It was just over a week ago when IGN published a story saying that Sony had essentially removed the PlayStation Camera from the PS4′s launch bundle to bring the console’s price down to $399/€399/£349, $100 cheaper than the Xbox One.
Even if they did it on purpose it would still be a good move by them. I could care less about having a camera with my ps4.
I think that is better PR as well ... Sony should say yep, we removed it to keep costs down and cuz gamers really dont gaf about motion controls
people are weird, camera has never been part of a PlayStation console and now suddenly because xbox requires Kinect then Sony may have thought the same! if it was the first PS console without camera i understand the debate but it was never the case. You want it you buy it you dont want it you dont buy it. PS4 has been conceived with a 399$ price from the beginning, how could they think of including a camera on top of that? especially knowing the fact that Sony themselves weren't expecting such a high price of the X1. On top of this, pricing of a console doesn't happen overnight, it's a huge process and ressources with market studies etc... @zebramocha: that's where it's interesting, cause you are like me you seem interested in the camera, but others aren't and they shouldn't pay more for it when they're not gonna use it! This is a pro-consumer move from Sony and i appreciate it! Now is a bundle with a camera and Killzone is planned i'll be ALL OVER IT!!!
@abzdine I believe they should incorporate the came because they have experience from the ps2 days. http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Does it really matter? Even if you include it I think it would still be cheaper!
Sony killed the camera at the last minute as evident by the fact that they have a led in the controller to use with the camera. why spend millions on led if the accessory will only be purchased by a very very small fraction of the user base? Sony you lie, but fangirls will eat it up!
if Media Molecule scraps that project they debuted Feb 20th. I think at the very least they were planning a 2nd SKU but canned the idea to drive home the price difference disparity.
Yeah... Sony's the bad guy. Shame on anyone supporting them and their shady ways, right? Speaking of shady ways, I assume you think even less of Microsoft, then yes?
Maybe so if you do buy the camera it's there for the camera to use? Maybe make it more enticing to buy the camera by including an LED which costs pennies at wholesale so a camera is more affordable without having to buy an expensive secondary controller like the Move? Maybe because the LED can be used for other things besides camera recognition. Or, maybe they lied. You come to a forgone conclusion, I come with possible reasons. Either way, I don't care. Not a fan of motion controls. Glad if they originally wanted to have it included that I now don't have to bear the cost of it....of course assuming that it would raise the price of the system. If the system price would be the same, I might be miffed about getting less value. OTOH, I, and I imagine most other people here who for the past 7 years have not been kind to motion tech couldn't care less.
"Sony you lie, but fangirls will eat it up! "
For someone who has no interest at all to purchase the system, you sure do know how Sony should run their company when it comes to their products.
Does it really matter that the camera was included? It's still a bargain. Oh and don't come at me with the "well it would force developers to use it." It wouldn't. It's still an option. It's not required to play games. If they use it fine. It's still an otpion.
Glad they removed the camera,. DS4 is going to be Sweet, esp. when I mod it.
You are absolutely right and the sony fanboys know it, they just don't want to accept it. Aside from the obvious argument about the LED's being in the controller, Sony has FREE features (PLAYROOM) in the PS4 that utilize the camera. Why bother wasting time developing this feature, giving it away for free on PRE-ORDER consoles where the feature can't even be used since the console lacks the device to play it? http://n4g.com/news/1304093... How much obvious proof do people need on this site to see that Sony saw where motion control was heading, saw how much MS was making off of Kinect where they then created the PSeye2 to compete with Kinect ONLY to NOT bundle it with the console thus resulting in little to no DEV support since devs are not gonna waste time developing a game for a device that many people won't even have? Remember PS MOVE? Ya me neither...it was DOA cause there wasn't any support...not even Sony supported the device...you think Sony is going to support the PSeye2 when it's not even bundled in every PS4 sold? Sony removed it last minute simply to entice consumers by having a cheaper console at launch. That's all it is. No big deal really, it's just sony has now shot themselves in the foot wasting time and money to R&D a device that won't even compete in the market. @ sAVAge_bEaST Way to support the industry.....but you are right. Sony's lack of money that forced them to throw together the PS4 with off the shelf parts has left the console WIDE open for serious pirating...more so then the 360 was this gen.
I'm glad they didn't include the camera in the box, consumers should have options, but I will buy the camera along with my PS4 launch unit anyway.
@lvl_up Maybe to get people to want to buy the camera to play it? A form of advertising perhaps. I remember they offered Sackboy's Prehistoric Moves on PS+ a while back, and it's a move only game. Why would they offer that if not everyone could play it? Maybe so the people that have Move can play it. Or maybe to entice people to pick up the Move, so a form of advertising... But yeah, lets all just assume the worst case scenario...motion control technology that most people I've seen(particularly from the Sony camp) haven't given a rat's ass about since before the Wii's launch, was stripped out of the PS4 so it could nail the price point for the initial buyers.
I should take a SWORN HATER's word over the company themselves... YEAH, RIGHT! If you take the (allow me to use your term, if you don't mind) "fangirl" goggles off for sec, nuke & lvl, you'll see that it isn't unreasonable to believe that the decision about the camera was not dependent on XB1 price at all. A simple way to debunk this is to ask in what situation in regards to XB1 price would Sony have included the camera? The XB1 priced as high as Sony or anyone expected at $499. So had the XB1 cost $399 would Sony have included the camera then? Of course not especially if you're going by the assumption that Sony is basing their decision on undercutting XB1 price. This is the same idiotic thinking people had with DRM. If Sony was waiting for MS to reveal their DRM plans how come they didn't join them as soon as MS revealed their console? Just stupid conspiracy theories by whining bitter fangirls! At some point(who knows when) Sony made the decision to not include the camera independent of XB1 pricing, deal with it and move on with your life!
i gotta ask why is it so important to the complainers that the PS4 doesn't come the camera? who's to say since it cost $60 and they bundled it with the system that they wouldn't take the $10 hit, and sell it at $450? either way you slice it the system with or without the camera would still be cheaper than the xbox. personally i'm glad i have the choice if i want it or not. the system will still work within, and if i see a cool game that uses it then i'll spend the $60 to buy it. to all the detractors why is this such a big deal for yall?
Because motion control is the new thing to love. Camera's are all the rage...even though most people saying so still probably don't care one lick for the current Kinect and likely wouldn't drop money on it in the first place for the 360. But still...Keep up with the times man. /s
The only people that say that Sony "removed" the camera are the people who chanted "PS4 will have the same DRM!"
I find it amazing that these people are the same ones saying that the specs between the two consoles are close enough that they won't change anything... despite all the evidence to the contrary. It's like they live solely for the purpose of denying not only what's right in their faces, but also everything those things imply. And, at the same time, they inexplicably come to conclusions supposedly implied by things that don't support their ideas at all.
They should just make a bundle that comes with it.
I think it was a smart move/original decision. I've only got so much money.
Don't you mean a smart PlayStation Move?
ba dum tss
Choices>told what's better for me.
The irony of your statement is....you are not choosing a single component in the ps4, the controller that ships with it, the price, or even if you want the camera bundle in the package. Sony is telling you what is best for you regarding the ps4....the positive is that it appears to be a good thing.
This shouldn't need explaining to you. I'm buying the PS4 this year, and a camera separately (yes, I like it). In the Xbox ONE, the choice isn't there. Consumers prefer choices and not including an accessory leaves options (and a cheaper package). @ LOGIC: I almost never agree with you and this time is no different. You don't get to choose the necessary options in any case (a controller, for instance, is a necessary input device). However, the camera ISN'T a necessity. Why should it be forced on me? If the interface of the Xbox ONE requires Kinect, it's a design choice, yes, but also makes the package $100 more expensive. You never choose most of the parts of a system (only PC offers that). So, no shit. Nothing any different here. Forcing one to buy a camera, however, for an interface that doesn't need it, wouldn't be the most effective option for consumers.
@CGI-Quality- You fail to see the point. In both cases, your not choosing anything with the exception of games and accessories. In terms of hardware, Sony(not you) CHOSE what components they wanted in the PS4. Sony chose what the controller would be like, what the UI would be like, what design the console would have etc. If you buy a PS4, your simply agreeing with decisions that have already been made for you. "You don't get to choose the necessary options in any case (a controller, for instance, is a necessary input device)." Correct. Thats my point. "However, the camera in the PS4 ISN'T a necessity. Why should it be forced on me?" Its not being "forced" on you. Is someone holding your TV hostage on unless you buy an Xbox One? The camera is built in the console because MS felt it was a necessary component to the console, just like Sony chose to bundle 500GB with every PS4 when they could have given consumers the option of a 250GB SKU for $50-$60 less.
Choice... No choice.... This way though developers know everyone has kinect, so much less risk involved in developing... Same thing happened with broadband on original XBox, heralding on line multiplayer as we know it.... Sure its risky at that price for X1, but might pay off in long run.
Sony's not scared of Microsoft at all, they outsell them consistently while producing a more diverse game library. That's not gonna change this generation. Sony just knows what their doing, Microsoft just throws money around and hopes for the best. Which is how Sony produced a better console for less money.
Sony won't release a PS4 bundled with an inferior camera than Kinect at the same price as it's competitor (if what IGN's said is true)
^FAIL. It's the topic about the camera, not about the system LOL
microsoft wont release hardware inferior to ps4 n cost more. wait they actually did
yes, and the only chance MS had to beat them was with PS3 and 360 which released a year before and much cheaper, but they lost again and with PS4 PlayStation brand has never been this strong!
Er that is not true. Look at the numbers before saying the Ps brand has never been so strong. The psp and ps2 sold a lot better at this point in its gen cycle than the psv and ps3 have. So Sony have lost a big chunk of its market this gen to Microsoft and Nintendo. Yes the ps3 sales are now above the 360's but the 360's numbers are more than double the Xbox numbers and the psv is nowhere near the 3ds numbers. Also no one knows how well the Xbox one or ps4 are going to do and we still don't know what the Wiiu will do when the big name games come out. IM looking forward to next gen as one thing we can all agree on is the Wiiu, ps4 and Xbox one will have so must own games.
You are WAY out of touch with business. Sony's brand has NEVER been this weak. Their market shares are still extremly low, they had to sell corporate buildings to try and pay off some of their debt where their credit is now in "trash" status. The PS4 is just off the shelf parts with no customized internals like how every PS console before it was. Sony lost half it's market share to MS. The PSP GO was an epic fail, the Vita has been a sinking ship shince release.... Either you are extremely out of touch with business or this must be your first gen of gaming.
@Lvl_up_gamer: I love how someone that doesn't know a thing about business calls someone out for not knowing a thing about business and then proceeds to regurgitate comments posted on N4G as fact. Hilarious. Keep up the funny stuff.
@Lvl_up_gamer : i can only congratulate you for the amazing loads of BS in such a small text. You talk about PSPGo, i'm talking about the present! Have you read and understood what i wrote before you talk? PlayStation has never been this strong, if you are an xbox fanboy then i understand your frustration. Look at the games they released and they will release this this year, a PS4 on fire since feb 20th, coherence in what Sony are saying which didn't happen since PSone. The message coming from them is clear which proves they are very confident and that's important, on top of that no changing of plans every week.
"I love how someone that doesn't know a thing about business calls someone out for not knowing a thing about business and then proceeds to regurgitate comments posted on N4G as fact. Hilarious. Keep up the funny stuff." Isn't that like saying a anonymous member here somehow knows more than game developers about the impact of used games how the cloud can help game developers offload some of the demands from the hardware?
hahahaha! I forgot that I had a PSPGO until it was mentioned. Now the only thing I need is a charger, as I have no idea where that thing is. I do however have a few classics on there that I downloaded from PSN. Bloody Roar being one of them :-), time to hit Amazon and find a PSPGO charger for cheap.
They know people don't really care about the camera lol.
Speak for yourself. Why would they spend R&D money on a $60 device if they knew no one was going to buy it? facepalm/ They did it because none of the launch titles require the camera(something that will change next year starting with Media Molecule's PS4 project).
R and D? Haha! Sony makes all sorts of cams. They don't need to "R and D" a damn webcam! I guess some times logicfails?
"They did it because none of the launch titles require the camera(something that will change next year starting with Media Molecule's PS4 project)." Honestly how many of the Xbox One launch titles "require" the camera? (I honestly don't know but I"m sure not many) Sony is basically saying if you don't want a camera you don't have to get one. Your system will still work. Most people who purchase a Xbox One really don't care about the camera and MS knows this. So what do they do? They make it mandatory for the system to even function... It's like they're saying "You are going to use this camera whether you like it or not" lol.
You're right OSIRUSS, no products need R&D anymore, they know how to make them all so everything is just made at the drop of hat. I guess sometimes OSIURANIDIOT?
"Most people who purchase a Xbox One really don't care about the camera and MS knows this." Thats an assumption. You don't know that.
@OSIRUSSS except there is a pretty well known R&D Department for playstation's camera and motion gaming department led by Anton Mikhailov. You dont think resources for move and eye development build themselves right?
@OSIRUSSS Yea because these things make themselves right? They work by magic and connect to a brand new piece of tech with a never before used look and design and facial and movement tracking software that appeared one day out of the blue. Right? R&D is not limited to hardware and even if it was they actively chose to design this thing for the PS4, they didn't take a random webcam and slap a black coat of paint on it. And even if they did that was additional costs for the company to mass produce this product for the PS4. It was obvious to nearly everyone that Sony planned to include a camera in the PS4, you do not add a light sensor bar to you standard controller for an optional device, you do it for something included in the box. I'm glad they kept the camera out to reduce costs, I don't mind buying one later on, the only thing is now that its not in every PS4 box the support will be much much less from developers.
@ Logic, Agreed. (I know you're running out of bubbles, wish we can keep the discussion going.) Let just say that MS would have not required Kinect 2.0 to be used with X1. Do you think that gamers would buy the new camera on a 1:1 basis if it was optional? Especially after the bad taste still left from the heap of shovel ware from the original Kinect?
I prefer buy another DS4 than buying this camera.. if it's an optional, not ALL people will get hands on it... which means, less developers are gonna support it (besides First Party).. This camera will turns like any Eyetoy
Not ALL people will get their hands on a PS4/Xbox One. Does that mean these consoles shouldn't be supported?
@LOGICWINS It's a totally a different thing. If you buy an Xbox One, it's 100% you will get a Kinect. So, developers doesn't have to gamble on their sales when they makes a Kinect game, or if they just want to put a Kinect feature on their game.. because everyone who got an Xbox One, it's guaranteed they will have a Kinect
May not turn out as meaningless as the EyeToy, but having the option to choose it is a wiser move, in my view.
@Kanzes- Kinect devs are still gambling. If the game sucks, people won't buy it. Alternatively, if PS4 owners see a great Move game, they will buy the camera to play it. @CGI-Quality- You DO have the option to choose. Get an Xbox One or don't get an Xbox One. The camera is an integral part of the experience.
@CGI-Quality Yes. Having an option is good, but it will affect what devs gonna think about PSEye.. Because not ALL people who got PS4 are having this camera.. they don't know if their games are gonna sells or not. @LOGICWINS All developers are gambling. Not just Kinect's games. People won't buy it if their games are sucks. That applies to all developers. Like I said, if all X1 users are guaranteed to have Kinect, the motion gaming market are gonnna expands further. More games are gonna be implemented by Kinect features, and more Kinect devs will put more of their money to Kinect games, because the market already the same as the traditional games.
"if all X1 users are guaranteed to have Kinect, the motion gaming market are gonnna expands further. More games are gonna be implemented by Kinect features." Which is exactly why I wanted the camera to be bundled with every PS4. Thank you for making my point for me.
Even if the PS4 would've kept the PSEye it still would've been cheaper than XB-1 by $40. So I don't see the point of even bringing it up.
PSEye it's always an inferior camera than Kinect. It would be normal if it's cheaper than Kinect. And, doesn't we have to buy a PSMove too?
If the Kinect 2 has little to not support for games (which is highly likely), then this argument about which camera is inferior is pointless.
A lot of people have the same view. It's a shame. I like the camera tech, but it will receive a lot less support now because it wasn't 'in-box'
Well duh....... It's obvious that they excluded it from the basic bundle to be competitive with the pricing..... however, I doubt they did this in anticipation of the Xbox One's pricing and bundling, but of course they were trying to compete with each other.... they can deny it, but its a competition. Trying to better appeal to the consumer is being competitive, and it's awesome that they gave us an choice on the camera of all possibilities. The necessities are there, and that is all some people need, why force us to pay extra for something we can buy later down the line when we feel there is enough gaming incentive?
Don't really care if they did or didn't, the price is still fantastic...
it is better they removed it I rushed into buying ps3 cam and move but now they are collecting dust. the only game I really enjoyed playing using move is heavy rain. it is safe for me to wait before buying ps4 camera.
sony never force their peripherals to their consumers even to hardcore gamers...
The problem with the camera being removed at the last moment theory. Microsoft priced probably as high as Sony or anyone thought they would go, so what was the plan if Microsoft announced a lower price? Leave the camera in and have an even less competitive advantage? These theories carry no weight. But like others have said even if these rumors were accurate, they were the right move to make.
You speak, actual, logic my friend. But sadly, some won't hear you.
Why is this such an important topic for so many? If they did, smart business decision. Camera based gaming burned out with the casuals last generation. There's always an interest but not a huge one for a long term investment, and Sony knows this very well. I just don't see there being a huge interest spike. What I find weird though is that it's as though people are angry that they left it out. I prefer a company that showers me with choices, rather than restricts me at every single turn possible. You get the ones arguing that because it's left out it won't get as much developer support. I can see that points, it's a good one, but it doesn't bother me because I don't buy a console for a camera and a way to wave about using my body. I do it for the games. If developers make games that look great and make use of the camera in truly interesting ways then I might pick one up, but otherwise I'd just be dragged along with that whether I liked it or not. Here, I get a choice, a more focused and powerful gaming system for a cheaper base cost. And a camera REQUIRED for a gaming system to work? Why in the hell would I support that standard? To end this, I'll point out something that will have the fanboys laughing, but it's part of the reason I'm not supporting any kind of forced camera. http://www.youtube.com/watc...
why do people keep reporting this 60$ doesnt = $100. story over
Silly Xbots. They always need to be arguing to be at peace with themselves. You ever notice how Sony gamers are more diverse and yet will still rip Sony a new one when they feel they are being wronged? If you don't believe go to the US PlayStation blog to hear nothing but complaints about how PS Plus gave them a game they already played and how PS Plus doesn't bend over backwards for them. But Xbots never talk bad about their daddy. They never see anything wrong with M$. M$ is always right and they are very protective of them. M$ is like the abusive spouse, its fanboys are the scared and battered spouse who still thinks this is love, and that their daddy can do no wrong.