Sony's NeoGeo Pocket's (PSP2/Vita) business/non technical ramifications talk

[wco81]

The other thing which drives up cost is licensing fees, high SDK costs and a reliance on retail distribution channels.

How many levels of middlemen get their cut out of the $40-60 game? And how happy would they be if Sony switched to a heavily DD model where games are priced $10?

It's the same reason music and video rights must be negotiated on a per-country basis because there are many people demanding their cut.

Lets say they made a Vita version of Infinity Blade, using the additional capabilities of the hardware. Lets say they want to sell it for $6, just as in the App. Store, and only expect 70% of the proceeds.

Would Sony let them? Would their partners be happy if this kind of arrangement took hold and cut into retail sales?

 

[Npl]

The other thing which drives up cost is licensing fees, high SDK costs and a reliance on retail distribution channels.

How many levels of middlemen get their cut out of the $40-60 game? And how happy would they be if Sony switched to a heavily DD model where games are priced $10?

It's the same reason music and video rights must be negotiated on a per-country basis because there are many people demanding their cut.

Lets say they made a Vita version of Infinity Blade, using the additional capabilities of the hardware. Lets say they want to sell it for $6, just as in the App. Store, and only expect 70% of the proceeds.

Would Sony let them? Would their partners be happy if this kind of arrangement took hold and cut into retail sales?

Right now you can buy "A space shooter for 2 bucks" for 2$ (2€). Does this answer your question?

Id guess that Sony will have 2 or 3 categories of games, like PSPMinis and "full" games right now. The later beeing more strict with pricing, higher licensing, and must met higher quality requirements.

Theres no reason you couldnt have "cut the line" or "watch paint try" on Sony platforms. Probably wont sell there as well as on platforms which have no alternatives.

 

[Entropy]

Sony confirms that Vita misses holiday season.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Right now you can buy "A space shooter for 2 bucks" for 2$ (2€). Does this answer your question?

Id guess that Sony will have 2 or 3 categories of games, like PSPMinis and "full" games right now. The later beeing more strict with pricing, higher licensing, and must met higher quality requirements.

Theres no reason you couldnt have "cut the line" or "watch paint try" on Sony platforms. Probably wont sell there as well as on platforms which have no alternatives.

I was gonna say this, PSN already offers DD only software for PS3 and PSP in the form of PSN games and PS Minis. Even some PSP games have been DD-only too.

Also re the devkit costs, we've already heard reports of Sony loaning out Vita devkits for free to smaller indie developers. So development cost is not really a valid reason for an indie dev to decide not to develop on the Vita over other available platforms.

 

[ergem]

I have questions.

PS Vita as we know is a quad core ARM A9 CPU and SGX543MP4+ GPU. Can Sony later down the road (say 2013) upgrade to quadcore ARM A15 and SGX 6 series when smaller die process becomes available without impairing the ability to play previous titles developed for the previous processors? Or does the ability to develop to the metal restricts Sony from upgrading Vita's CPU and GPU later on although using the same ARM and SGX technology?

And/or upgrade the screen resolution to 720p and/or screen size to 6" or 7" and/or stereoscopic 3D?

Another questions.

Is it technically possible to make a dev kit that allows encoding to the metal yet allows for differentiation (ex. texture resolution, output resolution, 3D capability) between the current specs of the Vita (quad core A9 and SGX543MP4+) and my proposition of an upgrade in the specs (quad core A15 and SGX6MP4+)? Or does it entail a software layer that would inevitably restricts the developers from encoding to the metal?

I was thinking if Sony can upgrade the Vita later in its lifecycle, it will secure the old model owners to upgrade to the new model. I am of the opinion that even a slight increase in screen resolution or perhaps texture resolution or stereoscopic 3D capability will entice a lot of old model owners to upgrade, thus more sales for Sony. Sony can keep the old model in the market and cut its price and release a new model which is faster, multi-tasking friendly and over-all more capable.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I have questions.

PS Vita as we know is a quad core ARM A9 CPU and SGX543MP4+ GPU. Can Sony later down the road (say 2013) upgrade to quadcore ARM A15 and SGX 6 series when smaller die process becomes available without impairing the ability to play previous titles developed for the previous processors? Or does the ability to develop to the metal restricts Sony from upgrading Vita's CPU and GPU later on although using the same ARM and SGX technology?

That would depend mostly on the GPU. The ARM should be directly compatible - it'd be a crap processor architecture if it wasn't backwards compatible! If the GPU is accessed via a suitable sofware layer, then apart from the random compatibilities that need to be addressed, backwards compatibility should be as robust as swapping a GPU in a PC. If the devs code to the metal though, ut'd need rewrites.

It would probably be in Sony's best interests to support forward compatibility allowing them Apple like product refreshes, selling the latest, greatest model to the die hards for a premium and having the old models passed on to new customers buying more content.

Is it technically possible to make a dev kit that allows encoding to the metal yet allows for differentiation (ex. texture resolution, output resolution, 3D capability) between the current specs of the Vita (quad core A9 and SGX543MP4+) and my proposition of an upgrade in the specs (quad core A15 and SGX6MP4+)? Or does it entail a software layer that would inevitably restricts the developers from encoding to the metal?

If you can code to the metal, you can do everything in software. Assuming the devs can poll the hardware for which version it is, the can just include flags for specific features. Worst case, they write two different versions of the same program bundled into the same package.

I was thinking if Sony can upgrade the Vita later in its lifecycle, it will secure the old model owners to upgrade to the new model.

I agree, given how the mobile market has developed, and I wonder if Sony do to. They've said that Vita will be the easiest PS platform yet to develop for, and have openly talked about their upcoming middlewares. I anticipate a pretty complex software layer and thus forward compatibility via porting this abstraction layer and supplying suitable drivers.

 

[ergem]

That would depend mostly on the GPU. The ARM should be directly compatible - it'd be a crap processor architecture if it wasn't backwards compatible! If the GPU is accessed via a suitable sofware layer, then apart from the random compatibilities that need to be addressed, backwards compatibility should be as robust as swapping a GPU in a PC. If the devs code to the metal though, ut'd need rewrites.

ARM being directly compatible is good news for me. What are the graphical implication if Sony went with the software layer? What are the noticeable differences from a consumer standpoint between the ability to code to the metal and the existence of a software layer? Any measurable differences between the two possibility (1.5X, 2X)? Looking at the game demos available in the internet (say Uncharted), can you give an insight what route Sony has implemented?

It would probably be in Sony's best interests to support forward compatibility allowing them Apple like product refreshes, selling the latest, greatest model to the die hards for a premium and having the old models passed on to new customers buying more content.

I'm quite elated to know you share the same opinion. Except that I think Sony should still manufacture and sell the old model to compete with 3DS. So it's having two models on the market - the newest and greatest and the base model.

If you can code to the metal, you can do everything in software. Assuming the devs can poll the hardware for which version it is, they can just include flags for specific features. Worst case, they write two different versions of the same program bundled into the same package.

If it's the latter case, DD version aside, does it mean two different game cards in one buy? (very costly for developers considering the price of flash memory)

I agree, given how the mobile market has developed, and I wonder if Sony do to. They've said that Vita will be the easiest PS platform yet to develop for, and have openly talked about their upcoming middlewares. I anticipate a pretty complex software layer and thus forward compatibility via porting this abstraction layer and supplying suitable drivers.

Forward compatibility. I hope Sony implement that for their sake. What about the same for PS4, what's your opinion?

EDIT: What about John Carmack's statement about the Vita's capability to code to the metal? Does it completely discount the possibility of a software layer?

 

[wco81]

Sony could keep the Vita relevant by upgrading the APU. But if sales volume doesn't materialize, they can't use scale to reduce costs, especially if they're subsidizing the hardware

 

[patsu]

I am actually more interested in their memory architecture. How fast is the external RAM ? If I add more RAM, how would the OS use it ?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

These two posts have left me confused!

Sony could kee the Vita relevant by upgrading the APU. But if sales volume doesn't materialize, they can't use scale to reduce costs, especially if they're subsidizing the hardware

What APU?? Or did you mean API?

I am actually more interested in their memory architecture. How fast is the external RAM ? If I add more RAM, how would the OS use it ?

What external memory??? The memory card?

 

[patsu]

Yap, the memory card. How fast is it ?

 

[wco81]

Application Processor -- the combo of the ARM core and the SGX GPU.

By the time the Vita is released, there may be comparable SOCs on devices. Or certainly within a year or two, it could be eclipsed by A15 and the next-gen SXG combos.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well the user's card could be anything, unless Sony state a bottom limit. But they could be looking at a class 2 SDHC card at 16 Mbps, 2 MBs. I bought a class 10 to go in my HD camcorder as it was an excellent price, but the camera can handle 28 Mbps 1080p (though stupidly it's capped to the 'EU' standard of 50 frames a second, despite the fact every HDTV can display 60 fps just fine. Thanks for the moronic gimping!) which means basically a class 4 is good enough. It'd be good if application data like browser content could benefit from installing faster storage, but it's not something Sony or devs can really rely upon. Would you be willing to make a game that doesn't perform as well as possible if the Vita owner's choice of storage didn't meet a certain level? That'd be an awkward confusion.

 

[patsu]

There is no question it will have stiff competition in some of its aspects which of course overlap with phones, pads and pods, but at the same time I think it may have surprisingly little competition in the hardcore gaming space. I think Sony has a good opportunity here.

IMHO, if they can properly support and advertise the cheap $1 - $5 mobile game aspect of the device, along with multi-tasking multimedia functionality you would expect from an iPod Touch, I think they'll put themselves in a good position. If people's first impression of it, however, is a $30 - $40 game, no matter how good, I think it will alienate itself from a large part of the potential market. It may be a portable gaming platform first, media device second but I think it needs to be advertised in the reverse order (and it absolutely must perform as well as a dedicated PMD, while adding functionality in that arena that PMDs can't do yet.

I have a bit more time today, so backtracking the threads now.

I agree somewhat. Advertising Vita as a core gaming platform will likely limit its audience. However advertising Vita as a media device will face tough challenges too unless Sony proves -- at launch -- that Vita has significant advantages in media playback and management, compared to iOS and Android and Mango.

To attract my household, they should focus their message on gaming, but redefine gaming to be inclusive of casual users. People like my wife who play Plants vs Zombies overnight will never admit that they are core gamers. XD. Sony may have to appeal to these people like how Wii + WiiSports did it. Show compelling casual games (that hardcore will play too). They may only have one shot at it.

Even better if they have integrated experience with PS3. I am demanding for my Near + Activity + LiveArea port to PS3. Allow PS3 to be part of the Vita (social) network can help to jumpstart the experience.

Even even better if Vita can embrace and augment a household-ful of iOS and Android devices. e.g., RemotePlay should be ported to all so that I can use Vita/PS3 to play on iOS devices and vice versa.


The other media experiences (e.g., Qriocity, NetFlix) are necessary but they may be hygiene factors -- unless Sony redefines Qriocity too... like augment it with a gaming platform that use the entire music library. Would be cool if we can play Karaoke, RockBand, Sound Shapes, etc. on all the Qriocity songs with various charging model.

EDIT: The other way is to carve an area out of the market (say hypothetically, mobile devices for group gaming, or in-car entertainment, or kid-distraction tool, or education focused, etc.). They may (or may not ) be feasible beacheads, and then grow from there.

 

[patsu]

Vita being powerful does not preclude the existence nor success of lower budget, less graphically intensive games. By reason of it being a portable console, the underlying expectation of the userbase is that they'll be playing games that aren't graphically "state of the art", in that portable will never compete with home consoles and the users know and accept this. You only need to look at some of the most successful games on the PSP and DS to know that graphics don't really matter much for a portable console. And though Vita is a beast hw-wise, and thus can enable higher end games, it certainly will not inhibit the success of lower budget more stylistically pretty games rather than the big production value "console"-like games.

Agreed ! Having more power can also mean lower cost because you don't have to work so hard to overcome technical challenges.

I also don't think mobile games = lower graphics quality. People want to be surprised. Basically anything goes.

At this point, I am not convinced that mobile games are necessarily low budget. To get to where Sony want, they may have to spend even more (for large scale, mass marketing to change perception over time). iOS and Android games can certainly improve in quality too when more and more people look for quality games on these platforms. It should be happening already.

 

[wco81]

Even even better if Vita can embrace and augment a household-ful of iOS and Android devices. e.g., RemotePlay should be ported to all so that I can use Vita/PS3 to play on iOS devices and vice versa.

One thing people may lose sight of is how difficult the economic climate is. Japan's economy has been flat for a long time and now, Europe is going to be weighed down for a long time by sovereign debt and economic integration issues for a long time, while US is also unable to deal with short-term growth and long-term debt issues because of political dysfunction.

So for a lot of households, adding a game-centric device (to smart phones) is going to be a real hard-sell.

A delay might not be a bad idea for the Vita if the economy improves next year. But OTOH, the delay would put it closer to the release of devices with better silicon.

 

[patsu]

The economy will rise and dive. A company like Sony will need to invest in long term platforms and roll out products in the short term. They need time to strengthen their software arm.

It may mean they need to cramp more features and contents into Vita (It's cheaper than iPad). Stuff built for Vita may be ported to Playstation Suite if necessary.

Beyond the fluffy stuff I mentioned above, their first party studios need to work on something very very specific. Curious to see which route Kaz chooses. I hope Stringer is flexible enough. One of the toughest things for a h/w company to create a software platform is the finance and accounting. The typical nickel and dime h/w approach usually conflict with the upfront s/w business investment.

EDIT:
On a related note, I wouldn't mind Dual Shock 4 becoming a Vita "shell" (dual stick + touch screen + back touch + internal sensors). It would be a first step to unify Playstation home and portable consoles.

 

[ninelven]

still, there are lots of pros and cons to weigh up, but the cost one isn't you portray it, any more than when someone buys a PSP they add in the cost of all those games they are going to buy.

So let me get this right:

If cell phone -> ignore additional data cost of smartphone (which you are contractually obligated to buy)

If game device -> add in cost of games (which you aren't contractually obligated to buy)


AKA:

If facts support previous held beliefs -> apply them.

If facts contradict previous held beliefs -> ignore them or call them irrelevant.


Attempting to reason with such a person is well illogical... peace.

 

[rpg.314]

Please show me a link to an Smartphone with the same graphics capacity as the PS Vita which costs only $199. I think only the iPhone4 or one of the new Samsung phones at > $500 come close, or?

Vita isn't selling yet. So you should compare Vita with phones that will be on market in that time frame.

 

[patsu]

If I understand their approaches correctly, Vita games will have closer to metal access whereas phones have to go through APIs to access the GPU. If so, developers will be able to tap on Vita's power much more efficiently.