Hell I'm getting a free smart blu ray player for my 10th anniversary with Allstate :up:
Printable View
Hell I'm getting a free smart blu ray player for my 10th anniversary with Allstate :up:
Sony lost so much this past generation because no one bought it for several months before they finally dropped it to a reasonable price. I mean, you're going to launch at $600 when the competitor launched a year ago and is selling for $400? :D
I realize Sony has the lead over Microsoft world wide, but Microsoft just completely dominates them in America. If Sony wants to buck that trend, they need to price it right, launch first, and have a really nice selection of launch games. They also better beef up their online, because, in case they haven't noticed, Americans love features like Cross Game Chat and Parties so that they can talk to their friends easily.
I think it'll be between $350 and $450 personally. Knowing Sony, you'll get a system with fairly low storage capacity and it'll be $400.
I know nothing yet re: HDD sizes but any guesses as to whether the PS4 HDD will be the same as the PS3 so that if you want to take a larger HDD from your PS3 it will easily convert over to the PS4?
I could really see it going either way. On one hand, you have to know that everyone loved the ability to upgrade hard drives, however Sony may also look over and see how much MS made directly on first-party peripherals and want a chunk of that for themselves. If I had to guess though, I'd bet we'd be able to upgrade our HDDs with off-the-shelf hardware.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
I'd imagine so. I don't see why they would change it around. It just uses a 2.5" laptop hard drive, right? Being able to use any hard drive was probably well received among PS3 owners, so I'd like to think they're smart enough to keep that ability around.
HOWEVER, they pulled the same shit with the Vita that Microsoft did with the 360 hard drives. Instead of just using a standard SD cards, Sony made their own memory tech and charged an arm and a leg for it. The largest size is 32GB and that retails for $100. ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS for 32GB! A quick google search and I can get a regular 32GB SD card from Newegg for $21. Microsoft did the same thing with the 360 hard drive. You can only use their model, and they currently charge $130 for 320GB. By comparison, you can easily get a 1TB drive for that price.
Read that earlier and almost threw up. Microsoft, no offense, but that interface only works for touchscreen. Having to maneuver through that thing with a mouse or a controller is not too great, not to mention it's a massive eyesore. So ugly.
Yeah it's 50/50 in my mind right now. There is extra $ to be made for sure for those that want/need to upgrade their PS4 later down the line. On the other hand, the convenience factor is also nice for the consumer. Given that Sony most recently did with the Vita we may be SOL. I'll miss you 1TB HDD. :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Interesting discussion re: the whole online only "issue"
http://youtu.be/ia_g7u-6GFY
On the topic of the harddrive sizes, it's entirely determined by the manufacture costs. If they have a large amount of those already in stock or still have access to them cheaply, then they most definitely will keep the same size. If there is any reason for them to change the size of the harddrives in the consoles, it'll be to cut down on the costs of the system.
As for the video above, I completely agree. If it doesn't happen this time, it will with the next consoles. It's the perfect DRM because it's unhackable. It's intelligent to do online only because it pushes the market to have competitive pricing for games to help fill the void of used games.
http://www.vg247.com/2013/02/07/game...re-restricted/
LOL, Gamestop amuses me. Console Makers might lose some customers but the only think diminished would be Gamestop.
No more annoying Sales Associates telling you that have it used when you walk up with a new game.
No more opened copies of new games as they would have to fear an employee taking it home playing it and making it unsellable. (I hate when I get a new game that has been opened)
Yeah Gamestop is basically the walking dead. They either die in 2013 or they die in approx. 2020 when the next-next gen goes to complete digital.Quote:
Originally Posted by bdoughty
I'm not worried about my Internet going out for minutes, hours, or days ... I'm worried about the occasional burp or flicker (which seems to happen nightly in my current living conditions) that would do more than just kill a multi-player session, it would kill my entire console usage.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
If Sony went to an always-online DRM (doesn't affect me at all if M$ does it), then I'd be strongly tempted to build the best computer I could afford and just play EVE Online day in and day out. Though I have plenty of PS3 games to finish too.
Microsoft’s next-gen Xbox to reportedly include Siri-like voice controls
Xbox 360 video game and home entertainment console already supports voice commands thanks to the Kinect controller, but it looks like we may see the company’s next-generation console ship with dramatically improved voice support. The Verge reported on Thursday that Microsoft’s upcoming Xbox refresh will support “wake on voice, natural language controls, and speech-to-text,” citing claims from multiple unnamed sources when reporting the details.
The enhanced voice support will supposedly allow users to speak commands naturally as they do with Siri on Apple (AAPL) devices. Microsoft’s next Xbox is expected to launch ahead of the holidays this year featuring a 1.6GHz eight-core AMD CPU, D3D11.x 800MHz graphics and 8GB of RAM.
http://news.yahoo.com/microsoft-next...WxhdGVk;_ylv=3
As Sony Computer Entertainment warms up its blue lighting and double-checks its playlist for February 20th, one unnamed SCE official says that the PlayStation 4 will act as more of a home entertainment hub than what we've seen in the past. They added, according to the Nikkei, that the main selling point won't be the rumored eight-core AMD64 CPU or other hardware specs, but how it opens up new styles of play -- something Nintendo is also focusing on. Sony is going to push the new console as a home entertainment "nerve center," with a focus on the hardware's ability to connect and share to mobile devices -- the rival that's pulling gamers away from traditional consoles. Edge had previously mentioned the possibility of a dedicated share button on the next-gen controller, though that remains a product of the rumor mill at the moment. No discussion on any Gaikai-powered cloud gaming just yet, but following its unveiling later this month, the report states that the new PlayStation should launch before the end of the year. A bit of a shame, then, that it's still only February.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/08/s...lshare_twitter
Microsoft and Sony both need to pull their heads of their asses and realize they're developing GAME consoles, not entertainment hubs.
Looks like the story of this current gen is going to continue onto the next. Nintendo does something that really catches on, Microsoft copies it and gets on the success to a degree, and then Sony copies them both and ends up losing a ton of money because the fad has passed. Well, I don't see the Wii U catching on at all, but it's still the same general idea.
I disagree. Yes while most here are more "hardcore" MS and Sony are both looking to grab that "casual" gamer and bring him/her in. I also like some of the aspects of the "entertainment" aspects of my PS3 (being able to play/rent/buy movies; use it to play songs on it; etc...). If they "beef" that up while still making a quality gaming console I won't complain.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Look at Kinect. It started amazingly well. What's it doing now? Jack squat(which I called as soon as it came out by the way :nod:). The PS Move absolutely never took off so it's doing just as poorly as Kinect is now, except it never had the blazing sales at the beginning like Kinect did.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
The Vita is another example. That was Sony's way of trying to get people that game on their phones to buy into their product. I don't think I have to speak on how just bad sales for the Vita have been so far, but when virtually no 3rd party publisher is willing to put their game on your device, you've got trouble.
As for the entertainment hub aspect, that's fine. The only problem is, from what I've seen, once they start going down that avenue, that becomes the focus. Do more people watch movies or play games? Do more people like TV shows or games? How many people like music compared to games? The answer is overwhelmingly in favor of the entertainment aspects, so the allure is to put all your eggs into that basket and focus on that. Microsoft has started doing that the past 2 or 3 years. They've realized that they can rely on 3rd party support, release one major exclusive, and then rely on Live subscriptions that are required to access all the content to bring in the revenue.
It's a strategy that works, but quite frankly stinks for the people that just want the thing to play high quality games.
Dude, you need to realize that, for most people, they use their consoles to watch things on their TVs more than they do to play games. For either console to actually be successful, they MUST continue to integrate those things into the consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
The days of video game consoles being just about video games is over. Cellphones, tablets, and iPads are cutting into that market QUITE a bit more than most video game companies are willing to admit (just listen to or read anything reporting about it from a business perspective - for instance, Sony MUST make a BIG splash with this coming console or you could actually see them having to pull out of the console market after the upcoming console generation; yes, their revenue stream from the PS3 and Vita is THAT bad).
There's a reason why this last console generation lasted so long (2004 to 2013 - and, no, I don't count the Wii or WiiU in this; they aren't generation gap consoles) compared to older generational gaps (5 years (2000 to 2005) for PS2 to 360 - 5 years (1995 to 2000) for PS1 to PS2) - 6 years (1989 to 1995) for Genesis to PS1 - and 4 years (1985 to 1989) for NES to Genesis). They had to try to get as big of an install base as possible to recoup the initial losses from their respective consoles for this generation (Microsoft lost something like $1 billion for their Xbox 360 heat fuck up and Sony didn't make money off of the PS3 until something in the neighborhood of 2 or 3 years after the launch of the system (Q3 of 2008 if I'm not mistaken)).
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
I agree with this only the game publishers care about what the hardcore gamer wants and even they only care to an extent, MS and Sony already have your business they want that casual person who will only buy it if it does something else and that something else is an "entertainment" hub.
Hardcore gamers bitch and complain but you know 90% still buy the stuff they are complaining about game after game. Don't let the internet fool you IOU with people saying they are not buying certain items, these people (developers and Console makers (except Sony apparently)) make money and they are pretty damn good at it.
Neither company gives a shit about people that just want to play games on their consoles. Those people aren't making Microsoft and Sony money like the people that pay to use the third party streaming software they have integrated into their systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Just like the whole argument about always being connected and the lack of internet for some people in this country - neither company gives a shit about those people because those people aren't making either company the amount of money that is available to be made for someone that's always connected to the internet and thus buying more shit through their consoles.
Sony fails at it because they have an incredibly ass-backwards menu system for their console and, thus, fail at advertising to most console owners that those items are even available to them. Until they do something that makes their menu system flow better and have a more cohesive feeling to it (like Microsoft and Steam have done), they will continue to fail at bringing customers into doing those things on their consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
Of course, Sony sucks balls at marketing in general. IOU, the reason why the Vita sucks is because they've done NOTHING in the way of marketing to support it (I've seen one commercial for a Vita game and it was that dumb ass Call of Duty game that came out for it and I'd be willing to bet that they funded the marketing for it instead of Sony). I wouldn't put my game on it either because it's pretty damn obvious that Sony doesn't have a clue in how to market it to actually sell games.
If Sony was smart, they'd make it an integral part of the Playstation (don't be surprised if the next consoles are just called Playstation and Xbox instead of PS4 and Xbox 720 or whatever - the power of singular branding like that is VERY strong) experience with their new console. How exactly they do that? I don't know, but it would be HUGE for them to do that. Even bigger would be for them to market two or three BIG releases for it in the coming year during this February 20th announcement that they have coming up. With all eyes on them because of the anticipation for the new consoles (I could almost not give two shits less and I'll probably still be watching), it'd be the perfect time to market the hell out of the Vita with some big Playstation exclusive releases.
That's fine...doesn't mean they need to focus the majority of their attention on it. I don't necessarily agree with your "most people use their consoles to watch things on TV than play games" statement, especially on the 360. Considering a Gold Subscription is REQUIRED to use any of the video/music apps, I find it a little hard to believe that many people would be retarded enough to pay $60 a year just to use Netflix when they could watch it on their PC, PS3, or other device for just the cost of Netflix.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
I'm not being fooled by other people. Look at recent sales of Kinect. They are God awful. It was a fad, just like every other thing aimed at the casual has been. They'll use it, they'll get tired of it, and they'll go back to their mobile games. Quite frankly, I'm a little shocked Microsoft is supposedly working on Kinect 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
It's partially marketing, and partially a million other things. There's not a single "MUST HAVE" game on the system. No 3rd party support. Too expensive. Memory cards are WAY too expensive. Also, as you said, terrible marketing.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
With the Vita, Sony has pretty much done everything wrong. No one knows about it and the few that do know about it, don't care about it because it's too expensive and there are no games.
See this article from 2011 and this specific fact from an analytics service called Strategy Analytics:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
While that may not mean that they are playing games less than watching Netflix or Hulu+, they are MOST DEFINITELY, using it for that more than ever before and, as said in the above article as well:Quote:
The report also found that 65 percent of U.S.-based weekly Xbox 360 users under the age of 25 watch more TV shows and movies online through the console than their desktop or notebook PCs. Strategy Analytics Senior Analyst Jia Wu says these findings indicate significant levels of consumer demand for such services.
“The upcoming Xbox TV launch for the holiday season will demonstrate an expansion of the partnership between the games consoles and the online TV and video industries,” he said. “Games consoles have already become the key media hub in U.S. households.”
More and more, people are using their consoles to watch this stuff on their giant HDTVs instead of watching it via their PC hooked up to just a normal monitor.Quote:
Twelve percent of U.S. households (about 15 million) use gaming consoles to watch content online, which is more than the percentage of households that connect a PC to a TV via HDMI.
While, yes, console owners are more than likely paying for a XBL Gold Subscription to play games online, more than before, they're using their consoles to watch and listen to streaming media more often than ever before. Console makers aren't going to stop doing that when it's nothing but $'s in their future.
Also, the argument of using the PS3 to do things online for free is going to go away after this new console. Seeing how Microsoft is able to support itself from it's Gold subscription profits, Sony would be insane not to do something similar and FORCE people to get PS+ to have access to online content. Even more so if they go with online only connectivity for their consoles. That's money in the bank.
Once again, Microsoft is looking at the success of the Wii motion stuff and how much money Nintendo made on their consoles because of the "it's so easy, grandma can play this stuff" factor. Nintendo struck gold with it and has no fuckin' clue how they did it (to the point where they have no fuckin' idea how to capitalize on it further) and Microsoft is trying to take that market share away from them. I guarantee you the amount of money they spend on creating the Kinect is FAR outweighed by the possibility of being THE motion control idea of this generation. Microsoft has to be licking their chops at the utter failure that is the Wii-U controller.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
I don't dispute that one bit. I was saying that I find it hard to believe people knowingly pay for a gold subscription on top of their Netflix JUST to watch Netflix. The vast majority of those gold subscribers are playing games with it. There's also no doubt that more and more people are streaming videos and music. However, that plays right into my argument of "it's a game console, focus on the games." Without that focus on the games, no one in their right mind is going to fork over $60 a year for Live(a nice money maker for Microsoft) just for access to Netflix and Hulu when they can use other devices and just pay the subscription fees for the respective services without an additional fee.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
I highly disagree with the 2nd paragraph I quoted. I think Sony's going to use the "hey, our service is FREE" tag line a lot in the upcoming generation. I also think they're going to continue with Plus, perhaps even upgrading it a little. Hell, they might even go with the ads on the interface somewhere and paying for Plus gets rid of those ads. I don't know, but I'd be willing to bet Plus will be a feature and the regular features of PSN will remain free. I know a good many people that only own a PS3 simply because it doesn't require you to pay to play online. I could be wrong, though.
I know that, but if you look at the recent sales of Kinect, it kind of makes you wonder if people actually want it. I believe that it was a fad that has come, seen it's day, and has started to die. Unless they make VAST improvements to how the thing works(sit down, precise movement recognition, and not having to have a clear area the size of a football field), I don't see people really jumping on board this time around. Of course, rumors are swirling that Kinect v2 is actually IN the Nextbox, so maybe the system will be centered around it this time rather than it just being a peripheral.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
I dont think I have seen so money multi-quoted posts in a row in a very long time.
Well, for me, I've absorbed a metric ass ton of information on this subject recently because of all the gaming podcasts and websites that I pay attention to all talking about it so, I have a lot to say on the subject. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
Just to throw in a comment here. While I do play games a majority of the time my 360 is on, I can completely understand if people use it most for their TV and movie viewing. Hell, I use nothing but 360 when it comes to watching Netflix. My 360 is hooked up to my TV by HDMI. My laptop isn't hooked up to it at all. Am I going to watch a movie or TV show on Netflix on my 40 inch TV or on my 19 inch laptop screen? I'm going the TV. Same with other apps that they have added on the 360. I'm gonna go with their uses through my 360 so I can watch/do stuff through my TV instead of having to have a large, bulky, heavy laptop sitting on my lap for long periods of time. I may still play games more often than not when my 360 is on, but there have been a great many times, especially over the last year, where I will go days and weeks without ever playing a single second of a game when my 360 is turned on, instead doing nothing but watching stuff on Netflix or Amazon on Demand or the other movie apps.
...BUT, if you had zero interest in games, would you pay $60 a year on top of your subscriptions to watch Netflix when you could watch it elsewhere for just subscription cost?Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
I'm all for Microsoft reaching out and going for the casual market along with the entertainment market, but they had better be wise enough not to abandon the core games. Without the core games, the necessity to pay $60 a year for Live evaporates. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't concerned with Microsoft's vision, especially with ONE core exclusive coming out this year. I realize part of that has to do with a new Xbox coming, but it still makes me wonder.
Another worry for Microsoft should be Sony going back to a PC like architecture this upcoming gen. I'd imagine a lot of people game on 360 because of the usually superior 3rd party games. Madden is better on 360. NCAA is better on 360. Call of Duty is better on 360. Assassin's Creed is better on 360. Virtually every 3rd party game available on both consoles is noticeably better on 360. Obviously, a lot of that has to do with Sony's cell. If they're going back to a more PC like design, you'd have to think the difference between the two would disappear and games would play and look identically on both systems. If there isn't a different between 3rd party titles, it falls to which has better exclusives, more features, and which controller you prefer.
I'd LOVE if Microsoft would be able to find a balance between 2 or 3 major exclusives every year, along with 3rd party titles, and then their entertainment features. They seem to bounce around a lot between which one they want to focus on.
If you don't count time on NCAA, which is the only game I'm playing now, the ONLY thing I'm using my PS3 for is Amazon Instant Video. And I have a good friend that purchased a PS3 solely to use Netflix.
I agree that non-gamers aren't going to pay for a Gold subscription. Hell, I know plenty of gamers that don't pay for one.
That's easy. I'd still do it, because even right now I don't pay a single cent for Xbox Live Gold and never have. I get a 12-month Live Gold card each Christmas from my sister (beats getting random things that may or may not end up getting put to use), so since 2008, I haven't paid a cent for Gold. Granted, if I had zero interest in games, I probably wouldn't have a 360 at all (and I probably wouldn't be posting here). But even then, I'd just watch Netflix through my Blu-ray player. So I still wouldn't give a damn in regards to using my laptop to watch Netflix or other stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Interesting chat about the "exclusives" debate:
http://youtu.be/7OQr_SjCZG4
Without listening to the clip: Yes, yes they do.
Microsoft has one big sports problem as they head into next gen with baseball. What are they going to do? Do they finally decide to use that High Heat license they bought? Hold their fingers crossed that EA jumps back into console baseball? Hope 2ksports keeps making baseball games?
Decisions, decisions.
I'm surprised EA hasn't jumped into the MLB license deal but I think part of that reason is they don't have a game engine ready for the PS3 or 360 and may just want to jump into the next gen. They do have a former MLB Show dev Kolbe on their Madden staff and I always assumed he was a guy to keep around for their own baseball game. MVP baseball was very popular and I think it would do very well if they update it properly.
I'm not sure baseball makes enough, personally.
I'm not sure any sport besides football is going to survive through to the PS5 generation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Chicken Little thought the sky was falling but it is still up there, holes and all. We seem to be forgetting about futbol (soccer)? The one that outsells football games, pro and college combined. Also the NBA is pretty safe based on 2K 13's sales figures continuing to grow, which are not that far behind Madden and well ahead of NCAA Football. Everything will depend on licensing costs in the future but I am pretty sure the MLB and NHL do not want to be left without a game in the market. Golf is my only concern, based on poor sales figures and the enormous licensing fees for players, courses, etc. etc. That said there will always be Golf games, people have shown they will buy golf games without the PGA stamp of approval (Hot Shots, Mario Golf, etc).
I think there will be games for a long while for the major sports. Soccer, football, baseball, basketball and hockey. I wouldn't be surprised to see the day that college football meets the same end as college basketball, and it won't have anything to do with EA making it. Regardless of who would be making it, the day will come where it's too costly on the company's bottom line to make a college football game.
So the major sports will continue, but we'll see where things have already gone. There will only be one game, whoever the companies making them at the time in the future are, but there will only be one company, one game. The days of multiple, competing titles in sports are dead and gone. Two companies dueling it out may make for a "cold war" battle trying to improve the game more and put more features in the game than the other company and may make for better games, but it'll lead to lost money for both companies with splitting the number of games sold. So they'll keep trying to get the solo licenses instead of ending up in selling wars with other companies and, regardless of how great or bad the game is, lose money because the other company will sell at least some copies.