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

Forums - Sony Discussion - 'Forced Camera Anti-Consumer' Says Sony

Tagged games:

Torillian said:
 

But you shouldn't expect him to call out his own company's products when he's not calling out anyone else's.  Didn't see any mention of the One, just the reason the PS4 originally had a packed in camera and why it didn't after.  If he then said "like those guys at MS" then yes he should also take the blame for similar issues Sony have with products they've sold.  

that's true



Around the Network

So according to this guy Vita isn't a "gamer friendly brand" since it doesn't give people the choice of buying the cameras separately instead of having them forced on you? That's in addition to forcing you to buy overpriced proprietary memory cards instead of giving you the choice of using the same inexpensive memory cards almost all other consumer electronics that requires such storage uses?

The guy is so eager to take digs at the competition that he's oblivious that he's also taking digs at his own company.





What a stupid thing to say. You have a choice as a consumer: don't buy it if you aren't interested in Kinect. Hey Sony, I have no interest in Move, do you have any controllers without that annoying light on the end? I also don't care for wireless, can you sell me a PS4 that is cheaper and has no wireless capabilities? No? Well that is mighty "against consumer choice" of you.

They clearly had big plans for Move being included in the box and wanted a cheaper price than MS so they cut it out.



Azerth said:
if sony is so customer choice then how come the customer doesnt have the choice to turn off the now useless (unless you buy the separate camra attachment) led light on the controller

It's not useless. There are lots of cool little gimmicks you can do with it, even without the camera.



crissindahouse said:
Max King of the Wild said:
TruckOSaurus said:

I think the comparison stands. The Blu-Ray did drive the cost of the PS3 up and it was a feature that not everybody wanted but if you wanted a PS3, you had no choice in the matter.

No. If the ps3 was a ps2 but with bluray then it wouldnt have been close to 600dollars (if sony was still willing to take a loss.. which they did with ps2 so im sure they would have.) The costly cell, wifi and included HDDraised the price and bluray was a natural progression

i believe blu-ray was the most expensive part of the whole ps3. like 300 bucks production costs or something like that.

The estimated cost for the BluRay drive was $107.  It was the most expensive component in the PS3.  The nVidia GPU, followed by the Cell CPU, were the next most expensive items at $83 and $64, respectively.

http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/2237/playstation-3-initial-release-hardware-analysis-60gb20gb-teardown



Around the Network
JoeTheBro said:
Azerth said:
if sony is so customer choice then how come the customer doesnt have the choice to turn off the now useless (unless you buy the separate camra attachment) led light on the controller

It's not useless. There are lots of cool little gimmicks you can do with it, even without the camera.


like what?  cuz as far as i can tell its useless now 



Azerth said:
JoeTheBro said:
Azerth said:
if sony is so customer choice then how come the customer doesnt have the choice to turn off the now useless (unless you buy the separate camra attachment) led light on the controller

It's not useless. There are lots of cool little gimmicks you can do with it, even without the camera.


like what?  cuz as far as i can tell its useless now 

Have you ever played move?

Basically it's equivalent to a second screen in your peripheral vision, just adding extra immersion to the game. Killzone is using it for health, infamous used the move light for good/evil and some attacks, heavy rain changed the move light when doing actions, etc. It's pretty comparable to rumble. Nothing needed for the game, but it's nice to have.



JoeTheBro said:
Azerth said:
JoeTheBro said:
Azerth said:
if sony is so customer choice then how come the customer doesnt have the choice to turn off the now useless (unless you buy the separate camra attachment) led light on the controller

It's not useless. There are lots of cool little gimmicks you can do with it, even without the camera.


like what?  cuz as far as i can tell its useless now 

Have you ever played move?

Basically it's equivalent to a second screen in your peripheral vision, just adding extra immersion to the game. Killzone is using it for health, infamous used the move light for good/evil and some attacks, heavy rain changed the move light when doing actions, etc. It's pretty comparable to rumble. Nothing needed for the game, but it's nice to have.

ok but u are able to see the light on the move controller but on the ds4 youll actually have to look down at the controller if you want to see what its doing and i may be mistaken but dont you need the camra to use move?



DM235 said:

The estimated cost for the BluRay drive was $107.  It was the most expensive component in the PS3.  The nVidia GPU, followed by the Cell CPU, were the next most expensive items at $83 and $64, respectively.

http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/2237/playstation-3-initial-release-hardware-analysis-60gb20gb-teardown

ohh, no clue how i thought something like 300 haha



Azerth said:

ok but u are able to see the light on the move controller but on the ds4 youll actually have to look down at the controller if you want to see what its doing and i may be mistaken but dont you need the camra to use move?


The light is strong enough that you can see its glow without directly looking at it.

You do need the camera to use move, but just for tracking purposes. The same light effects can be ported to DS4 without the camera.