Will Sony Really Wait Until 2015 to Release a PlayStation 4 Console?



+ Add a Comment

h e x e n

Excellent. We can bank on more shitty games made on 10 year old technology. Get ready for ports!!!

Who knows though. Maybe game developers will finally wise up and start making their games for the superior platform first instead of second.



from my understanding, microsoft or sony wouldn't profit from releasing anytime soon. especially in non 2k or 3d technologies which arent even readily cheap. 2015 is a realistic view. no one has 2k or 3d TVs that i know of. 3d tv's are all different technologies and there is no one main technology that everyone uses. PC gaming is the only thing you will get before then. sorry guys.


Holly Golightly

Actually, I recall the PS3 being launched in November 2006... But my exact memory is a bit fuzzy, so I am not sure. Either way, consoles are for babies. Let the little kids keep playing their 10 year old graphics. Fact is, Sony and Microsoft are more interested in generating a profit, instead of releasing new and competitive technology. The console gaming business is not the same as we remembered when growing up. Back then, 4 years was the perfect time. Consoles had state-of-the-art technology and offered some pretty cool accessories. Now they start with dated hardware and come with premium pricing. Plus, what the hell is up with the "Pay to Play?" I will never pay to access Xbox Live and PlayStation Plus just so I can keep hearing people using the N-word. No thanks. I can play online for free on the PC, and it never felt so good. We will see the PS4 in store shelves November 2016 at an $800 price tag. Now is the best time to become a PC Gamer. The last console I have purchased was the Xbox360, and since I have upgraded to PC Gaming a few years ago. I have been impressed, and have never looked back.



Consoles are looking better and better to me all the time.  I'll probably jump ship and switch completely to consoles at the next generation.

If you played the best PC games this year, then you are already comfortable using an XBox controller.  You also have two GFWL services running 24/7, one from Steam, two from Punkbuster, and at least two rootkit-style DRM kits hooked deeply into your computer.  Most of the games and services phone home frequently, reporting your gameplay habits in enough detail for a forensic investigator to reconstruct your every death in detail.  Ask yourself, what valid reason could a game possibly have to require being run or installed with administrative privileges?  The publishers fail for trying to get away with this crap, Microsoft fails for not providing us with tools to better sandbox questionable software, and the consumer fails for continuing to drink the Kool-Aid and acquiescing to insanely illegal EULAs.  To me, the idea of being able to uninstall a game by simply removing an optical disc sounds pretty attractive right now.  Especially when paired with a device that doesn't need internet access



As someone who cares more about how fun a game is than they do what version of direct x it uses, I can honestly say that I could not possibly care less, even if it does "hold back" pc game development. I like to let my hardware strut its stuff, and I love beautiful games, but just because it's pretty doesn't mean it's fun. Give me minecraft over Battlefield 3 any day.



Minecraft is fun? I argue that an open-ended sandbox without even a premise, let alone a narrative, is not a game. To me, it certainly isn't fun. Give me Deus Ex any day over that. Even Invisible War.

To an extent, I can play older games that emphasize gameplay and fun over graphics. I still fire up Tribes 2 for some unparalleled truly 3-dimensional FPS combat (and the graphics aren't that bad), but I draw the line at something that looks worse than the PS1 (ie:minecraft).



I'm w/ you, Basic. With sufficient numbers of add-ons, the game can be fun in a multiplayer situation. Unfortunately, the system and underlying platform are so rotten that even a powerhouse machine is incapable of serving up even a few users without severe performance issues. I think people are more enamored at the fact that some dude made a few million dollars than they are with the game itself, 'cause I just don't understand the hullabaloo.



Nice controller.  I still have my Intellivision in the attic.  Vive le disc!



The main problem with waiting until 2015 for a new Playstation is that games will continue to be developed for DX9/Playstation 3 until then. In other words, PC games will get some decent eye candy but no game developer is going to focus soley on the PC in order to push the envelope of game production. Id said they were going to with RAGE (loooool) but waiting until 2015 means no hugely innovate games until then as well. Meanwhile, we're stuck with DX9 ports for the next few years. 



Actually with the long lead times for most AAA titles (the ones that actually have the killer graphics) any game released in the next 2-3 years will have started at the earliest a year ago. So while the consoles are a common denominator thay don't hold back PC games as much as you would think. Does that mean that we have even longer then 2015 to wait? No, while Sony says no new system, I'd be really surprised if Sony wasn't already supplying development kits for the next PS.

IMHO that's one of the biggest problems with PC games. The hardware target is constantly moving forward so it comes down to release what you have or keep chasing the target for say 13 years and then have everyone hate the game because it doesn't meet expectations. You lose either way.



The PC hardware of 1 year ago was still significantly better than the hardware of over 6 years ago for the consoles.

Pretty much every console launch title that I can remember has been rather rudimentary in contrast to games that come later in the console's life cycle. Even if Sony is giving out the dev kits 3 years in advance (and assuming that they have never done so with their previous consoles) I still don't see this trend of the first few years of console games being rather poor compared to the games that come in the final years.

The common excuse is that it takes time to become familiar with the console's hardware, but that excuse died when consoles started using more and more off-the-shelf PC components in their design. After half a decade the whole "we still haven't tapped the full potential of the Cell processor" excuse has become bogus as well.



That is exactly what a console controller needs to look like to have the full functionality that PC gaming offers. Viva la PC gaming!



Honestly, I'd be ok with that.  I have a PS3 and i don't feel like buying a new console anytime soon.  The longer it lasts, the better for the consumer.  They can focus on buying games instead of different accessories (such as extra controllers) and the consoles.



How is the absence of progress good for the consumer? This reminds me of the infamous Bill Gates "never need more than 640k of RAM" quote.

We might as well stop making new models of cars as well, or of anything for that matter. Shoot, we've been "doing it wrong" for centuries; devices like the Model T and the arquebus were more than good enough.

I'd also hope that the PS3 controllers continue to work with the PS4. I'd also hope for some backwards compatibility there, but we saw how well that worked out with the PS3/PS2 debacle :(



Consoles are not as relevant as they used to be. With the shifting of focus from heavy media (bluray) to streaming, I don't see newer games being bigger than the ones we've seen. They'll have more online components, but they won't need a faster processor.

Today's image quality in consoles (PS3 and 360) is good enough for most people (and for those who it isn't, there's the PC).  An xbox 720 or a PS4 wouldn't be received with much enthusiasm. 

Who knows, we might not even see a PS4.



" I don't see newer games being bigger than the ones we've seen. "

That's crazy!

There is soo much room for improvement that it could merit not just a PS4 but upgrades all the way to PS9!

Also, the HD & streaming capabilities of these devices are very much in their infancy! We have literally "Seen nothing yet"!


Today's image quality in consoles (PS3 and 360) is good enough for most people

"Image" quality isn't everything! And if you mean the quality of the Graphics, you are way off! Not only are game engines in a constant cycle of upgrades and improvements, adding more realism and better refresh rates and bigger  and more majestic scenes, lighting, game realism, improved physics, and better rendering engines, but today's consoles can barely handle 720p gaming, let alone 1080p gaming! Remember, GTA 4 was 540p, not even a full 720p!

Also, Real time cut-scenes still have a loooong way to go to be able to match pre-rendered cut scenes! 

the PS3 isn't the end of console gaming, quite the opposite! Its the first in a long line of "Multitasking Entertainment Devices" , that allow streaming and interconnectivity. Streaming won't kill consoles, on the contrary, it has ushered in a new age for consoles!



I don't disagree with the streaming media part, but the Xbox and PS3 alread do streaming media like Netflix or Hulu Plus better than any of the standalone boxes or built in services on TVs and Blu Ray players. Because of teh processing power they have they can keep being updated to support new codecs for streaming from a PC as well.


As for sales I 100% disagree, the console gaming market is breaking its own sales records every year. Every year game sales and console sales grow and they are now the biggest media section in the world. MW3 was teh biggest launch of any type of media including CDs, Movies etc. of all time, I don't see that changing in the next 3 years let alone 10 or more years.



I have no problem getting another 3 years out of my PS3. I mean I paid hundreds of dollars for it and it still delivers a great experience, I don't want to be pushed into spending another $600+ so I can play the newest COD.

That said a "ten year life cycle" refers to the entire time Sony will continue to support the system, which includes the year(s) after they release a PS4.



the PS3 has always been on a ten year lifecycle, however that doesn't mean that there won't be a new Playstaion before the PS3 is retired. Remember when the PS3 came out, Sony continued to support the PS2 for a few more years. This same tactic will likely be applied to the next playstation, leaving the PS3 some tiem for a few swan song games.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.