Except it did come back and there's nothing you can say to change that.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pachter: PS5 to be a half step, release in 2019 with PS4 BC
- Thread starter bitbydeath
- Start date
Except it did come back and there's nothing you can say to change that.
If you suffer from myopic geocentrism, sure.
Dirtyshubb
Member
His point is that when you compare sales the PS3 was always selling more than 360 did at the same point in its life.
It did of course increase sales a lot when the PS3 slim came out but it didn't 'come back' because it was always in front.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
The whole point that I started with is that the PS3 gave their competitor MS a year on the market uncontested, giving up a 10m unit lead. This resulted in:
(i) The PS3 fighting back for most of its life to try to close that 10m unit gap which it only did manage 7+ years after the gen was over (that's hardly an achievement, and for most of the gen that mattered PS3 was behind the XB360 - in LTD console installed base).
(ii) The PS3 losing significant consumer and gaming media mindshare, which impacted sales in their biggest western territories
The PS3 should have been able to handily go on to sell 100m units, but it didn't because of the loss of initial sales momentum (due to both price and launch period) that caused it's sales trajectory to come in well under where Sony consoles had sold in the past (and well under where the PS4 will clearly land at the end of this gen.)
All of this is why Sony will NOT be looking to repeat that mistake.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
It was never "in front" until the very end of the gen.. That the PS3 was selling more globally since launch is hardly relevant, because they had already given up a 10+m unit lead to the 360 before they even hit retail stores.
Most of the gen. the PS3 spent trying to claw back at that gap, which it eventually succeeded in, but by that time the cycle was already over.
Bitch Pudding
Member
There was a strategic reason for PS3's late launch and high price. Yes, they took a beading by XBOX in some major countries, but then again, it is also thanks to PS3 that today you can buy Blu-Rays everywhere, not HD-DVDs. And Sony, together with some other major BDA members, earns royalties with every Blu-Ray and Blu-Ray player being sold. Which is not bad given that BR is most likely the last optical disc industry format.
DonMigs85
Member
I wonder if there's enough videophiles to sustain 4K Blu-Ray, since the average Joe is content with Netflix quality.
Bitch Pudding
Member
He, I think if there's a single company with enough customer insights to answer that question, it's the one who didn't put a 4K BR drive into their premium SKU...
Thats a Greay Area
Member
The PS3's late launch was NOT strategic. It was a major screw up that cost them a year.
This has been well documented.
After watching the DF video on Vega64 I'm not confident that anybody is launching a console with that tech before 2020 unless they can do something about the potential power requirements.
MS will test that for Sony so they can see how many people jump to the new box because of that.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
It was both. The strategy was to ship it with a Blu Ray drive to push the standard. It worked. The catastrophe is that they were only able to produce the drive is mass quantities by mid-2016, hence the delay from spring to fall release.
I think physical media was still a viable thing when BR first came out, so basing a machine around a drive like PS2/PS3 really worked. Now, though, not so sure.
Talking about PS3/360. So the PS3 clawed it back at the end of the gen, this was a thing that happened.
Isn't the big tale about attachment rate for games though? Sony didn't ever manage to topple the 360 on that, and I feel that it only did as well as it did thanks to the consistent IP investment.
Isn't the big tale about attachment rate for games though? Sony didn't ever manage to topple the 360 on that, and I feel that it only did as well as it did thanks to the consistent IP investment.
Thats a Greay Area
Member
Ummm no. Cell fabrication was the issue.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
Bitch Pudding
Member
Cell fabrication as well as Blu-Ray diode cost of production. Just have a look what that thing cost in 2006, when only a single supplier was able to produce them.
Thats a Greay Area
Member
LOL,Nah...Thats PR. Go read David Shippy's book - The Race for a New Game Machine -
I'll take the word of one of the principles on IBM teams that designed the Cell AND Xenon before a PR statement.
Also, the reason the 360 launched first was that MS spent a ton of money to have a backup fab ready. They didn't have to wait for a retool.
hanspampel
Banned
No. Nvidia has no x86 license and technology
They could go Intel + NVidia but this is definitely too expensive. They could also do AMD + NVidia...
hanspampel
Banned
They want one single SOC
They won't go back to dedicated CPU and GPU
There is no way i can see that happen.
So we're stuck with AMD then.
"Stuck with" is a little harsh, but correct.
AMD may be relegated to second fiddle, but they produce some excellent bang-for-buck hardware and play an important role in keeping the industry moving.
Thats a Greay Area
Member
There were several contributing factors to the cost of the system for sure. But the delay was down to the fact the cell was not ready.
Duchess O'Death
Member
The One S came out last year.
Cell wasn't ready for the end of 2005 (their first launch target).
Their next target was spring 06.
They couldn't meet that either so it became end of 06 (spring 07 for europe).
Cell was ready somewhere between these dates (end of 05-end of 06).
The reason they launched at the end of 06 and 5 months later in europe was blu-ray, because it was never ready before that date.
Which is different as it is a refresh, not a new console.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
My money is still on the Raven Ridge APU, with modified gpu bits. Early benchmarks leaked, and are looking pretty good. Grey Hawk would be better, and is set for 2019, but i'm not sure if it would be ready to build a console around by that time.
Maybe they'll make a decent jump with Navi.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
It does help when your partner (IBM) sells the chip (the PPE core) you helped them build to the competition (MS) and the competition rushes to market without completing QA of the SoC (hello RRoD issue... :/)...
Papacheeks
Banned
I honestly believe we will get something akin to a custom Zen APU with Navi or something similar in architecture.
TheRealTalker
Banned
Pachter aside I wouldn't want the PS5 to be a half step
for me the number represents a full console cycle... and now that we went back to X86 architecture for PlayStation the better have BC
for me the number represents a full console cycle... and now that we went back to X86 architecture for PlayStation the better have BC
That's pretty much a given.
The question is, how much semi-custom Zen and Navi silicon will PS5 be packing? (CPU cores & threads, GPU Compute Units / stream processors, etc) at what clock speeds, and how much RAM and memory bandwidth.
Those are the unknowns, this far out from 2019/2020 and without having any idea what Sony & AMD are working on. Edit: And more specifically, what Mark Cerny is figuring for target performance.
Wonder Peter
Member
I would love the PS5 had BC that ran games with the Pro patches, I would probably buy it at launch if that was the case.
Do we know how the engines are set up for PS4/Pro enhancements? Could the ability to run even better on more powerful hardware already be there or would each game need to be remastered or run at Pro levels?
Papacheeks
Banned
If they stay with similar architecture and write the API's for the OS it should in theory be able to scale once it goes out to dev kits. It would take some big software coding on Sony's part to make sure it would scale.
AMD is in a bad financial situation and the VEGA launch is a disaster. They might go under before 9th generation starts.
2blackcats
Member
How are they in a bad financial situation? A quick look at their stock shows their fine.
Stock as in... stock price?
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...oars-after-strong-guidance-earnings-beat.html
Has there been new news about AMD?
50%? Not even close. Wii won last gen and sold more than 360 and PS3.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Thisisnothowthisworks.gif
From your own link: https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/?symbol=AMD&tab=financials
High debt, every year net losses and negative cash flow from operations. Getting in the black for a FY would be new news.
Well, I would definitely like to see more of a difference between PS5 and next Xbox in terms of architecture, with each console having different strengths, like it used to be in every past generation. It would not surprise me if Nvidia gets a design win for one or the other. Now while I do want full backward compatibility in PS5, it wouldn't bother me a bit if either Sony or Microsoft went with Nvidia's next GPU architecture after Volta, whatever they're working on for 7nm for 2019/2020.
DonMigs85
Member
But what about the CPU? Other than Apple's chips no ARM design can approach the IPC and performance level of Ryzen or Intel's Core chips. I don't want a next-gen console with 16 Cortex A73 or Denver cores.
I would love to see an Apple / Sony partnership on the PS5. Apples silicon teams have been on a tear for years. If their GPU work started with the A11 winds up being competitive then things get really interesting, though I dont really see the necessary business synergies without being part of the same organization and Im afraid thats only the stuff of fangirl dreams.
You can say goodbye than to bc.