Print 106 comment(s) - last by Belard.. on Nov 19 at 6:36 AM

The PS4 launched for $399 today

Sony's PlayStation 4 officially released today, and the (mixed) reviews are in. 

Tech news sites like EngadgetThe VergeArs Technica and Joystiq have offered their insights on the new PS4 console, and the overall reviews seem to range from "worth it, go buy it" to "Maybe you should wait for Xbox One reviews." But many agreed that the design of the hardware (both console and controller) was done just right, and that it has an extremely friendly user interface. 

Let's dive right in.

The Specs
  • Octa-core, x86 AMD "Jaguar" CPU
  • Radeon GPU capable of 1.84 teraflops
  • 500GB hard disk drive
  • 8GB of GDDR5 memory
  • Six-speed Blu-Ray drive
  • USB 3.0
  • Ethernet
  • HDMI
  • optical audio output
  • AUX connector for the camera
Pricing & Availability 

The PS4 launched today in the U.S., and will hit Europe on 
November 29. The console is priced at $399. 


Hardware - Console 

Reviewers had nothing but great things to say about the PS4 console's hardware. Ars Technica called it a "beautiful" and "unique" case design while The Verge dubbed it "handsome." 

Here's what Engadget's Ben Gilbert had to say:

"Think of it this way: If E3 was a beauty pageant, and Sony's and Microsoft's next-gen console designs were the contestants, then the PS4 was basically crowned Miss World that day in LA. Sony's black gaming box is a return to form for the global electronics giant; it's the type of living room hardware that evokes signature Sony style, not celebrity-endorsed kitchenware."

Richard Mitchell, Joystiq:

"The PlayStation 4 itself is an attractive device. The unit is close in size to the "slim" PlayStation 3 that launched back in 2009. Not taking the PS4's angled sides into account, the two consoles have nearly the same square footprint...The only troubling physical quality of the PS4 is that the plastic casing has a good amount of flex to it. Squeeze or prod the console and you'll be able to see and feel the plastic bending under your fingers."

Hardware - Controller

The PS4's DualShock 4 controller is one feature that grabbed rave reviews all around (minus one comment about the controller only getting about seven hours of battery life). Ars Technica even claimed it's "one of the best we've ever used" while The Verge called it a "fantastic controller."

Engadget's Gilbert seems to feel the same way:

"There's no doubt in our minds: Sony's DualShock 4 is the best game controller that the company's ever created. It's not quite perfect, but it's damn close. For the most part, the DualShock 4 is a carefully refined version of the DualShock 3. The standard two parallel thumbsticks, the d-pad on the left face, a four-button layout on the right, two triggers and two shoulder buttons up top continue to be the main forms of input. The DualShock 3's tilt sensor and rumble motor are also back with minor tweaks, offering tighter precision and more detailed vibration (respectively)."

Mitchell, Joystiq

"The DualShock 4 is one of the most comfortable controllers I've ever held. It abandons the long-maintained DualShock design for something much more ergonomic. Specifically, the DualShock 3's tapered prongs have been replaced by more bulbous and natural handles. Even better, the back of the controller is made of a textured, but not rubberized plastic that offers great grip. The D-pad directions are spaced more closely together, and there's a nice divot in the middle that gives the thumb a natural place to rest. The analog sticks are spaced slightly further apart, and they now feature concave bowls on top, preventing the slippage common with the DualShock 3. Speaking of slippage, the DualShock 3's convex triggers are gone, and in their place are delightfully concave triggers that do a much better job of cradling your all-important shooting fingers."

Software - UI

The user interface (called the PlayStation Dynamic Menu) was touted as clean and simple, making it more user friendly. The PlayStation Store also received a lot of compliments. But reviewers had issues with system UI performance in some cases, such as the interface not scaling well for power users.

Engadget's Gilbert describes the UI as an improvement:

"The user interface on the PlayStation 4's new desktop is a massive improvement over the often confusing PlayStation 3 XMB (cross-media bar). It's essentially a set of square tiles that expand out with rich content when selected. Select a game and you'll see options for the developer-fed overview tab (screens, video, et cetera), recent social activity involving that piece of content and related items available in the Store."

And he's also fond of the PlayStation Store: 

"Finally -- finally! -- a digital store from a Sony PlayStation game console that is navigable! The PlayStation Store on PlayStation 4 is far and away the best iteration of the store yet, offering a single, simple left rail for navigation between film, TV and games offerings."

The Verge warns that you must download the day-one update before you can really do anything on the console, and also thinks the notifications could use improvement:

"Practically everything the system does, even the built-in web browser, requires you to log in to PlayStation Network, and most of the console's highly touted features aren't available until you install a 300MB day-one update as soon as you turn on the console — all you can do is pop a disk in and play a game otherwise...but even after you do update, the PS4's interface still revolves entirely around games. Where the PlayStation 3 was designed as a media hub where your pictures, music, and videos were neatly arranged in a scrolling two-column interface, Sony has stripped the vast majority of that away.
"But the real problem with the PS4's interface is that Sony hasn’t been paying attention. Sony hasn’t learned something smartphones and social networks mastered years ago: making notifications actionable."

Ars Technica's Kyle Orland said the new PlayStation Store UI is "great," but also mentioned that the flat system interface gets cluttered and can be hard to use. 

Joystiq's Mitchell even found a couple hiccups in the UI:

"The Dynamic Menu in general isn't without a few hiccups of its own. I encountered one moment when it became unresponsive for several seconds, notably when installingKillzone: Shadow Fall. Upon installation, the game required an additional update to be downloaded. At this point Shadow Fall's tile briefly displayed two different "start" buttons. One of these had a disc icon indicating I could start the game. The other was unlabeled, though clicking it appeared to start installing the update. Updates are supposed to be applied automatically, so something seems to have gone awry, though it did eventually right itself."

A few other favorites are the "What's New" section, which provides a look at friends' activities, and the automatic download of system and game updates. But there were complaints about the iOS PlayStation App being of limited use and the Music Unlimited being "clunky."

Software - Games

Engadget's Gilbert will tell you "Battlefield 4" is the prettiest launch-day title for the PS4, but The Verge will say there aren't enough great games yet. 

Here's Gilbert's guide to PS4 games: 

"If you're looking for bombast and bullets, 'Killzone: Shadow Fall' is your launch title of choice...'Resogun' is both an excellent game and a graphics showcase...Ten minutes with 'Knack' is all you need to realize this title is basically 'Crash Bandicoot' for the next gen...Thanks to the power of EA's Frostbite 3 engine, DICE's 'Battlefield 4' is easily one of the prettiest PS4 launch day titles. Amazingly, it's going to be third-party titles that keep early adopters afloat this holiday --'Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag' is no exception. The game features a beautiful Caribbean world, which shines on the PlayStation 4, and it's actually a fun game to play."

The Verge has a different perspective on the PS4 launch titles: 

"The two dozen or so launch titles for the console are unlikely to satisfy the exact gamer Sony’s trying so desperately to court — and that may be disappointed with what’s available for the console they pre-ordered...It's not that any of the games we've played are bad — quite the opposite, in fact — it's just that they're almost exactly what you'd expect. Aside from visual enhancements, the games played largely identically to their current-generation versions."

To Buy or Not to Buy?

Ben Gilbert, Engadget:

"After a marathon week with the PlayStation 4, we feel confident in saying it will be worth your hard-earned money when it goes on sale tomorrow. For $400, you're getting a speedy, powerful little PC with an extremely friendly user interface -- and it doesn't look like a PC, which is a nice bonus. We may not review game consoles every day, but we know a good one when we see it. This is just the beginning with PlayStation 4, and it's a hell of a start."

The Verge

"For right now, though, there's little incentive to spend $399 on a PlayStation 4. Not only are there few games worth the price of admission, the vast library of PS3 games is more compelling than anything the PS4 currently offers. If you're desperate for a new console, rest assured that eventually the PS4 will be one; it has plenty of power, a great controller, and a lot of good ideas about how we can play games better and how we can play them together. But for right now, they’re mostly still just ideas."

Kyle Orland, Ars Technica:

"The PlayStation 4 has an excellent controller, decently powerful hardware, some intriguing, well-executed new features, and an interface that shows belated acknowledgement of some of Sony's most user-unfriendly past designs. It also has a lot of features that are half-assed, missing, or downright bewildering at this point. Still, overall, it's a good starting point for a system that's meant to last a long time. Wait for the Xbox One review to compare and contrast."

For the DT readers who picked up a PS4 today, what are your reviews? 

Sources: The Verge, Ars Technica, Joystiq, Engadget

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

First thing
By eagle470 on 11/16/2013 10:52:14 AM , Rating: 2
First thing to do when you get it home is to swap that HDD with an OCZ Agility!

Started doing it with my ps3 when I figured out it buffers netflix to disk, HUGE improvement.

(The best connection available for purchase in the area I was in was 1.5 mbps.)

RE: First thing
By kleinma on 11/16/2013 12:31:46 PM , Rating: 2
So the first thing you do after getting a 400 dollar console is to replace the 500GB drive with an SSD that costs more than the console itself? Or are you saying you just limit your storage and get a size like 120GB, which adds 25% or more to the cost of the console?

RE: First thing
By Reclaimer77 on 11/16/2013 5:15:14 PM , Rating: 1
It would be worth it IMO.

SSD's should have been standard on next gen consoles. But at least Sony allows you the option.

The load times on current consoles when installed to the HDD are just painful. That's not looking to get any better going forward.

RE: First thing
By stm1185 on 11/16/2013 6:07:12 PM , Rating: 2
Why do you need 500gb of storage? Whats the system taking up? You'd think a $175 250gb SSD would do just fine.

RE: First thing
By The Von Matrices on 11/16/2013 7:46:39 PM , Rating: 2
Just like most PS3 games, PS4 games need to be partially or completely installed to the HDD before being played, so the SSD does increase performance by reducing load times. However, if you pick a small capcity drive you are going to have to be constantly installing and uninstalling games as you want to play them. If you play multiplayer games, it will make no difference because the games are designed so that the match does not start until all consoles have loaded, which would be limited by all the consoles with HDDs.

RE: First thing
By Reclaimer77 on 11/17/2013 1:21:23 PM , Rating: 2
Constantly? You exaggerate. A 256 gig drive will hold a TON of games.

In a few years SSD's will be even better than they are now. The flexibility Sony gave consumers will allow new life to be breathed into the PS4.

RE: First thing
By The Von Matrices on 11/18/2013 2:55:42 AM , Rating: 2
Okay, with a 256GB drive it might not be a constant constraint for space, but I think you're forgetting one thing. Since PS4s ship with 500GB HDDs, there will be less focus on keeping installation sizes small compared to the PS3 where a significant portion of the consoles had 60 or 80GB HDDs. Remember that the Blu-ray drive is only 3x faster than the PS3 while the memory is 16x larger, so there will be more dependence on files stored on the HDD.

Since the number of people who replace their hard drive let alone replace it with a SSD is extremely small, games will still be designed to compensate for the HDD's access time and transfer rate. This strongly limits the number of situations where a SSD would help.

Also, remember that the PS3 only supports SATA2, so a modern SSD might not perform any better than an old one. The minimum required HDD size is 160GB, so the person who suggested a 128GB SSD is suggesting an incompatible product.

RE: First thing
By The Von Matrices on 11/18/2013 2:56:21 AM , Rating: 2
In the last paragraph I meant that the PS4 supports SATA2 only.

RE: First thing
By Reclaimer77 on 11/18/2013 4:30:11 PM , Rating: 2
The interface only matters when it comes to maximum sustained throughput. What's really important, and where SSD's excel, is in random reads/writes. That is what kills HDD performance, random seek times.

RE: First thing
By Kiffberet on 11/18/2013 8:20:16 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think sizes will balloon, just because they device has 500Gb.

Games will probably get bigger as time goes by, mainly due to the additional design and detail that goes into making games, but on the flip side, on-line downloads are the future and these can't be too big or they'll take too long, and put people off.

RE: First thing
By FITCamaro on 11/18/2013 9:42:39 AM , Rating: 2
At average install sizes on the PS4 so far, a 250GB hard drive will hold 6-7 games.

RE: First thing
By FITCamaro on 11/18/2013 9:48:05 AM , Rating: 2
And that doesn't account for any DLC or other content on the system.

RE: First thing
By lexluthermiester on 11/17/2013 6:43:51 PM , Rating: 2
You'd think a $175 256gb SSD

Fixed that for ya. $175 for 256GB SSD? I paid $135 for mine. You're getting shafted where-ever you buy your stuff. Even for a performance drive that is a way high price.

RE: First thing
By lexluthermiester on 11/17/2013 6:38:36 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. I'd do something more in the middle like putting in a 750GB hybrid drive in it. Increase in both speed and capacity.

RE: First thing
By superstition on 11/17/2013 12:08:17 AM , Rating: 4
An OCZ, eh? I guess you're pining for the RRoD experience.

RE: First thing
By lexluthermiester on 11/17/2013 6:47:47 PM , Rating: 2
And why is that? Is there something about OCZ drives that makes them less compatible with consoles?

RE: First thing
By tamalero on 11/18/2013 3:55:55 AM , Rating: 2
OCZ had a huge batch last few years of defective Sandforce (with awful firmwares that didn't help) controllers that crippled almost every SSD of their portfolio.. specially the consumer VERTEX series..

RE: First thing
By TakinYourPoints on 11/17/2013 3:12:20 AM , Rating: 2
OCZ will deservedly be shutting down soon, you best get on those drives when they're on clearance ;)

RE: First thing
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/17/13, Rating: 0
RE: First thing
By EasyC on 11/18/2013 7:30:51 AM , Rating: 2
I would believe this. Every OCZ drive I'd had failed after only a few months. After 3, I stopped buying OCZ.

RE: First thing
By Kiffberet on 11/18/2013 8:22:57 AM , Rating: 2
3 failed SSD's...

You must be one of those unlucky guys in life.

RE: First thing
By retrospooty on 11/18/2013 9:31:55 AM , Rating: 2
I have had 5 and never a single issue. All 5 still working perfectly today.

RE: First thing
By AstroCreep on 11/18/2013 11:23:13 AM , Rating: 2
Three here (Vertex 2 series of various sizes) with no issues.

RE: First thing
By amsaim on 11/18/2013 8:43:06 AM , Rating: 2
Boss and manager wanted their pcs sped up by an ocz agility a while back. After a few months both ssd's died on the same day within hours of each other. Never Sandforce ever again!

RE: First thing
By Kiffberet on 11/18/2013 8:27:31 AM , Rating: 2
How long are load times?
It's pretty piss poor of Sony, if you have to buy an SSD to get reasonable load times.

RE: First thing
By Reclaimer77 on 11/18/2013 8:44:09 AM , Rating: 1
Things aren't going to be any better on the Xbox. Maybe even worse.

I'm admittedly biased. After having SSD drives for years on my PC, I've just come to expect that I/O performance. It makes me impatient, I'm spoiled.

If I were a serious console gamer, I would absolutely drop in an SSD.

RE: First thing
By retrospooty on 11/18/2013 10:11:00 AM , Rating: 2
HDD are simply slower, but the PS3 was REALLY slow. Not necessarily on load times specifically, but just the UI in general - masssive lag everywhere on every screen every time every day always LOL... It was gutwrenchingly slow, even for a hdd. The XB360 was OK... The PS4 supposedly fixes that so it's at least as fast as a HDD can be.

RE: First thing
By Ristogod on 11/18/2013 10:26:53 AM , Rating: 1
Poor choice in SSD

Maybe Overlooking...
By Mythbinder on 11/16/13, Rating: 0
RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By BPB on 11/16/2013 9:46:48 AM , Rating: 3
And what do the game developers do for the folks with the early release systems? Sell 4k versions and 1080p versions side by side? Too much confusion. Too many folks would just grab the wrong version when buying for the kids. I suppose the OS could be updated and the game engines adjusted so the same disc works on both, but that would still lose a lot of goodwill for customers with the early systems. And let's face it, mainstream 4k gaming is years off. Heck, you can still get 720p TV's.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By Stuka on 11/17/2013 12:08:12 PM , Rating: 2
We are talking about client rendered video, so there is still only one disc. The resolution would be controllable from the console or within each game.

You can already tell the PS3 whether you want 720 or 1080. Of course, whether the console is rendering in 1080 and scaling the 2D video down in post processing, I don't know... that would seem silly though.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By Warren21 on 11/16/2013 12:08:14 PM , Rating: 5
This won't happen.

Certainly, there will be die shrinks. This is always the best way to increase power efficiency and profitability, and happened at least once on the Xbox 360 and PS3.

To claim that because the processors' origins are now in x86 PC design suddenly enables console makers to put out higher power versions of their console is ludicrous, however. Fragmentation is the exact thing that consoles were made to avoid. A common set of hardware/performance is their biggest strength.

Also, "coming from a PC birthright" is overdramatic and incorrect, assuming you're insinuating that the previous designs did not. The GPU in the 360 was the precursor to the Radeon X1800/X1900, and ran DirectX 9.0C features. The RSX in the PS3 was practically an off-the-shelf G71 à la GeForce 7900 series.

Even before that, the original Xbox's hardware partners were Intel and nVidia. All we have here is a smaller difference in instruction set as they're now running on x86 whereas before it would be something more alien, like RISC/PowerPC. The hardware itself though was still "birthed" from PC architecture and knowledge, 100%.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By stm1185 on 11/16/2013 6:03:51 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are undervaluing the x86 transition. The GCN architecture and Jaguar CPU cores used in the PS4 and Xbox One will be improved on by AMD for other products, and in fact already have been. While the Cell architecture of the PS3 really wasn't. Nor the XBox 360s, or the Xbox's. Those were more One Off designs, while the new SoC's are in ongoing development.

I think he is right, I think in 2-3 years Sony and Microsoft can look at AMD's progress and say "go build us a SOC at the same power volume with the new cpu cores and GCN 3.0".

Enabling 4k, the code will remain largely the same, updating for older games won't be as big of an issue, and newer games can simply scale resolution to meet to the performance requirement, which we are already seeing on the PS4 with AC4 not enabling 1080p until a post launch patch can optimize it enough to stay at 30fps+ outdoors.

Instead of just "able to work" they target performance around FPS, stable 60, stable 30. They can do that for two or three or four different SKU's without much trouble.

Furthermore, Sony has 4k TVs to sell, they will need to do this for the sake of their TV business.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By Totally on 11/16/2013 10:25:19 PM , Rating: 2
I disagree with your last sentence TV sales are independent of whatever happens with the consoles. The transition to 4k is no different from the transition from SD to HD except the jump in image quality is as big or apparent.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By stm1185 on 11/17/2013 12:56:04 AM , Rating: 2
Except we saw in the last generation the strong effect the PS3 had on pushing BluRay and HD, even making BluRay win over HDDVD. If Sony had a PS4.5 in a couple years, with 4k Support and 4k BluRay playback it could have a similar effect.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By FITCamaro on 11/18/2013 9:46:37 AM , Rating: 3
It's not going to happen. Not because it can't, because it won't. Doing that undermines the very idea of a console. That everyone has the same thing so developers don't have to program for varying levels of performance.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By Mythbinder on 11/16/13, Rating: 0
RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By purerice on 11/17/2013 1:39:03 AM , Rating: 2
As a graphic artist back in the 90's, I assure you that with a Power Mac you could plug in a Daystar CPU upgrade without software tweaks. Sure, multi-processor cards were different, because OS 8 through 9.2 were not really designed for "MP" systems, but with single CPU upgrades it was a snap.

Perhaps certain console games were designed to run at a certain FPS and that was based on the CPU speed, so putting in a CPU with 3x the power would tweak the frame rate, but that was not because the CPU was RISC-based.
Maybe I'm reading you wrong here but Android and Apple phones are RISC, right? Are you saying Android and iOS games need to be adjusted for every single new CPU that comes out?

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By Manch on 11/17/2013 6:59:03 AM , Rating: 2
As someone already pointed out. That is incorrect. The original xbox was a celeron/PIII and an NVIDIA chip. MS had to get to market quickly so they went with off the shelf parts. That's also why they pushed to transition to the 360 so quickly. They did not own the design of either chip and production was going the way of the dodo.

As far as your RISC/software comment goes, dont be dumb. I have upgraded many RISC based systems and the software has remained the same. If the architecture is the same then the software sees it the same.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By The Von Matrices on 11/16/2013 7:41:58 PM , Rating: 2
I disagree with this being practical. Consoles have always been programmed to exploit all the idiosyncracies in the architecture in order to extract maximum performance. This has nothing to do with the underlying architecture; even among x86 processors and GCN GPUs there are differences than can make or break backwards compatibility of a game programmed at a very low level. Something like a slightly different latency between components can completely kill performance if the game is designed to synchronize data among components.

This is why making any console backwards compatible is so difficult and why Sony approached backwards compatibility in the PS3 by just integrating the PS2 hardware. You can release a new console over a shorter period of time, but I doubt the games would be backwards compatible as is. Developers would have to release updates, and considering how old some games would be at the time, there would be little incentive for most games to be updated.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By stm1185 on 11/16/2013 9:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
And yet I can go back and run games from 2001 on my PC built in 2011. Why is that possible, yet a Xbox One built with AMD's update to Jaguar and GCN wouldnt be able to run BF4, even though a PC with the updated CPU and GCN would be able to run BF4...

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By The Von Matrices on 11/17/2013 12:07:14 AM , Rating: 2
It's because PCs are built on high level standards (such as DirectX) that are cross compatible with a variety of hardware. The downside is that those standards have overhead and prevent extracting 100% of the theoretical performance. In consoles there's no need for a high level standard since there's only one set of hardware.

In an ideal world the console developers would only use standard low level commands like AMD's Mantle, which would be much easier to transfer to a similarly designed processor (for example one with a higher clock speed or more cores/shaders). But in order to extract every bit of performance, programmers write code anticipating things very specific to one processor but that they don't have direct control over (like latency, bandwidth, and cache sizes).

You can get race conditions by changing processors. If you know that your console processor requires 100 cycles to read main memory, you can safely program a second thread that writes to that memory address 101 cycles after the read request is sent. If you then you replace your original processor with a processor that accesses memory in 105 cycles, you would have the second thread writing to the memory before the first thread had completed its read. In more universal code, locks would be used to preventing the write from occurring before the read had finished; however, this introduces additional commands (like a wait for the first thread to complete) that reduce processor utilization and efficiency. In a console you can omit this safety features because every processor is the same and you know that the timing would work, thus conserving computing power.

This is just one of countless situations where this can occur when you change processors. This is why backwards compatibility is so difficult in a console; you basically have to reread your code to find every one of these types of situations and correct them. This takes so much time and money that backwards compatibility is either non-existent or limited to very few titles.

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By purerice on 11/17/2013 1:47:23 AM , Rating: 2
Really? I couldn't get half the apps I loaded in 2001 to actually work correctly on my computer even back in 2001. I often had to wait for version 1.9 to come out 15 months later for the program to finally work right, then 2 months after that version 2.0 would come out. It would essentially be unusable until version 2.5 came out 6 months later. Nonetheless everybody would rush to that and their docs would be incompatible with my v1.9 docs.

The beauty of consoles has historically been that apps programmed for them will work as designed and advertised on day one. If you want to play 12 year old games, surely a console able to play them should be available on the cheap, right? Man, what does it take to make some people happy?

RE: Maybe Overlooking...
By ShaolinSoccer on 11/17/2013 1:14:16 PM , Rating: 3
Man, what does it take to make some people happy?

An emulator on a PC.

By TakinYourPoints on 11/17/2013 3:09:58 AM , Rating: 3
The lack of games at launch is hardly something to ding a console for. The last two times a console launched with a well loved game was Super Mario 64 for the N64 and Halo for the XBox.

12 and 17 years ago.

Every other console has launched with mediocre games, but that doesn't really matter in the long run. The PS3 and XBox 360 had terrible launch libraries. Even the Nintendo DS had an awful first year of games, and that system ended up outselling the PS2 on the strength of its catalog.

The same thing is happening now with the Nintendo 3DS and the Wii U. The 3DS had an awful start but since Spring its sales picked up bigtime because (surprise!) great games came out. A Link Between Worlds will sell insanely well. I'd argue that the Wii U currently has the best next-gen library between Pikmin 3, Wind Waker HD, and the upcoming Super Mario 3D World. It had a very slow start but those first-party Nintendo games are (as usual) starting to move hardware.

I got a launch PS4 but I had no outrageous expectations about the quality of its launch library. Resogun is amazing... and that's pretty much it. The only game I was really interested in was Watch Dogs and that got pushed back to Spring. NFS is a lot of fun to race against friends with but it isn't what I'd call groundbreaking. Killzone is nice looking but it defines mediocre in every way.

That's fine though, in the next year the library will catch up, that's the way its always worked. Good software, with very few exceptions, will lag hardware.

By Omega215D on 11/17/2013 3:44:09 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly, it's pretty common for new systems to be released with a handful of titles. That is until the holiday shopping season.

I was pretty bummed when I found out Watch_Dogs was pushed back till spring. I wanted to play that while waiting for GTA V on the PC. Need for Speed is well... Need For Speed. I never really found Killzone all that fun to begin with. Seeing as how I'm an pro-am racer I do want to see the next generation of Gran Turismo. The last one was not as realistic as they kept claiming it to be, handling-wise. Then again maybe I'm expecting a little too much for a $60 to be a capable simulator (though Richard Burns Rally on the PC was almost there except graphically).

By TakinYourPoints on 11/17/2013 4:29:38 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, a handful of titles rushed to meet launch and "omg this is amazing" are two different things.

I mean, King Kong and Condemned for the 360 launch were kind of par for the course, you know? :)

Deja Vu--RLOD
By inperfectdarkness on 11/16/13, Rating: 0
RE: Deja Vu--RLOD
By ritualm on 11/16/2013 5:08:36 PM , Rating: 2
The PS3 was overbuilt only in that it doubles as a full-featured, network-connected, firmware-upgradeable standalone Blu-Ray player. Sony killed two birds (HD gaming and widespread consumer BR adoption) with one very expensive stone. And it was worth every penny.

Both the xbone and PS4 are built with the same basic hardware (AMD secured a lock on both console hardware this time around), so it's fair to say there is no product testing being done at all for xbone. I'm not seeing a trend here.

RE: Deja Vu--RLOD
By hpglow on 11/17/2013 1:29:13 PM , Rating: 2
Point 1 proves you have no idea what you are talking about. The original xbox was built with a intel p3 and an Nvidia GPU. It was built on top of of a stripped windows directx OS. This was all industry standard PC junk at the time, nothing hard to "design" for any game Dev. Xbox was no massive success but it gained a lot of ground being late to that generation of consoles and facing the PS2 behemoth.

Is XMB that confusing?
By ATC on 11/16/2013 2:06:52 PM , Rating: 2
I see this statement, "confusing PlayStation 3 XMB", come out often enough in reviews that the mass public must really be challenged by XMB's interface.

Strangely though, my wife who is technologically challenged, to put it very mildly, and my 6-yr old both navigated the PS3's XMB since day one without any issues and no one ever showed them how.

Do people really find XMB that confusing?

RE: Is XMB that confusing?
By retrospooty on 11/16/13, Rating: 0
RE: Is XMB that confusing?
By The Von Matrices on 11/17/2013 12:13:54 AM , Rating: 2
The XMB isn't confusing for me, but it can get very cumbersome since it uses lists that are too long. I have a lot of content on my PS3, and having to parse through 50 items in the games tab to get to the one I want is an annoyance.

No reason to buy PS4 or Xbox One
By zlandar on 11/17/2013 3:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see any compelling game that makes me want to buy either system.

RE: No reason to buy PS4 or Xbox One
By Da W on 11/18/2013 3:56:11 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. The game i want the most is Mario 3D world.

Too early
By Omega215D on 11/15/2013 10:19:02 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't that usually the case with new systems? Just a handful of launch titles until the holiday and post holiday shopping season. My brother just got his and it's a well designed system.

As for the PC gaming comments: chill out. The new gen of consoles should help with the porting of games in the future as they now run similar hardware. I will continue playing slightly cheaper PC games and using the PS4 for those awesome exclusives.

RE: Too early
By CaedenV on 11/16/2013 3:16:29 AM , Rating: 1
The issue with the PS4 is a failure to meet promises rather than a genuine lack of games. Many titles have been postponed (presumably due to the removal of the eye-toy which was going to be standard hardware), and the tauted indie community that Sony promised during their announcement keynotes has largely failed to materialize.

There are simply very few games, most of which can be had on the old platforms or the PC, which makes for very little reason to upgrade at the moment. A year down the road the games issues will probably be fixed... but another 2 years down the road and you will have console experiences on tablet hardware... so I am not exactly sure when people should jump in, if ever.

Another review
By Saist on 11/17/2013 4:06:49 PM , Rating: 2
Note: some people have jobs
By euler007 on 11/18/2013 11:31:49 AM , Rating: 2
Between Knack, Killzone SP+MP, Resogun, Warframe, Contrast, NBA2K14+FIFA14 I'm good until february.

Some of these reviewers miss the fact that not everyone can play 80 hours a game. Same for some of the difficulty complaints of some reviewers, do they realize that playing games is their job, and that the only step up from them is "pro" players that get paid based on performance?

By 2bdetermine on 11/16/2013 3:21:07 AM , Rating: 1
Aim assist!

By Da W on 11/18/2013 8:37:49 AM , Rating: 1
I don,t get it about these "best controler ever" reviews.
They manly compare to the PS3 controler. What about the Xbox controler?

I've hated sony's dual shock since its inception. Xbox is far better. For that mather, the best controler ever was the Gamecube's.

Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Nortel on 11/15/13, Rating: -1
RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Mint on 11/15/2013 6:29:17 PM , Rating: 2
How would a gaming PC replacement not need quality controllers or games?

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By retrospooty on 11/15/2013 6:33:17 PM , Rating: 3
It really doesn't compete against a PC a all. It competes with XBO. At that it is quite good.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By SPOOFE on 11/15/2013 6:44:21 PM , Rating: 3
The PC Master Race will not be ignored, not matter how much everyone wishes they'd shut their yaps!

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Totally on 11/16/2013 12:27:51 AM , Rating: 2
He does not speak for us 'PC Master race' talk is beneath us. He belongs to a group of individuals known as elitist scum, oft characterized as owners of many iThings in an attempt to feel more important than thou.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By JasonMick on 11/15/2013 6:52:23 PM , Rating: 2
It really doesn't compete against a PC a all. It competes with XBO. At that it is quite good.
I do like the Xbox's interface better, but that's a moot point because Microsoft is killing its TV guide and other features for those who aren't XBL Gold subscribers. As I'm not into online gaming currently (for lack of time), I don't want to be paying a monthly tax as a toll so that Microsoft doesn't brick features on my console.

As for the launch titles both consoles look pretty weak.

For those who want to compare:

Crimson Dragon looks fun (XBO), as does DC Universe (PS4) ... as for the rest, Ryse/Forza (XBO) both probably appeal to a lot of people as do Need for Speed/Injustice../Killzone (PS4).

While launch titles neither console seems to have a clear lead (so I think The Verge's commentary is kinda biased/nonsensical), Microsoft does perhaps have a bit of lead in terms of upcoming content as it has a lot of flashy Microsoft Studios exclusives.

That said, my favorite genre (RPG) is a historic weak spot for Microsoft title-wise, and Microsoft's XBO policies while somewhat improved given its backtracking still seriously rub me the wrong way.

I own a XB360 and PS3, so I'm relatively vendor agnostic... Overall I tend to play RPGs when I have the time more than FPS/action games and Sony in the past has had better RPGs on its consoles. Hence I might buy a PS4, although Microsoft might change my mind if it steps up its

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By TerranMagistrate on 11/15/2013 7:08:20 PM , Rating: 2

If you're big on watching TV and such then the XB1 is the way to go. The PS4 will undoubtedly have a monopoly on jRPGs and perhaps even some western ones too so I think your choice is clear.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By siberus on 11/15/2013 8:20:35 PM , Rating: 2
I'm hoping this gen gets more jrpgs then the last gen. Seemed like most companies were unwilling to translate there games last go around.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Mitch101 on 11/15/2013 9:24:06 PM , Rating: 2
Even so Im tempted to e-bay my XBox one launch console and buy it when the price drops to the $300.00 range by then a lot of titles will be on the platinum list for $20.00 or so.

Im very tempted to try doing a steam console on my HTPC. I currently run XBMC and WMC with the ability to switch between the two easily and I do it using an X-Box 360 controller. I might just install steam and see if it can be controlled from the Xbox 360 controller and go that route. Although Im tempted by Skype and Voice navigation of the XBONE. There is only on Kinect title at launch my family is interested in and FPS titles I prefer mouse/keyboard on eyefinity.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By YearOfTheDingo on 11/16/2013 5:58:07 PM , Rating: 1
I wonder if the Xbox will sell better this time around in Japan with the Kinect 2 being an integral part of the system.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By piroroadkill on 11/15/2013 6:43:04 PM , Rating: 1
I feel sorry for you that you wasted some of your time typing that.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By JasonMick on 11/15/2013 7:00:44 PM , Rating: 3
-stuck with hardware for the next 10 years, until ps5 arrives

Of all your comments this one in particular seemed the most insane and devoid of fact.

The PS3 launched 7 years ago in 2006, first off. XBox 360 launched in 2005 so it actually has a longer release cycle (8 years)... but either way your "10 year" estimate is purely pulled from your rear.

And further your complaint also makes you sound like you have some entitlement issues, like somehow you're being done a grave injustice by having to own to a product you chose to buy.

What... should Microsoft and Sony buy Nortel a new console to apologize? Should they release consoles faster? How dare they offend Nortel, who clearly knows how they should sell their product better than they do.

Sounds like someone has a case of special snowflake syndrome.

No one is making you buy a console. If you can't handle a half decade or more to wait before the next generation in the console war, then you're not a console gamer anymore. Because that is the industry standard whether you like it or not. So either deal with it, or move on and let those who still appreciate console gaming spend their money as they see fit.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By inteli722 on 11/15/2013 7:06:19 PM , Rating: 1
Don't necessarily know about the PS4, but a Microsoft exec said:

Literally the first line is that the Xbox One will be around for 10 years. It's not completely wrong.


(I'd think that people here would be more receptive of us)

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By JasonMick on 11/15/2013 7:51:20 PM , Rating: 2

(I'd think that people here would be more receptive of us)
Fail. Lifespan != Next console's time to market.

Until January Sony sold PS2s -- a 12 year lifespan that covered nearly 2 product cycles. So if you wanted to speculate in a more informed fashion, you could predict that the next Xbox would come out in 5-7 years, with the XBO selling as a budget model for the next 3-5 years (as the XB360 currently is).

(I'd think that people here would be more receptive of us)
That's great that you love PC gaming, but you're being trollish if you don't recognize there's a tradeoff.

A good PC gaming rig is expensive, but packs better graphics.
It's more flexible, but most people already own a PC so this a somewhat moot point.

Controls wise, some titles (e.g. Dragon Age) are better with mouse/keyboard, while others are better with a console controller.

Consoles are cheaper and more compact.

Different strokes for different folks.

I both PC game (albeit on a gaming laptop, so less than enthusiast resolutions) and console game when I have the time.

My point is that both you and Nortel are giving wild speculation, much of which is unproven and misinformed. I think you both seem to love PC gaming (I think??) which is great, but don't spread misinformation just because you don't appreciate a product.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By StevoLincolnite on 11/15/2013 11:53:11 PM , Rating: 3
A good PC gaming rig is expensive, but packs better graphics. It's more flexible, but most people already own a PC so this a somewhat moot point.

Not really.
For starters you can do more with a PC, so the comparison point is already in the PC's favor.

Steam/Valve,, and Humble Bundle etc' has made PC gaming more convenient and cheaper. (SALES EVERYWHERE!)

Plus, the next generation consoles you have to pay for online.

So in the long term PC gaming is actually cheaper - Especially so if you like to buy allot of games.

I still see a fair few gamers still kicking around 6-7 year old buckets equipped with a Core 2 Quad and running the majority of multi-plats just fine, granted with a GPU upgrade or two, but the online fee that you have to pay for with consoles negates that cost.
I still personally have a Core 2 Duo E7400 @ 3.8ghz, 8Gb of Ram and the *only* upgrade it has gotten is a $30 Radeon 6570 (I've overclocked it of course!) and it still runs Battlefield 4 on medium quality settings at 720P.
Granted, my main PC with a i7 3930K is where I do the majority of gaming at 1440P, I can't stand any resolutions lower than that, 720P and 1080P is something I expect out of phones now.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Totally on 11/16/2013 12:41:47 AM , Rating: 2
The initial cost is may be steep, but afterwards all you need to upgrade/swap out is the GPU and maybe some extra system memory, and that by far can be just as expensive buying a console every time one is released, especially if you factor in the monthly cost for an online pass.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By JasonMick on 11/15/2013 7:59:55 PM , Rating: 2
Don't necessarily know about the PS4, but a Microsoft exec said:

Literally the first line is that the Xbox One will be around for 10 years. It's not completely wrong.


(I'd think that people here would be more receptive of us)
Also his comment and yours are somewhat inane, as assuming a 5-7 year upgrade cycle, that's not that far off what many of the enthusiasts I know stick to in terms of system building.

Sure some people with a ton of cash buy a super-powered watered-cooled gaming rig every year, but most of my friends who PC game prefer to build a really good rig that last 4-6 years. They might upgrade their CPU/GPU once over that period, but they're not going to buy an entirely new rig every year or two.

I think the numbers bear out this hypothesis as well...

The most most common cards tend to be GeForce 400s/500s in terms of discrete GPUs made by NVIDIA. These series came out in 2010 -- so a 3 year upgrade cycle is the mean it looks like.

I would guess components that require a motherboard upgrade follow a cycle that's closer to a console cycle among the average PC gamer/casual system builder.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Mitch101 on 11/15/2013 9:38:07 PM , Rating: 2
I think the 10 year cycle on Xbox One is BS and heres why.

This time around Microsoft is not selling the consoles at a loss. They are making a profit from day one - no pun intended. With that there is no X years and X games for them to wait for the consumer to purchase to make profits. They make profits on the hardware, software, subscription at launch. With the 360 they sold at a loss and needed to sell I believe at least 3-5 games before they started making a profit on the consumer. Because of the new model of NOT selling at a loss there can be an XBox Two that lets say is Fully backwards compatible with XBox ONE because it will just be the latest CPU/GPU combo that exists 5 years from now. Lets say in 5 years it does 4k games. You can have the same game compatible with both it just loads the higher textures for the beefier console. You then wind up with a $200.00 720/1080P Xbox one console and a well lets say 2160P Xbox two console. Your now catering to the 1080P people and the 4K people and since there is no loss on hardware, software, subscription you cater to the low and high end with two consoles. Just theoretical but I think we will see the successor in 5 years when 4K gains traction and AMD CPU/GPU reaches that level.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By ritualm on 11/17/2013 1:00:27 AM , Rating: 2
It's not likely to be 10 years, Mitch. Maybe half that. Even so, 10 years is likely going to be how long its supported (not necessarily selling) until Microsoft declares it EOL.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Mitch101 on 11/18/2013 10:20:31 AM , Rating: 2
Yes good point 10 years support with successor in 5 years.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By retrospooty on 11/16/2013 10:08:49 AM , Rating: 2
"Of all your comments this one in particular seemed the most insane and devoid of fact"

How can you pick just one? There are so many to choose from.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By SatchBoogie1 on 11/15/2013 7:10:59 PM , Rating: 1
I see your point in the whole "value added" loss, but honestly, I don't care about losing most of those specs. I don't have a 4k display, don't care for 3D Blu-ray, I have other devices for YouTube/Music, don't use DLNA, and hardly watch movies on physical media anymore. You had to also figure that they would implement a subscription service for the online play eventually. How about wait for developers to release some games?

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By TakinYourPoints on 11/17/2013 3:18:37 AM , Rating: 3
3D Blu Ray will get patched in, the rest of his complaints are irrelevant.

I'm a proud member of the PC Master Race but I totally get why consoles are important. They almost always have exclusive games that for me are worth playing. I will always play first-party Nintendo games and I will play anything Naughty Dog and That Game Company makes, which is why I buy Nintendo and Sony consoles.

The XB1's main problem is that there isn't anything exclusive that I'm interested in. Microsoft let go of or shut down nearly all their studios, so almost everything its getting is cross-platform. I'll be playing those on my PC. Even Titanfall will be coming to PC, so yeah, don't care.

That big list of missing features or whatever is meaningless. A software library is the most important thing.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By JasonMick on 11/15/2013 7:42:17 PM , Rating: 2
-mandatory connection to play DVD/bluray
Misleading at best:
"Yes, PS4 supports DVD movie playback; you will need to download and install PS4’s day-one system software update 1.50, and then activate your Blu-ray Disc video capability with a one-time activation through the internet in order to play Blu-ray Disc films and DVD video content."

So yes, you need to connect, but after that there's no "mandatory connection" as you suggest.
-no 4k support
This is one of several purely untrue facts you have invented.

Please stop showering us all with this FUD. Stop.
-no Youtube support (ps3 does)
-no mp3/audio cd support (ps3 does)
Okay, do you not own a smartphone or computer? I thought you just said you had DLNA?

Why is it a necessity for you PS4 to be a music player? How many people actually used their PS3 to play MP3s?? (I own one and I sure never did.)

As for YouTube, again this is probably not much of an issue, though you're right Microsoft has a slight edge here. For me if I want YouTube I can go over to my app on Tivo. Or for anyone with an LG/Samsung smart PC, you could just use that. Or ya know, you could connect your computer and watch YouTube from there... oh man, no YouTube on my PS4... this is a great outrage... I demand YouTube pour forth from every device I own because I'm a massive whiner.

What was that you were saying?
-no DLNA support (ps3 does)
For most users who actually know/care about DLNA that's a superfluous feature as you'd just stream content your receiver, not your PS4. I'd be willing to bet most users who use DLNA have at least a budget receiver capable of receiving it.

So this is a non-issue, and is actually a good thing as it means that Sony isn't wasting m_oney on largely unwanted firmware/hardware support.
-mandatory connection to play DVD/bluray
Misleading at best:
"Yes, PS4 supports DVD movie playback; you will need to download and install PS4’s day-one system software update 1.50, and then activate your Blu-ray Disc video capability with a one-time activation through the internet in order to play Blu-ray Disc films and DVD video content."

So yes, you need to connect, but after that there's no "mandatory connection" as you suggest.
-very limited games available??
Its launch library is not substantially better or worse than Xbox One's. Most consoles launch with relatively weak launch libraries. Which you prefer boils down to which games you prefer.

And what's with the question marks? Are you unsure and asking us whether this is true?

If you're a PC gamer you know there's a tradeoff between stability/framerate and resolution, that's controlled by your hardware. To be fair these devices are single-GPU so in many cases developers may want to cap at 720p or 900p to ensure good framerates.

For example with BF4 Xbox One reportedly renders at 720p, while PS4 renders at 900p (from what I read).

Again both consoles suffer from this "issue" somewhat, but it's largely at a developer's discretion:

Yes, PC gaming gives you less flexibility, but historically there's less available PC games as it's a smaller market, plus console hardware tends to be cheaper and more compact as it's purpose built for gaming, versus a PC rig built from multi-purpose components.

You seem to be somewhat oblivious to that certain issues are intrinsic to each device (PC v. console), with each holding certain benefits.

Clearly PCs will always have the best graphics as users who want to spend well over the average price a casual gamer would pay can always stuff a box with SLIed/Crossfired GPUs and an overclocked GPU with liquid cooling. But casual gamers aren't going to want to spend that much.
-very mediocre hardware compared to a $600 PC ($400 ps4, $60 controller + 2 games is $580)

Show me a PC that costs 600 and does all that.

Here's my go at it:
AMD (AMD A10-6800K Richland) -- less cores, but the closest you come to a comparable chip.

+$212 (special combo deal)

Radeon HD 7970 GE GPU (slightly less powerful than the PS4 GPU)

Standard barebones case...




Cheapo mouse and keyboard (you pick)


500 GB HDD


No frills 500 W power supply


So there... a little over your $600, but $687 USD. So you've bought yourself a machine that's more customizable, and more flexible, but is also bigger, slower, and most importantly almost $300 more expensive.

You really think the PS4 at $400 has "mediocre hardware"?

Again you seem to have lost all touch with reality.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Nortel on 11/15/2013 8:22:47 PM , Rating: 2
I do understand the need to not burn the Sony ads bridge but c'mon. My points are completely valid.

There is no current 4k/3d bluray support period. The ps3 had SACD, custom OS support and PS2 support which were all removed over time. Who is to say the PS4 will EVER get support for features not currently on the system OR have existing features removed? I guess you can see why they removed the slogan "it only does everything".

PC's do so much more compared to a console, you can't even properly compare them. If I tried to explain how much better a ti-86 calculator is vs a smartphone you'd laugh.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Flunk on 11/16/2013 12:27:21 AM , Rating: 2
You're comparing a list of value added features, not the games. Games consoles are about the gaming experience so it would sell regardless of the bells and whistles or lack thereof.

Also, no one has 4K. No one, and they won't for a few years at least.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By CaedenV on 11/16/2013 3:08:27 AM , Rating: 2
You want games? PC has games. About 30 years of games, emulators, roms, etc. More games than you could play in a lifetime, most of which cost less than $5 each on a sale, even for 2-3 year old blockbusters.

PS4 and XB1 are both 10+ year solutions. The plan is that these are streaming platforms which are expected to play local games the next few years. A few years down the road then there will be a firmware update to HDMI 2 with 4K video support and you pay an extra subscription to offload the real GPU support to a server somewhere. These are plenty powerful for that kind of use model, and it is the reason why neither console maker bothered future-proofing the hardware like they did the last 2 generations.

As for 4K sets, black friday is already going to bring $5000 80" 4K TVs, even without sales you can already pick up a 50" 4K for a mere $1200 (granted with questionable quality). The prices are dropping extremely quickly, and adoption is going to be faster than most people are predicting. It is no big deal right now, but in a mere 2-3 years then this is going to be a large problem if the consoles do not have proper up-scaling capabilities. I mean, these things can barely crank out 1080p on midrange dedicated hardware! That's just sad!

A real gaming PC is not cheap. I'll agree with anyone on that. But large volumes of high quality cheap games more than makes up any hardware expenditures. Plus no multiplayer taxes, and a great indie community, and the ability to use the best controller for a game (be it keys, mice, controllers, joystick, gestures, or even mind control).

Anywho, I am not saying that consoles will not do well, because they are going to have an awesome launch. And I don't begrudge the console refresh either as the old consoles have been holding back gaming for several years now. All that I am saying is that in 3-5 years when consoles are outstripped in raw horsepower by tablets and phones which can also subscribe to off-site game streaming services (and connect to controllers and TVs), then there becomes a very real problem for why anyone would want or need a console. These things are going to have very short lives indeed.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Reclaimer77 on 11/16/2013 8:12:25 AM , Rating: 3
These things are going to have very short lives indeed.

No they aren't.

You people just don't get it. Consoles exist in their own ecosystem. People don't buy them and then go "oh but I can do X on the PC, this sucks". That doesn't happen.

Graphics? The Wii had sh*t graphics and sold how many consoles?

The prices are dropping extremely quickly, and adoption is going to be faster than most people are predicting.

There's like little to no consumer available native 4k resolution media available. Everyone is predicting 4k taking a loooonggg time to go mainstream. So what makes your predictions more accurate than everyone else?

you can already pick up a 50" 4K for a mere $1200

The Seiki? It has WORST picture quality at any resolution than the cheapest HDTV lol. Come on be serious.

A real gaming PC is not cheap. I'll agree with anyone on that. But large volumes of high quality cheap games more than makes up any hardware expenditures.


People want to sit on the couch and play games. They don't want to deal with building their own PC's, playing with software all day, and all of the other chores that come with PC gaming.

I love PC gaming. I don't even own an Xbox 360 and I doubt I'll own either next gen. However you guys are making PC gamers look like elitist assholes who can't see past their own bias.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By purerice on 11/17/2013 1:53:09 AM , Rating: 2
Thank you. Some people don't get it. Yes, I would LOVE to see in the next 5 years, somebody sitting at Walden Pond with their smart phone getting 1 bar waiting for offloaded GPU to load graphics. It would give them something to ponder about.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Belard on 11/19/2013 6:36:25 AM , Rating: 1
Some of the problems with PC gaming is the junk or drm that is bundled. The lack of AAA titles and that many PC games look no better than the consoles they were ported from.

I rarely buy PC games anymore. And since my new wife has hooked her console to my (our) 60" HDTV, I'm finding that gaming with others in the living room to be a more positive experience with her and other guests. I just hope and wish that console game developers would support proper keyboard and mouse support. I still cannot control FPS worth a damn with a console controller... The accuracy is shit compared to my mouse... But maybe I can learn...?

I plan on getting another gaming card next year... To last me another 5+ years. But primary game purchases will be for our future PS4. Simple gaming... Fun is the goal.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Mint on 11/15/2013 9:07:34 PM , Rating: 2
In what universe is a 7970 GE less powerful than a PS4 GPU?

A $180 R9-270 will beat the PS4's GPU every time.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By inteli722 on 11/15/2013 9:19:16 PM , Rating: 2
Radeon HD 7970 GE GPU (slightly less powerful than the PS4 GPU) +$350

What? The PS4's GPU is about an HD 7850, with 2 GB of RAM shared between the CPU and GPU for games (the rest of the 6 GB is in use when gaming). Certainly nowhere near the level of a 7970 GHz. The R9 280X should do plenty fine against a PS4. Hell, even a 7950 would run circles around the thing (By the way, I think that a GPU more powerful than a 7970 GHz would be able to run BF4 on high with Anti-Aliasing no problem at stable frame rates).

As for the CPU, it's 2 4-core Jaguar chips clocked at 1.6 GHz each. Those are laptop chips, not full-fledged Desktop chips. That A10 should run circles around it.

Here's my go at a more realistic $600 build that can (easily) compete with a PS4:

PCPartPicker part list:
Price breakdown by merchant:

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor ($158.97 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI 970A-G43 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($49.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot Signature 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($62.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.98 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card ($195.66 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 210 Window ATX Mid Tower Case ($44.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair CX 500W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($49.99 @ Microcenter)
Total: $622.57
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-11-15 21:17 EST-0500)

I'll admit that Sony's fit a decent amount of hardware in the PS4, but the games already look pretty bad, and they're just going to get worse. Console gaming is holding the industry back as a whole.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Reclaimer77 on 11/16/2013 7:58:16 AM , Rating: 2
Here's my go at a more realistic $600 build that can (easily) compete with a PS4: PCPartPicker part list: Price breakdown by merchant: Benchmarks: CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor ($158.97 @ OutletPC) Motherboard: MSI 970A-G43 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($49.99 @ Newegg) Memory: Patriot Signature 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($62.99 @ Amazon) Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.98 @ OutletPC) Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card ($195.66 @ Newegg) Case: NZXT Source 210 Window ATX Mid Tower Case ($44.99 @ Newegg) Power Supply: Corsair CX 500W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($49.99 @ Microcenter) Total: $622.57 (Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.) (Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-11-15 21:17 EST-0500)

Yes at which point you then have to assemble it yourself. Not something the console buying public at large feels comfortable with.

Consoles you just plug them in, turn them on, and they work. That's the appeal. PC gaming is viewed as clunky and troublesome, which I admit at times it can be. You generally get more bugs and compatibility issues with PC gaming.

I find most of these console vs PC debates pointless. It's like comparing apples to oranges.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By BPB on 11/16/2013 8:59:23 AM , Rating: 2
As for the CPU, it's 2 4-core Jaguar chips clocked at 1.6 GHz each. Those are laptop chips, not full-fledged Desktop chips. That A10 should run circles around it.

Keep in mind that even if all you do is install anti-virus software and games, Windows is doing more than a console OS. So Windows needs a little more oomph just to get started. But most people don't just intall AV and games, they install other stuff which also eats up CPU cycles. That's not to say the PS4 would be a PC powerhouse, but it does have good power for it's purpose, which is ultimately 1080p gaming.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By inteli722 on 11/15/2013 9:23:37 PM , Rating: 2
Don't forget that PC has the ever-so-helpful Steam sales and Steam/Origin, which are both 100% free to play online. You can play 4k games with a powerful enough GPU, the largest games library you can ever find, and aforementioned upgradeablility.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By kyleb2112 on 11/16/2013 3:52:50 AM , Rating: 2
Consoles can't even play THEIR OWN OLD GAMES. You know what can?
A F@#king PC!

*Drops the mic*

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Reclaimer77 on 11/16/2013 7:51:57 AM , Rating: 3
We understand all that. Look I'm a PC gamer too, but so what?

People standing in line to buy these things don't care about these console vs PC comparisons.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By retrospooty on 11/16/2013 10:17:45 AM , Rating: 2
exactly, that's what I was saying above. The two are not competitors, they are in two totally different worlds. people that want a console arent sitting there debating between a PC in a console, they're just going to buy the console. Some of them game on PC too, some of them don't, and it's totally independent each other. I do both. at my heart I am always a PC gamer, and I hope it makes a huge comeback, but consoles just have better games. More comfortable to play too.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By purerice on 11/17/2013 2:18:03 AM , Rating: 2
Key word: OLD games. The last console I bought was a PS2 at launch (I got lucky). I played a few PSX games on it because I never had a PSX. If not for the fact that Vagrant Story, Suikoden, Xenogears, and Castlevania SotN were legendary, I would not have touched them. Who needed GT2 when you had GT3?

Would you put a Titan GPU in your PC just to play DNF? So why would you buy a PS4 or XBO to play PS2 games?

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/16/2013 8:35:32 AM , Rating: 2
Again you seem to have lost all touch with reality.
That's been known for a while now...

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By TheJian on 11/16/2013 11:46:11 PM , Rating: 2
7970ghz edition is less powerful than a PS4 gpu? Smoking magic console fairy dust or something?

Maybe you really mean somewhere around 7870?

If I have a 7970ghz I won't be turning much off at 1080p, while PS4 is already upscaling some stuff just to get to 1080p, and even then not targeting 60fps for most games. The 7970ghz edition runs circles around PS4 or xbox1. There is no comparison even after accounting for SUPER 7TH YEAR CONSOLE OPTIMIZATIONS once they know the platforms inside/out :) It's not like PC game devs are completely stupid while using the same AMD/NV hardware year after year. Most years are just slightly enhanced models from the year before on PC, amped up with more cores (possibly if die is shrunk too), some clock speed bumps and a few extra features. PC devs are not learning whole new platforms yearly.

Sorry, consoles this gen are underpowered, or they wouldn't be upscaling ANY game EVER to 1080p they would be running EVERY game at 1080p natively. That is already not the case. You would think games would not be limited until they are pushing the platform in 5-7yrs with more taxing engines etc, but we are already hitting limits and negotiating effects etc to get the games playable from day 1. Not cool in year 1 (week 1?...LOL). On top, there are some games where a 7970ghz edition can actually pump out 1600p.

Not quite sure how you expect a $400 console (with a gamepad etc) to catch a $350 vid card with 3GB of local memory (on top of another 8-32GB of main ram etc). Even a badly coded game would probably be faster on 7970ghz edition based PC. PS4 has what, 1152 shaders and runs 800mhz, vs 2048 on 7970 running 1ghz (1050 boost) pushing 250watts? PS4 cpu and gpu SHARE 176GB/s bandwidth from the GDDR5 @5.5ghz, where the 7970ghz has 6Ghz memory and 288GB/s all to itself. I could keep going but you should get the point. 7970ghz is VASTLY outclassing the lowly ps4 gpu :) We haven't even started talking about overclocking the card, just out of the box spec stuff here. On top of that you can get a 7970 that can catch a ghz edition for under $300 with a bit of overclocking already so again...Whatever. Did I mention PC's do more than games/movies?

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By purerice on 11/17/2013 2:30:37 AM , Rating: 2
Your horse seems a bit high for you to get down.

I neither have a PS3/XB360 or plan on getting the new ones but I leave myself open. Here are some problems with your logic.

Some launch games need to be upscaled, but not all games, especially on the PS4. Launch games are never fully optimized for the systems anyway. Most games a year from now will run just fine in 1080p and comparisons between XBO 720p upscaled and PS4 1080p native show little difference.

Consoles also have an advantage of having less OS overhead stealing system resources than Windows games have. Profit margins on $400 consoles are also lower than flagship GPUs despite advantages of scale, so a higher percentage of what you pay is in the system's performance.

With TV screens that consoles play at, there are no current plans to have intermediate resolutions of 1440p, 1600p, or anything else before 2160p or 4K. No broadcasts nor any streaming video standards support such resolutions either. So why do you need games to play at resolutions that don't match any TV they'd play on?

Please, if you are going to hate on consoles, at least pick rational arguments to hate on. Or better yet, just stop hating.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By lexluthermiester on 11/17/2013 6:08:00 PM , Rating: 2
Are YOU high? His logic was impeccable! The PS4 GPU is nice, but doesn't hold a candle to the 7970 as was compared by the halfwit above. And really with the high-horse comment? Go buy a clue will ya?

Consoles also have an advantage of having less OS overhead stealing system resources than Windows games have.

Consoles have OS's as well, especially xbone which runs in the background ALL the damn time and is just a scaled down, recompiled version of Windows. PS4 has the lead in hardware, software and developer support. Microsoft has lost a ton of consumer and developer confidence in the past few years. Couple that with the rumors that the new CEO of MS could very likely shudder the Xbox altogether leads me to believe that it may be foolish to invest in the xbone.

In the console arena, Sony and Nintendo have the advantage right now. Those are the systems to have. As far as comparing PS4 to a PC; Honestly? When the frak is this argument going to die? PC's will ALWAYS out perform and out class consoles at the cost of needing more TLC and some hassle. END OF STORY!

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By ritualm on 11/19/2013 2:32:03 AM , Rating: 2
PC's will ALWAYS out perform and out class consoles at the cost of needing more TLC and some hassle.

Which is a big reason why consoles exist: put the disc into it and play the game - without having to worry about "why is my PC not hitting 60 fps?", "help! my gpu keeps throttling while playing BF4!", and other problems that PC gamers face daily.

If I'm short on time but want to game, the last thing I want to deal with is troubleshooting. Time is not something I have in great quantity these days. If it doesn't work mostly right on the first time I play it, I don't care how good PCs are compared to consoles. Don't like it? Take a hike please.

RE: Ps4 - peasant box 4?
By tamalero on 11/18/2013 4:04:34 AM , Rating: 2
ahem, since when you need a 7970 GIGAHERTZ edition??
with a 7870 you can do fine on almost all games for 1080 res gaming.
the PS4 as an equivalent of a 7870.
the 7970GE is WAY FASTER than a 7870.. and way more expensive

funnily, you can get a R290 (which offers better performance for less than a 7970 GE) now.

in short, your comparison is mot because you dont seem to compare similar specs...

"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki