Sony: Raised R&D Costs Related to PS4 Launch

[LIONSFAN20]

It doesnt matter, I MUST have it when it releases. I am such a sheep

[Maximus]

Try to stay on topic please...

[tarvis]

With games like The Witcher 2 and Battlefield 3 doing a better job of pushing tech, the sooner the next generation of consoles the better, as far as I'm concerned. Doesn't mean I'll buy a PS4 at launch, but having it available for development is a good thing. Televisions currently locked at 1080p means a higher probability of having a stable frame rate with vertical sync for once. I really hate tearing.

[Icemage]

Originally Posted by PA_Kid

Ninendo's new system is definitely the start of the next console generation? Think the jury is still out on that one.

I agree that they probably won't give MS a year headstart, but (to me) it still feels like the next N console is just playing catchup with Sony and MS from the specs we're heard. Granted a truly revolutionary gimick could let it do the Wii thing again, but a system only slightly more powerful than the PS3 and 360 in an age where all the systems have motion options doesn't strike me as next gen.

I think E3 will be very interesting this year...

This. I think much of what both Sony and Microsoft may do in the near future will depend heavily on how well (or poorly) received Nintendo's next hardware iteration is after its debut at E3.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that unless Nintendo has something really surprising under their hats, they're going to have a tough time selling their new hardware.

Right now, as things stand, "dedicated" gamers who buy lots of games have all but abandoned the Wii, and for good reason; the games simply aren't there. The games aren't there because the sales weren't there to support them, and the sales weren't there because the hardware caused most of the "standard" games to become unfeasible on the Wii, due to either the control scheme, the processing/graphics power, or both.

Unless Nintendo can make a convincing argument to 3rd party developers that people will buy more than just Nintendo first party games on their new system, they're going to just repeat history, and none of the 3rd parties wants to risk that again.

All of this elliptical logic really boils down to this:

(A) Does Sony need new hardware yet?

Not just yet, unless Nintendo catches lightning in a bottle a second time.

(B) Will Sony's new hardware be backward compatible?

Probably. Sony has seen the pitfalls of what happens when you remove backward compatibility.

(C) Does Sony want to beat Microsoft to market?

Also probable. The Xbox 360 enjoyed a hefty advantage for the first couple years of this console generation just by virtue of being first out of the gate. Sony is fortunate that Microsoft's game development and management made some major missteps after the launch of the PS3 which helped it climb back into the race, but I don't think Sony really wants to rely on that happening again if they get beat to launch again.

[Wingman1977]

My question (and probably everyone else), is does that translate into a higher price for that console? if that's a yes, if people thought $500-$600 was a lot for a console, we might have to brace ourselves (hopefully I'm wrong).

[4K display]

Maybe Sony should give MS a 2 year headstart, mix things up a little bit. Maybe they should forget about headstarts and generations and bring out the PS4 when its really ready to. "Fall behind" for one year and spend the whole next year hyping the shit out of it, two years would give it a significant leap technically(it bloody well better).

Easier said than done, but the last thing I want to see is a rushed PS4 that will most likely (among other things) suffer crappy ports all over again from 360's successsor. I'm also a little tired of the same old, same old console wars. Bring in some chaos...

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by Wingman1977

My question (and probably everyone else), is does that translate into a higher price for that console? if that's a yes, if people thought $500-$600 was a lot for a console, we might have to brace ourselves (hopefully I'm wrong).

No console maker will ever launch a major system at that price, ever again. it was too expensive for the market and severely cut into PS3 sales. If Sony could do it over again, the PS3 would not have been $599 at launch.

[nameisjimbo]

yes plz this generation is pretty stale.

[DonRSD]

when ps3 came out, was the iphone even out? (maybe it JUST came out)
look how much tech has changed.

a new console is NEXT years e3 for xbox and/or sony (e3 2012)

[awx]

Any indication if the PS4 is switching to Arm cpu or sticking with Cell/ppc? If it's an Arm, how many cores might it have? If they stay with the cell, what would the new one look like? How much Ram this time?

[tarvis]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

No console maker will ever launch a major system at that price, ever again. it was too expensive for the market and severely cut into PS3 sales. If Sony could do it over again, the PS3 would not have been $599 at launch.

Depends on how much proprietary tech they stick under the hood. If the NGP is any indication of what to expect from a PS4, as well as the price of Sony products across the board, I don't think it'll be cheap.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

No console maker will ever launch a major system at that price, ever again. it was too expensive for the market and severely cut into PS3 sales. If Sony could do it over again, the PS3 would not have been $599 at launch.

Originally Posted by tarvis

Depends on how much proprietary tech they stick under the hood. If the NGP is any indication of what to expect from a PS4, as well as the price of Sony products across the board, I don't think it'll be cheap.

Even @ $599, Sony was taking a loss @ both ends, manufacturing & sales. I know that the initial cost of a new media standard is expensive but it can be justified. I could honestly see the next PlayStation coming in @ least $399 due to the fact that Sony won't be having to introduce a new media standard i.e. blu-ray but the "it" factor will be there because it's PlayStation. Just my two cents so don't flame me...

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by omegaice

Even @ $599, Sony was taking a loss @ both ends, manufacturing & sales. I know that the initial cost of a new media standard is expensive but it can be justified. I could honestly see the next PlayStation coming in @ least $399 due to the fact that Sony won't be having to introduce a new media standard i.e. blu-ray but the "it" factor will be there because it's PlayStation. Just my two cents so don't flame me...

The system did cost a lot to build, but that was Sony's fault for designing the hardware to be that costly. They overestimated the amount of hardcore Sony fans who would pay any price to get a PS3.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The system did cost a lot to build, but that was Sony's fault for designing the hardware to be that costly. They overestimated the amount of hardcore Sony fans who would pay any price to get a PS3.

Absolutely! Which is why I wouldn't be surprised if the next PlayStation will @ least be listed @ $399 or more. But then again we all might be pleasntly surprised!

[Snake_XRS]

Max--Have you heard anything either way regarding the cell? I really hope they don't drop it, as it still has serious untapped power given a more powerful gpu and memory.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by Snake_XRS

Max--Have you heard anything either way regarding the cell? I really hope they don't drop it, as it still has serious untapped power given a more powerful gpu and memory.

Agreed. I hope they hang on to the Cell. It's a solid foundation to build upon.

[Icemage]

Originally Posted by Snake_XRS

Max--Have you heard anything either way regarding the cell? I really hope they don't drop it, as it still has serious untapped power given a more powerful gpu and memory.

The Cell architecture is something of a dead-end development, actually. It's fairly powerful, given the right conditions, but it's a nightmare to write code for, and those "right conditions" don't happen all that often.

Part of the problem is that Sony underpowered the RSX graphics chip, which means some of the computational muscle of the Cell processor is instead being pushed into helping out the graphics processing.

A bigger problem, however, is that the applications for which the Cell SPUs are actually well-suited are fairly limited. You can do some sneaky workarounds within the PS3 memory architecture to make them do more than they would normally be limited to (seriously, 256KB of cache on each SPU doesn't go very far these days). Such workarounds are complex and degrade the overall power and utility of the SPUs, but you don't have a lot of choices on the PS3.

I'd sincerely hope that Sony backs off of the Cell architecture, or they may have a full-scale revolt on the part of developers.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by Icemage

The Cell architecture is something of a dead-end development, actually. It's fairly powerful, given the right conditions, but it's a nightmare to write code for, and those "right conditions" don't happen all that often.

Part of the problem is that Sony underpowered the RSX graphics chip, which means some of the computational muscle of the Cell processor is instead being pushed into helping out the graphics processing.

A bigger problem, however, is that the applications for which the Cell SPUs are actually well-suited are fairly limited. You can do some sneaky workarounds within the PS3 memory architecture to make them do more than they would normally be limited to (seriously, 256KB of cache on each SPU doesn't go very far these days). Such workarounds are complex and degrade the overall power and utility of the SPUs, but you don't have a lot of choices on the PS3.

I'd sincerely hope that Sony backs off of the Cell architecture, or they may have a full-scale revolt on the part of developers.

So what do you see them leaning to if not the Cell?

[Icemage]

Originally Posted by omegaice

So what do you see them leaning to if not the Cell?

Anything multicore would be ok, but given that PS3 backward compatibility is probably to be expected, I'd lean closer to something like Intel's scrapped-but-maybe-usable-for-the-PS4 Larrabee multipurpose CPU design.

ARM has some neat designs out there, and of course I'm sure IBM would be just thrilled to provide yet another PowerPC-based design of some kind.

The Cell architecture, at its heart, has problems with bottlenecking and memory access. I definitely wouldn't want Sony to continue moving in that direction.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by Icemage

Anything multicore would be ok, but given that PS3 backward compatibility is probably to be expected, I'd lean closer to something like Intel's scrapped-but-maybe-usable-for-the-PS4 Larrabee multipurpose CPU design.

ARM has some neat designs out there, and of course I'm sure IBM would be just thrilled to provide yet another PowerPC-based design of some kind.

The Cell architecture, at its heart, has problems with bottlenecking and memory access. I definitely wouldn't want Sony to continue moving in that direction.

I agree. I was thinking some type of Intel based architecture as well. But IBM wouldn't be a bad way to go either.