Support NeoGAF

[killatopak]

Good PC disclaimer, shame it's needed at the moment.

Good first post, don't worry about your spelling and grammar it was a very coherent post, with better grammar than most native English speakers use.

Enjoy NeoGAF.

Thanks, I will.

I can't recall if this is the thread or the other one with the balance thread but I've seen people touting that the SHAPE audio processor helps mitigate the performance delta that the two have. Now I know that there's not really much that processor can do but why are they spouting as if all these special processors will suddenly bridge that gap when I could say the same about PS4's own special processor and say that it helps widen the gap much further.

A question, if anybody knows, didn't the PS4 have a special processor which is essentially another CPU in which it helps the PS4 perform background tasks? Now imagine if Sony and MS' positions were switched and the PS4 got the short end of the stick, I for sure would consider that processor , although vague in its abilities other than the specific task it was made for, which is pretty much the same as SHAPE's vagueness. You could probably call me out and say things that it doesn't help much or not at all but that is what is happening with these guys spouting as if SHAPE adds 100-400 GFLOPS. Why can't just enjoy the games for what they are. We've seen the specs. They are certainly more than enough for next gen gaming, no need to fight.

The only problem that I see is that if the performance delta is so large that it affects gameplay, not just graphics, is that exclusives will be more frequent with the leading console. How is that bad? It is bad because that leading console will more than likely have most of the market share and would monopolize the gaming industry. Why is that bad? PS3 happens. Specifically its exotic hardware, high price tag and arrogant executives is what happens. Microsoft made Xbox in order to prevent this and what happens? They became what they were meant to prevent. Now they are struggling because of their actions and they can't change their personalities because they can't admit their mistake as shown by Phil Harrison in his recent interview about their policies(something about winning the games front). They were confident with their plans and now that it has backfired a lot of time and trust is lost.

Now all that may or may not happen again because all 3 companies have already experienced what arrogance may cost them and I sure as hell not wish for it to happen again.

As gamers, we need for the gaming companies to have competition in order for them to polish up whatever they do and whatever they produce and try to sell us with or else we will end up with an inferior product where that product is the only choice or none at all.

A lot of this is conjecture but it is what I firmly believe.

 

[RoboPlato]

My guess will be Xbox OS reservation(2 cores, 10% GPU) leads to this 50% difference gap.

My guess as well.

The fact that PS4 is easier to develop for combined with the power difference is what makes me think that it'll be the de facto choice for multiplatform games. Each one of those advantages alone are pretty big but combined it's a massive win for Sony. In fact, I would even go as far to say that situations where they can throw unoptimized code at PS4 and have it run as intended and have to work to get the XBO up to snuff would be something that Sony would consider a major win. Moreso than graphics output, PS4's design seems to be all about ease of use for developers and sometimes the extra power just plain makes things easier for devs that don't have as many extra resources.

 

[jaypah]

True, im still unsure if im going to get either one actually. Might just stick to PC. I have my firstborn coming in March, and I just cant picture myself justifying $60 a game. I know,weak but oh well.

You could always just jump in late and stay behind the curve. Games will be down in price that way. Anyway, congrats on the kid!

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

Now all that may or may not happen again because all 3 companies have already experienced what arrogance may cost them and I sure as hell not wish for it to happen again.

Man... I really hope you're right and we don't but my cynic side is telling me a few years down the line, they will forget. I hope they all will remember their third consoles (N64,PS3,XB1) as how hubris and underestimating your competition can destroy your dominance.

 

[Moral Panic]

My guess will be Xbox OS reservation(2 cores, 10% GPU) leads to this 50% difference gap.

Highly likely that PS4 has a similar reservation though.

 

[Skeff]

Man... I really hope you're right and we don't but my cynic side is telling me a few years down the line, they will forget. I hope they all will remember their third consoles (N64,PS3,XB1) as how hubris and underestimating your competition can destroy your dominance.

I think we all need to hope for that, I'm confident Sony will remember as it probably cost them more than anyone, although we don't know about xb1 and they still seem keen on bringing drm back so they haven't even realised Yet.

 

[RoboPlato]

Highly likely that PS4 has a similar reservation though.

ElTorro had a pretty great post explaining why PS4 probably won't have the GPU reserve, at least. I'll see if I can find it. I know Nib usually has it handy.

 

[Perkel]

Nintendo has NEVER, EVER been good at "designing strong hardware." The Gameboy, essentially a portable monochrome NES released in 89. NEC released the Turboexpress a year later in full color with the capabilities of the Turbografx-16. The SNES and N64 were only marginally more powerful than their 2 year old competition. GC was the last time you could have argued they made the attempt, but even then the Xbox was significantly stronger, and released within about a month. Forget the Wii- Comparing the hardware capabilities of the PSP to the DS, or the 3DS to the Vita. Nintendo is either not capable or not interested in designing cutting edge hardware.

The Wii and WiiU were simply a concession that designing strong hardware wasn't something they were good at, so why bother?

I am not talking about creating best hardware there is i am talking about getting hardware that at least can compete with other platforms. Something which Wii U can't do.

And Gamecube was fairly powerful

 

[soundscream]

Maybe we should get back to talking about Tech & forget about all this who shot johnny industry stuff.



All I know is that for the devs to be saying that the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the Xbox One even after the CPU\GPU upclock there has to be something going on that we don't know about or PS4 APU design is just that good.

Honest question.

50% faster = 50% more powerful?

I really dont know much when it comes to how everything works out, but I think I understand that the faster you can pull information, it will obviously improve the performance. But is being 50% faster a direct correlation to being 50% more powerful? Does nothing else figure in to the puzzle?

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

I think we all need to hope for that, I'm confident Sony will remember as it probably cost them more than anyone, although we don't know about xb1 and they still seem keen on bringing drm back so they haven't even realised Yet.

If MS loses dominance in both US and UK, it will definitely drive the point home. We have to remember, Sony were also really cocky pre-PS3 release, but realized post-release how much ground they have lost. Numbers speak much louder than works. We've seen how quickly MS changed their tune once pre-orders opened up. If their sale trends don't match expectations out in the wild, I'd expect more policy changes.

However, on the other hand, I don't think MS is actually competing with Sony anymore. They're not selling at a loss (I don't think they can afford to, with the heavy scrutiny on the hardware division) and charging out the ass for subscription services. If they even sell half the install base of the 360, they'll be rolling in money. So yea... I might be wrong, and we don't see a full admission to arrogance from MS in the future.

 

[Manmademan]

I am not talking about creating best hardware there is i am talking about getting hardware that at least can compete with other platforms. Something which Wii U can't do.

Nintendo has never done this, ever, and isn't likely to start now. At best the hardware they release is on par to slightly better than several year old competition. Hell, the wiiU has been on the market for nearly a year and STILL hasn't managed to put out a game that outperforms PS3 exclusives, and the PS3 is 7 years old.

Their business model has typically required building in a significant profit margin to hardware. no one else works this way and nintendo will continue to underperform as long as they do business like this.

And Gamecube was fairly powerful

Compared to the 18 month old PS2? sure. Compared to the Xbox which launched at the same time? not at ALL. And all MS did was throw off the shelf parts into a funny looking PC case. there was almost no customization or specialty engineering there. Sony was a full generation ahead of them in the handheld space with the PSP and Vita.

Honest question.

50% faster = 50% more powerful?

I really dont know much when it comes to how everything works out, but I think I understand that the faster you can pull information, it will obviously improve the performance. But is being 50% faster a direct correlation to being 50% more powerful? Does nothing else figure in to the puzzle?

when talking GPUs with the same architecture? pretty much, yeah. are there other things that factor into it? sure. ease of programming, available memory, all kinds of things. unfortunately Sony has a significant advantage in every one of these areas. 50% might actually be a lowball figure, when talking practical performance and not theoretical.

 

[Sinthor]

True, im still unsure if im going to get either one actually. Might just stick to PC. I have my firstborn coming in March, and I just cant picture myself justifying $60 a game. I know,weak but oh well.

Good points. The only thing I'd say that is if you're going with NEW games, games on the PC cost $59.99 as well. You can get used and older games for consoles as well if the cost is the big factor for you. Maybe not as MANY as on PC, but the PC has a much wider variety and larger number of games available in the first place.

 

[Chobel]

Highly likely that PS4 has a similar reservation though.

ElTorro had a pretty great post explaining why PS4 probably won't have the GPU reserve, at least. I'll see if I can find it. I know Nib usually has it handy.

There're you go.

Why should the PS4 reserve any non-trivial GPU time for anything other than the game when the game is the only application rendering graphics during gaming? The XBO runs snapped Metro apps concurrently with the actual games, and since Metro is a hardware-accelerated UI and the WinRT-based apps have access to rendering capabilities, GPU time reservation is necessary. This does not apply to the PS4 which simply doesn't have the snap feature. As others already said, background tasks are much better put on the CPU.

This is marginal, and, most importantly, there is no need to reserve a fixed amount of resources all the time for such things. Most probably, notifications are just part of the game's process and handled by the overall game framework, whereas snapped applications not only are running in different processes, but in a different virtual partition.

.

 

[marvin83]

unfortunately Sony has a significant advantage in every one of these areas. 50% might actually be a lowball figure, when talking practical performance and not theoretical.

Unfortunate for whom?

 

[Manmademan]

Unfortunate for whom?

unfortunately for anyone looking for a reason why Sony's 40-50% GPU advantage would be less than that in practice.

 

[pixlexic]

ehh If I was smart i would wait a year and just play pc for now. But I am not that smart so I will still be getting a ps4 and xbone at launch.

The spec arguments are always worse at launch.

 

[Silly.Mikey]

What i find sad is how MS are getting dismantled at the stuff they supposedly specialise in. OS developement, drivers... These guys make a living making stuff run smoothly on hardware and they cant even have drivers (designed by them) run properly on HW they themselves designed.

They deserve to lose to Sony.

 

[prwxv3]

It's pretty hilarious how much MS underestimated Sony. I think they fully expected Sony to release later then them with specs on par or lower then theirs. I don't know if they expected Sony to have the same DRM though because some of the stuff that had panned were not even possible for Sony to accomplish.

 

[Manmademan]

What i find sad is how MS are getting dismantled at the stuff they supposedly specialise in. OS developement, drivers... These guys make a living making stuff run smoothly on hardware and they cant even have drivers (designed by them) run properly on HW they designed.

They deserve to lose to Sony.

Microsoft makes money because they have leveraged their OS and Office Suite programs into a de facto monopoly. "smoothly running drivers and OS" are not typically things that have applied to Windows or Office.

When forced to compete, MS's recent track record has them getting beaten and badly.

Windows 7 was pretty good though.

 

[Pain]

Have you ever seen these?

Embrace, Extend, & Extinguish.
Criticism of Microsoft.
Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt (Microsoft).

Now tell me that they're not a bad influence on everything that they touch.

Wow, so FUD is actually an acronym?

 

[Silly.Mikey]

Microsoft makes money because they have leveraged their OS and Office Suite programs into a de facto monopoly. "smoothly running drivers and OS" are not typically things that have applied to Windows or Office.

When forced to compete, MS's recent track record has them getting beaten and badly.

Windows 7 was pretty good though.

That would be true if everyone had the same specs a la Apple. Windows owners dont. Fact is they have to have shit run on pc's that are completely different from each other and have done that well.

But have one peice of HW they themselves designed, and its a stuggle.

Baffling.

 

[Pain]

It's pretty hilarious how much MS underestimated Sony. I think they fully expected Sony to release later then them with specs on par or lower then theirs. I don't know if they expected Sony to have the same DRM though because some of the stuff that had panned were not even possible for Sony to accomplish.

Their DRM and used games policies seem to me were Microsofts way of trying to monopolize that market with EEE.

 

[rawd]

Why is Microsoft so obsessed with Gaf?

I don't really understand how out of all three companies, Microsoft spread their shills like flower petal confetti at a carnival .

It is pretty sad.. Taking to the msg boards and XB1 road tours to sell their super shammy

 

[not_so_special]

Have you ever seen these?

Embrace, Extend, & Extinguish.
Criticism of Microsoft.
Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt (Microsoft).

Now tell me that they're not a bad influence on everything that they touch.

yes they are,thats why i dont trust them,and i have spend a lot of money on the xbox ecosystem,but aint gonna defend them

 

[Perkel]

Maybe we should get back to talking about Tech & forget about all this who shot johnny industry stuff.



All I know is that for the devs to be saying that the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the Xbox One even after the CPU\GPU upclock there has to be something going on that we don't know about or PS4 APU design is just that good.

After 125 pages i doubt there is anything more to discuss without any new info/leak/whatever. This thread already is long beyond what OP was all about

and like in ElTorro gif we are doing same stuff from page to page.

 

[Manmademan]

That would be true if everyone had the same specs a la Apple. Windows owners dont. Fact is they have to have shit run on pc's that are completely different from each other and have done that well.

There are other operating systems that run on PCs far better than windows typically does, Windows 7 aside. Most of these don't have quite the marketshare to make comparing them easy, though.

You CAN look at browser software though. Internet Explorer was by FAR the worst designed browser that ran on their own OS. Firefox, Chrome, and even Opera just crushed IE for years. supposedly IE10 is a good browser, but I don't know anyone that bothers to use it.

But have one peice of HW they themselves designed, and its a stuggle.

MS has designed other hardware. Zune comes to mind, as does Windows Phone and the Surface. All of these sort of rate a "so what?" on the hardware design front.

 

[Mr. PlayStation]

Have you ever seen these?

Embrace, Extend, & Extinguish.
Criticism of Microsoft.
Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt (Microsoft).

Now tell me that they're not a bad influence on everything that they touch.

Isn't there also another thing called Astroturfing, where employees of a certain company, end up blending in as normal people and post favorable reviews/opinions of their product, at places where it attracted negative impressions.

 

[Silly.Mikey]

There are other operating systems that run on PCs far better than windows typically does, Windows 7 aside. Most of these don't have quite the marketshare to make comparing them easy, though.

You CAN look at browser software though. Internet Explorer was by FAR the worst designed browser that ran on their own OS. Firefox, Chrome, and even Opera just crushed IE for years. supposedly IE10 is a good browser, but I don't know anyone that bothers to use it.



MS has designed other hardware. Zune comes to mind, as does Windows Phone and the Surface. All of these sort of rate a "so what?" on the hardware design front.

IE is the number 1 browser used to download other browsers. For me i use FF simply cause it lets me add all those add-ons that make surfing the net more secure and less annoying.

As for the OS, the point was: for a company that specializes in having stuff run on thousands of possible configurations on pc, they should have designing stuff for locked down HW down packed, and they dont. Its absolutely rediculous.

 

[not_so_special]

im very very puzzled about titanfall

in one side..i dont believe all the hype,buzzword,etc etc,seems so prefabricated,and people so overexcited in an non natural way,i dont know im tired of the whole quake,cod run and gun formula,titanfall seems to add just mechs and parkour to that


in the other side,gaf posters who have played the game seems to really like the game


and thats its what puzzled me..its thats? genuine? o self suggestion? ( with my poor english maybe im using the wrong words) because is touted to be the big next thing ( happened before with more games) or are these posters genuine? i dont wanna get into every poster past history to believe his impressions,and shills like the one bishop banned dont help to this

and the worst part is maybe titanfall its an awesome experience who is getting damage with this whole console war thing

 

[Chobel]

IE is the number 1 browser used to download other browsers. For me i use FF simply cause it lets me add all those add-ons that make surfing the net more secure and less annoying.

As for the OS, the point was: for a company that specializes in having stuff run on thousands of possible configurations on pc, they should have designing stuff for locked down HW down packed, and they dont. Its absolutely rediculous.

HAHAHAHAH! A really good one. FF here too.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

im very very puzzled about titanfall

in one side..i dont believe all the hype,buzzword,etc etc,seems so prefabricated,and people so overexcited in an non natural way,i dont know im tired of the whole quake,cod run and gun formula,titanfall seems to add just mechs and parkour to that


in the other side,gaf posters who have played the game seems to really like the game


and thats its what puzzled me..its thats? genuine? o self suggestion? ( with my poor english maybe im using the wrong words) because is touted to be the big next thing ( happened before with more games) or are these posters genuine? i dont wanna get into every poster past history to believe his impressions,and shills like the one bishop banned dont help to this

and the worst part is maybe titanfall its an awesome experience who is getting damage with this whole console war thing

I think it's genuine. Everyone who has played the game has loved it. From journalists to gamers. I think one thing people seem to love about the game is that it's very accessible. AI mixed with real players means you're not constantly dying. Although this may change once a lot of people start playing and some people become very good at it like COD.

I don't think the console war is hurting the game. Maybe not being released on all platforms will. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

Holy fuck @ this thread being 127 pages, I'm going to assume it's a graveyard as well.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

im very very puzzled about titanfall

in one side..i dont believe all the hype,buzzword,etc etc,seems so prefabricated,and people so overexcited in an non natural way,i dont know im tired of the whole quake,cod run and gun formula,titanfall seems to add just mechs and parkour to that


in the other side,gaf posters who have played the game seems to really like the game


and thats its what puzzled me..its thats? genuine? o self suggestion? ( with my poor english maybe im using the wrong words) because is touted to be the big next thing ( happened before with more games) or are these posters genuine? i dont wanna get into every poster past history to believe his impressions,and shills like the one bishop banned dont help to this

and the worst part is maybe titanfall its an awesome experience who is getting damage with this whole console war thing

My only issue is that the hype started, really, before anyone had even touched the game.

However, the reports from people have been positive but, for me, I see no reason to personally be excited about it same way I'm not excited by CoD.

 

[not_so_special]

My only issue is that the hype started, really, before anyone had even touched the game.

However, the reports from people have been positive but, for me, I see no reason to personally be excited about it same way I'm not excited by CoD.

the problem is some of them have played 5 minutes,take the example of andrea on weekend confirmed,she was overexcited..and when asked about the experience..she played only a match..five minutes...she dont know that a lot of his frag were on bots not on real players...she dont know about the lack of single player,etc etc

 

[Silly.Mikey]

HAHAHAHAH! A really good one. FF here too.

If IE was as customizable as FF was, id probably use it more.

Its just like Win8 for me. I dont hate it cause it performs badly, i hate it cause of the interface. I also dislike the IE interface. Thats something imo MS really need to improve. UI designing. They fucking suck at it. Win8 looks like it was made by students as a high school project. And now the Xbox One UI looks just as bad. And this is MS we're talking about!

I for one am glad they had that restructuring and that Balmer is finally leaving. He has no clue what hes doing.

And whats really sad is that we're going to have to wait till the console AFTER the xbox one to get something properly designed. Its fucking pathetic.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

My only issue is that the hype started, really, before anyone had even touched the game.

When has this ever not happened? Particularly after an E3?

Assassins Creed? (the original)

Watch Dogs?

Drive Club?

The Division?

The Order?

 

[not_so_special]

When has this ever not happened? Particularly after an E3?

Assassins Creed? (the original)

Watch Dogs?

Drive Club?

The Division?

The Order?

In the case off titanfall hits more evident

 

[Some Nobody]

They really don't. People should begin accepting the cold harsh reality that was evident over a decade ago, and that is the fact the majority of people don't care enough for Nintendo franchises for them to sustain a console. The Wii was a big fluke and its success was more to do with Wii Sports, not Zelda or Mario or some other obscure Nintendo IP which some fans will vehemently claim to be popular. The industry went in one direction and Nintendo isolated themselves by going another. Industry support is important, and it's why Sony and Microsoft are in much better positions. Good luck to them but they're not long for the console world.

Neither is Sony or Microsoft. I honestly don't see a PS5/Xboxwhatever unless they push one out between 2018-2019.

Either way, if Nintendo dies then I'm stuck with the horrible future of a Sony monopoly because I just can't fucking stand MS for some reason.

 

[Killroyskbg]

Power aside I am just glad we now have x86 architecture across all platforms (except WiiU). Hopefully this will lead to more games getting ported to more platforms so more can enjoy them since having to develop for these platforms will be so much easier then last gen and porting. It will also lower the cost of developing games meaning better games for the same budget. Hopefully no more time between releases like GTA V to PC or crysis to ps/xbox. Everybody as a gamer should benefit from this regardless of platform choice.

It will be really interesting though to see how these platforms will perform in a year or two when developers really have had their time with them. All launch titles (especially 3rd party) I believe will not tell the tale and the differences will be smaller than the numbers say. Both because of time pressure and (even though they are much easier) it will take some time to learn and optimize code for the hardware and the new solutions provided with it.

 

[frizby]

Holy fuck @ this thread being 127 pages, I'm going to assume it's a graveyard as well.

 

[StuBurns]

Neither is Sony or Microsoft. I honestly don't see a PS5/Xboxwhatever unless they push one out between 2018-2019.

Either way, if Nintendo dies then I'm stuck with the horrible future of a Sony monopoly because I just can't fucking stand MS for some reason.

I don't think anyone thinks Nintendo are going to die.

 

[onQ123]

Honest question.

50% faster = 50% more powerful?

I really dont know much when it comes to how everything works out, but I think I understand that the faster you can pull information, it will obviously improve the performance. But is being 50% faster a direct correlation to being 50% more powerful? Does nothing else figure in to the puzzle?

When talking about processing yes faster = more powerful.


FLOPS = FLoating-point Operations Per Second

so GPU's are judged by how much they can process in a second.

PS4 GPU can process 1.84 trillion floating-point operations per second & Xbox One GPU can process 1.31 trillion floating-point operations per second.

so it's around 40.66% faster.

 

[Manmademan]

I don't think anyone thinks Nintendo are going to die.

die? nah. i think they're done with consoles after the wiiU though.

at best we'll see some kind of hybrid handheld/console device.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

die? nah. i think they're done with consoles after the wiiU though.

at best we'll see some kind of hybrid handheld/console device.

You never know.

Game production costs are a pretty big deal.

Even in current gen you have huge name studios and publishers disappearing and that's to develop sub 720p quality games with current gen limitations.

Anyone who thinks many game studios will even want to spend the extra resources maxing out next gen consoles any time soon will be deluding themselves.

The Wii U could end up being the "easy money" option.

Or it could not........at all.......I just feel its somehow wrong to count Nintendo out.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

I was not really interested about the power gap in the first place since I was more interested in the games shown to me during e3, particularly FFXV, MGSV and KH3, and I already had my console choice buying all its iterations and handhelds. I then learned that those 3 were not exclusives anymore. Suddenly I was more interested with PS4 having a large power gap with xbox one or just its power and specs in general. This mean I'll be getting the absolute best version( for consoles only, PC guys ), the definitive version of those 3 games when I buy the PS4 and I think that's what drew me more and maybe others more to the PS4 even if Xbox one has very good exclusives such as Ryse and Forza.
Microsoft's DRM policies drew me away from them when I heard rumors about it since internet's kinda weak where I live so it really was PS4 for me at the time. I'm not really a multiplayer kind of guy so I think you know what I'll choose even if you give me reasons such as better online experience and that's what the PS brand is better know for which is single player stuff.

I bought the PS3 for GOW3, FFVersusXIII, MGS4 and FF7remake and I think people who bought the 360 for their sequels and compelling exclusives were the same too. Maybe if I had an OG xbox and played MS' exclusives then, maybe I too would have bought the 360 and the One next gen but the better multiplats, easier to develop for and cheaper in price that PS4 has gives it a much better leverage than the One if you owned both the 360 and the ps3.

From one junior to another welcome to Gaf

Exclusives are very important. I'm mainly a single player guy too but I plan on playing some next gen co-op with Destiny and The Division. In regards to exclusives I appreciate Sony supporting the ps3 with great exclusives. I mean just this year alone has been an amazing year. They could have not released some of their bigger exclusives from this year like God of War, Last of Us or even Beyond Two Souls and somehow released them with the PS4 which would have given them an amazing launch window line up but I guess they did the right thing and supported the ps3. I respect that and it bothers me when MS keeps talking about their xbone exclusives when they have left 360 owners high and dry the last couple of years. I expect the same kind of non commitment from MS down the line. They'll launch with a lot of exclusives and use it to gain market share and in a few years the exclusives will slowly disappear. Nothing from their behavior tells me otherwise

 

[Skeff]

Neither is Sony or Microsoft. I honestly don't see a PS5/Xboxwhatever unless they push one out between 2018-2019.

Either way, if Nintendo dies then I'm stuck with the horrible future of a Sony monopoly because I just can't fucking stand MS for some reason.

haha, I was going to say your username reminds me of another poster on here called senjustsu sage, I'm sure you know why, but that last sentence is the exact opposite of his opinion, I thought I'd just point out the similarities and opposites and how it made me laugh.

To be honest, I think we have 1 more console gen after this one, and maybe that will be a sony monopoly in the sense of pure games consoles

I'd like to clarify that point though, I think there will be an Xbox One 2 or whatever, but it will be less of a video game console and more of a multimedia device, less for the hardcore gamer and more for the casual/ TV watcher, essentially they'll put the most powerful console they can inside the kinect casing and offer a cloud service. Sony will continue with a PS5, it will be a strong piece of hardware capable of playing games, They will also release a Playstation Cloud service though on some hardware somewhere near what the equivalent of a VitaTV would be in 10 years. Then they will focus on Cloud gaming the gen after which would perhaps be in 15 years or so and certainly feasible for most of the world with the Playstation 5 still selling in countries without great internet infrastructure. Nintendo may or may not release another console, I think it would be more profitable for them to go multiplatform console wise and do mobile gaming.

I could imagine a deal at the end of the PS4 generation that resulted in Sony not releasing a handheld and offering Gaikai on the next nintendo handheld and nintendo not releasing a console and offering their 1st party games on PS5.

I ultimately see the three companies as diversifying into:

Microsoft: casual subscription service offering Apps over games + on live
Sony: Home games console + Gaikai.
Nintendo: Handheld + third party on Sony.

I'm aware this is probably going to be laughed at and I will be called a sony pony, but it's my 2 cents on your comments.

 

[Manmademan]

You never know.

Game production costs are a pretty big deal.

Even in current gen you have huge name studios and publishers disappearing and that's to develop sub 720p quality games with current gen limitations.

Anyone who thinks many game studios will even want to spend the extra resources maxing out next gen consoles any time soon will be deluding themselves.

The Wii U could end up being the "easy money" option.

Or it could not........at all.......I just feel its somehow wrong to count Nintendo out.

It's dead, chief.

are development costs high? sure. This actually HURTS the WiiU more than next gen though.

The PS4/Xbone/PC are similar enough in capability that they can share assets and code, to some extent. Development costs are essentially a fraction of what they would be otherwise.

The WiiU? odd man out. it can't run assets or code designed for next gen. it's simply too weak. this isn't just resolution, it's complexity of models, physics, AI, you name it. Once the PS3/360 are no longer being supported (EA/Activision give it two years) The WiiU will have to give publishers a reason to develop engines and assets exclusively for it. It doesn't have anywhere near the marketshare to make this possible.

 

[B_Boss]

haha, I was going to say your username reminds me of another poster on here called senjustsu sage, I'm sure you know why, but that last sentence is the exact opposite of his opinion, I thought I'd just point out the similarities and opposites and how it made me laugh.

To be honest, I think we have 1 more console gen after this one, and maybe that will be a sony monopoly in the sense of pure games consoles

I'd like to clarify that point though, I think there will be an Xbox One 2 or whatever, but it will be less of a video game console and more of a multimedia device, less for the hardcore gamer and more for the casual/ TV watcher, essentially they'll put the most powerful console they can inside the kinect casing and offer a cloud service. Sony will continue with a PS5, it will be a strong piece of hardware capable of playing games, They will also release a Playstation Cloud service though on some hardware somewhere near what the equivalent of a VitaTV would be in 10 years. Then they will focus on Cloud gaming the gen after which would perhaps be in 15 years or so and certainly feasible for most of the world with the Playstation 5 still selling in countries without great internet infrastructure. Nintendo may or may not release another console, I think it would be more profitable for them to go multiplatform console wise and do mobile gaming.

I could imagine a deal at the end of the PS4 generation that resulted in Sony not releasing a handheld and offering Gaikai on the next nintendo handheld and nintendo not releasing a console and offering their 1st party games on PS5.

I ultimately see the three companies as diversifying into:

Microsoft: casual subscription service offering Apps over games + on live
Sony: Home games console + Gaikai.
Nintendo: Handheld + third party on Sony.

I'm aware this is probably going to be laughed at and I will be called a sony pony, but it's my 2 cents on your comments.

Hey Sony & Nintendo nearly hit it off years ago....if your theory is correct, Nintendo wouldn't be in such a position to reject Sony as they were those years ago and thus would be definitely viable....sounds nice actually but yet saddening lol....the death of Nintendo would truly be an end of an era for me personally (somewhat like the death of their magazine .). Certainly not irrational and quite thought provoking.

 

[Skeff]

You never know.

Game production costs are a pretty big deal.

Even in current gen you have huge name studios and publishers disappearing and that's to develop sub 720p quality games with current gen limitations.

Anyone who thinks many game studios will even want to spend the extra resources maxing out next gen consoles any time soon will be deluding themselves.

The Wii U could end up being the "easy money" option.

Or it could not........at all.......I just feel its somehow wrong to count Nintendo out.

I'm confident the PS4 is the easiest and therefore cheapest console to develop on this upcoming generation and the user base and therefore potential sales is much higher, it also has a better Account situation for the purchase of digital games, which for a mid tier developer could be a better distribution channel than Retail.

Also another way of looking at the power options is that, you don't have to max the graphics if you want to release a game, a powerful console will take less optimization to get your designed game running at the same quality as a weaker console.

Though I'm not writing the Wii U off, there's a chance it goes on Oprah or something and people suddenly realize it's the successor to the Wii and not just an add on controller and go buy one.

Hey Sony & Nintendo nearly hit it off years ago....if your theory is correct, Nintendo wouldn't be in such a position to reject Sony as they were those years ago and thus would be definitely viable....sounds nice actually but yet saddening lol....the death of Nintendo would truly be an end of an era for me personally (somewhat like the death of their magazine .). Certainly not irrational and quite thought provoking.

Well, nicely it wouldn't be the end of nintendo, only the end of the hardware, the IP's and style would live on under the Nintendo brand both on the handheld and console, just the console would say Sony on it. I think it would actually be far more profitable for both companies as both would retain there biggest selling hardware market whilst having some of the competition removed, and both would sell more software, e.g. Killzone mercenary would have been released on 4DS which would comprise 3DS and likely Vita owners, and Smash Bros. would sell more units as it would be on PS5 which would be purchased by PS4 and WiiU owners.

The companies would need to decide if they wanted a big piece of a pie, or a smaller piece %wise of a much larger pie, which gives you more pie in the end.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Neither is Sony or Microsoft. I honestly don't see a PS5/Xboxwhatever unless they push one out between 2018-2019.

Either way, if Nintendo dies then I'm stuck with the horrible future of a Sony monopoly because I just can't fucking stand MS for some reason.

The Sony monopoly of the ps2 generation wasn't too bad