Support NeoGAF

[Abdiel]

Abdiel, you seem like a reasonable, logical person. So would you mind explaining how this concept is exclusive to iterative consoles and isn't something that could also be achieved with an x86 PS5? My impression is that these are advantages to systems with the same architecture, which allows BC and FC to be possible. I had assumed this is where things were going since we found out the PS4 was x86, and it's why I was excited by it.

So what exactly makes BC and FC a "Pro" for iteration?

I am going to preface my answer by saying that I am not a software or hardware engineer, and the answer I'm giving is based on the information I've gleaned from those who actually do work with such things:

My understanding is that with a full scale leap into a new generation, even with retaining an x86 architecture, altering enough of the core mechanics into a new system structure should allow for backwards compatibility, sure, but it would require development of new tools and formatting for that generation of software at the core level. I will not attempt to claim the nuances, since it's not an area of expertise, but having read detailed accountings by developers as to their reasonings, it seemed to be a logical consideration.

Would there be factors that would directly contradict that premise? Again, I don't know myself, and I don't claim any expertise there.

 

[Jacksinthe]

Abdiel, you seem like a reasonable, logical person. So would you mind explaining how this concept is exclusive to iterative consoles and isn't something that could also be achieved with an x86 PS5? My impression is that these are advantages to systems with the same architecture, which allows BC and FC to be possible. I had assumed this is where things were going since we found out the PS4 was x86, and it's why I was excited by it.

So what exactly makes BC and FC a "Pro" for iteration?

Rumors pin Neo having a slightly different GPU. This will require new tools. As technology progresses we will more than likely be looking at fewer number increases in speed and more architecture advancement for efficiency and throughput. This, by all rumors, is just a few years difference. I'm really not a tech expert but just looking at different technology advancements in the PC space and how things are changing I can venture a guess to say that while not wildly different, the architecture will not be 100% the same.

The longer the wait, the greater the shift, the more restructuring of tools, the longer it takes to get to the meat and potatoes of gamedev.

With smaller jumps, we can bridge those gaps with smaller steps and faster refactoring or retooling of our toolsets, getting us to build games and utilize hardware faster. Plenty folks gloss over this and want to stomp the ground with "just look at the difference between year one games and final year games!" As if that doesn't require a massive coming-to-grips process where that time could have been better spent on actual gamedev.

Even I write some of my own tools and Unity extensions for our PS4 game. I'd like to move some of those forward instead of a complete rewrite. Small steps and shifts would allow me to quickly refactor those tools for new hardware based on tech - even as a small indie. Now multiply that by who knows how much for AAA studios and longer gaps in hardware refreshes and you'll see why the AAA space is known for being a revolving door of employees.

I've lost friends in this space, I've had friends leave AAA studios from getting burned out. Might not be just from tools, but it's certainly a factor.

I want to keep as many good devs devving and every little bit helps.

As for BC - catalogs that carry forward are preferable. As a dev I believe games should not be exclusively playable in a given timeframe or until repair or support is dropped for old hardware. We are lucky to have places that sell parts for stuff like my NES. I had to buy a 72-pin a couple of years back to repair it. With today's hardware we won't be seeing the same 3rd party support later on so eventually games from certain gens will be harder to play and more expensive when you can for used parts. Preservation is almost non-existent in games these days. In case something ever happens to Absinthe Games I have documents and individuals ready to go which will open source our code for just this purpose with any IP we own.

FC is only important in the interim shifts between iterations to add value proposition and not force a user to update immediately or at all until FC is dropped perhaps with another iteration. Keep the support through a full hardware revision is fine, IMO.

Edit: Beaten like the sloth I am by Abdiel. THANKS, PHONE.

Edit 2: I traced back a bit and will add my thoughts on why MS doing the same is probably a bad idea.

I do believe Chubigans covered this but I'll quickly state: MS isn't in a position with the consumer to where they can get away with it. Scorched earth isn't fully healed and while I have great respect for their 3rd party relations and ID team the consumers spoke and need a bit more time to bounce back. I think their UWP approach is the best version they can do at the moment and that is on some shaky ground. As-is. At least this is my take on why some say they wouldn't want MS doing this. When they get into a better position with mind and market share, sure.

 

[Quasar]

Every market is different and people expect different things based on their experience. So you can't just simply point to one and say it applies to every market.

Well I think theres a difference between disliking consoles moving to faster cycles with multiple models and being confused by their existence.

I certainly just expect a similar reaction to Apples S model phones, for the majority an understanding of what it is (assuming there is competent marketing) but but choosing to wait for the next one where theres more of an advancement and their existing purchase has gotten more use. The exception being for people who need the newest thing or some specific feature, such as support for UHD streaming/blurays.

Makes me wonder if Sony would consider it a success if the Neo gets say 15-20% of the ps4 market and the rest wait till ps5 to update.

 

[kaching]

.I wasn't speaking for all hardcore playstation owners.

No, you didn't speak for all them, you were simply concerned for all their hardcore little souls, so you weren't exactly trying to not speak for all of them either.

but i am one, and my post describes myself and others likeminded.

So then speak for yourself and others who you actually know who are likeminded, don't reach for an entire group to buttress your personal opinion.

The funny part of that is the people who prefer iterative should already be PC gamers because that is one of the main tenets of PC gaming, but many of them appear to balk at the idea.

Perhaps there might be degrees to liking things, as in someone maybe finding iterating every 1-2 years to stay abreast or, even every 6-9 months to really stay bleeding edge...a little tiring. But, OTOH, having to wait 5-7 years for new hardware is also a bit too long to have to wait. So, maybe, just maybe there's some people who might find a slightly more iterative 3-4 yr refresh rate a happy medium. Or at least a natural option to consider on an already wider spectrum of approaches.

In any case, not only the OP but all of the supporting arguments I see for iterative consoles being the future that -should- be taken is distinctly on the persuasive side, attempting to rally support to guarantee the success of this new console that doesn't officially exist yet. Like herding cows into a barn. So as far as I'm reading, it absolutely has everything to do with cheerleading in the case of this thread. How long the iterative vs. not debate has been going on for through the years is irrelevant.

Of course it's relevant because it establishes that the cheerleading exists not simply for the sake of defending a favored brand like you claim, but because there is a longstanding, legitimately established preference for the iterative model amongst a sizable portion of the community. And, frankly, the attempts to cheerlead has as much to do with the knee-jerk booing that the other side seems equally invested in to rally support for their own cause revolving around a new console that doesn't officially exist yet. Because this is a debate that existed long before a whiff of the PS4K was in the air.

 

[Pokemaniac]

I am going to preface my answer by saying that I am not a software or hardware engineer, and the answer I'm giving is based on the information I've gleaned from those who actually do work with such things:

My understanding is that with a full scale leap into a new generation, even with retaining an x86 architecture, altering enough of the core mechanics into a new system structure should allow for backwards compatibility, sure, but it would require development of new tools and formatting for that generation of software at the core level. I will not attempt to claim the nuances, since it's not an area of expertise, but having read detailed accountings by developers as to their reasonings, it seemed to be a logical consideration.

Would there be factors that would directly contradict that premise? Again, I don't know myself, and I don't claim any expertise there.

A PS5 could be as similar or different as Sony wants. All depends on their priorities. Really, they could call the PS4k a PS5, and it wouldn't really make much difference. "Iterative" is just a shift in priorities.

 

[wapplew]

Rumors pin Neo having a slightly different GPU. This will require new tools. As technology progresses we will more than likely be looking at fewer number increases in speed and more architecture advancement for efficiency and throughput. This, by all rumors, is just a few years difference. I'm really not a tech expert but just looking at different technology advancements in the PC space and how things are changing I can venture a guess to say that while not wildly different, the architecture will not be 100% the same.

The longer the wait, the greater the shift, the more restructuring of tools, the longer it takes to get to the meat and potatoes of game dev.

So, the less we wait, the better for dev? By this logic, 2 years iteration is better than 3, 1 years is better than 2, 6 month is better than 12?

 

[nib95]

With smaller jumps, we can bridge those gaps with smaller steps and faster refactoring or retooling of our toolsets, getting us to build games and utilize hardware faster. Plenty folks gloss over this and want to stomp the ground with "just look at the difference between year one games and final year games!" As if that doesn't require a massive coming-to-grips process where that time could have been better spent on actual gamedev.

I find this weird coming from mostly indie devs like yourself, who aren't actually developing games that are that technically or graphically advanced in the first place, and don't really even make extensive use of the current hardware let alone larger jumps. Add to that, with iterative console releases you'll still have to develop for more hardware versions and variants, so it's not like it's not more work in other areas.

You're also speaking on behalf of AAA devs, many of whom (like Epic and Crytek) actually want far more advanced hardware to push their engines and tech even further. It's not like devs even have to, or are forced to push bleeding edge graphics despite getting massive jumps in hardware, they can continue to make graphically less advanced games like your own studio for example, brute forcing things where necessary, which should be easier the more powerful the hardware is.

Also, unlike you, other devs and gamers actually put massive weight and importance on the visuals and tech behind games, it's actually one of the biggest selling points of a new console in the first place, so in that respect that "massive coming to grips process", that you don't regard as "actual gamedev", is to many, up there as one of the most important aspects of game development progress.

 

[Pathfinder]

So if you don't also have gaming PC, you would have passed on almost 3 years of current gen gaming just so you could get a better model?

Yup. I have a backlog to attend to.

 

[Kazaam]

So, the less we wait, the better for dev? By this logic, 2 years iteration is better than 3, 1 years is better than 2, 6 month is better than 12?

Could be, but I think it's also a matter of being practical.. from hardware cost to game development, so I don't know how viable would a 6 month iteration be. I also think it's silly to simplify and compare it like that... you might as well just go to "what if a new iteration comes every day... every hour... every minute... etc.".

It's an interesting and bold move from Sony and given the other trends in technology it will probably be something unavoidable at some point, even if it won't be accepted by the console market now. I personally am happy about this iteration even if I will or I won't upgrade right now, but I can also see how this can fail. I'm very curious if Sony will start a new trend or if it will simply have it as a background product. Either way, I personally don't see the problem with more options.

 

[Syrus]

What are the chances of ths thing playing AAA games in 4K?

£ dont hVe a 4k TV but wilo upgrade this year probably , trying to sell my 7.1 to buy a 4k 7.1 receiver then later a TV

 

[CosmicQueso]

What are the chances of ths thing playing AAA games in 4K?

£ dont hVe a 4k TV but wilo upgrade this year probably , trying to sell my 7.1 to buy a 4k 7.1 receiver then later a TV

Native? 0%

Upscaled? 100%

 

[Marty Chinn]

What are the chances of ths thing playing AAA games in 4K?

£ dont hVe a 4k TV but wilo upgrade this year probably , trying to sell my 7.1 to buy a 4k 7.1 receiver then later a TV

None.

 

[backbreaker65]

So they bump up the cpu/gpu/ram, and tell devs to have a neo mode with the mandate of 1080p and no worse FPS than the base mode and no splitting the "ONLINE" community. That is the game side.

So what if this is just a PS4 and the 4k is for UHD Movies and streaming services. I think they can market that way without all the fuss about splitting the user base.

We must realize by now that these machines play more than games and have for over a decade.

Gamers will kill games, it's just a matter of time.

 

[2blackcats]

So no more remasters then. Guess devs will patch their games when a new console iteration comes out for another burst of sales.

Is downsampling computationaly expensive or trivial? Probably won't go 4K for a while.

 

[EloquentM]

I'm not seeing how this is any huge paradigm shift in the industry. Ppl have been asking for this for ages in the console sphere but it's not as if handhelds and phones haven't been doing this. What makes this be the one change things? if these other device industries are anything to go by won't really do anything new.

 

[Clyzm]

I think over all I can see where OP is coming from, but I think this comes at an absolutely trash time.

Tech advances have slowed to a grind, that's true in a few key areas (CPUs, RAM), but GPUs are still soldiering on with pretty large generational increases. This generation, consoles came out the gate underpowered compared to modern day PCs.

In particular, this refresh comes at a horrible time because of how powerful GPUs are about to get. 14nm finfet manufacturing is here. Ultrawide monitors are here. 4k 144hz monitors are here. VR is here. PCs are about to explode with brand new needs to drive really powerful accessories.

Now along comes the NEO. It sits in a world where 4k TVs and VR are the things it needs to focus on. It isn't powerful enough for 4K internal rendering at 60fps, and it's likely coming out because the PS4 wasn't powerful enough to sufficiently drive PSVR. So it'll handle the VR problem, and it'll upscale to 4k with better framerates and/or visual fidelity. Great. In 3 years it'll feel ancient again. People will complain about 4k framerate, and people will complain about Oculus/Vive being held back.

Had it come out a year later instead where it could capitalize on cheaper brand new manufacturing, I think it would have a fighting chance. However from what we know now, I think it is extremely ill timed and will do little else aside from make existing PS4 owners feel cheated.

 

[The Artisan]

If you want to play the game the best way the ps4 is capable of playing it, you don't have to do a Damn thing.

what is this nonsense? If I want to play Ps4 games in the most ample way, I have to get a Ps4K. What are you talking about?

If you'd like to take the luxury of premium hardware to get more out of the same software, then you could invest in the premium product. The issue is your perception, not the product itself.

The issue I take is the console generation heading in this direction where there is a premium option which forces the consumer (again, not literally) to purchase.

And that means that you have nothing to add, all you're going to do is try and find other voices to agree with you when people like myself, devs, cosmic, etc point out the reasoning and likelihood of what will happen here.

I could say the same thing about you. Judging by my post count I am perhaps the most vocal about it but your dismissive attitude isn't convincing me that your perspective is any more correct than mine.

And that's why it's tiring. You're not saying anything, you're going in circles because it's not saying what you want.

this makes you sound quote irrational. I have been saying again and again and again that I don't appreciate the industry going in this direction.

Not everyone is going to be pleased. I'm not rooting for or against this, though from all the dev insight we've gotten, it's certainly seemed like this is a really big positive going forward for helping with development.

there was also a retired dev who said he sees this as a big negative. And I explained already in this thread why I think his opinion is relevant, I'm not going to explain it again.

 

[wapplew]

I think the most important point on this iterative thing for developer is time & cost.
Not talking about retool or anything, simply on time to develop a game.

No mater how good are the tools, development time simply reach an unsustainable level. It takes 3-4 years to complete a AAA titles on PS4. It will take a lot more to make AAA titles at PS5 caliber I assume.
To me, this evolutionary console model just tactfully say making better ice cream is costly and time consuming, how bout some sprinkle.

I feel sad for maybe not going to get real PS5 caliber games for long long time, but I understand the whole industry just can't keep up and want to slow down.

 

[The Artisan]

No, you didn't speak for all them, you were simply concerned for all their hardcore little souls, so you weren't exactly trying to not speak for all of them either.

Would a simple "some" hardcore gamers in the front of my sentence made more sense to you?

So then speak for yourself and others who you actually know who are likeminded, don't reach for an entire group to buttress your personal opinion.

there have already been people in this thread saying they agree with me. Why are you being so hostile? Have I done something to offend you?

 

[Moneal]

I think over all I can see where OP is coming from, but I think this comes at an absolutely trash time.

Tech advances have slowed to a grind, that's true in a few key areas (CPUs, RAM), but GPUs are still soldiering on with pretty large generational increases. This generation, consoles came out the gate underpowered compared to modern day PCs.

In particular, this refresh comes at a horrible time because of how powerful GPUs are about to get. 14nm finfet manufacturing is here. Ultrawide monitors are here. 4k 144hz monitors are here. VR is here. PCs are about to explode with brand new needs to drive really powerful accessories.

Now along comes the NEO. It sits in a world where 4k TVs and VR are the things it needs to focus on. It isn't powerful enough for 4K internal rendering at 60fps, and it's likely coming out because the PS4 wasn't powerful enough to sufficiently drive PSVR. So it'll handle the VR problem, and it'll upscale to 4k with better framerates and/or visual fidelity. Great. In 3 years it'll feel ancient again. People will complain about 4k framerate, and people will complain about Oculus/Vive being held back.

Had it come out a year later instead where it could capitalize on cheaper brand new manufacturing, I think it would have a fighting chance. However from what we know now, I think it is extremely ill timed and will do little else aside from make existing PS4 owners feel cheated.

It is probably using 14nm. Its coming out now to keep up with all the things you listed, and in three years, when it begins to feel ancient, sony will release a new model.

 

[Abdiel]

what is this nonsense? If I want to play Ps4 games in the most ample way, I have to get a Ps4K. What are you talking about?The issue I take is the console generation heading in this direction where there is a premium option which forces the consumer (again, not literally) to purchase.I could say the same thing about you. Judging by my post count I am perhaps the most vocal about it but your dismissive attitude isn't convincing me that your perspective is any more correct than mine.

this makes you sound quote irrational. I have been saying again and again and again that I don't appreciate the industry going in this direction. there was also a retired dev who said he sees this as a big negative. And I explained already in this thread why I think his opinion is relevant, I'm not going to explain it again.

As I stated previously: You've already got a PS4. The PS4 will play the games the best way it can. If you want the PS4K version, you can pay for the premium version that will have that extra hardware, and the extras associated with that. That's not the version you already paid for, and your perception, as though it's something you're somehow coerced into, denied, or anything of the sort, is on you. That's your perception upsetting you. This is something new being offered as an extra. If you are upset at the idea of a new option, that's your own perspective. The product itself is neutral. It's a new thing, sure, but it doesn't in any way diminish your own ownership, because what you had, was always going to be that. This is just something extra available if you wish to do so.

The retired dev being brought up over and over again has never worked on this hardware and has no actual insight regarding how this might be implemented, he gave a speculative perspective from someone who has been out of the industry for quite some time. It's far less relevant than active developers, in this very thread, offering direct perspective on how this helps them, and what they're looking forward to. Forgive me for dismissing his null insight on hardware he's never touched in what was largely a throwaway article.

You're using terminology in your post, even if 'not literally', that is reinforcing that all of this is based purely on how you're just not happy about it, because it's just your own perspective, rather than a logical consideration of the industry's realities. That's what bugs me, or I find tiring. Your cyclical arguments or attempts to ignore people's reasoned discussion against your points means you're not looking to actually debate it, you're just unhappy about this idea. It's exasperating.

 

[Moneal]

what is this nonsense? If I want to play Ps4 games in the most ample way, I have to get a Ps4K. What are you talking about?The issue I take is the console generation heading in this direction where there is a premium option which forces the consumer (again, not literally) to purchase.I could say the same thing about you. Judging by my post count I am perhaps the most vocal about it but your dismissive attitude isn't convincing me that your perspective is any more correct than mine.

this makes you sound quote irrational. I have been saying again and again and again that I don't appreciate the industry going in this direction. there was also a retired dev who said he sees this as a big negative. And I explained already in this thread why I think his opinion is relevant, I'm not going to explain it again.

So the big issue for you is one that by your own admission only exists in irrational thought.

 

[nib95]

I think the most important point on this iterative thing for developer is time & cost.
Not talking about retool or anything, simply on time to develop a game.

No mater how good are the tools, development time simply reach a unsustainable level. It takes 3-4 years to complete a AAA titles on PS4. It will take a lot more to make AAA titles at PS5 caliber I assume.

To me, this evolutionary console model just tactfully say making better ice cream is costly and time consuming, how bout some sprinkle.

But this is where I think more developers simply need to go the digital only pricing or mid pricing strategy route, and stop chasing the absolute upper tier of technological advancements when they simply don't need to. Ratchet and Clank proves you can have a nice middle ground, and if you're willing to price your game sensibly, still see great success. It's a similar thing with games like The Witness, Ori and the Blind Forest etc. Let those developers and AAA studios who want to push the technical boundaries in substantial or radical ways, continue to do so. Not everyone has to follow suit, and can still see great success in going a less technically advanced route.

 

[MogCakes]

Perhaps there might be degrees to liking things, as in someone maybe finding iterating every 1-2 years to stay abreast or, even every 6-9 months to really stay bleeding edge...a little tiring. But, OTOH, having to wait 5-7 years for new hardware is also a bit too long to have to wait. So, maybe, just maybe there's some people who might find a slightly more iterative 3-4 yr refresh rate a happy medium. Or at least a natural option to consider on an already wider spectrum of approaches.

I don't buy that as a valid reason not to consider PC. One can choose parts at their liesure on PC any time they want, they don't have to wait for a set number of years unless they want the absolute newest parts or prebuilts - that are updated throughout a given year. There is something off with your reasoning.

Of course it's relevant because it establishes that the cheerleading exists not simply for the sake of defending a favored brand like you claim, but because there is a longstanding, legitimately established preference for the iterative model amongst a sizable portion of the community. And, frankly, the attempts to cheerlead has as much to do with the knee-jerk booing that the other side seems equally invested in to rally support for their own cause revolving around a new console that doesn't officially exist yet. Because this is a debate that existed long before a whiff of the PS4K was in the air.

Do you feel threatened by the negative sentiments? I never specified it was a brand people are championing. And yes, that's exactly what I'm getting at, it's a counter-reactive group to the mixed reaction to the 4K rumor. Why do people feel the need to persuade others to 'their side' now when we haven't even seen an official announcement? No, this PS4K-iterative-is-the-future didn't exist in this intensity before the rumor. I don't see what you're trying to do by bringing that up.

 

[Kazaam]

To me, this evolutionary console model just tactfully say making better ice cream is costly and time consuming, how bout some sprinkle.

Haha.. That's actually very well put and makes quite some sense. I personally don't have an expertise in game development and what this new trend might mean for it, but I can totally see your point given the many delayed games and the long time most games (aside from some franchises) need to be developed right now. At the same time, while you're saying the game industry needs to slow down, most people coming from last gen complained how long and slow that generation was. And as the OP wrote and I think you're also saying in your post (with the PS5 comment) is that it will take a very long time (probably quite longer than the already considered long previous generation) to have the same sort of gap in technology that usually was between generations. I find this periodical small upgrades/bumps to consoles as a solution to that.

 

[QaaQer]

Games like Destiny were severely neutered of what could have been their true potential, in which we will probably not see until Destiny 2, due to the memory/tech limitations of the last gen consoles. We do not need this again. Thus I agree with you.

What are people expecting? The important bit of any AAA fps game is that 7second loop that keeps the subject pressing buttons for dozens to hundreds of hours. Huge power gains arent going to change much of anything. Killing shit in d2 isn't going to radically better because 'no ps360'.

 

[The Artisan]

As I stated previously: You've already got a PS4. The PS4 will play the games the best way it can. If you want the PS4K version, you can pay for the premium version that will have that extra hardware, and the extras associated with that.

I find that to be a contradiction. The Ps4K, if it won't have exclusive games, is supposed to be the same platform as the Ps4. Playing the same games only better. Which means the best way to play PlayStation games means buying the Ps4K

That's not the version you already paid for, and your perception, as though it's something you're somehow coerced into, denied, or anything of the sort, is on you. That's your perception upsetting you. This is something new being offered as an extra. If you are upset at the idea of a new option, that's your own perspective. The product itself is neutral. It's a new thing, sure, but it doesn't in any way diminish your own ownership, because what you had, was always going to be that. This is just something extra available if you wish to do so.

The retired dev being brought up over and over again has never worked on this hardware and has no actual insight regarding how this might be implemented, he gave a speculative perspective from someone who has been out of the industry for quite some time. It's far less relevant than active developers, in this very thread, offering direct perspective on how this helps them, and what they're looking forward to. Forgive me for dismissing his null insight on hardware he's never touched in what was largely a throwaway article.

You're using terminology in your post, even if 'not literally', that is reinforcing that all of this is based purely on how you're just not happy about it, because it's just your own perspective, rather than a logical consideration of the industry's realities. That's what bugs me, or I find tiring. Your cyclical arguments or attempts to ignore people's reasoned discussion against your points means you're not looking to actually debate it, you're just unhappy about this idea. It's exasperating.

im on mobile so this is gonna have to be short. I took the time to read the OP and what others on board with it have said. None of it is making me feel any better. You seem knowledgable and know what you're talking about but it isn't convincing me that it's what's best for the industry.

However, other than saying that you could be more empathetic, I haven't said anything against those who who are on board with the way things are. You're getting what you want, others aren't happy about it, maybe they'll come around, maybe they won't. I also said in this thread that I'll make my final decision when Sony gives their official word.

What is your intent in conversing with me though? To convince me I'm irrational? To convince me that this is a necessary shift?

So the big issue for you is one that by your own admission only exists in irrational thought.

im not trying to make a decision or force a decision on anyone. At the end of the day I'm making a choice for myself. What's irrational?

 

[wapplew]

Haha.. That's actually very well put and makes quite some sense. I personally don't have an expertise in game development and what this new trend my mean for it, but I can totally see your point given the many delayed games and the long time most games (aside from some franchises) need to be developed right now. At the same time, while you're saying the game industry needs to slow down, most people coming from last gen complained how long and slow that generation was. And as the OP wrote and I think you're also saying in your post (with the PS5 comment) is that it will take a very long time (probably quite longer than the already considered long previous generation) to have the same sort of gap in technology that usually was between generations. I find this periodical small upgrades/bumps to consoles as a solution to that.

Solution is one way to put it. To me, it's just a clever way to masks stagnation.

 

[shintoki]

Made it easy for me. I no longer have any interest in buying a Sony system again, most likely an MS too.

If they want to go down the route of PC, why am I going to invest in a sub par one? I'll just be sticking with PC. I also feel like this is good news too, because they'll be less prone to changing the architecture anymore. Great for gamers honestly.

 

[QaaQer]

And how many people are Shinobi Colin's sources are they indie or aaa ?
Truth is we don't how developer feedback really is either way .
Plus we all know that not all devs are equal which will play a part .

Who is shinobi aside from a GAF poster with a serious Twitter habit?

 

[nib95]

What are people expecting? The important bit of any AAA game is that 7second loop that keeps the subject pressing buttons for dozens to hundreds of hours. Huge power gains arent going to change much of anything. Killing shit in d2 isn't going to radically better because 'no ps360'.

I don't see why it couldn't be. As a result of not being held back by last gen consoles, the size and scope of the game could be much larger, with far more NPC's, greater hub space scope, much improved physics, destruction, far better visuals etc.

Who is shinobi aside from a GAF poster with a serious Twitter habit?

Someone who has some pretty good contacts within the industry.

 

[Bl4ckSunsh1n3]

Made it easy for me. I no longer have any interest in buying a Sony system again, most likely an MS too.

If they want to go down the route of PC, why am I going to invest in a sub par one? I'll just be sticking with PC. I also feel like this is good news too, because they'll be less prone to changing the architecture anymore. Great for gamers honestly.

If you go with a new release every 2 or 3 years you're pretty much doing what it costs to be a mid to semi-high end PC gamer. At that point you might as well just buy a PC, hook it up to your TV and use your 360/Steam/etc controller. You'll get a better experience for a similar price. You'll probably miss 2 or 3 exclusives worth getting over those three years but, that's about it. The problem, obviously, is the initial entry cost but, if you're already a PC gamer it makes sense to switch over completely to it.

 

[Abdiel]

I find that to be a contradiction. The Ps4K, if it won't have exclusive games, is supposed to be the same platform as the Ps4. Playing the same games only better. Which means the best way to play PlayStation games means buying the Ps4K im on mobile so this is gonna have to be short. I took the time to read the OP and what others on board with it have said. None of it is making me feel any better. You seem knowledgable and know what you're talking about but it isn't convincing me that it's what's best for the industry.

However, other than saying that you could be more empathetic, I haven't said anything against those who who are on board with the way things are. You're getting what you want, others aren't happy about it, maybe they'll come around, maybe they won't. I also said in this thread that I'll make my final decision when Sony gives their official word.

What is your intent in conversing with me though? To convince me I'm irrational? To convince me that this is a necessary shift?im not trying to make a decision or force a decision on anyone. At the end of the day I'm making a choice for myself. What's irrational?

It's not a contradiction, it's still a matter of perception. Those versions would not have existed if this extra hardware hadn't existed, and will not in any way hinder your ability to purchase, play and enjoy the games releasing for the platform you already own. Being released as a premium option means just that, a premium option. Do you feel like you're denied first class seats when you fly on a plane, when you pass them and sit in Economy? You didn't pay for it, so it's irrelevant. You're still flying on the same plane.

And I'm not trying to be apathetic to your situation. It's hard to express emotional context sometimes in pure text, as the great barrier the internet can be, though perhaps my words are coming across as brusque. You and I have talked plenty of times, and I hope you know that I respect you, and I certainly think you're just as equal a member of the boards as I am. That's why I'm communicating with you. You've been active and vocal in this thread, and I'm engaging with you as a result. But what I guess I was trying to get across was that it was exasperating when it feels like the discussion is cyclical with you, because it comes back to the same point each time, that you just don't feel good about it. And at this point, I don't think anyone can really do anything with that. Perhaps it's best to let it digest and wait until Sony actually releases it to make your final determinations?

 

[TaterTots]

As someone who exclusively plays games on PC this is a turn off. I know many people believe you have to upgrade your PC every year for $400, but that is not true. In fact, the PC I currently have will give me a handful of years because I'm not picky. I'm looking at 1080p gaming perfectly fine. With that being said, I do not want to purchase multiple console upgrades throughout a "generation." 400 bucks for a PS4, 400 bucks for a NEO, and 300 bucks for a VR headset(?) is not appealing to me. Especially when I feel like the PS5 will release a couple of years after the NEO. Hypothetically, if I'm correct, that's $1500 in a short amount of time to me.

I have yet to find a reason to purchase a PS4, but what grinds my gears is people have purchased one fairly recently only to discover this news. I'd imagine console only gamers, are not too happy with this. Simply put, this is not what you would expect from console gaming.

 

[Clyzm]

Do you feel like you're denied first class seats when you fly on a plane, when you pass them and sit in Economy? You didn't pay for it, so it's irrelevant. You're still flying on the same plane.

I think what he's getting at is that he DID purchase first class seats. However, at a stopover the airline changed planes with a "first class plus" set of seats. Frankly, I agree with him.

The whole allure of consoles is "here's a hardware spec that we're going to work with it for a decent amount of time and bring you quality entertainment". When this notion changes halfway through a release cycle, one can't help but feel like a fool when they bought a PS4.

 

[QaaQer]

I don't see why it couldn't be. As a result of not being held back by last gen consoles, the size and scope of the game could be much larger, with far more NPC's, greater hub space scope, much improved physics, destruction, far better visuals etc.

Assuming Bungie will even have the budget needed to increase these things, how will they make the moment to moment shooting any better?

Someone who has some pretty good contacts within the industry.

Has he ever said this?

 

[The Artisan]

It's not a contradiction, it's still a matter of perception. Those versions would not have existed if this extra hardware hadn't existed, and will not in any way hinder your ability to purchase, play and enjoy the games releasing for the platform you already own. Being released as a premium option means just that, a premium option. Do you feel like you're denied first class seats when you fly on a plane, when you pass them and sit in Economy? You didn't pay for it, so it's irrelevant. You're still flying on the same plane.

I understand what you're saying here. In fact, because I love PlayStation and video games so much, ive been trying to tell myself again and again to just adopt this mindset. Maybe I'll come around. What I've been trying to say though is that, in terms of the PlayStation platform I've always wanted to stay up to date on the best hardware; it's why I bought a Ps4 after owning a Ps3, and why I bought a PS3 after having a Ps2, and why I got a Ps2 after getting a Ps1. In order to stay up to date with the latest PlayStation hardware it means having to buy hardware again this year.

And I'm not trying to be apathetic to your situation. It's hard to express emotional context sometimes in pure text, as the great barrier the internet can be, though perhaps my words are coming across as brusque. You and I have talked plenty of times, and I hope you know that I respect you, and I certainly think you're just as equal a member of the boards as I am. That's why I'm communicating with you. You've been active and vocal in this thread, and I'm engaging with you as a result. But what I guess I was trying to get across was that it was exasperating when it feels like the discussion is cyclical with you, because it comes back to the same point each time, that you just don't feel good about it. And at this point, I don't think anyone can really do anything with that. Perhaps it's best to let it digest and wait until Sony actually releases it to make your final determinations?

Fair enough. I appreciate the fact that you establish that there is a mutual respect between us. Whenever you talk to someone whether it be online or not I think that is important, although as we all know, things escalate faster on the internet since it's not face to face. Anyways, you've said your piece and I understand where you're coming from, like I said...video games have been a fascination for me since I was like 5 years old, and a passion of mine all throughout growing up with PlayStation, so I don't want to call it quits. I'll bow out for now because as you said, there isn't really much sense in me going in circles expressing my distaste for all this. Best I just wait it out for now until everything about the Ps4K comes to light.

 

[Bolivar687]

Not sure if this has been brought up yet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSYBO1BrB1I&feature=youtu.be

Just watched this video and now it makes total sense for Sony to be moving in tandem with AMD's manufacturing pace. The title and premise is a little presumptuous but if you can get past a heavy nordic accent, the argument is incredibly well researched and presented. It's imperative for the market leader and developers to get on board with AMD's architecture improvements and getting used to their mainstream, small die GPUs further optimized for modern APIs. When Navi launches in 2018, we're going to be getting very powerful and cost-effective gaming hardware by scaling multiple small die GPUs and AMD's investment in multi-core CPUs.This is why they invested in Mantle and took the small margins of the console market, as they're now firmly in control of DX12, Vulkan, and the platforms where game developers make almost all of their money.

I'm still going to shift my games budget more towards PC instead of keeping up with Sony's iterations but I'm totally on board with chubigans that PS4K is an important and necessary change, if for a slightly different reason.

 

[Bl4ckSunsh1n3]

I think what he's getting at is that he DID purchase first class seats. However, at a stopover the airline changed planes with a "first class plus" set of seats. Frankly, I agree with him.

The whole allure of consoles is "here's a hardware spec that we're going to work with it for a decent amount of time and bring you quality entertainment". When this notion changes halfway through a release cycle, one can't help but feel like a fool when they bought a PS4.

That's the issue I see that a lot of consumers have. They paid for what they thought was a first class ticket, only to find out they actually bought coach 6 months after purchase. Of course Sony could fix this by offering a trade-in program to anyone who bought a PS4 within a certain time frame of this announcement but, they won't. According to some that's just an entitled way of thinking anyways.

Here's where it hits for me. My nephew is 8 and finally got his PS4 for Christmas. Most excited he's been in a long time. He'll be upset when the PS4K comes out. Not because of the games but because of what it actually means as it relates to the PS4, which is you're now a second class citizen.

I digress though...I really need to stay out of these because I will not upgrade now or ever. I'll play my PS4 for exclusives only until it no longer can then I'll move on from consoles and just stay on my PC gaming, which has been my main way of gaming since the late 80s anyways.

 

[nib95]

Assuming Bungie will even have the budget needed to increase these things, how will they make the moment to moment shooting any better?

Moment to moment shooting is but one element out of a countless number that add to gameplay or enhance overall experiences, whether in terms of player freedom, options, scope, more strategic or tactical options and so on. There is literally no logic in focusing on only moment to moment shooting as the only barometer for progress or change. The things I mentioned all add to the aforementioned, and things like the scope of the game world (eg more open spaces for better and more complex vehicular combat, or larger bosses with more players involved etc), destruction (for taking up or strategically blowing away cover etc), far more NPC's (to interact or play with) and so on, are certainly going to going to change the experience in a tangible way.

Has he ever said this?

By virtue of his insider tidbits, that goes without saying. Though he has divulged some info to me personally, on at least one of his contacts, yes. But I'm certainly not about to announce the details of that on here.

 

[The Artisan]

I think what he's getting at is that he DID purchase first class seats. However, at a stopover the airline changed planes with a "first class plus" set of seats. Frankly, I agree with him.

The whole allure of consoles is "here's a hardware spec that we're going to work with it for a decent amount of time and bring you quality entertainment". When this notion changes halfway through a release cycle, one can't help but feel like a fool when they bought a PS4.

Yep. Would any passengers have bought the first class seats if they knew there were going to be first class plus seats so soon after purchase?

 

[Abdiel]

I think what he's getting at is that he DID purchase first class seats. However, at a stopover the airline changed planes with a "first class plus" set of seats. Frankly, I agree with him.

The whole allure of consoles is "here's a hardware spec that we're going to work with it for a decent amount of time and bring you quality entertainment". When this notion changes halfway through a release cycle, one can't help but feel like a fool when they bought a PS4.

*Especially* in this gen, there was always a 'first class' where PC gaming and such has demonstrated that there's capacity to play those same games in higher fidelity with other options. But it came with different context, or different planes, I guess in this analogies. For this circumstance, everyone was on the same flight, and then the airline started offering first class as an option instead, when maybe other airlines have had it available for awhile. Previously, everyone was the same exact format. Now that first class exists, your seat is still your same seat. If you want to pay more, you can get more leg room, but you're still going to be on the same flight.

And I can safely assure you that conversations like these, and the feeling of being slighted, is largely confined to these message boards. I've had a few people ask after it in store already for any rumblings, and there's no bitterness, more enthusiastic tech folks eager to see what's coming down the pipe.

That's the issue I see that a lot of consumers have. They paid for what they thought was a first class ticket, only to find out they actually bought coach 6 months after purchase. Of course Sony could fix this by offering a trade-in program to anyone who bought a PS4 within a certain time frame of this announcement but, they won't. According to some that's just an entitled way of thinking anyways.

Here's where it hits for me. My nephew is 8 and finally got his PS4 for Christmas. Most excited he's been in a long time. He'll be upset when the PS4K comes out. Not because of the games but because of what it actually means as it relates to the PS4, which is you're now a second class citizen.

I digress though...I really need to stay out of these because I will not upgrade now or ever. I'll play my PS4 for exclusives only until it no longer can then I'll move on from consoles and just stay on my PC gaming, which has been my main way of gaming since the late 80s anyways.

I don't game on PC myself, at all, but I understand the draw. Myself, I'll probably end up getting a PS4K, once I trade in my existing one, or selling it, if I can get a better deal that way, but that's just because I know I can. I do all of my gaming on my PS4, and being able to get more out of it seems like a worthwhile investment to me. I do a lot of gaming, after all. I've got 12+ preorders just this year.

As to your nephew... I mean, he got it just recently, and this will be at the earliest, a holiday season release, so it'd be almost a year since he had it, if not a full year, so it's still a solid gap in time, and even then, it's a higher end version. When I was a kid and I saw the gameboy updates, I generally asked my parents if I could trade towards the newer models as part of a present, so I could contribute, if I wanted the better version. Maybe I just understood it was a cost related upgrade, even as a kid?

And that's if it even is relevant to most kids. This kind of product will largely be marketed towards adults, not kids. The core model will still be the one directed towards price conscious parents, since they'll be able to lower the cost so much more anyway.

 

[xaosslug]

I think what he's getting at is that he DID purchase first class seats. However, at a stopover the airline changed planes with a "first class plus" set of seats. Frankly, I agree with him..

nah, it's more like he bought a seat - the only seat available at the time. And then new/first class seats were made available... he could pay the price to upgrade, or just keep the seat he has and enjoy the ride.I mean it's not like he's being ushered off the plane. LOL

 

[Clyzm]

*Especially* in this gen, there was always a 'first class' where PC gaming and such has demonstrated that there's capacity to play those same games in higher fidelity with other options. But it came with different context, or different planes, I guess in this analogies. For this circumstance, everyone was on the same flight, and then the airline started offering first class as an option instead, when maybe other airlines have had it available for awhile. Previously, everyone was the same exact format. Now that first class exists, your seat is still your same seat. If you want to pay more, you can get more leg room, but you're still going to be on the same flight.

And I can safely assure you that conversations like these, and the feeling of being slighted, is largely confined to these message boards. I've had a few people ask after it in store already for any rumblings, and there's no bitterness, more enthusiastic tech folks eager to see what's coming down the pipe.

See, but PCs aren't relevant to the discussion; that's a whole separate argument. I'm a PC gamer primarily and PCs are a whole different beast. You fiddle with everything, you likely build a more expensive machine (yes, I know $400 "console killer" PCs exist, but frankly you're more likely to splurge on parts). People don't necessarily want that.

So they look to the alternative. Hey, here's this static thing for $400. If history is any indication, it stays the same for 5-8 years. It offers fantastic return on investment, and is at the forefront of every developer's mind for those 5-8 years. It gets the first class treatment the whole way.

Now it doesn't. Now I'm sure a lot of people (especially those who purchased in the last year or so) are wondering why they didn't build a PC.

And of course there are no rumblings in store. There's no marketing yet. By and large, the public probably doesn't even know a "PS4k" is in the pipeline.

 

[The Artisan]

nah, it's more like he bought a seat - the only seat available at the time. And then new/first class seats were made available... he could pay the price to upgrade, or just keep the seat he has and enjoy the ride.I mean it's not like he's being ushered off the plane. LOL

not really. His analogy is more in line with my train of thought than what you're saying.

 

[Abdiel]

See, but PCs aren't relevant to the discussion; that's a whole separate argument. I'm a PC gamer primarily and PCs are a whole different beast. You fiddle with everything, you likely build a more expensive machine (yes, I know $400 "console killer" PCs exist, but frankly you're more likely to splurge on parts). People don't necessarily want that.

So they look to the alternative. Hey, here's this static thing for $400. If history is any indication, it stays the same for 5-8 years. It offers fantastic return on investment, and is at the forefront of every developer's mind for those 5-8 years. It gets the first class treatment the whole way.

Now it doesn't. Now I'm sure a lot of people (especially those who purchased in the last year or so) are wondering why they didn't build a PC.

And of course there are no rumblings in store. There's no marketing yet. By and large, the public probably doesn't even know a "PS4k" is in the pipeline.

Nah, I doubt we'll likely hear much of any response, and I can almost guarantee we'll hear virtually no 'I should have built a PC" comments. Those folks stick to places like this. The mass market doesn't even consider that as a viable premise. It's not really in the same frame of reference.

I personally have no interest in gaming on a PC. I have a decent laptop, but I have made no effort to use it for gaming purposes, and I've moved enough times and have a small enough apartment, that making any other arrangements to get a tower for a proper desktop arrangement is way more hassle than I have interest in. It wouldn't suit me at all. Those are my reasons, but the mass market typically uses consoles because it's what their established friends use, the dominant player base for multi-plats is on, etc.

And I don't really agree with your take on my plane analogy, but I guess it'll just be a matter of wait and see. My retail experience is what I'm drawing off of for this, which is why I say that with confidence. I don't think that any significant portion of the purchasers will really be all that concerned with the option, except with the interest to possibly trade-up.

 

[QaaQer]

Not sure if this has been brought up yet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSYBO1BrB1I&feature=youtu.be

Just watched this video and now it makes total sense for Sony to be moving in tandem with AMD's manufacturing pace. The title and premise is a little presumptuous but if you can get past a heavy nordic accent, the argument is incredibly well researched and presented. It's imperative for the market leader and developers to get on board with AMD's architecture improvements and getting used to their mainstream, small die GPUs further optimized for modern APIs. When Navi launches in 2018, we're going to be getting very powerful and cost-effective gaming hardware by scaling multiple small die GPUs and AMD's investment in multi-core CPUs.This is why they invested in Mantle and took the small margins of the console market, as they're now firmly in control of DX12, Vulkan, and the platforms where game developers make almost all of their money.

I'm still going to shift my games budget more towards PC instead of keeping up with Sony's iterations but I'm totally on board with chubigans that PS4K is an important and necessary change, if for a slightly different reason.

Fantastic watch. Thanks for the link.

Moment to moment shooting is but one element out of a countless number that add to gameplay or enhance overall experiences, whether in terms of player freedom, options, scope, more strategic or tactical options and so on. There is literally no logic in focusing on only moment to moment shooting as the only barometer for progress or change. The things I mentioned all add to the aforementioned, and things like the scope of the game world (eg more open spaces for better and more complex vehicular combat, or larger bosses with more players involved etc), destruction (for taking up or strategically blowing away cover etc), far more NPC's (to interact or play with) and so on, are certainly going to going to change the experience in a tangible way.

To the point of making destiny1 a joke? I don't see it. Destiny 2 will be a better game, but that will have very little to do with 'not being crippled by ps360'.

By virtue of his insider tidbits, that goes without saying. Though he has divulged some info to me personally, on at least one of his contacts, yes. But I'm certainly not about to announce the details of that on here.

So he isn't an insider and claims nothing.

 

[Clyzm]

Nah, I doubt we'll likely hear much of any response, and I can almost guarantee we'll hear virtually no 'I should have built a PC" comments. Those folks stick to places like this. The mass market doesn't even consider that as a viable premise.

And I don't really agree with your take on my plane analogy, but I guess it'll just be a matter of wait and see. My retail experience is what I'm drawing off of for this, which is why I say that with confidence. I don't think that any significant portion of the purchasers will really be all that concerned with the option, except with the interest to possibly trade-up.

If you're going to go based off retail experience, how much annoyance did you hear from parents regarding the DS, DS Lite, DSi XL, 3DS etc. bit? I heard a fair bit. Not only confusion, but straight annoyance that their kid wants the new one.

How about iPhones? I get rumblings all the time from people who believe in planned obsolescence arguments, quick release cycles. etc.

I think the new PS4 is much better compared to those markets than to traditional console sales.

 

[Keihart]

Forward compatible is the compromise for short cycle, it's nothing but giant ass anchor that limit software & hardware potential.
It's the most stupid idea of this whole iterative business model that kill the one of the appeal of console for me.

I still can't understand how the problem with forward compability is a non issue with so much posters when just a couple months ago almost everyone was complaining about remasters and crossgen.

 

[nib95]

Not sure if this has been brought up yet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSYBO1BrB1I&feature=youtu.be

This is a fantastic video. AMD are being pretty damn clever, and whilst I completely dislike the idea of full on iterative console cycles constantly held back by older hardware going forward, at least from a gamer and value proposition perspective, that imo stand to ruin one of the key incentives to console gaming, I can see how it benefits AMD here, especially with the multi smaller die systems going forward, that are going to make things so much more problematic for Nvidia, and be a potential catalyst to AMD's dominance with not only multi-GPU's, but the multi-core CPU side too.

On a side note, if the PS5 does come in 2018/19, I really, really hope they skip Vega and jump straight to Navi. With that being said, PC gaming is looking more inciting to me than ever before.