world size type of game but making it fit within the palm of your hand.

In fact, not too long ago it was demonstrated that there could be a fully fledged windows type OS with internet browser and yet fit within the size of a 1.44mb floppy disk.

The future isnt about getting bigger, its about making things smaller and more compact. Newer compression algorithms and chips so fast yet so small that the equivalent of a big gaming PC in your pocket.

Consoles of the future will be portable as well as stationary. Just because you hold it in your hands when on the go doesnt mean it cant plug into a tv when you are at home. And create the full immersive HD (maybe even 3D) experience.

To sort of add to my point of better programming, just look at the games at the ps3 launch and compare them to what is coming out next year. Its the same hardware but they just got better at using it. Imagine what they can do a few years from now with something as small as a phone.

sikbeta4137d ago

They can do 32GB of the slowest RAM ever if it's for the sake of the size, like Mr Crytek wanted :P but that doesn't work because most GPUs now use GDDR5 RAM which is faster than Edram and also expensive as @#*/! XD

So, the only thing they would do is put so much Edram as possible and then fill the thing with DDR3 and call it a day -__-

Sarcasm4137d ago

This article is blasphemy, The PS4 and Xbox 720 need to have at least 128 Terabytes of RAM to be relevant. It also needs to have 7.5GHz CPUs under LN2 and a GTX 990 that has 512 million CUDA cores!!!

And they need to make sure it stays below $299 or else like the article writer I'm not buying it!!!

AsimLeonheart4137d ago

I agree with you. 16 GB is just overkill and will only drive the cost of the console upwards. I wonder how some people demand such high specs for a console and then also want it to be under $400 at launch. I think 8 GB is more than enough and even then it will add significantly to the manufacturing cost. Maybe 4 GB will be enough and more affordable. I think Sony will especially try to keep the cost down next-gen while aiming for maximum performance within a certain cost range because the high production cost of the PS3 in its early days really hurt them this gen. I hope they can balance cost and power nicely next-gen so that both customers and Sony can benefit from it.

Denethor_II4137d ago

Yeah, why not chuck 32gb of RAM in there as more is always better. I have 8gb of RAM in my pc and have never needed 4gb.

AAACE54137d ago

This would be an interesting topic if the guy could use proper grammer.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 4137d ago
Enemy4137d ago

16? I don't even know any PC gamers with that much RAM on their machines. 8GB is what I'd like to see, but realistically, we'll likely see 4GB.

Megaton4137d ago

My money's on 4gb as well. 16gb is overkill for a PC, let alone a console.

sikbeta4137d ago

Remember these consoles will last for 5/6/7 years, so what it sounds like overkill right now, it may be the standard a few years later...

Sarcasm4137d ago

"Remember these consoles will last for 5/6/7 years, so what it sounds like overkill right now, it may be the standard a few years later..."

4GB was the minimum for PCs 4-5 years ago. Fast forward to today, 4GB is still the minimum and much more isn't really needed unless you have a crap ton of background apps.

System RAM isn't the de facto element that all of a sudden makes games run better. It's just a pipeline to fit data in for faster access times when the CPU needs it. The reality for gaming is that Video Memory is going to play a bigger role. And right now top end GPU's still only have 2-3GB and it is beyond sufficient for native 1080p games.

RevXM4136d ago

4Gb?

4 GB may have been the standard for 5 years, but then again graphics and other things in games havent exactly changed radically in that time either just compare Crysis to any recent pc game youd like. 4GB has been the norm prolly because 32 bit Windows have been where the sales are at, and Consoles have less also.
But the hardware have kept going on and is 20-30 times more powerful than Ps3 and 360 hardware today.

http://www.computerandvideo...

So for a current gen game at juicy resolutions, sure 4-6 GB would be allright.
Next gen however, well lets not vote to put restrictions on the future as future games should not only run at and with better resolutions, but at a greater fidelity and with way more going on in terms of number of objects, physics, AI and so on.

Id like to se 12-16GB ram on the next systems myself to avoid major bottlenecking new hardware and potentially even launch games.
Id be very dissapointed if I knew that future games would have huge typical traits from games all the way back to 2007... In 2014.

Anything beyond 16 would be nice too unless it comes at the cost of the memory speed or other things, but 12 is what Im realistaically hoping for.

rainslacker4136d ago

The past 5 years system memory has stayed pretty much the same, and OS's and applications taking up less of it as things become more efficient, Windows 8 has a pretty low memory footprint compared to XP. A majority of video cards use 1-2GB's of memory, but this is more likely due to most games not really taking advantage of higher amounts.

I think 2GB is probably going to be standard for next gen, but wouldn't be surprised at 4. If it's 2 there may be some extra slower memory set aside for the OS. How it's set up is a different topic however, and there are several configurations to choose from.

Enemy4136d ago

@ rainslacker: If Sony sticks to their regular pattern, the PS4 will have 8GB of RAM, even if it means splitting it between RAM and VRAM again. But it's hard to tell at this point as nothing factual has actually leaked the architecture. I'm right there with you in keeping expectations low and 2GB is the safest bet, considering costs.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4136d ago
4137d ago Replies(1)
Tapioca Cold4137d ago

Agreed.

At the beginning of last gen everyone wanted a beast of a console. Sony delivered. (built in wi-fi, hdmi, blu-ray, built in batteries, removeable storage, blu-tooth,free online) then everyone complained of price. If you want the best, you fools need to pay the price. people just don't seem to get that.

I don't want to see all you sissies whining on here next E3 when pricing in released. You want it? Pay!

ambientFLIER4137d ago

PS3 was ALMOST a beast. The ram killed it. If it had a full Gig, it would have been good.

Mounce4137d ago

I DISAGREE WITH THIS ARTTICLE...

MmmmYyessss....

Consoles need to have 12 Core processors and 32GB DDR4 RAM BEFORE I FEEL THEY ARE RELEVANT...MmYyyesss!

RAM, RAM RAM? RAAM....

Oh my~

It will also need TRIPLE CROSSFIRE GPU'S!.

Also, it 'HAS' to have a price tag of at MOST $400, or......it will not be relevant....Because I said so.

MmmMYyyyesss.

ALLWRONG4137d ago

4, 6 or 8 if were lucky. People tend to forget that 6 is a possibility.

ginsunuva4137d ago (Edited 4137d ago )

YES! Just about to say everyone skips from 4 to 8.
6 is possible. Just that 3gb ram cards are not too commonly produced.

GiTS4137d ago

@ginsunuva

Pretty sure 3GB Ram sticks don't exist... You can do different combo's and configurations to get it though like 2x1024's and 2x512's in dual channel. 6GB is the same, 2x2048's and 2x1024's dual channel or if you're on a triple channel system then 3x2048's.

akaakaaka4137d ago

Are you a next gen dev?
I don't think so, don't talk like you know anything You ...

Why I'm feeling like those who want a 4gb next gen console are pc fanboys? You guys want a low end console to bust your ego about how far behind consoles are but that will not happen specially next gen consoles will be very high end like last gen plus optimization will always nade it shine plus cloud gaming keep it up to date if anything ..

I also bet Nintendo fanboys hope for a low end console like the one they got lol

And I'm amazed on how cheap some people are in here, if you don't want to pay $600 or $800 for a launch console then just wait a year or two for it to get cheaper.

The history abd logic says ps4 will have min of 8gb ram but that was if it was launch this year but with the delay that could change to a higher end tech.

Exquisik4137d ago

I'm surprised no one ever brought this up...

Playstation (PSOne) - 2 MB Ram
Playstation 2 - 32 MB Ram
Playstation 3 - 512 MB Ram
Playstation 4 - 8,192 MB Ram (8 GB Ram)

Notice the difference in Ram between one iteration to its previous iteration?

DOMination-4137d ago

16 is unrealistic. My PC only has 6 and its played everything I've thrown at it so far without any issues. 8 is probably likely uf they want to futureproof but it might only be 4 if they go for cheap consoles

green4137d ago

This website is pretty ridiculous when it comes to next gen systems.

A few weeks ago, he posted that the next gen systems need to support 4K resolutions http://n4g.com/news/1126262...

Now he is talking about 16GIG ram? Can he pay $1000 for a console?

lfclee4137d ago

He's right your tripping not him, the future is now 4k is here a couple of years down the line 8k is on the horizon ready to go, so I think he's right, no malice intended.

neogeo4137d ago

I want 8k at 240fps on every game and I want full ray tracing.
and I want you to buy it all for me:)

MEsoJD4137d ago (Edited 4137d ago )

I have a gaming pc and don't have close to 16gbs of ram. I say 8gbs at the most.

lfclee4137d ago (Edited 4137d ago )

Ram is very cheap nowadays and when your buying in bulk your getting the product alot cheaper, I bet ati are rubbing the hands with huge contract offers being completed already regarding gpu's and hd's etc.

Bordel_19004137d ago (Edited 4137d ago )

If the PS4 ships with less than 8GB RAM I'm not buying it. PCs today are so much more powerful than consoles, I stopped using my PS3 more than a year ago. Xbox and PS3 are dinosaurs,6-7 years after their initial release.

If a PS4/X720 is to hold it's ground against PC for years ahead it needs to be really powerful when released.

I think the video game consoles are a dying breed, this next generation will probably be the last one as we know it.

avengers19784136d ago

There is no need for that much ram 8 gigs is plenty for a console, most high end PC's don't have 16 gigs and they run better frame rates and higher resolution... it be overkill...

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

@SynGamer
"on a PC, 4GB of RAM is being shared between the OS/programs and the game, etc. On a console 4GB of RAM is going solely to the game (hopefully Sony and MS give the OS it's own memory to run off of)."

Sounds like consoles.. Youtube, myspace, nexflix app more than one app open etc..

plus most pc gamer close programs or "apps" in windows 8 before playing.

Windows 8 is a phone/tablet OS on a beast pc.

That would be like putting psVita OS on a beast pc.

Windows 8 uses 300mb ram on pc and boots maybe faster than a console now?

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

how much for wiiU os again? lol

But I wonder if the next consoles will be 30fps or 60fps.. Are devs willing to give up an extra 30fps or will they want to use all the resources?

But anyway console are consumer friendly low cost gaming devices. Why is everyone wanting pc experience? Get a pc or be glad with what you got. Console gamers are not even supposed to worry about ram, cpu, gpu that you will never even see or your warranty is void. lol

Looks sounds like a pc gamer forum in here.

tordavis4136d ago

Whoever wrote this doesn't know a damn thing about video game hardware requirements. 6gb is all that is needed. Some for the OS and the rest to run games. Stop spreading bullshit!

donman14136d ago

And we need 16GB of memory WHY???

solid_warlord4136d ago (Edited 4136d ago )

All of u who say 4gb of RAM is more than enough are not looking at the bigger picture. If the next Xbox or PS4 is to not only survive but to flurish for the next decade atleast, it needs 8gb or more.

For M$, the leak of there so called "road map" tells us that there next console will come with Kinect 2.0 which will see vast improvements with multiple player detections. The road map also suggested the next xbox will be doing alot of multi tasking as it will come as a PVR and u will be able to take in game screenshot and record gameplay video and put them directly onto the web. All that requires more ram.

If M$ goes with 4gb then attleast half of that will go to OS to deal with PVR, party chats, kinect 2.0 feature ect. In the end, u will end up with 2gb ram for devs to play with the next 5-8 years or more and that seem very small as the years go by. PC will just stamp on consoles.

The best option for $ony and M$ is to have atleast minimum of 8gb of RAM so devs can get 5-6gb of that to play with. 16gb would be alot to ask but 8gb of Ram is feasible and i would think its the minimum requirment thats needed.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 4136d ago
000014138d ago

i'm so tired of this topic, wait until they show the goddamn systems before saying what it does and doesn't need.

ThichQuangDuck4137d ago

I would love to be a gaming journalist right now being able to be successful of what ifs and this is what should happen.

Danlord4137d ago

Syngamer- I see ur point. In The end l hope to see 16GB inside the console :-)

Show all comments (153)
280°

Xbox's Preservation Step Sets A Much-Needed Example, Especially For Nintendo

Hanzla from eXputer inquires: "If Xbox can care about preserving its games and legacy, what exactly is wrong with Nintendo, trying to kill game preservation single-handedly?"

purple1014d ago

Ahh yes the good old game preservation of saving all your games to a removable hhd on the Xbox 360, taking it round your mates house, setting up multiple tvs to
Be met with “save data corrupted, please re download”

Or how about removing 360 games
From the store
, download them now or else, and, better hope to god that save data doesn’t corrupt, or it’s lost for ever

Nice one ☝️

Zeref3d ago

It's better than what Nintendo and Playstation is doing. It might not be perfect but at least they are TRYING. Unlike the others.

DarXyde3d ago

Trying? Take off the blinders for a moment, mate.

1. A failure to preserve games is just that: a failure to preserve games. Don't try to sugarcoat it: NO ONE is doing it properly. Better than awful is nothing to write home about.

2. At the time of this comment, isn't it the case that you need an internet connection to play Xbox games even if you buy physical discs that are hardly in circulation anymore? I don't have a Series X and I can't verify, but I think that is correct. I'm fairly certain you can at least play PS5 games at version 1.0 (not much of a win really when many games require day one patches). I think Microsoft's all digital, licensing approach is by far more aggressive than anyone else's. They really try to push you to game pass where you lose your entire library by umm.... Skipping a month of payments.

I don't think anyone is doing it right whatsoever. Don't get me started on Nintendo, who goes after anyone looking to preserve their games better than they ever would with extreme litigation.

Don't be a simp for any of these companies. Get it together.

PhillyDonJawn3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

@DarX never speak on Xbox again. You lost all credibility with your internet connection comment. Smh you have 0 clue and misinformed yet speaking on something you don't no squat about.

Einhander19723d ago

What has Sony done exactly? You guys keep deflecting to Sony but I am not actually seeing any results, and ai am certain nothing that you can come up with even comes close to what Microsoft has done and what they have tried and failed to do, like tie all your disks to your account on xbone.

Microsoft removed their whole indie section when they moved to the xbone because they were going to only allow games on the service that came from a publisher, id@xbox started after xbone launched and it only exists because Sony embraced indie and Microsoft was forced to cancel their plans and reverse course.

And every single game that was part of games for windows live including disk games (I have gta 4 on disk that won't work) so hundreds of games that use that DRM no longer work unless the company themselves patched it out which of course very few did.

MrBaskerville3d ago

Not trying. Tried. they killed of the backcomp program years ago. They set something up again, but sounds like it's more of an attempt to save the current library on whatever they are planning next. With luck they save everything and more, but let's see. I could see them killing off parts of the OG xbox and 360 libraries. Can't imagine that they would allow us to play Forza 5-7 in the future.

With that said, I do like what they've done and really wish they could have done more.

shinoff21833d ago

Zeref

So killing off physical media is trying what exactly. Ms don't really give a fk if you think they do your kidding yourself.

Profchaos3d ago

They are not trying this team is established for forward compatability the team is. It interested in preserving Xbox or 360 games.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3d ago
isarai4d ago

Is that why Hellblade 2 is digital only?

Zeref3d ago

Just because it's digital only doesn't mean you can't preserve it. Just put it on an external and you have the exact same functionality of what a disc does.

MrNinosan3d ago

Guess you're trolling, but if you actually think that's how it works, I'd recommend buying some braincells.

mkis0073d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Volitile vs nonvolitile data. A disc will not corrupt either. A drive can be corrupted.

Einhander19724d ago

This is just a scammy PR move to distract from the fact they are going digital only and trying to push streaming and subscriptions only.

No gaming company has pushed harder to remove ownership than Microsoft.

Without discs there is no preservation, preservation can't be done by the rights holders it can only be done by the consumers, anything else is a lie.

4d ago Replies(3)
Einhander19724d ago

Anyone remember xblig which Microsoft removed their whole 360 indie section removing hundreds of games from people?

4d ago
4d ago
Zeref3d ago

Do you know you can put your games on an external and preserve them that way? There are no benefits to discs. ZERO. Idk why some of you are still obsessed with them.

DarXyde3d ago

Because games like Persona 5 exist. It's STILL V1.00. On Playstation, that's a win because 1.00 is installed on the disc—no need to download anything.

If a game does not require any updates, it's all on the disc.

Extremely low bar in the modern era, of course. It's not much of a win by any stretch.

But for now, physical media does have a purpose, at least on Playstation.

Einhander19723d ago

That is factually not how game licensing works, try plugging your hard drive into someone else xbox, It's not going to work, and it won't work if the licensing servers ever go down.

Einhander19723d ago

Anyone remember games for windows live.

I have around a dozen games, some on Steam itself that will not work because Microsoft shut off the licensing servers.

BehindTheRows3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

I do. I STILL have games (Gears of War being the big one) I cannot access because Games for Windows LIVE is total garbage and no one has held Microsoft accountable.

Zeref3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

You don't have an Xbox apparently. Because you can 100 percent plug in your external and play games from it on any Xbox console lol. You just have to be logged in to prove ownership.

Chevalier3d ago

"You don't have an Xbox apparently. Because you can 100 percent plug in your external and play games from it on any Xbox console lol. You just have to be logged in to prove ownership."

Damn how many times do people got to explain your idiocy to you? You can take a copy of Persona 5 like someone used as an example and play that game on ANY console WITHOUT logging in which means I can lend the game to a friend without internet and they can play my game. Can you lend your hard drive to anyone without logging in for them to play? NOPE. That is a huge difference and if you think otherwise then sorry you're an idiot.

Tacoboto3d ago

"No gaming company has pushed harder to remove ownership than Microsoft."

Ubisoft is literally erasing games people bought from their libraries... My PS1-3 discs are useless on modern hardware. Nintendo's re-published and resold almost their entire Wii U library, and the eShop is completely dead with no BC mechanism in the Switch software. Microsoft publishes everything they make today day one on Steam and Xbox/Windows. Sony only brings to PC the titles they think you might want some years later and Nintendo won't even design a functional long-lasting joystick.

You're absolutely trolling and not serious if you think Microsoft today is the worst offender.

shinoff21833d ago

Yay steam

Not everyone fks with computers though. The disc is still the best way as a console player. Period.

Tacoboto3d ago

How do Sony and Nintendo feel about these discs from 2001-2013?

Don't be stupid, you know Xbox is the best at this today.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3d ago
Hofstaderman3d ago

Nobody wants this. Sales or the lack of it in the case of XBOX is very telling. I wonder how the adorably all digital series X will fare. Adorably dismal perhaps?

crazyCoconuts3d ago

Only time will tell, but for from someone like me suspecting that Xbox is trying to gracefully exit the console market, that "forward compatibility" team is trying to get Xbox games playing on Windows PCs. I mean, it's nice that they're not planning on exiting with a "enjoy your games while the hardware still works" message, so that's nice. They still have a brand to protect via Microsoft so probably feel obligated to have a better exit strategy.

Xeofate3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

That is not their plan, their plan is to transfer users accounts to the cloud.

Phil Spencer himself said as much a few months back, plans could have changed but I think people are reading way too much into one statement where Phil said he would allow Epic on xbox because he wants to be able to sell xbox games directly on other platforms. Aka, instead of selling Sea of Thives through PSN he wants to have an xbox store to sell his games on PlayStation without giving PlayStation any money.

Again, it's extremely unlikely that Phil plans to put PC on xbox and licensing would prevent them from just giving out other publishers games purchased on xbox copies of thier games on PC, Microsoft does not own their games.

crazyCoconuts2d ago

The thing that doesn't align with the cloud strategy is the giving up on exclusives. You'd still need strong exclusives for cloud streaming - it's still a "platform" , just with a lower upfront hardware investment. I feel like they've learned what PS learned with PSNow long ago. We're not ready to stream games and it's only gonna lose them money to try at this point

FinalFantasyFanatic3d ago

I would love that, I'd buy up some of the Xbox games if they could run on PC, like the Rare Replay, Lost Odyssey and Dead or Alive Ultimate, probably a pipe dream though.

Show all comments (43)
280°

Sony Taps Bungie's Head of Revenue to Lead Live-Service Games

Sony has recruited Bungie's head of revenue Jaremy Rich to head up its live-service gaming division, Rich has announced on social media.

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
ChasterMies13d ago

Please do not put Destiny’s monetization into Sony’s first party games. The monetization is what’s driving players away from Destiny.

just_looken13d ago

The new temp boss is the sony cfo bean counter so i can see this being a thing get every penny.

Cacabunga13d ago

PlayStation officially losing it.. fans will never support gaas games

just_looken13d ago

@car

The new boss did a interview in japan he wants to tap into the mobile market like nintendio so he give 0 fucks about gamers/fans

https://www.pushsquare.com/...

Redemption-6413d ago

@Cacabunga
You only speak for you and those who think like you, but most fans will support what they want. Playstation and PC fans are literally supporting Helldivers 2 and that is a gaas. Maybe you wouldn't, but many more would if they like it.

Huey_My_D_Long13d ago

@Redemption-64
Look, Im not making any judgement calls about this guy, but I will say that Helldivers 2 GaaS model is unique to Helldivers, and legit the only other game I can think of thats similiar was the Avengers game except HD2 pass is still better.
The fact that you can earn in game currency in a way that doesnt make you feel like you have to grind forever, as well you being able work on that pass that you bought...on your own time without a time limit...that right there is fucking huge to me, and I can't name any game other than avengers that avoided trapping players with FOMO logic...I think GaaS on HD2 shouldn't be compared to the rest of the industry...it should be copied.

Einhander197213d ago

Cacabunga

Helldivers 2...

Redemption-64

In Europe it's a 60 40 split favoring PC.
In the US its a 60 40 split favoring PS5.

So PlayStation owners supported the game just fine, it's not getting carried by PC or anything like that.

FinalFantasyFanatic13d ago

@just_looken,
I'm perfectly fine with the way Nintendo entered the mobile market, I never touched their mobile games, meanwhile, the console/handheld stayed the way it is. As for being a bean counter, he's probably going to reel in these massive budgets that Sony's studios have had lately, I haven't played Spiderman 2, but I cannot see how they almost tripled the budget for that game.

@Redemption-64,
That's an exception to the rule, I'm expecting a lot of these GAAS games from Sony to fail, to be fair, they only need a few to succeed, but I would have preferred that they put more of their resources into other types of games.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 13d ago
DivineHand12513d ago

True their monetization is driving players away and at the same time, their decision to chop out content and convoluted systems is keeping new players away from the game.

Joe91313d ago

I don't think that will happen based on how things worked out at Naughty Dog now that we know what we do, seems they had the option to fully commit to live service games or stay making single player experences so they gave up on their live service game. We are not sure how things came about with Bend making a live service game but I hope that was not a forced situation. Sony doesnt seem like they are forcing studios to switch up but we will see, Sony's bread and butter is single player games it is how they dominated the console market.

Obscure_Observer13d ago

Yeah, I though Sony learned something from all their failures in the LS segment under Bungie´s disastrous leadership and supervision which led to games been cancelled, studios closed and all the people laid off.

Looks like Bungie still plays a major role in Sony´s LS initiative and Sony is not backtracking on their GaaS plans.

S2Killinit13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Are we forgetting that Destiny is also a highly successful franchise? I feel like that definitely deserves mention here.

Besides, there is no reason why a person cant learn from past experiences.

Joe91312d ago

I agree, people act as if Destiny flopped when it came out lol it took 9 to 10 years for the numbers to fall yet people are still playing it add the success of Helldivers 2 no wonder Sony is going forward down this path.

S2Killinit12d ago

Personally, I see no problem with Sony also having service games as long as they make good ones, and more importantly they deliver the AAA story driven games that they are known for. So yeah, I agree 100% with you.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 12d ago
Christopher13d ago

I mean, this person made some pretty bad decisions at Bungie. I hope they've learned from them because I definitely don't see those type of ideas as good for PlaySation in general.

CrimsonWing6912d ago (Edited 12d ago )

Honestly, what’s to learn from? How to make people happily continuously dump money into a single game over its life-time? Buy season passes continuously for several years with a smile on our faces?

GaaS is a design decision that is everything wrong with this industry. The fact that Helldivers 2 did so well and people defend the monetization because it was $40 and is a fun game, scares the sh*t out of me to see that the door is open and all shift will probably be to replicate that in future games. We already know the ROI for traditional game dev cost isn’t doing it for them.

I thought with Jimbo leaving we’d see a change for the better… I’m not so sure now.

S2Killinit12d ago

Service games are being offered by everyone. Sony cannot afford to only create single player AAA games. No one can. They already said they will be doing both.

Abnor_Mal13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Ps5 gamers in 2023 seemed to play more live service types of games, so regardless to how people feel about them, numbers don’t lie and Sony is going where the money is. I mean look at the excitement around Helldivers2, people are showing that they want live service games.

Christopher13d ago

They play long-time existing live service games like CoD, Fortnite, Apex Legends, Destiny 2, and the like. Mass majority of new live service games are considered failures and aren't moving gamers away from older games.

just_looken13d ago

Yep the huge issue with live service is they need paid players along with a reason to play them.

You forgot mobile market that also taps into that player base as well as the eve online style games there is only a certain amount of krakens/whales blind supporters compared to the amount of live service games we have its not sustainable math wise.

700 restaurants making food for every seat for 1000-3000 eaters just does not work out

Einhander197213d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Christopher

I am not a big live service fan and literally own zero of the games you listed, but that is not true, unless you call games that aren't the top games to be failures.

There are tons of live service games that are profitable.

Games don't have to be the biggest game ever they just need to make more than they cost.

I challenge you to show professionally prepared data that shows that more live service games fail than make enough to keep going.

Because all the data that I have seen shows that live service is less of a gamble than making a big AAA budget game which needs to survive off retail sales.

FinalFantasyFanatic13d ago

I sometimes wonder if we're at saturation point, where it's hard for a new game to join those ranks unless it's particularly exceptional, people only have so much time and money to devote to these types of games.

romulus2313d ago

Correction, they have no issue playing good live service games

shinoff218313d ago

Lol it's not even a quarter of the ps5s sold. Helldivers may have been a hit but let's not say most are enjoying it because truth is most(the real most ) don't care about it.

S2Killinit12d ago (Edited 12d ago )

I play what is fun. If a live service game is good I’ll play it as long as its not a money scheme which Helldivers is not.

And Im a single player gamer.

mastershredder13d ago

How do you kill a franchise that already been killed?
Destiny’s grind, cash-in-on-playbass-cha-Ching, and pop-culture-insertion mainstream-me-too bs totally killed any rep Bungie had. Sony/Bungie, if you are doing this to ward-off players, it’s already working.

crazyCoconuts13d ago

Headline truncated:
"... off a cliff"

Show all comments (43)
370°

Could Xbox Soon Become The Next Dreamcast?

Microsoft's future in the video game space is murky right now, so let's break it all down.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
ApocalypseShadow16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Not anytime soon. But they're on that path.

One thing not mentioned in the article is Microsoft's money bags. If Sega had Microsoft's money, they would have still been around as a hardware manufacturer. Xbox as a platform only survives because of the money bags. They can continue making consoles for the core and port to PC.

The multiplatform strategy is only the result of arrogance and misguided leadership that blew up in their face. They thought gamers would jump on Xbox in droves if they knew that many of their favorite games would be only on Xbox. But that's not happening at all. Sales didn't increase. They decreased. Why? Because the dumb asses thought giving away these expensively made games in a cheap service would also turn the tide.

Gamers on other platforms are willing to buy quality. They don't need to be handed nearly free games in a service that aren't even finished and sometimes average in their development. Gamers buy Nintendo games. They buy Sony games. Microsoft groomed their base to not buy games. Even the quality ones. It has always been their plan to go digital. But most gamers still like single player gaming. Still like physical releases.

Microsoft's problem has always been that they don't produce high quality games at the same output as Nintendo and Sony. Actually, they should be producing quite a lot more because they're worth over 2 TRILLION. How they don't have more is ridiculous and no excuse. Buying publishers to take away from competition only backfired. Because it still takes millions of dollars to continue to make those games from the publishers they snatched. Their only choice was to crawl back to their competitors to help sustain those developers because Nintendo and Sony platforms were the ones buying games.

Am I sorry for Microsoft? Hell no! They deserved last place for putting in the least effort. They deserved the fallout for buying up the industry and didn't make a single blip on the radar against their competitors where they now need those same gamers they took away games from to support them. Part of it may have been to cash in on their competition. But the result is the slow death of their platform. They may go 3rd party. They may keep making hardware. I don't give a shit about them to worry about it. I only give a shit about the destructive nature of their industry moves that only negatively affect gamers. They could sell and drop out of the industry and I wouldn't blink. Probably laugh. But not blink. They deserve whatever comes to them. At least Sega put in the effort when it came to games. They just had poor leadership. Microsoft has poor leadership and barely makes memorable games. That's a killer combination. And not in a good way.

Cacabunga16d ago

That would be an insult to Dreamcast.. it had a crazy line up of legendary critically acclaimed games.

Crows9016d ago

I was thinking the same. Dreamcast had incredible games in such a short amount of time. It was truly exceptional.

darthv7215d ago

...and yet all those great games were not enough to sway people from the looming release of the PS2 at the time. Sony just has that kind of brand loyalty.

Cacabunga15d ago

Darth

I do not agree.. Sony had even better games thanks to an unprecedented 3rd party support..
DC had amazing lineup but 90% were arcade games..

88315d ago

@darth:
And Sony showed off "The Emotion Engine" and their real time demos that made everyone think they would miss out on REAL next gen 128bit magic if they jumped in before PS2s polygon pushing monster (and early lack of anti-aliasing with a healthy heap of shimmer + DVD playback) stepped up. PS2 was a fantastic system though with amazing games.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 15d ago
blacktiger16d ago

That's not true. Just because Microsoft has the money doesn't mean Microsoft can allow xbox to bleed entire Microsoft money. It doesn't work like they. Also SEC will be watching and investor won't allow it. Lot of reasons why Microsoft can not continue even if they wanted to. SEC regulations is expensive.

fr0sty16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Exactly this... Microsoft is a publicly traded company, mostly owned by their shareholders (Approximately 59.24% of the company's stock is owned by Institutional Investors, 7.73% is owned by Insiders and 33.03% is owned by Public Companies and Individual Investors.). Their shareholders call the shots on the business decisions, and their shareholders want one thing and one thing only, for their stock price to go up. Losses do not make stock prices go up... so if the division continually posts losses on hardware, but shows profits on software and services (which has been the case with Xbox its entire lifespan, for over 20 years now), the shareholders are going to grow impatient and demand they stop making hardware and focus on the only thing that has ever made them money, software and services.

When Microsoft bought Blizzard and Activision for almost 100 billion, I knew that was the nail in the coffin for Xbox as a console... as the shareholders were going to expect a quick return on that investment, and when it didn't materialize, they were going to be out for blood... out to force Xbox to sell those games on as many consoles as possible, "and while you're at it, sell those first party exclusives that aren't selling well on other consoles as well... hell, just stop making consoles and sell games."

If there is another Xbox console generation, it will definitely be the last, but I doubt there even will be one at this point. I think the Xbox division planning on it just in case, but I don't think the project has been greenlit from Microsoft itself. The rumors that they have not yet even secured the chips needed from the chip fabrication facilities ties into this.

shinoff218316d ago

While I usually agree with you . Alot of what was said can just also be asked before any of that.

How long will the shareholders wait? It doesn't appear long at all

Babadook715d ago

I think I get your point. Like just because MS has money does not mean they are content to throw it away on a dying ecosystem. Xbox has to be profitable or “what’s the point?”

ifinitygamer15d ago

Money bags, yes, but are we ignoring that Xbox actually makes a profit on games and GamePass? Hardware is often a loss leader, and they're probably making profit 4 years into the life cycle, but games and services revenue have been very profitable while other parts of Microsoft's business is struggling. Say what you will about the quality of those games, of course, but this is kind of a reverse Dreamcast situation, where the console was dragging down the company and put it at risk of shuttering entirely. Killing that console saved the business and allowed it to continue to make games on multiple platforms. In this case, the service is very profitable, as are the games, and they're also double-dipping into Multiplatform to extend this further, while their hardware is just sort of what they believe to be the best for gamers and their own titles (whether that is the case or not...)

fr0sty15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

The issue is, they aren't selling enough hardware to make their exclusives profitable, and now that they've bought half the gaming publisher/dev industry, they have no choice but to go third party to make a profit... and that is making their shareholders take a real close look at their hardware division under the microscope... why keep making the hardware if the software is all that is making them money, and they continually, generation after generation come in dead last with hardware sales?

Look at a game like Spiderman 2... if it had been an Xbox exclusive, with the amount it cost to develop, it would have been a huge failure... simply not enough consoles out there to sell it on. They would have been lucky to break even.

ifinitygamer15d ago

@fr0sty agreed completely, which is why they're hedging by releasing other games to multiplatform, plus they have PC to make up for the difference in a lot of ways, which is why their games are not complete money pits. It brings up the question of whether or not those exclusives would drive sales of consoles, though. Let's say Spiderman 2 was an Xbox exclusive, it would certainly have pushed console sales, though who's to say how much is anyone's guess.

fr0sty15d ago

That's why you can't rely on just one exclusive, Sony has always delivered on a wide range of solid exclusives, even this generation (even if they haven't been strong on the first party exclusives, they've made up for it with third party). They don't rely on just one "system seller", they have a portfolio of them.

15d ago
JBlaze22615d ago

ApocalypseShadow To be honest Sony has more of a chance to go 3rd party because like you said Microsoft has money, Sony does not. Sony does not have games, Only games they have come from 3rd party. Sony has been losing money for years and you. Saying Microsoft has been putting the least effort just proves you have no idea what's been going on. All Sony has done is repeat and recycle, never innovating or doing something new. All Sony has is brand loyalty nothing else and it shows.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
LG_Fox_Brazil16d ago

Not sure about that. It's been two decades and I still think about Power Stone, Shenmue, Crazy Taxi, Jet Set Radio, Seaman and others, but I'm not sure I'll remember Xbox Series X/S games in a few years from now... Maybe I'll remember about the franchises that the Xbox brand spawned, but I don't believe that the Xbox Series lives up to the late Dreamcast or even to the Xbox name itself. I do have great memories about the 360 with Blue Dragon, Gears 2 and Lost Odyssey though

isarai16d ago

Nah, sega actually makes good games

Becuzisaid16d ago

No, Dreamcast was ahead of it's time and most still have very fond memories of it that had one. It also had some good games on it even in it's short lifespan. Xbox has none of these qualities.

Profchaos16d ago

I remember it coming out at the time in a really bad place they hit the market before the PS2 but it was during this transitional time when Sony was promoting the power of the PS2 and so many of the Dreamcast games were awesome but often third parties simply ported the PS1 version increased resolution and performance but rarely fully utilise the capabilities of the console.

I think in the end bad marketing done it in and like the GameCube so many people are fond of it now but at the time it was looked at in the lense of the day and it didn't stack up.

Personally I miss Sega in hardware they took risks that many companies won't

Becuzisaid16d ago

I never owned it, and got the PS2 right when it launched. But there were certain games it had that I was always jealous of that I didn't have access to - Sonic adventure, crazy taxi, power Stone, code Veronica, shenmue, skies of Arcadia. I always thought it was a really cool machine though. I've never heard a bad thing about it though from those that had it.

FinalFantasyFanatic15d ago

I only ever saw one Dreamcast, and that was one my friend owned, pity I never got to play it, I wonder what games he had for it?

It would be nice if some of those games got ported to modern systems.

Profchaos16d ago

Oh man sonic adventure on the Dreamcast made me so jealous as a huge sonic fan on the mega drive who also moved to PlayStation 2 I never got the chance to play it back in the day either. The Dreamcast in Australia where I am was always relegated to the smallest corner of EB Games it was kind of a strong first indicator that things were not going well at the time.

Show all comments (72)