PS4 bundle with PS Eye camera and Knack leaked – report

Thursday, 27th June 2013 09:28 GMT By Dave Cook

PS4 may not come bundled with a PlayStation Eye camera, but a bundle image showing the device and Knack together with Sony’s console has appeared online, suggesting that a higher price-point release is on the cards, or has been scrapped. Either way, we’ve got the image here.

Why might the above bundle be scrapped you ask? Well, according to this report, Sony decided against bundling the PlayStation Eye camera with PS4 units to shave $100 off the asking price, and to undercut Xbox One at market.

The above image – said to have been pulled from Sony’s own asset servers – could be of the $499 bundle before Sony’s decision was made final.

NeoGAF has also compared the above image to the final bundle art:

What do you make of the above? Could the Knack bundle be announced soon, or has it been scrapped to make the cost of entry cheaper? Let us know below.

Thanks DualShockers.



  1. Bam007

    Of course they did. They removed the PS Eye Camera to lower the cost at launch, which somehow has been met with thunderous applause since E3. Funny how people forget that Sony launched the PS3 at over $700, but hey, $499 is too expensive when it isn’t your console of choice!

    #1 2 years ago
  2. No_PUDding

    I’m guessing not really, because a ton of the marketing materials had PS4 photos with the Eye.

    I understand it’s a bundle set, but it’ll probably just be another alternative.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. Djoenz

    Why dont they include a freaking hdmi cable? ?
    Yeah probably another alternative with yet another one which includes a psVita.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. jmg24bad

    #3 the ps4 comes with a hdmi cable….

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Sang2

    #3 are you blind?, the HDMI cable is displayed in both images.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. Rosseu

    They should have just kept it at $499 and placed 1 PS Eye with every PS4 unit. Since it’s optional again this gen, only a few devs would be willing to integrate it the same as PS3.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. Djoenz

    My bad it looked like a scart cable lol.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. orakaa

    @6 : yeah… because games with a camera are sooo interesting… Seriously, both on Kinect and/or PSEye only (Move doesn’t count), I fail to see a real good game using those functions properly. Star Wars Kinect? Fable the journey? Eyepet ?
    Seriously, apart from dance games and a few gimmicks, there is no real interesting use in camera, gaming wise.

    I’m neither interested in the PS Eye nor Kinect, and I prefer to have the choice to pay $100 less.

    @1 : if you followed, you’d have seen that one of the reason why Microsoft got so many PS2 owners buying a 360 was because of PS3′s price. It didn’t sell that well (when it was at $599), until they lowered their price. So yeah, expensive price was a problem back then for Sony, and it is one for Microsoft as well today.

    #8 1 year ago
  9. MFBB

    I am glad they did not include the camera.

    I dont want Kinect and I dont want the eye camera.

    Not gonne use either of them at all and games for those 2 are casual style or family/kids orientated (not gonne shout some Mass Effect voice command either).

    If I end up buying a Playstation 4 at least I dont have to pay for something I dont want and If I somehow want it later I can buy it for 59Euro.

    #9 1 year ago
  10. tezzer1985

    If you look at the price of the camera alone, if you were to buy it with a PS4, it’s still cheaper then a Xbox one. The PS Camera cost less then a PS4 Pad, at least in the UK

    #10 1 year ago
  11. fihar

    There’s Dance Central, Child of Eden and Kinect Sports/Sports Champion
    It’s not the hardware’s fault when developers keep churning out cheap cash-in titles.

    Although, I personally can’t see the use of motion control other than sports games to be honest.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. orakaa

    @11: Microsoft put MASSIVE amounts of money to develop Kinect games (I am talking about Microsoft because on Sony’s side, they haven’t really put a lot of efforts into Move games).

    The results/conclusion are that motion gaming with a camera only is tiring and not precise. Even with improved sensors on Kinect 2/New PS Eye, you don’t have any feedback (button, stick, whatever) so YOU can’t be precise, even if the camera is supposed to be.
    Even the “serious games” pushed by Microsoft through exclusivity deals were absolutely terrible and awfully limited. Again, have you seen Fable the journey, Harry Potter, Dragon Ball Kinect, Star Wars Kinect?

    Child of eden is a good game but motion gaming wasn’t a real benefit and the game was more comfortable to use on longer sessions with a controller.
    And as I said above, dance games (like Dance central, Just Dance) are the only games where motion gaming make sense and actually work.

    #12 1 year ago
  13. TrickyAudio

    I’m also glad they did this.

    I have seen some cool stuff with the Eye though at E3, but I’m not sure I’d need the camera straight away.

    Still think they should of offered a ‘Super’ PlayStation bundle with PS4 +PS Vita and PS+ thrown in. Drum some interest back into Vita and remote play.

    #13 1 year ago
  14. Belmont

    I’m really happy that I am not forced to pay for a device that I can only play dance and fitness games with !
    But of course Sony can release a bundle including that, now the barrier of entry is lower and more accessible but the device is there for those who enjoy it.

    #14 1 year ago
  15. VibraniumSpork

    RE: Console Cameras, I’m really only interested in the opportunity they offer for voice commands in games – used in the right context it’s a natural fit, Mass Effect 3 w/Kinect being the most obvious proponent. I don’t want to faff about with military hand signals to send my squad wherever, but shouting “Move up!”? Yeah, that’s pretty cool.

    As there’s a mic with every console though, can’t this kinda thing just be implemented that way instead? Unless it’s the case that Kinect 2.0 and PsEye have some onboard processing that’s integral to such a feature…answers please, techies ^_^

    #15 1 year ago
  16. ps3fanboy

    it’s not scrapped, it’s one of them bundles they are gonna offer at launch. you see sony like to give people a choice. while microsofts don’t.

    #16 1 year ago
  17. Stardog

    I wouldn’t have paid more than £350 for any next-gen console, so they’re lucky they removed the crappy camera.

    There isn’t one motion game worth owning, and there never will be.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. Rosseu

    #8 because the hardware was optional this gen. Forcing it with every console can get it a lot support. There’s a good chance we’ll get decent games with it.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. orakaa

    @18: You’re missing my point. Microsoft has put a lot of efforts and some of their internal teams to make “appealing” Kinect games.
    They’ve put RARE, Lionhead studios, etc.

    Optional peripherals or not only matter for third party developers as they’re unlikely to invest in that technology/peripheral if it’s not there from the start. But first party developers from Microsoft tried to push the peripheral’s use and showcase what could be done with it… and it’s (way) too limited. If First party can’t even make proper use of it, do you think third party will? Like on Wii or WiiU perhaps? With a camera you can’t properly move in a game, nor make specific, precise actions. It’s a gimmick.

    I hear people talking about voice command: do you REALLY need a $100 camera for voice command? Can’t just a mic/headset be enough for that? Besides I have a 5 year old daughter, and I only play when both her and my wife are sleeping. I don’t want to have to yell at the camera, next to the TV to be heard. If I use voice command I want to be able to do it from my couch, without shouting (a microphone/headset would be better).

    #19 1 year ago
  20. wildBoar

    Honestly that IGN article was utter bullshit.
    Giving the consumer a choice is never a bad thing. Those people who don’t want to buy a fucking Kinect to play their Xbox don’t want to buy fucking kinect games either.
    Those who want it, will get it, you can’t create a market through force.
    And you can buy the PS eye and it’s still cheaper than the X1..

    #20 1 year ago
  21. OlderGamer

    Does this mean that Knack will be motion control oriented?

    #21 1 year ago
  22. ashishkashyap25

    #22 1 year ago
  23. laughing-gravy

    This is ridiculous. How on earth can a camera that costs $59 at retail add $100 to the cost of a console?

    #23 1 year ago
  24. DrDamn

    They would be trying to hit particular key price points $399/$499/$599 etc. If they were going to launch at $499 but had the option already to maybe hit $449 then by removing the camera they could hit $399.

    #24 1 year ago
  25. laughing-gravy

    No it doesn’t work like that. Charge someone $100 for a camera that separately costs $59? That’s just stupid. Or is it wishful thinking on behalf of xbox fanboys?

    #25 1 year ago
  26. DrDamn

    They would have looked at the price points and sales projections at those price points. If they can balance out the extra cash they expect to get from every extra customer with the loss they take at the lower price point then it’s a good move. Without removing the camera the lower $399 price point may not have worked, by removing the camera it works.

    #26 1 year ago
  27. freedoms_stain

    @25, If it’s Camera + Knack that makes more sense.

    #27 1 year ago
  28. DrDamn

    No not as far as I am aware. This is just an image of a possible bundle that was or may yet still be.

    #28 1 year ago
  29. laughing-gravy

    @27 Because of a picture that appeared on neogaf? Basically this is MSofts end game. They are beaten on specs, price, and first party support. So they’re trying to justify the cost of a camera that no-one wants. It’s pathetic.

    #29 1 year ago
  30. Maabren

    Of cause PS4 will bundle with other content like PS4Eye and games. Rest are wishful thinking made by Xbots. MS still need to get rid of camera and sell XO at $399.

    #30 1 year ago
  31. laughing-gravy

    @26 No company the size of Sony or MSoft would ever try to charge $100 for a camera that they separately charge $59 for it would be suicide. I honestly can’t believe any one would be stupid enough to fall for that crap.

    #31 1 year ago
  32. DrDamn

    It’s not charging $100 for a camera though. It’s setting your price based on your costs. Say they estimated costs would be $499 including the camera. As things progressed costs of key components came down so they could maybe knock the price down to $469. That’s not a big enough gap to distinguish the two machines. Remove the camera and they can bring it down to $399 and that’s a much more attractive proposition and Sony are in a much better position selling the machine.

    It’s the camera in combination with a lot of other considerations which has made the price difference. It’s not just remove the camera and reduce price by $X.

    #32 1 year ago
  33. laughing-gravy

    @32 It is charging $100 for a camera, what don’t you get? Saying we’re having a bundle with a camera that cost $499 and $399 without is what the article implied. So yes it is charging $100 extra for a camera. Sheesh the stupidity of some people. EDIT:All costs are factored into the retail price.

    #33 1 year ago
  34. DrDamn

    If that’s what your talking about what about Knack?

    I’m talking about the idea that Sony took out the camera to reduce the price by $100. That is unlikely the case, it would have been in conjunction with other savings.

    #34 1 year ago
  35. laughing-gravy

    @34 Because of a photoshop job that appeared on neogaf. You have to be kidding right. It’s obviously BS. The original story that broke didn’t even mention Knack. So someone’s realized the mistake and put out a photo with Knack included. It’s a troll job cobbled together to try and add credence to a pack of horse shit.
    Check out the original story on IGN there’s no mention of Knack at all.

    #35 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.