Sony Teases Possible PlayStation 4 Announcement
- Thread starter MikeWehner
- Start date
You won't be getting Left for dead on consoles anytime soon. Valve hates closed systems, that's why they stick to PC.Wesley Brannock said:
A montage video of shapes and neon lights that is remembrance of the 1980's. In particular, it's kind of lame. Nothing spectacular as the PS2 or PS3 was (PS3 pre-videos were futuristic).
Until it comes from Sony's own mouth, nothing is confirmed.Eri said:
That said, I'm not signing up for the Wall Street Journal, so I can't actually read the article you posted, but if this is the Wall Street source other sites have been quoting, it's another one of those vague 'people familiar with this matter state' kind of things, and I hold absolutely no degree of belief in those sources until they are confirmed correct by the company itself. If there's something in that article that is more than that, then perhaps this is as good as 'confirmed.'
OT: However, if it's not, (as I'm not yet believing it to be), I don't know what else it would be. Perhaps Sony is announcing that Home is finally out of beta. Making a huge tease like this for a cloud service seems unlikely, but I suppose it's possible.
The thing is, Sony has to know that when they make an announcement like this, the very first thing on people's minds, given how much speculation has been flying about it, is their next console. If they make this huge tease and then it isn't for the next PlayStation? I think there's gonna be some huge fallout to that that Sony aren't seeing.
Also, if it is for the next PlayStation, why would they make the announcement on February 20th? Why wouldn't they wait and make a killer press conference at E3? Is there some significance to the date that I'm not seeing? I mean, the Vita came out on the 22nd of February last year. Maybe the announcment is like a one-year anniversary type thing for it, and there's some big news on that front? Other than that, the first PlayStation launched in September, the 2nd in October, and the third in November, and the PSP in March (these are all the North American dates).
And then there's that. As far as I know, this mystery tease popped up on Sony's North American site first, and perhaps exclusively. If this were a PS4 announcement tease, shouldn't it have been on a Japanese site first? I mean, that is their country of origin, and all of their stuff comes out there first.
I dunno, guys. I don't know what it might be, but I'm not feeling a console announcement at the moment.
It would be in their self interest to hasten the release, Sony just closed it's New York HQ. I'm not sure if they were cutting the fat or the meat. Based on the Japanese economy it could very well be they just cut the meat to save their Japanese HQ.
If these independent console developers move as fast as their timeline suggests, the proprietary nature of the big name consoles will isolate themselves and cause the big name publishers along with developers big & small to abandon them, for the low cost development of the Unix based consoles.
If these independent console developers move as fast as their timeline suggests, the proprietary nature of the big name consoles will isolate themselves and cause the big name publishers along with developers big & small to abandon them, for the low cost development of the Unix based consoles.
This. Modern PC graphics, release of the Wii U, and rumors of new systems from the others has put pressure on publishers; they're slowing down and waiting for the new hardware to be revealed before announcing anything themselves.Fireprufe15 said:
I think Sony pulled the usual corporate marketing talk with that 10 year plan. Didn't they consider the PS2 to have its own 10 year plan, too? They just stopped making PS2s about a month ago, so expect them to keep making PS3s along with PS4s until 2016 if the continue to sell up to then. New games for the old playstation will quickly go to a trickle when the new playstation picks up the pace a year after launch just like the last generation.SonOfVoorhees said:
Best phones of 2006:
http://m.cnet.com.au/best-mobile-phones-of-2006-339272785.htm?redir=1
Best phones of 2012:
http://m.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/20-best-mobile-phones-in-the-world-today-645440
This is just a reminder of how much technology developed in the last six years for all of those who think 7 year old hardware is still 'fine'.
http://m.cnet.com.au/best-mobile-phones-of-2006-339272785.htm?redir=1
Best phones of 2012:
http://m.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/20-best-mobile-phones-in-the-world-today-645440
This is just a reminder of how much technology developed in the last six years for all of those who think 7 year old hardware is still 'fine'.
?But it is fine. The PS3/360 still very much hold up to the modern standard, even compared to PC graphics. Although of course PC graphics have indeed far out-matched consoles, a) thats always the case and will remain that way in the next generation as well, b) games like Uncharted 3 aren't that far behind compared to PC games (it can still be considered a beautiful game, put it that way), and c) the Wii U doesn't exactly have powerful graphics and that is certainly 'next gen'.Fireprufe15 said:
Consoles aren't mobile phones; remember, the mobile phone market was kind of kicked into overdrive in terms of development speed when the iPhone forced the entire market to dramatically change. Before that, mobile phones weren't developing that fast.
Yes consoles aren't mobile phones, they're computers made to play games. And yes, some of the games really are beautiful. This is due to art style and optimization, not power. As a PC gamer I think new consoles are definitely needed, they're holding back game innovation and better graphics.Simalacrum said:
Graphics doesn't necessarily mean innovation. In fact, for the first few years of the next console cycle its going to mean a significant lack of innovation, as developers try to understand yet another console.Fireprufe15 said:
Put it this way. Some of the most innovative video games of our console generation looked like this:
Indie games truly flourished in this generation, and they certainly didn't need powerful consoles to achieve that they did: they needed an internet connection. Now that corporations are catching onto the fact that Internet downloads are far more profitable and more and more consumers are being attracted to it, Indie games are going to have to yet again compete with AAA game developers in the next console generation. Is this necessarily a good thing? I'm not so sure.
1. What I mean is that games on PC are being held back from the true potential due to developers needing to downsize for consoles. And yes indie games are a good thing they force AAA devs to be more innovative or drop out.Simalacrum said:Graphics doesn't necessarily mean innovation. In fact, for the first few years of the next console cycle its going to mean a significant lack of innovation, as developers try to understand yet another console.Fireprufe15 said:
Put it this way. Some of the most innovative video games of our console generation looked like this:
Indie games truly flourished in this generation, and they certainly didn't need powerful consoles to achieve that they did: they needed an internet connection. Now that corporations are catching onto the fact that Internet downloads are far more profitable and more and more consumers are being attracted to it, Indie games are going to have to yet again compete with AAA game developers in the next console generation. Is this necessarily a good thing? I'm not so sure.
But there will always be demand for better AAA games.
Still waiting for a good reason to get the PS3 or Xbox 360. I'm guessing they're never going to get around to that.
The developer or the publisher? The publisher wants to sell the most copies so they use the most common medium to satisfy their shareholders & bondholders, the developer needs the capital that the publisher has yet they don't want to be in debt.Fireprufe15 said:
Thus they dance to the tune of the Publisher.
I have a romantic view that the developers are the artists that just have a vision and want a canvas to put it on. Unfortunately they need to eat and pay rent, along with their families.
Am I in the minority over that?
Compared to PC? Not really. PC's are leagues ahead of the current consoles. The PS3, last I checked, used a chipset similar to the better 7 Series NVidia Graphics Cards. We are now all the way back around to the 6's again. The XBox 360 can't even compare.Simalacrum said:
There's been a LOT of advances in technology. Time to raise the bar.
Well, I reckon that the next Playstation is going to be blue, have four buttons that are marked with an ex, a square, a triangle, and a circle, and will probably use some kind of electricity.
Teasing a possibility to announce a possibility.
seriuosly, how is this newsworthy? this is turning into that celebrity news site who reports "at 8 pm a certain light was turned in the house, therefore we deduct that she has a secret lower. omg please make a scandal".
seriuosly, how is this newsworthy? this is turning into that celebrity news site who reports "at 8 pm a certain light was turned in the house, therefore we deduct that she has a secret lower. omg please make a scandal".
I'm rather sick of people continuing to spit this out like it's some kind of truth. It's not. Giving developers more processing power means that they can do more.Simalacrum said:
How many indie open world games are there? Hell, how many 3D indie games are there (some, but I'm making my point)? The small teams that make up indie gaming don't have the manpower or funding to make the next GTA, Arkham City, or Fallout.
There are some genres that really shine with more power behind them. This goes to more than just raw pixels, improved and more AIs, allowing for bigger environments and worlds, more characters, etc.