Despite its absence at E3 2012, Sony has acknowledged the existence of a PS3 successor. However, the company isn’t ready to reveal anything until they can demonstrate a “significant leap” over the current console generation.
Sony’s Andrew House feels that new hardware should be announced when it can actually provide a noticeable change. It appears they’re trying to avoid mimicking Nintendo’s decisions with the Wii U, which saw the Big N announce new hardware, though with very few games to show off its latest gaming machine.
In any case, Sony’s still keeping its lips tight on the PS3′s successor. We’ve read about what the future could hold quite a bit recently, from 1,000,0000 polygon character models and cloud gaming to possible games like Killzone 4. With the system in development, and this generation coming to a close, perhaps we’ll hear more about the PS4 at E3 2013 – even if it’s the last dedicated home console.
“The right time to talk about new advances in hardware is when you can demonstrate a significant leap on the current experience, and something that is going to be attractive. That remains our philosophy. Beyond that we have nothing to say at this point.”
For now, we’ll have to be content with what we have in the present, the Vita and PS3. In fact, Sony’s Scott Rhode, VP of Worldwide Studios, says the PS3/Vita combo offers an experience better than that of the Wii U. Unlike the Wii U’s pseudo-tablet controller, the Vita has a processor inside of it. This means everything needs to be handled by the Wii U console, whereas the PS3 can offload some tasks to the Vita.
“Because we have the Vita, I think we can do a lot of special things. And remember, that Wii U tablet doesn’t have a processor in it, so it’s got to be fueled by that box sitting under your TV. We can do some pretty special things that you’ll start to see on the floor this year and you’ll see more over the upcoming months about what you can do when you actually have a processor in the thing that’s in your hand as well.
When you start to see how you can cross over between the two platforms — look at two of the titles that are here at E3, PlayStation All-Stars and Sly 4, for example. Both available on Vita and PS3, and there’s some sort of interactivity across the board. Developers are interested in that kind of stuff.”
We were able to try out the Vita’s cross-play abilities back in February, and it worked quite well. But Sony has a tough road ahead of them when it comes to cross-platform gaming. In order to take full advantage of PS3/Vita cross-platform abilities, gamers will have to own both the PS3 and Vita copies of the game. With retail titles in particular, that that can cost quite a bit of money. Sony’s alleviated the issue, releasing some PSN titles under a “buy one get one” promotion. Sony just needs to more widely implement these types of promotions so gamers can really take advantage of cross platform features.
-
Follow me on Twitter @AnthonyMole.
Source: MCV, Gamesindusrty.biz
What You May Not Know About The ‘Xbox One’ [Updated] 
Xbox One: Watch The Next-Gen Xbox Presentation Here! 
Electronic Arts Engineer Blasts the Wii U 
Rare Bringing ‘Historic’ Franchise to Xbox One; Reveal at E3 2013 
Loading ...
“The right time to talk about new advances in hardware is when you can demonstrate a significant leap on the current experience, and something that is going to be attractive.”
Exactly. A lot of people want next-gen consoles just because the current-gen consoles are “old.” That’s stupid. We don’t need new consoles until they are able to offer a much superior experience than the current consoles.
The crossplay is cool and all, but I’ve yet to see any interesting examples of WiiU-like gameplay with the PS3+Vita combo. The only thing I’ve seen like that, in fact, has been the PS All-Stars demo. Woo, you can play that crappy Smash Bros. knockoff with a $250 Vita instead of a $40 controller, which is totally worthwhile and not way less comfortable at all! And of course the combined cost is probably gonna be restrictive against any developers really taking the combo seriously as a gameplay component. Project Glass has some chance of success, since I guess a lot of people have tablets anyway, but I don’t see the Playstation combo doing very well.
But they do seem to have the right philosophy about a next-gen console.
I think what they mean is why buy the wii u when u can buy the vita
-Because you might not already have a PS3.
-Because, even if you do have a PS3, that thing’s gonna be succeeded by a new console in two years or less, and that’ll be the end of its game library, and for you to continue to get new games with WiiU-like Vita functionality, you’ll have to buy a PS4.
-Because of Nintendo’s franchises.
-Because, again, I’ve yet to see any sign that the Vita+PS3 combo will have games released for it that are similar to Wii U games, regardless of the fact that it’s possible.
-Because it’s ultimately a lot simpler.
What they’re doing is keeping fans and gaining some too. Of course if you don’t own a ps3 it’s stupid to buy both. From the sounds of it you don’t own one, congratulations you get to buy a wii u. But what they’re saying and it actually clearly said it in the article, if you have a ps3 why bother going put and buying a whole new system to replace it just because it’s different. They offered the same gaming the wii u has by simply adding the vita to the ps3. And if you don’t own a ps3 what does it even matter to you?
I do own a PS3, in fact, and I understand the point being made in the article. I’m not necessarily arguing against it; I’m just speculating here.
I guess my main issue is the likelihood of there being many WiiU-type games made for the PS3+Vita. Whereas WiiU developers can develop for the console secure in the knowledge that everyone who has the console will have the tablet, PS3 developers would have to count on this secondary installed base of the Vita, which, as I understand it, is still something that Sony is looking forward to having. Those developers’ pessimism in that regard seems like it’d be both reasonable and restrictive. The whole thing kind of reminds me of the 64DD in a way.
Why buy a Wii U? – exactly!
Because Vita doesn’t need a PS3, it can work just fine on it’s own.
Because the PS4 will have more advanced Vita connectivity undoubtedly and who’s to say PS4 won’t play PS3 games as well.
Because Sony’s franchises,in my opinion, offer much much more to an older gamer.
Because thank god there hasn’t been any Wii U like functionality to the Vita & PS3 – because the gamepad strikes me as nothing more than a lame gimmick – the PRO controller’s existence would agree with me.
Because you don’t have to buy a new Nintendo only to have it be useless for anything but 1st party games in two years.
yep the wii u gamepad is a lame gimmick, that’s why your ps3 and xbox360 are already trying to copy it. lmao!!! And for a fact, sony franchises aren’t anything great, that don’t offer much more. They are nice to have I guess for kids trying to be cool, like the poor man’s smash bros game called battle royale or whatever the heck that’s called. (sony really???)
PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale is definitely not a poor man’s SSB game. It’s going to be priced at a full $60. It’s just that it copies SSB a lot, but with PlayStation characters. And there are lots of great PlayStation franchises. Jak & Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, Crash Bandicoot, Sly Cooper, Spyro, Uncharted, Infamous, Gran Turismo, the list goes on.
I dunno, I think it’s fair to call it a poor man’s SSB. You saw that footage at E3 right? It looked boring as hell. And the graphics were pretty underwhelming (pretty Wii-ish). So, not “poor man’s” in terms of it costing less at retail, but probably “poor man’s” in terms of its development budget. At least that’s the impression I got.
Guess I’ll probably be buying a Vita sooner than later. Being a PS3 owner, PS3+Vita cross play sounds more appealing than the Wii U.
I’m going to preorder the White Vita with Assassin’s Creed Liberation as soon as it’s available.
Once again, let’s bring up pricing.
PS3 + Vita = $520 before taxes. (That’s a 160 gig PS3 with a Vita and a 4 gig memory card)
A game for both PS3 and Vita = $100-120 (depending on if you have to buy the game for both systems to achieve cross-play or not)
PS3 + Vita combo = $620-640.
The Wii U will wind up costing somewhere between $300-400, and the tablet controller will come standard with the system.
Games will be $50-60 depending on what they are.
So for the price of the PS3, Vita, and one game, I can buy a Wii U and…five or six games.
Yes, the PS3 can do Wii U-style games, but it’s really not worth the crapton of money you’ll have to spend on the Vita/PS3/Games for a system that’ll most likely be replaced in two to three years anyway.
Most games for the ps3 vita combos are 60, plus you get two seperate systems, so consider the price to play one game on one system, yoy divide that by two, my point is that the vita allows you to play games seperate, you dont need a ps3.
Also, like the psp and ps2, he ps4 will have vita connection.
hi there it be cool cool add 4 gb flash too the 160 gb hard drive