Sony’s Shuhei Yoshida Explains PS4 Production is Going Smoothly, Still Can’t Make Predictions on Possible Shortages

There have been conflicting articles around the net about possible shortages of the PS4 at launch, but how does the situation look from inside? SCE Worldwide Studios President Shuhei Yoshida seems cautiously optimistic, but still won’t make predictions on possible shortages, as he expressed during an interview on 4Gamer.

The interviewer asked: When the PS3 was launched there were problems because the first shipments were insufficient. Can we assume that such a thing won’t happen with the PS4 and that it’ll be shipped in large quantities?

Yoshida-san’s response was as follows:

That’s right. Partly because we have so many preorders in the west, we still can’t predict if we’ll be able to ship the hardware without any interruption, but production is going smoothly.

He also specified that in Japan Sony has a little more time, so there should be abundant supply of the hardware there.

Will Sony manage to satisfy the demand for the console fully? We’ll have to wait and see about that, but at least we know that production is proceeding without hiccups. The situation should be quite different from what happened with the PS3, and that would be a large improvement already.

Join the Discussion

  • foureyes oni

    i really hope there are no shortages, since i didn’t preorder lol.

  • quinten488

    glad I preordered right after the e3 conference

    • theodor70941

      I don’t think it really matters when you made the pre-order was made, it’s probably gonna be whose first at the store

      • quinten488

        Amazon dude

        • theodor70941

          You know… Amazon isn’t in every country!

    • Thomas

      Just make sure you’re at the store at midnight, ready to fight.

      • quinten488

        Amazon dude.

        • lance

          Make sure you’re in the Amazon, ready to fight.

  • Axe99

    I think it’s been made pretty clear that there’ll probably be shortages initially, which is hardly surprising given the demand (which is huge – more than I can recall for a console to-date). The thing to remember is that the PS4 (and XB1) will be great consoles for the next 5-8 years – whether we get one in November 2013 or January 2014, it’ll still be a blast :).

    • Bobby Joe

      How will they be great consoles for years? The current graphics card in my 2 year old gaming PC is equivalent to what’s being put in the current Xbox One and PS4 Consoles. They’re already outdated…

      • Axe99

        Sure, if you’re tied into the ADHD rut where it’s only good if it’s better than the last thing, then they’ll age quicker, but that’s a sign you may have been listening to a little too much advertising ;). A great game is a great game is a great game. Hell, I’ve got a PC with similar specs to yours, it smokes my PS3, but The Last of Us is comfortably the best ‘story’-style game I’ve ever played, by some margin. I have no doubt that in five or so years time, I’ll have an even better PC card again, but that some of the best games I’ll be playing will be on the PS4 and XB1 (deffo PS4, XB1 depends a bit on how long MS remain interested in it from a developing AAA games perspective, as they lost interest in the 360 after a few years).

        Another thing to keep in mind is that devs are saying costs for developing AAA games are starting to get close to an unsustainable level. I’d be very surprised if, going forward, the limiting factor on games development wasn’t the client-level hardware, but rather the cost of making games _for_ certain levels of hardware. It’s quite clear that the development industry isn’t ready to move into a Titan/7990-fuelled era just yet, even if enthusiast PC gamers are keen for it too. What I mean by this isn’t that you won’t get an advantage from having a kick-arse rig, but the advantage will be in texture detail and frame rates, rather than fundamental gameplay factors such as AI, world simulation and animation. These will remain, by and large, locked to things that will run on console, because it won’t be financially viable to make something deeper for the gaming PCs that exceed console spec.

        • Bobby Joe

          You have no idea what you are talking about. I’m sorry.

          • Axe99

            Sorry for what? For providing no response other than suggesting I didn’t know what I was on about, even though I’d provided plenty of examples borne out through actual experience ;). You could have, for example, provided the numerous examples of AAA PC-only games that had been produced outside of the console ecosystem in recent years – except there have been only 3-5, in very PC-focussed genres (Starcraft 2, SW:ToR and GW2 come to mind, not much else) ;). You are, of course, conveniently neglecting that the great games that have been cropping up on PC aren’t particularly hardware-dependent (you hardly need a GTX 780 to play Don’t Starve ;)). There’s nothing wrong with PC gaming at all – it’s awesome, I do a tonne of it – but the money in AAA games – the games that take full advantage of advanced PC hardware – is in console, and suggesting otherwise is head-in-the-sand stuff.

          • Bobby Joe

            “Sorry for what?”

            –> I’m sorry that you’re so ignorant. That’s what I’m sorry for. I didn’t bother listing examples because when I was a kid my mother taught me that arguing with crazy people makes you crazy yourself, but heck why not entertain you…maybe you CAN see reason.

            “Sure, if you’re tied into the ADHD rut where it’s only good if it’s better than the last thing, then they’ll age quicker”

            –> I’ve had a 1080p television close to since the Xbox 360 came out. The Xbox 360 was not capable of playing games in the native 1080p resolution of my television (Which I know…you’ve already stated that you don’t care about graphics, so why aren’t you still playing an n64??). I still have that same 1080p television and the XB1 and PS4 STILL cannot output all games in the native resolution of my TV, in fact, I’m going to have to wait for the next gen of consoles to come out to do this (e.g. PS5). My PC can do this, and in fact, with a 2nd graphics card, will be able to support 4K televisions when they become more popular in the next couple of years. Something this gen of consoles will never be able to do. If not wanting to wait 15 years to use the full resolution of a TV I bought 8 years ago is having ADHD, you have a pretty interesting take on the word “patience.”

            ” You could have, for example, provided the numerous examples of AAA PC-only games that had been produced outside of the console ecosystem in recent years – except there have been only 3-5, in very PC-focussed genres (Starcraft 2, SW:ToR and GW2 come to mind, not much else)”

            –> I’ve noticed you have this bizarre obsession with triple AAA games as if they’re the smoking gun in your argument. This argument of yours is reliant on the fallacy that console sales far outstrip that of PC and that consoles is where all the $$$ in the industry is at. The above statement you have made is untrue and invalid. I’ll give supporting evidence below.

            “You are, of course, conveniently neglecting that the great games that have been cropping up on PC aren’t particularly hardware-dependent”

            –> Just a reality check, you don’t need the hyper realistic graphics of a “AAA game” to push hardware. I can stress out my “advanced PC hardware” (which is amusing that you’re labelling it as such, the same parts are in consoles too) and bring my computer to it’s knees on non-AAA games with terrible graphics, such as Kerbal Space Program, if I want to. Look at DayZ or Arma for example, the amount of objects and increased view distance in the immense worlds are all that is needed to stress a set-up. You even listed Starcraft 2?? Heck, with a gtx 770 and thousands of units in a map, that game will even take my FPS down a bit. Imagine how bogged down and unplayable an xb1 or ps4 would get in a similar situation with way less processing power? I don’t know where you’re going with this argument, because it’s completely incorrect. Not all of the great games cropping up on PC are hardware dependent, BUT some are. This statement is incorrect, plain and simple.

            “but the money in AAA games – the games that take full advantage of advanced PC hardware – is in console”

            As mentioned before, you are under the impression that a majority of the money in the game industry is generated from console titles and that is where the market is at. In fact, this seems to be the main argument of your whole previous reply. Since you’re incapable of using a google search, I should let you know that PC game sales have officially surpassed that of consoles in 2014 and this difference is expected to grow in 2015. Let me help you out:



            The real kicker for me, is that when defending console vs PC, you brought up the stupidest, most untrue, completely wrong, and ignorant facts possible, instead of the ACTUAL advantages of a console over a PC. Which is why I pretty much went right out and called you an idiot. You didn’t even try to bring up the REAL advantages of a console vs PC. Ease of use, accessibility, cost, ability to play with more friends, and countless more strengths. Heck, it’s a lot easier to sit down at my couch with a controller in my hand and just have to press one button to fire my game up then sit at my PC in a computer chair, click a shit load of stuff, and make sure I have all the latest driver updates for my different pieces of hardware and software. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, I’ll acknowledge that, just the ones you listed are way off base.

          • Axe99

            Way to change the argument to keep your points relevant ;). I was never talking a broad PC vs console debate – I was arguing against your assertion that these consoles wouldn’t last 5-8 years – hence the reliance on AAA/hardware-heavy games, because clearly the consoles won’t have any trouble competing with the likes of Don’t Starve (excellent game, but hardly hardware-breaking) and FTL (another excellent game that’s easy on your system). You’re dead right on the broader PC vs console point, and they’re very similar to the points I’d have made if we were having that discussion, but we weren’t actually having that discussion until you changerd tack ;). As an aside, given the advantages for console you list, does not that mean they will remain great gaming machines for 5-8 yeas? ;).

            As for your other points:
            – The _only_ link showing actual game sales in dollars for PC vs console was the Nvidia chart, and PC doesn’t pass console until you hit their projections (2014, which hasn’t finished, and 2015). Yes, in the future, people predict PC gaming to pass console, but it hasn’t yet, even based on Nvidia’s (a company with a vested interest in spinning the data in PC’s favour) numbers. Come back to me when you’ve got actual like vs like data, rather than a party with a vested interests projections.

            – A lot of PC revenue (like a lot of mobile revenue) is in things like Farmville. Take that out of the picture, and the type of gaming on PC that is ‘core’-style gaming shrinks again. Again, something that people trying to spin the figures generally don’t mention, as they’ve got a vested interest, either in a platform or click-bait. As we’re talking about hardware-intensive games, as opposed to the likes of World of Tanks or DOTA, then it’s pretty hard to argue that consoles are still where the big revenue $$$ are.

            – I’m not saying PC isn’t growing or improving. Give it a few years, and we’ll be back to the glory days of the 90s, where many games, including shooters and platformers were developed on PC first and ported to console. We’ll see more AAA titles launch first on PC.

            – I agree you don’t need hyper-realistic graphics to push hardware (my main genres is strategy games – I can push my i7 with EU4 late in the game, and while it’s pretty for a strategy game, pushing visual boundaries isn’t what strat games generally do), but it _is_ the case that games that push hardware through cutting-edge graphics are more expensive to make and hence not popping up as PC exclusives. PDS makes its strategy titles with teams of 20-odd, because the hardware-intensive work is looping algorithm’s rather than incredibly detailed visuals, and requires much less manpower to do. On the other hand, all the high-res artwork for titles like Assassin’s Creed, or Call of Duty, can take 50-100 artists alone. In the context of this argument, I’m talking about cost of production more than cost to hardware (although they’re linked). As a lone developer, I could put together code that’d lock up a GTX Titan – that doesn’t make it expensive. That comes from the artwork, assets and higher-fidelity animation and physics (something your examples, other than Starcraft 2, lack).

            Things will improve for PC (and it’s already a great platform right now), but at the end of the day, the proof of the pudding is in the market. How many AAA, cost-heavy games launch on console alone, compared with PC? Those numbers tell you where the money is, simply because developers need to be paid too ;). Because high-end games need console to pay the bills, the consoles will continue to get the high-end games (and will be able to cope with the low-end games as well), and so will remain great games machines to 5-8 years. That’s the logic of my argument, and a logic that you haven’t actually refuted (indeed, you’ve added another thread that supports it).

  • Total Wafflez

    I pre ordered my PS4 in June mine is guaranteed

  • jdp12

    Glad I pre-ordered mine on the 21st of February!

    • Day One

      same here

  • TristanPR77

    So glad I pre ordered after E3. Just 53 days more to November 15. Do you guys knows already what is the first thing you will do when you got your PS4?
    First, I will navigate all the interface , explore all the settings and options s, setup the camera, setup my Vita and them I will star playing games.