Honestly, do you agree with my thoughts about the all new PS4(I know it hasn't been released yet)?

Well the controller doesnt need to be changed i am actually un happy about the changes, I mean whats the point of changing something that is already perfect and hasnt had any problems for 20 years. Anyways besides the controler.

The conferance was only a demonstration and almost every game was just a demo. Also the current games that they showcased arent using full advantage of the ps4. Look at the ps3 graphics of launch titles to games right now. They need to be optimized for it and that takes time.

Also games are games.... Its not about sony its about the developpers to decide what game to make and whats good. Its going to be the same thing for the Xbox. Its not microsoft its the developpers. Also they did showcase some really good stuff like streaming demos so u dont need to download them.

They added memory to the ps4 so that we will have less problems with online play. Apparently it was a memory problem. If you have ever played call of duty and tried to chat with someone..... than you know what im talking about (its pure crap).

They upgraded alot of things and I think its going to be very good. Also im not a fan boy but i do prefer my ps3 over my xbox but I will be purchasing the new xbox also because I know microsoft will do something really good also.

question of the day:Why isn't Tiger woods variety one, he's nearly a robotic while he talks and purely an all around sleaze bag. the place's Rodger Clemens and Barry Bonds, shouldn't they be on the record too? AL Davis is somewhat too extreme for my liking, i do unlike him, yet a approach or the different he might desire to be in the suitable 8 no longer in the suitable 2, somewhat ideas-blowing say the least. something i can trust, swap some names around right here and there...

You know that they are improving the processor right? So that we might finally be able to have 64 player maps on Battlefield games rather than the stupid 24 we are limited to on consoles. Games are not going to be as hindered as they are now on consoles, that is why we are looking forward to new ones.

When you say they are riding the old "graphics, gameplay and multiplayer gimmick" HOW is that a gimmick? That is what makes up a game. Besides sound, story, and quality of controls. You essentially just said you are tired of video games. Where you looking for the next huge leap in Virtual Reality? because that is what it sounds like to me. You want a completely new interface, which is why you also don't like the controller. You know Computers still use the same keyboard layouts since the dawn of computers, right? The design works, there is no need to do something crazy like have the controller sense your heart beat to activate some weird function in the game.

A big leap in gaming without lots of support from game developers will result in the console landing flat on its face because of the big price tag and the lack of games that use the functionality well. That is why the wii sort of fell flat. It was a great concept, but there were only a handful of games you would buy for it that actually were worth a dam. Since the Wii I think most people will stay away from anything really different when it comes to purchasing consoles.

Backwards compatibility is also a stupid thing to be concerned about. I am 100% sure if you are concerned about backwards compatibility its because you already own the previous console. Just keep the PS3 and pull it out when you want to play those games. Or they will slowly release profiles for the PS3 hits and use a sort of emulator like they do on the Xbox 360 to play the previous consoles games. You will have to buy the games again, but that is your fault for not keeping the PS3 or PS2 that you previously owned that could run the games you wanted to play.

Backwards compatibility has only recently been a thing. It has only been around for 1 Generation. The PS2 was the 2nd console to be backwards compatibile after the atari 7800*forever ago). you cant play SNES games on a N64 or N64 games on a Gamecube. The way they make a console backwards compatible is by putting the older consoles hardware inside the new one. This increases the cost of the new console by quite a bit, which is why the ps3 cost like $600 for the first few models. The other method is through emulation. And emulation is difficult because you need hardware that is like 2-3x more powerful than what you are emulating for it to be smooth, as well as create profiles for each game. The Xbox 360 slowly released profiles for games so over the years you could play more and more of the older games, but you couldn't play all of them on release(or even now).

JUST KEEP THE OLDER CONSOLE!Being able to play on the newer console wont make the game smoother, in fact it could run even worse. I would much rather save money on the new console and have to pull old consoles out, than pay out my butt for essentially a PS4 and 80% of a PS3 that was shoved into it.

I thought Sony doesn't really make games, studios do.

Well, to me it's kind of how like Hollywood works. All the same krap weak after weak because movie producers don't want to invest in new ideas because they are more high risk. Where as if the keep remaking the same old movies or comic book movies they know they are guaranteed return on their production investment.

Personally, I'm ready for the ps4. It's 2013 and it's time for a new console. Im not a big fan of backwards compatabilty, it's cool, but I want to play the newest of games.

I remember when the ps3 first came out, it takes a couple years for game developers to really put out the best games, whatbwe see at first isn't not indicative of what the potential both new consoles will have.

As for backwards compatibility, I can understand that. One of the largest complaints from developers is how difficult it is to develop for since it used a CELL processor. Their decision to move to x86 processors (the same chips you'll find in your computers) makes developers happy, since they can code for a PC game and easilly port it to PS3 without a complete rewrite. Or the other way around. (and I imagine xbox isn't too far off from x86 either).

So due to this major change in processor, I can see why they chose not to do backwards compatibility. It would require a power-house to try to emulate the CELL processor.

You also have to keep in mind that much of what you saw probably was written with PS3 in mind first, then ported to PS4. I think the Watch Dogs demo at E3 was running on a high-end gaming PC, not PS3, so the move from there to PS4 would be minimal.

Also think back 6 years ago when PS3 was new, people said the same thing. "These are just slightly better than PS2 graphics". As developers learn to use the new hardware, they will create better things on the same hardware than they did the first time around. So just think what the games in 2017 might look like.

And....you think the new Xbox will be any different? They'll probably showcase a new halo or gears of war on that.

What did you want, brand new IPs? The best way to hype a system is to bring better looking versions of what people already know.

If you put brand new games that no one has heard about, then no one will react (just look at how silent the crowd was when that Driveclub game was being introduced. A Gran Turismo game would've brought a larger response)

Moreover, graphical limits are being reached, you can't have the same jump as ps2 to ps3.

Also, remember that these are launch games. Graphics are quite low. Go look at ps3 launch games and compare them to now. WAY different

Yeah, I do agree with you. And for £400? Just stick with the old ps3, its not worth it :)

My #1 fear is everyone getting the PS4, forcing Sony and game producers to stop work on the PS3, making Online multi player go downhill, and plus I honestly think the PS3 is good enough. It's been, what, 4 years since the PS3? Sony should just calm down, take it slow and fix hardware issues on the PS systems.