Support NeoGAF

[CosmicQueso]

That is a non-trivial increase in work, money, man hours, and resources that have now been added to the game development cycle. That's all I've been trying to get across.

Absolutely it's non-trivial. And there's opportunity cost on top of that.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Absolutely it's non-trivial. And there's opportunity cost on top of that.

Sure, there's a potential of gain, but I'm not convinced that this is guaranteed or likely yet. My problem with it from a business perspective is I'm not convinced that having the Neo out there is going to accelerate growth faster than if it didn't exist and they simply dropped the price of the PS4.

I'm just not quite convinced that there is a substantial number of people who wouldn't have bought a PS4 but now suddenly will because the Neo exists. I'm not saying nobody will because you can always find someone that fits a scenario, but I'm not convinced there is a large number of people that fit that criteria.

What it really comes down to is take the number of Neo sales then subtract anyone who already has a PS4 and is just upgrading. After that, subtract anyone who is new but would have bought a PS4 anyway and decided to pick the Neo instead because it is now an option instead of the PS4 alone. Once you've subtracted those people, how many people fall into the category of getting a Neo because it exists and wouldn't have otherwise? Take those number of people, figure out how many of them is now buying your game and what those additional sales are compared to what the costs are to support it. I'm not convinced right now that the mandatory requirement to support the Neo will usually have you come out ahead compared to if you didn't have to support it at all. I know it's not a binary level of support where it's all or nothing, but then balancing how much effort to put into it now becomes a factor. That is my concern. I don't think it's invalid or naive to be concerned about that.

 

[Keihart]

wouldn't it be just better to get PS5 on 2018-2019? if this thing really goes down the half asses updates route the performance of consoles will grow at an even slower pace.

 

[SeanTSC]

wouldn't it be just better to get PS5 on 2018-2019? if this thing really goes down the half asses updates route the performance of consoles will grow at an even slower pace.

For some people, yes. For others though every 3-4 years is absolutely worth it. It's definitely worth it to me, especially since I'll be buying a PSVR. And I think that console performance growth worries are unfounded. We'll have to see how it goes, but I think things will be okay.

 

[mugurumakensei]

wouldn't it be just better to get PS5 on 2018-2019? if this thing really goes down the half asses updates route the performance of consoles will grow at an even slower pace.

You got it reversed. This is happening because getting high powered technology in a smallish frame without being too hot is taking much longer. Therefore, the lengths of the generations must be stretched so that when a new major version comes the leap is significant.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

For some people, yes. For others though every 3-4 years is absolutely worth it. It's definitely worth it to me, especially since I'll be buying a PSVR. And I think that console performance growth worries are unfounded. We'll have to see how it goes, but I think things will be okay.

And here is the crux. The people that want to wait want to force every one else to wait as well.

 

[geordiemp]

Sure, there's a potential of gain, but I'm not convinced that this is guaranteed or likely yet. My problem with it from a business perspective is I'm not convinced that having the Neo out there is going to accelerate growth faster than if it didn't exist and they simply dropped the price of the PS4.
.

Other factors is loosing gamers from the PSN ecosystem if you dont offer a high end product.

Lets face it, $ 200 AMD cards with 970 to 980 performance is the hot topic, an explosion of price vs performance.

If Sony do nothing which is what you are advocating, SOME gamers will move on to an ecosystem with more power (Scorpio or PC). And those gamers who want more are likely those who dispose allot of income to gaming.

I am one of those gamers, If Neo does not bump performance enough I will move in 2017 with so many good options coming.

Also if I do get a couple of Neo's, I will probably sell my ps4's on ebay, bring in some budget conscious gamers where £ 300 is too much for OG ps4. Neo sales could increase Ps4 ownership if consumers upgrade and sell their existing consoles cheaply on ebay - its not a zero sum game here..

Sony cannot afford to stand still when everything is going to change around them - Nx, Scorpio, 480, 1070 and Zen they are all coming in 2017 or this year.....

Remember 360 lost allot of gamers to Ps4, the might go back if Sony sit on their laurels, most of these were early adopters and high attach ratio consumers according to Sony I recall.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Other factors is loosing gamers from the PSN ecosystem if you dont offer a high end product.

Lets face it, $ 200 AMD cards with 970 to 980 performance is the hot topic, an explosion of price vs performance.

If Sony do nothing which is what you are advocating, SOME gamers will move on to an ecosystem with more power (Scorpio or PC). And those gamers who want more are likely those who dispose allot of income to gaming.

I am one of those gamers, If Neo does not bump performance enough I will move in 2017 with so many good options coming.

Also if I do get a couple of Neo's, I will probably sell my ps4's on ebay, bring in some budget conscious gamers where £ 300 is too much for OG ps4.

Sony cannot afford to stand still when everything is going to change around them - Nx, Scorpio, 480, 1070 and Zen they are all coming in 2017.

How is the situation that much different with this generation compared to all the previous generations? Are you really implying that the pace of technological development is speeding up?

 

[Keihart]

You got it reversed. This is happening because getting high powered technology in a smallish frame without being too hot is taking much longer. Therefore, the lengths of the generations must be stretched so that when a new major version comes the leap is significant.

But that its not the case right now, gpu technology is certanly just about to have a big jump soon.
An what if this mid gen becomes so succesful that the cycle does become like the one in phones? So next gen never comes.

 

[Philippo]

I am perfectly fine with a "New Console Release - 3 years - Improved Versione of the Console - 3 years - Next Gen Console and so on" cycle, so bring it on Sony, exiting times ahead for sure.

 

[CosmicQueso]

I'm just not quite convinced that there is a substantial number of people who wouldn't have bought a PS4 but now suddenly will because the Neo exists. I'm not saying nobody will because you can always find someone that fits a scenario, but I'm not convinced there is a large number of people that fit that criteria.

I agree with you in that it seems like a big bet when the outcome isn't very certain.

Unfortunately, without knowing specific release timing, pricing or support, it's a very difficult thing to predict at the moment.

 

[geordiemp]

How is the situation that much different with this generation compared to all the previous generations? Are you really implying that the pace of technological development is speeding up?

You know the answers to that. This year really seems a big leap in low power performance, ideal for consoles and living room small form factor PC's. Do you think its not ?

I agree with you in that it seems like a big bet when the outcome isn't very certain.
Unfortunately, without knowing specific release timing, pricing or support, it's a very difficult thing to predict at the moment.

I believe that with zen and polaris, PC option will become viable to many more people in 2017, Sony cannot stand still otherwise they will loose consumers. Neo is about retaining users as much as getting new ones IMO.

I bet Valve are rubbing their hands. I cant remember Pc's being potentially low cost as they will become (in UK its still expensive to build a decent gaming PC, not everyone gets crazy US prices.)

 

[mugurumakensei]

But that its not the case right now, gpu technology is certanly just about to have a big jump soon.
An what if this mid gen becomes so succesful that the cycle does become like the one in phones? So next gen never comes.

It's about to have a big jump at the high end but Vega will be a $600-900 card depending on ram amount. Polaris is a nice jump on the low end but that really only gets you to 970-980 depending on clock which is not a generational jump from what's in the PS4/X box one. We also have no idea of how hot the 480 or Vega run.

 

[Prisoner KSC2-303]

And here is the crux. The people that want to wait want to force every one else to wait as well.

You could equally say those who don't want to wait want to force a longer generation tied to ageing hardware on every one else.

Neither's true, no one wants to force anything on anyone, people just have opinions about what's best in the long term, and some have worries about this new approach.

 

[Theonik]

To be fair, while there is very obviously work involved and people saying that were insane, being ready to be show games within 4-5 months of receiving development kits would suggest that it isn't nearly as hard as moving over from PS3 to PS4.

In this case, rather than PS3 to PS4 which required re-engineering pipelines to be efficient on the new hardware, the difference is strictly one where more effort goes directly in creating benefits for the extra power.

Developers could just release games for the new system or they could spend time adding extra Neo features. Sony needs more of those to showcase the Neo though rather than straightforward PS4 games with better performance and maybe extra AA. That takes more time.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I could have told you the same thing and it still wouldn't change the fact that it's not simply configuring an ini file and toggling settings and you're done. How can you begin to claim it's trivial in man hours, and cost, but not actually have any idea of what is involved?

Who are you even arguing with? I for one have never said this, and those that do should either be educated, or ignored if they refuse to get it. But the passive aggressive posts you keep making attacking those ignorant types is looking rather juvenile.

Just providing links to a recent developer post that squelched one of the "it is going to be oh, so hard" fears for him, as well as think your one end of the extreme in this regards is due to your fervor to jump on the "flick a switch" posters. So you are being more intense and seemingly refusing to see a more rational middle ground.

Other factors with cost I completely agree with, however, it is not like the big dev houses have gone on record before these leaks expressing their distaste for total resets and having to retool.

 

[jdmonmou]

Other factors is loosing gamers from the PSN ecosystem if you dont offer a high end product.

Lets face it, $ 200 AMD cards with 970 to 980 performance is the hot topic, an explosion of price vs performance.

If Sony do nothing which is what you are advocating, SOME gamers will move on to an ecosystem with more power (Scorpio or PC). And those gamers who want more are likely those who dispose allot of income to gaming.

I am one of those gamers, If Neo does not bump performance enough I will move in 2017 with so many good options coming.

Also if I do get a couple of Neo's, I will probably sell my ps4's on ebay, bring in some budget conscious gamers where £ 300 is too much for OG ps4. Neo sales could increase Ps4 ownership if consumers upgrade and sell their existing consoles cheaply on ebay - its not a zero sum game here..

Sony cannot afford to stand still when everything is going to change around them - Nx, Scorpio, 480, 1070 and Zen they are all coming in 2017 or this year.....

Remember 360 lost allot of gamers to Ps4, the might go back if Sony sit on their laurels, most of these were early adopters and high attach ratio consumers according to Sony I recall.

MS lost customers to PS4 because of its stupid policies it planned to launch with and Kinnect, not because of power.

Also, consoles trying to compete with PCs in terms of power is a losing battle. PCs will always have more power than a console even despite iterative releases.

Most console gamers value longevity over power. If there is still good games coming out at a steady pace then lack of power isn't really a huge concern for most people.

Sony doesn't need to do this. They could let Scorpio and NX come out and they'd still sell more PS4s than both of those companies. Also, by doing this they'd avoid upsetting existing customers and keep the value proposition of the PlayStation in tact.

 

[Panajev2001a]

You know the answers to that. This year really seems a big leap in low power performance, ideal for consoles. Do you think its not?

I agree it is a leap in computing performance, but I do not think it is marking a different trend than the one I was mentioning. I did not say that performance boosts were not going to happen, just saying that they are spreaded farther and farther apart.

Also, I think that they will be extracting quite a lot of performance with second and third generation chips developed on the new 14nm manufacturing process which means that a PS5 in 2018 would still be a nice jump up in performance over PS4K and a massive one over PS4 making me wonder why gamers need a PS4K and especially moving away from console generations and into iterative/evolutionary upgrades every few years.
Manufacturing nodes are taking longer and longer to get maxed out not less.

It is funny that the GTX 1080 is generating such a demand for a new generation of consoles now, we have yet to see big budget chips on second or third generation 14nm tech paired with HBM2 or further evolutions of fast on board memory...
Technology that will probably become target for home console prices in... 2018...

 

[Keihart]

This argument is going to be win when the market speaks, as always. I hope console manufactures don't see much profit in it so they desist.

I'm usually all for console succes, whatever the manufacturer is, but this move is not a good one in the long run as i see it (Unless it is aimed at keeping the pace with VR, in wich case this is the best move as long as the headset keeps compatible allowing users upgrade at they leisure, PS might become the VR platform by default)

 

[Louis Cyphre]

How is the situation that much different with this generation compared to all the previous generations? Are you really implying that the pace of technological development is speeding up?

Different in the fact this generation was already lagging behind affordable pc builds. Now with the new card from AMD for $200, that can do VR as well, has aged the new consoles even more so and we are only mid-cycle.

 

[DeepEnigma]

MS lost customers to PS4 because of its stupid policies it planned to launch with and Kinnect, not because of power.

Also, consoles trying to compete with PCs in terms of power is a losing battle. PCs will always have more power than a console even despite iterative releases.

Most console gamers value longevity over power. If there is still good games coming out at a steady pace then lack of power isn't really a huge concern for most people.

Sony doesn't need to do this. They could let Scorpio and NX come out and they'd still sell more PS4s than both of those companies. Also, by doing this they'd avoid upsetting existing customers and keep the value proposition of the PlayStation in tact.

Sony is the console leader.

As a PC gamer, one should be THRILLED Sony is doing this, that way, all those great AAA games that come to PC due to the existence of the console gaming model, may then be able to push the fancy PC tech even more -- since there should be more of an incentive to have a higher spec polish, versus only the low end, with high end relying on brute force more often than not that we have now.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Different in the fact this generation was already lagging behind affordable pc builds. Now with the new card from AMD for $200, that can do VR as well, has aged the new consoles even more so and we are only mid-cycle.

You are really stating my point... from a different angle. Consoles are limited by power consumption and component pricing issues which shave not changed and are not getting better. How can be releasing more consoles more frequently the answer?

 

[Kinyou]

And here is the crux. The people that want to wait want to force every one else to wait as well.

Well the crux is also that the Neo is meant for PS4 games. That means we won't get the kind of upgrade we usually get from a new console since they're essentially all cross-gen. But we'll likely still pay the same price as for completely new console.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

You could equally say those who don't want to wait want to force a longer generation tied to ageing hardware on every one else.

Neither's true, no one wants to force anything on anyone, people just have opinions about what's best in the long term, and some have worries about this new approach.

It doesn't force a longer generation. If these are going to be 3 years cycles not much will change. You talk as if developers were not going to do cross-gen games anyway.

We get to avoid 2 to 3 years of bullshit while the companies wait for the install bases to grow large enough support their biggest game. Any time will be a good time to launch a major exclusive.

 

[jdmonmou]

Sony is the console leader.

As a PC gamer, one should be THRILLED Sony is doing this, that way, all those great AAA games that come to PC due to the existence of the console gaming model, may then be able to push the fancy PC tech even more -- since there should be more of an incentive to have a higher spec polish, versus only the low end, with high end relying on brute force more often than not that we have now.

I think they are thrilled from the perspective that the PC market will thrive even more as people get fed up with consoles and migrate to PCs.

I'm doubtful that we will get more technically advanced games on PC because NEO games will have to keep parity with PS4.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well the crux is also that the Neo is meant for PS4 games. That means we won't get the kind of upgrade we usually get from a new console since they're essentially all cross-gen. But we'll likely still pay the same price as for completely new console.

PC is cross gen technically, and they get some noticeable upgrades. Also, what you stated can't be fact until we see then outcome.

I think they are thrilled from the perspective that the PC market will thrive even more as people get fed up with consoles and migrate to PCs.

I'm doubtful that we will get more technically advanced games on PC because NEO games will have to keep parity with PS4.

You totally missed what I said, lol.

Then again, earlier you are of the disillusion that if consoles die, the AAA gaming as we know it won't go with it. As if the bastion of f2p and penny sales are fruitful enough for 8 figure budgeted games to flock to.

Witcher 3 would have never happened without consoles.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Well the crux is also that the Neo is meant for PS4 games. That means we won't get the kind of upgrade we usually get from a new console since they're essentially all cross-gen. But we'll likely still pay the same price as for completely new console.

This only matter for exclusives. 3rd party games are always going to be mulitplat for first 2 or 3 years of new console launch. Or I guess you don't remember COD, Far Cry 4, Destiny, Assassin's Creed, Watch Dog, LBP3, every sports game, Dragon Age Inquisition, The Evil Within...you get point. All being developed with ancient ass Xbox 360 and PS3 consoles as the base. This is a garbage argument because new hardware being held back by old hardware will continue happen regardless of switching the traditional cycles.

This new mode could possibly result in only being held back hardware that is 3 years old instead 6 to 10 years old.

PC games are ALWAYS held back by console, yet they generally seem to see some significant improvements to their versions of games.

 

[wapplew]

You are really stating my point... from a different angle. Consoles are limited by power consumption and component pricing issues which shave not changed and are not getting better. How can be releasing more consoles more frequently the answer?

PS4 tech is behind the curve from the start, they to go cheap on R&D and choose on shelf part for PS4. Neo is a answer to a question shouldn't be there at the first place.
Because PS4 is behind, it can't last as long by itself, that where Neo come in.

 

[wapplew]

This only matter for exclusives. 3rd party games are always going to be mulitplat for first two or 3 years of new console launch. Or guess you don't remember COD, Far Cry 4, Destiny, Assassin's Creed, Watch Dog, LBP3, every sports game, Dragon Age Inquistion, The Evil Within...you get point. All being develop on ancient ass Xbox 360 and PS3 consoles and base. This is a garbage argument because new hardware being held back by old hardware will continue happen regardless of switching the traditional cycles.

This new mode could possibly result in only being held back hardware that is 3 years old instead 6 to 10 years old.

And now first party too going to held back by old hardware.
We talk about Neo give people option and more option is good. What about the option for me to get none held back first party games? Is it fair for you to have high end hardware option but take away mine?

 

[StrongBlackVine]

PS4 tech is behind the curve from the start, they to go cheap on R&D and choose on shelf part for PS4. Neo is a answer to a question shouldn't be there at the first place.
Because PS4 is behind, it can't last as long by itself, that where Neo come in.

They are still using off the shelf parts for Neo. I don't think designing your own tech is worth it(see PS3). The more similar every platform is in design the better.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

And now first party too going to held back by old hardware.
We talk about Neo give people option and more option is good. What about the option for me to get none held back first party games? Is it fair for you to have high end hardware option and take away mine?

Do you like having wait 2 to 3 years into a generation for the top exclusives to really start releasing because Sony doesn't want to release a huge game like Uncharted to an install base of 15 to 20 million? Now exclusives can potentially ALWAYS have a large base to sell too. There are positives and negatives to any scenario. I guess you decide what matters most to you.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This only matter for exclusives. 3rd party games are always going to be mulitplat for first 2 or 3 years of new console launch. Or I guess you don't remember COD, Far Cry 4, Destiny, Assassin's Creed, Watch Dog, LBP3, every sports game, Dragon Age Inquisition, The Evil Within...you get point. All being developed with ancient ass Xbox 360 and PS3 consoles and base. This is a garbage argument because new hardware being held back by old hardware will continue happen regardless of switching the traditional cycles.

This new mode could possibly result in only being held back hardware that is 3 years old instead 6 to 10 years old.

PC games are ALWAYS held back by console, yet they generally seem to see some significant improvements to their versions of games.

.

And now first party too going to held back by old hardware.
We talk about Neo give people option and more option is good. What about the option for me to get none held back first party games? Is it fair for you to have high end hardware option and take away mine?

Huh?

 

[family_guy]

That is a non-trivial increase in work, money, man hours, and resources that have now been added to the game development cycle. That's all I've been trying to get across.

But let's say it's 2 years ago when developers were still supporting 360 and PS3 and still developing for Xbox One and PS4. More effort or less, and more expensive or less expensive in comparison?

 

[jdmonmou]

This only matter for exclusives. 3rd party games are always going to be mulitplat for first 2 or 3 years of new console launch. Or I guess you don't remember COD, Far Cry 4, Destiny, Assassin's Creed, Watch Dog, LBP3, every sports game, Dragon Age Inquisition, The Evil Within...you get point. All being developed with ancient ass Xbox 360 and PS3 consoles and base. This is a garbage argument because new hardware being held back by old hardware will continue happen regardless of switching the traditional cycles.

This new mode could possibly result in only being held back hardware that is 3 years old instead 6 to 10 years old.

PC games are ALWAYS held back by console, yet they generally seem to see some significant improvements to their versions of games.

To me, the longevity of PS3/360 era proves that iterative releases are not necessary. Uncharted and Doom look fantastic on the PS4 to name a few recent examples of games that show the current tech we have is just fine.

If developers are clamoring for more advanced consoles why did most continue to support the 360 and PS3 as long as they did? Also, why don't more develop with the PC in mind first and then scale down if they are truly concerned with power?

The answer is because developers will make games for the platforms owned by the most people. Which brings me back to my point on why the NEO will flop. Not enough people will buy the thing to make it worthwhile for developers to optimize games for it.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

You are really stating my point... from a different angle. Consoles are limited by power consumption and component pricing issues which have not changed and are not getting better. How can be releasing more consoles more frequently the answer?

Because it's likely cheaper for Sony to have a mid-generation update rather than launching an entirely new console and resetting their userbase, and it's likely more profitable for Sony to extend the current generation as long as possible for the same reason.

Also, Sony likely knew about MS and Scorpio, and the vanilla PS4 trying to exist along side Scorpio + Oculus for another 3-4 years isn't an ideal scenario and it could backfire no matter how much momentum Sony currently has.

I'm not saying the Neo will be success, but the reasons it exists make plenty of sense.

 

[Prisoner KSC2-303]

It doesn't force a longer generation. If these are going to be 3 years cycles not much will change. You talk as if developers were not going to do cross-gen games anyway.

We get to avoid 2 to 3 years of bullshit while the companies wait for the install bases to grow large enough support their biggest game. Any time will be a good time to launch a major exclusive.

It does force a longer generation than some envisaged considering the conservative nature of the PS4's power. Some hoped it'd be closer to 5 years, so it's still a question of perspective as to who you think is forcing people to wait.

I have no idea why you said "You talk as if" when I mentioned nothing relating to the point of developers. Maybe you got confused and meant to quote someone else.

The worry I have with iteration is one of possible forwards compatibility, namely that each machine could be designed to be compatible with the games that are to released on the following iteration, such as PS4 and Neo, and possibly Neo and PS5. It may not be the case, but I fear it could take out the generational leaps that've gone hand in hand traditionally with gameplay evolution, and leave us with machines constantly tethered to the previous outdated hardware.

If it ends up being simply a mid gen refresh, with backwards compatibility, and doesn't mean the generation goes beyond 6 years then I'm all good.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

To me, the longevity of PS3/360 era proves that iterative releases are not necessary. Uncharted and Doom look fantastic on the PS4 to name a few recent examples of games that show the current tech we have is just fine.

If developers are clamoring for more advanced consoles why did most continue to support the 360 and PS3 as long as they did? Also, why don't more develop with the PC in mind first and then scale down if they are truly concerned with power?

The answer is because developers will make games for the platforms owned by the most people. Which brings me back to my point on why the NEO will flop. Not enough people will buy the thing to make it worthwhile for developers to optimize games for it.

Money is your answer. Regardless of how badly outdated last gen was they could afford only release games on current gen consoles.

Were already seeing specs hold back these consoles. Uncharted 4 could not run 60fps like ND originally targeted and the multiplayer had to be scaled down to 900p to accommodate 60fps. Every Frostbite game has to run sub-1080p on consoles to maintain 60fps. The situation won't improve as games continue to get more ambitious.

 

[viHuGi]

I agree it is a leap in computing performance, but I do not think it is marking a different trend than the one I was mentioning. I did not say that performance boosts were not going to happen, just saying that they are spreaded farther and farther apart.

Also, I think that they will be extracting quite a lot of performance with second and third generation chips developed on the new 14nm manufacturing process which means that a PS5 in 2018 would still be a nice jump up in performance over PS4K and a massive one over PS4 making me wonder why gamers need a PS4K and especially moving away from console generations and into iterative/evolutionary upgrades every few years.
Manufacturing nodes are taking longer and longer to get maxed out not less.

It is funny that the GTX 1080 is generating such a demand for a new generation of consoles now, we have yet to see big budget chips on second or third generation 14nm tech paired with HBM2 or further evolutions of fast on board memory...
Technology that will probably become target for home console prices in... 2018...

Tech needs to evolve but this isn't a big leap, more like a "small" leap.

Still ps4 already sold so much Nvidia can't compete so AMD has a good opportunity here with 480 again..

Let's see how it fares on pc though.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

It does force a longer generation than some envisaged considering the conservative nature of the PS4's power. Some hoped it'd be closer to 5 years, so it's still a question of perspective as to who you think is forcing people to wait.

I have no idea why you said "You talk as if" when I mentioned nothing relating to the point of developers. Maybe you got confused and meant to quote someone else.

The worry I have with iteration is one of possible forwards compatibility, namely that each machine could be designed to be compatible with the games that are to released on the following iteration, such as PS4 and Neo, and possibly Neo and PS5. It may not be the case, but I fear it could take out the generational leaps that've gone hand in hand traditionally with gameplay evolution, and leave us with machines constantly tethered to the previous outdated hardware.

If it ends up being simply a mid gen refresh, with backwards compatibility, and doesn't mean the generation goes beyond 6 years then I'm all good.

So the generation might last six years instead of five? One extra year to see major improvements in games right now is OK by me.

Tech needs to evolve but this isn't a big leap, more like a "small" leap.

Still ps4 already sold so much Nvidia can't compete so AMD has a good opportunity here with 480 again..

Let's see how it fares on pc though.

If we end up being able to run most games at 1080p/60fps and no more games struggling to maintain 30fps on Neo I would consider that a major step up.

 

[TrackZ]

I didn't say shit about an exodus. What I'm saying is that a console trying to compete with PC in power is dumb, and that attempting to do so would result more in people going to PC (notice I didn't say every single PS4 owner) than people deciding that upgraded consoles are a better value than PC.

Console doesn't have to be equal to compete against PC. It just has to be close enough that the margin of difference is acceptable given the lower cost and convenience. Plenty would still skip the PC, including power enthusiasts, if that margin is small enough.

 

[viHuGi]

So the generation might last six years instead of five? One extra year to see major improvements in games right now is OK by me.

Games already look great, tell me when another game looks as good as Uncharted 4 on any platform.

Hint :it will take a long time.

 

[jdmonmou]

You totally missed what I said, lol.

Then again, earlier you are of the disillusion that if consoles die, the AAA gaming as we know it won't go with it. As if the bastion of f2p and penny sales are fruitful enough for 8 figure budgeted games to flock to.

Witcher 3 would have never happened without consoles.

I didn't miss what you said. I respectfully disagreed with what you said.

Consoles will eventually die (sad I know), but there will always be games to play. The reason I say this is because physical media will one day die out and no one will buy a console that only has digital downloads through Xbox Live and PSN.

If Sony and Microsoft were smart they'd be trying to get ahead of that and make cloud gaming more appealing. That could potentially even be a death knell to PC gaming as we know it. It would be very attractive to pay for a subscription to a gaming infrastructure as a service platform rather than spending thousands of dollars to upgrade your PC every couple of years. Iterative console releases is like Blockbuster finally getting into DVD by mail when Netflix was switching to on demand streaming.

 

[viHuGi]

Console doesn't have to be equal to compete against PC. It just has to be close enough that the margin of difference is acceptable given the lower cost and convenience. Plenty would still skip the PC, including power enthusiasts, if that margin is small enough.

Some Gaf users still think people will just go on and buy pcs because Neo is coming out, man sometimes I think some people here are just joking because if they are serious lmao

 

[Prisoner KSC2-303]

So the generation might last six years instead of five? One extra year to see major improvements in games right now is OK by me.

Or it could be seven, either way, without a refresh it'd have to be shorter. For some, they'd rather see even greater improvement sooner, rather than incremental ones, and that tends to come with a new generation.

As I said before, the theory that some want others to wait is very much a matter of perspective.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Games already look great, tell me when another game looks as good as Uncharted 4 on any platform.

Hint :it will take a long time.

Tell me why Uncharted 4 could not hit the 60fps target that ND wanted?

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Or it could be seven, either way, without a refresh it'd have to be shorter. For some, they'd rather see even greater improvement sooner, rather than incremental ones, and that tends to come with a new generation.

As I said before, the theory that some want others to wait is very much a matter of perspective.

This is pure speculation. There no is proof that PS5 would launch sooner without Neo happening. That will happen when the tech they consider necessary for a generational leap is available at an affordable price.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I didn't miss what you said. I respectfully disagreed with what you said.

Consoles will eventually die (sad I know), but there will always be games to play. The reason I say this is because physical media will one day die out and no one will buy a console that only has digital downloads through Xbox Live and PSN.

If Sony and Microsoft were smart they'd be trying to get ahead of that and make cloud gaming more appealing. That could potentially even be a death knell to PC gaming as we know it. It would be very attractive to pay for a subscription to a gaming infrastructure as a service platform rather than spending thousands of dollars to upgrade your PC every couple of years. Iterative console releases is like Blockbuster finally getting into DVD by mail when Netflix was switching to on demand streaming.

I was talking about higher end optimization and polish, you commented on something totally different.

As for the bolded, you are delusional. Clearly your all in on PC, so why are you even hear other than stealth cheerleading?

The strange thing is it's an argument that's been used by both sides. Some even think Neo's coming out partly because people will want to go out and build / buy a PC with these new graphics cards.

So we come full circle on the dick waving haven't we?

 

[Prisoner KSC2-303]

Some Gaf users still think people will just go on and buy pcs because Neo is coming out, man sometimes I think some people here are just joking because if they are serious lmao

The strange thing is it's an argument that's been used by both sides. Some even think Neo's coming out partly because people will want to go out and build / buy a PC with these new graphics cards.

 

[viHuGi]

Tell me why Uncharted 4 could not hit the 60fps target that ND wanted?

Still looks better than anything and some levels can't be made by others devs anywhere, its just too complex it's outstanding, look at the chapter 11, can anyone match that? Most likely no.

But sure ps4 limited their vision of 60fps but it's a pretty smooth 30fps I might add.

http://gamingbolt.com/uncharted-4-graphics-analysis-next-gen-begins-when-naughty-dog-says-so

Edit : Neo will address some issues on the PS4 sure and it's welcome but we are already seeing amazing graphics.

 

[geordiemp]

Games already look great, tell me when another game looks as good as Uncharted 4 on any platform.

Hint :it will take a long time.

Uc4 was not as smooth or responsive as TLOU on Ps4 which was 60 FPS.

Beauty over smoothness, whynotboth.gif