Sony May Include PS4 Eye Camera in Future Bundles

[roseofbattle]

Sony May Include PS4 Eye Camera in Future Bundles

The PS4 Eye camera was not included in the launch for the PS4 console in order to keep the price at $399.

Sony could have bundled its PlayStation 4 Eye Camera with all PS4 consoles for launch like Xbox One and the new version of Kinect; however, Sony dropped the inclusion of the camera to maintain the lower price of the PS4 at $399 when compared to the $499 Xbox One. The PS4 Eye is a motion- and voice-sensing peripheral.

Andrew House, Sony Computer Entertainment President and Group CEO, told Business Spectator that the exclusion of the Eye will not hurt PS4 sales. "The vast majority of the audience that we speak to tells us that their primary wish is for the full controller interface and there's not necessarily a huge emphasis being placed on camera interaction," House said.

According to Business Spectator, Sony is losing $60 on each PS4 sale by selling it at $399. The company tried to include the camera and leave the $399 price mark where it is, but it would have meant losing even more money on each sale, which Sony hopes to make back by selling software, services, and extra hardware like the Eye.

House said Sony may bundle the Eye with each PS4 later in the console's lifespan, but he iterated the PS4's core audience emphasizes a full controller interface over camera interaction.

Certain regions will have a launch-day bundle including the PS4 Eye, but Sony said that is "a decision to be made at the regional level closer to the launch date." The Eye will retail at $59 separately.

Source: Engadget [http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/10/8/technology/sony-plays-ps4s-fanbase]

Permalink

 

[Genocidicles]

Damn... I hope they still continue selling the console without it, otherwise I guess I'll have to buy one before they pull a Microsoft and force me to pay for a gimmicky piece of shit I don't want.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Maybe my memory is flawed but I thought Sony said that they weren't influenced by Microsofts decisions and that they had the $399 price in mind all along after the disastrous PS3 price of $599.

Not my imagination:

?Designing PS4 was all about learning lessons from PS3 ? ease of development and the cost of the system is a big part of it,? he said. ?We always wanted to hit $399 and we designed the system and carefully chose out of all the potential inclusions of the core hardware components and we made a system that we could sell for $399.

http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/12/sony-to-support-ps4-for-10-years-always-wanted-to-hit-the-399-price-point/

Hey Sony, when you are in such a favorable position, shut up!

 

[dragongit]

That almost seems like a given. The PS3 has PS eye bundles already. It's just another way of selling their kit in different ways. The fact that Microsoft made the Kinect mandatory in the package (though no longer mandatory to play) is the strange bit. I suspect any device they come up with, they will devise some bundle to go along eventually. It never said that the eye PS4 was mandatory for later releases, just that it may be possibility in the future. By then, the console may have dropped in price by itself with the original price standing for the bundle.

 

[LordMonty]

As long as its all part of a grander selection of choices then it matters not, all in all this is not that big a story its just an obvious option they'll probally put out there for people who like motion tech stuff.(i'll pass as i hate it but no judgement on anyone, well except wiiu owners).

 

[Vivi22]

Damn... I hope they still continue selling the console without it, otherwise I guess I'll have to buy one before they pull a Microsoft and force me to pay for a gimmicky piece of shit I don't want.

Of course they'll keep selling it without the PS Eye as well. They have both options right now with the PS3 as it is. Why would they change that after Microsoft publicly shat themselves?

 

[Flunk]

If Sony wants to be competitive, they'll be forced to do this eventually.

Why? Because in the days of the PS3 porting something from the cell processor to the more typical processor found in the Xbox 360 was a serious pain. Which made it worthwhile for companies to simply choose a side and run with it, giving us exclusives.

Now though? With the PS4 reverting to a more normal architecture, it's become very easy (read: cost effective) to port from the PS4 to the Xbone, so why would a company give up on that potential revenue?

However, on the flip side, *every* Xbone is going to have a Kinect. Developers know there'll be that base there, and a good number of them will want to play with that.. so Xbone will get exclusives that won't be easy to port over to the PS4. Unless Sony can convince developers that a significant enough portion of their user-base has the Playstation Eye, the Xbone will become the machine you want if you want the largest selection of games and exclusives.

I don't think so, I think it will just end up like games for the Xbox 360 did and Kinect support will either just not be there or it will be meaninglessly tacked on like it was in Mass Effect 3.

 

[SeventhSigil]

If Sony wants to be competitive, they'll be forced to do this eventually.

Why? Because in the days of the PS3 porting something from the cell processor to the more typical processor found in the Xbox 360 was a serious pain. Which made it worthwhile for companies to simply choose a side and run with it, giving us exclusives.

Now though? With the PS4 reverting to a more normal architecture, it's become very easy (read: cost effective) to port from the PS4 to the Xbone, so why would a company give up on that potential revenue?

However, on the flip side, *every* Xbone is going to have a Kinect. Developers know there'll be that base there, and a good number of them will want to play with that.. so Xbone will get exclusives that won't be easy to port over to the PS4. Unless Sony can convince developers that a significant enough portion of their user-base has the Playstation Eye, the Xbone will become the machine you want if you want the largest selection of games and exclusives.

Actually, that's assuming that the developers choose to work, independantly, with the Kinect in any large number. As you said, developers won't be so eager to toss away potentially half, maybe even more, of the overall revenue stream by making something that is overly difficult to port. This is especially the case since porting on a basic programming level will now be far easier, so developers will be far more encouraged to make their titles multiplatform. While we will no doubt see developers that Microsoft has made an arrangement to work on the sensor with, and likely some independent developers interested in tinkering with the technology, larger third- party developers are going to be less likely to make an exclusively Kinect-controlled game, when they could make a conventional controller title and bring in many, many more sales.

Like I said, there would be exceptions. Microsoft will, and probably already is, hiring on devs to work on titles for the Kinect, but since it's Microsoft making the arrangements, those titles will be exclusive regardless of whether or not Sony bundles the camera. And indie devs, generally speaking, are willing to take their titles in broader directions than most triple-A devs, so some will no doubt enjoy experimenting with the Kinect. But otherwise, making a Kinect-only motion title, one that cuts out half the available market by virtue of running on a non-standard (overall) control interface...

Like you said, with Microsoft's console, the camera is guaranteed to be attached to every device. However, it's still only going to represent about half of the market for that platform, and even sales of 24 million for the first Kinect didn't draw much interest from devs.

 

[CrystalShadow]

As long as its all part of a grander selection of choices then it matters not, all in all this is not that big a story its just an obvious option they'll probally put out there for people who like motion tech stuff.(i'll pass as i hate it but no judgement on anyone, well except wiiu owners).

Hey, I love the Wii U... But motion controls are not the main reason.

Though speaking of motion controls, the razer hydra is the best I've ever come across.
Pity nothing actually supports it properly.

(If you're wondering, the razer hydra consists of 2 handheld controllers, that between them have 2 analog triggers, 14 buttons, 2 analog sticks, and full independent 6-dof tracking for each hand. - that means it reliably tracks both rotation in all 3 axes, and linear motion in all 3 axes. Without any line of sight issues...)

But eh. Motion tech is rarely implemented in a way that makes it worthwhile. Sony already ruined any prospects of the ps4 having decent motion controlled games before they even started.
Microsoft has the right idea in technical terms, but since it annoys people so much, it may end up being counterproductive...

 

[Arawn]

Okay when Wii came out, I was hopeful. But after trying it, I was less than impressed. It was novel, but seemed an unneeded gimmick. Unfortunately one that they anchored many games with. As such many games became even less appealing in my eyes due to such a practice. I don't know how many Wii Sports and Wii Resorts like games did I end up playing. Much like how some games for the DS had a touch feature when the buttons functioned. Almost they were told their project HAD to utilize it. MS has put alot of work into their new Kinect, but I'm still reluctant to try playing a camera only game. Did anyone see that last Steel Battalion game? It wasn't pretty and nor functional. A great idea, just falling short of being an enjoyable experience. If they had tested it I wonder why it was so cumbersome. Regardless I'd hate to be among those that purchased the product and not be satisfied with their experience. Forcing a company to use the camera in the game might foster similar results. Such an element would drag down whatever good the game might otherwise accomplish. It's a neat option, but if not done right it's a complete waste of time. Sony giving people a choice is a gambit. As stated companies might be more willing to attempt something for Xbox One since the camera is standard. Less so likely with the lack of one for PS4. Perhaps either system will get a game that makes the peripheral worth using. Don't know what the future will bring.