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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony's biggest obstacle heading into next generation

Dgc1808 on 28 December 2012
Jay520 said:
Their television division


You da man.



4 ≈ One

Around the Network
platformmaster918 on 30 December 2012
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
Fixing marketing and achieving 1080p 60fps at $400 by refusing to give into motion or otherwise non-traditional gaming.


achieving 1080p60 will be easy but the games will still look like ps3-games, just more polished, with these requirements for games. i doubt that people want that...

don't most PS3 games run at 720p and/or 30fps?




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

walsufnir on 30 December 2012
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
Fixing marketing and achieving 1080p 60fps at $400 by refusing to give into motion or otherwise non-traditional gaming.


achieving 1080p60 will be easy but the games will still look like ps3-games, just more polished, with these requirements for games. i doubt that people want that...

don't most PS3 games run at 720p and/or 30fps?


not really, res is quite often sub 720p and that is with dealing fps-issues. The point is: they and ms won't achieve higher polygon models (e.g. with tesselation), better textures, better ai, deeper and richer worlds *AND* run games at 1080p60. You can't have both as this will be extremely performance-hitting. Yes, both consoles will most definitely have a lot of power but they can't do miracles.

Look at current PC-games: Most of'em are console-ports. And how do they look? Like polished versions from the consoles. Better lighting, better textures, better res, more fps. But mostly *not* more detail. Still same poly-models, sometimes better lod, but overall not really better graphics. And now look what PC you need to play these at 1080p60 and what you have to spend for a PC like that.

To me, I would be fine at 720p with a stable frame-rate BUT I want more detailed worlds, more complex worlds and better poly-models.



platformmaster918 on 30 December 2012
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
Fixing marketing and achieving 1080p 60fps at $400 by refusing to give into motion or otherwise non-traditional gaming.


achieving 1080p60 will be easy but the games will still look like ps3-games, just more polished, with these requirements for games. i doubt that people want that...

don't most PS3 games run at 720p and/or 30fps?


not really, res is quite often sub 720p and that is with dealing fps-issues. The point is: they and ms won't achieve higher polygon models (e.g. with tesselation), better textures, better ai, deeper and richer worlds *AND* run games at 1080p60. You can't have both as this will be extremely performance-hitting. Yes, both consoles will most definitely have a lot of power but they can't do miracles.

Look at current PC-games: Most of'em are console-ports. And how do they look? Like polished versions from the consoles. Better lighting, better textures, better res, more fps. But mostly *not* more detail. Still same poly-models, sometimes better lod, but overall not really better graphics. And now look what PC you need to play these at 1080p60 and what you have to spend for a PC like that.

To me, I would be fine at 720p with a stable frame-rate BUT I want more detailed worlds, more complex worlds and better poly-models.

ah I see what you're saying now.  I think they could still have a console that can run Battlefield 3 PC version or other games that seem to have a big difference.  I think multitasking could be a big selling point and streaming which can be achieved with easily affordable RAM.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

walsufnir on 30 December 2012
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
Fixing marketing and achieving 1080p 60fps at $400 by refusing to give into motion or otherwise non-traditional gaming.


achieving 1080p60 will be easy but the games will still look like ps3-games, just more polished, with these requirements for games. i doubt that people want that...

don't most PS3 games run at 720p and/or 30fps?


not really, res is quite often sub 720p and that is with dealing fps-issues. The point is: they and ms won't achieve higher polygon models (e.g. with tesselation), better textures, better ai, deeper and richer worlds *AND* run games at 1080p60. You can't have both as this will be extremely performance-hitting. Yes, both consoles will most definitely have a lot of power but they can't do miracles.

Look at current PC-games: Most of'em are console-ports. And how do they look? Like polished versions from the consoles. Better lighting, better textures, better res, more fps. But mostly *not* more detail. Still same poly-models, sometimes better lod, but overall not really better graphics. And now look what PC you need to play these at 1080p60 and what you have to spend for a PC like that.

To me, I would be fine at 720p with a stable frame-rate BUT I want more detailed worlds, more complex worlds and better poly-models.

ah I see what you're saying now.  I think they could still have a console that can run Battlefield 3 PC version or other games that seem to have a big difference.  I think multitasking could be a big selling point and streaming which can be achieved with easily affordable RAM.

Well, we just have to wait. Perhaps I am too critic by now and MS and Sony will surprise us with something! And yes, streaming could be a really big game-changer but there are problems, too. Once at Gamescom in Cologne (I think it was last year) my employer was and so partly me was responsible for the network for Gamescom (I think it was Online but don't know anymore). We had to do some fiddling with our routing to connect efficiently to the streaming-service-servers. Performance was OK after a day the company told us. So streaming really *highly* depends not only on bandwidth but especially on response-times. But as said: let's get surprised by companies!



Around the Network
platformmaster918 on 30 December 2012
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
walsufnir said:
platformmaster918 said:
Fixing marketing and achieving 1080p 60fps at $400 by refusing to give into motion or otherwise non-traditional gaming.


achieving 1080p60 will be easy but the games will still look like ps3-games, just more polished, with these requirements for games. i doubt that people want that...

don't most PS3 games run at 720p and/or 30fps?


not really, res is quite often sub 720p and that is with dealing fps-issues. The point is: they and ms won't achieve higher polygon models (e.g. with tesselation), better textures, better ai, deeper and richer worlds *AND* run games at 1080p60. You can't have both as this will be extremely performance-hitting. Yes, both consoles will most definitely have a lot of power but they can't do miracles.

Look at current PC-games: Most of'em are console-ports. And how do they look? Like polished versions from the consoles. Better lighting, better textures, better res, more fps. But mostly *not* more detail. Still same poly-models, sometimes better lod, but overall not really better graphics. And now look what PC you need to play these at 1080p60 and what you have to spend for a PC like that.

To me, I would be fine at 720p with a stable frame-rate BUT I want more detailed worlds, more complex worlds and better poly-models.

ah I see what you're saying now.  I think they could still have a console that can run Battlefield 3 PC version or other games that seem to have a big difference.  I think multitasking could be a big selling point and streaming which can be achieved with easily affordable RAM.

Well, we just have to wait. Perhaps I am too critic by now and MS and Sony will surprise us with something! And yes, streaming could be a really big game-changer but there are problems, too. Once at Gamescom in Cologne (I think it was last year) my employer was and so partly me was responsible for the network for Gamescom (I think it was Online but don't know anymore). We had to do some fiddling with our routing to connect efficiently to the streaming-service-servers. Performance was OK after a day the company told us. So streaming really *highly* depends not only on bandwidth but especially on response-times. But as said: let's get surprised by companies!

I think console streaming would be a lot smoother considering Sony and/or MS would be commiting a lot of resources to making the taking advantage of bandwidth as much as possible.  My internet at home could easily afford it but my college one?  Not so much.  Anyways I'll buy the next Sony system and buy it first because they have never disappointed with exclusives for me.  Over half my PS3 library is exclusives and I hardly touch my Wii and have no interest in 360 (not that I don't enjoy a couple exclusives just not enough for me to make room/time for another console).  I'm just drooling over what ND could do with a more modern machine considering they did Uncharted 3 and will do LoU on 6 year old tech.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

Dr.Grass on 30 December 2012

teh C3LL



7204life on 30 December 2012

price point and they will be just fine(and power comparable to microsoft)



HesAPooka on 30 December 2012

Microsoft



I was walking down along the street and I heard this voice saying, "Good evening, Mr. Dowd." Well, I turned around and here was this big six-foot rabbit leaning up against a lamp-post. Well, I thought nothing of that because when you've lived in a town as long as I've lived in this one, you get used to the fact that everybody knows your name.

thismeintiel on 30 December 2012
Jay520 said:
Their television division

This x100.  Now that they have gotten their gaming division making them profit again, they need to do something about this division, as its bleeding the company dry.  Either lower their rices to be more competitive or give up on it completely.  I'll also throw in marketing.  They do great marketing for a couple of their big hitters, but leave the smaller and middle ground releases to fend for themselves.

As for gaming, I think Sony is going to be alright.  We should be getting a reasonably priced console (~$400), that is a good leap over this one power-wise.  Sony will not be letting MS get a year head start (1 1/2 years in some regions), so that is another plus for Sony.  They already have monetized PSN with PS+, so they shouldn't be taking any loss on providing PSN for free, which is another plus for Sony when compared to having to pay for online gaming with Live.  Then you have all the varied IPs from Sony, which will bring in gamers of all tastes.  Put that all together and I think Sony is going to have a great next gen.