Support NeoGAF

[pixellated_man]

What's to stop them from going further and basically doing an iphone situation. Brand new model every 2 years with a "S" version inbetween.

What's to stop them from stepping back from this iterative model if it doesn't pan out how they'd hoped for? If we are to take the opinions in this thread at face value, the success of such a business model is no way guaranteed.

 

[kc44135]

Awesome week. First the NX controller unveil and now this.

Man, I hope all this is fake. I really, genuinely do.

 

[Moneal]

This is how I'm trying to figure this out. You got a dev working on four versions of a game at once and they have to somehow build it to take advantage of the new PS4 which could be weaker or stronger than the new xbox while also making sure it's still good on the old consoles.

Most currently design for pc and port to consoles anyway. Not much would change on that front.

 

[SneakyStephan]

You keep saying "optimize" but I don't understand what that really means to you. .

Idk what he means but by optimising for fixed hardware you'd assume they (at least for exclusive games) run through their entire game testing the performance of their levels/environments and fix issues and move /remove things to make sure you always maintain that locked 60 or 30 fps.

If you look at games like tomb raider 2013 (shanty town) or witcher 3 (some areas in the swamp) or dark souls (blight town) the performance absolutely craters in those areas.

Those you would refer to as unoptimised areas in the game. In a multiplatform game you can either cater to the lowest common denominator hardware and tone them down, or don't and have it look as good as possible on better hardware.

In a first party exclusive something like that should normally NEVER happen, as you know exactly what hardware it'll run on and you can test each area to see exactly how it'll perform and whether it's up to standard or not. There is no excuse for performance drops.

Basically you build and fine tune the entire game around the limitations of that one particular set up.


Now if you have multiple performance targets for an exclusive game then you could worry that they'd treat the lower spec console the same way a multiplatform studio would treat a lower spec platform.

For multiplatform games absolutely nothing will change, they're already making their games for an infinite number of hardware setups and a bunch of platforms. They haven't cared about optimising the console versions of their games for the consoles since the end of the ps2 generation (which is a shame )

 

[mckmas8808]

i also expect that gow4 would be a good launch title for it, but i wonder why they wouldn't just let ps vr breathe more unless they didn't really have a ton of faith in it.

But Shu said the demand for PSVR is higher than they thought. And they are estimated to sell 1 to 2 million PSVRs this year!

 

[PensivePen]

I'm intrigued by the concept, but need to see how the official word and execution turns out. I expect most developers to target the base PS4 spec where most of the money is and for the 4K to mainly receive improvements in areas like framerate, IQ and some visual effects.

 

[Heshinsi]

If you are upgrading, the graphics card will probably the only thing that you actually need to upgrade. There are people maxing this year's releases with 6 year old hardware (other than the graphics card)
A graphics card the price of a PS4K will last you more than the PS4 did before having the upgrade version, and it will last you more than the remaining life of the 4K. Upgrading your PC is evidently cheaper and more effective.

4K gaming on PC requires something substantially more powerful than a GTX970 though. If I'm planning on playing latest and greatest on PC 1440p/4K, I need a 980ti. I'm probably going to up[grade mine in a couple of years if not sooner to keep up.

 

[DownWithTheShip]

Man, I hope all this is fake. I really, genuinely do.

Some elaborate April fools joke.

Tomorrow they'll reveal it was all a joke.

 

[Stilton Disco]

I stand by what I said. The consoles lose nothing by this move and only gain one additional hardware configuration. Contrary to popular belief, this will not be a problem to the devs or to the general console gaming populous. The common target is not lost just because an additional target is added, that's ridiculous. The current common target just becomes the 'lowest target of two' and that apparently bothers you.

The common target will be the more powerful console, that will be easier to program for as it doesn't require as much optimisation to get running properly.

This situation is not going to mean the same games but 60fps on the PS4K and everything carrying on as before on PS4, it means those same 30fps maximum frame rate with as many pretty effects as possible Dev goals will now be targeted at PS4K, and downports with less optimisation, worse performance and possibly even less impressive results overall than we're even seeing now for most games on PS4.

And in a just a few short years time it will happen again with the PS8K.

This benefits no one but the big budget production studios, who can now just brute force their way past any development issues rather than need to learn how to get the most out of the hardware. This is killing late gen optimisation and the ever more impressive releases that we used to get and mean the future of console gaming is a never ending procession of disappointing cross gen titles with ever more performance issues as more and more focus can be put on pretty graphics on the latest hardware before any other consideration.

 

[RootCause]

Will framerate be improved for games with unlocked framerate? Like some ps2 games?

 

[timmyp53]

Reminds me of this:

 

[Iacobellis]

So are consoles going to go the way of smartphones and tablets? An upgraded device every few years, but still the same core system?

For example, as long as the developer has properly updated the app, I could play the same game on my iPhone 6 that was originally targeted for something much older like the iPhone 3G. I wouldn't mind this happening to consoles, it would definitely end the entire guessing game to backwards compatibility.

 

[pixellated_man]

But devs never fully push hardware unless you talking first party .
Do you think 3rd party devs try to push PS4 to the limit ?
Not to mention there also X1 to take into account and marketing deal etc etc .
Also pushing to the limit is not always a good thing since framerate always take a hit because of effects .




Devs don't optimize for the consoles now why would PSK4 change that .

Good points. In complete agreement especially about devs having to target Xone. Don't see many Xbox one owners complaining about a more powerful console (ps4) ruining their multiplatform games!

 

[Vinland]

This is how I'm trying to figure this out. You got a dev working on four versions of a game at once and they have to somehow build it to take advantage of the new PS4 which could be weaker or stronger than the new xbox while also making sure it's still good on the old consoles, which has a power gap itself.

This could be seen as an olive branch to Microsoft in taking on the consumer dissent for what both feel is necessary: iterative console hardware. It is also a way to burry the Xbox one parity bullshit and head Nintendo off at the pass.

If this shift is coming do it with nearly 40 million consoles sold. What are the knee jerker so going to do, buy an Xbox one out of protest and get the worst? Buy an Xbox onepointfive and lose backwards compat on all the current titles for ps4? Buy a smurgleblaster 5000 PC where all the big multiplayer AAA FPS titles have a fraction of the user base, if we're talking frankly.

Nope, they will keep their ps4 or upgrade. And like it.

Spoiler

and we will all probably like it if this isn't all a hoax

 

[Memento]

OMFG IT IS 1:55 AM HERE AND THIS THREAD JUST KEEPS GOING...

STAHP GUYS U ALL GONNA GET CRAZY

 

[MUnited83]

4K gaming on PC requires something substantially more powerful than a GTX970 though. If I'm planning on playing latest and greatest on PC 1440p/4K, I need a 980ti. I'm probably going to up[grade mine in a couple of years if not sooner to keep up.

Well, if you want to set some arbitrary goal like running all your games at 8K, of course you will need to spend more on upgrades, that just common sense.
The PS4K won't run games at 4K though, so talking about 4K gaming seems a bit irrelevant. it will run them at 1080p, and you don't need to upgrade every single year to keep up with it. You can literally buy a 400$ or less GPU now and i will always run games with better settings and framerates than the PS4K.

 

[Moneal]

The common target will be the more powerful console, that will be easier to program for as it doesn't require as much optimisation to get running properly.

This situation is not going to mean the same games but 60fps on the PS4K and everything carrying on as before on PS4, it means those same 30fps maximum frame rate with as many pretty effects as possible Dev goals will now be targeted at PS4K, and downports with less optimisation, worse performance and possibly even less impressive results overall than we're even seeing now for most games on PS4.

And in a just a few short years time it will happen again with the PS8K.

This benefits no one but the big budget production studios, who can now just brute force their way past any development issues rather than need to learn how to get the most out of the hardware. This is killing late gen optimisation and the ever more impressive releases that we used to get and mean the future of console gaming is a never ending procession of disappointing cross gen titles with ever more performance issues as more and more focus can be put on pretty graphics on the latest hardware before any other consideration.

Ill ask again why isnt this happening with xbox1. Very few titles run terrible on it compared to ps4. Many games have targeted xbox1 and just let ps4 brute force its way through.

 

[GHG]

I've come to the conclusion that some people like stagnation in order to not make their purchases seem inferior.

No wonder some of you say building a gaming PC costs thousands. It does when only having the best is acceptable.

History has shown time and time again that devs don't target the most powerful hardware. If they did then PC gaming would be glorious. We would have a new Crysis every 6 months.

 

[Tagyhag]

Sacrifices from the PS4k experience.

Which could literally mean anything. Given that devs currently choose to sacrifice effects, textures, lighting, and such from the PC version to deliver a 1080p (usually) 30fps (usually) experience on the PS4, I'd imagine the same exact sacrifices will take place to offer the same experience PS4 owners are currently getting.

The PS4 spec hasn't changed. High end PCs are always changing. Now another new, better (but still not top of the line) configuration exists. What has changed from a dev perspective?

But it says sacrifices made to performance...

 

[plainr_]

This ones real and not 3D printed

Wait, that was confirmed 3d printed?

 

[CCIE]

I'll get it strictly for the 4K Blu Ray movies... steal at that price

 

[pixellated_man]

Idk what he means but by optimising for fixed hardware you'd assume they (at least for exclusive games) run through their entire game testing the performance of their levels/environments and fix issues and move /remove things to make sure you always maintain that locked 60 or 30 fps.

If you look at games like tomb raider 2013 (shanty town) or witcher 3 (some areas in the swamp) or dark souls (blight town) the performance absolutely craters in those areas.

Those you would refer to as unoptimised areas in the game. In a multiplatform game you can either cater to the lowest common denominator hardware and tone them down, or don't and have it look as good as possible on better hardware.

In a first party exclusive something like that should normally NEVER happen, as you know exactly what hardware it'll run on and you can test each area to see exactly how it'll perform and whether it's up to standard or not. There is no excuse for performance drops.

Basically you build and fine tune the entire game around the limitations of that one particular set up.


Now if you have multiple performance targets for an exclusive game then you could worry that they'd treat the lower spec console the same way a multiplatform studio would treat a lower spec platform.

For multiplatform games absolutely nothing will change, they're already making their games for an infinite number of hardware setups and a bunch of platforms. They haven't cared about optimising the console versions of their games for the consoles since the end of the ps2 generation (which is a shame )

Very interesting. Thanks for posting!
Now I'm off to bed. If I don't reply to anyone you know why!

 

[Night Angel]

But it says sacrifices made to performance...

Ok, and if you want to believe that the only way that can be interpreted is to release the same exact product and let it run at 6 fps, well by golly you go right ahead. My post was perfectly clear.

 

[SmiteOfHand]

So are consoles going to go the way of smartphones and tablets? An upgraded device every few years, but still the same core system?

For example, as long as the developer has properly updated the app, I could play the same game on my iPhone 6 that was originally targeted for something much older like the iPhone 3G. I wouldn't mind this happening to consoles, it would definitely end the entire guessing game to backwards compatibility.

Sort of, yes, the important distinction between what we are seeing here for consoles and tablet/mobile is consoles look to be operating on a 2-3 year cycle. Meaning your hardware will be strongly supported for a much longer time table than mobile. Closer to the traditional console generation as we know it now around 6-8 years give or take and depending on how things go.

Worth mentioning all sorts of factors like competition, cost, adoption, etc... Could cause these time tables to accelerate or slow down.

 

[GHG]

But it says sacrifices made to performance...

Sacrifices in comparison to the ps4k version. Just like the PS4 versions of games have sacrifices in comparison to the PC version of the same games.

Don't be obtuse.

 

[Theognosis]

Unlike the Wii U, the PS4 isn't going away and will still sell extremely well. The PS4 is simply going to be the sub $300 entry level console and its sales will spike every time its price crosses an even lower threshold. I wouldn't be surprised at all, and in fact would expect, that the PS4 gets an internal redesign lowering its price below $249. On top of that I can see special $199 deals being made for things like Black Friday. That's going to be huge and will open up the console to a whole new market.

This hysteria is baseless. The standard PS4 is going to be THE lead platform for quite some time. It'll take like 3 years or more for the PS4K to overtake it, and that would be the natural end of the generation anyway.

I have absolutely no problems with the PS4K and generally I am a tech geek, but after the technolust for the specs of the PS4K died down I am not even sure that it is an automatic buy for me. If it turns out that the PS4K gets about as much improvement in graphics quality that the PS4 gets over the XB1, then it really isn't worth an entirely new console to me. PSVR could change my mind because graphical differences should be more apparent there.

The point I'm trying to make is that the PS4K isn't going to be like a new console generation that obsoletes the one before it. After an initial spike it's going to be a slow sell that will gradually ramp up.

You may be right. If Sony makes the PS4 a $199 console for the casual market, then they have a hit in their hands. Millions of more peope will buy the PS4 for NBA 2K, FIFA and COD.

But where will Sony put their premium PS4K after 2 years when the latest VR technologies come in?

Seems like the smartest move is to buy the vanilla PS4 when it becomes cheap and ignore the PS4K altogether and wait for the PS5.

Afterthought: The PS4K will be Sony's version of the 32X.

 

[tr00per]

I... I just...

Why?

 

[Fess]

This ones real and not 3D printed

Are we sure about this? Maybe it's an early april fools joke? This whole idea smells a bit too foul coming from Sony considering how much they've done right this generation. I don't get why they would suddenly think an upgrade after 3 years would be a great idea, people are still waiting for many AAA first party releases promised for the original PS4, the timing couldn't be worse really.

 

[Vinland]

Sacrifices in comparison to the ps4k version. Just like the PS4 versions of games have sacrifices in comparison to the PC version of the same games.

Don't be obtuse.

This. I swear if that 'to' had of been 'for' this thread would have been a bunch of hifives and champagne spray.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Idk what he means but by optimising for fixed hardware you'd assume they (at least for exclusive games) run through their entire game testing the performance of their levels/environments and fix issues and move /remove things to make sure you always maintain that locked 60 or 30 fps.

If you look at games like tomb raider 2013 (shanty town) or witcher 3 (some areas in the swamp) or dark souls (blight town) the performance absolutely craters in those areas.

Those you would refer to as unoptimised areas in the game. In a multiplatform game you can either cater to the lowest common denominator hardware and tone them down, or don't and have it look as good as possible on better hardware.

In a first party exclusive something like that should normally NEVER happen, as you know exactly what hardware it'll run on and you can test each area to see exactly how it'll perform and whether it's up to standard or not. There is no excuse for performance drops.

Basically you build and fine tune the entire game around the limitations of that one particular set up.


Now if you have multiple performance targets for an exclusive game then you could worry that they'd treat the lower spec console the same way a multiplatform studio would treat a lower spec platform.

For multiplatform games absolutely nothing will change, they're already making their games for an infinite number of hardware setups and a bunch of platforms. They haven't cared about optimising the console versions of their games for the consoles since the end of the ps2 generation (which is a shame )

You said better than i did .
This will chnage nothing for 3rd parties devs and pub .
Also this is a plus for me when it comes to first party IMO .
ND push the PS3 to it's limit with TLOU and the framerate suffer and now i have the option for that not happen .
Same for any other 1st part \2nd party games.

 

[c0de]

I'll believe it when they announce it officially.

Will be funny if they announce it on friday.

 

[Xander Crews]

Glad I waited.....

And then the PS5 or similar upgrade comes out in 2019. Might as well keep waiting!

 

[BudokaiMR2]

This is gonna suck.

 

[panty]

I have no problem selling my PS4 and buying this one. Hopefully the bits about the GPU are true. Couldnt care less for PC gaming so I'm down with "upgrading" my PS4.

 

[Papacheeks]

The common target will be the more powerful console, that will be easier to program for as it doesn't require as much optimisation to get running properly.

This situation is not going to mean the same games but 60fps on the PS4K and everything carrying on as before on PS4, it means those same 30fps maximum frame rate with as many pretty effects as possible Dev goals will now be targeted at PS4K, and downports with less optimisation, worse performance and possibly even less impressive results overall than we're even seeing now for most games on PS4.

And in a just a few short years time it will happen again with the PS8K.

This benefits no one but the big budget production studios, who can now just brute force their way past any development issues rather than need to learn how to get the most out of the hardware. This is killing late gen optimisation and the ever more impressive releases that we used to get and mean the future of console gaming is a never ending procession of disappointing cross gen titles with ever more performance issues as moure and more focus can be put on pretty graphics on the latest hardware before any other consideration.

Thank God someone else who sees what I see happening in the future. Maybe not in this refresh but maybe the second on in PS5.

It does not paint a bright future. If Nintendo can make due with the Wii U and create great looking games for outdated tech. SONY and MS should be able too.

 

[Spman2099]

Honestly, I think this gives Nintendo a real chance to get back in the race. If they can release at a comparable price point, and be as powerful as the 4K consoles, I will just buy an NX instead of having a second PS4.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Exaggerated specs like PC and especially android are nothing, absolutely nothing, like an iterative console market. Trying to draw similarities is setting up a straw man. Think iOS, not Windows or Android. Also, generations can live in an iterative system you just get a few more profiles to hit and wait for the hardware breakthroughs to happen to release a iteration cutoff that gives enough space between the drop off to be a "generation" shift.

Sure it is. Plus I wasn't talking about Android. I had iOS in mind. Let's look at the iPhone 6S. How many games fully push that hardware? Developers aim at the iPhone 5 level of performance and not the 6S. They aim for a lower common denominator and a lot of potential is wasted on the newer phones in order to maximize their audience. That's what happens when you switch to an iterative model. No longer are you aiming at the current known target; you're now aiming at the widest audience. The same holds true with PCs. Nobody targets a Titan.

But devs never fully push hardware unless you talking first party .
Do you think 3rd party devs try to push PS4 to the limit ?
Not to mention there also X1 to take into account and marketing deal etc etc .
Also pushing to the limit is not always a good thing since framerate always take a hit because of effects .
.

But it's not just first parties. Third party games also took a big leap in visual fidelity once the new generation took place. It's because the new consoles were now the new baseline to target. Why? Because it's a common factor that goes across all their platforms. Pushing to the limit also implies maintaining a decent framerate. I mean if you really wanted to say you were pushing the visuals to the limit, you could go for 5 fps, but nobody expects that.

That has to do with xbox1 being weaker than ps4. We have seen quite a few examples of games being optimized for xbox1 while ps4 has basically the same game, destiny comes to mind as does AC unity at launch. Being the gold standard has nothing to do with optimization and everything to do with hardware power.

Right, the Xbox One is weaker than the PS4 just like the PS4 will be weaker than the PS4K. The fear is that the weaker platform may get a less than ideal version at the expense of the more powerful system. So there's no guarantee that now with the PS4K being on the horizon that the PS4 will get the same level of polish that it once did. The gold standard absolutely has to do with what you're targeting as the version that sets all other expectations.

 

[Mad Season]

If true. Cya sony

 

[Midn1ght]

It was also made very clear that current games would not be getting any type of performance upgrades by being played on the system and any benefits to older games would come via patch per game and per developer. When asked if this was going to happen the response was "Its a possibility but doubtful with the exception of a handful of games."

The worst part of this whole thing in my opinion. Not that I expected anything difference but here is probably the main reason why I find mid-cycle upgrade for a console not interesting at all when you compare it to PC.

 

[Moneal]

Right, the Xbox One is weaker than the PS4 just like the PS4 will be weaker than the PS4K. The fear is that the weaker platform may get a less than ideal version at the expense of the more powerful system. So there's no guarantee that now with the PS4K being on the horizon that the PS4 will get the same level of polish that it once did. The gold standard absolutely has to do with what you're targeting as the version that sets all other expectations.

You yourself gave the reason why this won't happen.

Sure it is. Plus I wasn't talking about Android. I had iOS in mind. Let's look at the iPhone 6S. How many games fully push that hardware? Developers aim at the iPhone 5 level of performance and not the 6S. They aim for a lower common denominator and a lot of potential is wasted on the newer phones in order to maximize their audience. That's what happens when you switch to an iterative model. No longer are you aiming at the current known target; you're now aiming at the widest audience. The same holds true with PCs. Nobody targets a Titan.

 

[c0de]

So are PS4.0 users going to have to deal with gigantic patches that ready their games for the PS4.5?

Why would devs do that? There is not much more money involved.

 

[The Maverick]

Now I'm upset again. The one time I early adopt, I get fucked. Sony better have some amazing sales pitch/trade in or this will not go over well.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

But it's not just first parties. Third party games also took a big leap in visual fidelity once the new generation took place. It's because the new consoles were now the new baseline to target. Why? Because it's a common factor that goes across all their platforms. Pushing to the limit also implies maintaining a decent framerate. I mean if you really wanted to say you were pushing the visuals to the limit, you could go for 5 fps, but nobody expects that.

And that has not change the only difference now is a consoler gamers have chance at better looking games before PS5 comes out .
Plus we all know as the gen goes on devs push more and more and that is how we keep on getting worst games tech wise near the end of the life cycles .

 

[SmiteOfHand]

Let's look at the iPhone 6S. How many games fully push that hardware? Developers aim at the iPhone 5 level of performance and not the 6S. They aim for a lower common denominator and a lot of potential is wasted on the newer phones in order to maximize their audience.


Right, the Xbox One is weaker than the PS4 just like the PS4 will be weaker than the PS4K. The fear is that the weaker platform may get a less than ideal version at the expense of the more powerful system.

What?

 

[GHG]

The worst part of this whole thing in my opinion. Not that I expected anything difference but here is probably the main reason why I find mid-cycle upgrade for a console not interesting at all when you compare it to PC.

Developers who care about their games will put updates out. CDPR spring to mind as a developer who would do something to update the Witcher 3 for PS4K.

 

[Silent-blades]

If this shit is true I'll go right the fuck back to Xbox one. Pathetic Sony.

 

[ArtHands]

I've come to the conclusion that some people like stagnation in order to not make their purchases seem inferior.

No wonder some of you say building a gaming PC costs thousands. It does when only having the best is acceptable.

History has shown time and time again that devs don't target the most powerful hardware. If they did then PC gaming would be glorious. We would have a new Crysis every 6 months.

It seems these people insist on getting the best thing in life, to the point where they will rather things not get improved without their permission.

"But my ps4 will be playing second fiddle!!"

 

[Moneal]

If this shit is true I'll go right the fuck back to Xbox one. Pathetic Sony.

since they have hinted at doing the same thing right.

 

[captainraincoat]

On the plus side we might hopefully have a quiet Playstation console again as if i didnt have headphones the hairdryer fan would get really annoying.

 

[Stilton Disco]

Ill ask again why isnt this happening with xbox1. Very few titles run terrible on it compared to ps4. Many games have targeted xbox1 and just let ps4 brute force its way through.

I'd suspect a lot of that has to do with MS's rather infamous parity contracts and established relationships with publishers and development studios.

Plus, both the XO and PS4 are relatively close to one another in power levels and architecture when looked at from an outside perspective, especially compared to the variations possible in PC gaming, and they're the two leading hardware SKU's currently on the market when it comes to Console gaming and it'd make no sense to deliberately fuck one over with game development when that would just hurt profit margins.

With the upgraded systems however, suddenly you'll have both hardware manufacturers pushing their new systems over their old ones and not bothering to put pressure on Devs to keep to contractually set limitations, as well as a far bigger gap in power and lower development costs because there's no pressure to optimise for the hardware to the same degree.

It's just not a good comparison basically. A better one would be the difference in how third parties treat the WiiU compared to the PS4 and XO. The shitty downports like Watch Dogs on WiiU, that's the future for PS4, right there.

However, a good point you do indirectly bring up is that no matter the size of the power gap between the PS4K and XO.5, multiplat games released on both will likely be incredibly similar if no identical. Which ever of the two is the least powerful will likely be the baseline for development.