PlayStation 4 Orbis

[sang]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/playstation...081700844.html

There is some rumors about the PS4 from a leaker


If its true


The good

The new machine will be capable of playing games at extremely high resolutions up to 4096x2160

It will have something called 'super-HD' not the first super toshiba has also spoken about super-HD TV

Will launch in Q4 2013

The bad

Machine will 'block' second-hand games

Cant use hard PS3 Games

Blu-ray is now fucked

Game will always need to be authenticated online when first loaded.

[Starblade]

I'm not sure about the rest of that but 2013 sounds too soon. The motion stuff everyone's been doing was done to increase the consoles' lifespans for another couple years, unless they're admitting Move is a wash.

[Sohtaraz]

Too soon, 'super-HD' altho a nice idea is no where near from my understandmend on actual home theater settings.

Also, Super-HD might also mean increased game development costs thus a 'reason' to bumb game prices further up.

And everything else sounds really more like a death sentence to console gaming as it was (Hurray \o/) and the return of good old pc gaming that demands more innovation and longevity of games.

[Mokino]

The locking games to one system was also rumoured for the next XBox.

Sohtaraz, I don't see this meaning anything close to the "death of console gaming." PC games already have such restrictive DRM (Steam, Origin, UbiDRM, etc.) and console gamers are even more likely to put up with it.

[Sohtaraz]

Well what I did mean by that is the console gaming era at the moment is depended on the 3 month sale period and then the game dies off and you don't get sales profits becouse of that. Now that game sales will most likely drop (or remain the same but people will be more careful with games they buy since used games are out of the picture/piratism will take its place) the entire huge hype+marketing for 3 months becomes less usable strategy to maintaining 'avarage' consumers thus resulting in actual innovation, not specticle rides, for games and longer lifespan (see 6-8 hour campaing games).


While its true this restrictive DRM has existed for PC games for a long time, you have to remember there are no used games sales on PC and piracy is considered to be the number one cause amongs developers not to make triple A titles for PC market.

So my point was that if people are smart and wise up, and instead of people spending more money on console gaming will suffer at its current form. And yes I do consider it to be the death of it since alot of titles in console gaming at the moment are depended on the resale value (see entire COD, madden franchises, nhl).

Edit: Yeah it was rumoured along time ago by the developers demanding it.

Edit2: At the moment some games are really overpriced, and I don't think this will in current economical situation amongst the world further encourage spending even on the entertainment front.

[Vintage]

The new consoles will cost as much as a budget gaming PC you can put together yourself, and they will still be far less powerful. I don't see why anyone would purchase a console when you can just build your own PC for the same price and it's not only better at gaming but can also an infinite amount of things a console cannot do.

And yeah, console gamers won't care about the DRM since they don't know any better.

[Ewokz]

I'm not really a fan of no pre-owned games unless they plan on implementing some way to obtain older no longer produced games. With PC its not too hard to obtain a new copy of an old game, but console gamers will find it much harder to find new old games. Whats annoying about it in particular will be games that get broken through age and need to be replaced, for instance I had to pick up a new COD:WAW 360 game due to mine being scratched to death in an accident. Had the game been less popular I wouldn't have been able to replace it under this proposed system.
I had another similar thing happen a few years ago, I had a weird itching to play "Legend of the Dragoon" on PS1, having lost one of the four discs I was basically boned, luckily I just hopped on Amazon and picked it up second hand. Under this system I wouldn't have been able to complete that game.

@Vintage it does have the advantage of being far easier to play when your feeling lazy and want to lie on your couch, which you can't really do with a gaming pc. Not until companies regularly port over controller support anyway. Some games are also console only, such as Halo, Gears of war etc.

[ÜberJumper]

I buy all my games new so I probably wouldn't run into the "blocking used games" thing, but I'll be damned if I buy any console just on the principle of that. Fuck Microsoft AND Sony if they block "used" games from working.

(Now, if the next gen consoles don't sell "physical" copies of games, which I expect will be the way they go, then all bets are off)

[Mokino]

The new consoles will cost as much as a budget gaming PC you can put together yourself, and they will still be far less powerful. I don't see why anyone would purchase a console when you can just build your own PC for the same price and it's not only better at gaming but can also an infinite amount of things a console cannot do.

Because consoles are much easier to use and develop for. You don't need to worry about hardware requirements or compatibility. You won't run into those odd situations where something simply decides to not work due to your hardware configuration, etc. Consoles definitely have their advantages over a PC with even comparable hardware to them because the games can be optimised for a single platform.

And, no, you usually cannot build a PC to run games at the same level of the consoles in the first year or two due to the optimisation the console games get. With a PC you have to factor in other things consuming your system resources (security software, DRM, operating system, etc) that a console does not have or need.

And I refuse to buy a system that locks games to one system. I also refuse to buy any game that forces an always online internet connection (sorry Diablo 3, any Starcraft 2 expansion, Sim City, etc.) unless, of course, it's a game built for MP only like an MMO.

[Sentinel]

And yeah, console gamers won't care about the DRM since they don't know any better.

It's a sad state of affairs when elitism has become so systemic withing the gaming culture than statements like this can be excreted and accepted without anyone batting an eye.
"Console gamers" are no more a class of people than car owners.

People already kick up a fuss over the online unlock codes which are becoming the norm with new releases, and there's been more than enough whining over the rumour of console DRM.

Killing the second hand game sales market won't bother me so long as they offer a viable digital store where I can buy old games instead. So long as they develop the PSN store a bit more by offering sales and reducing the price of old games to make it worthwhile, then I'll have no issue with this.

I'm not happy about it not having backwards compatibility with the PS3, but hopefully that won't turn out to be true.

[Misiok]

@Sentinel - so you're okay with re-buying stuff you already own (as PS4 won't have any backwards compatibility) if you decide to sell your PS3 but still want to 'keep' some of your favourite games?


Console gamers DON'T know better when they can get milked for a tonne of DLC, making devs think they can milk PC for DLC (and well, they can) and so on.

And for the record, I own a decent PC and a PS3, and am disappointed how PS3 handles online 'communities'.

[Starblade]

Nipping this in the bud, no PC/Console superiority shit. It's tired and played out.

[FriendlyFire]

@Mokino: I assume you must've missed all the whining about how hard the PS2 and 3 are to develop for? The PC might have multiple configurations, but they're always following very established standards (x86-64, DirectX, etc.) that make them fairly uniform. In comparison, consoles tend to get rather weird with their hardware (like the PS3's Cell processor). Sure, there's only one configuration, but it's so alien it might be more of a pain.

Saying PC is harder to develop for usually is just a cop out. Developers and publishers will go where the money is, it's as simple as that.

[Shuma]

Sounds as stupid as the PS3, as in, it'll cost a thousand bucks and Sony will bleed money like crazy again. As for the no-used game thing, i think it's stupid to say that console gamers don't know any better, i bet most of them buy their games from gamestop and used, this will probably end up killing gamestop and the like, which is obviously the plan. I wonder if gamestop and the like would even stock this consoles.

We don't really know much about the PS4 and 720, but right now the only one that sounds interesting to me is the WiiU.

[Ewokz]

This is definitely going to be the nail in the coffin for GAME, no way in hell they'll make a come back after this development.

[Mokino]

@FriendlyFire, there weren't complaints about the PS2. The PS3 suffers because Sony used silly proprietary tech but the other two consoles don't and I suspect the PS4 won't either.

The 360 is basically a slimmed down PC with standard hardware. Developing for it is basically PC development except that you know exactly what kind of hardware the game is going to be running on. It's actually using a version of DirectX. Yes, HAL and that abstract PC development to some extent but you still need to keep in mind that there's a wide range of PC hardware out there. It's still rare to see a PC game that runs absolutely perfect on every system that meets the recommended spec (and, ironically, most of those that do are, surprise, console ports.)

Right now this DRM thing is just a rumour and it's honestly suicide for ANY of the companies to adopt it unless they are absolutely sure all of the competition will be doing the same (it looks very unlikely Nintendo will.) I don't think (or rather hope) that Microsoft and Sony are not this stupid.

[Shuma]

I'm pretty sure that Sony is in fact, that stupid. And Microsoft can afford to be stupid. Then again, is it really surprising? Publishers have made it pretty clear that they hate the used game market, it would be no surprise that EA and the like would be pushing the console companies to help them do something about it.

Either way, even if it goes bad for them, i doubt it's suicide, well, maybe it is suicide for Sony. Now that i think about it, how much does this even affect the console manufacturer? Microsoft and Sony don't really make that many games themselves, hell, does Microsoft even own developers? I thought they let Bungie go, do they own others? What about Sony? I know they own IPs, but do they own developers?

[FriendlyFire]

The PS2, was, in fact, quite hard to develop for. Its architecture was just as bizarre, if not more so, than the PS3's (it had a custom GPU as well as a custom CPU, whereas the RSX in the PS3 is close to a 7800). Why didn't developers complain back then? Because it sold like hot cakes.

Also, the 360 is fairly close to a PC, yes, but there are still some fairly major differences, namely that it uses a PPC architecture as opposed to x86. When you want to get every last drop of performance out of the hardware, the differences between PPC and x86 become important.

Finally, I'll just say that console ports tend to be the worst of the lot as far as performance goes. I'm sorry but I've heard many, many more horror stories about bad PC ports than the reverse.

[DrRansom]

When I first heard that the Xbox 720 was going to not allow re-sold games, I thought that would not be the case unless Microsoft could get total agreement from the other console developers. Now, given the PS4 rumors along those same lines, the future of resale in the game market looks extremely grim.

I have a different take on what it means. I think that the lack of resale will push games to pretty much only buy the "must have" games of the season; that means that the number of high selling games will decrease, while the sales of the remaining high selling games will dramatically increase. This is a byproduct of the over emphasis on online play; if a FPS, for example, doesn't attract a sufficient sized audience, then its online play will suffer. If the gamer knows that his fellow gamers won't be buying as many games, then the gamer will logically only buy those games which he knows will have the largest online community. The 2nd rank of AAA games, the AA+ rank, so to speak, will fail miserably. No one will want to take a chance, if they have no secondary market to recoup some of their losses.

Net Result: AAA FPS market thins out considerably. (Note: this will slingshot massively against the big game developers; or, those who do not release the 'best in class' games)

What will be the saving grace, at least for the XBox, will be the next generation of the Arcade games. I suspect that arcade games will be the ripest area for console success in the next generation; as only a few AAA games, with their 60 - 70 dollar price tags, will be hyper-successful. Also, Arcade games will probably see the greatest innovation, as the risks are low and the gamers may be willing to take a shot with the low price point.

[Sentinel]

@Sentinel - so you're okay with re-buying stuff you already own (as PS4 won't have any backwards compatibility) if you decide to sell your PS3 but still want to 'keep' some of your favourite games?

No. I specifically said the complete opposite in my post. If it doesn't have backwards compatibility I'd be disappointed.

[Misiok]

@up - I meant backwards compatibility and used only PS3 games as an example. My bad.