Sure, you can praise them for changing, but it's not because of any other reason than they realised they were going to get annihilated. No matter what spin they try to put on it, it's still massively embarrassing for them.

It's also interesting that I'm seeing a lot of people who said they were switching from Xbox to PlayStation still standing by that decision, saying they're still no going back. Of course, whether they do or not remains to be seen.

Personally, I won't be getting one. I've seen nothing exclusive that interests me, I'm not interested in all the TV guff, and I don't see any point wasting money on another console when I've had the first two and barely used either.

It seems the consoles aren't fully 'bricked' since they do still boot partially, so I'm guessing that installing the updated/corrected firmware (once it's released) through the System Restore menu will revive most if not all affected systems.

I don't think I even lasted 10 minutes on the demo. Looked a mess and seemed pretty generic.

Last game of theirs I actually enjoyed was Tools of Destruction. I wasn't mad on Resistance 2 despite loving the first game, and A Crack In Time bored me. I didn't bother with Resistance 3 or R&C All 4 One, and I didn't like the look of Sunset Overdrive either.

This is what I wanted to hear - praise for the system which isn't from Sony's first-party studios.

If Sony are playing people, they'll cut their own throats when they 'announce' it. But that seems highly unlikely to me.

There's no way they'd make such absolute public statements like they did at E3, then U-turn on it after release. It would be utterly suicidal.

Sat down to play for an hour or two at 10:30pm last night. Next thing I knew, got to a cut scene and noticed it was getting light out... 4:15am!

Totally engrossing game. Hard going emotionally, but brilliant stuff.

Trophies are... odd, though. Very unlike a Naughty Dog game, but understandable why.

For me personally, Sony strolled it, and it was topped off nicely with Jack's 2m 20s demolition of Microsoft. After all the crowing about how they were going to "kill Sony" at E3, they left just shy of being torn a new one themselves.

Granted, I have a dislike of Microsoft (have for a very long time, before Xbox), but it doesn't stop me buying their systems; I had an Xbox and I have a 360. And in truth I wasn't really bothered by the whole DRM issue, as I buy all my games new.

But I saw not one single exclusive game for the Xbox One which made me think "I must have that system." Anything that to me is worth playing, is also coming to the PS4 - and in many cases (Watch Dogs to name but one) we'll get the better version. The whole TV/Sports aspect is also completely irrelevant to me, and not a selling point at all.

I'm not in the least worried about Sony not having shown enough exclusives, because we all know that exclusives are the one thing that Sony is never, ever short of. They have more variety than even Nintendo in that area. And speaking of Nintendo, I didn't even bother watching their conference, as their games have never held any interest for me.

I certainly don't count Microsoft out, as they will throw endless money at people to convince the world it's worth having. It's one of the things they've always done best - release a so-so product and convince people they need it. But I do wonder if they may have bitten off more than they can chew this time. But I can't deny it was nice to see them pretty much humiliated. They may have released Adam Orth for his "#DealWithIt" outburst, but that certainly does seem to be the attitude running through the whole Xbox arm at the moment; their arrogance certainly exceeds Sony's "get a second job" quip for the PS3, especially with the 'rape joke' at E3 and the subsequent "No internet? Get a 360!" quote from Don Mattrick. I think some heads will roll at Xbox in the coming months, and I wouldn't be surprised if Mattrick was one of them.

Given the light bar on the controller, I can only see the camera being included. Why sell a controller with a light bar that needs a camera, then not include the camera? You're only giving the consumer half of something that - potentially - many games will make use of. It would be like selling the wheels separate from the car.

If they don't, they're going to have a split market again as they did with Move and PS Eye for PS3, with devs not supporting them in any form because not everyone has them. It was understandable with Move as it arrived late, but they shouldn't let the situation happen again when they have every chance to prevent it. Since every controller will have a light bar, every system must have the camera.

I don't think the camera would add much to the price anyway. The tech isn't overly advanced, it's a lot smaller than Kinect, and isn't motorised.

What I would like to see - for all consoles, not just PS4 - is a HDMI cable and second controller included in the box.

No accounting for taste.

Personally, I'm not interested in a glorified TV remote or any of the non-gaming features they're pushing for the One. If - IF - they prove to have some decent games further down the line that I can't get on PS4, I'll consider it. But the lack of use my original Xbox and my 360 have had mean that I won't be buying day one, and probably not for the first year or so.

No longer just a claim by a third party... Yoshida confirmed this on Twitter earlier today!

@get2sammyb Agree with you about the Xbox One - people are going to rush out and buy it anyway. I saw a story earlier today where Blockbuster are claiming that it's breaking all their previous pre-order records.

The other issue muddying the water as far as Sony are concerned is that they've already said in no uncertain terms that PS4 won't require an Internet connection; if they do have a system in the works, it can't possibly work in the same way as Microsoft's, so until they provide details it only raises more questions.

Either way, it won't affect me as far as purchasing games goes, as I've always bought new anyway. But it will affect me when it comes to selling games on. I actually agree with developers getting something from the used game market, and I figure the best way to do my bit is to sell my used games directly. So I don't trade in to Game etc. who never pass on any used game profits, I sell via Play or eBay, and that money always goes on new games - at least that way, the industry gets something out of it.

I buy all my games new, so on that side of it this won't affect me.

Where it will affect me is that I sell my used games, either through Play.com or eBay. I don't trade them in at retail because, frankly, their offers are usually insulting.

I have no problem at all with developers wanting a slice of the pre-owned pie; in fact, I'm in favour of it. But you've got to allow fair use - gamers must be able to take a physical game to a friend's house to play for no extra charge.

If Sony can implement such a scheme on PS4, they could win yet more favour from gamers.

Even if they follow Microsoft's scheme to the letter, it won't stop me buying a PS4. To be honest, the DRM issue wouldn't stop me buying an XBone either... I'm just not interested in it for several other reasons. 

Loved the first two games, with the possibly exception of hunting down the Blast Shards.

This is one of four games I have pre-ordered with my PS4 from ShopTo.

It's all good news, but I've never been particularly interested in these side-by-side comparison things that CVG and co. often use to generate hits.

Even on PS3 and 360, there's very little difference between games these days, and unless you have each system, two TVs, two heads, four arms and four eyes, you're not going to tell the difference between them anyway.

So far, everything is working in Sony's favour, but there are still ample chance for them to screw up.

The price must be good: personally, I had no issue with the £425 UK price as it was actually less than I was expecting when they came out with that line about getting a second job to pay for it. I'd say £349 as a maximum for PS4, considering the PS1 and PS2 were £299 at launch.

The whole used game thing: Microsoft have been blasted over this, and - to an extent - rightly so. Their whole reveal was a mess, and no-one seemed to know where they stand on it. Phil Harrison said the price would be as much as the full RRP, while Xbox Support were apparently denying that on Twitter, and other reps were saying something different again. There's nothing to say Sony won't follow a similar route, but if they do, they need to make sure that it's clearly defined when they announce it, and where possible, a cheaper and/or more flexible option than Microsoft offer.

PS4 Eye: There's a lot of fuss around the XBone requiring the new Kinect to function, and that it may scan the room for the number of people and charge extra for movie rentals, etc. Sony should steer clear of this kind of thing, and if at all possible, make the PS4 Eye entirely optional, even though it's being supplied with the machine. It should also not be the de-facto way of controlling the system - it's still far quicker to press a button than to gesture or even speak commands.

Unnnngh... Just Cause 3... the possibilities!

Easily and by far one of my favourite games on PS3, and in my personal opinion, one of the best of the current generation. So much fun, so much to do... it was repetitive, but never got boring. According to Raptr I have 138 hours clocked on it, and I'm still not at 100% completion. I have got all the trophies, though.

Just Cause 3 would be an instant buy for me.

I think signing games exclusively to the Nextbox is still a big gamble at this point. If they confirm the 'always online' rumour, there are a lot of people who aren't going to buy it no matter what.

About two or three years ago, I would have been gutted about EA doing anything exclusive, but these days... not so much. I didn't buy Dead Space 3, I haven't bought any NFS games this generation, I'm not interested in Madden, and the last FIFA I got was 12 - and that was only by virtue of the fact that it came free with my 360 when I bought it. I think Battlefield is about the only EA game I personally would miss at the moment, but I don't see that going fully exclusive.

@get2sammyb It will be if - IF - we get the PS4 this year.

And I forgot Tearaway in that list.

Even if the Xbox event tempts me (which is unlikely, but never say never) it will still have to wait until this lot are out of the way, no matter what exclusives they may have thrown money at.

Looking forward to this very much.

This, The Last Of Us, Beyond: Two Souls, Until Dawn, Rain, Puppeteer, GT6, PS4, Shadow Fall, Watch Dogs, Drive Club, Infamous Second Son... potentially an expensive 6-8 months ahead.

Microsoft will no doubt put on a massive spectacle. That's what they're good at. Where they've always fallen down is actually backing it up with anything relevant - for me, at least.

Some of it looks more charcoal grey than black, which would be a nice change and still fit in with other TV and audio equipment. Could just be the lighting, though.

Looks like it has a monster cooling fan, too.

I'm not a graphics lover, but even i enjoyed reading that.

But I still say I'd like to hear this kind of praise for PS4 from a dev who isn't owned by Sony, and so more or less obliged to say nice things. Ubi have said some nice things, but what about EA, Activision, etc? Or are they in Microsoft's pocket and 'encouraged' not to be seen praising the competition too highly?

Bought a 4GB card with it, and picked up a 32GB card a couple of weeks later.

Are they cheap? Not exactly. But they're a worthwhile purchase. You pay £30-£40 for a game, so £55 for a card which holds many games isn't that big a deal, at least to me. Sure, SD cards are cheaper, but this isn't an SD card. Cheaper cards would leave no option but a more expensive system; at least with the cards, you have a range of prices to choose from.

The transfer/backup software isn't that bad either. Could be quicker, but it's easy enough to use.

Not that great... they got the symbols in the wrong order at 11 seconds.

Triangle, Circle, Cross, Square... it's only been a trademark for 19 years or so.

Yeah, in his mind, maybe. I'm still as hyped for PS4 and indifferent to Nextbox as I ever was.

It's on my pre-order list with my PS4.

A lot of the footage seems to be similar to what's in the CVG video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBhrWdDtGmw

There must be a PR clip doing the rounds.

@LDXD But gaming is an expensive hobby, always has been. i don't know why people still seem surprised by prices.

Even at it's current price (which I still say is a bargain for what you're getting), the Vita is sold at a loss, so Sony need to make money somewhere, and that's obviously going to be on things like memory cards. The alternative is cheaper cards, but a $400 portable system - which would probably mean it sells worse than it already is.

Of course, nothing says you have to buy a 32GB card. I have one now, but I bought a 4GB card with my Vita; I upgraded not because it was necessary, but because I could afford it at the time - I got it a couple of weeks after the Vita launched, and it still has 20GB free, so it was a good investment and I won't be needing another any time soon.

If you buy 'full' games at retail (i.e. on cards) you won't need a lot of card space anyway, just enough for the saves; plus of course, the money you save buying retail rather than paying PSN prices for 'full' games would go towards a larger card. An 8GB or 16GB card will do if you plan to download the smaller PSN games, as you can always back them up to and restore them from your PC.

People always compare the price of the cards to SDcards etc., but I don't. The way I look at it is that if I'm willing to pay £40/$60 for a game, then £55/$80 for a card that will hold many games isn't that big a deal.

@charlesnarles "What happened to Vita to make it so fail?"

Cheap, fickle gamers, that's what.

Everyone was wowed by the price when it was announced, then decided it was too expensive when it released.

Jerks.

Fortunately, I've been steering clear of anything and everything TLOU related since last E3. No chat, no forums... haven't even watched ND's official trailers. I don't want to know anything more about the game until it's released and I discover it all for myself.

Why these morons want to insist on trying to spoil it for people is beyond me.

I won't even re-visit this article in case some pilchard posts something here.

@Slapshot "Why would/should anyone buy an expensive handheld console to take the exact same games you already own with you, when you can purchase a 3DS"

Perhaps, like me, because you don't actually rate Nintendo games.

Just more console-quality games would suit me - I don't care if they're cross-platform or not.

I'm sick of all the retro-themed indie stuff that keeps appearing, which could run on a 3DS, DS or even a GBA - I'm not interested in games like that at all. I'm looking forward to Killzone Mercenary at the moment.

It's true that there are cheap tablets (I have a Nexus 7 myself), but they're not competition for the Vita as far as any serious gamer is concerned; a few gems aside, the majority of the games on Android/iOS are utter rubbish.

In total, 5 minutes 10 seconds for me, from the moment I clicked 'Start' until the system was ready to use again. 1 minute 28 seconds to download, the rest taken up by the subsequent reboot/update/reboot.

I know because I made a video, (a) because I have some new editing software I needed to try out, and (b) I've seen people claim it takes anywhere from 30 minutes to a couple of hours, and when I've told them that it takes about 5 minutes they haven't believed me, so I wanted some proof.

@Gamer83 I'm glad you said that and not me!

This whole "cable box" thing is irrelevant to me, and I fact quite a turn-off. I already have a TV service which will always surpass anything a console can offer... as I'm sure do most people. It might be a selling point in the US, but outside there I'm not so sure.

So far, nothing I've heard about their system inspires me to buy one. They almost seem out of touch with what people want. I'm not sure it will even be a competitor to PS4 - it seems like they're aiming at a different audience now.

I've bought every PlayStation system day-one since the PS2. Never been disappointed yet!

I'm generally not worried about whether a particular game is exclusive, but the range, type and quality of exclusives available will influence my decision.

For now at least, I will always buy a PlayStation because of Sony's exclusive titles. I don't like/buy everything they produce, but they produce more that suits my tastes than anyone else. Even when owning more than one system, it's always been the PlayStation that gets by far the most use.

Neither my original Xbox nor my 360 have ever seen much use, so it's unlikely I'll bother with their next system for some time, if at all. Unless they pull some rabbit from the hat and announce a range of new IP that simply seems too good to miss, but that seems unlikely - probably another Halo/Forza/Gears and some paid-for 3rd-party limited time exclusivity. Their focus seems to be shifting away from games and into the family entertainment sector.

Nintendo have never done anything for me at all. I had the Gamecube for the exclusive Resi games and a couple of others, and that was about it. It's highly unlikely that I'll ever consider one of their systems again.

Meh. Nothing to get excited about there. I'll wait until there's something more tangible. Given recent Japanese "horror" output, I won't get my hopes up just yet.

I'd like more on the UI and features.

The games are going to look like PC games, that's a given; as for the content of those games, I know there'll be lots worth playing because it's an area where Sony and their first-party studios excel - it's why I'll always buy a PlayStation console regardless of what anyone else is doing.

I'm not particularly bothered about what the console looks like, as that's pretty irrelevant; it's what it does that counts. That said, Sony rarely produce ugly electronics, the only possible exception being the PS3 super-slim; even then it's not really 'ugly', just not up to the usual standards. But the super-slim is essentially a late-life budget version of the system - PS4 will be prime new electronics, so should be pretty sexy.

Regarding web browsers... of course, there's a chance that PS4 may not have one at all. Like CD playback, it's not something I'd miss, simply because they're awkward to use via a console interface.

That said, it's x86 based, so there's presumably no reason that Google couldn't release a Chrome app for it on their own, regardless of what Sony offer (or don't) on the browser front.

Doesn't bother me personally - I'll keep my PS3 for as long as I want to play PS3 games.

Even with b/c, I didn't play PS1 games on PS2 after the first couple of weeks and sold the lot on eBay; still don't play them now on PS3.

I bought and played exactly one PS2 game on my 60GB b/c capable PS3 and haven't touched one since.

This time it will be slightly different as I'm likely to want to keep and replay the Uncharted games; that and the fact that there are still quality PS3 games being released mean I will probably hold on to the PS3 for a while longer than usual.

Backwards compatibility is hit and miss anyway. It never works 100% and usually leads to complaints when obscure games don't work, or when it gets removed on later models to save on costs. People also want the machine to be as cheap as possible; the Cell is costly to produce and would drive up the cost of the system, while software emulation most likely isn't an option - going by the specs the PS4 is beast, but I doubt it has the grunt to emulate a fully utilised Cell smoothly.

The lack of b/c is a sacrifice I'm happy with, and it shouldn't do PS4 any harm at all. After all, the 360 wasn't compatible with the original Xbox, and it did their sales no harm whatsoever.

It sounds as if the whole system has been designed around input from developers, from the hardware to the development software. If there are any grumbles from devs, they'll have to point the finger at themselves. No "Sony should have..." excuses this time.

I don't have any problem with it. In something like Uncharted, my view is that Drake wouldn't necessarily be a killer, but he has no choice. If people are coming at you with guns, and you have a gun, you either shoot them or they shoot you. Killing out of necessity doesn't make you "a killer" - if you see what I mean.

What I'd like to see next gen is a more realistic mechanic to all the shooting. For example, rather than having to kill someone outright or they get up again, let us be able to shoot them in the leg or arm, then disarm and leave them as we move on - maybe just knocking them unconscious or something. Do away with the wave upon wave of fairly mindless enemies and have a few genuinely intelligent ones who use cover effectively and are a genuine challenge to overcome, but will go down if you hit them in the leg etc. Getting past someone like that would feel far more rewarding than cutting down a wave of 50 mindless bullet-sponges.

And you should always, always be able to pick up the weapons of your enemies. That was one area Uncharted gets right and where Tomb Raider really fell down for me. I kill a guy who has a gun, but I can't pick it up and use it - what?

@get2sammyb What he says certainly flies in the face of comments from other developers and everything we've heard so far. It should also be remembered that developers have said that Vita's tools are very good to use, so it would seem likely that PS4 would continue that trend.

Yes, previously with their custom chips and hardware, PlayStation development may have been more challenging. But let's not forget that PS4 is essentially a PC, so there should be no such issues. Epic have said it's great, as have others; then there's the dev-friendly Unity3D coming, as well as lots of other 3rd-party development tools and enhancements. It's not all about Sony's own software.

The more you actually think about it, the more it seems he's working with some very out of date information. Still, when you look at what some devs did with those "lame" PS3 tools, imagine what they'll do with some half-decent ones!

Obviously completely oblivious to the fact that developers are the ones shaping both the hardware and the development software. If developers have any complaints about the PS4, they'll have only themselves to blame.

Even the creators of the 3rd-party tools are saying how easy it is to get stuff done. Seems he's not keeping up to date.

Surprise you only just picked up on this, as I saw it a few weeks back.

I still buy CDs, as prefer to have physical copies as a backup. But I have a hi-fi to play them on. I've never used a console to play them, so this doesn't bother me at all.

Well, it will in the cut-scenes. Different story when a full game is running and less polys can be pushed. Tech demos always outperform actual games.

Still, it will look stunning.

Graphically fantastic. I just hope they have the game to back it up.

I'd be a little disappointed, but it wouldn't surprise me. I thoroughly enjoyed Sleeping Dogs, but even for a single-player game it had virtually zero replay value.