Support NeoGAF

[David Ricardo]

Did you even read the article....

Would you care to elaborate?

 

[Marty Chinn]

Surely you know what you're typing is false. When the Xbox one and PS4 released the PS3 and 360 were still the lowest common denominators with the largest install bases. The only difference being that the architectures between PS4 and PS3 are so different that massive sacrifices had to be made to develop for both user bases.

So no, when a new console comes out it has never been 'the baseline'. That comes with time only this time the similarity between architectures means exploiting the extra grunt on offer should be orders of magnitude simpler without compromising the stability of the game on the less powerful console

No, I know what I'm typing is true. In less than one year after release, games were being released with the target focal platforms were the PS4, Xbox One and PC. Even with PS3 and 360 ports still being released, they were farmed out to other developers to port down to those platforms while the main developer was working on the current gen consoles. In fact, we were getting AAA titles less than a year after release that did not get 360 and PS3 versions. Factoring in how long it takes to develop AAA games of that scale, and even factoring in lead time available with access to dev kits prior to the release of the consoles themselves, it's pretty clear that development shifted focus to the PS4/Xbox One being the new target baseline. Launch titles certainly are hindered by cross gen, but that went away pretty quickly once you moved past launch. The only reason you still saw 360 and PS3 down ports being released is like you said, there was money to be had still by releasing down ported versions. The PS3 and 360 were not the baselines for those games unless you think the farmed out developers were dictating how the game was being developed over the main development team.

 

[GamerMax73]

I don't think there will ever be PS4K games that don't run on a PS4.

AFIAK, the PS3 is currently still manufactured (I can pick a new one up from Argos for £179). Regardless of anything else at all, I'll be pretty damn certain the PS4K will still be manufactured and sold for some time after the PS5's release. I think the PS4 will cease production before PS5's release. Read in to that what you will about PS4K not running on PS4...

PS4/K games will run on all newer PlayStations going forward.

Hopefully yes. Even without PS4K no one was expecting Sony to radically change the hardware enough to seriously effect BC. Hell, we all thought that was part of the reason for partnering with AMD in the first place.

Nothing is going to require a dev to make a PS5 game run on older hardware unless they want to.

Maybe not. Sony might put a temporary certification clause for PS5 in the same way they are now for PS4K, they might not. Ultimately what machines they support is a question for individual developers.

However, from Sony's and the consumers point of view. When PS5 hits PS4 owners have three legitimate choices:

1. Super Chaep - Buy a secondhand PS4K
2. Cheap - Buy a brand new PS4K
3. Normal - Buy a brand new PS5

Whatever happens the PS4 userbase will naturally start shrinking compared to these two platforms. After all, the PS3 userbase isn't as strong today as it was 3 years ago, is it?

As a developer, where are you going to concentrate your efforts? PS4+, PS4K+ or PS5 exclusive? I'm sure the answer will be different for individual dev teams, but I'll happily place bets that PS4+ is the least popular option, and in the first couple of years PS5 exclusive would be rarities.

Remember 2016, with the release of first party games like Uncharted 4, is being hailed as the first real year of PS4. It's taken 3 years for PS4 development to get this far...

 

[Swass]

With the news that the NX is pushed into 2017, AMD not being able to meet 14mm demand, and Microsoft doesn't seem near having their iteration ready to go, this seems like a brilliant move for Sony. My reasoning here is that by getting the specs finalised allowed them to get priority on the 14mm chip production this year which probably pushed the NX into next and possibly the Xoox iteration as well. This would give Sony 6 months on the market including holiday 2016 all by themselves with the most powerful console..

 

[Pathfinder]

With the news that the NX is pushed into 2017, AMD not being able to meet 14mm demand, and Microsoft doesn't seem near having their iteration ready to go, this seems like a brilliant move for Sony. My reasoning here is that by getting the specs finalised allowed them to get priority on the 14mm chip production this year which probably pushed the NX into next and possibly the Xoox iteration as well. This would give Sony 6 months on the market including holiday 2016 all by themselves with the most powerful console..

That's all assuming Microsoft doesn't release their iteration around the same time as Sony.

Just because they haven't officially announced (leaked) it yet doesn't mean it's not in the works. They could just be keeping it very close to the chest and waiting for their time to strike.

 

[Swass]

That's all assuming Microsoft doesn't release their iteration around the same time as Sony.

Just because they haven't officially announced (leaked) it yet doesn't mean it's not in the works. They could just be keeping it very close to the chest and waiting for their time to strike.

Even so, Sony is to the point where development kits are reaching developer hands, and likely the design and order for the 14mm chip has already reached AMD for production to begin.. if Microsoft and Nintendo are a step behind here, Sony gets the limited 14mm production to meet a holiday launch while the others slide to next year..

 

[bigedole]

Just nitpicking here, but AMD doesn't produce chips. They don't own a fab anymore. AMD designs an SOC and then sends that design to either Global Foundries or TSMC to fabricate. If anyone is having trouble with a 14 nm process, it's one of them, not AMD.

 

[jroc74]

I'm not seeing this anywhere, especially not in this thread. Your own insecurities creating that perception perhaps?

That in a nutshell is what some of the arguments about all this come down to.

Surely you know what you're typing is false. When the Xbox one and PS4 released the PS3 and 360 were still the lowest common denominators with the largest install bases. The only difference being that the architectures between PS4 and PS3 are so different that massive sacrifices had to be made to develop for both user bases.

So no, when a new console comes out it has never been 'the baseline'. That comes with time only this time the similarity between architectures means exploiting the extra grunt on offer should be orders of magnitude simpler without compromising the stability of the game on the less powerful console

Even if we post this a million times...there will still be comparisons made...just like when ppl compare the n3DS to the Neo. And on that note I appreciate Nintendo breaking down the sales of the different 3DS models in their recent financial report. The Neo might do ok sales wise.

 

[dano1]

Would you care to elaborate?

With this new cycle, you don't have to worry about that anymore. The PS4 is also the PS4K, and is probably the PS5 too. When the PS4K launches, it will already have a userbase of over 40 million players. It already has all of the developmental tools that have matured and strengthened over the last few years. There's no risk to building the next big online game late in the PS4 future, because the transition over to the new system is built into the ecosystem. This is a huge, huge benefit to game development.