Jack Tretton: "PlayStation 3 Is Just Hitting Its Stride"

With the Wii U on the way, some speculated that it may only be a matter of time before Microsoft and Sony unveiled their own new consoles. Well, according to Jack Trettor, President of SCEA, we won't be seeing a next generation PlayStation for "quite some time."

Speaking to Forbes, Tretton insisted that after an initial struggle, the PS3 was starting to gain momentum.

"PlayStation 3 is really just hitting its stride," he claimed. "And technologically, I don’t think it’s possible to provide any advancement beyond what we have. What we’ve seen from the competition is trying to add features that already exist in PlayStation 3. We invested heavily in that, we rolled a very heavy rock up a steep hill, through the launch period. But now I think that all pays off, and we’ve got a long run way behind it. So, I wouldn’t look for any discussion of a next generation PlayStation for quite some time."

When it came to the competition -particularly with regards to the Wii U, Tretton's attitude was blase - almost John McLane-esque.

"I think there’s ground to be carved out for everybody," began Tretton. "But I didn’t see anything about Nintendo’s announcement that said ‘Oh, we’d better get working on rolling out a new PlayStation here pretty soon.’

"Our attitude is kind of ‘welcome to the party.’ If you’re looking at being a multimedia entertainment device, if you’re looking at high def gaming, that was 2006 for us."

Worth noting - Jack Tretton has a mean poker face.

PlayStation Chief Jack Tretton: How To Sell Vita, Navigate Clouds, And Debut The PS4 [Forbes]


    “Our attitude is kind of ‘welcome to the party.’ If you’re looking at being a multimedia entertainment device, if you’re looking at high def gaming, that was 2006 for us.”

    SNAP. :)
    Also, Wii U won't play DVDs, I understand...

    “Our attitude is kind of ‘welcome to the party.’ If you’re looking at being a multimedia entertainment device, if you’re looking at high def gaming, that was 2006 for us.”

    Brave response.

    Tretton: "That's what this is about? A controller that looks like an iPad? Why'd ya have to nuke the whole industry Reggie?"

    Reggie: "When you make 600 billion, they will copy you unless they think you're already tripping balls. Oh yes, what was it you said to me before: Yippee-kayay muddafugga."

    Tretton: "Hahahahaha!"

    Reggie: "Hahahahahaha!"

    Dude who looks like Huey Lewis: "Hahahahahaha!"

    Tretton: "Hahahahahaha-KAZ!"


    Tretton: "Happy trails Reggie".

    Personally i'd prefer it if this generation lasts as long as possible.

      If only that was possible, mate.

      i'm not going to buy a new console for a long time. i don't see the point, awesome games are still being made. i don't have any incentive to buy something so unnecessary as a new game console...

    So, what I think we can all take away from this, is PlayStation is stuck in 2006... what?

    I have a lot of respect for Jack Tretton. He seems like the kind of mate who would help you move house and ask for nothing in return.

    He just seems like an all round good guy when it comes to being a CEO. That's hard to come by in this industry now days.

    Yes I am looking at you Bobby Kotick. Stop milking the Call of Duty franchise and actually do something worthwhile for gaming instead of making a quick, undeserved buck.

      Really? Jack Tretton sounds like a jerk to me. He always comes off as incredibly arrogant and hypocritical, and always tries to insult his competitors.

      Remember when he called the Wii remote a lollipop? Then had to announce the Move? Hell just recently he called the 3DS a babysitting tool.

        In other words he has little man syndrome :P

    What we need is another Crysis game. A game which pushes the boundaries of graphics and makes the developers go "Oh shit! I want to do that. Give me new technology!"

    What step up is there for a new generation of core consoles?

    We're at HD, the PS3 has 3D, there's nothing new that will actually be available to the mass market, aside from implementing new user interfaces (kinect, wii-u controller, move)

      Or before that, the wiimote...
      Seriously, until there's another jump in television resolution, home consoles have reached their graphical limit, save for how much they can render at the same time.
      Gameplay IS the next step, if you're a graphics whore, get a PC, then you only have to upgrade your graphics card or monitor occasionally, not your whole home theatre.

        "Seriously, until there’s another jump in television resolution, home consoles have reached their graphical limit"

        Thats a bit off there dude. The current retail standard for a TV is 1080p (1920x1080), most games bar the extremely rare exception (GT5, Wipeout HD) are rendered at 720p (1280x720) and up scaled to 1080p, it's a similar process to blowing up a photo 50% to make it bigger. As such there's still plenty of room to go on the existing standard. Personally I'd be pretty stoked if the consoles made the leap to native 1080p with 60 frames soon.


          I'll believe it when Sony release a AAA title at 1080p, running at 60fps.

          Agreed, we aren't at 60Hz FullHD gaming yet, and forget about doing it in 3D as well.

          A quick look at current PC graphics shows there's still plenty of room for improvement on consoles; not just more resolution, but more polygons, more tessellation, more particles, more detailed textures, more anti-aliasing, more complex shaders, more realistic lighting, more volumetrics, more realistic surfaces etc.

          Then there's all the improvements that more RAM and CPU can bring to the table - better physics, better AI, longer draw distances, larger worlds, more detailed scenes, less-frequent loadpoints... the list is near-endless.

    We need a new NEXT gen, purely so us PC gamers can have semi good games again, its sad but true that the current PC game market is being driven by bottle-necked consoles, with outdated hardware.

      I think escalating development costs are also a factor. Games look pretty darn good, even on consoles, at the moment - though this comes with a huge price tag that makes developing a game fiscally analogous to producing a B+ grade movie.

      My prediction for next gen: first three years of next gen will be nothing but the very very biggest developers releasing clone after clone of their existing tired IPs.

      I really hate the point you're trying to make.

      If it's just graphics that are being held back... that's one thing.
      But if you're suggesting that games that are raddicaly different in terms of gameplay, mechanisms, or pure content... are not being developed because of consoles, then that is pretty damn incredible.
      Consoles controllers have 12 buttons (that doesn't include the shoulder buttons, which would bring the number to 14) if you use the shoulder buttons as modifiers that brings the number up to 36 (not including using the thumbsticks for directional selection). Add in newly added motion and voice control options and the numbers increase exponentialy.
      Anyone who suggests that games have to be simplified for consoles is an ignoramous.

      I think the proliforation of consoles is one of the best things to happen to games in years... it's expanded the market, and created an ecosystem where developers have solid benchmarks to develop against.

        Sorry but if you think PC games have not be dumbed down due to consoles you are yourself an "ignoramus"...

        Go play Dungeon siege 3, Dragon age, play CODMW2 or even black ops, play NFS Shift... All horrible games with heaps of potential limited by the fact that they are console games trapped on current GEN hardware.

        lets forget the pure better performance/graphics and superior controls. (don't even try arguing against this cos its futile and you will just look stupid)

        If you had made Dragon Age for PC the control scheme would have been 100% better than it was, Dungeon siege 3 wouldn't have to have limited itself to a handful of skills (anyone remember dungeon siege 1 or 2 how much better were they, and guess what they were pure PC games).

        And as for voice control and motion controllers... WTF kind of drugs are you on... how has either of those things improved game-play for any game except maybe the SOCOM games?

        Sure don't get me wrong i have a Wii and i even had a PS3 with move, for like 2 days before i sold it for being a total waste of money, and ooo the kinect.... yeah sure..

        Consoles have a place in today's market im not arguing that, but to say that the PC gaming world hasn't been restricted in the most extreme way is just plain stupid, any one with an open mind and a shred of intelligence can see this.

        hate the point all you like, its a valid and accurate point..


          DNR is right guys. I'm a console gamer but you can't deny the points he makes.

          My sentiments exactly. I was stoked with how good Dragon Age 1 was, and barfed at how 'consofiled' dragon age 2 was.

          I don't want to belive that console gamers are 'dumber' than PC gamers, but the current trends that have emerged lead me to belive it is so.

          Here's a steak, have a feed.

          I think the problem with the games you've mentioned is that they are just bad games, consoles have nothing to do with it. Combine badly designed gameplay with a terrible plot, and no love for what you're doing, and you will create a bad game.

          Look at Portal 2, it had one concession made to consoles, and that was the frequent loading screens, would you say that that is a limiting factor in terms of its gameplay? How about its story telling?

          Go play Flower, or look at From Dust, are either of those "crippled" because they're on consoles?

          Deus Ex stands as one of the most creative games of all times, and it could run on a Playstation 2. It was in no way ruined by technology of the time.

          If you feel like having a reasonable discussion about the strengths of different systems, then by all means, feel free to respond in a reasonable manner, but otherwise, live with the fact that Mass Effect 2 and The Witcher 2 were both consolified (yes, even though the latter has not been released on consoles yet), and were considerably better than the first, whereas Dragon Age 2 was just a rushed game.

            @steven Bogos: i didn't mean console players were dumber, what i meant is that as consoles themselves don't have the hardware or adaptability that PC's do, it limits the games potential (i.e. dumbs it down).

            @Blaghman: there is always going to be exceptions for the rule mate, portal was an excellent crafted game, but it was built on a PC using an engine designed for the PC and released on the PC.

            Then yes sure valve realized that they could also port their engine to console, i haven't played the console version of P2 or TF2 but if its half as good then that just proves my point even more.

            If developers make the games for PC they can then scale them down to fit a console, instead of creating something on inferior hardware and then trying to make it upscale with bug fixes and programming shortcuts.

            yeah sure Dues Ex could run on a PS2, and the witcher 2 will be on console eventually BUT it was built for PC hence why they was so good.

            I haven't played Flower, and as far as i know 'from dust' isn't released yet?

            I cant argue if MASS EFFECT 2 was a good game or not, i wasn't a fan of the first and it left a bad taste in my mouth.

            But ultimately it all comes down to a $ figure, unfortunately for classic gamers like myself there is more money in mass produced console games, and PC games are becoming an after thought for developers.

          "Sorry but if you think PC games have not be dumbed down due to consoles you are yourself an “ignoramus”"

          No, games are dummed down because of the intended audience. Hardware is not a factor.

          If a game is designed and planned will it will work irrespective of it being on a PC, 360 or even an Atari 2600.

          "to say that the PC gaming world hasn’t been restricted in the most extreme way is just plain stupid, any one with an open mind and a shred of intelligence can see this."

          No, developers have the final call and if they are not willing to find ways around the hardware limitations that is their problem. Consoles are not inhibiting PCs whatsoever and gaming is all about the games - not the platform.

          "hate the point all you like, its a valid and accurate point."

          Depends on your definition of accurate. While I am aware that everyone is entitled to their own opinion calling anyone who differs form your own as unintelligent and stupid is by no means accurate.

          And for those wondering and are waiting to brand me a fanboy to a specific console, I will say now that I have a PC (Quad Core 2, 8 GB RAM, GTX 450) and all three current generation consoles.

          Why? Because I play for the games and refuse to be limited by exclusives.

          I also do this so that I do not get caught out by bad ports (the PS3 often being the target for them in the past).

        Any posts beyond this line are feeding a troll


          You know, I don't actually think he was trolling. He had a different opinion and was willing to back it up. The whole back and forth discussion was actually interesting reading with both sides having somewhat valid points.

      What? You mean there are PS3s sitting at computers writing software that works for them?

      There are Xbox 360 running the artists so that only colour and styles only fit in their memory?

      There are Wiis in the design room ensuring that the levels only work for their capabilities?

      Give it up - the real bottle neck is with the developers that wish to push out games as fast as they can and at minimal cost.

      The platform is irrelevant - it is the game that matters. If a game stinks on a 360, it is going to stink on a PC, PS3, and even the Atari 2600.

    Nice response, and I thought his apology at E3 came accross as very sincere... whilst I'm sure it was scripted, it certainly didn't seem like it.

    2 things though Mark,
    1. "Well, according to Jack Trettor..."
    2. That's a picture of Tom Arnold

    As far as I'm concerned the WiiU will just be playing catchup to the other consoles.

    The true next generation of consoles might be able to add more polygons, fps and more detail happening on the screen at once but in the end you'll probably still be looking at the back of some guy's head or down a gun barrel so just how different will it be to current games?

    PS3 and 360 still have some years left in them, I'm in no rush to replace them.


      Back in 1997, they thought this was the best that games could possibly be.

      Think about that when you next say 'some extra polygons or pixels won't make a difference'

    Why on earth would Sony or Microsoft panic?

    Nintendo revealed a gimped console that won't even allow 2 people to play at the same time using the new controllers. ROFLMAO!

    That and they will not have any more 3rd party support this gen: No Activision, No Capcom, No Konami...

    Seems like launching a year or so before the big boys is a desperate move that will only end in tears for the fanboys.

    Wii U? -more like LAMECAST! :p

    We don't need new consoles yet. Hell, I'd say most of us don't want new consoles yet. The PS3 and even the 360 still have some horsepower left in them and neither have the take-up that the PS2 had.

    In this case I'd say Nintendo's playing the Dreamcast card early. As great as the Dreamcast was (and I still rank it as one of my three favourite consoles of all time) it tried to do the next-gen early but didn't quite manage it in a few places.

    In terms of raw power it doesn't seem like the Wii U is offering enough of a leap over the existing consoles with it's only new feature being the touchscreen pad - which admittedly is a great feature. I guess it really is like the Wii again - which offered nothing new over the PS2/GC/XB aside from the control scheme.

      This is incorrect. Epic have stated that Gears of War 3 is 'The best an xbox game can possible look.'

      To further confirm this, you needn't look further than the BF3 PS3 footage, which while still impressive, is clearly inferior to what they are doing on the PC.

      Current gen consoles hit their peak a couple years ago, when PC games started to look better. Now, PC games are starting to look a LOT better, and games like BF3 are showing us this.

      Personally, I hope they keep trying to ride their failed console as long as they can, maybe then more developers like DICE will switch focus back to the king of gaming - the PC!

    Why is Sony always ridiculously arrogant when they talk to press?

      Take it for what you will, I didn't find anything he said too far-fetched.

      Mate, at the end of the day, they are an organisation that exists to make money for shareholders.

      They have to talk up their situation.

      What do you think would happen if they simply spoke the truth?

      What large corporation in direct competition with other large corporations *doesn't* always sound ridiculously arrogant when they talk to the press? :-P

    This entire article is rife for shenanigans. This is like entering a landmine of posts.

    This is great news for the Wii U if true, it means that the PS3 will be around for another few years, then porting to the WiiU is a given. If there was a new PS3 and 360 then the Wii-U may have been too far behind again and had trouble attracting releases.

    The ps3 is just hitting it's stride right now because it was way behind right from the start. IT doesn't necessarily show how great the system is, but more that they don't know what to do next since graphics are kinda capped and they can't innovate anything.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now