News & Rumours: Playstation 4/ Orbis *spin*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gradthrawn said:
That's what I'm not sure about. I'm sure you've seen the UI video demo that's been floating around, right? In there, you can see the main actor viewing a video shared by the supporting actor directly from the CUX. Is that an unbranded YouTube hosted video with a custom player, or is uploading to YouTube just one potential option (along with FB), while by default you have a certain amount of shared video space in their infrastructure (the nebulous SCE cloud)? YouTube would make a lot more sense to me, but you never know. Could be Crackle at the backend as well (by default or as an option). It will be interesting how they structure all of this. Hopefully, they proceed smartly. As I think they're going in the right direction with the Share button. Would be a shame to paywall it off.
Click to expand...

Live streams only need a key that looks like

live_1406513_hsINh3Rd6TFYvzzaWpSdsei1OU8EVH

thishttp://www.twitch.tv/broadcast# (I took mine and scrambled, changed some stuff) and proper software to stream.
if it works with twitch, youtube, ustream or anything, this key is all they need.

None of this actually requires Sony's input so I don't think they will charge for something a service that they don't really serve as a backbone for..
 
Gradthrawn said:
That's what I'm not sure about. I'm sure you've seen the UI video demo that's been floating around, right? In there, you can see the main actor viewing a video shared by the supporting actor directly from the CUX. Is that an unbranded YouTube hosted video with a custom player, or is uploading to YouTube just one potential option (along with FB), while by default you have a certain amount of shared video space in their infrastructure (the nebulous SCE cloud)? YouTube would make a lot more sense to me, but you never know. Could be Crackle at the backend as well (by default or as an option). It will be interesting how they structure all of this. Hopefully, they proceed smartly. As I think they're going in the right direction with the Share button. Would be a shame to paywall it off.
Click to expand...

In the video, what exactly did he use to talk to his friends ? I only saw his earpiece. PSEye or one thing else ?
 
AlphaWolf said:
MS is providing the framework to use azure. Is Sony just telling developers to go ahead and use cloud if they want or are they actively supporting its use? There is a difference.
Click to expand...
Naughty Dog have used Amazon's cloud services this generation. Devs are free to shop around for opportunities, and I dare say they could even use Azure if they want. It's not entirely clear to me if Azure is specific to XB1 and not used by anyone else, or if it's just part of the Azure framework, but I believe the latter for several reasons.

I don't suppose Sony want to invest in a cloud computing infrastructure when there are alternatives out there already. That's another battleground Sony have no interest in, whereas MS does, so it behooves MS to invest in and fight for that space. I guess MS have the option to provide discounted services to developers so that may be cheaper, but any third party game is going to need a solution that works across all platforms.

The take home point being MS's position isn't really unique and PS4 can use cloud compute if it wants. That's hardly news or a rumour. ;)
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Naughty Dog have used Amazon's cloud services this generation. Devs are free to shop around for opportunities, and I dare say they could even use Azure if they want. It's not entirely clear to me if Azure is specific to XB1 and not used by anyone else, or if it's just part of the Azure framework, but I believe the latter for several reasons.

I don't suppose Sony want to invest in a cloud computing infrastructure when there are alternatives out there already. That's another battleground Sony have no interest in, whereas MS does, so it behooves MS to invest in and fight for that space. I guess MS have the option to provide discounted services to developers so that may be cheaper, but any third party game is going to need a solution that works across all platforms.
Click to expand...

I would think the distinction is that on Xbox One, it's part of the service, part of the framework to be supported by default, which to me also means that somehow, there's a fixed agreement on who handles costs and how much performance is available.

On the PS4, if it's up to the developers to use it, and indeed if they have the option to use any service provider they wish, who will pay for it? I would hate if there were additional costs to Sony's paywall as a customer. I.e. I'm a PlayStation Plus member and then I buy a game that happens to offer extra features through cloud-computing, but that would require me as a customer to register seperately to that publishers account for a subscription to use their cloud. I would pretty much prefer Sony to handle the expense, so that I can have one account (the PSN account) that also handles any extra features developers/publishers might think of.

It's a bit like crap we had with MGS4 (online) where a Konami account was required or Activision offering Elite (in Call of Duty) accounts through their own subscription - or any Android app, where you have to pay the developer directly instead of being able to pay through the Android Market place. It just isn't as attractive. It's all about convinience. I sincerely hope they think of this, before offering the services, rather than follow the metric "just go with it and deal with it later".
 
^^^
From Polygon:

Shuhei Yoshida: "As far as free-to-play games are concerned, it's a publisher's decision whether they put it inside or outside of the PlayStation Plus requirements,"
Click to expand...
 
Strange said:
Live streams only need a key that looks like

live_1406513_hsINh3Rd6TFYvzzaWpSdsei1OU8EVH

thishttp://www.twitch.tv/broadcast# (I took mine and scrambled, changed some stuff) and proper software to stream.
if it works with twitch, youtube, ustream or anything, this key is all they need.

None of this actually requires Sony's input so I don't think they will charge for something a service that they don't really serve as a backbone for..
Click to expand...

Interesting thanks. I didn't know that. Outside of the initial coding they have to do to work with a particular service's API, hopefully the setup is just that simple. Logically, it wouldn't make sense to paywall it. I'm more concerned about seemingly illogical decisions.

patsu said:
In the video, what exactly did he use to talk to his friends ? I only saw his earpiece. PSEye or one thing else ?
Click to expand...

Brad Grenz said:
There's a string mic on the cord of the earpiece you saw.
Click to expand...

As Brad Grenz mentioned, the string mic pictured below: You can also see the blue toggle switch for mute.

9012443116_b6aee64135_z.jpg


Cjail said:
^^^
From Polygon:
Click to expand...

They're in discussion with Square right now as well for FFXIV. What I'm quite curious about is what the "decision" publisher's have to make actually is. I doubt its as simple as "yes, no paywall" or "no, keep it behind your paywall". There must be some cost involved somewhere on the publisher's end to keep it open for non PS+ members (making it "yes, no paywall at this cost to us"). Otherwise the answer would always be yes! That or perhaps its not so much a dollar cost as it is a cost of certain features being offloaded from Sony's infrastructure to the pub's, while also adhering to SCE's requirements to ensure interoperability and consistency for the user. That I could see and probably makes more sense.
 
^^^
I think they are discussing with SE as well because FFXIV has a subscription model.
My guess is that games that has subscription won't need PS+.
 
Good video interview with Yoshida about a variety of topics. He clarifies some of the paywalled features beyond online multiplayer for PS4. A few highlights:

  • He did not see "near final" hardware until after the February PS Meeting.
  • Seemed really impressed at how small it was. Felt it looked like a "2nd gen" PS4 in terms of size even though its the first iteration.
  • PS+ Multiplayer Paywall in place to cover additional infrastructure investment.
  • Some current PS+ features on PS3/V will be available to all PS4 users with a PSN account.
  • Automatic trophy sync will be available to all PSN PS4 users (damn well better be, current system is horrible even with Plus :p).
  • Cloud saves remain behind PS+.
  • Automatica downloads and installs behind PS+.
He didn't mention the share functionality, and the interviewer didn't follow up on the particular topic.

Just to be clear, I'm more curious than anything if they're going to paywall any or all of the Share functionality from a feature exposure perspective. As has been previously mentioned, it would be smart to make as much of that available to as many people as possible. As a current Plus subscriber, I'll have it either way (and I'm quite looking forward to it).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cjail said:
^^^
I think they are discussing with SE as well because FFXIV has a subscription model.
My guess is that games that has subscription won't need PS+.
Click to expand...

IMHO, the right way is F2P and subscription services outside the wall.

But PS+ has bulk (discount) deal.
 
I wonder how many millions played PS3 online but never got PSN+ like myself.

I want to know about these additional infrastructure investments.

Are downloads going to be faster and more reliable now? Are most games going to connect to a server or remain P2P?

Are there going to be ads?
 
A boatload of people won't have PS+.

But these are the people most interested in games, and more willing to pay.

Gaikai infrastructure won't be ready for everyone on day one. It has to start somewhere. The core gamers are likely the best place to start.

They can't handle everyone because as I mentioned before, some of their Feb announced services won't work well in P2P over WAN. Some sort of server platform would be more robust and usable.

Once they acquire a sustainable base. They can improve and grow their services.

I don't know about PS+ specifics. On PS3, I don't remember ads.
 
PS+ is a better value than Gold IMO at the moment, the free games are a real bonus. But I've never really understood the resistance to paying the small amount of money involved for either, I pay over 20x that a month for cable TV and I probably spend less hours watching that.

IMO The stupid stuff that's behind the paywall are auto updates and patches, I could live with that if after subscribing it actually worked on all the PS3's in your house, it doesn't. Though I believe that's fixed for PS4.
 
PS3 has plenty of ads, they are just not as obtrusive as what Microsoft does.

You have the constant (yet mostly nonsensical due to lack of context) news ticker by the clock. You also have the "What's New" menu items include tiles of stuff Sony wants to push.

The unfortunate thing about requiring PS+ for multiplayer is that there will be less and less incentive for Sony to offer anything decent with it as far as PS4 customers are concerned. I wouldn't be surprised to seem them add extra tiers once we are further along this gen.

Cheers
 
deathindustrial said:
I wouldn't be surprised to seem them add extra tiers once we are further along this gen.
Cheers
Click to expand...

I hope both do, any tiered service would have to offer additional value to justify its existence, I think that probably means a subscription games service, and that's something I would very much like to see.
To my mind it's the only model that has the potential to reward developers based on how good a game is, rather than market hype, or it's ability to drive players to micro transactions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top