descender wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 17:51:That argument is arguably moot anyway, because the PS4 and XBox One were originally sold at a tiny profit, meaning their basically permanent price drops result in them selling at a loss after the initial release window. Of course the manufacturing costs may have come down a bit, but I don't know how certain that is. At the very least, we know that both consoles were sold at a very small profit during their release windows, which at least for the Xbox One, was not where the bulk of the sales came from. The Xbox One started selling after the price drop around Black Friday 2014.The issue is that MS and Sony are greedy fucks.
They no longer wanted to sell the hardware at a loss. They wanted to earn money from each console sale from day one so they put extra cheap and crappy parts inside.
Just think about that again for like... 2 seconds...
Those greedy fucks running a for-profit business! The nerve!
descender wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 20:06:
CJ, as usual you miss the point.
They didn't want to sell the consoles at a loss in the past, they had to (the X360 was profitable after ~2 years anyway) in order to grow their market. Now they have millions of customers who will actually pay what it actually costs to make one of the consoles. They also could because they were also selling you more profitable games and peripherals. The gaming market has changed significantly since. Sony/MS may not even be able to sell it at a loss anymore since they don't produce nearly the quantity of games they used to and those games cost considerably more to produce than they used to.
nin wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 14:20:Agent.X7 wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 14:05:
Almost guarateed that Sony assigns Uncharted to another developer. The people who made Golden Abyss did a fantastic job, and there are more stories from Drake's past they can tell.
So they own the IP, and not ND (honestly don't know, I'm asking)? I know the mobile was an outside dev, but I didn't know if that was something ND cooked up, or sony?
Honestly, at this point, I want to see another Last of Us (which they basically say is coming), minus Joel and Ellie.
descender wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 17:51:The issue is that MS and Sony are greedy fucks.
They no longer wanted to sell the hardware at a loss. They wanted to earn money from each console sale from day one so they put extra cheap and crappy parts inside.
Just think about that again for like... 2 seconds...
Those greedy fucks running a for-profit business! The nerve!
The issue is that MS and Sony are greedy fucks.
They no longer wanted to sell the hardware at a loss. They wanted to earn money from each console sale from day one so they put extra cheap and crappy parts inside.
jdreyer wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 13:31:Verno wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 11:33:
I don't think backwards compatibility matters that much at this point. It was just a convenient press bullet point for Microsoft who desperately needed some positive news coverage. The next gen console libraries are getting fairly fleshed out and interest in the feature tends to taper off outside of the launch periods. Many of the popular games have HD remasters/etc anyway.
Three words Verno: Red, Dead, and Redemption. In that order.![]()
Ozmodan wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 16:52:
Exactly. Moving to the Intel cpus was a no brainer.
jdreyer wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 13:30:Razumen wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 10:59:
I wonder if Sony kind of shot themselves in the foot by switching architectures again? Sure the Cell had it's issues, but developers were getting used to working with it, and if they improved the design they could've had an even better performing console than the XB1 that might have actually been capable of supporting PS3 games.
They would have had to pay for the development cost of a new cell processor. That's 100s of millions of dollars, and there's no guarantee that it would be faster than x86 architecture which has had billions poured into its development over the years. Also, Sony originally developed the cell proc along with IBM and Toshiba, neither of whom really ended up doing anything with it. Finding partners this time around would probably prove pretty difficult.
jdreyer wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 13:30:Razumen wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 10:59:
I wonder if Sony kind of shot themselves in the foot by switching architectures again? Sure the Cell had it's issues, but developers were getting used to working with it, and if they improved the design they could've had an even better performing console than the XB1 that might have actually been capable of supporting PS3 games.
They would have had to pay for the development cost of a new cell processor. That's 100s of millions of dollars, and there's no guarantee that it would be faster than x86 architecture which has had billions poured into its development over the years. Also, Sony originally developed the cell proc along with IBM and Toshiba, neither of whom really ended up doing anything with it. Finding partners this time around would probably prove pretty difficult.
Agent.X7 wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 14:05:
Almost guarateed that Sony assigns Uncharted to another developer. The people who made Golden Abyss did a fantastic job, and there are more stories from Drake's past they can tell.
Verno wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 11:33:
I don't think backwards compatibility matters that much at this point. It was just a convenient press bullet point for Microsoft who desperately needed some positive news coverage. The next gen console libraries are getting fairly fleshed out and interest in the feature tends to taper off outside of the launch periods. Many of the popular games have HD remasters/etc anyway.
Razumen wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 10:59:
I wonder if Sony kind of shot themselves in the foot by switching architectures again? Sure the Cell had it's issues, but developers were getting used to working with it, and if they improved the design they could've had an even better performing console than the XB1 that might have actually been capable of supporting PS3 games.
Suckage wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 10:32:
How incompetent must Sony engineers be? It's impossible to change PSN regional settings and user names on account of engineering issues. Yet it's perfectly feasible on competing platforms.