PlayStation 4 (codename Orbis) technical hardware investigation (news and rumours)

[Deleted member 11852]

I put myself in the shoes of Crystal Dynamics who will next year be be launching Rise of the Tomb Raider on PS4 after Uncharted 4 and where the technical comparisons are going to numerous. Now ask yourself, is that fair?

Prelaunch I actually think Sony did a fair (in the truest sense of the word) job. The decision to include 8Gb GDDR5 was "last minute" in hardware development terms but it's not as though Sony couldn't have prepared first party studios for the possibility but no, everybody was in the dark until Mark Cerny said "8Gb" at the PS4 reveal on 22nd February 2013.

I firmly believe that when one company controls the platform (Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sony etc) and also compete with third parties on that platform that this is really the only way you should do business because Sony as publisher and developer are competing with Ubisoft, EA, Activision and every other non-Sony first or second party for customer's money. Just like Microsoft in the console space and Microsoft and Apple competing with their professional applications on their desktop and mobile OS platforms.

 

[Nesh]

I put myself in the shoes of Crystal Dynamics who will next year be be launching Rise of the Tomb Raider on PS4 after Uncharted 4 and where the technical comparisons are going to numerous. Now ask yourself, is that fair?

Prelaunch I actually think Sony did a fair (in the truest sense of the word) job. The decision to include 8Gb GDDR5 was "last minute" in hardware development terms but it's not as though Sony couldn't have prepared first party studios for the possibility but no, everybody was in the dark until Mark Cerny said "8Gb" at the PS4 reveal on 22nd February 2013.

I firmly believe that when one company controls the platform (Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sony etc) and also compete with third parties on that platform that this is really the only way you should do business because Sony as publisher and developer are competing with Ubisoft, EA, Activision and every other non-Sony first or second party for customer's money. Just like Microsoft in the console space and Microsoft and Apple competing with their professional applications on their desktop and mobile OS platforms.

I wouldnt say competing is the right word. They get royalties from those third party devs. They need them to succeed on their platform. Of course they can get higher margins on first party but still, they didnt build consoles to sell their own games. They are not like Nintendo which treats third party as complimentary.
Its the third party devs that defined the previous consoles anyways. Its their support to those third parties that defined the PS1 and PS2 experience. Most popular Playstation games were not from Sony. Sony games were special in their own right and this is why they appealed to less people in most cases.

I am sure Sony would have been delighted if third parties were making exclusive games on their console just like the good old PS1 and PS2 days.

First party and second party games are great extra sources of income for Sony when they have a huge console install base (see games like Rachet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, The Getaway etc. Great sales due to the high install base but not record breaking sellers). But when the install base is not huge their first and second party efforts are trying to differentiate the console to increase the install base (See the case of PS3 where Sony was trying to prove the product's worth through exclusives and first party games).

In general first party games are powerful marketing tools

This is how I view it.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I wouldnt say competing is the right word. They get royalties from those third party devs. They need them to succeed on their platform. Of course they can get higher margins on first party but still, they didnt build consoles to sell their own games. They are not like Nintendo which treats third party as complimentary.

I guess it depends where you are standing and you sound like you're standing in Sony's shoes. When your console is successful and you profit from all software sales it's hard to lose. Sony probably profit as much (if not more) on third party developed games because there are no internal costs to amortize, every sale = profit from the outset.

Now put yourself in the shoes of Ubisoft. You launch a game at the same time as Sony and you know that your target market consists of people who can't afford both games so you need customers to buy your game over Sony's game. You're directly competing with Sony and Sony, whether you consider them competing or not, are taking sales from you and taking a slice of your sales via licensing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I firmly believe that when one company controls the platform (Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sony etc) and also compete with third parties on that platform that this is really the only way you should do business because Sony as publisher and developer are competing with Ubisoft, EA, Activision and every other non-Sony first or second party for customer's money. Just like Microsoft in the console space and Microsoft and Apple competing with their professional applications on their desktop and mobile OS platforms.

I'd say in that situation the only true way to be fair is to isolate the software and hardware businesses and have the software company work as a 3rd party to the hardware. Otherwise the internal developers are always going to have an advantage. If there's a support issue, they'll be prioritised. If there's a possible change in specs, they'll be first to know. If there are some beta SDK options, they'll be first to try them. New devkits for new hardware, they'll be first to receive them and first to receive them en masse.

Same for Epic providing an engine and games - their games benefit unfairly versus other developers using the same engine. Same for cops - a cop needing police support is going to get preferential treatment versus the ordinary public. Same for masons...

Hell, ND and ICE share the same building - of course ND is going to have an advantage! But companies having a competitive advantage is part of doing business. As it is, pubs are happy enough it seems. Sony is providing good tools, services, and a platform with millions of gamers to buy their games, and rolling out to 3rd parties everything 1st parties have if just a bit later (and we don't even know how much later).

 

[London Geezer]

Also there's the whole issue of unlocking 7th sauces and whatnot to developers using off the shelf engines like UE4, for example. Would Sony release new tools to Epic, and would Epic then integrate those new tools and sauces to all developers using UE4?
Sounds like some devs will always stay behind due to there being too many layers in the onion. The sauce can't penetrate it all.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I'd say in that situation the only true way to be fair is to isolate the software and hardware businesses and have the software company work as a 3rd party to the hardware.

It's definitely not the only way. If you work in any large organisation then information flow and access to key resources (like engineers) is not a free for all, there will be an InfSec doctrine. Practically, it has to be this way if your engineers are the people building new products and platforms and I speak from experience. This also prevents leaks.

Apple's internal compartmentalisation is well known and an engineer working on Logic Pro can't just call an engineer on the OSX team, which is surprisingly small.

In terms of Sony, what the core API team are working on and might deliver at some point isn't really helpful to other first party devs when they're writing code now. Engineers deal in absolutes and relying on some feature that may change or get canned is no way to deliver software. If anything it's a potential distraction and I'd be astonished if features in dev are widely publicised to Sony first and second parties.

It's about having an attitude predicated on discipline and focus. We know Sony teams share deployable tech but that's a long way from widespread internal publication of roadmaps and teams planning to build on tomorrow's frameworks. I'm sure I'm not the only code monkey to have tried that and been burned on timing or re-specification issues.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

In terms of Sony, what the core API team are working on and might deliver at some point isn't really helpful to other first party devs when they're writing code now. Engineers deal in absolutes and relying on some feature that may change or get canned is no way to deliver software. If anything it's a potential distraction and I'd be astonished if features in dev are widely publicised to Sony first and second parties.

Right. And we're talking here about a feature that will make into final release for everyone, just being tested first on a few trusted devs with excellent 'in-house' communications. As I say, there'd be no problem allowing ICE team remote access to development PCs at a first party studio for debugging. It's field testing of the tech ahead of general release.

Engineers deal in absolutes and relying on some feature that may change or get canned is no way to deliver software. If anything it's a potential distraction and I'd be astonished if features in dev are widely publicised to Sony first and second parties.

They clearly won't be working designs based on fuzzy ideas. But when Sony think about releasing a new console, do you think they don't tell their first parties to start prepping with much more clarity than third parties who estimate when the consoles will release and what spec they have?

I'm sure I'm not the only code monkey to have tried that and been burned on timing or re-specification issues.

Because it happens, because lots of businesses work that way. And 3rd parties get repeatedly burned. Apple rolls out a new iOS with new APIs and all the third parties find their apps break thanks to fundamental changes to how things are implemented.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Right. And we're talking here about a feature that will make into final release for everyone, just being tested first on a few trusted devs with excellent 'in-house' communications.

You're faith in engineers differs from my experience of engineers.

They clearly won't be working designs based on fuzzy ideas.

You're faith in engineers differs from my experience of engineers

But when Sony think about releasing a new console, do you think they don't tell their first parties to start prepping with much more clarity than third parties who estimate when the consoles will release and what spec they have?

We know from Mark Cerny's 'The Road to PS4' talk at GameLabs that Sony aproached third parties in paralell with internal devs because it was third parties, having to accomodate multiple architectures, who struggled more with PS3. And also know from first party studios who commented on the change from 4Gb to 8Gb who found out only Mark Cerny announced it to everybody. So there's more evidence of a level playing field than not.

Because it happens, because lots of businesses work that way. And 3rd parties get repeatedly burned. Apple rolls out a new iOS with new APIs and all the third parties find their apps break thanks to fundamental changes to how things are implemented.

Apple mark APIs for deprecation well in advance of removing them. And look at Logic Pro and Final Cut X, niether of which are ever using the latest Core foundation technologies. If you own a platform or ecosystem and also compete with third parties companies in that ecosystem you have a responsibility to be as fair as possible.

 

[Globalisateur]

Some updates about the 7th core available for devs on PS4. Dying light the following is apparently going to use it (on XB1 too):

Dying Light was made and optimized to work on 6 cores since that’s what was available when we made the game. So the opening up of the 7th core CPUs on both platforms simply gave us a good reserve of processing power...It essentially gave us a helping hand in dealing with more processor intensive situations, but given when Dying Light was developed, it simply means we use the additional CPU power as a nice to have and not something we need have to rely on.

http://gamingbolt.com/dying-light-t...ps4-and-xbox-one-dev-talks-about-cloud-gaming

The elder scrolls online devs also intend to update their game in order to use the untapped 7th core:

We do have plans to take advantage of the 7th processor core in some capacity, and are still discussing the exact details internally.]

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2528679/#Comment_2528679

 

[Clukos]

So it's not a first party exclusive and we'll see some use pretty fast. According to the leaks the SDK update was 4-6 months ago so that makes sense.

 

[London Geezer]

Rumour keeps popping up......

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/03/18/sony-may-be-making-a-newer-better-ps4

 

[Grall]

@London-boy
Yeah, there's a post over at Kotaku about the same thing. Allegedly, they have "confirmation" of the rumor from multiple "trusted" sources.

It's not completely surprising they'd at least explore a product like this, and IF they actually go ahead with making it... Woe Nintendo NX. It's gonna get steamrolled SO BAD.

 

[London Geezer]

Apologies, I just noticed we actually have a thread about this - moving there!

 

[orangpelupa]

Just got a confirmation from Yoshida-san that the new pc remote play will only be one way remote. It won't allow pc games to be played on the console

 

[morphinapg]

Of course it wouldn't, that's not what Remote Play is about.

 

[orangpelupa]

Of course it wouldn't, that's not what Remote Play is about.

What remote play is about? I thought it was about playing remotely, like it's name.

 

[morphinapg]

It's just a PS3/PS4 remote. A service for playing your PlayStation console games without being near the PlayStation console.

 

[DieH@rd]

What remote play is about? I thought it was about playing remotely, like it's name.

Since it was introduced in 2006 on PSP, remote play enabled remote playing of a home console.

 

[orangpelupa]

and they have no plan to expand that unlike MS

 

[DieH@rd]

What plans has MS? Currently they offer remote play from Xbone to PC, and from Xbone to Oculus VR cinema.

Sony's remote play offerings:
PS3 > PSP & vita
PS4 > Vita, VitaTV, Android, other PS4s [SharePlay], and soon PC&Mac