810°

PS3 SPUs are 'total monsters', says inFamous 2 dev

Sony has described its PS3 console as being "future proof", but just how powerful is it?

Well, inFamous 2 developer Sucker Punch reckons the PS3 is the business.

"The SPUs kick ass," he said.

"Move your shit there! The SPUs are just total monsters. You just have to move more and more and more and more and more stuff there. We have post-processing graphics passes going on in the SPUs. We have more particle stuff, more collision and physics stuff going on in there. They're unbelievable."

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
Cloudberry5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

---------------------------
Looking forward to inFamous 2. : )
---------------------------
EDIT :

The link's broken......... /: (

FangBlade5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

Music to my ears.
I'm glad I have a PS3.

Gamerbee5486d ago

Just give us the the old Cole. Not Skinny nathan drake.

Rumor5486d ago

I love em all. Not only do they LOVE to make games, they LOVE to make GOOD games. And we ps3 owners benefit it all! Take your $60 to gamestop and choose a game like alpha protocol after playing uncharted or something, i guarantee u will return it within an hour.

NYPunkster5486d ago

F**k Gamestop bunch of thieves.

Cevapi885486d ago

lets see them back those words up with another great title...if the first Infamous is the devs 1st attempt...imagine how well the 2nd installment will play after all the bugs and minor hiccups are resolved along with pushing the PS3 even further

DaTruth5485d ago (Edited 5485d ago )

"We have post-processing graphics passes going on in the SPUs."

MLAA confirmed!!! Lord knows the first game could have used some of this!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5485d ago
Strange_Evil5486d ago

Try this link if you can't access the article...

http://www.videogamer.com/n...

HighDefinition5486d ago ShowReplies(4)
raztad5486d ago

If released inFAMOUS 2 screenshots are not bullshots. I'd say the leap from inFAMOUS 1 to 2 is a lot bigger than from UC 1 to 2.

It's amazing to see a dev so excited by the power of the SPUs.

"It's frickin' unbelievable how far we've come. It's crazy how much we've been able to get out of it [the PS3]. It's crazy how much more we're able to do."

inFAMOUS 2 will show R* how a proper HD, with smooth framerate game is done on the PS3.

NecrumSlavery5486d ago

Yeah, it looks as if inFamous 2 will be damn near the same graphical caliber as Uncharted 2, but in a full sandbox. About a year out and this game is already 10x what infamous was. I am completely in awe of what these Sony First Party Devs are capable of.

Incognegro5486d ago

Me too.. but SuckerPunch isn't first party.

NarooN5485d ago

Yeah, they aren't. I think what he meant is pretty much any dev who works really closely with Sony for a good period of time. A lot of people think Sony doesn't care about the games, but a lot of Sony teams help the HELL out of any dev that shows that THEY care about the platform.

ProjectVulcan5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

Its sort of common knowledge now to developers that the key to PS3's performance is in the SPU utilisation. If you treat it as a conventional system with a general purpose CPU and a dedicated GPU then it will be slow, slower than 360 without a doubt. Its been clear to the most talented developers for a while now that offloading tasks to the SPUs that conventionally the GPU would be given frees up a huge amount of GPU cycles for what it does best, mostly pixel shading and throwing triangles about. RSX has strangled bandwidth, but when you look at CELL, SPUs have enormous memory bandwidth for a CPU (25.6Gb/s which is more than every modern PC desktop CPU bar a core i7 with very fast triple channel memory) - unusually high and a strange balance or so it seemed at first. Then you realise that it was DESIGNED to take tasks from the GPU and thats what that masive chunk of bandwidth is intended for....

Most of the early criticism of the architecture from developers were because it does not comply with their instinctive method of seperating the tasks firmly between what the CPU can do and what the GPU should. Valve clearly found this irritating as a pc developer, but as they became more accustomed to consoles they realised this is just how it is, its not the machine's fault, its your fault for your preconceptions on how to dev for PS3.

Once you work to the machine's strengths instead of your own stubborn ideas of what it should do then the results will come. The library of exclusive PS3 titles is now solid evidence of this fact.

nveenio5486d ago

Bubbles for Well Said. Honestly, I think that devs have been spoiled by companies like Microsoft that build dev kits that are "too easy" to use. Apple is the same way. The iPhone/iPad SDK is so simple that you really don't have to think anything through unless you're trying to do something insanely innovative. When Sony released the PS3, there was little-to-no experience for utilizing the Cell besides simple tech demos and conceptual code. Now that Sony has found some good devs and stood behind them 100%, the devs have learned to realize that when the engine starts to chug, they can just shovel something else over to the SPUs. The SPUs have more theoretical terraflops than any PC CPU out there (except maybe Intel's new 16-core). It only makes sense that their ceiling is uber-high.

Morituri5486d ago

Dude, you just blew my mind... What, are you from the future or something?

P1NKY5486d ago

The internal BUS that the SPUs and PPE use has a bandwidth of 300Gb/s

ProjectVulcan5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

Internal bus between the SPU and the controlling PPE is obviously huge but i was referring to the bandwidth between the processor as a unit and system memory. Typical bandwidth of a core 2 and dual DDR2 800mhz memory is about 7GB/s, a phenom which has an IMC (integrated memory controller) and dual channel 1333 DDR3 is about twice that and a core i7 with triple channel 1600mhz DDR3 over the 20GB/s mark.

In other words only the very fastest consumer desktop x86 processors and compatible system memory even in 2010 surpasses the bandwidth CELL enjoyed in 2006. Which gives a clue to how much performance Sony's engineering team expected to be exploited, they gave the CPU huge system memory bandwidth for a reason, the reason being they saw it as a graphics co-processor and not just a general purpose CPU

Gabe Newell's early complaints in 2006 were that developing for PS3 is useless BECAUSE the techniques didnt apply elsewhere, its a unique system. He was right of course partially at that time! But he looked at it negatively that being unique was a problem and not a challenge. However four years later the whole scene has changed even for PC, as GPGPU takes hold (CUDA, OpenCL etc) the once tightly controlled barriers between what a CPU and GPU can do are fading and becoming very fuzzy. That makes using CELL, a hybrid CPU of sorts, for traditionally held graphics tasks more relevant than it was when PS3 launched!

thereapersson5485d ago

It really does show that Kutaragi was a visionary, and he did everything he could to ensure the PS3 would remain relevant for years to come. Most developers are just *now* realizing what the PS3 can truly do, so just imagine how good PS3 exclusives will look like in another few years!

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5485d ago
sikbeta5486d ago

There is a lot of Improvement going in Infamous2, I totally believe in them

Cant wait to Play this Monster...

Blackfrican5486d ago

The PS3 alone is proof of aliens. The technology present inside of the PS3 is so technologically superior to anything else that the only possible explanation is that we reverse engineered this technology from a UFO wreck--or that the PS3 was made with the assistance of aliens.

NewZealander5486d ago

thats just a wee bit OTT dontcha think...aliens lol

jerethdagryphon5486d ago

while its an incredibly powerful chip its not alein what it does do is show how some people are capable of lateral thinking rather then more speed more cores more ram. thinking of the late nighties early noughts

218gflops theoretical output,

cell and ageia both changed the way people are looking at cpugpus

larrabe is more in line with cell or a graphics card then it is with the x86 archatecture

Snakefist305486d ago

Hellya PS3 is the ULTIMATE GAMING CONSOLE!!!!!!

NewZealander5486d ago

im not a fan of games like infamous, but i cant wait to see what naughty dog do with uncharted 3, if anyone can tap the ps3 its them. and last guardian is going to be pretty awesome too.

FACTUAL evidence5485d ago

Don't you just love it when dev's get used to the ps3? Only positives baby! It only does monster SPUs!

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 5485d ago
Shadow Flare5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

Thats why the ps3 is still going to be fresh 5 years down the line. Still pushing bars. Combined with the massive storage of bluray, the ps3 is the most future proof console ever created. And its really gonna stand Sony in a good position in years to come. They saw the generation as a marathon, not a sprint, and planned accordingly. Getting trashed by the media in the process. But they've designed a console which will last a very, very long time. There isn't going to be a need for a PS4 for quite a while yet. Sony had a vision and stuck with it, and its done gamers the world of good.

iceman29295486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

I agree with what you say to a certain extent. There was about a 200 dollar difference between "comparable" skus between the ps3 and 360. If the ps3 can continue to be pushed in a way that allows for a comparable experience with the next xbox then what you say is true. However, if the next xbox completely blows the ps3 out of the water in terms of features and graphics and whatnot, then I feel that releasing a less future-proof console was the better strategy. If Microsoft were to release a console with similar prices to the 360s launch, and did manage to blow the ps3 out of the water, with the 200$ saved , this would essentially pay 2/3 of my new console. essentially the determining factor would be whether or not the remaining 100 -200 dollars of cost makes it worth a new console.

Sorry if my thoughts are a bit murky, im currently slighttttly tipsy so please forgive me :)

Shadow Flare5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

MS have said that they don't plan to release a new xbox until at least 2015.

http://n4g.com/news/548840/...

Kinetc is supposed to lengthen 360's lifespan. Ergo, PS3 is gonna keep pushing and pushing, while 360 is gonna be really held back since Kinetc uses the 360 to process its games as well. PS3 games like Uncharted 2 already clearly surpass 360 titles, but over the years, that gaps just gonna get bigger.

Also, if console sales carry on the way they are, PS3 will definitely push 360 to 3rd place, possibly as soon as next year, if MS aren't planning a new xbox till 2015. Analysts predict PS3 will outsell 360 this year by 4 million units, leaving a 1 million gap between ps3 and 360, which will most likely dissapear in 2011. And if Kinetc isn't a success.....well......it's over.

iceman29295486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

I think people have it wrong with that article.
"What you've seen is with this new sleek design and Kinect for Xbox 360 we've got at least another five years of this generation where we continue to offer great experiences for people."

I think this means they will support the 360 until 2015 , but I can't see them not releasing a new console before then. Especially if kinect isnt a hit... however even if it is, I still think we will hear an announcement for the next xbox at the next E3.
Also, in my personal opinion , I feel like the reason why they took the chip out of kinect and made it use the consoles processing was sort of a future-proofing the technology. They will allow you to use the same camera on the next xbox. So on the 360 its sort of a BETA!!

And I don't really care about which console wins or looses or sales, all I want is for them to give me the best gaming experience possible for my money.

Demonsdown5486d ago

Well MS investors are pushing for them to get out of the console business so there may not even be another xbox at this point. Depends on how far they are in to developing it I guess might get one more maybe.

iceman29295486d ago

I feel like xbox live would be the reason why they keep the xbox around.

There was another article on here talking about the revenue from the sales passing the revenue from the subscriptions. Thats pretty big news!

nveenio5486d ago

That $200 difference was worth every penny. PS3 has half-a-dozen games that are insanely better than anything on the 360...and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon.

P1NKY5486d ago

Don't always believe what MS says. They might say they won't be releasing a new console till 2015, but that could be so that they can get a head start.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5486d ago
sikbeta5486d ago

Totally True Shadow Flare, if the PS2 was the "inferior" Console of Last Gen and has 10 Years in the Market, I can't Imagine How Long the PS3 is going to be...

Starlight5486d ago

I do agree but you can't say that there won't be a need for a PS4 for quite some time. Depending on what you mean by quite some time, we'll be seeing a PS4 launching in November 2012 in JPN and US following Sony's history, we should also see the launch of PSP 2 next year.

kws10655486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

SPU pride

MGRogue20175486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

... Those SPUs are just one of the nightmares that Xbox 360 experiences about the amazing PS3 every night. :D

mushroomwig5486d ago

I wonder what the last batch of PS3 titles will look like compared to the first batch.

I remember a huge difference between an early PS2 title and one of the last titles to be released.

fooltheman5486d ago

interesting question...but let sony surprise us

Topshelfcheese5486d ago

good example is The Bouncer-ps2 launch year game, and Final Fantasy 12, both from Square, and it was a huge leap.

bjornbear5486d ago (Edited 5486d ago )

we put an early PS2 game ( Devil May Cry ) and then a VERY late PS2 game (SoTC) and the resolution of textures, jaggies, frame rate and even lighting were VASTLY improved

but you think "OH BUT THOSE ARE DIFFERENT DEVS! TEAM ICO PWN CAPCOM"

well ok, look at ICO against SoTC, or even MGS2 vs MGS3! the leap is HUGE just technically (not only artistically, but that too)

so...the PS3 must have that powa =O

but we've seen a very small version (albeit HUGE visually) of that leap: Uncharted 1 ---> Uncharted 2

edit: topshelfcheese props + FF12 looks amazing too, i'd even argue to say better than FF10 (technically not artistically)

Show all comments (129)
140°

Sony Faces Class Action in the Netherlands Over Allegedly Inflated PlayStation Store Prices

Mass Damage & Consumer Foundation in the Netherlands has filed a class action against Sony for inflating PlayStation Store prices.

dveio3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

My personal opinion:

Manufacturers and publishers have indeed inflated the industry.

From $700 million development costs for games like Call of Duty, to digital (store) prices for games and DLCs, online multiplayer fees on consoles (why can you play Helldivers 2 online for free on PC but not consoles?) or still preventing sell/lend digitally purchased games.

Sometime in the future, this bubble will collapse.

They should know better, but they just can't help themselves and suck even the last penny out of our wallets.

BeHunted3d ago

Because Sony knows people will be forced to pay those prices for single player and multiplayer games, not everyone prefers PC gaming. Sony also has a monopoly on PlayStation digital games. In 2019, they stopped allowing retailers and game key sellers to sell PlayStation digital games, making them available only through the official PlayStation Store

anast3d ago

The Dutch gov. wants a piece of the pie.

Eonjay3d ago

They should be suing the individual publishers increasing the prices to $80 instead of suing the store. There are plenty of publishers still selling game for like $50 with much success (like E33). But this proves that the publishers are the ones setting the prices.... so again nothing changes because they aren't even going after the main offender. How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD? Sony being the number one store in the market doesn't mean that publisher have to charge us an arm and a leg. Again the industry is laughing at us because consumers never get real representation. Just these fake platitudes that are meaningless.

BeHunted3d ago

"How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD"

Because Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I can purchase Call of Duty at a huge discount from CDKeys or other gaming retailers. The only way to purchase digital PlayStation games is through the PlayStation Store.

djl34853d ago

Weird, I swore GoW, Stellar Blade, Horizon Zero Dawn, TLoU, etc. were on the steam store....uh.....

BeHunted3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

@djI3485

I'm talking about PlayStation games that you can only purchase on PlayStation. I can purchase Steam and Epic games from 3rd party retailers and key stores.

"Sony to stop selling full-game download codes at retailers"

https://www.videogamer.com/...

Killer2020UK3d ago

About time. There is zero fair reason why digitally distributed products that you cannot recoup any value when you want to dispose of them, should be priced higher than that of physical copies that entail all of the costs and the benefits of owning.

Show all comments (12)
170°

Sony Aims To Sell 15 Million PS5 Units This Year, but Is Shifting Focus to Monthly Active Users

Sony CEO Hiroki Totoki and CFO Lin Tao talked about the state of the PlayStation business and the strategy and targets going forward, including how they're responding to the tariffs.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
1Victor45d ago

I wonder how the USA tariffs war will affect that projection. 🤔

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

I think they take that into consideration when they announce their projections. Currently, after the xbox price increase, the PRO is cheaper than the series x! That is ridiculous, and it can’t last.

darthv7244d ago

you keep saying that but the price of a PS5 Pro is S699.99 (US) and the price of a Series X is $599.99 (US)

S2Killinit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

The series x with 2 TB storage space is more expensive than PS5 PRO which also has 2 TB storage space.

darthv7244d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Oh so you are pitting a regular Pro with a special edition X... got it. If you are going so far as trying to compare apples to apples... please add in the optical drive and stand to the Pro. Seeing as the X has both of those by default.

I will help you if you are unable to do so.
PS5 Pro 2tb: $699.99, Optical Drive: $79.99, Stand: $29.99 = $809.97
Xbox Series X Galaxy Black Special Edition 2TB: $729.99

44d ago
S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. The series X with 2TB storage and much weaker, is… more expensive! So yeah, Im pointing out that fact.

Also, the PRO does not require a stand.

Ps: regular series 2TB is $749 (where did u get 729?)

darthv7243d ago

Its right here on the official XB site: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/...

Okay, so no stand for the Pro, but you might still want the optical drive. So $779.98 vs $729.99. A properly outfitted Pro is still more $$ than a 2tb X.

S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Do I need to mention that the series x is not nearly as powerful as the PS5 PRO?

And no, the PS5 PRO runs just fine without a drive, and people don’t have to buy the drive right away, assuming they want it.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
drivxr44d ago

I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU.

RaiderNation44d ago

Because that's where the real money is made, in microtransactions.

Profchaos44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

People are spending less time playing is a typical trigger for this.

The less time spent playing the less likely you are to spend more money on games and services including subs or even the next console.

Increased engagement equals more money.

44d ago
DarXyde44d ago

Same reason Microsoft does it: it looks better to investors and it's a solution when unit sales slow down.

Personally, I'm not a fan of this metric; and by using it, you're kind of signaling that you're moving into the "This is a PlayStation" era.

Z50144d ago

Because the PS4 also has users and not necessarily sales

Obscure_Observer42d ago

"I wonder why they are shifting focus to MAU."

Because they´d finally realized that MS wasn´t wrong after all.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 42d ago
44d ago
44d ago
310°

Sony Announces Large Profits Growth for PlayStation; Expects Further Wins in Current Fiscal Year

Sony announced its financial results for the fiscal year 2024, and things are certainly looking up, despite a decline in PS5 sales.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
CrimsonWing6945d ago

Expect sh*t to slow down if prices aren’t kept in check.

Redgrave45d ago

Who downvotes the truth?

Even PSN itself is too damn high.jpg

S2Killinit44d ago

Gamepass is already at 20$ per month if im not mistaken.

toxic-inferno44d ago

@neutralgamer1992

Not all of us. I'm a big PlayStation fan, and have been since the PSOne. But I can't begin to defend what's happening currently.

At least Nintendo release a large number of games from their major franchises. Sony is just not banking on their established franchises, and yet are raising prices. Not great.

S2Killinit44d ago

Im pretty sure we are going to see a price increase for PRO. I mean think about it, its currently cheaper than xbox series x! That cannot last.

Eonjay44d ago

I'm absolutely sure we will not see a price increase. I don't think we should 'expect' to see price increase because it just adds validity to what Nintendo and Microsoft have done.

darthv7244d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Sorry to pop that bubble but the Pro is not cheaper than a series x... generally speaking (like you are). It is cheaper than one specific version, and doing so by not including the optical drive and stand like the X has by default.

So keep on trying to convince people you are right when everyone knows it's quite the opposite. A stock Pro is $699.99 and a stock X is $599.99. A special edition galactic black 2tb X is $729.99. And if you really want to compare apples to apples... adding the aforementioned optical drive and stand brings that Pro to $809.97 and then they would be on equal footing.

Twisting truths to fit a narrative... I expect better from you S2.

S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

The PS5 PRO has 2TB storage. And the series X with 2TB is more expensive. Which in my opinion is insane conseidering how much more powerful the PRO is. The PS5PRO does not need a stand, it can be used without a stand.

TheKingKratos45d ago

So the Pro is not offering any push in sales at all ?

CrashMania45d ago

It's still an expensive, niche product ultimately. And they exceeded their sales projections for units sold by half a million.

lawox44d ago

"18.5 million units have been shipped during the full fiscal year. This is actually ahead of the 18 million units target set by the company."

They beat their yearly estimate. It's not broken down by device, but it's clearly performing well enough. Since it's been released it's consistently been the second best selling SKU on Amazon only after the the Slim with disc.

44d ago
Bathyj44d ago

18 million a year is in the toilet?
I remember when 10 was considered good
Hell Microsoft would take that right now.
Probably pay $100b for it.

44d ago
BeHunted45d ago

If their profits fall next quarter, we'll probably see more price hikes. I can't imagine having to pay £20 a month for PlayStation Plus.

S2Killinit44d ago

I think gamepass is already paying that much.

44d ago
drivxr45d ago (Edited 45d ago )

Decline in hardware sales.
Behind on lifetime sales and decline in first party sales.
Third party content and PSN came through to save the day.
Things will improve starting with the next Ghost game.

Hopefully a steady flow of first party content by end of '25

rlow144d ago (Edited 44d ago )

I guess you get downvoted for stating facts from Sony’s own lips. What I’m curious about is what their top games of the year were and how much Xbox games contributed to the increase?

CrashMania44d ago

Well, generally 3rd party publisher games contribute the most anyway, so no different to capcom, EA and so on contributing to this figure.

lawox44d ago

That's because the report is actually really good.

They beat the console sales estimate that they set last year March, they have increased users both due to the record numbers of PS4 users and strong PS5 sales which is leading to great profits in sales and user spend.

This report is about the financial health of the PlayStation brand and as a platform PlayStation is stronger than ever. Heck they even have Microsoft putting their biggest franchises on the platform.

44d ago
S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Well, the facts in the article are positive. Nothing wrong with his comment, but in my opinion it doesn't correctly indicate all the facts and nuances that give context to the reality of things. I downvoted for that only.

Make sense?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 43d ago
Lightning7744d ago

This is exactly what happened to Xbox year's ago. They had no first party and started seeing decline in 1st party sales, which effected their third party games which eventually effected their console sales. A slow decline across the board.

Calm down PS fans I'm not saying PS is becoming like old Xbox. I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. Look how Xbox finally has compelling first party and things are on a up swing(despite years going on a downswing). I know thanks to PS releases which helps a ton, (which is why Xbox hardware only dropped 6% instead of 30+% like it usually does) The point still stands despite what Genz Trends may go, first party and compelling games sell hardware and software still. Sony's financial quarter is an example of this, of what lower First party output looks like.

No matter they'll be right back on track in due time any time especially with DS2 (not my type of game but I know many like it) and Yotei. They're not Xbox and let things get bad for so many years on end.

crazyCoconuts44d ago

"I'm showing examples of the importance of first party output. "
First party is mostly relevant for the sole purpose of creating EXCLUSIVES that are needed to stay competitive. With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important. PlayStation as a platform now has free reign to profit without the high expense of needing exclusive first party titles.

red2tango44d ago

Sony has been very lazy with 1st party games compared to the PS4 era. And even the PS4 era was nothing compared to the PS3 era in terms of games.

S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

We have Ghost and Intergalactic coming. And then Marathon which is not exclusive to PlayStation. I think Covid and that chip shortage put a speedbump in game development because game manufacturers dont want even more risk that their game will arrive to too little hardware, but the games are starting to show up.

Lightning7744d ago

"With Xbox consoles collapsing and no more Xbox exclusives, first party is way less important."

Absolutely not. If that was the case then Nintendo would put Mario on Sega Genesis and Sonic on Super Nintendo. I know things are way different 30+ years later but not much has really changed in terms of exclusives and their impact on hardware. Especially early in the console life cycle.

Sony made all the money this quarter handover fist. Profits isn't a issue for them right now. I was just saying lower hardware sales and lower first party sales will hurt them or any console manufacturer of they don't have the compelling games in the long run. Just like it hurt Xbox. IF Sony keeps up not having lower first part output. Which we know they're not.

crazyCoconuts44d ago

Well no big exclusives in the last two years yet PS is doing great. What are people gonna do? Buy an Xbox?

S2Killinit43d ago

I agree with you. But they have had plenty of exclusives so far. Has it been ideal? Nope. I have a feeling we are seeing a resurgence with the effects of covid and that chip shortage now behind us.

Lightning7744d ago

No it's just like 360 where they had no games yet ppl still bought it because they sold ppl on the games early on that gen the fans were locked in and invested. They were riding the good will and was dubbed the shooter, racer box. The games dried up and they never recovered from it which hurt them in the long run. Same here with PS they still make the big bucks because they had games early on and the fans locked in and will continue to lock in for a little while longer despite lacking in first party.

S2Killinit43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

I agree. But the problem with xbox was that for some crazy reason MS thought game development wasnt all that important to a platform holder. They literally did not fund games with their own studios. When they lost marketshare they couldnt justify paying for exclusives with large install bases making it too expensive. That is not the scenario with PlayStation.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 43d ago
Show all comments (46)