OK so now that it's been officially announced what does everyone think?  I know "it's all about the games" yada yada but hardware and feature-wise since that's mostly what we have to go by for now.

Controller:

The touchpad is an interesting idea.  I don't see it having much real use for gaming at that size but for navigating menus and keyboards it could be handy if there's enough surface area.  As for the light bar it's hard to imagine what functionality it enables that isn't already there with sixaxis.  The share button could have just as easily been a menu item when pressing the home button but as long as it doesn't get in the way whatever.

Personally I wish they would use Move as the default controller.  Yes I am serious.  An upgraded Move with basically the full left side controls of a DualShock (analog pad and digital pad with triggers) on one controller and the right side controls (analog pad, action buttons and triggers) on the other.  More than the motion functionality it would be nice to have from an ergonomic standpoint (the 30 year old convention of holding a controller with your hands five inches apart is NOT very ergonomical if you think about it).  And what with casual gaming being a big thing now would fit in well with that, being able to control some games single-handedly (cue memories of playing FFVII with that one-handed ASCII controller in one hand and eating popcorn with the other).

The big question controller-wise is whether the stereo camera is going to be included with all systems.  It ups the cost and is a bit of a hassle to set up but adds a lot of interface possibilities and eliminates one of Microsoft's trump cards if they include it.  I bet they'll wait to see what MS announces.

Features:

The always-on recording of your last 10 seconds of gaming is interesting.  Not necessarily as much for sharing as for just keeping highlight reels of certain game moments.

The ability to watch a game a friend is playing and then jump in and control it is *very* interesting.  Definitely the most enticing of the social features announced and I can see it leading to a lot of sales of games.

And though it doesn't have the wow factor of some other features, being able to download in the background while playing or doing anything else, and being able to play games and demos mid-download will make using the PlayStation Store so much nicer.

Games:

Still way too early to gauge (and I need to watch some video) but looking at some screen shots Watch Dogs still looks like the next-gen killer app.  Glitzy sci-fi and atmospheric fantasy are both great but that game is taking real-world environments and making them look REAL, which in my mind is the hardest graphical trick to pull off and one we still haven't really seen accomplished.

I can't imagine Capcom releasing a next-gen dark fantasy adventure and it not be a Dragon's Dogma sequel but we'll see.

Final Fantasy announcement of an announcement, don't make me laugh.

Concept-wise the recently announced Destiny is the most interesting and given how huge FPSs remain could be the next big thing.

According to CNN:

"A superpowered central brain, share button and built-in camera for 3-D tracking and motion control. Sony lifts the curtain on the PlayStation 4, but will it be enough for gamers?"

I don't know about other people, but all I really want from a video game system, any video game system, is good quality games.

I think they're dead, if they try to push the way the system is supposed to interact with a Vita. Vita barely has a userbase and it's too expensive for a portable (both it and the games). 90% of people who get a PS4 won't see any kind of added value or functionality with that combination. At least Wii U is smart enough to pack the tablet in with the system, so even if people aren't crazy about the tablet functionality, it's there and still makes a decent controller (I've had the chance to handle the demo units and it does feel nice).

Other than that, I can't comment. I didn't get a PS3 because Sony totally botched the launch price and by the time the system came to a reasonable price, I had a 360. I actually didn't buy a single full price retail game during all of 2012 because nothing interested me (I picked up a couple fighters on the cheap). But strictly from a business perspective, it will be interesting: PS4 needs to come out and distinguish itself from its competitors and fast. It also needs EXCLUSIVE software (I never got a PS3 because nearly every game I want is also on 360) and it needs to be affordable...It can't launch for $600 again. There's also the reality that if PS4 turns out to be a failure, it could be the end of Sony in the console business.

Edit: Also, share button? Wouldn't it be easier to just make it part of the menu, under the 'home' button? Seems superficial to me.

Gigantically disappointing, on all levels.
I mean, they're the first to announce a proper next-gen system and they totally botched it in a way that probably only they can.

The show was over 2 hours long and they managed to give us pretty much NO information at all, and the games they showed were hardly interesting. A giant MEH as far as I'm concerned.

Funny you should say that, because I actually thought that the video of Watch Dogs looked really underwhelming if you consider it's supposed to be the "next gen."
It looked only marginally better than what the PS3 can already do.

It was revealed that the game was running off a PC by the way, so I expect actual PS4 graphics to be WAY better.
Because if not, what's the bloody point!?

I should point out that I don't actually NEED a new console with better graphics though.
I think we've reached a level where games can pretty much do what they want and look good while doing it.
There's no need to go further. It will only mean games become even more expensive to create, which will lead to even more companies going bankrupt.

I agree with most of your sentiments, but I somewhat disagree with this last statement. I think you can always argue that people never truly *need* a console with better graphics. In fact, if everyone felt this way I'm not sure games would have progressed much beyond the SNES. Of course, the SNES had some amazing games, and I will always take quality over graphics, but at the same time I do think it's good to push the envelope. I think that in the near future, perhaps on the PS4, some games will be near photo-quality which can really add to the atmosphere of many games. Of course not all games should be like that, but still I think inherently there's nothing wrong with that. Also, I don't necessarily believe this will make games more expensive to create. Recall that NES and SNES games during their heyday reached $70-80, and I think some Genesis games were around $100. The reality is that we're paying less for games today than we did in the past. As for companies going bankrupt, I would hope not, but it's always possible. Still, I think better graphics, sound, more processing power are a natural part of game evolution, but ultimately it still comes down to how fun are the games.

I've already had two people agree with me on this:

The smartest possible thing Sony could do is have Square-Enix fully remaster FF VII and make it a launch title. They would sell more hardware than can be produced. This type of thing is making billions in the box office; game makers should take note. People like things from the past.

Companies ARE going bankrupt or merging with larger corporations to save what's left of their skins (Taito comes to mind). Once-giants like Konami and Capcom are scared to take risks because of the rising costs of games and I feel like their output has been stilted in recent years. Midway is long gone and THQ recently filed for bankruptcy. Development cost is a large reason we don't see many launch pack-in games anymore (or if they are, it's something few people would pay full price for, like Nintendoland or Wii Sports).

I know we've discussed the cost of games before, but those late-gen super expensive cartridges had special chips in them that drove their prices sky-high. But I think that was expected and companies responded by producing them in lower volume. I know Virtua Racing clocked in at $100. But now you have more programmers, more dedicated equipment, longer development cycles, etc...That's all costly as hell. And we can thank the Playstation for starting the price war in the late 90's and effectively forcing down the price of new games (which have been on an up-curve ever since).

In short, I don't think another console generation is sustainable at the moment. I mean, if you just want to see loads of crappy me too shooters and sports games and the latest GTA's (the more or less proven sellers recently), they're coming. But I don't think we'll see anything that resembles the richness and variety of the 16 or 32 bit eras.

The FIRST thing that comes to mind is....how smart Nintendo looks in the wake of the PS4 'semi' announcement...seriously, WHY do we need 'next gen' graphics and systems if they are not significant leap from the previous...Sony just doesn't come close in original content to garner it's own 'cost efficient' sway of technology delivery (IMHO)...

when I read the talking points for Vita-link/streaming capabilities, I just let out a major yawn...for me, as a US customer, this next cycle of systems is now coming to controller preference...I'm disappointed the right analog stick did not move up akin to the Xbox...

I was an early adopter of the PS3, and felt BURNED by the entire experience, poor interface, bad network connectivity, degraded quality ports, arcane software interfaces...2 years later I switched teams to Microsoft, and honestly, haven't looked back...I WILL look back however because I think the Japanese have the potential to make some very cool technology - but at this point, the PS4 does nothing to impress me..the original content, at least what was presented, does nothing to evoke a strong emotion in me to go the Sony route, and maybe because...I'm getting old (hahaha)...

that said, I say, let's see what Microsoft has up it's sleeve - I believe they've invested more wisely in this motion technology (which is really secondary to me anyway), but for FPS games, have the better controller layout...it's that simple....God help us all when we need to buy every system for the killer game...I'm running out of HDMI inputs...

Lastly - can I just wish for Nintendo and Sony to make amends,  if not now, then perhaps in time for the PS5/WiiU2...The Japanese people are tremendously capable on a united front.

Yes, we've been over this before, and I agree, but that doesn't change the fact that games are becoming more expensive to CREATE. This is not about what WE pay as customers, but it's about how much money devs/publishers are pumping into creating games nowadays, which is most definitely a helluvalot more than during the NES and SNES days.

This also perfectly explains WHY so many companies are going bankrupt: games are getting more expensive to create, but cheaper to buy.

When I look at the data, I just don't buy this "video game companies are NOW going bankrupt" argument. It turns out video game companies have always gone bankrupt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:D … _companies

Goldfish noted: "Once-giants like Konami and Capcom are scared to take risks because of the rising costs of games and I feel like their output has been stilted in recent years."

I agree with the latter, their output has been pretty lame, but I don't think it's just the rising cost of games. I think it has more to do with the fact that they invest money in crappy/mediocre games and then are surprised when the next Castlevania which is similar to the previous Castlevania, just wasn't a big hit. Frankly, I can't tell you the last time I was excited about a Konami or Capcom game. On the other hand, a company such as CD Projekt RED S.A. keeps developing awesome games and is doing strong. Also, their games are published by Atari, which went defunct some four times before being what it is today.

I pretty much have zero interest in this. The PS3 has proven to be a letdown, only a few good games on the console. The PS4 seems even worse, furthering the "graphics over gameplay" paradigm. I'd rather play Gunman Clive than Killzone 4, however shiny the glass buildings look. The "help another gamer" feature seems somewhat interesting, but it probably won't be of much of use on a no-gameplay console. Sony is in a desperate need of a change of direction, and unfortunately, PS4 isn't it.

I like my PS3 but my backlog is really large and I'm not willing to upgrade until the PS4 drops in price (or starts at $399).

*Reads through Thread*

*Goes back to playing Ginga Force on 360*

HAHAHA, that's a 360 game I cannot wait to play...sound track from Yasui & Co. sounds great!

I think the PS4 could be ok. I could do without the light bar, touch pad, and camera, but I guess we're stuck with all that nonsense. The machine itself and its emphasis on making digital downloading easier and making stopping and restarting easier seem pretty cool to me, but there are a lot of unknowns. Sony has been cagey about DRM, region locking, and used games, and I know that the physical design of the console isn't that important, but I would like to know how much space this thing is going to take up in my house. I'm also concerned about the amount of storage space that will be offered. Since the market is going digital very quickly, I want lots of space, and I don't want to have to buy any external stuff that takes up even more space (looking at you, Wii U). Unless it's very affordable, I see little reason to get it at launch, especially with multiple Steam boxes on the horizon that offer more freedom, but I will give Sony the chance to impress me.

I've never understood this gripe, as I prefer the two sticks to be lined up, but I guess that's a matter of personal preference.

What say yee? What, did I say "Yee?" I don't remember saying "Yee"... *ahem*

I remember reading somewhere (I'd find the article if I could, but it was from around the same time the Wii U was first released; this past November, maybe?) that developers haven't even been able to make full use of either the 360 or PS3 hardware, that their full potential hasn't even been tapped yet. So, hearing of next-gen consoles already is a big surprise to me, especially when I remember reading that Sony and Microsoft said they were going to stick with their current consoles for at least the next 4-5 years. I guess both of them just want more money?

Otherwise, I'm tired of current consoles not being backwards compatible with games from their previous generation. What am I supposed to do when my PS2 and PS3 breakdown, and the PS4 isn't backwards compatible with them? Figure out how to rig together a drive that'll read those games myself?

Or the simple fact of the more machines you have, the more wires to need to connect them, the more space they take up, etc etc. And then as time goes on it's harder and hard to get replacements, not just the console itself but memory, etc.

Yeah, I've mentioned that before, too. I've had people call me anal retenant before, because I don't like having several machines hooked up all at once on account of the cable mess, besides just having several console "Boxes" on the shelf.

P.S. If I was in charge of Nintendo, I'd figure out how to pressure TV manufacturers to make their sets detect my motion sensitive devices like the WiiMote, so one wouldn't need a sensor bar to detect the thing, when the TV itself is designed to detect it, so you can actually point at the screen, and the cursor shows up on the screen accurately.

P.S.S. No comments on how people I know think the PS3 is a more powerful console than the 360?

But then the Wii would lose all those nostalgic ties to the Power Glove. Since controller wiggling and power gloving are essentially the same thing...

I have said before I would buy a newer PS3 if they were to add the upscaling PS2 capabilities. They didn't, so oh well...I'm happy with my Xbox. Still, stuff like that just added to the confusion for Sony. Too many different versions of the system. Half the people I talk to don't even know about the $500 crap model that was available at launch.

So what does everybody think of the design?  I'm not sure yet about the angular aspect but I really like the matte finish with just a touch of gloss, the cross-sectional design with those grooves, that sliver of futuristic lighting, and the overall sleekness.  I'd say it's easily my favorite initial design of all four PlayStations.

At $400 it's a full $100 less than the Xbox One.  Both include 500 GB hard drives.  The trade-off is that their PlayStation 4 Eye is a separate $59 accessory, which means Eye-enabled games will remain a fragmented market (which I doubt bothers most people here).

As has been mentioned here elsewhere (and everywhere), unlike the Xbox One there is no always-on internet requirement nor are there restrictions on buying, selling, or trading used games - everything looks to work as it did on the PS3.

Also no region locking.

The only bad news I've read is that multiplayer online will require a paid subscription to their online service PlayStation Plus.  Free is certainly preferable but still this seems like a reasonable requirement and was only a matter of time.

I know I'm joining the chorus but it really does look like Sony did everything right this E3.  As I'm not a hardcore gamer myself I still don't know if I'll drop the $400 unless they have some truly remarkable first-gen games, but when the time does come to buy a new system Sony very much looks to be getting the nod over Microsoft and Nintendo.

The parallelogram sandwich design is just odd to me. I'm sure I'll get used to it, but I prefer the more straightforward look of the Xbox One at the moment. I won't be buying either of these at launch. I'll buy the PS4 whenever MGS5 comes out, and I won't buy the Xbone until some point later, if at all.

Sony did everything right, it's almost scary. and they're giving us another Region Free console for another generation. the only downside is the new pay to play online model. but it's very reasonable if you look at what you'll get in exchange. you'll even get their new racing game for subscribing. personally, this doesn't bother me much, since i was a subscriber for the free games anyway. if you own a Vita like me, you'll get double the amount of games. seriously, this is a pretty good deal.

the design is allright i guess. think i'll have to see it in person to judge.

Not surprisingly, it seems like whoever is on top likes to shoot themselves in the foot. Do people remember how terrible the PS3 release was in E3 2006?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJElsNaC6yQ

Well, now Microsoft has shot themselves in the foot, and they will suffer massive damage. Sony on the other hand has learned from their mistake, at least for the time being.

By the way, was anyone else underwhelmed by Nintendo at E3? I was looking forward to the Wind Waker remake, but from what I've seen so far, it appears to be nearly the exact same game with just better graphics. Again, NO one talks in the game! Seriously, the same sound effects from Ocarina of Time from the N64... what crap is this? This isn't a remake, re-imagining, or anything. It's just slightly prettier graphics and a hefty price tag. Like Microsoft, I think Nintendo seems to believe that they can't go wrong, at least when Zelda is involved.

Damn, son! When do you sleep? Are you still up in the northeast?

I think everyone was, but then, we really should have expected this since they've been doing E3-style announcements all year long through the Nintendo Directs. They didn't really have anything left for E3 except the new Donkey Kong game for Wii U (everything else they showed had been announced previously). Would you have felt differently if they had kept A Link Between Worlds secret until E3 instead of announcing it a few months ago?

I'm not sure where your hate for Wind Waker HD is coming from. They never said it was a remake. It's an HD remaster just like similar ones that Sony, Konami, Ubisoft, Square Enix, Capcom and others have done with many of their PS2 games. Now that Nintendo finally has an HD console, it's jumping on the bandwagon. At least they're adding an option to make the boat go faster.

Seriously, what happened?  I had gotten used to the Sony of $600 MSRPs and giant enemy crabs and "Ridge Racer.  Riiiiiiiiidge Racer." and crying baby dolls.  Now Sony is saying all the right things and has a pleasantly upbeat ad campaign.  I'm scared.

As an academic, I can verily say that my sleep schedule is 100% SNAFU! Dude, I'm going to be around your neck of the woods (again) soon! Drop me a PM for details...

Japan release date of February 22, 2014 announced (39,980 yen).

Growing up in the NES days, when the Sega Genesis and Super Nintendo took nearly a year to make it over from Japan, I never would have thought then we'd see a major console from a Japanese manufacturer come to the USA a few months BEFORE its Japanese release.  Shows how much the market has changed since then.

It also shows how much of a non-threat Sony consider the Wii U, allowing it another holiday season as the only new console on the Japanese market.  Smart move on Sony's part to focus on the more serious competition in the USA and Europe and leave themselves a little extra time to get the Japan launch sorted.

Funny, it just randomly occurred to me the other day: won't this be the first time we've seen a Sony console launch without a Ridge Racer game?  Another sign that the times have changed.

So who's got a PS4? I don't plan to get mine until Ground Zeroes comes out in the Spring, but one of my friends was kind enough to bring his over this evening, and I got to spend some quality time familiarizing myself with the hardware and interface. The most noticeable thing is how slick the box is for a first gen unit. It's much smaller and lighter than the first gen PS3 and has lower profile than I was expecting. The controller feels good, particularly the much improved sticks, and the touchpad works better than I was expecting (in Killzone, you flick it in different directions to tell your OWL what to do).

The interface is essentially the next generation of Sony's XMB with two basic layers: a top layer for settings and options, and a larger, bottom layer for recent apps and your library. It works well enough. The PSN Store is just as confusing and crappy as it is on PS3, but at least it runs smoothly on the PS4 instead of chugging along since the more powerful hardware can actually handle the redesigned store.

In terms of heat, the bottom and rear of the unit get very hot, so definitely don't put it on carpet, and keep enough room behind it to clear the hot air.

Friend demoed me the play anywhere feature on a PSVita and it's incredible. I want one solely for that although that dangerously borders on complete unproductivity at work...

So, those with a PS4... is 500 gig enough? Would you recommend someone to wait for the slim? Will there be a slim?

Correct me if I'm wrong... but aren't there PS4 bundles packing 1TB drives now? Gamestop is also offering refurbished with 1TB now as well.

I'd recommend getting one with a TB because at this point 500GB is a (expletive) joke. It really is and the "budget" last gen consoles with lower that 500GB are an even bigger joke cause you're not going to save money in the end.

Also, am I the only one who thinks a slim might still be a ways off? It would make sense to get a slim out there if it cuts the production costs and this would offset the recent price drop... but I have a feeling it's not around the corner.

Do PS4 games just take up a ton of space? I still have a 60 gig PS3 and I seem to have plenty of space. I don't download and watch films/shows on my playstation, so I don't know how much space I would need just for games? I did hear that the new TB PS4 uses the old CPU which is crappy

In my experience, most disc games take up between 40 and 50GB.
Yes. DISC GAMES. It doesn't matter if you buy retail, you're gonna have a huge install file on your hard disk, but, on the upside, these files are installed SUPERfast so you won't even notice (it's the updates that take forever to download), and you can just delete them once you're done with the game, because they don't contain save data.

Whether 500 GB is enough for you depends on whether you like to keep everything you download on your HDD forever. I personally don't and just delete games once I'm done with them (I buy disc games most of the time anyway), so I'm nowhere near running out of space.
If you're a "hoarder" though, then you're gonna run out fast, yes.