We go hands-on with the latest build, sheathe our weapons, and build our own little slice of Valhalla.
Assassin's Creed Valhalla - We Play Viking Settlers
We sit down with Xbox Game Studios’ World’s Edge and Melbourne developer Tantalus to discuss the creation of Age of Empires III: Definitive Edition.
The Making of Age of Empires III: Definitive Edition
Where we fall in love with the turn-based RPG combat and new protagonist Ichiban Kasuga.
Yakuza Goes Full RPG In The Brilliant Yakuza: Like a Dragon
NBA 2K21 is the best basketball game around... but it's also the only one.
NBA 2K21 Review
Post by Eorl @ 01:20pm 11/06/13 | 19 Comments
Sony has finally revealed the pricing for their next-gen console, the PlayStation 4. Available "this holiday season", the console will be priced at USD$399, GBP£349, and EUR€399. If pricing will be similar to the Xbox One, we will most likely see an Australian release at $499, however no details have yet been confirmed.

Sadly the news isn't all that good, as a trailer demonstrating the simple "DRM" required for used games on PlayStation 4 has revealed that PlayStation Plus membership will be required for online multiplayer action. Luckily however those looking to simply play the single-player of titles will gladly be able to, though from the looks of the next-gen titles online will be offering a number of incentives.

Update: Australian pricing has since been officially confirmed as RRP AUD$549



playstation 4





Latest Comments
Pirroh
Posted 01:40pm 11/6/13
EB has updated their placeholder price to $549

edit: dat broken link
WirlWind
Posted 01:37pm 11/6/13
F*****G LAME!

I was SO goddamn excited and then they go and pull the same s*** that made me sell my 360.

"Oh hey, you want to play MP on a game you already paid $60 for, using an internet connection you already pay $70/month for? Why not pay another $x/month just because we can!"

*sigh* looks like it'll still be 100% PC gaming for me.
Che
Posted 01:37pm 11/6/13
Well there we go, the actual reason I was going to move from xbox to ps4 has now been adopted by sony. TBH i don't care that much about the DRM BS or whether a specific game is coming out on what console at release.. I do care about having to pay to keep using features that should be free.
groganus
Posted 01:40pm 11/6/13
TBH Paying $5 a month for PS+ to get access to multiplayer is not such a bad deal. I have it atm just to grab the free games on offer which has been great value. Alot of games i've been holding off for till they become cheap have been released on PS+ for free and for me its paid for itself 5x over.

You can tell that sony are on to a winning forumal with this as microsoft are doing the same thing. If anything there online services are now matching each other. Which is great for consumers (ignoring MS s***** DRM policy)
WirlWind
Posted 01:45pm 11/6/13
Grog, it might be good for someone who actually plays a console atleast equally as much as their PC, but I'm a PC gamer who occasionally plays a console for the odd exclusive title.

I won't pay $20 for what will likely only be a few days use of MP. It's a f*****g rort.
Tribal07
Posted 02:52pm 11/6/13
Lol 20$ for 3 months of online play plus up too 14 free games a month? Way better than xbox's 2 games a month.
I will pay it because it carries over from the ps3 ps plus and hopefully the ps4 is region free like the ps3.
That and it's way cheaper than Xbox live. I believe people take things at face value too much, plus used games are helpful too 550$ is way cheaper than what I thought it was gonna release at. Well done Sony.
groganus
Posted 03:11pm 11/6/13
Grog, it might be good for someone who actually plays a console at least equally as much as their PC, but I'm a PC gamer who occasionally plays a console for the odd exclusive title.


I can see how in this particular case the value isn't there, but lets be honest if past history has taught us anything, this exclusive console game you want to play on MP won't have dedicated servers, it will have terrible match making and it won't be worth your time let alone the subscription it costs for PS+... so by not paying for PS+ you get the pleasure of not being exposed to potentially wasting your time on something that isn't worth your time.

But in all seriousness I am with you 100% on this, I don't play console games multiplayer and if I do its only to realise the above statement is true... Again I pay for my PS+ sub for the added (existing) benefits and as long as the price doesn't go up to much i will continue to do so...

My Xbox live sub is the biggest waste of money, my son plays halo online and its the only reason I bought it.. he plays maybe once a month.. its really not worth it, I get nothing extra from it. In fact the last few years the xbox imo has been such an unappealing system that i've hardly touched it, my 10yr old uses it more than anyone and even then he's more engaged in the 3DS.. the Xbox demographic does not live in my house.

But back to the PS3, if you won't get value out of the PS+ benefits like free games then you probably won't get value from the PS3 at all, lashing out $500+ for the console and $70 bucks an exclusive game probably isn't value to you.. a pc gamer.
thermite
Posted 03:47pm 11/6/13
wtf is holiday season?

Is that winter holiday or summer holiday (winter there)

or september holidays because that's the biggest school holidays?

edit: wait whats this monthly fee people are talking about? theres a dealbreaker, lol . Newsflash I don't even pay for a mobile phone subscription, I've never had cable tv, never bought an online game with ongoing fees, hell I don't even purcahse my own petrol - so you can stick that monthly fee up your f*****g a******* along with the playstation itself.

This would have been my first playstation. I've never even seen one in real life before. I've seen a first gen Xbox, and before that a Megadrive (but never actually played it).

Now it will be my never playstation.


Kids at school teased me because I asked what "dual shock" meant. LOL DUH they said DUAL means TWO idiot

I now know it referred to the joy pad which contained some kind of vibrator.
WirlWind
Posted 04:16pm 11/6/13
Thermite, it's a $5/month sub to play MP. Sure, you get a few free games with it, but at the end of the day, you have to pay to get online.

As for "holiday season", I'm pretty sure that's sept / oct / nov / dec.

Probably more the nov / dec time. Basically, around christmas.
Raven
Posted 04:27pm 11/6/13
at the end of the day, you have to pay to get online.

Then get less computer-literate neighbours. Ones with s****** WEP keys.
ravn0s
Posted 04:36pm 11/6/13
you only pay to have access to multiplayer games. you don't need to pay to have access to your other media programs (eg. netflix) like you do with the xbox.
WirlWind
Posted 07:20pm 11/6/13
ravn0s, I don't particularly care about netflix etc, I'm just annoyed that the main function of the console (playing games) needs a subscription to do something that was previously (and still should be) free.

It's like having to drop $5 on the MP unlocking DLC for a game you just paid full price on, except it expires every month and you have to re-buy the DLC...

Sure, you get "free games" but like I said, I'll have already bought any game I care about on PC anyway. All the sub is doing is c***-blocking me when I want to get on my dusty console and play for an hour every other week.
paveway
Posted 08:01pm 11/6/13
Just to clarify, you don't need to pay a subscription to play games on the ps4.....

Most games i've never bothered playing multiplayer on my ps3 any games i want to play proper multiplayer on i play on my pc. That said the game i've played the most you needed to be online to get the most fun out of it

You seem angry maybe you should just stick to pc
ravn0s
Posted 08:13pm 11/6/13
Just to clarify, you don't need to pay a subscription to play games on the ps4.....


not for single player, only multiplayer.
Tollaz0r!
Posted 08:18pm 11/6/13
Microsoft's Live sub made me dump buying games for it, I'm not forking out for a subscription for multiplayer games on a console. Not gunna happen. Xbox is dead to me, do you hear me Microsoft. DEAD TO ME!

*Turns back.
BladeRunner
Posted 09:32pm 11/6/13
Its unfortunate that Sony has done a Microsoft when it comes to Multiplayer sub fees. Sony seemed to have been hitting the right buttons so far except for this. If you are a casual console player like myself the sub may not be worth it. Even though it is cheaper then XBL. If you are a h4rdc0re console gamer then you will reap the benefits of this scheme.

This is not necessarily a deal breaker for me but it does take the shine off what was shaping up to be a good console release. Now the price, its disappointing. Right now $399 USD = $426.60 AUD as of typing this. Is Sony going to be taking a loss on the sale of the console? If we assume they do make money off it and can sell it for $399 USD at a profit, then $426 here in Aus should be good enough. If we are to account for the fluctuation of the aussie dollar, $450 AUD would be the best price all things considered.

$549 is a bit much unless it comes with a game or other things.
Khel
Posted 09:41pm 11/6/13
I hear everyone keep saying the $5 a month for Playstation Plus is cheaper than Live, but really, if you're paying more than $5 a month for Live then you're doing it wrong. I only ever pay $50 for 12 months at a time.

Personally I like that Sony is going this route, because it hopefully means they'll be building their version of the infrastructure that makes multiplayer on Live so much better, with the cross game voice chat (which I think they already said they'll have) and all the built in inviting and matchmaking type stuff and all the rich presence stuff. Those are the things that make Live a superior platform for multiplayer imo, so if the monthly fee means Sony are adopting that stuff for PSN (which from all indications, it sounds like they are), then I'm all for it. It makes more sense from the point of view of catering to developers as well, instead of forcing each developer to roll their own multiplayer and matchmaking s***, just have it all built into the core system and developers just leverage it.
WirlWind
Posted 08:32am 12/6/13
I hear everyone keep saying the $5 a month for Playstation Plus is cheaper than Live, but really, if you're paying more than $5 a month for Live then you're doing it wrong. I only ever pay $50 for 12 months at a time.Personally I like that Sony is going this route, because it hopefully means they'll be building their version of the infrastructure that makes multiplayer on Live so much better, with the cross game voice chat (which I think they already said they'll have) and all the built in inviting and matchmaking type stuff and all the rich presence stuff. Those are the things that make Live a superior platform for multiplayer imo, so if the monthly fee means Sony are adopting that stuff for PSN (which from all indications, it sounds like they are), then I'm all for it. It makes more sense from the point of view of catering to developers as well, instead of forcing each developer to roll their own multiplayer and matchmaking s***, just have it all built into the core system and developers just leverage it.


Don't they have skype integration? They can do SO much without needing to get their own infrastructure in place.

If you're desperate for cross-game chat, make THAT a PS+ feature.

But rolling free MP into a sub that YOU MUST PAY to get the most out of your games is a "lets grab the money because we can".

As for the whole "let's cater to developers" idea, while nice for the game publishers, is ALSO pointless for the consumer. I don't care if it saves gave dev's a month of having to slot in their own Matchmakinging code module (which they likely have if they've done games on that engine before), it f**** over the common gamer.
Khel
Posted 09:20am 12/6/13
Making better games is pointless for the consumer? Thats an odd conclusion to arrive at. How does having a solid multiplayer framework that is easy to implement for all developers, guaranteeing the same quality of multiplayer accross all titles and a familiar multiplayer framework in every game you play, f*****g over the common gamer? Think of all the games that have had huge issues with their multiplayer implementation on PS3 (Battlefield 3 springs to mind as a recent candidate), thats the sort of thing that having a framework like this in place will fix. Which is quite the opposite of f*****g over gamers tbh.

Whether charging a monthly fee for it is a bad thing or not, I dunno, thats a judgement call really. Its hardly a new business model, subscription gaming has been around for a long time now and Sony would have been crazy to ignore the success of XBox Live's model. I guess I'm just used to it now so it doesn't bother me, and I don't mind paying a couple of bucks a month for a good service.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
19 Comments
Show