Sony: No Playstation 4 at E3, Sticking to 10-year life cycle plan

I don't think we are ready for the next gen giant enemy crab yet. Ok lame joke...

It might be better for them to react to what Microsoft does instead of showing their hand at the same time? I'd think Sony would not want to be releasing after Microsoft again
 
Last edited:
Even though the released after microsoft, sony still managed to give good competition and to a degree beat Microsoft. Its been like 3 months since i saw the sales figure, but isnt sony about to pass ms? The major area where sony is having trouble is US.
 
I posted this in the other thread but, Sony has lied before to consumers. Who says they are not lying now? They want you to keep buying PS3's and not hold out for PS4. It's been 6 years, the new consoles are going to be here any time.
 
Zohar78 said:
Even though the released after microsoft, sony still managed to give good competition and to a degree beat Microsoft. Its been like 3 months since i saw the sales figure, but isnt sony about to pass ms? The major area where sony is having trouble is US.
Click to expand...

But in fact M$ is beating sony. No need to get all specific the fact is both are doing fine. But M$ is beating them for sales of units, total units and games worldwide. They are doing this with a less powerful system and the need for XBL membership for many things. With all the disadvantages xbox has one wonders how this is possible. Well I would say a big reason was they released first.
 
MM keep in mind they are focusing on Playstation Vita. With thats future being so unstable I don't blame them for being conservative with the PS4 info.
 
No offense but these are weekly stories now ..

Seriously every week someone from Sony or MS deny's anything regarding a new system and then the very next week we get this :

http://games.ign.com/articles/121/1215948p1.html

Report: BOTH New Xbox and PS4 Will Be Shown At E3

Information comes from "100% concrete, ultra high level" source.
Click to expand...

Can we please post these constant , non-stop fluff articles in the console forum at least where they belong?

Why don't we just stop posting rumor threads on it and wait for E3 this summer..
 
rudy said:
But in fact M$ is beating sony. No need to get all specific the fact is both are doing fine. But M$ is beating them for sales of units, total units and games worldwide. They are doing this with a less powerful system and the need for XBL membership for many things. With all the disadvantages xbox has one wonders how this is possible. Well I would say a big reason was they released first.
Click to expand...

Xbox 360 has more memory, more ED ram and a more powerful GPU than the PS3, all combined with the industry's best SDK making the devs jobs easier. This is why the majority of multi plat titles run better on the 360, over the PS3. The PS3 has a more powerful CPU, but thats about it really. The 360 is selling more hardware, selling heaps more software and racking in hundreds of millions in Live subscriptions (alone) because it really is the better platform, there is not magic here... its the better platform to the average Joe consumer who puts their money where their mouth is.

The PS3 is a great device, but Sony has fallen far from the PS2 era of 100+ million lead on any competition.. they are in 3rd place, a close third to MS worldwide but 3rd nonetheless. They are just starting to turn a profit off of the PS3 this late in its cycle so of course they are not going to release a new platform and eat hundreds of millions in R&D costs up front. Also, the biggest reason we won't see a PS4 any time soon isn't because of some silly 10 year cycle (because the PS3 came out before the PS2 10 year cycle ended), or earnings, or this or that.. but its all because this is the year of the PS Vita. Sony is not going to announce another, or release another platform in tandem to the Vita and kill whatever steam it has going for it. They are treating the Vita as a next gen platform and its critical they avoid chopping themselves down from the inside.

But, lets get something straight.. the PS3 is not more powerful than the 360. The 360 is actually a teeny tiny bit more powerful in most specs, probably edging it out over the PS3 if you were to list them all out. In the end the two consoles are basically as powerful as the other and a good developer can port between with little loss.

No new PS4 because of Vita and because Sony is bleeding money still, closing business divisions left and right, and reworking UK development studios to try and save money where they can. The wonders behind the Xbox 360 making all this money is very simple ...

People want it, the numbers don't lie. I suspect MS will beat them to the market again, by a minimum of 6 months.
 
yea, they certainly wouldn't lie about it. They'd simply say "Yes, new PS4 at E3, stop buying PS3s".
 
Keep in mind the 10-year life-cycle isn't exclusive of another generation. I.e, they may release the PS4 at 8 years into the PS3's life-cycle, expecting the PS3 to still be active for another 2 years. The PS1 continued strong for a long time after the PS2 release.
 
Well I may be wrong about total power, it may like most things be totally up for debate. But you still have lots of advantages to the PS3 over the XBOX like 2 big ones, blu ray and the lack of a need for XBL for various things. Also while it may be false like most things people think about apple are false the vast majority of consumers believe the PS3 is more powerful.

In fact I told an older lady I know and my parents to buy a PS3 for blu ray playing and netflix. With these issues and others like the ability to use alot more controllers. I think that the early lead M$ put up which of course included the better SDK back then and exclusive titles gave them the momentum that allowed them to take and to this day keep the lead.

So yeah basically I think sony is crazy to sit on their ass , they need to score a console before M$. They need to time it right too. The PS3 was released in the spring which was silly. M$ did it before christmas.

Not that I care I kinda wish M$ would lose the console war so they would focus on making PC gaming better.
 
rudy said:
Not that I care I kinda wish M$ would lose the console war so they would focus on making PC gaming better.
Click to expand...

Say wha?

Shouldn't that be aimed at the actual game developers.....you know.....the ones making PC games?


RealityCrunch said:
Keep in mind the 10-year life-cycle isn't exclusive of another generation. I.e, they may release the PS4 at 8 years into the PS3's life-cycle, expecting the PS3 to still be active for another 2 years. The PS1 continued strong for a long time after the PS2 release.
Click to expand...

This man speaks the truth. The PS1 ran well into the PS2's life as did the PS2 into the PS3's....there is no reason to not assume the PS3 will run alongside the PS4.....

I gotta say tho, I have absolutely zero interest in the next set of consoles as it stands today, they'll just be another expensive set of underpowered PC's with similar online setups that they have today.
 
It is more than just game developers. Look at GFWL, XBL is widely known as the best environment for console game social networking, and delivery of everything. GFWL is known as the bar non worst POS software ever to grace the face of gaming. Now let’s look at other issues. For instance Xbox controllers are admired on the PC because drivers are there and they work decent. It is plug and play. But the other parts like the chat pad don’t work and even more than 1 controller will have problems with some games that claim to support 2. It makes no sense that MS does not get their Xbox controller and chat pad all working so people would be able to use Xbox controller. If MS was not in the console business today I bet that we would be seeing a huge push to get people to use HTPCs. The Xbox controller should be able to function as a mouse but it does not.
AFAIK you cannot get 4 controllers working on a PC but you can on an XBOX. Game devs will not develop games that are HTPC friendly if the hardware support is rare or non existent.

I am happy that MS brings these products to the PC but they are always late and often half done.

I realize you can probably get some hacked drivers and get some of this working but most people in the real world cannot be bothered. And if the majority of people out there do not do these things applications will not support it.

No way am I letting developers off the hook though.
 
rudy said:
But in fact M$ is beating sony. No need to get all specific the fact is both are doing fine. But M$ is beating them for sales of units, total units and games worldwide.
Click to expand...
You seem to of forgot that 360 shipped a full year early. PS3 is only a few million units behind the 360, which on average per year, means the PS3 is outselling the 360.

theNoid said:
Xbox 360 has more memory
Click to expand...
You need to get your facts strait before making such a bold claim. The PS3 and XBOX both have 512MB of memory. The difference is that 360 allows developers to dynamically allocate what amount to use on GPU/Processor, where PS3 forces a 256/256 split, which was a mistake.

Anyways, both of your comments are being obvious troll. This isn't a 360 vs. PS3 thread.
 
rudy said:
But in fact M$ is beating sony. No need to get all specific the fact is both are doing fine. But M$ is beating them for sales of units, total units and games worldwide. They are doing this with a less powerful system and the need for XBL membership for many things. With all the disadvantages xbox has one wonders how this is possible. Well I would say a big reason was they released first.
Click to expand...

PS3 surpassed the 360 worldwide early in 2011. Consistently outsells 360 in EUR and JPN monthly.
Not fanboy talk just stating the facts.
 
bigdogchris read the context there really is no need to comment on my statement. Xbox shipped months ahead of the PS3 not a whole year. But M$ was a heck of alot smarter and made their release just before the holidays where sony put it in theuseless spring for who knows what reason. But but more or less you are trying to support my point which is that getting a console out first is important. Also see below


4saken
http://www.vgchartz.com/

I got my info from here if I am wrong you can cite your source.

theNoid actually enlightened me to some specs I was not aware of. There is what appears to be a myth that the PS3 is just strait up my powerful but when I looked at the numbers and layout it appears M$ did a very good job balancing the hardware.

But hey who cares apparently all the games look similar on both consoles and they are both from the same generation. What matters now is who is going to play their cards right. With nintendo getting ready to repeat what it did before which is deliver a console well ahead of the competition it looks like they are going to enjoy a health monopoly of high end power for a while.
 
rudy said:
AFAIK you cannot get 4 controllers working on a PC but you can on an XBOX. Game devs will not develop games that are HTPC friendly if the hardware support is rare or non existent.

I am happy that MS brings these products to the PC but they are always late and often half done.
Click to expand...

You can get 4 "xbox cotrollers" working on a PC (well a laptop, and they are 4 PS3 controllers via a bluetooth controller emulating xbox controllers, but the PC thinks thats what they are). Works for Jamestown!
 
rudy said:
bigdogchris read the context there really is no need to comment on my statement. Xbox shipped months ahead of the PS3 not a whole year. But M$ was a heck of alot smarter and made their release just before the holidays where sony put it in theuseless spring for who knows what reason. But but more or less you are trying to support my point which is that getting a console out first is important. Also see below


4saken
http://www.vgchartz.com/

I got my info from here if I am wrong you can cite your source.

theNoid actually enlightened me to some specs I was not aware of. There is what appears to be a myth that the PS3 is just strait up my powerful but when I looked at the numbers and layout it appears M$ did a very good job balancing the hardware.

But hey who cares apparently all the games look similar on both consoles and they are both from the same generation. What matters now is who is going to play their cards right. With nintendo getting ready to repeat what it did before which is deliver a console well ahead of the competition it looks like they are going to enjoy a health monopoly of high end power for a while.
Click to expand...

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/...2c00_-wii-sales-will-continue-to-decline.aspx

or just google ps3 surpasses 360 worldwide. "The PlayStation 3 plays middleman with 43.4 million units sold, and the Xbox 360 weighs in at 42.9 million."

that was back in April 2011, and has widened since then. It was fairly big news when it tipped in PS3s favor last year.


I personally have both systems and use them both fairly equally. Next Gen ill buy tme both again. No reason to have to miss out on any feature to stay a fanboy right? :)
 
Why would you quote a sales figure from spring why nto just get a modern one that is all I did by linking vgchartz
 
MS is the one that's overdue IMO.

They came out a good year or so earlier than the PS3 with the 360.

I would have thought they'd have been quite eager to move on from a platform whose inherent hardware flaws that led to RRODs were never really fully fixed and solved. The hardware has been limited and showing its age for quite a while at least IMO.

By all rights, they should have announced and teased something at last year's E3. Instead they decided to stall and buy time with Kinect. Kinect is something that can easily roll over but MS needs to get it on so we can finally raise this lowest common denominator bar a bit and stave off the stagnation that's coming around the corner in gaming.


Nintendo is coming out with the Wii U this year in time for the holidays if I read that right. That could be interesting.
 
bigdogchris said:
You seem to of forgot that 360 shipped a full year early. PS3 is only a few million units behind the 360, which on average per year, means the PS3 is outselling the 360.

You need to get your facts strait before making such a bold claim. The PS3 and XBOX both have 512MB of memory. The difference is that 360 allows developers to dynamically allocate what amount to use on GPU/Processor, where PS3 forces a 256/256 split, which was a mistake.

Anyways, both of your comments are being obvious troll. This isn't a 360 vs. PS3 thread.
Click to expand...

LOL, clearly you favor Sony based on the fact that you attacked anyone that had something relative and factual to add about the 360. And to think you had the nerve to call others trolls for posting factual information related to the thread.
 
theNoid said:
Xbox 360 has more memory, more ED ram and a more powerful GPU than the PS3, all combined with the industry's best SDK making the devs jobs easier. This is why the majority of multi plat titles run better on the 360, over the PS3. The PS3 has a more powerful CPU, but thats about it really. The 360 is selling more hardware, selling heaps more software and racking in hundreds of millions in Live subscriptions (alone) because it really is the better platform, there is not magic here... its the better platform to the average Joe consumer who puts their money where their mouth is.

The PS3 is a great device, but Sony has fallen far from the PS2 era of 100+ million lead on any competition.. they are in 3rd place, a close third to MS worldwide but 3rd nonetheless. They are just starting to turn a profit off of the PS3 this late in its cycle so of course they are not going to release a new platform and eat hundreds of millions in R&D costs up front. Also, the biggest reason we won't see a PS4 any time soon isn't because of some silly 10 year cycle (because the PS3 came out before the PS2 10 year cycle ended), or earnings, or this or that.. but its all because this is the year of the PS Vita. Sony is not going to announce another, or release another platform in tandem to the Vita and kill whatever steam it has going for it. They are treating the Vita as a next gen platform and its critical they avoid chopping themselves down from the inside.

But, lets get something straight.. the PS3 is not more powerful than the 360. The 360 is actually a teeny tiny bit more powerful in most specs, probably edging it out over the PS3 if you were to list them all out. In the end the two consoles are basically as powerful as the other and a good developer can port between with little loss.

No new PS4 because of Vita and because Sony is bleeding money still, closing business divisions left and right, and reworking UK development studios to try and save money where they can. The wonders behind the Xbox 360 making all this money is very simple ...

People want it, the numbers don't lie. I suspect MS will beat them to the market again, by a minimum of 6 months.
Click to expand...

One of the most factual and well thought out posts I've seen in a while related to the comparison of the 360 vs PS3.
 
I still think this all boils down to have irrelevant CES has become more than anything else.
New big-ass TV's and boatloads of iPad knock offs - Yawn.
Even if Sony had something I don't think they'd announce it this week.
 
After all the shit Sony has pulled, I'd never trust them again. They have repeatedly shown they don't care about their customers at all.
 
rudy said:
Xbox shipped months ahead of the PS3 not a whole year.
Click to expand...
360 retail availability December 2, 2005. PS3 availability, November 11th, 2006. So 3 weeks shy of a whole year constitutes a 'few months' to you?
 
bigdogchris said:
360 retail availability December 2, 2005. PS3 availability, November 11th, 2006. So 3 weeks shy of a whole year constitutes a 'few months' to you?
Click to expand...

That was EU for the 360 and JP for the PS3.

In the US the 360 was released November 22nd , 2005 and the PS3 launched on Nov 17th 2006.


But yeah, 1 year apart here in the US anyways.
 
That's to bad. I own every current gen system and am looking forward to a new gen console from both Sony and Microsoft. I really hope that Sony releases before or within a few months of the new Xbox's release. At least the PS3 exclusives look much better compared to the Xbox exclusives I've played this year.
 
VGChartz doesn't factor in the whole world evidently. In the Asia Pacific region it's easily an 8:2 split on PS3:X360. But of course, the biggest market for games is the US where the X360 still reigns supreme.
 
vgchartz says global. Now how would global not include the whole world? Not saying they are perfect but people here keep trying to use deductive reasoning to say vgchartz is way wrong. But if it is then it should be a piece of cake to go look up the global numbers .
 
Last edited:
There is almost no difference in power between the xbox360 and the PS3, on any meaningful scale that represents total available GPU horsepower to the market today, they are within less than 1 percent of each other. The 360 has a very slighty better graphics solution and the PS3 has a better CPU.

Microsofts main benefit are a much easier to use SDK, you can develop games for 360, for PC and for windows phone in XNA and Silverlight all on one platform, using common languages and have most of the console specific stuff abstracted for you. The PS3 has a much trickier SDK to use and requires a lot more specialization when it comes to making the most of the hardware. The primary source of difference between the quality of a PS3 and 360 game is due to ability of developers to optimise the game for the platform.

I think the difference is that 360 is very much a family entertainment centre, it has the novel characteristics of the Wii with the slightly better graphics and mainstream action titles that also appeal to teenagers, so the whole family can use a 360. PS3 is somewhat more of a mature platform, the games seem more mature and the interface is stylish, it's aimed at being an all in one entertainment centre.

I believe both the major current gen consoles are far behind on their initial expected ROI and so they're going to be drawn out for as long as possible so Sony can make a decent profit back on the market place, it's a massive risk to put yourself in that much debt and only break even many years later, once they do they're going to want to milk the platform for as long as possible.

Both consoles are now embarrassingly old, they're really showing their age and it's a big problem especially for PC gaming because they're holding back innovation within the industry, we have developers like Epic all but pleading for new hardware to take advantage of. I think both MS and Sony have been in some kind of mutually beneficial development pause for a while so they can both see good returns it's just a case of who draws first.
 
The PS3 is harder to develop games for because of their multi-core setup. Also the Kinect has extended the life cycle for MS XBOX. I do not believe that MS is bleeding at all. Is the console makers lag in bringing out new hardware hurting development over all. YES!! look at how the other industries have changed over the last few years. 10 Years between machines is way too long. Just look at the CPU and GPU development advancement over the last few years, tremendous gains. Also, most game developers are porting console development to the PC arena. That means that the lowest common denominator has to be taken into account. I think the critical review of the graphics on MW3 was because of this. Maybe there needs to be a modular setup for consoles where the user can add CPU or GPU processing power with upgrades. That way developers can write at a higher level and if a person wants to play a particular game they may need to upgrade. Does it defeat the purpose of the concept of a console? Maybe!! but it also gives a console a longer reasonable life. There has got to be a way to maintain a concept of a console and have it be able to meet higher requirements when possible.
 
rudy said:
vgchartz says global. Now how would global not include the whole world? Not saying they are perfect but people here keep trying to use deductive reasoning to say vgchartz is way wrong. But if it is then it should be a piece of cake to go look up the global numbers .
Click to expand...

VGcharts is garbage.
 
Well frankly theNoid is the local [H] xbox fanboy, for a few years he only posted ProXbox / Playstation flames.

The real truth of the matter is that the PS3 has sold more worldwide, has less game adoption rates and is just as powerful as the xbox with the exception of the retarded even split of the 512mbs of ram. Uncharted 3, GoW III, an other first party platform titles are easily some of the best games graphically this generations. Here in the US the Xbox dominates because of Live plain and simple, it's a remarkable service tbh.

Folks get an Xbox to play with friends in CoD: MW3, folks get a PS3 to play some of the best exclusive games around. I own both and I usually buy the multiplats for Xbox for the online and PS3 for it's exclusives.

But I have my PC so they can both be trashed for all I care :p
 
Dreaz said:
VGcharts is garbage.
Click to expand...

lol what is really so hard? Go find the better site then and link it here. I did not cherry pick news I just googled console sales and hit the first link.
 
bigdogchris said:
You seem to of forgot that 360 shipped a full year early. PS3 is only a few million units behind the 360, which on average per year, means the PS3 is outselling the 360.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Xbox fans seem to ignore that fact. Either way, Nintendo kicked both their asses.
 
on the PS3 vs. Xbox.

The big difference between the two systems is the xbox has a unified memory architecture. Xbox has 512MB of total unified memory whereas the PS3 has 256MB of dedicated graphics memory and 256MB of dedicated system memory. As the games have progressed it's become more necessary to shift the usage in favor of the GPU and as a result the XBox has gained an advantage. Additionally the disabling of two of the Cell's processor cores and the total effective flops of the Cell being lower than projected the PS3 never actually achieved what Sony had said it could do. Many people still believe the PS3 to be more powerful but it's not really true.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
There is almost no difference in power between the xbox360 and the PS3, on any meaningful scale that represents total available GPU horsepower to the market today, they are within less than 1 percent of each other. The 360 has a very slighty better graphics solution and the PS3 has a better CPU.

Microsofts main benefit are a much easier to use SDK, you can develop games for 360, for PC and for windows phone in XNA and Silverlight all on one platform, using common languages and have most of the console specific stuff abstracted for you. The PS3 has a much trickier SDK to use and requires a lot more specialization when it comes to making the most of the hardware. The primary source of difference between the quality of a PS3 and 360 game is due to ability of developers to optimise the game for the platform.

I think the difference is that 360 is very much a family entertainment centre, it has the novel characteristics of the Wii with the slightly better graphics and mainstream action titles that also appeal to teenagers, so the whole family can use a 360. PS3 is somewhat more of a mature platform, the games seem more mature and the interface is stylish, it's aimed at being an all in one entertainment centre.

I believe both the major current gen consoles are far behind on their initial expected ROI and so they're going to be drawn out for as long as possible so Sony can make a decent profit back on the market place, it's a massive risk to put yourself in that much debt and only break even many years later, once they do they're going to want to milk the platform for as long as possible.

Both consoles are now embarrassingly old, they're really showing their age and it's a big problem especially for PC gaming because they're holding back innovation within the industry, we have developers like Epic all but pleading for new hardware to take advantage of. I think both MS and Sony have been in some kind of mutually beneficial development pause for a while so they can both see good returns it's just a case of who draws first.
Click to expand...

I would almost agree with that (like 99%) except for MS has been in the black since 2008 and they could at any time release a new machine without need to recoup losses. Live alone is worth BIG BIG $$ and a new console would not really affect that.....
 
Yantelope said:
on the PS3 vs. Xbox.

The big difference between the two systems is the xbox has a unified memory architecture. Xbox has 512MB of total unified memory whereas the PS3 has 256MB of dedicated graphics memory and 256MB of dedicated system memory. As the games have progressed it's become more necessary to shift the usage in favor of the GPU and as a result the XBox has gained an advantage. Additionally the disabling of two of the Cell's processor cores and the total effective flops of the Cell being lower than projected the PS3 never actually achieved what Sony had said it could do. Many people still believe the PS3 to be more powerful but it's not really true.
Click to expand...

Negatron ghostrider

*points to Uncharted 3*

BladeVenom said:
Exactly, Xbox fans seem to ignore that fact. Either way, Nintendo kicked both their asses.
Click to expand...

Wait what? Didn't you know Nintendo sucks the proverbial donkey nut? (what I am really saying is leave the common sense at home) :p

Also IMHO Sony's biggest failure was to not charge for PS3 and leae the featureset lighty ears behind what MS offers.....I hae a feeling this will change next time around
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top