By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - There's no way PS4 is coming in 2013

Persistantthug on 04 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
Persistantthug said:

1.  The VITA is not a home console

2.  The VITA had almost a year from announcement to release

3.  The VITA is failing badly atm.

 

 

honestly, HappySqurriel,  seeing how poignant point #3 is....

Your point of example (VITA example) seems pretty poor in retrospect.


The vita isn't failing because Sony didn't announce it earlier or release it later, it is failing because it is an over-priced system that is designed to sell to a very small market (the people who want "home console" experiences on the go).

Regardless of whether the Vita is successful or not, the point is that Sony doesn't have any strict rules about how far in advance to announce a system prior to releasing it. While I wouldn't expect Sony to announce the PS4 at E3 and release it at the end of the year, announcing it between TGS 2012 and GDC 2013 would be completely in line with their most recent system release.

There's alot of reasons that the VITA is failing.....crap marketing is also among them.  And guess what?  Launching with less than 1 year of maketing and hype, and not during the AMERICAN HOLIDAY, has contributed.  That cannot be denied, HappySqurriel.

But regardless of that, I say again, the VITA is not a home console, so really, the whole  of VITA is not applicable here.

 

But even if you wanted to try and barge the VITA into this, a home console discussion, your point and sentiment still fails, because the VITA is a current failure.  That's the bottom line, I'm afraid.  Sorry.



Around the Network
HappySqurriel on 04 September 2012
Persistantthug said:

There's alot of reasons that the VITA is failing.....crap marketing is also among them.  And guess what?  Launching with less than 1 year of maketing and hype has contributed.  That cannot be denied, HappySqurriel.

But regardless of that, I say again, the VITA is not a home console, so really, the whole  of VITA is not applicable here.

 

But even if you wanted to try and barge the VITA into this, a home console discussion, your point and sentiment still fails, because the VITA is a current failure.  That's the bottom line, I'm afraid.  Sorry.

Since you refuse to see the point ...

The Wii was (truly) first shown of at TGS 2005 in September and released 14 months later. A short timeframe between showing off a system and releasing it does not negatively impact sales.

In modern times if you really needed a lot of time to get information out about your product for it to be successful Apple would be one of the least successful technology companies in the world. While game developers need time to develop games, consumers have demonstrated that they don't need a long period of time to be marketed to.



Troll_Whisperer on 04 September 2012
BenVTrigger said:
Im not a part of any group.

MS will have the more powerful console, that is all.

Can you tell us something about this rumour from GameStop about one console launching in 2014? If you know anything and if you can comment anything, of course.



No troll is too much for me to handle. I rehabilitate trolls, I train people. I am the Troll Whisperer.

Persistantthug on 04 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
Dodece said:
@persistanthug

I will keep it real simple for you. This time I will go chronological rather then prioritizing the response.

Microsoft shutting down under performing studios is proof of nothing. If the games those studios make suck then it stands to reason that there is no reason to maintain the studios. Just like it doesn't make sense to keep churning out installments of series that even though profitable aren't necessarily helping the platform, or furthering long term goals. Closing a studio doesn't necessarily mean that Microsoft fires everyone. Usually it means Microsoft is just moving the talent around.

Your seriously bemoaning Rare. The studio had a long string of failures in core gaming, and wasn't particularly all that appreciated by the rank and file of console owners. Microsoft didn't have anything to lose, by having them work far afield, and they would be fucking stupid to have them come back now. Since they found success out where they put them. I doubt the employees at Rare would protest too much for that matter. This isn't a great big loss, and nobody feels the least bit deprived.

On a side note it is funny that you mentioned closed studios, but are mum about all the studios that Microsoft has opened, or acquired in the past couple years. Microsoft now has twenty game development studios. They only have five studios that aren't specifically focused on games. Yeah kind of puts your media box argument to rest, but it isn't like you should have made it in the first place. Everyone knows that the patches for Live that allow it to connect to already existing services outside of Live are puny when compared to the size of actual games.

You shouldn't confuse public presentations with where the money is actually being spent. Oh my god they talked up their Kinect device to sell casual players on the machine. How dare they not spend time on courting the large contingent of hardcore players that hadn't already bought into the machine. On wait silly me. They don't fucking exist. So what if they aren't lavishing the attention. They are still pumping out the games. New and bad studios taking up the task of developing for the device isn't really sweat off of my balls.

With all your talk you would think that Microsoft had no plans to release core games next generation. Oh wait I am looking at the list of studios. It looks like Microsoft will have more core studios next generation then it ever had this generation. How could that be with their new casual focus. Here is an idea maybe Microsoft just maybe is actually more competent then Sony or Nintendo. Maybe they can I don't know balance both audiences you know without failing one at the expense of the other. I hear Nintendo is going to try something similar.

Seriously Nintendo is taken seriously, and they have made it clear that what they did was really fucking dumb in the long run. Casuals might buy machines, but they are lousy when it comes to buying games. Something tells me that Microsoft has more then a five minute attention span. They aren't going to make more games then the casual market can support, or produce so few games for the core that demand will not be met.

That sign of yours points in one direction. Specifically to the fact that Microsoft has a surprising capacity for being self indulgent. Microsoft has no problem whatsoever with fleecing fools. It is the same reason they sell me a two month gold plan for two dollars. It is an excuse for them to turn my auto renewal back on, and sign me up for a monthly plan that costs me ten dollars a month. Unless I remember to turn that auto renewal back off. They are banking on me forgetting to do it just once so they can take my ass to the cleaners. Your evidence is exactly what now.

As for guaranteed I certainly never said that, but I think the odds are somewhat better then a fifty fifty shot. There is a problem that Microsoft has that Sony doesn't have. Namely the fact that the 360 is further along in its lifespan which is a finite thing. Eventually the 360 must succumb to sales degradation, and once that happens Microsoft is going to start losing brand momentum. Microsoft has to get there sooner rather then later. Nintendo with its new hardware isn't going to help, and neither is market saturation.

There is a rule in business. It costs much less to keep a customer then it is to get a new customer. It costs more money to sell someone on a product then it costs to keep a current customer buying the product. Microsoft cannot want sales to stall, and to end up having to spend millions, or even billions rebuilding the brand loyalty that they have right now.

As for your last statement. I hate to tell you this, but Sony has been known to lie. Not just lie, but do so blatantly. This is the company that had top members of management denying a price cut was going to happen for the PS3 all of a day before it was announced publicly at E3. Hell we had circulars advertising the price for god sakes. That didn't phase them at all. So forgive me if they have no credibility as far as I am concerned.

While there is a popular assumption that "casual gamers don't buy games" I'm not sure it really stands up ...

For every Wii system sold there are (roughly) 10 games that were sold, and this would work out to being at least 3 games being sold per system per year (after all, not all systems were sold on day 1). For a system that had such a "casual" userbase, had such widespread piracy, and with a library full of little games that were likely undertracked, it is hard to say that the "casuals" weren't buying much software.

Microsoft's lack of success with selling Kinect software has more to do with the quality of Kinect software than the buying habits of "casual" gamers.

I probably shouldn't point this out, because I don't want to make this into a Nintendo discussion,

 

But I want to point out that, for the most part, the Wii users bought NINTENDO games.....they didn't buy 3rd party games....not hardly.  And that's why 3rd party devs and publishers have mostly abandoned Nintendo, and Nintendo is having to resort to begging for 3rd party support for the Wii U.....and mind you, for the Wii U, they're only getting a bare fraction of support.

Most 3rd party devs and publishers have lost confidence in Nintendo's home console(s).  Hate me for saying this, but it's true.



Persistantthug on 04 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
Persistantthug said:

There's alot of reasons that the VITA is failing.....crap marketing is also among them.  And guess what?  Launching with less than 1 year of maketing and hype has contributed.  That cannot be denied, HappySqurriel.

But regardless of that, I say again, the VITA is not a home console, so really, the whole  of VITA is not applicable here.

 

But even if you wanted to try and barge the VITA into this, a home console discussion, your point and sentiment still fails, because the VITA is a current failure.  That's the bottom line, I'm afraid.  Sorry.

Since you refuse to see the point ...

The Wii was (truly) first shown of at TGS 2005 in September and released 14 months later. A short timeframe between showing off a system and releasing it does not negatively impact sales.

In modern times if you really needed a lot of time to get information out about your product for it to be successful Apple would be one of the least successful technology companies in the world. While game developers need time to develop games, consumers have demonstrated that they don't need a long period of time to be marketed to.

"Two years later, engineers and designers were brought together to develop the concept further. By 2005, the controller interface had taken form, but a public showing at that year's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) was withdrawn. Miyamoto stated that, "[W]e had some troubleshooting to do. So we decided not to reveal the controller and instead we displayed just the console."[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii

 

 

As indicated,

We knew about the Wii well before any launch, and before TGS 2005.  That's a Year and a half lead time, bro.  And guess what?  The Wii is successful (bottom line again)

 

This is the second time that your point(s) have been blown up.

If this were a debate, you'd officially be losing  right now, HappySqurriel.



Around the Network
Adinnieken on 04 September 2012
Persistantthug said:

Another thing,  Again, we don't know that Microsoft is going to release an XBOX 3 in 2013, and there are several signs that show that they won't.  Perhaps one of the most poignant signs, is their  recent 2 year subsidy  deal.  Why would Microsoft roll out such a plan, only to bring out an XBOX 3 1 year later?   That makes about as much sense as 2 left shoes.

This is the worst bit of crap logic that I've read anywhere on any site.  Microsoft offers a 2-year subsidized Xbox 360 purchase plan and that means they aren't launching within that two year period?  Are you serious?  What does a two year Xbox LIVE subscription have to do with when you launch a console?  iPhones are sold all the time on two-year contracts despite the fact that a new version comes out in less than two years. 

Please tell me you're still in primary/elementary school, that way I can understand the logic fail here.  Otherwise this is just really seriously sad.

Microsoft has shut down ENSEMBLE, ACES, FASA, DIGITAL ANVIL, and turned RARE into nothing but a casual game studio. Microsoft has clearly shown that they care more about Kinect and casual gaming more than ever. They also seem to care more for "media box" related stuff more than ever as well. HARDCORE gaming for Microsoft has clearly taken a back seat.

Ensemble was disbanded, and reformed largely as Robot Entertainment, which coincidentally went on to make Age of Empires Online for Microsoft.  The majority of ACES went to work for a military defense contractor that purchased the rights to Microsoft Flight Simulator.  Last I knew, Microsoft Flight Simulator wasn't considered a hardcore game.  Microsoft licensed the rights for the MechWarrior, Crimson Skies, and Shadow Run to Smith and Tinker, a studio founded by the founder of FASA.  Piranha Games is working in conjunction with Smith and Tinker to create MechWarrior Online.  Digital Anvil was dissolved.  The two games they made for Microsoft were Freelancer and Brute Force, Freelancer was for the PC and Brute Force the Xbox.  Neither did particularly well.

With the exception of Digital Anvil and Aces, the other companies reformed and went on to create, or are working on, games for Microsoft on Windows and or the Xbox 360.  How, exactly it means Microsoft has abandoned hard core gaming, I don't know.  Especially when it licenses the use of its IPs back to the developers that worked on them.

In the case of Aces, I suppose if you're upset about it.  Just enter the US Air Force and put some hours in the combat training simulator.

With respect to Digital Anvil, the only game I would be interested in is the Wing Commander series.  Unfortunately that IP belongs to Origin, which now belongs to EA.  So, yeah.  We don't have Freelancer or Brute Force.  I think we get a better 3rd Person Squad-based Shooter in Epic's Gears of War than we got in Brute Force.  The most important games the developers did under Origin, they couldn't make because EA owned those IPs.  So how is that Microsoft abandoning hard core gaming?

If you followed Xbox gaming, you would have know back in those days, Microsoft was moving toward 3rd Parties to create gaming experiences rather than try and fill every niche gamers wanted.  That's pretty evident in this generation with the Xbox 360.  Microsoft has relied on 3rd Party developers to create the experiences rather than attempting to create them themselves.  Again, Gears of War shows just how smart that effort was. 

Gears of War sold 6m units world-wide compared to Brute Force's 83k.  I don't know.  I think Microsoft made the right decision.  The perception that Microsoft has abandoned hard core gaming is just a perception.  More hard core gaming software is sold for the Xbox 360 than any other platform.  So how is it abandoned?  It exists and it's vibrant.



Persistantthug on 04 September 2012
Adinnieken said:
Persistantthug said:

Another thing,  Again, we don't know that Microsoft is going to release an XBOX 3 in 2013, and there are several signs that show that they won't.  Perhaps one of the most poignant signs, is their  recent 2 year subsidy  deal.  Why would Microsoft roll out such a plan, only to bring out an XBOX 3 1 year later?   That makes about as much sense as 2 left shoes.

This is the worst bit of crap logic that I've read anywhere on any site.  Microsoft offers a 2-year subsidized Xbox 360 purchase plan and that means they aren't launching within that two year period?  Are you serious?  What does a two year Xbox LIVE subscription have to do with when you launch a console?  iPhones are sold all the time on two-year contracts despite the fact that a new version comes out in less than two years. 

Please tell me you're still in primary/elementary school, that way I can understand the logic fail here.  Otherwise this is just really seriously sad.

 


Please sir....

Please do not bring IPhone's into this home console discussion.  Those are 2 completely different markets, 2 totally different consumer types.......they are not even remotely similar.

 

You asked if I was serious.

But I might ask you the same thing.

Seriously?   IPhone market (where phones go obsolete every year) = Home Video gaming market where people hold on to them for 4 -6 or 7 years?

Are you serious, Mr. Adinnieken?



Gamerace on 04 September 2012

The industry seems to be talking more and more about WiiU this year, one console in 2013 and one in 2014. Since we know quite a bit about MS next console but vertually nothing about PS4 (at least nothing I've seen) I think it's fair to assume that PS4 would be the last to market.

I do think that has a lot to do with PS3 only recently becoming profittable. PS3 will not have the legs of PS2. PS4 will kill it pretty quick. PS2 was a MASSIVE seller and even an 80% drop in sales was still a worthwhile system to sell. PS3 may be on top right now, but it's on top of a saturated and dropping market and it's own sales are falling y/y. Bottom line, unlike PS2, PS3's sales will be too low to maintain within a year of PS4 launching.


Launching last isn't great but it's not necessarily bad, as you can see what the competition is doing and capitalize on that knowledge (to some degree). You can also come out with something that's innovative and distruptive, putting the ball firmly in your own court. However, this is Sony we're talking about....



 

Adinnieken on 04 September 2012
Persistantthug said:

Please sir....

Please do not bring IPhone's into this home console discussion.  Those are 2 completely different markets, 2 totally different consumer types.......they are not even remotely similar.

 

You asked if I was serious.

But I might ask you the same thing.

Seriously?   IPhone market (where phones go obsolete every year) = Home Video gaming market where people hold on to them for 4 -6 or 7 years?

Are you serious, Mr. Adinnieken?

Both are consumer electronic devices, so yes.  I'm serious. 

The roll-out of a subsidized payment program that's relative to a service and not the hardware has no impact on when the replacement for a CE device is launching.  Especially considering that as long as the payments are maintained the next generation model could be used on that service, and likewise the older device can still function with both the service and the new device.

So what one has to do with the other is an incredibly daft string of logic. 



HappySqurriel on 04 September 2012
Persistantthug said:
HappySqurriel said:
Persistantthug said:

There's alot of reasons that the VITA is failing.....crap marketing is also among them.  And guess what?  Launching with less than 1 year of maketing and hype has contributed.  That cannot be denied, HappySqurriel.

But regardless of that, I say again, the VITA is not a home console, so really, the whole  of VITA is not applicable here.

 

But even if you wanted to try and barge the VITA into this, a home console discussion, your point and sentiment still fails, because the VITA is a current failure.  That's the bottom line, I'm afraid.  Sorry.

Since you refuse to see the point ...

The Wii was (truly) first shown of at TGS 2005 in September and released 14 months later. A short timeframe between showing off a system and releasing it does not negatively impact sales.

In modern times if you really needed a lot of time to get information out about your product for it to be successful Apple would be one of the least successful technology companies in the world. While game developers need time to develop games, consumers have demonstrated that they don't need a long period of time to be marketed to.

"Two years later, engineers and designers were brought together to develop the concept further. By 2005, the controller interface had taken form, but a public showing at that year's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) was withdrawn. Miyamoto stated that, "[W]e had some troubleshooting to do. So we decided not to reveal the controller and instead we displayed just the console."[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii

 

 

As indicated,

We knew about the Wii well before any launch, and before TGS 2005.  That's a Year and a half lead time, bro.  And guess what?  The Wii is successful (bottom line again)

 

This is the second time that your point(s) have been blown up.

If this were a debate, you'd officially be losing  right now, HappySqurriel.

The display of the console was effectively showing off the case ...

The first meaningful demonstration of the Wii was the concept video at TGS, and the Wii would have sold no worse had they skipped showing off the case at E3, and it would have sold no better had they shown off the TGS concept video at E3.

In a day and age where you can get tens of millions of people watching your youtube video in a month what benefit is there to announcing something 24 months before releasing it? If it is actually interesting people will get the information about it alost imediately, if it isn't interesting no matter how long you announce it prior to being released it won't suddenly become interesting.

Take the iPad as an example, it was announced January 27th 2010 and released April 3, 2010; if Apple can launch the iPad to massive line-ups in 66 days why can't Sony release a successful console in roughly a year?