Search Unity

  1. Good news ✨ We have more Unite Now videos available for you to watch on-demand! Come check them out and ask our experts any questions!
    Dismiss Notice

PS4-400$ price tag and no DRM.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by dxcam1, Jun 11, 2013.

  1. dxcam1

    dxcam1

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Posts:
    477
  2. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    13,133
    I thought I read that it was tied to the hardware rather than the account? I won't be upset if I'm wrong.
     
  3. Wild-Factor

    Wild-Factor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Posts:
    605
    I agree on the used game things, it's really a shame for microsoft.

    But on the price:
    PS4 has no move and no cam.
    It's the usual sony memory card tricks. Display a low price, and ask you to pay later...
    Of course if you only play hardcore game alone, one controller (which is nice) should be enough.

    The new kinect is different from the old one. The old one was just a broken idea. This one should actually WORK (precise and no latency).
    On the price, I thing both console are the same.
     
  4. dogzerx2

    dogzerx2

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    3,873
    No latency huh... I instantly thought about oculus rift + kinect!
     
  5. landon912

    landon912

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Posts:
    1,573
    Personally Sony not forcing me to spend an extra 100 bucks on a device that I wont use is a huge plus, and that's giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt that the Kinect is around 100 dollars.

    That's what they said in the first place....

    Um, no. The PS4 has more raw power, and doesn't force me to buy a stupid camera.
     
  6. khanstruct

    khanstruct

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Posts:
    2,865
    So what about the people who have no interest at all in motion control? Gimmick devices like that should always be sold as peripherals. NOT packaged in with the console to jack up the price.
     
  7. dxcam1

    dxcam1

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2012
    Posts:
    477
    How can it have no latency? Did Microsoft break physics?
     
  8. nipoco

    nipoco

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2011
    Posts:
    2,008
    This.
    Personally I have no interest in Kinect. It's the contrary, I definitely don't want something that probably spies my activities even if turned off (See PRISM and Microsoft's involvement there)
     
  9. Wild-Factor

    Wild-Factor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Posts:
    605
    you don't read me :)
    I quote myslef:
    "Of course if you only play hardcore game alone, one controller (which is nice) should be enough."
     
  10. Wild-Factor

    Wild-Factor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Posts:
    605
    physics??
     
  11. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    I think that the PS4 is sub par to, It is as though just because the Xb1 sucks the Ps4 is suddenly a godsend. If you actually look at it it costs $550, requires a subscription and no backwards compatibility. Compared to the Ps3 that costs $250 and has no subscription... Does that not look like a step backwards?
     
  12. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    13,133
    You only "need" the subscription for one part of the experience, though. And, while I agree it'd suck to have to get it if you didn't want it anyway just to get into multiplayer, as it currently is the subscription is pretty excellent value.

    I haven't looked into it, but I assume that aside from existing Plus features, the sub does more than just unlock the "Join game" button?
     
  13. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    I think that's a little unfair, that's like comparing the ps3s cost to a gameboy.
     
  14. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    What? why? No its not... Unless you are saying that the graphics will sell it?
     
  15. TwiiK

    TwiiK

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Posts:
    1,678
    Why are you comparing it to the PS3? Why not a PS2? That one is much cheaper and it makes no sense either way.

    And where are you getting $550? It's $400.

    And what subscription does it require? You're talking about online play? Not everyone requires that. My Xbox 360 works fine without the gold subscription.

    I think it's a very good deal. The PS3 was $600 at launch. You're getting quite a lot of hardware for $400.

    I'm no Playstation fanboy nor am I an avid console gamer, but you'd be hard pressed to build a similar pc gaming rig for $400 so it's by no means a bad deal.
     
  16. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    The Ps2 is not still getting current games or is sold.

    Australia.

    We could play free on Ps3.

    Maybe not, IDK but that is not really the point.
     
  17. Izitmee

    Izitmee

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3,233
    Ehe while I think what Microsoft did with Xbox One is shameful and rather stupid, I don't like the PS4 either (especially because they're asking a monthly fee to play online - I mean, WTF!): it shines just because Xbox One sucks horribly. You should take a look at this E3 wrapup: hilarious (warning, explicit dialogues) :D
     
  18. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    Basicly my thoughts.
     
  19. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,602
    Actually sony has thrown in so many blockbusters into the Plus subscription the past year that even hardcore gamers can save money with it.
    PS3 EU got titles like Mass Effect 3, Red Dead Redemption, Batman and a whole pile more for its like $80 a year and for me as PSVita and PS4 owner its even more than just that.
    They throw in that much actually that the 250GB edition of the PS3 is no way enough to even keep up remotely with what they throw at you.

    I preordered my PS4 when its preorder went online some months ago as it was obvious already back then that MS would fail due to steps taken on X360 and PR big bomb messups performed by high level decision makers at MS. E3 only solidified the knowledge that Microsoft decided to push the PS4 with a $500M++ anti-marketing budget for their platform ...

    If MS wants to get out of this, they have a whole layer of management that needs to get cut or MS will in the end be forced to cut the whole division within 6 years (wouldn't be the first time that the game devision gets shot down at MS and probably also not the last time unless MS runs out of money)

     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  20. PrimeDerektive

    PrimeDerektive

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2009
    Posts:
    3,073
    Nor will the PS3, after about 6 months.
     
  21. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    But isn't there something like when I stop my subscription I lose all the free games acquired? It seems like it should be exactly what it seems a "plus" service that is on top of what is free.

    Are you sure?
     
  22. Agent_007

    Agent_007

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Posts:
    899
    If you are being sarcastic, please, use smileys.

    E3 2013 games list includes at least 50 PS3 games, and many of those games won't hit to markets during 2013. So both PS3 and Xbox 360 will get big name games during 2014.
    http://www.ign.com/wikis/e3/Big_Games_at_E3_2013
     
  23. kerafrymm

    kerafrymm

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Posts:
    21
    Regardless of whether its now pay for online, I don't understand why with the X360 and PS3, people said Microsoft was horrible and disgusting for making you require Xbox Gold to play online.

    Now PS4 requires you to pay for PSN+ if you want to play online... and it's being celebrated?
     
  24. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    Yeah, its just fans. No way is that good. I get that you can get good value but it should be an option not a necessity.
     
  25. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    13,133
    They're not "free", they're an "instant collection", and you lose them because you're subscribed to them, you're not buying them.

    Of the $40 I've spent on PS Plus this year I've played well over $150 worth of games, $50 of which I was going to otherwise pay for anyway, play in a weekend, and probably never touch again. In other words, I'm $10 ahead and I got an extra $100 worth of gameplay *and* I still have months left. Loss aversion really wreaks havok with people's perception of value.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  26. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    The price goes down over time, the ps3 cost a lot more than it does now. You're comparing old hardware with the cost of new hardware and calling it a "step backward" and justifying this sweeping statement by saying it adds on subscription costs. Leave the cost of the console out of it, it's a very reasonable cost.

    Also, PS4 is now dropping online passes..so what's your new argument for why it's a step backward? The cost? because if you want to make an argument for why it's a step backward, every single point you mention needs to be a step backward, the price isn't one.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  27. khanstruct

    khanstruct

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Posts:
    2,865
    Who's celebrating? That was the one bit of disappointing news that came from the Sony conference. However, it is still half the price of XBox Gold, and for $5 a month, you get a ton of value.

    In a nutshell, Playstation has more powerful hardware, a lower price tag, and doesn't have all of the crazy taboos of the XBox One (always on camera and mic, required internet connection, insane DRM rules, etc.)

    XBox does have some pretty awesome, exclusive titles, but its not enough to beat what Sony is offering (and most of those exclusives will be on PC anyway).

    Sony wins.

    P.S. Comparing the price of one generation of consoles to the previous generation's price is ridiculous (especially when there's almost a decade gap between the two). Prices increase. For everything.
     
  28. RichardKain

    RichardKain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Posts:
    1,258
    It is not a necessity. I own two XBox 360s, and have never once subscribed to XBox Live Gold. I don't play my XBox 360 games on-line. I own over 100 PS3 games, and rarely ever play any of them on-line. On-line is a nice addition, but it has never really been a requirement.

    Naturally, on-line play for consoles is a lot bigger and more popular now than it used to be. For some individuals this change is going to be a kick in the pants. Some gamers only turn on their consoles to enjoy a little on-line play. (and couldn't care less about single-player experiences) Those gamers just had their free on-line options cut back to the Wii U or PC. Those are the "options" you feel should be present. The great thing about a competitive market is that the consumer always has plenty of options.

    Seriously, if you are adamant about not having to pay for on-line play, feel free to pick up a PS3 instead. It is a well-established platform with a very large library of titles. (as I can personally attest to) It's going to continue getting solid releases for the next year and a half easy, and has enough games to keep any player happy for another three or four years. It won't be going away just because its successor is on its way.
     
  29. RichardKain

    RichardKain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Posts:
    1,258
    Not to mention the fact that the PS3 originally launched at $500 and $600. The fact that the PS4 is launching for $400 is actually a bit of a relief. It is much closer to what is usually expected of a home console launch, and is only $50 more than the Wii U's primary sales unit.

    I am sorry about the Australian native. But then, Australia always seems to get boned when it comes to video game prices.
     
  30. khanstruct

    khanstruct

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Posts:
    2,865
    Not to mention, all the perks of the PS4 are OPTIONAL. Not required like the always-on kinect, microphone and required internet connection.



    If you don't have internet, use the 360. Really!?
     
  31. dogzerx2

    dogzerx2

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    3,873
    @khanstruct Haha, yeah, that guy really put his foot in his mouth. Surely if you don't want to depend on your internet connection to use your console you can use the xbox 360, oOOOoor.... you can get PS4, his freaking competition. How can he be so dull??
     
  32. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    Not to mention this online pass people keep talking about is dropped and it's up to the publishers if they want to charge for online.
     
  33. Starsman Games

    Starsman Games

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Posts:
    2,152
    In the full length interview, loved how the guy kept repeating over and over "what people need to understand is..." for so many points. I think he is the one that has to stop and try to understand the S***ty position they currently are standing on, and how telling consumers that the consumer is the one that "needs to" do anything, is going to hurt them in the long run.
     
  34. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    So its free now? Well thats fine then. But if you look through history, Ds and Ps2 were both very underpowered to the competion and are the highest selling consoles of all time, the Wii outsold the Ps3 and Xb360 and was far weaker, so why the Ps4. IMO a 1080p Ps3 would have been a better choice.

    Though if online is free now I will poroboly get a Ps4.

    And again Khanstruct you are comparing the Xb1 terrible policies the Sonys bad policies acting as if it is good. And why shouldent new consoles be comapred to old, its not like these are just going to drop off the face of the earth... expecialy with games like Crysis 3 looking great on the aged consoles.
     
  35. Noisecrime

    Noisecrime

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Posts:
    1,568
    The thing with XBL is that you also need it to do anything online at all, from watching netflix or youtube, to well anything, other than actually downloading patches and buying games. All the extra media stuff is trapped behind its XBL paywall with the exception of the BBC iPlayer in the UK and that's only because MS had to offer that for free.

    Unfortunately as MS have got away with this for so long its now pretty much accepted for online play and the potential benefits you get from paying, i.e. they can continue to invest and improve the service. However at least on PS4 if you have no interest in online play you can ignore PS+ and still get access to online content such as youtube or Netflix (assuming you've got a subscription for it).

    This is one factor that had already pushed me towards PS4 before all the announcements. I didn't bother renewing my XBL subscription at the end of last year, as i'd stopped being interested in most multi-player games. Unfortunately that effectively made the whole xbox practically worthless as I couldn't watch netflix on it, can't even use Internet Explorer. In my mind this was just madness on MS part, since I switched to using my laptop connected to the TV it created a vicious circle that led to the xbox being used less and less. If anything that sort of stance has costed them money as I was no longer looking at xbox arcade games to buy.

    For me this was a sign of where MS was heading and all the worse fears over the last year of rumours have pretty much come true.Whilst Sony have come out like a beacon of hope to gamers, giving them a gaming console. Of course the sad fact is they've been able to do this without actually doing anything other than maintaining the status quo.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  36. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    13,133
    Actually the Aussie price is pretty ok when you take tax (which is included in prices here) into account. In this regard it seems that some companies have changed their tune at least slightly since the recent inquiry. Publishers don't seem to have been among them so far, though, aside from ones who weren't doing it in the first place.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  37. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    Technology advances, that's what it does. The PS4 market is different to Nintendo. They shouldn't be compared, it's a different demographic. It's like the Mac vs PC argument. The Nintendo relies on selling their rehashed IPs and they don't "need" that new hardware. Sony Microsoft require it, if they had the Wii U hardware they'd probably die or downsize and that's not what a business does. Studios want better hardware and they're giving it to them. I'm still waiting for better hardware for one of my game ideas and it has nothing to do with the GPU.

    Also, it's free but it's up to publishers to charge for online. I doubt they will but we'll see. So if you do intend on buying I'd wait a while, but you probably were going to anyway.

    I suspect it'll be like a one-off thing in the box that is only available to first purchasers if anything...would be a smart move, takes the blame off Sony partially.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  38. Izitmee

    Izitmee

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3,233
    Ow, I still don't like both consoles, but I just discovered another terrible thing about Xbox One: it will work only in 21 countries at launch (and who knows when things will change) :O WTF?!?
     
  39. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    That is what I don't get, if you look at the highest selling games like for example COD, then look at a game like Crysis 3, you can see that even on those consoles graphics don't sell a game, so why keep pushing for basicly only graphics? I don't see any new gameplay possibilities in these consoles just boosted graphics.


    Yeah, as you can probably tell I only pick up Nintendo consoles day 1, maybe 6 months to a year from launch I'll get a Ps4 though likely based on how good the new Halo looks.
     
  40. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    They'll come eventually(I hope), some of the games look pretty interesting, especially the hacking one. A lot of the improvements could be in the AI department etc, we don't know yet till we try them out. But I agree, there should be at least one game that is pushing what we can do in the game and not with graphics. I didn't see anything that pushes it, improvements yes, but not innovative new game play only possible due to new hardware. It just looks like they're doing more stuff with what they already have, like instead of having 10 AI before it's now 20 etc.

    It's possible the games will become more sandbox and open world than innovative, which is what it looks like is happening.

    I figured you would do that, I won't be getting the new Xbox anymore. I was going to get it for my cousins etc but I'm not touching it now. PS4 release day for me :), I have to get a new console eventually and I'd prefer the PS4 over the Xbox any day, might as well get it earlier if I already know which one I'm definitely getting.
     
  41. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,806
    Multiplayer is not free (need PS+) except for few F2P titles like Planetside 2
     
  42. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    This is true, I misread a little but yes, multiplayer requires a PS+ sub, except for F2P titles. Luckily it's only $5/m and if you can afford the luxury of a PS4 you can afford that subscription for the luxury of online, the servers cost money. Kind of like those guys that super computers and still pirate computer games.

    Online passes on the other hand is where you pay money to gain access to multiplayer, which is a form of DRM to make money off used sales. They're dropped for the PS4 but publishers are still free to come up with their own solution, although it's "discouraged".
     
  43. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    Still, it was free with the Ps3. I'm not happy with that, IMO its just a grab for money.
     
  44. Izitmee

    Izitmee

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3,233
    It's not only a question of having the money or not. The main issues - money included - I see are two:
    1) 50 euros a year (66$) for a subscription is not that cheap
    2) obviously, if nobody complains and paying to play online becomes a fact, the price will grow in time (it just went from 0 to 66$ a year :p), and possibly new limitations will appear (as the recent E3 clearly showed, new limitations ALWAYS appear) - not to mention that, sure, PS Plus now offers some bonuses, but will they still offer them a year from now, since subscription is now practically compulsory?

    That said, if someone tries to set new limits to your lifestyle, then there's always a reason to complain. Not doing so sounds very weird: "oh yes, you want to limit something that I was free to do? and you want to do that without any particular reason? sure, you're welcome!" <- WEIRD :D
     
  45. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,611
    It is and I don't like it but it's the best choice..sadly.

    Well, they'll get away with it as long as people are willing to let them get away with it. Gamers aren't very good at organizing boycotts, but that's what healthy competition is for. We choose by buying which one we prefer, I doubt people will choose to buy neither. Sony would probably have online passes if it wasn't for them wanting to get rid of them to look better compared to Microsoft. Sadly, they thought that charging a monthly sub is worth the negative attention and it probably won't be effecting a majority of sales and the fact that Microsoft screwed up so badly let them get away with it.

    By the way, how are they limiting your lifestyle? This is a $5 monthly subscription that is optional(as long as you don't want online for non-f2p games).
     
  46. TylerPerry

    TylerPerry

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Posts:
    5,577
    Not really, it just means that I will be limited to PC, Ouya and Wii-U for multiplayer. Though those are my choice platforms anyway so its fine for me :D
     
  47. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,806
    PS+ has been great so far and haven't hear any of my friend dissing it either as its not feeling just a cash grab like Live Gold felt like. The discounts and free games have been great. If you you buy everything and buy em quickly after release then it might feel that beneficial service. Only costs the same as one game to subscribe for one year.
     
  48. Gnimmel

    Gnimmel

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Posts:
    354
    I have 2 Xbox 360's and 1 PS3. If a game comes out on both systems I always buy the Xbox version, why? because I feel the online experience of the xbox 360 was just better. If that was because I've been paying a yearly subscription then I don't mind Sony charging a little, as long as it improves the experience. To be honest though, I haven't been online with my ps3 in a long time, so perhaps it improved a little.

    I always try to buy new games, I like to support the developer, so no used games doesn't really make a difference to me, however not being able to let a friend borrow them is a bit much. The DRM crap is the real killer for me and why I wont have a xbone this time round. I don't always want to be online, I like story driven single player games more then online games, so why should I need to check in with big brother just to play it.

    As unlikely as it sounds, MS or at least their gaming department might not be around for ever, what happens if they shut off the xbone servers in the future? People still like to play their old retro games from time to time, this might not be possible in the future.
     
  49. Izitmee

    Izitmee

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3,233
    If someones puts a gate in front of a park (which we'll call multiplayer) where I previously could go freely, even if that gate costs just 1$ it's definitely a limitation. Also, you don't believe it will stay 5$ forever, do you? :p
     
  50. shadowpeak

    shadowpeak

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Posts:
    19
    I have been on the fence about either system, but the angry mob has really distorted this. After researching what actually MS is planning on doing (because I couldn't believe that MS was taking such draconian measures), I found that you can have up to 10 friends have access to your entire library to download and play your games. One of your friends can even play the same game that you are playing at the time.

    The only catch is that it is unclear (from what I have found) if only one person can play on your library at a time, or only one person per game at a time.

    Either way, not really as restrictive as what I had previously thought. My brother (who still lives with our parents about 45 minutes away) and I often borrow games from each other, so I thought it was an automatic disqualifier, but this works even better since we don't have to make 90 minute round trips to borrow games.

    Yes, it is still restrictive (I don't care about 24 hour check-in, my Xbox is always connected anyways) but it has moved my needle from completely jumping the Xbox ship to straddling the fence once again.
     
unityunity