Geek Revolt

Don’t Be Shocked If The PS4 Is Less Powerful Than The Next Xbox

There’s a good chance that a new Xbox will be unveiled next year, and a new PlayStation will follow shortly after. This is leading some people to assume that the PS4 will automatically be more powerful than the next Xbox, since it’ll be released later. This could be true, but there’s a chance it might not be. Here are a few reasons why the PS4 could be less powerful than the next Xbox.

The PlayStation wasn’t the most powerful console on the block. The PS2 also wasn’t the most powerful system in it’s generation. Yet—none of this mattered, both systems outsold the competition. This showed us that games are more important than raw power, but for their third generation, Sony was clearly aiming for both.

Sony set out to make the best console they could with the PS3, and it almost ruined them. The PS3 is a great console, but it was ahead of it’s time. The price tag at launch didn’t exactly help; Sony aimed for the stars and was punished and mocked. What do they have to gain from being the specs leader again?

Nothing, getting the PS4 out around the same time as the next Xbox and at an affordable price is more important than power. Actually, the only people who really care about which system is more powerful are the fans that love to argue online. To the average person they’re only concerned about which one is the most affordable and has the coolest games (the Wii is a great example).

Expect Sony to learn from all their mistakes with the PS3, sometimes it doesn’t pay to live on the bleeding edge. While it’s great for bragging rights, it also has the potential to do more bad than good.

I wouldn’t be shocked if Sony doesn’t go nuts on the specs next generation. Of course it should be within range of the next Xbox, like the 360 is within range of the PS3 (so they can play the same games). They should focus on games instead of making the most powerful console; if it happens great—but it’s something they shouldn’t aim for. Sony’s biggest weapon is their first party support, not their specs. Some gamers have lost sight of that this generation.

Update: 6/16/2011

Okay, some of you guys/gals are misunderstanding a few things. First off, this is an “opinion piece”, so I don’t understand why some are asking for proof. I’m not making any absolute statements here, the title isn’t “The PS4 Will Be Less Powerful Than The Next Xbox”. Still, I apologize if you were expecting something else.

Also this isn’t bashing Sony, far from it. If you read it carefully you’ll see that I’m actually praising them for making the best console they could with the PS3, and for their first party line-up.

My only motive in writing this was because I saw a lot of gamers “assuming” the PS4 would be more powerful than the competition just because the PS3 is. And I wanted to give my opinion on why Sony “might” not go all out during the next generation.

Anyways, thanks for reading, even if you disagree and think I’m an idiot, I have no problem with that, it’s unfortunate–but it’s your opinion. Feel free to never visit Geek Revolt again if you have a problem with what I write. I understand there are tons of sites out there fighting for your attention.

Update: 11/15/2013

I was proven wrong. The PS4 is more powerful than the Xbox One. This article was written before we knew anything about the PS4 and Xbox One, though…

I'm DeShaun Zollicoffer, and I approve this message/bio. "26-years-old, Proud Northeast Ohioan, a Gamer Without Loyalties, an Equal Opportunity Offender, Apple Evangelist, Apple Hater, Music Lover, Anime Junkie, Little Monster, Frequent Flyer, Dexter Fanatic, Title Case Addict, and Geek Revolt's Founder and Editorial Director."
  • doa766

    considering that PS4 will probably be released a long time after the next XBOX I see this as highly unlikely

    it might even be two years after it, since it’s pretty much confirmed that MS will show the new Xbox at the next E3

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Do you honestly believe Sony will wait 2 years after the new Xbox is released? I’m sorry, but I highly doubt that. My guess is a year tops, I don’t understand where everyone is getting this idea from.

      I hope it’s not the 10 year life cycle thing, that only means they’ll “support” it for 10 years, not that it’ll be there one and only console for a decade.

      • doa766

        maybe you don’t understand where people are getting this idea because you don’t know enough about gaming as you think

        when Sony said the 10 year life cycle, they meant that PS3 would be their flagship console for that time, even if it’s not going to be 10 years, most likely 8 or 9, they said “life cycle” for lack of a better term, clearly the life cycle of the PS2 is a around ten years now but they never said that like they did of the PS3, and that’s because they meant something different, the fact that a Sony was going to “support” the PS3 for ten years is nothing worth annoucing, they already did it with the PS2 and PS1

        second, looking at the upcoming line ups (or lack thereof) for both 360 and PS3 anyone who’s been paying atention during previous gens can tell you that MS is preparing for a new console and Sony isn’t yet

        third, halfway through this generation MS clearly decided to switch the focus from core gaming to casual, or in other words they stop trying to lure the PS2 audience to lure the Wii audience, but the 360 is a core console and most people know it as such, they need a new approach with a new image, and they need it now

        there’s more reasons but I don’t feel like writing anymore 

        • Zeroskie3

          It’s sad that SONY has been punished for being overly ambitious, but I don’t think that they’re going to release a less powerful system than the next xbox in order to compete with the release date. The amount of first party support for the PS3 is tremendous. It doesn’t seem like they are willing to give up on the PS3 just yet, and if they did release their console in tandem with Microsoft, it would probably be a rushed job, since it seems that they’re just not read yet (not that they aren’t capable).

          Besides that, the PS3 could reasonably co-exist with the other next-gen consoles for a while in the same way that the x360 was less powerful (except in the AA department) but still had the same 3rd party games available, dragging down the PS3 a little bit.

          What I’m trying to say is: I WILL be shocked if the PS4 is less powerful than the x720.

          • obvioustroll

            But PS3 has no games. 

          • blackskimmer

            The NGP or PSVITA is EXTREMELY powerful.  It leap frogged the entire mobile market by years.  However SONY built this system on exsisting hardware as to get to that 249.99 price.  The difference is that with Blu-ray already developed and the CELL already exsisting they can simply build off of that.  If they took the Blu-ray drive out of the PS3 it would have been cheaper then the 360.  I would have hated em for it but there you go.
             
              No huge R&D costs to make up this round, SONY can put out a technical powerhouse with a reasonable buy in price for consumers.  With SONY’s first party studios coupled with the most powerful gaming system at a competitive price against the next xbox I fully expect SONY to win the next gen.  MS really is in dire need of first party studios though.  

          • Dcbronco

            The Blu-ray drive was estimated to cost $240 at launch. The PS3 was estimated to cost Sony $840 at launch. The 360 was estimated to cost $526 at launch. Eliminating Blu-ray would still have left the PS3 more expensive. I agree that Sony can build on the Cell and Blu-ray. But MS can build on what they have too. They also own all of their tech. They can push up to ten or twelve cores and a more powerful Xenos all on a single die. Running at a higher speed and all of the efficiency of SoC architecture. And they could easily resurrect HD-DVD. It was always a far cheaper technology than Blu-ray. Or they could go with another high density format. Just like Nintendo has apparently done. And we know Nintendo doesn’t spend much.

            Oh, and Tegra 3 already lloks like the chip small chip solution to beat.  Not sure how many cores the SGX543MP4+ the PSV is using, but Tegra 3 is running full blown PC games. And can carry up to 12 GPU cores. SGX543MP4+ can use up to 16, but I doubt if the PSV will. I think that will be a tablet type number.

          • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

            Yeah, I forgot it was 2007 lol :)

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=580935000 Adrian Whitwell

            dont be shocked if the ps4 has 2 or more cell chips on board (the new generation cell chips that is) to push the power. The original specs for the ps3 had 2 cell chips and no graphics chip (one cell for general work and one for graphics work) that along with increased memory and memory speed couples to wireless n and a seamless link to the vita should make it powerful and also a def buy for vita owners.

          • Jeffg1013

            Totally agree. The eXcell8i (or whatever the fully functioning 8-core Cell chip is called) would be a logical choice for the PS4:
            1) It’s already been developed and is in production
            2) It is a performance boost over the existing Cell (i.e. all 8 SPE’s functional plus 10x double floating point performance)
            3) Developers would not have to learn an entirely new programming model for a new chip – they can build on the considerable Cell programming knowledge they’ve gained with the PS3
            4) By including a 2nd eXcell81 CPU to handle/augment the GPU duties they can theoretically get great graphics performance at lower cost that a custome nVIdia or ATI GPU chipset.

            As you mentioned, the Blu-ray tech is now a low cost commodity item so that shouldn’t impact system cost all that much. Hopefully Sony can keep the CPU/GPU/Blu-ray costs to a minimum and throw a ton of high-speed RAM in the PS4.  RAM limitations was -the- biggest factor in the overall performance of PS3 and Xbox360.

          • Jeffg1013
      • yesac

        Thank you! I’ve been waiting years now to hear someone explain that to all of these morons. With the speed at which computing tech evolves, why would they keep the PS3 as their only console for ten years? That would just be stupid. They would more than likely lose a huge portion of their fan base and third party support, maybe even some first party support. I say this because the gamers would see the games on the competition’s console and jump ship. Also the developers are the same as consumers. They get sick of old tech and start itching to see what they can do with a newer more powerful console.

        • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

          Yup, I figured everyone knew what they meant by 10 years. It would be suicide to stick with “only” one console for a decade.

  • Pingback: Don’t Be Shocked If The PS4 Is Less Powerful Than The Next Xbox

  • Anonymous

    Sony have established themselves as the powerhouse part of the market, not just for the sake of it but because the expansive technical sandbox expands not only the graphical capabilities but also the whole spectrum of the creative sandbox.

    They will disappoint fans greatly if they’re not at least 10-15% more powerful.

    They will learn from their mistakes and probably have the release window a little closer and the price a little lower. 

    I expect the next Xbox to release in October 2013 at £299-320 and the next PlayStation to release in March 2014 at £349.

    Power isn’t just about power or graphics, it’s about performance, ai, physics, audio, gameplay, collision etc. It helps create immersive worlds, it allows boundaries to be pushed, it expands the creative sandbox and the various possibilities. I have an accute dislike for the snobby people saying “it’s all about graphics these days, should be about gameplay”.

    Games don’t have to be realistic looking and it’s not about that exclusively, it’s about having it as a possibility, the art style can be cartoon-like, realistic, minimalistic, simplistic, unique, whatever. It’s about options and being able to pull it off with good performance and cleaner graphics alongside the other important elements of a game.

    • Guest

      Lol @ prices when ther isn’t even a name for the consoles…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C2KJEHWK6X2V5PDLHDU42SVEXM Phatty Mcphats

    ehhhhhh……how are they going to make good games if it’s not powerful?
    Thought “powerful” was kind of a blanket term, over-generalizing the specs and what they do for next gen games.
    You can still make a good game with a stick and a ball, so I can see what you mean a bit. But Sony is well versed in new age technology(i.e. paper thin OLED screen), and they’ve got a good wrap-up on what’s to come.

    The Vita also shows they’re not hesitant in the choice they made when they lost money releasing the PS3.
    The Vita’s not going to gain them substantial profits for the next 3 years.

    • Revomartinez

      stupid fucktard

      • http://profiles.google.com/timothypatricklarkin Timothy Larkin

        He’s right. Sony said themselves that Vita won’t see profit for 3 years. They’re selling Vita at a loss.

      • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

        Hey, be nice :)

  • Revomartinez

    Good article. Definately got some fanboys talking crap, bu that’s ok.

    • Zeroskie3

      haters gonna misspell

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks, that wasn’t my intentions though. I only wanted to say this because I felt like everyone is assuming that the PS4 will automatically be more powerful.

  • http://profiles.google.com/timothypatricklarkin Timothy Larkin

    Sony’s first party titles do not sell as well as Microsoft or Nintendo first party titles. Sony has survived on third party games like GTA, and Call of Duty. Sony was the “big tent” of consoles during the PS1 and PS2 days. That tent has shrunk. If PS4 is less powerful, there will be zero reasons to buy it.

    • http://twitter.com/wishingW3L WEL

      Uncharted 2 sold 5 millions, GT5 sold 7 millions and most of the other franchises surpass the 1 million mark. On top of that Sony is the only publisher that has the guts to finance games like Heavy Rain, Last Guardian, Little Big Planet and the only ones that allows MMO games and cross-platform gaming in their online service… I think that if you were a real gamer you wouldn’t diss Sony like that seeing the many risks they take for the sake of making their console to look unique to the consumer.

      And I don’t know why you mention the GTA and COD when those are not only multiplats but these are the 2 top selling franchises on the X360 too.

      • Dcbronco

        Uncharted, God of War and GT5 are exceptions. But even they don’t compare to Halo, Gears, Fable and Forza. LBP sold well the first time, not the second. MMOs will eventually come to the 360. It’s funny hearing someone support Sony by saying they pay for exclusives like Heavy Rain and Last Guardian, when in the beginning of this generation they talked about how they don’t pay for exclusives. And MS did spend a ton developing Kinect so they are willing to spend money. That and all of the money they spent buying exclusives too.

        And though MS paid for favorable release dates or content, it paid off with higher sales. Remember that this is a business. Sony spends a lot of money on mostly marginally successful games. MS spends less and gets a far better return on their money. Paying 10-20 million in advertising for exclusivity to Epic nets MS 120 in royalties. Sony paying up $100 million to develop Killzone 2 probably lost them money. MS has made the smarter decisions. Also add the cost of Sony buying some of theose developers too. Sony spent 100s of millions buying companies and hoping they produce hits. MS spent 100′s of millions buying exclusivity on promising franchises they had a chance to see. The MS model works better.

        • Guest

          “Paying for exclusives like heavy rain” No. SUPPORTING, they don’t buy exclusivity.
          And please stop pulling numbers out your ass.

        • Jsarmiento

          Why would you care if ms made more money? Does it help you?Do you own ms stock? You probably don’t. As a consumer, Sony is giving back better games, and more features on their console. I could care less if ms made more money by selling more games than Sony. At the end of the day we’re all playing the same games. Btw this is coming from a guy who owns both and plays his box alot more.(been playing alot o FIFA)

          • Dcbronco

            Supporting and paying are the same thing. You only believe it’s not if you fall for the “It can only be done on the PS3 nonsense”. MS “supported” Gears, in return they got exclusivity. And pulling numbers out of my ass and taking a reasonable guess that a game that took over five years to develop with over a 120 workers ran up a nice sum. Notice I said up to. Especially since it was a new and complicated system.

            @6ea9b407fd412d6dadd2d2018e233a03:disqus, You must be one of those kids that doesn’t realize that video games are really about making money. You just want great games right? Maybe you didn’t notice that another studio closed this week. No matter how big you think Sony is, they will not be able to continue making great games if they aren’t making enough money to keep making games. So it’s not about MS amking more. It’s about Sony’s business model being flawed.

            As for stocks you’re right. I don’t own any. I’m smarter than that. The stock market is a huge ponzi scheme. Companies take your money, raise their bonuses, run the company into the ground and then use their golden parachutes to glide into retirement. It’s all lies and speculation. Just one rumor and you could lose everything. It’s gambling with a fixed deck. Crashes aren’t accidents. Yeah, I know. Who would have known that selling houses to people with little or no income would cause foreclosures when the interest rates hit 8%.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2Q26GBH7P6REHEZJ2V67TUSS7Q John Jeffrey

            I completely disagree with you saying that MS `model` works better. If you haven’t notice, MS PAYS a lot for marketing to make sure their “exclusive deal“ sells a lot; e.g. GTA4, Call of Duty. Like you said: Business is business. Saying that Sony paid 100 million for killzone 2 (They didn’t) is utter Bull$hit as MS spent 500 million to advertise Kinect. Look how that turned out. How long will it last? It may have worked the first time but it won’t work for long. Sony don’t spend much advertising because they know their products will sell well even if it doesn’t attain the Guinness World Record for sales. I gotta admit, they didn’t do well on PS3 launch but they’re turning the table fast. Statistically, compare the PS2 to PS3 year by year in terms of sale and you’ll notice that PS3 is selling a lot more than PS2. Oh, and don’t forgat that MS is only strong in the US but not offshore. So if you say MS’s “model“ works better, think again… numbers might really be coming out your ass, lol…

      • Gemmol Lewis

        Nintendo murders all Mario kart 20 mill or more the other Mario game 20 million or more, and this is on one system they have a few more its nothing against sony i have a ps3 but Nintendo first party Murders all other first partys

  • Ray LaHood

    There is something different about this Zollicoffer guy, he is one of the few people writing about games on the internet that has a brain! This is one of the most clairvoyant articles I have seen in years on gaming, so simple yet so logical.

    I wonder, where did you get your outstanding critical thinking skills from, business school or your parents :)

    Keep up the good work, and ignore all these sony loving baboons, they have yet to call anything correctly this generation, their latest blunder, “kinect will be a huge failure at launch” yeah right, that sure happened. LMAO!

  • Anonymous

    While I don’t doubt the legitimacy of this story, where’s this info coming from? Sony usually likes to wait till they see their competition before they unleash their PS Beast. At least that’s what happened with the PS3, and yes, it did almost cost them this generation. While they released first with the PS2, which was under powered compared to the beast that was the original Xbox, they still won that generation hands down. What I’m saying is either scenario is plausible and likely to happen. But what I really think will happen is Sony’s pride will kick in and they release a more powerful PS4 that’s a lot easier to develop for than the PS3 was a year after the new Xbox releases. Just my theory.

    • Gemmol Lewis

      Wii won this Generation over 80 million system sold compare to sony 50 million n software wise Wii sold 676,251,685 games in its lifetime n ps3 did 396,363,110 n remember no matter what sony do they first party cant beat nintendo world wide mario kart sold 27 million this is on one system not counting other 20 million sellers

  • godzilla1200

    “To the average person they’re only concerned about which one is the most affordable and has the coolest games (the Wii is a great example).”

    This statement right there will  be what will ruin gaming forever. Gaming is not for average people, it is for gamers. It is for people who likes to play games and wants the technology to improve in every generation. For average people there’s Angry Birds and Farmville.

    If industries like Sony and MS (and even Nintendo now since they are jumping into the HD bandwagon) thought like that statement, the industry would be dead because we wouldn’t have advanced from SNES era.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      I know, I was thinking more about business. Sony wants to sell the most consoles possible, but yeah that could hurt the real gamers in the end.

  • Me

    Wow that article was really deep…

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      I was trying to get to the point as quickly as possible, I know gamers don’t always like to read a wall of text.

  • Anonymous

    I believe Sony’s problem this time around they tried to do too much too soon.  They wanted an everything console.  Unfortunately, this made the everything console hard to program for and Sony’s attitude that it should be hard to program for in order to slow down the development life cycle made everyone mad and the console cost too much.  The market wouldn’t support it.  Instead of putting up with Sony the consumer went with the viable alternatives.  Sony has better hardware, but it doesn’t mean squat if you can’t develop for it.  Now the Microsoft is a credible player it really doesn’t matter if someone sells 100k more consoles this month or the next.

  • Ray LaHood

    Problem is, the PS3 is believed to have JUST recently reached profitability on each console sold. Sony cannot afford to pump cash into the development of a new PS when they are still deep in the hole that PS3 development cost them. At the same time, I’m with the author, I do not think they will wait years to launch a new PS if MS launches a very powerful xbox 720 in 2012.

    Bottom line Sony has got themselves into a pickle here. Oddly enough it will probably be Microsoft who gives them an out, most likely MS will not be aggressive (since they dont have to) and announce the 720 at E3 2012, but not launch it until holiday 2013, this will give Sony enough time to make some cash off PS3, so they can justify building a PS4 to the share holders. PS4 will launch holiday 2014, with an equal amount of power to the Xbox 720.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Well said, Sony has put themselves in a strange position this generation.

      • http://twitter.com/DarthDiggler Rich

        The PS3 has been “profitable” for much longer than JUST recently.  The PS3 started turning a profit before the Slim came out.  To act as if Sony is not going to put any money into R&D is stupid, they will not need as much R&D because most of the work for the Cell processor has been done.  Likely PS4 will use a Cell CPU with more cores (and maybe even more cache memory).  It would cost them more to abandon the Cell CPU then to embrace it for a 2nd generation in a more powerful format.

        Now MS on the other hand has a pretty rich history of throwing near “off the shelf components” together into their consoles.  The first Xbox was nothing more than a PC with an overly large controller.  While the Xbox 360 did lack the Intel CPU, it was using the PowerPC platform which is not unknown to the PC sector.

        Look MS isn’t a hardware company, that’s why Sony out does them on hardware.  Sony isn’t a software company that’s why MS out does them on software.

        “Bottom line Sony has got themselves into a pickle here. Oddly enough it
        will probably be Microsoft who gives them an out, most likely MS will
        not be aggressive (since they dont have to) and announce the 720 at E3
        2012, but not launch it until holiday 2013, this will give Sony enough
        time to make some cash off PS3, so they can justify building a PS4 to
        the share holders. PS4 will launch holiday 2014, with an equal amount of
        power to the Xbox 720.”

        That statement is completely uninformed.  You act like the next gen console is created just because the last one was released 5 years ago.  PS4 and Xbox 720 have been at work likely before the PS3 and Xbox 360.  When the PS3 came out I am sure a small team got together to start working on PS4.  This type of R&D isn’t an option for a company like Sony it’s an on-going process.  PS3 spent a ton of money on R&D but that R&D will help into the next couple generations.  Console development is not as myopic as you guys make it out to be.

  • http://profiles.google.com/trainor.doug Doug Trainor

    A few reactions/thoughts:

    the overall package is what is critical– power is only one piece.  But power does appeal to hardcore gamers– the shiny graphics actually do sell games and consoles to most of us whether we admit it publicly or not. 

    I must be old, but the history in the article is a little misleading.  The PS1 was not the most powerful but it came out a year before the N64– which had a bit more power. On top of that, the lack of cartridges with the PS1 vs N64 was hugely appealing to third parties because they made more profit per game without cartridges.  The key to understand is, when the PS1 first came out, it was heavily marketed and seen as more powerful than the current competition– the Sega Saturn. Sony took every chance they could to point this out.

    The PS2 was not the most powerful due to the Xbox coming out a year later. But the PS2 was initially marketed and hyped as the most powerful box ever– a supercomputer even as the marketing types spinned their stories.  Like the PS1, the PS2 came out after Sega (this time the Dreamcast) and Sony touted the power of the PS2 all day long– in fact long before the console even launched they did this to dent the Dreamcast market penetration.

    So, Sony has a long history of hyping and selling their consoles’ power– it did not begin with the PS3. The difference was, they were clearly more powerful than the competition when they launched and they launched significantly before the consoles that eventually came out with more power.  The PS3 was the first time this did not happen. PS3 came out last in the cycle and it has only marginally more power than the 360.  (that will upset fanboys, I know, but it is clearly true by all serious accounts).  And that slight bit of additional power is hampered by restrictive memory allocations and tough to program silicon so only the most dedicated programmers ever access it.   Add in high costs due to Blu-ray etc and you have the huge market share loss that Sony took with the PS3. From first to last place in Sony’s largest business segment– ouch.  Their consolation prize is blu-ray won the format war largely due to the PS3.

    I think the PS4 will have to be competitive with the power of the next xbox.  If they launch a year later than Microsoft, then they will need to differentiate based on something.  Will it be power, price, online, games or something else?  We’ll see.  I do think Sony should have learned that to come out a year later without clearly differentiating is big trouble for market share.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks for taking time out to right all that, and that’s true that the N64 did come out after. So that might be an unfair comparison to make, sorry about that.

    • Chris

      Very well said Doug. I was going to point this fact out but now I can site back and read the fail post about sony always having the best system.

  • http://profiles.google.com/trainor.doug Doug Trainor

    A few reactions/thoughts:

    the overall package is what is critical– power is only one piece.  But power does appeal to hardcore gamers– the shiny graphics actually do sell games and consoles to most of us whether we admit it publicly or not. 

    I must be old, but the history in the article is a little misleading.  The PS1 was not the most powerful but it came out a year before the N64– which had a bit more power. On top of that, the lack of cartridges with the PS1 vs N64 was hugely appealing to third parties because they made more profit per game without cartridges.  The key to understand is, when the PS1 first came out, it was heavily marketed and seen as more powerful than the current competition– the Sega Saturn. Sony took every chance they could to point this out.

    The PS2 was not the most powerful due to the Xbox coming out a year later. But the PS2 was initially marketed and hyped as the most powerful box ever– a supercomputer even as the marketing types spinned their stories.  Like the PS1, the PS2 came out after Sega (this time the Dreamcast) and Sony touted the power of the PS2 all day long– in fact long before the console even launched they did this to dent the Dreamcast market penetration.

    So, Sony has a long history of hyping and selling their consoles’ power– it did not begin with the PS3. The difference was, they were clearly more powerful than the competition when they launched and they launched significantly before the consoles that eventually came out with more power.  The PS3 was the first time this did not happen. PS3 came out last in the cycle and it has only marginally more power than the 360.  (that will upset fanboys, I know, but it is clearly true by all serious accounts).  And that slight bit of additional power is hampered by restrictive memory allocations and tough to program silicon so only the most dedicated programmers ever access it.   Add in high costs due to Blu-ray etc and you have the huge market share loss that Sony took with the PS3. From first to last place in Sony’s largest business segment– ouch.  Their consolation prize is blu-ray won the format war largely due to the PS3.

    I think the PS4 will have to be competitive with the power of the next xbox.  If they launch a year later than Microsoft, then they will need to differentiate based on something.  Will it be power, price, online, games or something else?  We’ll see.  I do think Sony should have learned that to come out a year later without clearly differentiating is big trouble for market share.

  • Popdog

    wowow a place thats not dominated by fan boys and some real intelligence!!!!!

    • Dills

      You can tell when somebody is smart when they put five exclamation marks after a poorly-constructed sentence.

      • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

        Ha-ha!

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks, although I think they’ll eventually overrun this site too lol

  • Bmp1113

    I agree that Sony will make it more reasonably priced but not because it will have less power, it’s because they already invested in blu ray and cell. The could use blu ray again for a low cost and an upgraded cell with more spes. Being more powerful had having the best looking first party games is sort of their thing now. Just look at the recently revealed PSV, equal price as 3ds but more powerful and even new features. Yes the ps3 became profitable not too long ago but we can’t forget game sales and that they will continue to sell the ps3 well after the ps4 is out like they did with the ps2.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      That’s true, since they’ll probably stick with Blu-Ray the initial costs won’t be as high as they were back in 2006. Hopefully Microsoft uses Blu-Ray too so games can become larger without needing a few disks. That reminds me of old PS1 JRPGs :)

  • Joebobsky

    Simple, logical. Good article, no fanboy crap.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks, the funny thing is the people raging about this article are too silly to realize I’m actually praising Sony more than anything.

      • http://twitter.com/DarthDiggler Rich

        Dude you do not start an article with a headline and work backwards. 
        Next time you form an opinion for public digest why don’t you do a
        little research and find some facts to support your opinion.  Editorials
        that draw on NO FACTUAL INFORMATION are just works of fiction.  You
        would be better off closing this site and becoming a novelist if that is
        your approach to journalism.

        The problem is man your whole site is like this.  Mostly “Oh wouldn’t it be cool” and what seem to be “wishful thinking” articles.  Where is the analysis?  Where are the facts structured in a way that support your words?

        I could do an editorial espousing my opinion that you are a child molester.  It wouldn’t be true but I bet I could get some page views with it.

        How do you praise Sony by saying that the electronics giant will be out done in hardware?  That isn’t praise, Sony has never released a less powerful system after a competitor put out a more powerful system.

        • Retard Basher

          This is just stupid, you guys wont read it at all dont you?

          Hes just saying that Sony may choose to downgrade his console to be more competitive cause thet may have learned of the nut hit they got with theyre overpriced console, and, plus, its his OPINION hes hasnt said it was a fact, moron.

  • Rapflow

    What an article? How many words are there? 10? Write something more than a class job for 14 year old american.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      I could have written something that was 1,000 words, but everyone doesn’t want to read a wall of text. So I kept things short and too the point.

  • Chrislaguna03

    The truth is that Sony cares way more about there consoles then Xbox does, when Sony made the Ps3 they were breaking even on the price. They wanted to make a console that would have a ten year life just like the ps2 not be a 2-3 year system.There now starting to get the best games it has to offer. Ps4 wont make any announcements until 2013 and sell until 2014.Sad to see microsoft forget about the 360 buyers when the 720 comes out

    • Naysayer

      >Sad to see microsoft forget about the 360 buyers when the 720 comes out

      Are you from the future?
      I have a few other small problems with what you said also.  It appears that you are trying to slander MS by saying that they release consoles every two to three years, when if the nextbox does release 2013, that will be 8 years between releases a full 2 more years than between ps2 and ps3.  
      Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not going to say it was good of MS to cut off all support for the original xbox once the 360 came out, but they were trying to keep up with the opposition, and there is no point floundering money on a console which was declining in sales and had only sold 35 odd million consoles compared to Sony which was going strong with a 100 mil strong ps1 install base and a ps2 install base that is now over 150 million.  With those numbers it was a good idea for sony to continue supporting their previous generation consoles until they could be phased out, and likely come the nextbox’s release MS will do the same since their new console is doing better than the original.  

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      I think Microsoft will think about 360 owners in the future. And I somewhat agree that Sony built their console with the 10 year thing in mind.

  • http://www.facebook.com/TheUncutAngel Angel Duarte

    “First party support” kinda weird writing. “Games” would have been more appropriate, considering their first party studios have no choice. You don’t say you get support from someone, when their obligated to do things for you. Sorry, that’s a pet peeve of mine.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Ha-ha, no problem, I’m always trying to improve my writing. Now that I think about it, that is redundant.

  • Contrabida

    good article.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks, glad you liked it.

  • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

    Wow, I said that…

    • Michael Munnett

      I talked to somebody in software at ibm over the phone & asked if sony had contracted them to build a processor architecture similar to the cell processor & the person responded with a yes & also asked if it was possibly for sony’s next playstation console & the person responded with a  yes so that indicates it’s going to be incredibly powerful as the cell processor if not more & possibly for sony’s next playstation console.

  • Anonymous

    nice theory man

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Not sure if you’re being sarcastic or not, but thanks :) That’s all it really is, a theory.

  • Toddcarnley

    What an insightful and well presented argument from a…a 24 year old college kid?  Good going on making a generic statement about an industry you know nothing about. And with no actual information or proof either. Stay in school kid, and while you are at it stay out of game journalism too.  

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      I’ll also stay off your lawn if you want. Seriously though, this is an “opinion piece”. Does the title say, The PS3 “Will Be” Less Powerful Than The Next Xbox? I thought it was obvious from the title, but I guess I need to spell it out more clearly next time…

      All I was saying is we shouldn’t assume the PS4 will be more powerful than the next Xbox just because the PS3 is currently the most powerful console on the market.

  • Rob

    The Xbox is within range of the PS3? 
    The writer of this article needs to go do some tech reading.. 360 more powerful GPU, slightly less power CPU.. PS3 more powerful CPU but can’t ustilize that power fully because of a less powerful GPU and slower bottlenecked memory system.  The memory system will hold back anything that is faster then it in and kind of computer, device, etc.. Sony cut cost in the memory system and GPU.. That being said the systems are very equal, except the 360 is much easier and cheaper to develop games for because its basically a PC !

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      I’m taking about being within in range when it comes to graphics, and what the end user (gamers) sees.

  • http://twitter.com/ephoenix6 Everett Phoenix

    I agree with your points, but the original playstation had superior graphics to it’s competitors, the n64 and saturn. Meanwhile, the dreamcast, which was supposed to be a next gen competitor to the ps2, gamecube, and xbox, was released early; so it seemed to be in competition with the last gen systems. Also, we don’t know for sure what’s going to happen next, so I don’t think it’s fair to state your opinion as fact, by telling us what to expect as if the details have already been confirmed.

    • MKai 28

      I don’t think I agree with that, both the N64 and the Sega saturn were technically more powerful than the PS1.  Even the Saturn was more like the PS3 at the time( difficult to program for). If you remember, saturn had a perfect arcade marvel vs street fighter game( you could switch characters during game) whereas PS1 couldn’t do this.(only playing with one character instead of 2 vs 2).

      N64 was even more powerful than the two, Mario 64 proved that. You need to back track and do your research.

  • BlackWolf

    Ok, so you stupid people should stop critizing the author on every little detail. If you have a problem with the article, why dont you go and write your own article and see how easy that Is. And you idiots who are fighting back and forth with large paragraph comments, go find a forum, or chat room to fight on.

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks Wolf, I know my writing isn’t perfect, but I also didn’t know there were so many experts out there on journalism. My best advice is like you said, “write an article yourself”. I’ll take it one step further, start a website, it’s not that hard (I’m winging it).

      I fail to see how my stuff is worse than the sites that post screenshot comparisons between Uncharted 1, 2, and 3. With headlines like “Uncharted 3′s Visual Advancement Is Amazing”. That’s “poor” content, but hardly anyone would call me out for that, they’d be too busy having a circle jerk in the comments.

      Or the ones that quote one line about Sony “having lots of cool stuff at E3″. The bottom-line is this, I’m not the best out there, but there are far, far worse gaming sites out there.But this isn’t even a gaming site actually…

      Anyways, thanks again Wolf.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Badassbab Babz Rahman

    Wise comments. The PS4 and 360 should be similarly powered and as the last 3-4 gens have shown being the most powerful doesn’t equal the most success. Anyway Sony have got Blu Ray to defeat HD DVD and the PS3 helped them to do this though the future is really digital distribution.

  • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

    That was a mistake on my part,I didn’t mean to write”somewhat”. Sorry about that, I was trying to reply to too much at once.

  • http://twitter.com/kdog254 Kristian Wright

    Nice article, I agree!

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks!

  • joao henrique

    Really liked your article, i have a ps3 and love it, bough it instead of xbox360 cuz i preffer the sony games, not because the system is less/more powerfull. Ppl need to stop raging about graphic, console war between ms and sony is a benefit, they both try to make better games, but this flame wars by the fans adds nothing…after all i have to agree with you, sony made it too expensive, looks like a fail, but there is no technology evolution without risks… Again, nice article.
    ps: sy the bad english

    • http://www.geekrevolt.com/ DeShaun Zollicoffer

      Thanks and it’s okay your English is better than some people that’s been speaking it for their whole lives :)

  • Ivar Lønning

    Look at the Vita. Are they downplaying specs? No. Thinking otherwise is foolish.