• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PS4K information (~2x GPU power w/ clock+, new CPU, price, tent. Q1 2017)

QaaQer

Member
Yeah it's the psychology of the perception of something being taken away from you by virtue of someone else getting more. Even if in reality you're getting no less than before. It's a powerful psychology that consoles appealed to strongly, the sense of 'we are all equal'... Tip toeing around that will be an important part of the messaging and marketing.

Esteem is part of what motivates us on a fundamental hardwired level, or at least it is for males. Esteem is a absolutely a zero sum game and confers substantial benefits in the competition for mating opportunities for 'winners'. It is incredibly powerful and it is why horrible, soul destroying jobs like investment banker, high frequency trader, or president of the united states, attract so many candidates.

wrt consumer products, the most profitable ones are the ones that purchasers believe will confirm some sort of status and raise their amount of esteem. The margins you can get on those products are huge. It also leaves people who don't have iphone 6s or a 400hbp electric car feeling like less of a person. It will be hard for Sony to manage this.
 

On Demand

Banned
This is the exact reason many people are against it.

Where you get that from? The overall sentiment is no longer having one console that's the focus of development and dividing the player base.

How the hell is it a dumb decision to cater to 4K TV owners who don't have much media for their 4K TVs yet? this isn't about the people who already own a PS4. no one is hurting you by progressing you're hurting yourself by worrying about what others have, if you was happy before they made a PS4K you should continue to be happy instead of trying to hold everyone else back.

They can add UHD playback without changing the specs.
 

geordiemp

Member
We'll never get it is a bit of a stretch don't you think? Tech improvements come, heat management improves, prices go down. I don't think it's crazy to imagine Titan X power in a console a decade for now.

On a different note I actually hope this is the death of the traditional console cycle and instead we'll have incremental upgrades every 2-3 years. It doesn't make sense anymore to completely dump an old platform. The fact that both Microsoft and Sony went with off the self parts and the common x86 architecture should pretty kill the idea of a tradition PS5 and Xbox two or whatever they'd be called.

Hope so in terms of the console cycle. No need to ever make ps4 obsolete from this day onwards. No reason at all.

In terms of future, I am being pessimistic yes, lets come back in 5 years and see lol
 

komorebi

Member
This is why the thread starter has to be careful about the way things are worded as what he wrote has sent out a certain message and idea about the machine. How do we know what he is saying he heard is correct? Until we get official unveil the scaremongering is silly.

Anyone who interprets the things I and others have said as "scaremongering" (not saying you're saying I'm saying that :p) need to just understand that this is a real possibility given the current market. If more sub-30fps games and sacrified performance (whatever that means) for PS4K games doesn't seem like a big deal, then by all means point and laugh. We'll see soon enough. But if people want to believe that EA, Ubisoft, and so on will suddenly care even more about the performance of their PS4/XB1 ports then I really don't know what to say.
 

Markoman

Member
More hardware in a shorter period of time also means more potential technical fuck-ups.
Rubber decay on analog sticks will be a best-case scenario then.
Worst case: see last gen
 
12 TF is the new 17 billion transistor mega chip from Nvidia (14 nm Titan and then some whatever lol). No way will we ever get that in a small console - I would love to live long enough to see the day !

Its amd / sony, and at 14 nm amd / sony will probably go as big as they can cost wise this year, so thats it. Maybe they could go 30 or 40 % bigger at 14 nm as costs come down a bit, but who cares ? Thats not a ps5 generational leap is it ?

That's the same thing as saying consoles will never hit 1.8 TF because _____ GPU had it 3 or 4 years earlier. PS3 only had like what 250 or 300 GF to PS4's 1.8 TF?

Not with PS4K we won't get 12 TF.

But 12 TF and even more is very plausible for what might come in the next 4 or 5 years for consoles.
 

onQ123

Member
Where you get that from? The overall sentiment is no longer having one console that's the focus of development and dividing the player base.



They can add UHD playback without changing the specs.

Why should they have to be limited to just 4K media? you are not being hurt by others having a console that can play 4K games on their 4K TVs.
 
I'm willing to bet 60fps isn't even a serious consideration for almost any developer working on a PS4K targeted game, unless they would have been targeting 60fps on a standard PS4 anyway.

Most people don't give a shit about frame rate, those that do already play 60fps games like COD and aren't who a PS4K would be aimed at.

It'll run most games at 1080p, 30fps and just as likely to fall below both of those as we currently get with console games, but with better textures and more effects, upscaled to 4K on a suitable TV. Meanwhile, the PS4 versions will be more often under 1080p, more likely to drop frames, and with less effort put into optimisations and quality control.

Even with already released games getting patched to take asvantage of the higher specs, I'd put money on them choosing looks over performance. Sure, some games might get the 60fps treatment, but just a more consistent 30fps is far more likely.

Honestly, the way people are blindly clinging to the idea of 60fps suddenly being the norm just because of a hardware boost clearly have not been paying attention to gaming, particularly mainstream console and AAA gaming, as we've now it for almost 30 years.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
If the PS4K is B/C with PS4 games...

Why are so many upset about this? Sell or use a sure to be Gamestop trade in deal and go PS4K.

No one is forcing you to stay on PS4...and no one is forcing you to upgrade to the next console. With so many that got a PS4 coming from a PS3....with MS doing B/C....

I dont see the outrage over this. If anything ppl should have been outraged when the PS4 launched since it has no B/C. Especially after what MS did with the XBO and B/C.

Not talking about the technical difficulties involved with PS4 B/C with PS3...just the general public knowledge that the PS4 wont have B/C with PS3.

None of that stopped Sony from running away with this gen with console sales. If anything....Sony marketing the PS4K being B/C with PS4 should keep things rolling along.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
Esteem is part of what motivates us on a fundamental hardwired level, or at least it is for males. Esteem is a absolutely a zero sum game and confers substantial benefits in the competition for mating opportunities for 'winners'. It is incredibly powerful and it is why horrible, soul destroying jobs like investment banker, high frequency trader, or president of the united states, attract so many candidates.

wrt consumer products, the most profitable ones are the ones that purchasers believe will confirm some sort of status and raise their amount of esteem. The margins you can get on those products are huge. It also leaves people who don't have iphone 6s or a 400hbp electric car feeling like less of a person. It will be hard for Sony to manage this.

Yeah, it's hugely powerful. There's that famous experiment that offered group A $12 and group B $15 OR group A $10 if it also meant group B would get $10. IIRC, most opt to take less if it means everyone else gets less too - not feeling inferior is valued more highly than being, in absolute terms, better off. It's irrational in many ways but it's a strong factor in many situations.

(I've changed the numbers but that was the gist of the experiment :p)
 
I'm willing to bet 60fps isn't even a serious consideration for almost any developer working on a PS4K targeted game, unless they would have been targeting 60fps on a standard PS4 anyway.

Most people don't give a shit about frame rate, those that do already play 60fps games like COD and aren't who a PS4K would be aimed at.

It'll run most games at 1080p, 30fps and just as likely to fall below both of those as we currently get with console games, but with better textures and more effects, upscaled to 4K on a suitable TV. Meanwhile, the PS4 versions will be more often under 1080p, more likely to drop frames, and with less effort put into optimisations and quality control.

Even with already released games getting psyched to take asvantage of the higher specs, I'd put money on them choosing looks over performance. Sure, some games might get the 60fps treatment, but just a more consistent 30fps is far more likely.

Sucks if true.
 
Where you get that from? The overall sentiment is no longer having one console that's the focus of development and dividing the player base.



They can add UHD playback without changing the specs.

I'm getting it directly from this thread. How is the player base being divided if both will get the same games? PS4 is not the focus on multiplatform games any way so how much will an extra configuration on the same architecture hurt development?
 

omonimo

Banned
I'm getting it directly from this thread. How is the player base being divided if both will get the same games? PS4 is not the focus on multiplatform games any way so how much will an extra configuration on the same architecture hurt development?
More developers could care less to optimize on ps4 if ps4k is the new lead.
 

vpance

Member
We'll never get it is a bit of a stretch don't you think? Tech improvements come, heat management improves, prices go down. I don't think it's crazy to imagine Titan X power in a console a decade for now.

I think chip stacking will bring the next major jump in power for consoles. That way they might not need to rely on the latest node.
 
Yeah, it's hugely powerful. There's that famous experiment that offered group A $12 and group B $15 OR group A $10 if it also meant group B would get $10. IIRC, most opt to take less if it means everyone else gets less too - not feeling inferior is valued more highly than being, in absolute terms, better off. It's irrational in many ways but it's a strong factor in many situations.

(I've changed the numbers but that was the gist of the experiment :p)

I always found esteem in things I have achieved or things I have created, but things I have bought? Not me, but I am a bit older, maybe this is more true for the younger folks who have spent their whole lives in this consumerist world.

I've always personally found it really odd when people talk about being proud of things they have purchased.
 
I'm getting it directly from this thread. How is the player base being divided if both will get the same games? PS4 is not the focus on multiplatform games any way so how much will an extra configuration on the same architecture hurt development?

It very likely won't. At all.

But Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt reign when there is a lack of information.

More developers could care less to optimize on ps4 if ps4k is the new lead.

Oh, so they could care less to optimize? That means they must still care quite a bit! So that's good, right?

significant sacrifices?

Insert avatar quote.

Personally, I just don't want console turn into PC/mobile.
Developers get to make games for specific hardware is console advantage, I don't want to lose that.

They have 4K TVs and UHDs to sell. One minor revision in a cycle isn't turning consoles into PC/mobile. The hyperbole.
 

Markoman

Member
If the PS4K is B/C with PS4 games...

Why are so many upset about this? Sell or use a sure to be Gamestop trade in deal and go PS4K.

No one is forcing you to stay on PS4...and no one is forcing you to upgrade to the next console. With so many that got a PS4 coming from a PS3....with MS doing B/C....

I dont see the outrage over this. If anything ppl should have been outraged when the PS4 launched since it has no B/C. Especially after what MS did with the XBO and B/C.

Not talking about the technical difficulties involved with PS4 B/C with PS3...just the general public knowledge that the PS4 wont have B/C with PS3.

None of that stopped Sony from running away with this gen with console sales. If anything....Sony marketing the PS4K being B/C with PS4 should keep things rolling along.

This thread is 200 pages now. If you really want your question answered, many users have brought up their plausible concerns and arguments regarding this plan which go way beyond the initial saltiness. But throwing in the rethorical "what's your problem, just do this and that or just deal with it?" mantra is really getting exhausting at this point. Sorry, I don't want to attack you though.
 
12 TF is the new 17 billion transistor mega chip from Nvidia (14 nm Titan and then some whatever lol). No way will we ever get that in a small console - I would love to live long enough to see the day !

Its amd / sony, and at 14 nm amd / sony will probably go as big as they can cost wise this year, so thats it. Maybe they could go 30 or 40 % bigger at 14 nm as costs come down a bit, but who cares ? Thats not a ps5 generational leap is it ?

Complete nonsense I'm afraid. Do you even follow technology?

12 TFLOPS will be possible on a handheld device within 10 years or there abouts.
 
How the hell is it a dumb decision to cater to 4K TV owners who don't have much media for their 4K TVs yet? this isn't about the people who already own a PS4. no one is hurting you by progressing you're hurting yourself by worrying about what others have, if you was happy before they made a PS4K you should continue to be happy instead of trying to hold everyone else back.


People do not buy consoles just because it take 5 or more years before a new one comes out they buy consoles because it's a simple way to play games that they like.
If Sony released a PS4 Slim with 4k scaling, UHD blu-ray playback, 4k video streaming and what not, nobody would care. That's irrelevant for owners of the previous version. It's the 100% extra gpu that's the problem. If it doesn't make much of a difference, why release it at all? And if it makes a difference, how are og PS4 owners not going to see "sacrifices" being made in their version of the game?
 

3x0

Neo Member
significant sacrifices?
It's in the first post.

It was stated plainly and with no room for interpretation that there are developers that already have development kits for the PS4K and that they are making games that will directly target and take advantage of the higher specs of the PS4K. It was also stated that these games will in fact work for the PS4 but with considerable sacrifices made to performance.


Edited to add:

I got a bit more information today but I am trying to find out who all knows about it before posting.

Also the word "Sacrifices" is being blown out of proportion. There are sacrifices made when making a console version of a game as compared to a PC game or when making an XB1 game as compared to a PS4 game. Don't expect PS4 games to all of a sudden become shit just expect them to run better on PS4K. I would expect a game that is really pushing the graphics envelope to run at 1080p 60fps on PS4K while the same game might run at 900p 60/30fps on PS4. Just the way I took it.
 

onQ123

Member
If the PS4K is B/C with PS4 games...

Why are so many upset about this? Sell or use a sure to be Gamestop trade in deal and go PS4K.

No one is forcing you to stay on PS4...and no one is forcing you to upgrade to the next console. With so many that got a PS4 coming from a PS3....with MS doing B/C....

I dont see the outrage over this. If anything ppl should have been outraged when the PS4 launched since it has no B/C. Especially after what MS did with the XBO and B/C.

Not talking about the technical difficulties involved with PS4 B/C with PS3...just the general public knowledge that the PS4 wont have B/C with PS3.

None of that stopped Sony from running away with this gen with console sales. If anything....Sony marketing the PS4K being B/C with PS4 should keep things rolling along.

It's not even BC because it's actually still the PS4 just with extra stuff
 
Nope. Read the OP for starters, look at the last 6 years of gaming, look at the current market, look at "AAA" development times and "day one patches", look at the big name publishers releasing games with shit performance (Fallout 4, AssCreed, and so on), look at the sales of those games and what the public seems to prioritize. I mean come on, its already been stated: "significant sacrifices". The writing is on the wall where this will lead.

I'll gladly be wrong but I don't see them even maintaining the already iffy performance level of current gen games when publishers know they can crank things even more as long as they make sure the PS4 version is "playable" by current standards.

See i think devs were going to do this with or with out PS4K .
This way at least i have a option when things get worst .
 

platina

Member
If the ps3 could pull these visuals off then I can't imagine what even the ps4 version would bring

ascension_by_raziel1992-d783k93.gif
 

onQ123

Member
If Sony released a PS4 Slim with 4k scaling, UHD blu-ray playback, 4k video streaming and wahtnot, nobody would care. That's irrelevant for owners of the previous version. It's the 100% extra gpu that's the problem. If it doesn't make much of a difference, why release it at all? And if it makes a difference, how are og PS4 owners not going to see "sacrifices" being made in their version of the game?


It's needed for 4K gaming & most people should understand that
 
It's not impossible that it will sport a Zen APU. But we know AMD are only going to get their Zen APUs out for the first half of 2017 (and they're going full throttle to meet that release window) so that rules out any kind of mass production for a custom Zen APU for the PS4K in Q4 2016 I would imagine. Unless of course the PS4K is coming early 2017, which changes things.

That was kind of my point (highlighted). While I tend to agree with your assertions, We don't know what FAB processes AMD have allocated to Sony production or what they, with Sony, plan to produce through them. You know that the FAB's allocated to Zen APU's for the PC market are running full throttle to make H1-2017. AMD obviously have FAB's allocated to producing APU's for Sony. If those FABs have been tooled for 14nm for a new CPU that tells us nothing of the actual APU design being produced through those FABs.
 

geordiemp

Member
Complete nonsense I'm afraid. Do you even follow technology?

12 TFLOPS will be possible on a handheld device within 10 years or there abouts.

http://semiengineering.com/fab-challenges-at-7nm-and-5nm/

Go read a bit then, I think they will go bigger on 14 and maybe even 10 nm, think below that its silly expensive time. They are hitting the boundaries of optical semi conductor manufacturing.

If we had crystal balls I would go get a lottery ticket.
 
Anyone who interprets the things I and others have said as "scaremongering" (not saying you're saying I'm saying that :p) need to just understand that this is a real possibility given the current market. If more sub-30fps games and sacrified performance (whatever that means) for PS4K games doesn't seem like a big deal, then by all means point and laugh. We'll see soon enough. But if people want to believe that EA, Ubisoft, and so on will suddenly care even more about the performance of their PS4/XB1 ports then I really don't know what to say.

'Considerable sacrifices made to performance' is very strong, emotive and negative wording. This is obviously not how Sony would even contemplate putting the message out regarding PS4 ports compared to PS4K's. 'Significantly enhanced on PS4K', sure. In fact the way the OP put it is completely his interpretation.
 

Markoman

Member
See i think devs were going to do this with or with out PS4K .
This way at least i have a option when things get worst .

Bravo, that's the best definition of "sheep mentality" you can come up with. Ignorance is a bliss. Yeah, let's just fix performance issues in games by buying new hardware. LOL.
The famous '360 for people without internet connections' quote now really sounds legit to me. Bring Mattrick back!!!
 

jeffram

Member
If Sony released a PS4 Slim with 4k scaling, UHD blu-ray playback, 4k video streaming and what not, nobody would care. That's irrelevant for owners of the previous version. It's the 100% extra gpu that's the problem. If it doesn't make much of a difference, why release it at all? And if it makes a difference, how are og PS4 owners not going to see "sacrifices" being made in their version of the game?
the general population of ps4 owners are going to see it the same way they see almost every consumer device in history, the new one performs better. That's it. No one is going to see sacrifices, they are going to see enhancements to the new one. People understand that concept.

You can bang the "sacrifices" drum all you want, but it's clear that these are two specs with similar capabilities with one being more powerful than the other. Anyone who has bought a phone or a PCs understands this concept.
 
There's just no way a PS4 will be able to handle those games. And the same would apply to a PS4.5 trying to run games made for the PS5.5

I meant PS4.5 overlapping with PS5, not PS4.5 overlapping with PS4.5. I wouldn't expect PS4 to still be current by the time PS5 hits.
 

Reaperssj

Member
To be honest after reading everyone's worries about sacrifices being made to ps4 versions of games vs a ps4k verison, I think if you look at it differently it is more akin to ps4 hitting it's ceiling more and ps4k just having a higher ceiling without ps4k existing that ceiling on the ps4 will still exist and if and when the ps4k comes out that ceiling will still exist on ps4 so games won't really have to have sacrifices on ps4 it would just hit the harware limitation where as a ps4k would just give devs a higher ceiling to work with while still trying to optimize on ps4 and it's ceiling.
 

jeffram

Member
It isn't. Especially not if they keep the weak-ass processor.
Resolution is more of a gpu thing.

If they really wanted to push resolution, 1920x2160 would be a good target. 2x 1080 with half the horizontal resolution of 4K. That's how some PS3 games rendered 1080 (960x1080). It will scale well and look much sharper on UHD TVs.
 
I just cant see whats next, ps5 when they can do 7 nm ? LOL, think if we are stuck with 14 nm for 10 years we will be stuck with ps4.5 for the same time as how would you do a step performance ?

Guessing - Core count, clock frequency, instruction pipelines, cache.

I'm sure there's other ways of providing a nominal (not drastic) increase in performance. As costs of production come down and technology matures I'm sure we'll see similar upgrades to the proposed PS4.5 upgrade. I doubt well remain completely static with PS4.5 for 10 years.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I find it weird as well. In a world where Digital Foundry threads are full of outrage when framerates aren't locked to 30, people scanning every single piece of media of a game looking for downgrades to be up in arms about, the idea that we're getting a mid generation hardware refresh (which was going to happen anyway), along with a little extra juice to help games perform better is met with vitriol.

I get the concerns but I think they're misplaced. I don't think this will end up being as disruptive as many here are worried it will be. Time will tell though. It's exciting, either way.

Completely agree.

I don't really get this though. The architectures are all basically similar and the PS4/Xbox One already were the lowest common denominator. They suffer only to the extent developers designing on PC just didn't meet their budgets for art/effects/etc.

Games that were being designed on PC just have their sliders adjusted, basically. Will having a new tier really change things all that much?

This just seems like a problem developers have been dealing with for a very long time.

I think more personally (and I can say this would motivate me to upgrade) is that nagging feeling you no longer own the "best" product than it is concern about optimization.

Yep. Especially the last part. This is a good thing for console gaming as far as game development and cost. People just can't wrap their head around it yet. They will eventually. And before anyone quotes me, it has been repeated in this thread over and over, as to why it will save development costs. If one chooses to ignore it because the cognitive is too strong, that is on you.

What I don't understand is why some people are so against this happening. Do some people not like progress or something?

Consoles are the only gaming platform which doesn't progress for long periods of time. The PC, tablets and mobile are all subject to yearly hardware improvements. Meanwhile with consoles things don't progress for 5-7 years at a time. How is that healthy for the industry and the companies involved?

Apple, Samsung and Nvidia are currently raking it in while AMD are looking on from the outside and are probably pushing for this to happen more than anyone because it looks like being their biggest opportunity moving forwards.

In addition, with the rising costs of development it no longer makes sense to have to scrap everything every 5-7 years and start from scratch with a new platform to develop for with an initial small user base. Why not just have a single platform that is built upon incrementally, easing the burden for developers and allowing them to have access to millions of customers to sell to at all times?

It all makes too much sense but some of you are whining because it means you will feel inferior if someone gets the newer version of your platform of choice while you are stuck with the older version. Well let me tell you, I'm still on my OG iPad Air and I can still play any new game that's released for the platform without any problems. I'm also still on my i5 3570k and can play any new PC game that comes out. Would I get better performance on both platforms if I upgraded? Yes. But do I have to? No. And that's all that matters.

Yep. Still on my iPad 3 playing all the games. Uprising runs perfectly fine, and looks great as well. Similar situation with PC as well. Choices though, who the fuck wants those!?

I'll buy someone's PS4 for $10.

I will buy your Gaf account for 25 cents and a Chiclet.

Yeah it's the psychology of the perception of something being taken away from you by virtue of someone else getting more. Even if in reality you're getting no less than before. It's a powerful psychology that consoles appealed to strongly, the sense of 'we are all equal'... Tip toeing around that will be an important part of the messaging and marketing.

Well said. This should be the disclaimer in every one of these threads, lol.

He was Legend.

My best gaf memory was seeing those blue buttocks smash against the window in that gif for the first time. Good times.

They've always known and they also know it is a depreciating asset currently. Which is why they need to get the next generation of kids onboard, and to do that, they need to be in mobile and f2p. Also, transmedia.

Yeah he was. That Gif was so amazing. I remember years ago when I was mostly a lurker. Shit cracked me up every single time.

Agreed on the second part, what I meant mainly was that, it is about time they started making these key moves.

You guys fold too easy. This is a complete dumb decision and nothing will change that fact.

And lol at people who are against this being boiled down to not having the best system as the reason. This isn't PS4 vs XB1, multiple hardware releases changes the whole idea why people buy consoles in the first place.

I can play this game too. It is a great decision, and nothing you say will change that.

Consoles will retract as every other tech chasing market grabs people's attention, and this is also good for developers with cost in the long run.
 

On Demand

Banned
I'm getting it directly from this thread. How is the player base being divided if both will get the same games? PS4 is not the focus on multiplatform games any way so how much will an extra configuration on the same architecture hurt development?

I don't know how many times the same points can be regurgitated over and over.

I doubt PS4 will be optimized as it could of with another more powerful version to deal with. And developers will have a potential 5 platforms to code for now. They already have trouble with 2. How is adding more good?

They have 4K TVs and UHDs to sell. One minor revision in a cycle isn't turning consoles into PC/mobile. The hyperbole.

He gave his opinion on why he doesn't like this. You're response is it's hyperbole.

This is exactly the dismissive attitude i was talking about if anyone needs anymore proof.

Fuck this thread.
 
Complete nonsense I'm afraid. Do you even follow technology?

12 TFLOPS will be possible on a handheld device within 10 years or there abouts.

I follow tech and please tell how we are going to be able to do that .
We are hitting the silicon wall for chips and it's taking longer and longer to do die shrinks .
 
To be honest after reading everyone's worries about sacrifices being made to ps4 versions of games vs a ps4k verison, I think if you look at it differently it is more akin to ps4 hitting it's ceiling more and ps4k just having a higher ceiling without ps4k existing that ceiling on the ps4 will still exist and if and when the ps4k comes out that ceiling will still exist on ps4 so games won't really have to have sacrifices on ps4 it would just hit the harware limitation where as a ps4k would just give devs a higher ceiling to work with while still trying to optimize on ps4 and it's ceiling.

In theory that's a possibility. In practice, it is a question of whether the majority of developers will have the incentive to optimize the PS4 version or the PS4.5 one.

On the one hand, they might start announcing that anyone wanting the definitive edition should get the PS4.5 one.

On the other hand, the PS4.5 could be held back by the limits of the PS4 with the developers optimizing more for it seeing how it has the larger base while getting okay performance from the 4.5 without much optimization.

Development costs are skyrocketing as is so adding another tier would make things more complicated and corners are likely to be cut.

It would be interesting if Sony would end up forcing all developers to target 4K with the new console while keeping the IQ similar to PS4 but then there is the question VR so this might be unlikely.
 
Completely agree.



Yep. Especially the last part. This is a good thing for console gaming as far as game development and cost. People just can't wrap their head around it yet. They will eventually. And before anyone quotes me, it has been repeated in this thread over and over, as to why it will save development costs. If one chooses to ignore it because the cognitive is too strong, that is on you.

I don't think it is completely without caveats.

For the first time we will have a generation where it is actually intended to have games run on two separate SKUs with actual hardware differences. Does that damage optimization on one or the other? Increase development costs? Make it harder for first and second party studios to "get the most" out of the original PS4? Maybe.

But also maybe not. Maybe the idea is to essentially demand that developers only use the PS4 OG as the base platform for developing all their games, if there is some way to enforce that, and that PS4K is only for uprezzing them.

I'm still waiting to find out what happens though, this is exciting, even though I have a couple of reservations, I think it will at worst not really affect the current sales of the PS4 series of consoles (of which I guess it will become a series).

I just want to see how this all works out, definitely exciting to see such a change in the console gaming space.

I wonder when we will have a true PS5 then also. Will it be 6 or 7 years post PS4 launch? I hope for 7, I think the 7 year gap between PS3 and PS4 was ideal for a hardware refresh.
 
Bravo, that's the best definition of "sheep mentality" you can come up with. Ignorance is a bliss. Yeah, let's just fix performance issues in games by buying new hardware. LOL.
The famous '360 for people without internet connections' quote now really sounds legit to me. Bring Mattrick back!!!

Not this me see knowing what happens in the later years of consoles .
This is me knowing that devs and pubs know the bigger market does not care .
Last gen games got worst in performance as time went on .
Just look at games like TLOU, GTAV , Skyrim , COD that sell million with frame drops all over the place.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I don't know how many times the same points can be regurgitated over and over.

I doubt PS4 will be optimized as it could of with another more powerful version to deal with. And developers will have a potential 5 platforms to code for now. They already have trouble with 2. How is adding more good?



He gave his opinion on why he doesn't like this. You're response is it's hyperbole.

This is exactly the dismissive attitude i was talking about if anyone needs anymore proof.

Fuck this thread.

Just because you repeat something ad nauseum, does not make it accurate. Developers already deal with this with the PC, so it leaves a turd on the plate of that argument. It will be scalable not unlike the PC... this is not a brand new platform architecture, it will be the same disc, just like, PC. If developers were raving about how they got PC versions in the beginning of the PS4, unoptimized, up and running in mere weeks, this will be MUCH easier between Sony's two specs.

There is nothing dismissive with what he said. Your attitude on the other hand, of not wanting to have a discussion, other than, "This is a stupid idea, it will never work", with baseless concern, constantly claiming people are having a dismissive attitude for providing a counter argument... is.

I don't think it is completely without caveats.

For the first time we will have a generation where it is actually intended to have games run on two separate SKUs with actual hardware differences. Does that damage optimization on one or the other? Increase development costs? Make it harder for first and second party studios to "get the most" out of the original PS4? Maybe.

But also maybe not. Maybe the idea is to essentially demand that developers only use the PS4 OG as the base platform for developing all their games, if there is some way to enforce that, and that PS4K is only for uprezzing them.

I'm still waiting to find out what happens though, this is exciting, even though I have a couple of reservations, I think it will at worst not really affect the current sales of the PS4 series of consoles (of which I guess it will become a series).

I just want to see how this all works out, definitely exciting to see such a change in the console gaming space.

I wonder when we will have a true PS5 then also. Will it be 6 or 7 years post PS4 launch? I hope for 7, I think the 7 year gap between PS3 and PS4 was ideal for a hardware refresh.

I can agree with this as well.
 

jeffram

Member
I follow tech and please tell how we are going to be able to do that .
We are hitting the silicon wall for chips and it's taking longer and longer to do die shrinks .
This is very relevant to this whole discussion. People are assuming large leaps in performance every generation, but that isn't the reality anymore. The concept of revolutionary generational leaps is pretty much over. PS5 was never going to be able to come out after 6 years with 10x performance for $400.

We might be at the point where iterations and multiple entry points make the most sense because all hardware should be able to play the same software anyways.
 
He gave his opinion on why he doesn't like this. You're response is it's hyperbole.

This is exactly the dismissive attitude i was talking about if anyone needs anymore proof.

Fuck this thread.

I certainly did not dismiss the opinion. I was pointing out how the opinion was certainly taking massive leaps of logic. One revision =/= annual revisions forever.

So, your "proof" is horseshit, because that's not what I was saying. At all. And any reasonable person would see that.
 
Top Bottom