Sony: "It's not the decline of consoles, it's the decline of a generation"
Shuhei Yoshida adamant consoles can still innovate in a world of pioneering mobile and business disruption
Console manufacturer Sony is convinced that home hardware can still innovate in the games business, rather than follow the lead of the disruptive technology and business models pioneered by mobile and free-to-play games companies.
"After you see sequels to the same three games people feel like they've seen everything before. That's natural, but that's nothing like the end of the consoles"
The console market has suffered decline particularly during the past three years, with a thinning out of big-box publishers like THQ and Midway, and the closure of successful development studios responsible for some of the best-loved franchises in the business.
Many commentators see this, along with plummeting retail sales, as the beginning of the end of the console business, as more developers move to mobile, PCs and tablets, shunning high game prices for free-to-play services, value for money bundles and app stores that offer distribution opportunities to millions of consumers.
But Shuhei Yoshida, president of Sony's Worldwide development studios, has told GamesIndustry International that home consoles can still innovate in development and business, stating: "if we didn't believe in that we wouldn't be in this business."
"It's not the decline of consoles, it's the decline of a generation," he said. "This generation has been the longest on the PS3 and the Xbox, it's the seventh year. In older times we would have launched a new system already. Really, developers hit the limits after a couple of games on the same system, typically.
"There are a few developers like Naughty Dog or Quantic Dream who are doing more, but that's kind of the exception. After you see the sequels to the same three games people feel like they've seen everything before. That's natural, but that's nothing like the end of the consoles."
While this generation has been much longer than previous, Sony is planning a 10-year lifecycle for the PlayStation 4, but it's not concerned such a long time on the market will lead to console fatigue.
"If players are excited that means we are doing something right," said Yoshida, referring to the companies triumphant showing at E3 earlier this month.
"It's very simple. When you look at the PlayStation 3, it is way, way better than the PS3 that came out in 2007. Because we're constantly improving and adding content and updates, through firmware or PSN updates. It's the same with PS Vita with new applications added. It's a constant evolution of the system even though the hardware remains exactly the same.
"It will be the same with the PlayStation 4," offered Yoshida. "We are launching this holiday but we already have plans on the roadmap for additional features and improvements on the services side which will constantly evolve with time.
"The key to this on PS4 is we have a huge 8GB of memory. That's way more than game developers need initially. At the mid-point of the PlayStation 3 lifecycle we really hit the limit of what we can add in terms of system features. The reason we couldn't add cross-game voice chat that players wanted was we were out of memory. Because we have 8GB of RAM we can secure enough room for whatever great features developers can come up with."
"If you're a PS3 or a PS Vita user you can still enjoy cloud services. We're developing along that schedule, not necessarily trying to tie in with the PlayStation 4 schedule"
If new services and updates are key to keeping the PlayStation 4 relevant for the coming decade, then the cloud gaming services that Sony is putting in place will be central to the console's evolution.
However, cloud gaming services won't be available at launch of the PlayStation 4 this Christmas, with Yoshida explaining that the technology developed by the Gaikai team is being integrated across the whole PlayStation ecosystem, not just the PS4.
"Cloud gaming services are launching next year in the US so PlayStation 4 and Vita users will be able to play PlayStation 3 catalogue games even though there's no native compatibility on the system itself. That's just one example of how we can improve the system.
"The PlayStation 4 is just one of the target devices. It's all about the cloud server. Our team in Gaikai and Sony Japan are working hard to provide the online game services but it doesn't require the PS4 to enjoy those services. If you're a PS3 or a PS Vita user you can still enjoy the cloud services. So we're developing along that schedule, not necessarily trying to tie in with the PlayStation 4 schedule."
I think the answer to this will be the difference between consoles becoming more mainstream, or more niche.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Todd Weidner on 27th June 2013 3:02pm
And finally we have this :
This means that PS4 will support cloud processing like the XboxOne and any other feature developers might come up with. It doesnt even suprise me if the PS4 can do voice recognition and kinect like motion sensing. It has the power to process those features.
Can the console business get better... Oh yes it can... an my money is behind it. I invest quite alot in console games and its not because they suck.
To me consoles are where you go to expirience a game, much like you would expirience a movie in the movie theater.
You are 100% right...
We all expect him to comment. He is turning from a marketing guy to a viral add itself...
Faced with the investors fury we see a series of executives give hurried interviews promising strong interest in their Gen-8 hardware plans, that the light at the end of the tunnel is not an oncoming express train, and that there is no need to be concerned. All this and in the shadows a hoard of Android, PC and open-source game platforms gather like an oncoming storm.
When the reckoning dose comes next year, as the reality of Gen-8's sales figures kick in, all I ask of the media is that they focus on the cause of this collapse and reports it in a unbiased manner, rather than go for a “everything is okay nothing to see” approach. It will be essential that accountability regarding this failed business approach is highlighted rather than brushed under the carpet.
We live in interesting times, though there is a danger that too much corporate BS could be injected into the mix – rather than admitting a failed business acumen, some executives may try and hide behind claims that the games market is at fault, and that this collapse is “inevitable”. The last thing I want to see 'again' is that those executive-geniuses responsible vanish for a few years only to reappear and claim they had nothing to do with this mess, wrapped in the cult of personality, as we have seen before!
And that their online model is getting heavily praised by indies, right?
And that their development environment includes Unity and conversion tools, right?
More demos would be great. But again, they give that option to the developer. Unlike MS that mandates all games have a demo. I've heard that devs hate that because it takes away from actual development time.
But this whole generation is beginning to smell like the Philips CDi to me guys!
That said, the amount of actual Nintendo demo discs (outside of press/public event builds and retail kiosk stuff you can't purchase unless someone puts it up on eBay or some dedicated collection/trade site) is really tiny compared to what Sony and Microsoft put out in the pre-digital madness era we're in now..
And no, I don't know where Bruce is...
You mentioned him too many times, you scared the game away.
Edited 1 times. Last edit by Andreia Quinta on 30th June 2013 11:47am
That Sony and MS have more trouble finding an audience beyond a core gamer demographic, than tablets made for surfing the web on the toilet?
That we see a shift at which age children first interact with games, which type of games those are and which type of platform they are running on? A shift which will influence later gaming habits.
That we have two console manufacturers which have problems growing up with their audience and trouble connecting to a new generation of gamers because of what I just wrote above?
That using gameplay as a mere psychological primer to trigger inherent human behavioral patterns which are against the player's financial interests is not shady at all, but the way of the future?
We forget how this mess touches us now at our peril!