Ben-DutkaWell, price remains a definite stumbling block.
With all these rumors floating around about the PlayStation 4 – none of which are true, as far as we're concerned – we wanted to know how much you'd pay for Sony's next machine.
The majority said they'd shell out between $300 and $400, but a whole lot more said they wouldn't go any higher than $300, which might be concerning. After all, the PS3 emerged at the disagreeable $600 price. Of course, things didn't go so well at the start of the system's lifespan, and the high price was a definite detraction. Next time around, might Sony make their new PlayStation more accessible by releasing it with a decent price tag? There were a few of you who said you'd go over $600, but even so…
This week, we want to know what you think about Catherine . It has received a few great reviews in Japan and we're hoping for something refreshing and even tantalizing. Remember, though, this question isn't about the game's potential quality; it's just asking about your interest. Are you up for this horrific, erotic puzzler? Or is it just not your thing? Or might really high reviews change your mind?
I choose "Over 600" and I didn't like the catherine demo becase I got stuck at the 2nd dream.
$600 is considerably to high when you factor in Sony's inability to catch the 360 in North America.
Id be fine with between 300 and 400. But I wouldn't be getting it close to launch, as I'm sure there would be some quirks to work out. Let's face it, everything new has a few quirks to work out, but that's how people learn. And ya gotta love that.
The catherine demo is sick. I've only done the 1st dream, but so far I'm diggin the hell outta it. I'm gonna get more into tomorrow on my day off. But I'm thinkin already its a must buy.
I think Sony will be able to offer PS4 tech at a lower price and so it will come in around 400 in 2014. That'll be fine with me.
I dunno if I'll be getting Catherine day 1 but I will be getting it because the demo was great. It was top quality and very different from what you usually see, I just have to have it in my collection and can't wait to follow that story. I like how your text messages affect the story and stuff. I can see why even the evil forces at IGN had to give it a 9.
I chose $400-500 because that's how much I'd actually be willing to pay. I'd perfer $400 or less obviously. =P
Last edited by Claire C on 7/17/2011 10:40:00 PM
Indeed. I'd pay up to $500 (perhaps more if it was really worth it) but definitely agree with a 4-500 range with my preference being the lower end of that range.
Do you not think Sony will make the console worth buying at a higher price mr lander???
Depends what you mean by worth buying.
If it will play every generation of PS games made PS1 – PS4 plus PSP and PS Minis and PlayStation Suite along with being a fully up to date BluRay specification, full 3D in 1080p, media card reader, over engineered cooling system and bundled Move components, then hey, why not. I'd pay $500 for that.
PSP game res is really small for it to look good upscaled to 720p, as for PSP minis that should be a given, PSSuite is a category? aren't those the same games as in the PSN only with different DRM?. Anyway, what I would love for it to have is the physical EE and the other chip (forgot its name) on the actual PS4 itself. But with that configuration you have going on, don't expect sony to throw in an HDMI cable for free.
PlayStation suite is a separate category and includes games specifically developed for PlayStation suite devices (of which Vita is one, as is the Xperia Play). PSP games could be up-res'd much like PS1/PS2 games are on the original PS3 phats.
With a PS4 containing considerably more computing power and GPU, there is no reason to include the PS2 hardware on the motherboard at all. That was done with the PS3 because there was no way to properly emulate the GS chip in the PS2 with the PS3 hardware – that should give you an idea of how capable the PS2 is. A PS4 may include sufficient computing power on the CPU to fully emulate both the EE and GS from the PS2. In that way it could manage it. I don't think we'll see the PS2 chipset included unless a single chip version with negligible cost and power requirements comes along, but even then perhaps not because it really adds to the complexity of the design.
Cesar_ser_4,
That chip in the PS2 you were thinking of was called the "Emotion" chip
Nope. He mentioned the "EE" (Emotion Engine). He was referring to the GPU, which was just called the "Graphics Synthesiser" (or GS, as in High's reply).
Last edited by Fane1024 on 7/21/2011 4:51:59 AM
I'm buying Catherine on Day One simply because it's different and I need something like that right about now. I'll just learn how to play via Super Easy and work my way through tougher difficulty levels as I go.
I said $400-500 for a PS4 though I wonder if I'll be done with video gaming by the time it shows.
I think this game deserves just a try, I'm sure this game is different to everything in the library now, so it deserves to be played at least. It's always good to see developers trying new stuff an mixing it with good stories.
Though I'm certain this in not for everyone, I'm 100% sure this would leave at least a little mark in this gen. And what better to try it in PS3 to enjoy it the most!
Realistically, I think a decent portion of PS3 users today have gotten a better idea of how Sony is likely to operate when they unleash their next next-gen hardware.
There may not be such a huge rush as in previous iterations to get the machine. It may be evident that gamers of this current generation will hold onto their PS3's for longer, purchasing cheaper games to fill up their back catalogue; and rather wait a further 2 years – say 2016/17 before entering the PS4 fray.
We have read countless times that this community wants the PS3 to last longer and too enjoy their investment for a greater amount of time. If this is the case PS4 sales would be steady but no necessary huge to begin with.
I mayself would rather hold back and see where the technology is heading. It won't take long for Sony to revise their hardware if they feel they got the release version wrong cost wise.
Saying that, Sony as a company could also have learnt a great many things from the PS3. They may be engineering the PS4 from the ground up to be "cost" efficient from the outset. In addition, expensive technology parts such as Blu-Ray player mechanisms and lenses are cheap. Other components have also come down in price.
Its been mentioned here before that the PS4 will be an evolution of the PS3. The architecture my change, more memory, faster Cell and a top of the line GPU, but, a lot of the ground work, operations infrastructure and PSN development has already taken place. We have helped subsidies this already; therefore it is only logical to think that PS4 should be competitively priced and yet still be in the order of 2 to 3 times more powerful than the current generation.
I think a $399 price tag is realistic for a PS4… but we will have to wait and see…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
I agree with what you say mr Q. But what we have to understand is that there are two types of prices… the prices the machine is actually worth, and the price the consumer is willing to pay. We cannot be sure that what we want to pay is what the machine will cost. Just look at what the majority of people said. That they wouldn't pay more than 300 dollars… Really? Clearly they don't want to support Sony. So lemme ask you this mr Qubex. Do you really think you can find yourself a nice little set up that can pump 1080p 60 fps at a price lower than 400 dollars launch ESRP?. With bluetooth connectivity, standard b/g/n wi-fi, wireless remote, and support for multi layered BDs, with backwards compatibility (if sony doesn't decide to go for a completely different architecture that is not compatible with the current gen games) whilst still be able to play BD movies DVDs and CDs, and have a 500 gb hard drive, and still expect sony to drop in an hdmi cable just to be generous… then sr you're in for a surprise… This is sony we're talking about.
i do fear that ps3 owners are the type that don't make day1p purchases. that is a pattern i have observed this gen when it comes to exclusives. 1080p 60fps and i'm there day1 no matter the cost.
Consumer electronics life cycles start with early adopters and then as costs of production fall, prices fall and more buyers become interested and jump on board. It's actually very unusual to have any CE device as the first of it's generation be immediately mainstreamed. The PS3 would have fared better at a $500 price point for the 60GB and a $400 for the 20GB at launch. It would still have been in the usual model, but the sticker shock initially would have been less severe.
I think the new system is likely to land at $399.99, but wouldn't be shocked to see it at $499.99 for a fully spec'd SKU.
Ha, Sony would say; "We don't comment on speculation and rumors"!
Mr Q is speculating $399 – but then again, if there is a drastic change in architecture and "cutting edge" technologies that fulfill what Epic want to do at full 1080p 60fps as standard (and no less) – and in 3D as well, it could very well be more than $399…
But as far as I am concerned… I am gunning for that $399 price tag if Sony are going for more of a "middle of the ground" device – that will still have at least twice the bandwidth of the current console – but would not need a major major overhaul from an architectural perspective…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Last edited by Qubex on 7/18/2011 4:35:18 AM
I'm gunning for $399.99 as well. The reduced cost of BluRay and the use of commodity memory will help reduce the build cost. Also the total investment for R&D in the new CPU/GPU architecture could well be limited if the system is an evolution of the PS3 design using Cell/Power7 and an nVidia GPU. I think that Sony may still sell the systems at an initial loss, but that loss will be far smaller a proportion than it was with the PS3, making it much more sustainable for Sony. That will itself make it easier for Sony to stick to that lower $399.99 price point at launch.
My money is on an upgraded multicore cell with on die gpu and vector graphics chips or a similar performing multicore Haswell and I hope the magic 299
Last edited by Russell Burrows on 7/18/2011 12:29:40 AM
Cell is already multi-core (9 cores to be precise) and the SPUs are essentially Vector processors. Cell is designed to run in multi-cell configurations, so that is a possibility. There is a more up to date version of Cell that is considerably faster for Floating Point, and the Power7 architecture from IBM uses a lot of the technology developed for Cell, you might see a hybrid of the two for the PS4, a Power7 plus Cell SPUs.
But you are unlikely to see the GPU on the same die as the CPU.
Another unlikely thing, actually nigh on impossible short of Sony being paid in dump trucks of cash direct from Redmond is an Xbox design based on the Cell processor. Cell is a joint effort from Sony, Toshiba and IBM. Sony and Toshiba have been back and forth with manufacturing and such on the Cell, but Sony now holds all the cards. I mentioned this because I recently read a speculative piece on a tech site speculating that the next Xbox would be based on a Cell processor design. I'll simply say, that's not going to happen short of S0ny making a billion dollar deal with MS.
the $300-$400 price range winning in the pole is interesting becuase i thought it would be higher on this site. i guess that is the price range people have become accusomted to paying for a console, and is probably why the reaction to a $600 ps3 was the way it was. maybe microsoft will be arrogant enough to luanch a $600 system and return the favor sony did for them. one can dream, right?
as for catherine…i liked the demo, but i don't consider it a day 1p. it does have a lot the japanese charm that i have missed this gen. it is definitely on my radar.
Nah the reason people chose the price is cause people are cheap. There is no way sony will be able to release a home console with upgraded everything at that low a price… It's not a wii, It's not just a videogame console. It's become much more than that. And it sucks really. Cause it's because of people like that, that we get watered down versions of what the console once was…
i agree that people are cheap when it comes to consoles. north america has proven that much to me.
How can they be "cheap" when they buy three 360s or more? That's some high-rolling gamers right there.
/s
I actually think at this point Sony needs to put the PS4 on the back buner for 3-4 more years.
Improve games and make the PS Move a bigger deal and keep realeasing amazing titles but we need to IPs.
the PS3 has more, And I don't see the PS4 being great out of the gate with sales at all anyways. There's not enough PS3s out there yet.
Drop the price to $199 this Nov and keep dishing out those games. And put out some awesome deals for the Move. Plenty of bundles and stuff. that's what i want to see.
I would like to see the PS4 launch in the year of 2014. But it could come sooner, at a good price and if sony thinks it's good too launch in the year 2013. I don't see me getting the PS4 until '15, maybe evven '16.
I'll pay up too $600 for the PS4, because i will be ready for a new system when I get it. I'll be done with the PS3. And right now, it doesn't look like the PS3's strong life is ending any time soon. just keep up with the games sony! (:
And for Catherine. It looks interesting, different. I still have to try out the Demo, I'll give it a spin when I get home next week.
For some reason, I think that a lot of people will wait for the PS4, unless it really is a revolution, myself included. Either that, or there is an exceedingly strong launch line-up with an almost instant cut on the creation of PS3 games.
As for Catherine… that's easy.
Absolutely; it's a day one buy for me. Or it would be…
If, as I hope, it's an evolution, the cost of the work for Sony will be such that the system will sell in the $400 range, with the PS3 in the $200-$250 range. That will create a nice twin SKU dynamic for a couple of years to soften the upgrade path since both systems will run Home and PSN and the new PS3 will likely run PS3 games.
An evolution is indeed far more sensible, but I wasn't actually referring necessarily to the hardware path in my initial post. How much further can consoles be pushed? Graphics are already quite amazing, and 3D will undoubtedly become an industry standard, but that is all already in the pipeline.
I meant more of an online revolution, in perhaps pushing UGC as part of Home, or the core PSN. Perhaps an AR revolution, in which you'll be able to upload photographs onto the hard drive, which are then rendered as maps within games. Or how about taking the first steps into real time virtual reality interfaces? More realistic AI. Taking advantage of the Vita's unique capabilities to allow console gaming through the utilisation of the device as a specialised controller within certain games. I don't know. Something, some feature that will wow the masses, as the Wii did in this generation.
An iterational approach to the hardware, at this point in time, makes too much sense not to be done.
well, according to amd microsoft's next console will be capable of avatar like graphics. looks like the hype train is already starting. i highly doubt this claim. i think graphics in consoles can come long way, though. there are still a lot of games with jaggies, low res textures, and blocky shadows. not to mention the resolutions and framerates a lot of games run at. a lot of games struggle to reach just 30 fps on the current gen of consoles.
I think evolution is a key word. I also think that the hype train started by AMD is really not smart considering that video game consoles connect to TV which have a max res of 1080p. As long as the next generation consoles can hit 1080p60 and 1080p30 in 3D, everything else (including 'Avatar-like' graphics) is pointless hype.
Lawless, I agree, I think that the specific hardware architecture is important only with regard to being capable of actually rendering at 1080p60 and 1080p in 3D backwards compatibility and PSN/Home compatibility. The specifics are less important because the video target is 'set' already.
no way the ps4 is going to launch under 400 bucks.
id be surprised if it released under 500 bucks considering the inflated prices of tech these days, and not to mention the amount of money sonys lost with the ps3 they will want to start making a profit off its next console as soon as possible.
If they were considering that route, they would have started with the Vita, but they've already announced that they expect to sell IT at a loss for at least the first three years. The PS4 will be another stupidly expensive piece of kit to be sure, to be sure.
there doing it with the vita to gain a advantage on the 3Ds and also because it wont take as much of a hit with this as they would the ps4.
if the ps4 releases in the states under 459 bucks ill eat my hat!
I enjoyed the puzzles in the demo of Catherine, it's been a long while since I had to rack my brains to get through a level on my own without the hand holding a lot of games built in.
Last edited by VampDeLeon on 7/18/2011 8:21:28 AM
"Its been mentioned here before that the PS4 will be an evolution of the PS3. The architecture my change, more memory, faster Cell and a top of the line GPU, but, a lot of the ground work, operations infrastructure and PSN development has already taken place. We have helped subsidies this already; therefore it is only logical to think that PS4 should be competitively priced and yet still be in the order of 2 to 3 times more powerful than the current generation.
I think a $399 price tag is realistic for a PS4… but we will have to wait and see…"
Under this kind of scenerio, there is realistically no way economically that Sony can release a $399 console, that is unless they are planning to take a HUGE loss on a far grander scale thus bankrupting the company in the process. In fact to say Sony would release a console in such a price range would be like saying premium automakers like Ferrari, Bentley, or Maserati would release a luxury exotic in the $10,000 – 20,000 range. It aint going to happen.
Seriously though I think gamers need to be realistic and realize that the age of cheap consoles are over and simpily because these companies who have been undercutting themselves(e.g. Micorsoft and Sony) can't do it in the longrun because they can't afford to. In fact the retail price of the 360 and PS3 at launch reflect this.
Speaking of being realistic, I give nintendo alot of praise for actually being realistic about the Wii U price by declaring that it will not come cheap.
i think $399 is unrealistic as well. you brought up bankrupting a comapny, i noticed sony was recently valued at around 63 billion compared to 70 billion in fy 2010. they are already bleeding money from somewhere before next gen even starts. compared to ms both nintendo and sony's value is relatively small. microsofts is worth around 222 billion. that dwarfs tiny nintendo's value of 7.8 billion. no wonder nintendo took a different route last gen and decided not to compete directly.
yes nintendo should get praise for saying it is not going to be cheap. i noticed they didn't tell people to get 2 jobs.
i want the most powerful console possible, and i am prepared to pay for it. having said that it is critical that sony gets the pricing right and watches ms closely. i think it also very important sony makes it easy to develope for so we don't just have a small number of devdopers who can really harness the power of the system. no more bad multiplats on a sony system.
I think you're both wrong. An off the shelf GPU along with standard memory components and the now much, much cheaper BluRay components. The original BluRay components added as much as $300 to the price of the original PS3, since BluRay is now a mature platform, that is not going to be an issue. If Sony uses the updated Cell design and puts two of them on a single die, that is very nearly an off the shelf design, if they use a slimmed down Power7 with SPU support, that is a design that is much closer to what IBM already is working on.
I think you are both being far more pessimistic than is required, or realistic.
BluRay must have really dropped in price, because I see a lot of BR players selling in the low $100 range now.
And I even saw an ad for a $59.99 BR player just last week.
I just hope the PS4 is fully backward compatiable all the way down to the PS1. Their's one thing on the machine that I wouldn't want to pay the high price if the PS4 launches $400 or more (from my own experience and some of my friends, rather not say). So when it comes down to that, It would be nice if they came out with two versions.
Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 7/18/2011 12:48:55 PM
Yes, The PS4 needs to have B/C for all 3 prior PS's well.
At first, Catherine looked/sounded good from all the reviews I was reading and videos I was watching. But once I played the demo, I was like holy CRAP! This game is going to be awesome! None of the reviews did the game justice at all. Its definitely a unique game that feels like its going to suck me in!
I, like most people, was heavily anticipating Catherine. Then I saw the demo in action. The story looked interesting and I really liked the anime sequences, but the whole climbing blocks thing turned me off and looks like they will get monotonous pretty quick. If there's other puzzles besides that then I might get it, but as it stands now, I'll pass and just pick up the novel to get the story.
Like Geo, I loved everything but the block puzzles, and I love puzzle games. The controls weren't tight enough. Even on easy (and so presumably less rushed), I experienced too many missteps that weren't due to mental errors on my part. Just not fun. The rest was great, though.