Playeressence's Furious Francis discusses how the PS4 doesn't need to be the cutting edge monster the PS3 was at launch to sell the most consoles next generation.
"looks at my PS2" it actually benefited them not being the most powerful system
even though more power don't hurt any one and would be a plus just look at ps3 1st party games we have and the upcoming ps3 exclusives this year but all i care about is games and sony will get my money because of that
Thats the whole point of the article, Sony didn't go on this power hunt till the PS3. The PS2 was great and the games looked fantastic and it was the weakest out of the Xbox and Gamecube. Price is going to be a huge factor. If Sony could some how make the PS4, $349.99. It will do extremely well next generation.
it has to be most powerful for me, its just a more of a guaranty that it will provide best results in long terms... EDIT: and I agree above that power is not everything.. PS2 best memories!!!
If they are missing 2013 and launching in 2014 (huge mistake, if it happens), then YES, they do need the strongest console. If they launch day and date with the Nextbox, then they can probably get by with slightly less power than their direct (MS) competitor. Launching later and offering less power, plus more shoddy "works better on Nextbox" ports would be a mess. People making comparisons to the PS2 seem to forget that Sony was the market leader in those days. Now they're not. They don't have the benefit of coming off a hugely successful PSX, PS2 generation beforehand. PS2 only benefited because it had the market locked down from the previous gen, so every developer was already on board. Sony could really seize next gen, but they need A.) A good price B.) Strong 3rd party relations (See AC III for an example of that - selling better on the PS3 for a multiplat, that's amazing) C.) Bleeding edge tech that people have come to expect of them.
@the yellow This article is bs,know one can say Sony wasn't on a power quest until the ps3 because not many of us had Internet back in the late 90's early 2000's,I remember people saying that the ps2 could push more polygons than the xbox1.
@zebramocha Dial-up and many of the techsavvy people here must have had internet in those days. And if not you can still search for articles written in the past on the internet you know.
Kaz needs to make major changes at Sony. The Playstation division is one of the few areas they have found some success in as of late. I doubt they are going to get into new types of formats or go in a different direction that makes things harder for game programmers again. I expect a more reserved system that focuses more on key franchises. The PS3 had a lot of exclusives but not all of them were a success. They have already closed down a few studios. The most powerful is often not the most successful and as the new generation of platforms looms I expect gamers to be less loyal and more open to see what all the new systems have to offer.
@Zebramocha , The ps2 was the first out between MS , Nintendo and Sony. Metroid prime 1 destroyed everything on Ps2 graphically and ran at 60FPS in progressive scan. The Xbox edged them both out with games such as KOTOR which looked amazing.... Ps2 had great graphics , but remember , Resident evil 4 had to be downscaled in its port to PS2 from Gamecube and came out looking a lot worse than it did on gamecube. The major advantage Ps2 had over gamecube was Disc Storage , A game Like San andreas simply wouldn't fit onto a Gamecube disc. But a game like Metroid prime , F-zero , Windwaker simply wouldn't run on Ps2.
@king jak & daxter ran at 60 fps had bigger environment,was third person and a launch title,there are othe games techniquely thought impossible on the ps2.
The problem is Microsoft's More Money & More Power campaign to gaming. Typical American way of handling stuff. Everyone knows Sony & Nintendo combined can not outspend M$ in those departments. So like Nintendo did with the Wii, Sony should wise up and not go head to head with M$ in those terms & and use the current economic recession on their side. Sony will undoubtedly go back to their PS1 & PS2 roots in terms of balanced price point & power to keep both core hobby gamers and developers satisfied in the graphics, AI & gameplay department. Like they did with the PS3 Slim they will only put the important stuff. As The Last of Us is any indication, the new generation of gameplay will be more cerebral and will depend much to AI interaction as opposed to hardware gimmicks. There fore Sony might focus on more RAM. Also Sony should simply continue to do what it does best : planting the seeds of New Game IPs and ideas, diversity, variety, Indie game support, lots of free stuff, PS+, Gaikai cloud gaming, but of course a big push in marketing, which is severely lacking now, is much needed.
Ps3 is a great console, but it will do no one any good to repeat it. Ps3 could have been less powerful (Or more traditional in hardware - either way, less pricey from the start) and I would have still loved playing games like Infamous, LBP, Demon's Souls, etc. Probably more people would have, too.
@bicfitness: During the PS2 era, developers was actually afraid of just association with MS. Sony didn't care about their developers, and made systems without their input. That's how bad it was. That's all changed now with MS successfully shifting the game industry from Japanese to the west. Providing developer support (MS sent engineers out to developers) and developed a console with proper developer input. Sony didn't get third party developer input, and hence the PS3 ended up as it did. Lots of power you can't really use and a huge price tag. This generation (not next, because Nintendo already started the next generation), is all about who can build the better service, manages hardware production better yielding lower price and has the more balanced system (i.e. not hard to program for and the strengths are catered towards programs). Being more powerfull or less (if the gap isn't too big) isn't as important as how the whole the end user views the whole value. There is a reason why the Xbox 360 still sells as wells as it does without all the extra hardware and exclusives.
to be stronger than the Tegra 4 (which output 4k video) and handles Unreal Engine 4. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... If ps4 is atleast 5 times faster than ps3, than we can expect to see at least one or two games running at 4k resolution. It should be noted that sony ran the 4k demo with 4 ps3s connected. So if anyone says ps4 won't do it then throw this video at them.
only clowns need 4k
same thing about HD when it was first announced. Given SOny's CES press Confeence and the big industry push for 4k, PS4 will have it. Some of you are thinking it's mandatory, no it's not. It will simply support it just like the ps3 didn't initially support 3d, but did at a later time. That's all i'm saying. Sony doesn't think one or two years ahead, they think five or ten years ahead. It's called future proofing your hardware. Another thing is if you don't think that the GPU in ps4 will be stronger than a Tegra 4, you're out of your mind. If that were the case then Nvidia's shield should be considered a next gen console. It's an open platform (android) with expandable memory slots, and hdmi out port. Tegra4 was shown running EPIC's latest Unreal Engine 4. How do you disagree with a video where it's showing you GT5 running off of four ps3 at 4k resolution. What I was stating wasn't a theory, but something that has been done before. I guess you have to look at if from a LOGICAL standpoint instead of an OBJECTIVE one. If SONY has proved that they can run a game @ 4k using 4 ps3s. Couldn't one assume that if ps4 is 4 times as powerful as ps3, that if could run 4k games? Just like 3d was with ps3, 4k will be there as an option for those who have it. GT5 4k demo = 4 ps3s 1 ps4 = 4 ps3s GT5 4k demo = 1 ps4
I'd rather have the PS4 use that extra power to render with more complexity at 1080p 60fps, than have a a 4K game with PS3 level details. PS4 will probably be a hub for playing back 4K content. I'll happily play games at 1080p and 60fps. Also, if a game looked as good as a 720p movie with ultra-realistic rendering without jaggies, I'll take that too!
@Muerte You are out of your mind. I think it's safe to expect PS4/X720 to run games at 720p(60fps) and 1080p(30fps) for the most part, but of course with exceptions where some 1080p games will run at 60fps. 4K games is utopia (unless it's Styx or Solitaire). @hesido I'm pretty sure you can forget 1080p 60fps on complex game types like Skyrim, GTA, etc..
On the PS4 1080p 30-60fps will be what 720p 30fps was to the ps3. 4k will be what 1080p was on the PS3. Expect 4k mini games that are the equivalent of wipe out but look much better like GT5 on PSN. And expect full release games that look similar to the Unreal Engine 4 tech demo to run at 1080p 30-60fps.
@Gumtrol I agree with you 100%. The sad part is that PlayStation fanboys think PS4 will be über powerfull and run all games in 1080p/60fps and 4K/30fps. Just like they thought PS3 would run dual screen 1080p games, they're still gullible and living in a fantasy. To be able to run complex games with high quality rendering, and lots of gfx effects you need a beast of a GPU, something the PS4 will absolutely not have. I mean a GTX680 alone today costs more than what a PS4 will cost. The GPU in the PS4 won't be even close to a GTX 680. Fanboys are delusional as always.
This 4K resolution for gaming on a console is a pipe dream it's not going to happen unless the system is $600+ get a PC if you want this. However I bet the PS4 will support 4K resolution for Movies.
my entire comment and take only bits and pieces from it. "...we can expect to see at least ONE or TWO games running at 4k resolution.." I never said that that would be the standard for games. Gumtrol pretty much repeated what I said. I'm just providing evidence that this will indeed be supported on ps4. @Bordel_1900 that's why I posted the video. The demo showed being rendered @ 4k so utopia is here i guess.
Here we go again. The magical 4k that will somehow magically run at 60fps on peoples 1080p TVs. Video playback 4k @ 30 - probably Iphone style download games - probably UPSCALED 4k - possibly Native 4k - Not a snowflakes hope in hell If they can get ALL games 1080p at 60 fps I'd call it a good day.
4K is a long ways off from becoming relevant. Allow me to explain. 1.) High end PC's can't run games optimized at 4K resolution. What makes anybody think a console can achieve anywhere near this type of performance. 2.) 4K HDTV's are priced starting at $20,000 and above. Seeing as how ther is NO demand for 4K HDTV's then I don;t see the price coming down significantly any time soon. 3.) Currently there is little to no 4K media being manufactured or distributed for purchase. Plus Cable/Satellite providers are barely starting to push 1080P content. The bottom line is 1080P still isnt the standard and until 1080P becomes the standard and there is a demand to push beyond 1080P then perhaps Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo should focus on 1080P.
I don't mind it to be less poverfull... BUT! I will stop comming on N4G, cause the 1000 comparison articles will be, " Xbox wins, sony is dommed" No matter if the look is the same...Sigh.
Yeah I was going to write this. Next gen, all these microscopic comparisons must stop! They should only make comparisons if the differences are actually noticeable.
Are you serious? That won't happen because N4G is full of people like you.
look at nintendo
So people say the WiiU is useless and will fall behind and won't get 3rd party support because it's weak specs, but it will work with PS4 ?!!!!!
Thats........yea you have a point. I personal think the wii u is fine and i see the next ps and xbox being near the same but thats just my opinion. I been saying it for over a year now but regardless i'll pick up uncharted 4 even if it shows on a atari.
Were still assuming that the ps4 is still way more powerful than wii u even if its not most powerful system available. Wii U is current gen capabilities. Plus Sony has the games we want. Mario and Zelda alone don't justify a Wii U purchase for me. I'll play those Nintendo games after the Wii U dies and is dirt cheep.
Everyone is always saying the wiiU isn't a leap and I just don't understand. I can see what you mean :S We don't know yet. All because the games that are ports or remakes run badly. This makes no sense as look at things that are ported to ps3 (skyrim can be a good example) ran badly. Also when Xbox 360 first released there wasn't a huge jump then either. Also clock speeds aren't the main factor to look at its the architecture of the CPU and the console as a whole. I just don't see the point of being a fan of one brand and slagging off all the others is necessary as a company isn't gonna come and give you loads of money for doing that.
It's always been about the exclusives and I see no short list of whats soon to come this year. They keep on providing us with AAA titles year after year. The only thing they need to do is price the PS4 at an acceptable medium, they do that and they're set.