DanneSandin said:
Turkish said:
DanneSandin said:
goopy20 said:
Wow that is one wall of text but I stopped reading after the first line. "Sony's console won't be a huge leap because they can't afford it..." This whole theory is based on that assumption and it makes no sense. Sony might be in a bad spot but the ps3 is still one of it's few products that is going very well, outselling the Xbox and Wii-U combined, for months in a row now. So instead of thinking Sony will cut corners with the ps4, you can also asume they are going all out to make sure it's most important cashcow will stay on top.
The Wii-U never had a chance because it's not competing with the ps4/ Xbox720, it's competing with the current gen and has no visual edge over the 7 year old consoles that were already on the market. Next gen graphics will obviously take a leap over the ps3 and Xbox720 because if it doesn't, then why the hell would MS and Sony spend a fortune building those things? The only chance Nintendo has is by showing that the tabet controller really is the best gameplay invention since the mouse and keyboard, and personally i just don't see that happening.
|
The PS3 certainly is not a cash cow. In fact, it's lost tons of money over the years, and it's not until fairly recently it has started to make money. But in the long run it will have lost most of the money PS2 managed to gain. And it's around this point I base my whole theory; in the end, PS3 has lost Sony money, and I don't think they want or can allow that again.
|
Fairly recently? The PS3 has been profitable since early 2010, roughly 3 years ago, or half a gen ago.
The PS4 won't have a catastrophic launch like the PS3. PS3 was expensive thanks to the Cell and Bluray drive. Sony was losing close to $300 on PS3s at launch, they lost a lot of money on Cell r&d. Blurays today are cheap, Sony will go with AMD for both their cpu and gpu next gen. All recent rumours point towards an economical 8core cpu and a beast 7900M gpu at nearly 2tf. If these rumours turn out to be true then its nearly 10x ps3. Sony can take a small loss with PS4, they'll profit from the software.
You expect 3rd parties to embrace the WiiU, but it doesn't even get PS360 ports like Tomb Raider, Bioshock, Dark Souls 2, DmC, Crysis, MGR, how can you expect WiiU to get Watch Dogs, Cyberpunk, Starwars 1313?
|
The exact wording isn't as important as the fact that PS3 has lost Sony more money than they've got from it. Just take a look at one of my replies to Tachikoma; I provided her with some links showing how much Sony lost under a few years time. Granted, those links don't show the picture, since none offers facts for the last few years. But they should still offer some sort of understanding of the HUGE losses they made.
Hopefully PS4 will do a lot better than PS3, but looking at the Vita doesn't show much of an improvement...
|
What PS3 did has no basis on how PS4 will perform, they won't be similar. PS4 will be significantly cheaper to produce and it will cost cheaper than PS3 did thanks to a cheaper bluray drive and absence of a Cell 2. It won't make a huge loss like the PS3. Bluray players cost $1000 in 2006, Sony put a lot of money in the development of Cell. They would've learned from their mistakes. All Sony 1st parties are working on PS4 now, the system will have lots of games. (PS3 got it first system sellers in 2008.)
Saying PS4 won't be cutting edge makes 0 sense. What is cutting edge to you? Putting GTX680 in a PS4? It doesn't need it, its overkill. The rumoured components are plausible, 7970M has comparable performances to a hd7870 despite using less power.
If PS4 costs Sony 450 to make, they either sell it at that price and break even, or sell it at 500 and make profit, or sell it at 400 and take a small loss.
WiiU has no chance to win next gen, there is no hype, casuals think its an addon for the Wii. It will be a console for Nintendo fans.
