I'm seeing a pattern, a cycle between hubris and humility.<p>When Nintendo ruled, Sony broke in by courting game developers. Then, they became arrogant, and made the best hardware they could, they was difficult to use. Thus, Microsoft won, simply because it was easier for developers. It was then amazing to see how arrogant they had become with the xboxone trying to squeeze everyone, in every way - similar to how they removed the ability to cancel xbox live online.<p>What Microsoft didn't realize is that <i>they</i> didn't win - Sony lost, by shooting themselves in the foot. But in this generation, if PS4 is easy to develop for, cheaper, more powerful, and not trying to squeeze every cent and control every aspect... things will be different.<p>Of course, Microsoft will see their mistake and adjust (as they've done many times). But while they can drop prices and relax controls, it may be difficult to make their console more powerful.
Also, next year, mobile devices should reach GPU parity with last gen consoles... and with their faster iteration cycle, match PS4/xboxone three years after that. (unlike CPUs, GPUs scale really well).
This was a good read, and the narrative between Sony's launch and Microsoft's launch has the feel of some pretty classic hero's journey stuff in it.<p>The interesting upstart this time seems to be the SteamBox.
The PS4 may well make for a better video game machine and more profit for Sony, but it's too bad the very interesting and powerful cell processor concept will be relegated to the dustbin.
I wish more people would care about Sony's record.<p>They initially officially supported Linux on the Playstation 3, but later decided not only to remove the feature from new models, but reach out through the cloud to <i>remove the feature from existing consoles</i> [1] [2].<p>This is also the company that put rootkits on CD's [3].<p>[1] <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5886509" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5886509</a><p>[2] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otheros" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otheros</a><p>[3] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootki...</a>
<p><pre><code> It makes a lot of sense to just a build a piece of it first — but that piece needs
to be representative. You can’t just hack something together.” He calls this
prototype a “publishable first playable,”
</code></pre>
A better explanation of MVP than most.
So I'm clueless as I haven't been paying attention to this market since the PS4/XBox360 were released - does the PS4 not run PS3 titles? If so, does it have some emulation or is it new hardware sitting on top of the old Cell design?
Unified memory architecture! Should be some cool hybrid cpu/gpu algorithm possibilities. Currently the overhead of copying stuff between the two memories in CUDA prevents any fine-grained cooperation. I wonder how much gpgpu ability is exposed.
They should have mentioned the number of titles at launch for xbox one. If ease of making games is such a big deal why aren't there any facts on how far behind their main competitor is.
PS4 is just a PC stuck in one configuration, linked to a popular delivery system.<p>I don't get what the hype is about.<p>Yes, it's a pretty good configuration at a reasonable price. But that will only be the case for a few months. PCs will catch up very quickly and will become cheaper, and then much cheaper.<p>As somebody who loves games, I don't see a reason to buy PS4. I'd rather spend a bit more on a PC, and then upgrade it as I go.<p>The positive thing I see is the PS4 <-> PC game portability. No longer developers need to have to very different engines and codebases. That's why PS4 is a much better option than XBox One in my eyes.