740°

PS4: Sony went for “cheaper hardware” for fear of smaller install base - Cousins

PS4 is made up of cheaper hardware than its predecessor because Sony fears it will see a smaller install base in next-gen, ex-Battlefield producer and EA exec Ben Cousins has suggested.

lnvisibleMan4037d ago

With the ps4, Sony has created a great ecosystem for game developers. But at the end of the day it is up to developers to inovate. Hear me EA.

MikeMyers4037d ago

Sony needs to innovate as well and I believe they will. One of the jobs of anyone who releases a platform is to lead the charge and show what it has to offer. Sony knows the PS3 had a negative image in the beginning due to its high price. I don't think they will make the same mistake. A game console needs to also be affordable, otherwise you might as well build a PC.

Sony also knows they have to attract the mainstream public and that the gaming world around them has changed. The developers so far seem pleased with the hardware which is always a good sign and Sony went knocking on their door to see what it was they wanted.

The thing is we all need to just accept gamers of all stripes. Those who play casual games, those who enjoy motion type games, those who like hardcore games and the indie scene. We often want to label people out of ignorance or because we feel threatened by their existence without realizing gaming can expand. There just has to be a good balance of the software you provide.

aCasualGamer4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

There is no doubt in my mind Sony will come out as the winner of nextgen if they keep up the good work. By good work i mean focus on games ofcourse and not "TV channel services for gaming consoles".

darthv724037d ago

sony went against the grain of the industry. They didnt build easy systems to program for, they built systems to challenge the creativity within the developers.

so now they take a change of direction and build a system the devs are interested in. Now they could have done that because of developer pressure to have a platform with a quick turnaround on investment OR they could have done it because they know the cost of specialized programming tools adds to the development cost and some companies just dont have that kind of $$ to spend.

For whatever their reason, sony made a change to their strategy. We will know by the quality of the titles released if that change was good or bad.

will developers take the easy route and turn out games that arent up to the quality sony is synonymous for? or will they try and push their creative side to use the more familiar platform design in unique ways nobody thought of?

Proof is in the pudding.

Denethor_II4037d ago

"For whatever their reason, sony made a change to their strategy. We will know by the quality of the titles released if that change was good or bad."

You have absolutely no reason to doubt the quality of games released for the next Sony console. Look at the legacy they have created.

Sony taking this route is the only way forward after last gen. It's a positive thing.

gaffyh4037d ago

They didn't use cheaper hardware because of a fear of a small install base. They went for cheaper hardware because the company as a whole is struggling and needs to be able to make as much money as possible, but at the same time, they wanted to offer gamers a serious upgrade from their current consoles.

darthv724037d ago

I don't doubt "Sony" or their 1st/2nd party divisions. I know they will deliver above and beyond the rest.

It's "the rest" that i have doubt with. Taking the easy route generally results in quick and dirty cash in type of games that feel unfinished and/or incomplete. thus resulting in the DLC routine and patches up the whazoo.

We really can only expect nothing but the finest work from sony and if Sony has some sort of clause that there be no cheap shovelware released for the PS4 then we will likely see games released for it that have no place.

They may have a higher standard for their own IP's but unless they hold the same standard to all other 3rd parties then a platform that is cheap and easy will result in similar titles from 3rd parties just trying to make a fast buck.

The hardware may exceed the previous generation but if the games do not then what's the use? Sony needs to hold every developer accountable for their software if it is to be released on the PS4. Quality control needs to be enforced. But with costs at an all time high, they probably cant be picky about every detail and we will get unfavorable releases like we have seen in every generation before.

@gaffy...if sony is struggling then i fear we will get quantity over quality this time around. Sony making a system easy to develop for opens the flood gate to any/every kind of game developer that wants to release their game.

I dont have a problem with the ones that show a legitimate passion for creating something fun but at the same time there will be those with the quick and easy way of thinking that will flood the market with crap that buries the good stuff like what we see on ios and droid devices.

yeah, i just compared the PS4 to the mobility market. If there is no quality control....that is where things are headed.

Denethor_II4037d ago

@darthv27
tbh It seems to me that you're kind of stating a business practice that Sony have been excising for nearly twenty years, and that's quality control. Sony are for the core gamers, and with their multitude of studios there's no worry there. In regards to multiplats I don't think Sony can direly dictate the standard there anyway.

AntoineDcoolette4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

Kudos to Sony for learning from their PS3 F!@# up fiasco.

1) Working closely with studios to get insight into how to make developer friendly hardware instead of some BS unnecessarily complicated cell processor 2.0

2) 8 gigs of RAM so that developers will once again not get knee capped

3) Less expensive hardware that will hopefully draw in a larger audience; perhaps a lot of the people who were put off by the initial high price point of the PS3

PopRocks3594037d ago

Any company needs to innovate to stay relevant. I think Sony's social network ideas are pretty solid. I honestly don't mind it using lower than expected specs if it 1) helps the system be more affordable and more competitive in the market and 2) helps keep Sony in the black more so than the PS3 did in its initial years.

The graphics for the upcoming exclusives look just under the par of CGI movies, so honestly do not mind what they're doing right now and I'm surprised that it's received as much criticism as it has (no console?! DERPY DOO!).

Gaming1014037d ago

This has confirmed what I've been saying all along. Sony saw the backlash after they charged a measly $100 extra for the PS3's top end model, so now they have to make it cheaper. They can't include a better shader modeler since it would be too costly. I think Sony should have beefed up the PS4 and sold it for a couple extra hundred bucks, or at least have the option to sell it for more, with a cheaper $500 option like last time, at least we would be getting a better console!

Dee_914037d ago

ugh
flamebait titles

full quote.
"so maybe that’s a kind of defensive move against their expectation that they’re not going to have the same install base, or maybe they just want to hit profitability quicker because of Sony’s less stable financial state at the moment.”

Just saying the 1st part makes no sense and makes it a dumb suggestion without explanation (which cousins did explain but that explanation is still just his assumption)

The latter makes much more sense.So that shouldve been the title instead.

gaffyh4037d ago

@Darth - Quality depends on the developer not the console itself. Sony's first and second party developers will continue to make amazing games that will still be more optimized than the majority of third party titles.

Hayabusa 1174037d ago

@darthv72

So...developer friendly hardware=lazy developers? Give me some examples. As far as I can tell, crap games are crap games. The original Playstation was easy to develop for, yet the original Playstation out performed the N64 and Saturn in terms of quantity...so quality? Well, do you reckon the N64 and saturn had better games then PS1? PS1 certainly had it's fair share of "quality games", and these games didn't seem to have much trouble standing out from crowd of common dross.

Sony do have a set of technical standards that every game must meet before shipping (it's called a TRC) whether or not they reach YOUR pius standards, I don't know. And I don't see the need in filtering out the rubbish games either. You have to take the good with bad, that's life. It's up to you to decide which games you want to play and which ones you want to avoid. Who keeps the quality filter on all the music that gets made these days?

Sy_Wolf4037d ago

As much as I love gaming on a PC, Sony has a fantastic lineup of exclusives which can motivate people to buy a PS4 as well.

Kevin ButIer4037d ago

Fear... come on... It wasn't fear it's part of their objectives, to have a big install base.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 4037d ago
thechosenone4037d ago

Sony is the global leader in console sales, so what do they have to be worried about exactly? Also MS went with even cheaper hardware than the PS4 so does that mean that they have twice the level of anxiety and fear of losing out market share?

Fear mongering article is just fear mongering.

Objective4037d ago

Seems like Sony is no longer so arrogant and has come to realize that it has lost a huge chunk of market share and projects itself as losing even more next gen. Sony must start making decisions that make financial sense if it wants to survive next gen.

N4g_null4037d ago

Sony should release a price then if it is cheaper then they can solidify preorder before ms even announces. This could be a good gen for them.

Freedomland4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

@Invisibleman

This is not suggested by EA but by some ex-employees. These websites always twist and tell, just to get more hits. Look at the title, writer has created a sensational title by mixing to statements in a different contexts. Shallow journalism, something is under the rug.

adorie4037d ago

I find it appalling how so many articles leeching off the same interview by the EA exec, twisting headlines to get the hits and kickstart the fanboy wars even more, make it past failed status.

If these mods and community on N4G were serious about cleaning this crap up, this place could begin to find a balance.

It's almost as annoying as the fanboys who derail threads to talk about fanboys. SMFH

Gamer19824036d ago

cheaper hardware does not always equal inferior hardware. Look at the 360 it always had the cheapest of hardware to stay cheaper than the ps3 and still make profit..

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4036d ago
TheLyonKing4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

Cheaper doesn't always mean worse, Sony quality is good quality.

Once the install base is established i wouldn't be surprised if they realesed a better spec one.

*by better spec I don't mean ram etc*

What mean is a bigger hard drive or built in functionality for something's or even just am extra USB slot. If they went for the cheap option then it's highly likely they would release a more expensive one. Seems business models are lost on some people

Utalkin2me4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

So they don't release ones with bigger HDD or in the 360 case add wifi and hdmi? They do this all the time.

Omar914037d ago

@Utalkin2me: yes they do do this all the time, however if you noticed for example the ps3 had hardware removed such as usb slots BC before they added the extra hard drives.

PS4isKing_824037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

@Thelyonking Since when has that ever happened? No console maker ever released a system and updated its specs midway thru its life cycle. That's not how the console business works.

The specs of the ps4 are amazing as they are already. If a person wants any better, that's what pcs are for.

KrystofKage4037d ago

In terms of quality, sure they have.

Pretty sure the xbox 360s was a pretty big upgrade in regards to hardware. Infact, comparing the original 360 to the current one and you'll see a world of difference(most people don't even remember there was no HDMI port in the first release).

Baylex4037d ago

Did you read what he written? he talked about HDD, usb slots! And yes that happened before.. the first ps3 had 4 usb slots and the next ones had only 2. There are a lot of ps3 versions with differents hdd. You should read before writting...

Utalkin2me4037d ago

This is embarrassing...lol. Learn to read people.

DOMination-4037d ago

To all guys above and below telling people that they should learn how to read: The original poster CLEARLY edited the post after the confusion over the point. The point about HDD and USB was clarified AFTER all the other posts were made.

insomnium24037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

Yeah I think MS is the only one to ever release a better version afterwards. I mean ofc better by HDMI (something fundamental). MS is also the only one to ever make the games require a HDD even when they sold a HDD-less version of their console and publicly said that HDD is not a mandatory purchase.

But hey I've come to learn that it's forbidden to talk about these things on this site. You get called a Sony nuthugger the minute you speak of these things. That's why I lost my bubbles. Broken system is broken. I can hear the angry typing right now so I'll make my escape before it happens.

DS364037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

@insomnium2 dont forget
XBOX 360 core package released in 2005
No HDD
No HDMI
No Built-in Wifi
HD-DVD (failed)
No HD-DVD player
No wireless controller
All this was added later.
And the joke about it is that, if you added these missing features to the core or the arcade, at that time, it would have costed more than a high end PS3 at launch ($599).

PS3 in still pretty much the same minus 2 usb ports, dual shock and BC. People don't realize how much M$ nickled and dimed the xbox faithful at launch with their console.

That's why I'm going to wait and see to evaluate both consoles before making my final decision. But as of right now its leaning towards sony again.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4037d ago
cayleee4037d ago

"Once the install base is established i wouldn't be surprised if they realesed a better spec one."

Depends on what you mean by "Better Spec", if a slimmer version is what you are thinking, then thats not a better Spec. Its just shrunk down.

The Spec will remain constant for the life of the console. Dont get your hopes up for a upgrade.

Hydrolex4037d ago

a better spec one ?

your source is legit, good stuff, don't smoke too much tho

Utalkin2me4037d ago

I like how most people just skimmed read your "better spec one" then just commented on that. But didn't finish to read you saying "bigger HDD" or "Extra USB slots", you said nothing of the sort of better GPU or CPU.

Classic selective reading, my wife has something similar, which is called selective hearing.

GiggMan4037d ago

His original post was edited. The *asterisks* and below was added after everyone assumed he was talking about RAM, GPU, or CPU.

There was no distinction between hardware and system specs.

wishingW3L4037d ago

people, you need to learn to read more than just the first sentence. lol

jcnba284037d ago

Sony products were brought from a 3 star down to a 2 star and labelled "junk status" in 2012.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4037d ago
MasterCornholio4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

Cheaper isn't equal to inferior in this case because Sony has decided to outsource all their parts so they can reduce the fixed costs for their console which include research and development for example. In my opinion some of the technology in the PS3 WAS great but the cell processor and the split ram configuration made game development difficult for developers. I'm not lying here because even Sony admitted their mistakes with the PS3.

Motorola RAZR i

ProjectVulcan4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

The world economy is a very different place now, and Sony have a less than brilliant current financial situation.

These consoles are sons of austerity. Cost is now incredibly important and hugely critical, much more so then when PS3 launched.

Really an average consumer doesn't want to buy a console for $600/£400+ pounds in these times and nor do Sony want to lose hundreds of dollars on each machine they build and sell for years to come like they did on PS3.

It is unsustainable.

It is understandable and only sense that these consoles have reigned in their hardware ambitions and looked for the best bang for their buck shrewdly, instead of throwing too much at the development of them.

Sony's attitude with PS3 was quite clear, they expected people to go and spend all that money on launch even going so far as saying they should get another job to pay for it!

Obviously they have learnt from this mistake and come to the reality of most people's economical situation.

Until we know the exact cost of the machine at retail we can't say for certain how well they have managed it, but I believe they have been much more clever with where they spent their money this time out.

M-M4037d ago

Sony is playing it very smart this time around.

4lc4pon34037d ago

EA sucks. Who cares about what they have to say in any situation. I poo on your company

CommonSenseGamer4037d ago

So tell me, how is EA different to any large company that's in the business to make money?

Is Sony so giving that they always put people before profits or do they just better hide it through better PR?

HarryMasonHerpderp4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

EA are the parasites of the industry.
How can you even compare the two companys?
Sony has made plenty of mistakes but they've done a lot more for the gaming industry than EA, tell me what EA has done apart from close studios,dumb down franchises, rip off consumers and stagnate the market for the past 3 years?

CommonSenseGamer4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

So, tell me what Sony has done other than to use slave labourers to build its hardware, reduce the number of activated systems from 5 to 2, provide lackluster support for several developers that lead to their ultimate demise, introduce game passes, release inferior slim models with lesser build quality and features, block the use of some 3rd party controllers.

Just because what they do sits better with you does not make them a better company. I'm not anti-Sony but I don't think they are an better or worse than anyone else. They're in it to make money.

fermcr4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

Bubble up for CommonSenseGamer.

I agree, every company is in the business to make money, it's just that some company's have better PR departments then others.

"So, tell me what Sony has done other than to use slave labourers to build its hardware"

I agree with this too, and unfortunate there are many other companies that do the same thing beside Sony... Nike, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Nestlé (even them are accused of using child labour on their cocoa farms), etc...

R_aVe_N4037d ago (Edited 4037d ago )

"So, tell me what Sony has done other than to use slave labourers to build its hardware, reduce the number of activated systems from 5 to 2, provide lackluster support for several developers that lead to their ultimate demise, introduce game passes, release inferior slim models with lesser build quality and features, block the use of some 3rd party controllers"

What the hell are you smoking? Slave labor? If you are referring to pretty much everything being made in China well 80% of all products move through China at some point. I am not saying I agree with it, but if it was not done you would be paying twice as much for the same product. Still sucks either way. Your going to be pretty hard pressed to find any electronic product that doesnt have something made in China. Sony does not block 3rd party controllers never has. As far as slim models if you want cheaper systems you have to cut stuff out its that simple. The slim model not only is more stable that the launch consoles, but heck of a lot cheaper as well.

WeAreLegion4037d ago

Sony's PR department is terrible. They are a business, but they're a business run by people who actually like their customers. Have you guys never seen Kaz talk? The man loves gaming! He loves technology! Look at Mark Cerny. That's not good PR. He creeps everyone out! He's passionate about gaming and creating something that we'll enjoy. That's the difference. Sony isn't just in this for the money.

kenshiro1004037d ago

The fact that you received agrees for that is embarrassing. Almost every product made in China is based on child labor. Its sad that you chose to single out Sony of all companies.

adorie4037d ago

How are EA different from other companies?

Sim City
Dead Space Franchise
Lying and pulling the rug from under their customers
Spinning controversy on NEOGAF
Microtransactions

Sounds like they are doing everything every other company with bad business practices in this industry is doing, all by themselves.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4037d ago
Show all comments (116)
70°

Disney Dreamlight Valley teases part two of paid expansion

Disney Dreamlight Valley devs have officially teased the second part of the paid expansion titled The Spark of Imagination.

70°

Best Stardew Valley Farm Names – 100 Funny, Nerdy, Cute Ideas and More

Starting out a new farm, but need help choosing a name? Check out this article for a 100 farm name ides for Stardew Valley.

190°

Bethesda Needs to Reduce the Gaps Between New Fallout and Elder Scrolls Releases

Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
-Foxtrot13h ago

Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.

Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.

When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.

The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.

If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.

We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.

RaidenBlack11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland

KyRo7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years

RaidenBlack1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

@KyRo
So, by 15 years, you mean Fallout 3 was the last great game Bethesda made?
You don't consider Skyrim a good game, which came out 13 years ago?
I'd consider Fallout 4 a pretty decent game as well. It's Story & RPG elements were a bit downgrade from New Vegas but the exploration and shooting on the other hand, were upgrades.
FO76 was disappointing and Starfield could've been better at launch I'll agree.

Duke197h ago(Edited 7h ago)

I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.

Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.

--Onilink--4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)

By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030

The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…

They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times

Duke193h ago(Edited 3h ago)

Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs? Look at what happened to Final Fantasy as a recent example - there is pretty clear FF fatigue setting in because they are now pumping out titles in the franchise every few years. Pumping out more games faster doesn't always make a series better.

There are plenty of options to make new games, not just create more titles in the same universe at a faster pace.

-Foxtrot52m ago

"Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs"

He's literally just told you why

We're waiting like 15 years before a sequel comes out, it's insane

Skyrim came out in 2011, the next game is expected to come out in 2027 at the earliest so that's 16 years apart while Fallout 4 came out in 2015 and might not release until 2031, again 16 years.

We're fine with Bethesda trying new things and doing new IPs like Starfield but adding a new game to the cycle now means a bigger wait. Also Starfield didn't meet most peoples expectations, can you imagine waiting 15 years or so for a sequel and it's disappointing? It would feel even worse because you would have to wait another 15 years to see if they manage to come back from it.

They need to give it to another developer, we don't need main numbered titles but a spin off of Fallout and Elder Scrolls should be cycled in between the long gaps of the main releases.

Once again you are making out people want these games as quick as possible when all we want is a standard development time of at least 4 years or so rather than waiting 15.

mandf4h ago

Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.

Skuletor6h ago

Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.

SimpleSlave5h ago

"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.

Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?

🤣

C'mon now. What timeline are you from?

Skuletor3h ago

Think about it, they're already bug filled messes on their current schedule, can you imagine how much worse it would be if they rushed things?

-Foxtrot49m ago

@Skuletor

Who's saying to rush the releases? No one is saying that...

People just don't want to be waiting 15 years for a sequel, they aren't working on the game for that long, you do realise that right? The issue isn't coming down to them working on the game and us "rushing them", it's the fact they are working on other games like Starfield now meaning bigger gaps before they even get started on them.

I bet you any more Elder Scrolls VI only entered full development last year when Starfield was finished despite being announced in 2018.

Duke193h ago

I mean you aren't wrong. People are going to complain about anything

isarai5h ago

Hows about you focus on quality, just a thought 🤷‍♂️

Sciurus_vulgaris4h ago

Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.

Show all comments (22)