PS4 Originally $499, Included Camera Peripheral

[Seracen]

I don't think this actually surprises anyone. However, the fact that I can CHOOSE not to bother is a great power given to me as a consumer, and I like that.

 

[Smeggs]

Ok, people are moaning at me alot. I hate kinect, have zero interest in being forced to buy one with the xb one. But, looking at it in a different way. Maybe this will enable good kinect useage? Maybe some indie developer will use it good now everyone has it? Now they can make awesome AAA kinect games. Or indie developers can be more creative than a AAA studio cant.

Now isnt this, as a gamer and loving games (regardless that previously kinect/eyetoy are crappy shovel ware worthless games) dont you think that these new toys are worth given the chance to be what they are? To make the games we wish could exist? Thats all im saying. Sony did good, they did what i did. But are they shooting themselves in the foot by not packaging the eyetoy with the PS4? (Now if MS forces companies to use it, i will protest louder than you, but is having it as opportunity to create something a bad thing?) Thats all im saying. Take away all the fanboyism and MS hate and what the kinect has done now. Imagine its day one of Kinect, we all had ideas of how kinect could be good. Just that the niche aspect has counted against it.

Interesting choice of words. People were "moaning" at you?

No, your stance has no ground to stand on. PS4 without the camera is $100 less. That alone is a good thing. Especially for someone like me, who doesn't want the camera. I don't have to buy something I don't want just to get something I do. It'd be like making me buy tampons, just so I can buy some chicken. I don't want them. I won't use them (especially as a guy). They have nothing to do with what I want to use the chicken for, so why do I have to buy them?

Yeah, not a perfect example, but I was trying to be ridiculous. In my view, the PS4 Eye is just as useless as those tampons.

Now, if I see some features and games that make the Eye seem worthwhile, then, I can easily do so. At a lower price, no less. But until then, I don't have to buy something that I don't want. And that will be that much better if nothing ever comes out to make me feel like the investment was worth it. It's win/win.

Why are you upset about a company doing something smart and beneficial to both them and the consumer? Or should I be asking where you plan to buy your Xbox One? Do you think the Day One achievement will be worth it?

I pretty much agree with all that Saltyk has said here.

Also, the problem isn't that people weren't being creative enough with the Kinect, it's that the Kinect is a shitty peripheral that constantly fails at the one job it's meant for. The Kinect's motion recognition needs to be fixed. If it would actually do what it was advertised to do then there would have been no problem with the games it was used for. Meanwhile, trying to shove this worthless piece of crap down our collective throats without any choice being given to the contrary is stupid. I don't ever intend on using the Kinect, nor do I intend on buying any games for Kinect, this is just Microsoft's way of forcing people to buy their shit.

If some form of insanity ever enveloped me and made me want a Kinect, I'd go out and buy a damn Kinect.

 

[faefrost]

I'm thrilled with SONY's decision, however they came to it, simply because I am one of those people that absolutely despises even the most vague concept that my games and game systems are watching me, rather than me watching them. I do not want a camera pointed at me while I game. I most certainly do not want an internet camera pointed at me. (And honestly, thanks to a surgical mishap no voice recognition tech will ever behave well for me.) This may seem strange, but I do not want my household entertainment devices searching for general input from the broad environment around them. I only want them to be able to sample or collect the very specific input that I deliberately give them.

 

[Vylox]

So how's the motion controls working out for the Wii U ¿

.........

That good... yup, exactly.


When the device itself can function as intended, if not better, then it might be worth working with. However, as things stand, the cameras for each of the currently released systems are not good enough to be a serious contender for changing how games are played. And with the current technology there is, both physical and software-wise, it is unlikely that the PS Orbis (PS4) or XBOne will be able to use these devices to the potential that are being claimed for them.

I should say more, but I think that should be sufficient.

 

[Roander]

Anyone else noticing that the Eye only costs 59 bucks and not a hundred?

Yeah. It's possible that they decided to take the eye away then eat a bit more of the cost to get a nice round 3 digit number to rub in Microsoft's face. It's also possible that their math is just being done by the same people who had decided including the eye in all ps4 packages would be a good idea.

 

[Flamespeak]

"According to sources"

Nice how those sources aren't mentioned and the sources don't add up. Seems like some kind of smear tactic to try and justify the other sides stance. I have no idea why anyone would want to make stuff up though when Sony, in typical fashion, will do something that will actually be scandalous with their new console eventually (Disc read errors on PS2, removal of linux capabilities of PS3, removing backwards compatibility, backtracking on rumble features, etc).

Still, Sony has the best box for next gen in terms of price and features so far, so they will get my money.

 

[Kataskopo]

I pretty much agree with all that Saltyk has said here.

Also, the problem isn't that people weren't being creative enough with the Kinect, it's that the Kinect is a shitty peripheral that constantly fails at the one job it's meant for. The Kinect's motion recognition needs to be fixed. If it would actually do what it was advertised to do then there would have been no problem with the games it was used for. Meanwhile, trying to shove this worthless piece of crap down our collective throats without any choice being given to the contrary is stupid. I don't ever intend on using the Kinect, nor do I intend on buying any games for Kinect, this is just Microsoft's way of forcing people to buy their shit.

If some form of insanity ever enveloped me and made me want a Kinect, I'd go out and buy a damn Kinect.

The Kinect it's actually a pretty great peripheral for research. I've used it to make a 3D model of a room, or to control a robot with your hands.

But as a gaming device, it's pretty shitty.

 

[Lightspeaker]

Sony look forward....not knee jerk. PS3 was really expensive because it came with a bluray player. Did they change? No, they went with it and look how many PS3s they sold. They took the risk and proved everyone wrong.

This is a terrible example. The PS3 was part of Sony's big effort to secure the Blu-Ray on behalf of the Blu-ray Disc Foundation. In return for that they sacrificed their market (because of the high price) as well as profits (since it was sold at a loss). They HOPED they wouldn't lose out as much as they did at launch, but evidently they viewed it as a loss worth taking if they could win the format war.

Ultimately Sony got off to a god-awful start this console generation but that didn't matter much because they had a bigger fight to win. They lost that particular battle, but they won the war. HD-DVD died a death in 2008 when Toshiba finally waved the white flag and surrendered to Blu-ray.

That was absolutely nothing to do with "faith in technology" and absolutely everything to do with the fact that they'd nailed their colours to the mast of Blu-ray. They wanted to win that war and they did. It came at a price which they eventually made up for as the technology became cheaper and so sales are now more or less even between the two consoles. But that's really just the icing on the cake as a result of winning that war. If you think about the other possibility...if HD-DVD had been THE format now then the PS3's Blu-ray capability would look laughable. It was a hell of a risk to take, but it meant they massively outsold the competition.


In comparison with the Eyetoy and Kinect...there isn't any bigger fight for Sony to fight here. Its not a big revolutionary change with competition that they want to be on the winning side of. They're both cameras which capture motion. Its just integrating a new gimmicky piece of technology (motion control) into their current setup in the hopes that it'll take off. And many customers are not convinced.

 

[barbzilla]

Edit: You can remove this comment if you wish. I just realized that the person I quoted to "discuss" with isn't actually discussing anything, he is just using circular logic.

OT: I think that removing the eye toy was a good move, and I'm glad they didn't do away with it entirely. I can only hope they use it in some way that actually makes it useful one day, but as for now, I just see it as wasted space.

As for the people talking about the price disparity, the eye toy may only be 60 dollars, and the price drop 100 dollars, but that is likely just sony eating a larger loss to try and make more console sales. If you remember when the last generation started, Sony got a horribly slow start until they got their prices down. They are probably trying to avoid this a second time and going for the throat while they are at it to gain a larger installed base than MSFT this generation.

 

[LordMonty]

Sony wins this simply by leaving me to make the choice.

 

[StewShearerOld]

"Sources"

I always laugh at this kind of stuff, when it comes from guys in a dark parking lot handing a file dossier like it's a cold war era Espionage movie...

Seriously, I see no point in discussing this, I don't think that the hours Sony had since MS PressCon and theirs was enough to have a talk with investors and model their own decisions based on that, and convince them.

This kind of things take longer than an afternoon to plan, debate and come up with a decision. I could believe if they made more than one plan and decided on the last week which one they would take, and I would believe if you tell me that with the Eye, the PS4 would cost 450, not this.

And if I'm wrong... well... I just take back what I said, but I still hold my ground on this.

 

[Mayamellissa]

I like how even with the 59$ extra it will STILL be cheaper to buy it than Xbone.

 

[Toadfish1]

Similar argument could have been made coming from someone coming from SNES to N64 "Two analog sticks are not and never will be a vital part of all games, so why force feed people with one?"

The reason, of course, is to provide a large enough base of people so that developers see the point in developing games that make use of the new control scheme.

Two Analog sticks WAS optional. The original DualAnalog (the controller that invented dual analog design, the staple that stuck and proved one analog stick was half assing it) was not bundled with the Ps1, but was such a huge hit that it proved to be overwhelmingly popular with gamers and developers. Instead of being a forced gimmick, dual analog design was an experiment that was allowed to grow and catch on at its own pace. And after everone loved it, Sony made it standard with the Ps2.

 

[klaynexas3]

Anyone else noticing that the Eye only costs 59 bucks and not a hundred?

Oh you bet I did. At first, I chalked it up as a good thing on Sony, in that they could allow you to have it's motion control peripheral still cheaper than the Xbox One, but now, finding out they would have sold it $40 more expensive bundled with the PS4, that kind of angers me. However, I am pleased that they had the sense to opt out of it.

 

[Olas]

They could have called it the Playstation One.

Honestly, what part of optional accessory do these developers not get?

 

[lacktheknack]

So Sony chickened out? Did Sony not think their eye thing was any good? Regardless, atleast MS stood up for the kinect as a viable addition, though i hate the kinect. An not acted like a cowardly chicken.

Sony smartened up. Understanding what the market will tolerate is important in business.

I disagree. Sony have zero faith in the eyetoy. Regardless if its crap like kinect is. Its not about those things. Its that Sony went against their original idea. They were not smart or anything and its nothing to do with being tolerant or anything. Its about Sony having zero faith in their own equipment and backed up just because fans moaned.

I hate kinect and have no interest in it at all. But atleast they stood by it. An maybe something will come out of it and make kinect worth while. Sony just backed out because they were scared of the fans when they should be saying "Ok it has eyetoy but this is why the eyetoy will make gaming on ps4 amazing" but nope.

The thing is, with it added as standard. It means better companies with more imagination can make these additions work.

If they have no faith in the Eyetoy, then dropping it and selling the stuff you ARE confident in for a cheaper price is a VERY smart move.

I don't understand this "At least Microsoft stood by their camera!" sentiment. What, is life now a massive sink-your-ship-with-your-pride-a-thon, and we are supposed to cheer for the most dunderheaded contestant?

The only thing that they lose out on is having a camera standard, but considering the "great performance" of cameras up to this point, I'm OK living without.

 

[Innegativeion]

You do know that companies wont make a kinect game because it wont make much money. An know one is going to buy a kinect to play one game. The kinect isnt madatory, just cos its in the box doesnt mean you are forced to use it or make games that has to have it. Just means in the future some companies may have an amazing use for it and thus can waste money on it because every one has one. Same as if everyone has a keyboard and mouse, there would be more strategy games on xbox because you wont expect your consumers to spend £100 on a kinect just to play your game.

MS are not making you buy it, how are they making you buy it? They got you at gun point? Kidnapped your family? Just dont buy it. lol. MS isnt making anyone develop games for Kinect, its just there if developers want it. Why are people acting like children about this? Your an adult, just by a PS4 instead.

Now in a years time if all games suck because all companies are forced by nazi MS, then i will apologise and by you a beer. But until then, instead of moaning, just see how things work out. Will connect be used to make gaming better? Then excellent. If it turns into a piece of crap as me and you think. Then i will be joining you in the anti kinect war. For now, im just saying, lets see what they do. What they come up with.

The kinect is bundled with the Xbone, thus jacking its price up 100$ or so, thus forcing you to buy it if you want an MS console.

This is, OBJECTIVELY, what they are doing. No amount of word-mincing on your end will change that. The xbone is IN FACT bundled with the kinect, IN FACT raising its price point.

Furthermore, if a product is shit, the consumer has EVERY right to say it is shit, and shout to the heavens that it is shit without fear of being shamed, if that is what they believe. It doesn't make them childish. It doesn't make them entitled. Actually, they not only have the option to exercise this right, but they SHOULD exercise it. Consumer feedback is the only way anything ever improved.

If it weren't for people practicing this right and saying the xbone was shit, it would still have an online requirement, be region locked, and charge people for lending out games.

And yet here you are calling people childish for it.