PS4 Price Reduced by Removing Camera, Will Games Suffer?

DailyGame: Will Sony’s removing the camera to get the PS4 price reduced have long-term consequences for next-gen games? What does it mean for multiplatform titles?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
ZBlacktt1941d ago

We've already said no in other stories about this. I have never once owned a Eye or motion controller set up. It's just not for me. Yet, I own many games that have the ability to use those types of controllers. But since I don't "need" them and can use the DS3. I'm not missing out on anything. I'm glad the camera is not forced on us.

dedicatedtogamers1941d ago

Hahahah that title....

Yeah, I'm also glad the camera isn't forced on us. I have yet to see a single game that truly justifies Kinect or Eye on the 360/PS3 and I'd be pleasantly surprised if the next-gen cameras were significantly better.

LOGICWINS1941d ago

We should be seeing more Move/Eye stuff at Gamescom.

badboy7761941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

No unless the Camera was Mandatory and had to stay on for the system to Function. Because even though the camera may have been included it can break at any moment Then what?

MikeMyers1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

Of course they are better. Both will offer better capturing and the Kinect 2 will be able to detect up to 6 people, distinguish voices much clearer, see people in bad lighting, less size requirements, and even be able to read your heart rate.

These cameras won't make every game better but having it on every platform makes it much easier for developers to utilize. That was the major issue with the Playstation Move. Great device but poor support. It also didn't help developers when they didn't know how many actual people they could potentially sell to since some people such as myself owned more than one of them. Games like Dance Central proved to be big hits and was only possible on the Kinect.

The trade off of course is it brings up the price and not every person cares about it. However what we don't need are consoles being the same. What's the point? Why not have a system like the Wii U with a Gamepad in each system and a Xbox One with a camera in every system and a standard console like the PS4? Even the PS4 will all have touchpad support on the controller which means they will likely use that feature much more than selling an optional controller with a touchpad on it.

SilentNegotiator1941d ago

I would say quite the opposite. Developers can focus on making the game instead of finding some way to shoehorn gimmicks in.

MikeMyers1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

"I would say quite the opposite. Developers can focus on making the game instead of finding some way to shoehorn gimmicks in."

Sure you'll get that in some cases but it's not mandatory to use it. They are still offering standard controllers on the PS4 and Xbox One. It's not like Kinect has to be used in Forza 5 to control the car. Instead it has Kinect features that you can choose to use or ignore.

JokesOnYou1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

No games won't suffer, most ps4 games just wont have the same motion/voice options as X1 games, however a great ps4 game will still be a great ps4 game with or without ps eye/motion.....the difference is micro is fully supporting kinect while sony is making ps eye optional/peripheral. I got to say Im glad micro has really showed some damm committment for once and stuck to their guns by putting alot of support behind kinect -I remember when the knock was it was just a wii like gimmick that they would drop soon.

We've already seen how kinect implementation is being added to more and more core games. If you don't care about expanding game play options through gesture or voice controls because a controller works just fine then micro strategy doesn't mean much to you but if you're like me and welcome new ways to interact with early games like Forza5 and Ryse then you'll love micros strategy this gen....its a major difference between the 2 consoles, we shall see which pays off more in the long run.

The_Con-Sept1941d ago

Honestly what kind of article is this? I hate motion controlled gaming. Never bought a Wii, never bought a 360 for Kinect, I have the ps eye but only cause it came with the wizards of the coast game. I use it to video chat mostly with my friends. I do own 9 psn ps eye titles. But I never play them. Because each one was less spectacular than the last. Motion controlled gaming is only fun for 30 minutes. Navigating menus by pretending to be a composer is annoying and tiresome. Minority report esque crap should stay in minority report.

Ju1941d ago

It's a pity they took it out, but I'd go with the price decision and I am OK with it.

I like me some Move controls and a camera would certainly have lowered the entry barrier and opened up markets for camera based games which now will rely on the numbers the camera/Move can sell as an add on which is of course lower.

But, yes, it would probably have raised the console price for 80% of customers. Looks like the majority doesn't want it. Yet, I still hope devs will implement the feature. Dev kits come with cameras, so at least there you don't have to buy an add on to make it work and all the tools are available which should at least make it easier to support it as an option.

SilentNegotiator1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

"Sure you'll get that in some cases but it's not mandatory to use it"

It still causes many developers to limit games to what Kinect is capable of.

I know certain people have put a lot of stock into Ryse, but look at how clunky it is when not in a QTE, how full of setpieces it is, how narrow every environment is to serve easy Kinect-walking (think Rise of Nightmares), etc. It's still a Kinect game even if they put in traditional controls.

And then you get things like Fable: The Journey, where Microsoft takes a beloved franchise and makes it a Kinect game.

Entire studios like RARE get sucked into being almost entirely dedicated to producing Kinectware. RARE, starting out the generation making the very RARE-like Kameo, then having XBL rammed down its throat (leading to mediocrity like BK:N&B), then as a killing blow, Kinect shoved down their throat leaving no trace of what the studio once was.

The best things we've gotten out of Kinect as a game enhancer is shouting commands...and seeing as Microsoft doesn't have exclusive ownership of voice recognition software, we don't need a $100 camera for that.

PS4 gamers will get to vote with their wallets on the camera and the move.

Godmars2901941d ago

Thing is with the PS3eye and games, Sony did a far better job of both integrating Move into games and making it optional. Move has its own games which means you have to have it to play them, but then its also usable with non-Move centric games and by reports improves them. Games like Kilzone and Infamous. Sony often says little to nothing about Move, but by all counts it does work.

Meanwhile with Kinect, especially now with 2.0, voice command has become the only thing MS actively talks and shows off. Know that many will disagree, but with the current demos there is still notable lag issues as well at that spastic tick. They've been talking up Smartglass more than they have any improvements for Kinect. Have reduced its importance and functionality on games like Ryse and Crimson Dragon - Xbox 360 games which were suppose to show that Kinect could be used for more than party games.

nukeitall1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

I'm glad the Kinect is included. I thoroughly enjoyed the current Kinect, as well as Wii.

However, I think the new Kinect is going to be really good from the tech demos shown.

If Kinect wasn't included, the Xbox One would just be another exstention of what we already have. The extra omph in graphics doesn't do it for me.

It has to have next gen features, otherwise I could have just gotten a PC and had beyond next-gen graphics now!

That is if I really cared about graphic much. I feel next gen should be about new ways to play. Continue what the Wii did, but focus that on core gamers.

When we went from rudimentary to 2D, then to 3D, and finally motion controlls, but the latter really wasn't for core gamers. So I'm hoping boundaries will be shifted again.

I personally think it was the right decision to include Kinect, and I love the idea of bringing Skype (and video into the living room and my games.


"No unless the Camera was Mandatory and had to stay on for the system to Function. Because even though the camera may have been included it can break at any moment Then what?"

What happens when your controller break?

Which by the way is far more likely to happen!


Of course games will suffer, that's exactly why it's called a "sacrifice", but the general opinion is that's it was a worth one, as price is much more critical than camera functionality for most people.

Personally, I think it's the best strategy even if personally I'll be getting a camera later (if good stuff comes by, I'll be holding my Move and Navigator when I trade my PS3 anyway), simply because there's no need to punish everyone with a bigger price just to please the few of us that actually want some motion controls.

And, more importantly, it completelly avoid the mandatory or dominant motion control problem we have with Wii, good games that you don't want to play cause you have be jumping in front of the TV all the time. I rather have motion as an option here and there, never be forced to use it.

miyamoto1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

More Great Games Less Gimmicks

Spinning this rumor will make you dizzy M$ and will get you nowhere.

The PS Eye is not meant for 24/7 spying on gamers' privacy unlike the mandatory Spynect.

Don't be surprised if the present PS Eye and PS Move controllers can work with the PS4 as they do with PS3 and PC.

And Sony can bundle the new PS Eye with PS4 at discounted price like they do with PS3 today. Its about choice and options.

There are many lessons learned with my PS Move system on PS3
and I tell you motion controls are "optional" and not a core gamer's number one priority. Ask Naughty Dog about this.

This is just M$ campaign to make it seem that XBOne has more "value" and justify the $500 price tag ..... but no. People are smarter than this.

morganfell1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

"...they took the camera out."

At what point was it in? These attempts to spin this matter are laughable and reek of the worst type of desperation.

Most core gamers have shown the camera isn't something for which they care and would rather developers take that time and effort and expend it elsewhere - such as using the superior hardware in the PS4 to provide an experience that can't be found on other consoles.

As was asked over at GAF, I want a long long list of all the great games that were made because consumers were forced to purchase a camera they did not desire.

After all of this talk about the superiority of cross game chat this generation and how your console was useless without it, maybe this worthless website should be asking why there is no headset with the X1 and why MS went proprietary on the plug for a headset you have to purchase separately rendering your current versions useless. Great marketing move.

vickers5001941d ago

"Most core gamers have shown the camera isn't something for which they care and would rather developers take that time and effort and expend it elsewhere"

That's because it hasn't really been properly implemented in very many core games. Mass Effect 3 and Skyrim seem to be the only ones that come to mind, and Skyrim only got it from a later patch which didn't launch with the game.

Personally, from the youtube video demonstration I saw of Skyrim kinect features, I'd welcome a camera on either system in games like that. It seems like it makes equipping spells/gear/weapons much easier and much less of a pain in the ass then having to dig through tons of menus.

I don't think we absolutely need CAMERAS for that feature, but I sure as hell would love some proper voice control for my games, at least games like that where you have an inventory system with tons of different items that I'd rather not waste time scrolling through and would instead prefer to say "drink healing potion" or "poison current weapon" or "switch to fire spell", because in games like Skyrim or Fallout new vegas, I avoid using things like posions, potions, status enhancers (like med-x, buffout, psycho, steady, etc.) because it's far quicker to just fight the enemies at a slight disadvantage than to scroll through the menus and equip each one just for a brief fight.

But if a stupid camera is the only way that we'll get voice commands, then I'm fine with MS including it. Developers of core games never implement those features because they fear nobody will ever use it, but now that a kinect comes with every Xbone, they might actually make use of it and we might finally see some of these fabled "useful features" that kinect has been claiming to offer.

I'm not getting an Xbone at launch (still getting a ps4 at launch), but I'm very interested in seeing how microsofts shoehorned in kinect will translate into kinect supported games.

I'm not at all sold on the features of the actual motion control part of it, but voice control in my opinion (proper voice control) would be a wonderful addition to next gen games if they could get it right.

morganfell1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

It doesn't matter if it hasn't been implemented. People keep missing this. Its like an Obamacare sales pitch. People assuring you that its better for you when its actually a disaster that will only cost too much money, tax the system, and provide things you would rather pay for on your own IF you want them. And like Obamacare there are that core gorup that never pay for anything and expect to get everything for free. The camera has a dev cost in terms of time and money.

Most gamers do not want it. They want to lay back and relax, not get up and move around.

How many hours do you want to stand up when you could be kicked back with a cold beer?

Oh sure it's cool for the occasional game but pretty soon it gets old. There is no way they can implement a fully featured camera in a game without having to cut the budget in some place and at the end of the day most gamers would rather they spend that time and money on something else.

pixelsword1940d ago

Yeah, because the camera made such a difference the last three gens.


NumOnePS3FanBoy1940d ago

@mykemyers Soo why won't M$ let you make that decision upon purchasing instead of shoving the gimmick kinect down peoples throats?

MajorLazer1940d ago

I never use gimmicks. It's always just me and my controller and I certainly never miss out on anything

vickers5001940d ago


Clearly you didn't bother to read my whole comment. Seems you were too busy trying to push your political beliefs on other people.

Please gtfo here with that crap, this is a gaming forum, not a political forum.

morganfell1940d ago (Edited 1940d ago )

So you can't use an analogy here at all? Nothing? How illiterate are people? You would be telling everyone to shut up.

And we, this includes you, plenty that isn't game related. How many times have you commented on morality? Well...people that live in glass houses.

I did read your comment and didn't bother disagreeing with eating a camera just because it's the only way to get voice coms.

Its absurd.

You are fine with them pushing a piece of equipment that wasn't used by core games, it drives up the price while omitting the item that was cheaper and was used by gamers. Brilliant.

vickers5001940d ago

"So you can't use an analogy here at all? Nothing?"

There are plenty of gaming related analogies you could have used, instead you tried to push your irrelevant and opinionated beliefs onto others. Also, this article has absolutely nothing to do with morality, it has nothing to do with politics.

If you want people to hear your irrelevant opinions about politics, then go to a political forum or post something on facebook, or better yet, have an actual conversation with a human being face to face. Or even wait for an article to pop up that is related to politics, but keep it out of articles that it has nothing to do with.

This site is already a cesspool of immature pricks who cannot have a discussion without resorting to insulting people they disagree with, we don't need topics like politics polluting it any further. Though it seems you like contributing to it.

morganfell1940d ago (Edited 1940d ago )

What a laugh. Insulting people? Immature? Have you bothered to read what you have written? You use profanity like a 5th grader that just learned the F word. You insult people left and right and then you pull this hypocrite routine as if you have never:

1 - Discussed anything OT
2 - Used an analogy
3 - Insulted people
4 - Acted immature

I have news for you my smug little teenage friend, you are 3 for 4 in this thread alone. Grow up, put on your big girl panties, learn to laugh at yourself, pull the stick out of your backside, and take a long hard look at your own actions and words.

Irrelevant? Who died and made you relevant police chief? Not your decision pal. And I will keep on because apparently you do not like it.

Diver1940d ago

Vickers dude where did you go to school? The whole point of an analogy is to use an unrelated subject. In this case a govt plan is related to gaming. Maybe you haven't gotten to the grade where they teach that. Thas what an analogy does dude. Man you really now how to pwn yourself.

vickers5001940d ago

" You use profanity like a 5th grader that just learned the F word"

...I used it once in my comment (in an abbreviation). But nice that you automatically assume I'm a teenager.

You know what? I apologize. I should know better than to have responded to someone like you in the first place. People like you aren't happy unless they're picking a fight with someone about something.

I try and discuss the possible positives of the other side to the "include a camera" argument, and instead of actually responding to what I said, you go on an unrelated rant about Obama for whatever reason (your rant being completely subjective) and don't even respond to the main points of my argument.

Over the years, there has always seemed to have been an unspoken rule here on n4g (and probably other gaming sites), to not bring up overly sensitive issues (like religion, sexual orientation, political beliefs, etc.) UNLESS it was relevant to the topic of conversation, like an article discussing the involvement of government in gaming or the inclusion of sexual orientation in a game or "should god be in video games", but those discussions are usually kept to those articles. It's one of the few things that I admired about the gaming community here.

I'm not opposed to discussing such issues WHEN IT'S RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE AT HAND, but your anti-obama rant isn't in an article like this. But whatever, I give up. There's just no possible way of conversing in a civilized manner with people as angry and bitter as yourself.

morganfell1939d ago

"There's just no possible way of conversing in a civilized manner with people as angry and bitter as yourself."

Hold on, I'm still on the floor...ha ha ha ha ha.

One more minute my sides are hurting. Seriously? Go back and look at this thread and see which one of us flew apart cursing and being spiteful. That would be you. I never knew literary techniques could be so maddening. No wonder the works of Shakespeare are filled with so much madness.

A little self reflection and a good dose of objectivity might allow you to see which one of us became bombastic. I do have the impression it was general politics that upset you but rather the use of the "O" word in a negative connotation. Oh well, another day another angry person.

+ Show (23) more repliesLast reply 1939d ago
liorishot1941d ago ShowReplies(1)
1941d ago Replies(2)
Prime_281941d ago

You seem to be missing the point of this article. No one is going to buy the camera now that it's sold separately. The ps move was sold separately and did not sell very well. So it's likely that games that will require the camera will suffer in sales.

SilentNegotiator1941d ago

If gamers vote with their wallets not to buy a camera or move and camera/move games, then so be it.

Minato-Namikaze1941d ago

The move sold 15 million units.......

nukeitall1941d ago

It is a chicken and egg problem.

If nobody has it, who is going to spend time making a great experience for it?

I personally think it was the right decision, and I love the idea of bringing Skype (and video into the living room and my games.

moparful991941d ago

Here's my point "motion" controls have proved to be very gimmicky so far and Forcing the consumer to have it whether they want it or not probably wont change the shallow and gimmicky nature of motion games. Especially on the Kinect, there is a limitation on full interaction.. You can't move in full 3d space, you can only move as far as you are from the camera.. So that means that you would either have to use the controller in conjuction with the Kinect which eliminates the uniqueness of Kinect or it has to be an on rails experience.. So far only voice commands seem to be the best use of Kinect and even that doesn't improve gaming to the point where its a must have.. I would much rather Sony leave the camera out and save $100 and have the option to buy later then to be forced into buying it...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1941d ago
filipakos1941d ago

Move is okay if you get used to it.There are some cool games for move but got certain type of gamers.Not me but i enjoyed playing for a day or so.Forcing it wouldnt be a good strategy and im glad they left the option on us whether we buy it or not.Most gamers including me prefer to buy a game or the one year sub for ps+ with the console

JetsFool35001941d ago

Im Just Happy Sony Isn't Stickin Tha Camera Down Our Throats & Forcing Us To Use It


there's a reason Microsoft is forcing the Kinect. me.

GABRIEL10301941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

I never have used a camera in video games. For the xbox, kinect was its perdition, for example Star wars kinect is humiliating and insulting.....

CalvinKlein1941d ago

Nope the games wont suffer, because cameras and mandatory motion controls suck. Im glad that barely anyone will have it so developers dont put a bunch of stupid motion gimmicks in every game.

The only thing id really like to use a camera like the eye or kinnect for is a time crisis like game where you have the option of using your furniture as cover, but I havent seen them making any of those, let alone something that actually looks to be of good quality or fun.

crazyboom1941d ago

Im glad there is no camera as the kinect for the xbox one was a major negative to me.

showtimefolks1941d ago

cameras or motion controls are nothing more than Gimmicks

give me a Dual Shock 4 and a awesome game to play

$399 a great price point

JohnS13131940d ago

I owned the camera for the PS2 and PS3 but I don't really care about using a camera in my games. If a great game comes out that needs a camera then just buy one.

s8anicslayer1940d ago

All these people are bickering about this for nothing because sony would've sold the camera bundled in at 450$ which is still cheaper than the One!

alb18991940d ago

The problem is that isn't just about you, I know that with a kinect in every console there will be better games for kinect and let me tell you that I and my kids enjoy a lot dance central.

I like conventional controls but to have options wont hurt me. I dint want camera in my iPad but now that is there I use it more than I ever imagine.

ZBlacktt1940d ago

I own a Kinect and also have Dance Central and my teenagers love it. But all that has zero interest to me. I have close to 4000 trophies on the PS3. All done with just a DS3. So I'll never need that camera stuff. That $100 savings in cost over the X1 could buy me two full years of PS Plus. Which would give me around $2000 worth of content. Which is a total win for gamers like me.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 1939d ago
Godmars2901941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

Depends if motion/camera games ever mature past party and child game phase.

Wouldn't mind seeing a few more lightgun games.

Some lightgun games.

*Any* lightgun games...

clearelite1941d ago

Yeah, some proper lightgun games where you can calibrate and don't have need to have that silly reticle on the screen.

Also, I was able to do some massive damage in the Killzone 3 beta with the move.

....therefore, if properly implemented it could be a great OPTION for FPS games as well.

ZBlacktt1940d ago

After watching that video. It's very clear that was some really bad players, lol. I mean damn you are just walking around out in the open often.....

I could run through every game as a Infiltrator and get 20+ kills in a row very easy. But anyway, the move was so not needed for the game.

alb18991940d ago

Now that every x1 will have kinect there will be serious games about it because developers will like to try.

Everything is about sells! Money!

Godmars2901940d ago

Besides Child of Eden, what is there that's close to a ligthgun game on Kinect?

Given that Crimson Dragon in no longer a Kinect-only game, the failure of something like Steel Battalion, I seriously doubt your claim.

LOGICWINS1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

I own the Eye, Move, Nav controller, and Sharpshooter. I would have preferred if Sony included the camera in the KZ bundle instead of a second controller.

I understand why they did it though. Most people don't care about Move. I'm sure Shadow Fall supports Move, but its a bit suspect that they didnt mention it. The only rational explanation is that Sony wanted to downplay the importance of the camera since they didnt want consumers to feel like they were being shortchanged by the lack of a camera in the bundle.

clearelite1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

I would love an OPTION to use move in shadow fall, though I wouldn't mind the second controller either.

If people don't think Move can work for FPS, the should watch the video in my above post of me embarrassing people in the KZ3 beta.

greenpowerz1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

Probably very little if Sony had software or camera hardware that were worthy of mass adoption they would include it. But yes the mass adoption angle to game development will be held back when it comes to what little Sony's offerings could bring to the table.

The_Klank1941d ago

This is you just 24 hours ago,

'I seem biased? I'm a xbox fan that talks about xbox in xbox threads/articles either talking about xbox related stuff, giving xbox opinions or trying to correct misinformation about xbox. I guess you think that because I'm not a fan of other consoles? I'm biased because I don't go into other console threads talking about those consoles?'

OT I have the current Move and Eye and it doesn't get much use these days so I'm glad it's not included, If software comes out that impress's me then I'll pick up the new eye.

greenpowerz1941d ago (Edited 1941d ago )

So you tracked a few articles out of tens of thousands with my comments in them to prove your point? Tell you what you find more than 5 PS only articles I've been in in the last 6 months and I'll give you a cookie LMAO

The article was edited in the platform channel system to get the least exposure trying to hide it. This article is in reality is just as much an XB1 article as it is a PS4 one. LOL

If the topic was the other way around and Xb1 didn't have the camera and Sony did the contributor would have added both Xbox One and PS4 tags/channels.

I thought I did a good job not offending anybody while talking about both console as related in this article.

On topic...
I'm sure there will be watered down ports with basic camera functions from XB1 games for PS4 gamers to take advantage of.

Remember the actual article is talking about XB1 and PS4 and my first comment is what a lot of people think about why Sony decided to sacrifice the camera to lower the price

moparful991940d ago

@greenpowerz Give it up. Someone exposed you for the troll you are and yet you are still trying to defend your stab at Sony in an article about Sony.. You have no business here considering how little you care about Sony.

PirateThom1941d ago

No, because controlling games with a camera doesn't work, EyeToy showed it and Kinect stamped the confirmation on it.