PS4 rumours (leaked?) ...

[Obli]

I have just read a translated article (Japanese-to-English; not an easy read!) regarding PS4 leaked info / rumours - here it is: http://gamingfront.net/story-156-.html

If the article is to be believed, here is a general summary is:


* Sony have made a huge investment in the Cell processor.

* PS4 will use a smaller, faster cell (talk of a 24 - 32 core cell!) with improvements in frequency (clock speed).

* It will have more RAM, although what type is undecided. They may go with a 'memory standard said to be emerging', to keep costs low.

* It will be cheaper to produce, due to manufacturing improvements / more Cells per silicon wafer / better yields.

* It will be high performance at a competitive price.

* Developers will be familiar with the architecture which will be the same (or similar) to the PS3 architecture. Not only that, but the development tools will be evolved from the PS3 development tools / SDK.

* Sony are trying to prepare for a 2011 launch if they need to launch that fast. Read: if Microsoft launch something, Sony will be ready. Cell development and expanded use of the scalable PS3 architecture allows them to be ready to manufacture quickly.

* No mention of Blu-ray.



Really, I could have predicted most of that! I think Sony, having invested and slogged through a wave of 'bad times', are looking to come out on top. Who would have ever doubted them?

 

[Ardius]

Sounds less like a PS4 and more just an upgraded version of the PS3, similar to a PS2 Slimline or the PSOne.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Sounds less like a PS4 and more just an upgraded version of the PS3, similar to a PS2 Slimline or the PSOne.

How so?

 

[Pepsi0]

Yeah, I agree with Ardius. There's no shocking technology in there, and the apparent launch year is way too early for a totally new console.

 

[Dazzla]

They'll keep Blu-ray. That was the one thing they did right.

 

[Dragonistic]

They'll keep Blu-ray. That was the one thing they did right in my opinion.

Fixxed.

 

[GT4 genius]

This article can confirm the first bullet point:

http://siliconrepublic.com/news/art...ead-research-into-ps3s-cell-broadband-engine/

But I'd have to agree with Ardius, it sounds more likely a slim line cheaper model of the current Playstation. It'd be ridiculous of Sony to ask from €400-€600 off customers and then within 4 years expect them to pay that again. As well as that the keep talking about their 10 year life cycles.

 

[Obli]

I don't see how it is a slim-line PS3. According to the article, the CPU will be clocked faster with more 4 - 5x more cores. The RAM will be larger and probably faster. I'm sure they would use a new GPU too, which have already improved a great deal since the 7800 series based RSX in the PS3.

Why reinvent the wheel if the current architecture is that scalable allowing for a significant increase in performance?

 

[boiltheocean]

I don't see how it is a slim-line PS3.

I think you'll find he never said that.

EDIT: Woops GT4genius DID say that. I thought you were commenting the post from Ardius.
Sorry

 

[Kryz11]

Sounds less like a PS4 and more just an upgraded version of the PS3, similar to a PS2 Slimline or the PSOne.

Just likne Nintedo to super nintendo
or xbox to xbox 360
Sega to genseis..
etc etc


Everything is an upgrade.
Even PC era is always upgrade.

What do you accept?

Only thing to accept something really new and revolutionary is that beam from space will deliver a new PlayStation and is hooked up to your brain cells! Now that be something new.

It'd be ridiculous of Sony to ask from €400-€600 off customers and then within 4 years expect them to pay that again. As well as that the keep talking about their 10 year life cycles.

Just because they will make a PS4 (if they do in few years) does not mean people will have to buy it. They will still continue making games for the PS3. Just like they still do PS2 games.
It's just like in PC world, game like Crisis came out, not everyone got it because they did not have money to spend for a good PC. SO they buy other lower end games stable for their PCs.

 

[Obli]

Yeah, I agree with Ardius. There's no shocking technology in there, and the apparent launch year is way too early for a totally new console.

Again, if this article is to be believed, 2011 is the earliest date that Sony feel they would be ready, should they have to counter-act a launch of a next-gen console from a competitior. The launch of a PS4 wouldn't mean PS3 support would stop. Sony don't want to allow MS another headstart that they got this generation.

I don't want to see a PS4 by 2011, but if Sony felt they had to launch it then to compete with a new XBox (or whatever else), I'd be tempted if the cost was low enough.

I can see this scenario. If MS lauch a new console in 2011, Sony will be ready to respond. PS3 will be much cheaper to manufacture by then. Imagine an overlap like this:

PS4: £299
PS3: £99

 

[Ardius]

How so?

I'll explain by replying to the following quotes:

I don't see how it is a slim-line PS3. According to the article, the CPU will be clocked faster with more 4 - 5x more cores. The RAM will be larger and probably faster. I'm sure they would use a new GPU too, which have already improved a great deal since the 7800 series based RSX in the PS3.

Why reinvent the wheel if the current architecture is that scalable allowing for a significant increase in performance?

The point about the slimline PS2 and the PSOne is that they were minor upgrades to the current generation system.
Regardless if it is slightly more powerful, etc, thats nothing interesting at all. Where's the selling point? It sort of goes without saying that a new console will be more powerful than an older one, just because technology advances each year quite dramatically.

Unless it brings something actually new to gaming, such as the Blu-ray player, Sixaxis controls, XMB, etc it seems a rather pointless investment, I may as well start PC gaming instead, because the advantages of consoles are starting to die.

Just likne Nintedo to super nintendo
or xbox to xbox 360
Sega to genseis..
etc etc


Everything is an upgrade.
Even PC era is always upgrade.

What do you accept?

Only thing to accept something really new and revolutionary is that beam from space will deliver a new PlayStation and is hooked up to your brain cells! Now that be something new.

You mean expect? Accept is a completely different word.
I was actually getting quite interested by the prospects Sony were recently experimenting with such as the 3D TV, ultra-sound motion sensor technology, etc.
I'm not saying everyone has to make a Nintendo Wii clone, but they do need to start doing some more innovating rather than just making a more powerful version of their last console.

 

[Suede53]

Considering how much Sony has been talking about a 10-year life cycle and how developers claim they are just scratching the surface of the PS3's capabilities, 2011 seems way to soon.

Also, like several others have said, what's so surprising about predicting a next gen console with faster/more CPUs and memory?

 

[Obli]

I think the PS4 will be significantly more powerful, even if it uses a similar architecture. I think Sony will bring innovations - historically, they have done (or have tried to) with each Playstation. What about the recent 3D demonstrations? What about the Playstation Eye? Perhaps an improved motion-controller (rumours, at present) ? I'm sure these ideas will mature, and possibly converge.

It's ironic that you would resort to the PC, which I see as less innovative. PC architecture has hardly changed throughout the life of all Playstations. Clock speeds of CPUs, memory and GPUs have been ramped up... and now they have hit the celing, they're adding extra cores. Not a lot better, or different imo.

 

[Pepsi0]

Again, if this article is to be believed, 2011 is the earliest date that Sony feel they would be ready, should they have to counter-act a launch of a next-gen console from a competitior. The launch of a PS4 wouldn't mean PS3 support would stop. Sony don't want to allow MS another headstart that they got this generation.

I don't want to see a PS4 by 2011, but if Sony felt they had to launch it then to compete with a new XBox (or whatever else), I'd be tempted if the cost was low enough.

I can see this scenario. If MS lauch a new console in 2011, Sony will be ready to respond. PS3 will be much cheaper to manufacture by then. Imagine an overlap like this:

PS4: £299
PS3: £99

If the PS3 was still the main console, which it probably would be if the PS4 was only a little upgrade, then the PS3 would cost quite a bit more than that. I'd imagine it to be the other way around.

PS3: £299
PS4: £99

 

[Ardius]

I think the PS4 will be significantly more powerful, even if it uses a similar architecture. I think Sony will bring innovations - historically, they have done (or have tried to) with each Playstation. What about the recent 3D demonstrations? What about the Playstation Eye? Perhaps an improved motion-controller (rumours, at present) ? I'm sure these ideas will mature, and possibly converge.

It's ironic that you would resort to the PC, which I see as less innovative. PC architecture has hardly changed throughout the life of all Playstations. Clock speeds of CPUs, memory and GPUs have been ramped up... and now they have hit the celing, they're adding extra cores. Not a lot better, or different imo.

Ironic, but if consoles follow what PCs are doing, whats the point? Especially as they start to become more and more like them, we're now up to installation of games, directories, patching, etc. One of the main reasons I hated PC gaming was the endless patching required when you tried to play an older game, but now consoles are also following this method.
I'm not so sure Sony will have developed anything by then, it seems too soon, which is why it makes me think "PS3 V2" rather than "PS4". We've not even got PSP2 yet!

 

[Obli]

If the PS3 was still the main console, which it probably would be if the PS4 was only a little upgrade, then the PS3 would cost quite a bit more than that. I'd imagine it to be the other way around.

PS3: £299
PS4: £99

Why would Sony do that? No-one would buy a PS3 if it was three times the price of the PS4! Everyone would buy a PS4 and Sony would make significant losses on it if it was £99. I think you have misunderstood. The PS4 should be a lot more powerful than the PS3, not just a design revision (slim-line) model.

 

[Pepsi0]

But, more people would be playing the PS3 and then the PS4 people will be lonely, because if it turns out as a small upgrade people will just stick to their PS3s.

 

[GT4 genius]

If the PS3 is brought out in 2011 I doubt the PS4 will have any huge improvements over the PS3, like it had over the PS2. Yes there may be a few add-ons like better motion sensing and much greater performance but there wont be any true evolutions. Which is why I highly doubt Sony will bring something out that soon, unless forced to by MS (which could be a case where competition actually harms consumers) but if MS dont launch something before 2011 then I can see Sony waiting maybe until 2014/15 until Broadband is much better and pretty much everyone has fast reliable broadband so as they can concentrate on the idea of a full media hub where you can download your movies almost instantly flick through your photos uploading and downloading all your media seamlessly off a Sony owned sever system which acts like a HDD but with limitless space. This is what I would say they are aiming for. IMO blu-ray has won the last ever solid state format war, within ten years almost everything will be digital, we may not like that but the generation that grew up with torrents instead of vinyls will force it upon us (not that I grew up with vinyls!). This has to be the next step a console media hub that doesnt just connect with the internet but rather practically lives within the internet. And there is no way something like that is feasible as early as 2011.

 

[Obli]

Ironic, but if consoles follow what PCs are doing, whats the point? Especially as they start to become more and more like them, we're now up to installation of games, directories, patching, etc. One of the main reasons I hated PC gaming was the endless patching required when you tried to play an older game, but now consoles are also following this method.
I'm not so sure Sony will have developed anything by then, it seems too soon, which is why it makes me think "PS3 V2" rather than "PS4". We've not even got PSP2 yet!

I agree with you. I would like it for consoles to remain a relaxed, trouble-free experience. I don't want installations either; hopefully they're not here to stay (btw, good news - Killzone 2 runs from the disc! Let's hope many other developers take notice!).

Regarding patches, yes, it is a pain, although at least it's a lot easier with a console - it's pretty much automatic. Some PC games can be a right pain to patch. I think with the complexities of modern-day games, patches are inevitable. I'd like to see improvements in QA processes though, so buggy messes cannot be released (e.g. SOCOM). I'd rather we had patches though, so the system / game can be improved and bugs can be fixed. I also like how Sony have constantly added features and made improvements to the PS3 via firmware updates (although yes, monthly (even weekly?) updates become a pain on my slow broadband connection).

The 3D technology is possible (it was demonstrated on the PS3 by three PS3 games, after all) but the specialist televesions are not in production yet. I'm sure they will be available before the PS4 launches. Perhaps if the technology is not too expensive, Sony's HDTVs will come with the tech as standard...? Other innovations such as an improved motion controller are rumoured to have had patents filed. I'm sure they're looking into a Wii alternative which is more advanced than the Sixaxis. Also, we'll see more about what Sony can do with the PS Eye when EyePet launches later this year. Initial videos have impressed me, even though the idea of a virtual pet isn't really my cup of tea

Sony should be able to spend more of their time on these innovations (as - if that article is to be believed - they're not planning to reinvent the wheel with the PS4) so I don't see why these ideas wouldn't be available in the next two+ years.

It'll be interesting to see how things develop.

 

[zazaza]

PS4 for 2011, for my point of weiw, it doesn't sounds nice. PS3 has a big potential. We need software, not an another console.

 

[zazaza]

PS4 for 2011, for my point of weiw, it doesn't sounds nice. PS3 has a big potential. We need software, not an other console.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Not to turn this more into a PC vs Console topic as much as it already has, but PC gaming is something I only bothered with when I was in college. There are too many disadvantages, like;

• Costly Hardware
• Costly Hardware upgrades
• Compatability
• PC Game Developers Making Games for the lowest common denominator to boost sales.
• Having to lug the PC around to play it on a TV or to run cables through the house.
• Etc

Software upgrades don't bother me as they are relatively easy to do and often allow publishers to fix problems with a game and add features.

Based on sales, console gaming is certainly outpacing PC gaming, although I suspect many PC gamers aquire pirated copies of games, so those numbers are not likely an accurate portrait of the popularity of PC gaming.

I don't want installations either; hopefully they're not here to stay (btw, good news - Killzone 2 runs from the disc! Let's hope many other developers take notice!).

Disc space for the PS3 is cheap, and nothing loads faster than having the game data on the HDD, so personally I would much rather it was the opposite, and all game developers gave us the option of installing the data on the HDD, thus speeding up load times considerably.

After all, what would you rather do... spend several minutes each hour watching loading screens during gameplay, or simply downloading the game data once, while you go and do something else, and then play the game as many times as you like with much faster load times during gameplay?

For this reason alone I really wish all developers would give us the option to download game data to the HDD.

 

[ChadSpeed]

Not to turn this more into a PC vs Console topic as much as it already has, but PC gaming is something I only bothered with when I was in college. There are too many disadvantages, like;

• Costly Hardware
• Costly Hardware upgrades
• Compatability
• PC Game Developers Making Games for the lowest common denominator to boost sales.
• Having to lug the PC around to play it on a TV or to run cables through the house.
• Etc

Software upgrades don't bother me as they are relatively easy to do and often allow publishers to fix problems with a game and add features.

Based on sales, console gaming is certainly outpacing PC gaming, although I suspect many PC gamers aquire pirated copies of games, so those numbers are not likely an accurate portrait of the popularity of PC gaming.





Disc space for the PS3 is cheap, and nothing loads faster than having the game data on the HDD, so personally I would much rather it was the opposite, and all game developers gave us the option of installing the data on the HDD, thus speeding up load times considerably.

After all, what would you rather do... spend several minutes each hour watching loading screens during gameplay, or simply downloading the game data once, while you go and do something else, and then play the game as many times as you like with much faster load times during gameplay?

For this reason alone I really wish all developers would give us the option to download game data to the HDD.

I would love it as an OPTION also. I don't like being forced to install it before playing, as that first night with GT5p was 45 minutes before I could play it with the install and downloading of the update. Thats a horror story if I ever heard one, but if we had the option, then you could do it whenever it was convenient, great Idea for it being an option DN, +1.👍

 

[wrcsti]

PS3 slim render.

 

[Quiet_Storm]

^^^The view on the right makes it look like a Wii stuck to half a PS3.





If the rumors are true then I guess I'll be out a few more hundred dollars for a new PS4 and Xbox in 2 years.

I have a question for you computer savvy people. Ok, you know how PCs are upgradeable as far as video cards, CPUs and RAMs? Is it possible to make a console with these characteristics? I'm not saying that a console should have all those things upgradeable but how about just having expandable RAM? You know, for higher resolution and better textures along with other things?

I think it's possible because my N64 has a slot for expandable RAM and I bought the cartridge for it which allows you to play games in a higher resolution with better textures or something like that. I could be wrong about what that cartridge actually does in the N64 but I remember reading about it way back in the days.

If it is possible, maybe that should be the way to build next-gen consoles? Someone enlighten me so I'm not always confused. Thanks!

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

If it is possible, maybe that should be the way to build next-gen consoles? Someone enlighten me so I'm not always confused. Thanks!

Possible, yes. However, one of the big advanatges of consoles is that the key hardware (GPU & CPU) are the same for everyone who ones that generation console model. This way developers can optimize their games for those specific platforms, and as consumers we don't have to worry about compatability issues in the same way that PC gamers do.

 

[wrcsti]

People upgraded the original Xbox in some ways you just mentioned.

 

[LaBounti]

Ps3.5 will be cheap and powerful and it cant come soon enough. Xbox 361 will have built in WiFi and some sort of large capacity disc medium and possibly some other standard on PS3. Thats a givin. There isnt much more Sony can innovate Hardware wise. It will be software and system power. Ps3 is already future proof. Upping the power and memory and making it cheap is a good safe move like the Xbox 360 when it was introduced 4 years ago

 

[Krymzen18]

Why would there be a PS4 in 2011?? That means the life cycle of the PS3 would be 4 years... not the 10 years Sony were on about. There are always advances in technology, and it's always speeding up. In 2 years time, 2011 incidently, the "upgrades" that you guys are on about will be old news. Even if Microsoft cobble together a new console, Sony will just keep on working on the PS3, upgrading it if necessary, maybe bring out a smaller version like they have done with the Playstation and Playstation 2.

Orginally, Sony stated that they wouldn't make a slimline version, as the components wouldn't fit into a smaller size, but new innovations and upgrades come, so i guess this what this whole thing is about. I reckon some of this stuff is ideas for the new PS4, and some of it is for a new, smaller PS3. I still reckon the PS4 is at very least 4-5 years away, that's 2013-14. And I really mean "at very least." The PS3 has so much potential and so much to give, so I can't see Sony replacing it in 2 years time.