Yes when PS5 arrives, expect the base PS4 to disappear and the PS4 Pro will reduce in price to become the budget console throughout the next gen. Imagine if Sony made multiplayer free, but made all PSN game purchases half price if you subscribe to PSN+. That would be a game changer and win a lot of support.
Or even better, double the PSN+ subscription with all games available for free download, even new games, and they all remain playable as long as you are still a member. £100 for a full years worth of games. Forget game streaming, forget MS, that's a winner. Right now, 3 new AAA games will set you back £100+. Even a £150 PSN+ subscription would be great value if all the games were free download, but that one would be a very hard sell to pay that much upfront. Or a two tier service: £100 free access to all games over 6 months old, £150 free access to all games including brand new AAA games.
Sony could allocate a percentage of the profit to the game devs. Screw greedy devs like EA or those pushing for game streaming. They would just have to take a hit or sell nothing to PSN+ gamers. They would just have to rely on selling games to those that didn't buy PSN+ or stream games to those who cannot afford a proper high quality native console. Devs could still charge extra for fair DLC, expansion packs and season passes if the gamer feels the base game is worth the extra investment.
If Sony do decide to adopt such a strategy, they should push for high quality content by installing a negative star rating system so that gamers can identify such products via feedback, or the whole thing falls apart. This would avoid greedy devs releasing stupid free to play versions that offer very little content for the premium free download PSN+ gamers, then rely on paying extra to turn the game into something worth playing.
Most gamers won't go back to put a positive red star after enjoying a game so there is no value in that, but they will go back to complain with a negative black star. That way the market would police itself and stop abusive greed. Red star approvals should be dumped. Any approval simply lowers the black star rating which starts as no star. All positive votes would result in no warning black stars. Would you buy DLC for a base game that had 5 black stars. You would not even download that free base game. Imagine Red Dead Redemption 2 with 5 black stars. We all want it but something would be seriously wrong with the game and people need to know it. Hardcore fans would still download it to see what the issue was, then say "yep they gimped it," and put a black star on it. This would force the devs to try better next time.
I currently find all PSN games a third more expensive compared to the actual disc from Amazon. Yes downloading is faster than waiting for a postal delivery, but a re-instal from disk is faster than a PSN download. Plus the disk is yours forever. The PSN version is only yours while it's still on the server. Amazon disk wins 3-1. Cheaper, faster re-instal and yours forever vs faster initial access.
Imagine what the game industry would be like without the regular console gen cycles. Every time they come around, gamers become extremely excited with a huge hype boost keeping everyone engaged. The hype is far bigger than any single game can generate because it's something that boosts all games going forward.
All that would end and just become one big constant meh, if the greedy devs and MS execs transform the thing into a lame game streaming service relying on the unreliable internet. The internet will never keep up with game progress. As the internet gets faster, games just add more stuff to be passed back and forth in order to add new features.
Even a fast internet connection is not immune to dropped packets due to traffic conditions that produce latency and lag issues. It's bad enough when the CPU ignores your controller instruction because it's too busy working the AI trying to kill you. It's even worse when the internet is also ignoring your instructions because the network is busy passing the info about the guy or AI who killed you one second ago. The round trip for instruction data and response just adds another hurdle we do not need that destroys gameplay. The magic of multiplayer died years ago for me, so game streaming is a total none starter. Everyone who shouts "bullsh!t" after an unfair death will know exactly what I'm talking about. Skill plays no part in the equation, and that kills gameplay.
MS and game devs want game streaming because they only have to make the game once without any ports and simply stream a pre-rendered video to all subscribed devices. All the rest is pure profit with gamers receiving a sub standard service for a similar price. With game streaming you are basically playing an interactive video render, not a native game rendering the content in real time on native hardware. Game streaming should always be regarded as a budget service for those that cannot afford high quality native hardware running in real time.
I expect MS to release a powerful console with native hardware called something like the XB2 and a budget console for a quarter of the price with all the guts stripped out that only does streaming called something like the XB Stream. The latter will be designed to train everyone into accepting subscription based game streaming via an initial low price.
I'm really excited about the PS5 and XB2. I really hope Sony and MS stay in the game and continue making consoles that run local game code in high quality on local hardware. Both consoles will be very powerful, but I'm always suspicious about any claims about a 'future proof' beast that is the 'most powerful' console in the universe. Just look at the expensive future proof XB1X as an example. The thing will be dead in the water in 2 years time and will never have received any exclusive games that could be regarded as an unmissable masterpiece. It's a great game console but never fulfilled its potential. An expensive dud.
That's the problem I have with MS. Even if the XB2 is the most powerful console, I will still be leaning towards the PS5 because the exclusive games on PS are just unmissable classics. Sony have set a very high bar in terms of quality. But we actually play more 3rd party multi-plats than 1st party games, so ideally we need the PS5 to be extremely powerful with equal parity to the XB2. It's important that both consoles are a similar quality in terms of power so they are both competitive. The industry and gamers suffer if one console dominates too much. The important decider for the gamer who cannot afford both is the games. If one has better games that can only be played on that console, then that is where the battle is fought. Content is king. Content is king. Content is king. Just making sure we all get it.
How Trumpy's trade war will affect all this is uncertain because although most of the research and design is done in the US and Japan, all the current consoles and components are manufactured in China due to cheap labour. A trade war with China could end up very expensive for US gamers.
I could never understand why Neil Druckmann let himself get involved with movies of Uncharted and The Last Of Us. Maybe his inflated ego got the best of him and now he's regretting his actions.
It's well known that games turned into movies or movies turned into games never work. Not only are they different genre's, but you can never repeat the art of the original. It's the same, when you recreate a classic painting, re-record a classic piece of music, remake a classic movie or make a sequel trying to cash in on the original magic. It ultimately fails unless the original was flawed in some way.
Clearly the actors in these games are cast in stone within the minds of the fans and a change would be unacceptable. Only those who have never seen the original would be able to accept it. I always said if you're going to make a Tomb Raider movie, it should be a high end CGI animation with the proper Lara assets, not a US actress like Angelina Jolie who looked nothing like Lara and more importantly didn't even look British. Lara was supposed to be a product of British aristocracy living on a posh mansion, not an Asian looking American woman. Miss cast. This is not being racist, this is about portraying people correctly. Imagine a movie about Martin Luther King played by a white actor. Totally wrong.
There was no ambiguity. Joel lied to stop Ellie beating herself up over something that was not her responsiblilty. Joel realised that no-one should be sacrificed to save others, especially not someone he cares about. Joel has no obligation to mankind because it was mankind that killed his daughter. He was not going to let that happen again to someone he loves. He had grown to love Ellie as a daughter.
A sequel does not affect that ending. It was such a strong game with people we cared about, it's only right that we should revisit them to find out how they are getting on.
My guess is that Ellie gets raped and has a baby. It has to be a rape because Ellie is a lesbian. She was wearing a gas mask while pregnant in the U4 epilogue poster because she was unsure whether her baby would be immune to spores. The fireflies find out, and think the baby will be immune as well, so they kidnap the child and harvest its brain. This kills the child and it does not work.
Ellie then vows to "kill every last one of them" (Fireflies) for murdering her child. That's why Joel says "What are you doing kiddo, are you really going to go through with it" when he discovers her at a scene looking mentally unstable after slaughtering a load of fireflies.
What better way to launch Ellie on a vendetta of 'hate' than to kill a mothers child. The second trailer turned things full circle and showed a flashback featuring Ellie's mum being hung up while she was pregnant with Ellie. A crucial point is where the woman points the knife at her belly and is about to stab her to kill unborn Ellie, almost ending the story before it even began.
The pregnant poster in the U4 epilogue was titled 'American Daughters" plural, so the theme is 'pregnant with a daughter'. Ellie's mum was pregnant with Ellie and Ellie was pregnant a baby daughter who was later kidnapped and killed by the Fireflies to try and extract a cure.
If true, then that's a story that needs to be told, so stop whining about The Last Of Us not needing a sequel. You cannot make such a claim unless you know what the story is about.
After years of waiting in hope of a Beyond Good and Evil sequel so I can revisit environmentalist photographer Jade and all her animal friends to see how they are getting on in an all new epic adventure, we find Michel Ancel's ego has got bigger than the core characters in the game and he decides to ramp everything up on a much grander scale set in another time period with totally different characters. Photo mode is gaining popularity right now, yet we find Jade and her camera is gone. Big mistake and totally out of step with currents trends.
Why is this game even called Beyond Good and Evil 2. It's a different story with different characters set in a different period. Michel Ancel is just using the franchise as a crutch to guarantee success for his new project which doesn't look as good as the original with extremely annoying characters. Without Jade I have zero interest in this game. The lighting and colour palette is cold and lacking atmosphere. Open world games have moved on with awesome transparent lighting systems such as GTAV, AC Origins, Horizon Zero Dawn, GR Wildlands and Far Cry 5.
Michel Ancel has demonstrated his ego is so big he would even make a new Tomb Raider game without Lara Croft, instead of having the guts to make a totally different game called Tomb Explorers or something. We have the same issue with the Uncharted series. That series is the story of Nate, Elena and Sully.
I'm currently playing the U4 DLC with the two females and although it has all the ingredients of an Uncharted game, it leaves me shallow because I constantly miss Nate and Elena. The two females are simply speaking the words, phrases and banter of Nate and Elena like a weird personality transplant. If the series carries on, they have to follow Nate and Elena in different adventures or call it a totally different name. Relying on a strap line like Uncharted: The Lost Legacy it not a big enough break to tell you it's not Uncharted with Nate and Elena. The word 'Uncharted' is retained merely to cash in on the franchise, but it's a con.
Hopes are riding high for Days Gone but they have to fix that stuttering alpha frame rate even if it means dumping stuff. I'm just relieved it isn't stamped with a name like The Last Of Us: Days Gone. The Last Of Us is the story of Joel and Ellie. You can add new people they meet and backstories but the main story is always about them.
I disagree about keeping things small. Not all gamers like a short 10 minute turkey shoot with unlimited ammo that gets 5 stars off all the casuals. My maps are huge adventures and very detailed with multiple battle zones and can take a player over an hour to complete first time around due to the exploration and navigational puzzles. If you want to deep dive into what I'm talking about, try my map 'Nothing Personal' on PS4 Pro.
Did MS deliver the promised native 4K 60fps on all games that was supposed to be the differentiator between the XB1X and PS4 Pro? No, and all the games turned out to be meh. It is a game console, right? Or just a replay machine for reliving the good days of the 360.
The only game that delivered was Forza 7. MS put all their eggs in that basket and everyone bought the console based on that game. One great game is just not enough to justify a game console. All the great multi-plat games where perfectly fine on the cheaper PS4 Pro which also had superb exclusive games as well.
Phil Spencer says be patient for the great games. But MS have been sleeping on the job as far as exclusive masterpiece games go, so be patient and be content with no great exclusives on your XB1X. Great games take 4 years to make so don't expect any great exclusives on the XB1X. Even if they start now, they won't be ready until after the XB2 arrives.
So you think next gen will all be about Dolby tech for movies. Have you learned nothing. The XB1 was crucified by Sony because it was designed as a multimedia machine. When someone wants to buy a game console, the last thing on the list is how good it plays movies. It's like going to buy a new TV and the shop says, this model only has an average picture but it makes great fried eggs. Not exactly what I wanted.
I'm still waiting for this game to drop in price before I can buy it. Although the game will be top draw, it's the perfect example of overpriced DLC. Uncharted 4 was over 30 hours long and cost £46.
46/30 = £1.53 per hour entertainment.
Lost Legacy is 10 hours, so 10 x £1.53 = £15.30
The content is worth £15.30 but ND want £24. Most DLC do this scam unless you can pick up a Gold edition with a season pass to cut the DLC price.
We still don't believe you because nothing has changed. This is not a Sony announcement to decide the argument. It's another shady rumour from a dubious source. You are way too early declaring any victories. You could still end up the fool.
2020 would offer little gain for Sony. They need to release the PS5 while MS have their hands tied with the 'future proof' XB1X. It has only just been released and the minimum lifespan for a game console is 3 years, so if PS5 launches in 2 years time in fall 2019, Sony will have a full year to grab the market unless MS release the XB2 at the same time and risk a huge customer revolt. You have to strike while the iron's hot. PS4 was a huge success because Sony had a solid vision that appealed to gamers and stayed true to it. No reacting to events. All preplanned.
PS5 will only slip into 2020 if AMD let them down supplying the chips on time. All seems to indicate that Sony and AMD will be ready to deliver the blow in fall 2019. Sony are all about innovating and controlling the pace, not reacting to events like MS. Sony will not be releasing the PS5 based on fluctuating events in the market place. The road map vision for PS5 will be clearly laid out based on 4K HDR TV adoption rates, and will only change if there is delay with AMD supplying the tech at a console friendly price.
The only market event that influences the pace is the predetermined 4K HDR TV mass adoption rates. That path is fixed because as soon as you can make the TV's at a lower price in higher quality, mass adoption will occur. Sony have that information because they make the TV's as well.
Those who think the PS5 will launch 2020 because Sony won't want to mess up PS4 sales don't understand the market because they think everyone is an early adopter by default. Late adopters will always adopt late. Late adopters do not buy the latest console at full price. They buy the earlier console at a reduced price. Someone who buys a PS4 Pro today is a late adopter. They will play the console for 3 years or more, then late adopt the PS5 as well when the price drops. Sony always support the current gen and the last gen simultaneously for that very reason.
justerthought's comments