Support NeoGAF

[boredandlazy]

Just realized this'll probably cost the same/similar to standalone 4K blu-ray players so this is a pretty good deal if you're looking for a 4K player or console...or both!

That's one of the ways I'm looking at it. I'm not really sure of Sony's strategy and whether it'll come off, but if I want a UHD player I may as well get the PS4K. There's literally no downside to buying one in that regard, since the worst case scenario is that 3rd party devs don't bother and I'll be left playing the same PS4 games anyway.

 

[Prisoner KSC2-303]

I'm interested in the 4k Blu-ray player mentioned in the OP. I wonder if this'll be merely a 4k upscaling Blu-ray drive, as Sony already manufactures, or does it mean a proper 4k UHD drive?

If it's the latter, and Sony is going to use the console in a similar manner to which the PS3 was a carrier for Blu-ray, then this might indicate something about the timing of the release, given Sony is preparing their first line up of 4k players in this financial year, so no later than March. Some think they may arrive before Christmas, but either way, a line-up that included a player/console hybrid would offer great value for money, even at $499.

Edit: Looks like this has already been covered.

 

[El_Chino]

The problem with this kind of time line, with dual hardware launches, is the amount of money Sony's base has to spend on new hardware. There's a reason they don't want a repeat of FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE. The console consumer market can only sustain so much. In your time line, those new hardware launches are going to cannibalise one another, lowering adoption rates across the board. Sony have been in the consumer hardware business for decades - they're not going to put themselves in a position where their hardware is competing against one another for your money, when the idea is to get everyone on board. If - and I'm not convinced yet - we see an honest, upgraded PS4, it'll be after the PSVR is on the shelves and had time to sell. "Better VR" is a marketing term people might understand and buy into, if VR is out and people have had a reasonable chance to experience it, to understand what "better VR" might look like.

Um, if the PSVR works on both the PS4 and PS4K then I don't see what the problem is? You could own either PS4 and still be able to use your VR on it. What's better is that if you never bought a PS4 then now you have a chance to own a better one and still use the VR.

 

[Nightengale]

The problem with this kind of time line, with dual hardware launches, is the amount of money Sony's base has to spend on new hardware.

The Sony base doesn't "have to" spend money on these unless they want the prettier graphics.

 

[orochi91]

If I looks at the landscape of competition and timing, I feel like this is the ideal timeline for Sony.

2013 :
- PS4

(3yr gap - mid gen cycle)

2016 :
- PS4K (new status quo of mid-gen new hardware)
- PSVR ( establishing new platform alongside competition in same year )


(3yr gap - end gen cycle)

2019 :
- PS5 ( new gen console, backward compatible with all PS4 features and software)
- PSVR2 ( new gen VR platform for PS5 & PC )


So a 6 year console cycle, with an upgrade path every 3 years. A 2019 generation upgrade also makes the PSVR iteration faster, and not have to lag behind competition too long as other companies are seemingly primed to do 2-3 year upgrade cycles.

It's probably best to upgrade every mid-cycle and forgo launch units altogether.

I'll pick up a PS5K in 2022.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Just realized this'll probably cost the same/similar to standalone 4K blu-ray players so this is a pretty good deal if you're looking for a 4K player or console...or both!

That's one of the ways I'm looking at it. I'm not really sure of Sony's strategy and whether it'll come off, but if I want a UHD player I may as well get the PS4K. There's literally no downside to buying one in that regard, since the worst case scenario is that 3rd party devs don't bother and I'll be left playing the same PS4 games anyway.

And it follows the pattern of Sony with the PS2 (DVD), and PS3 (Blu-ray).

 

[MADGAME]

The Sony base doesn't "have to" spend money on these unless they want the prettier graphics.

Do you think the majority of gaming enthusiasts would want prettier graphics or would be content without?

 

[CosmicQueso]

Just realized this'll probably cost the same/similar to standalone 4K blu-ray players so this is a pretty good deal if you're looking for a 4K player or console...or both!

Now we're starting to "get" this concept it seems,

 

[El_Chino]

The Sony base doesn't "have to" spend money on these unless they want the prettier graphics.

Exactly.

 

[Lady Gaia]

Do you think the majority of gaming enthusiasts would want prettier graphics or would be content without?

Obviously they'd prefer the newer technology, but they'll have to decide whether it's worth the cost. That has always been the way technical advances work.

 

[MogCakes]

The Sony base doesn't "have to" spend money on these unless they want the prettier graphics.

Do you believe it's an ultimately profitable decision to make for Sony to revise the hardware every 3 years? Would it be expensive? How many people would buy into it? How many would reject? The consumer side of it is divided (among the hardcore). Would it have any effect on the average joe? Lot of questions to be mulled over on this idea.

 

[Nightengale]

Do you think the majority of gaming enthusiasts would want prettier graphics or would be content without?

Well, that's the risk of this whole thing isn't it? It's uncharted waters for the PlayStation base.

Do you believe it's an ultimately profitable decision to make for Sony to revise the hardware every 3 years? Would it be expensive? How many people would buy into it? How many would reject the idea? The consumer side of it is divided (among the hardcore). Would it have any effect on the average joe? Lot of questions to be mulled over on this idea.

Lots of questions.

None that has an answer without someone actually going through with it.

 

[The God]

Do you think the majority of gaming enthusiasts would want prettier graphics or would be content without?

the PS4K won't be selling like that, most people will still be buying the og model.

 

[ZehDon]

Um, if the PSVR works on both the PS4 and PS4K then I don't see what the problem is? You could own either PS4 and still be able to use your VR on it. What's better is that if you never bought a PS4 then now you have a chance to own a better one and still use the VR.

I'm sorry? The problem I highlighted has literally has nothing to do with what you're talking about. The problem is the amount of money the time line suggested exists within the console space, which has demonstrably contracted. Consumers are going to be hard pressed to buy a console, and then spend the same amount of money again on a console-priced peripheral, in addition the the games for either device. The PSVR is already pushing the absolute limits of what consumers are expected to pay. Launching the products side-by-side doesn't magically increase the amount of money consumers are spending on video game hardware. The adoption rates for either hardware are going to decrease significantly if launched at the same time. Sony are smart enough to understand this, and will launch each product spaced apart to give each product the highest chance of success.

The Sony base doesn't "have to" spend money on these unless they want the prettier graphics.

So, rather than explaining your rationale or defending your view point, you offer a non-response. Under your logic, no one has to buy a console anyway, so why not just charge US$1,000.00 for them, and make more money? Answer: because there is a finite amount of money available, and a finite amount of money the consumer base is willing to spend. You're "defending" the PS4K mid-gen revision, rather than actually reading my post and responding to my explanation of why I believe your suggested timeline is unlikely. If you're going to speculate on time lines for hardware, at least be prepared to back up your thinking with actual thought, rather than non-replies.

 

[Nightengale]

So, rather than explaining your rationale or defending your view point, you offer a non-response.

I'm on mobile and I didn't know you wanted my full thought process on this.

Give me 3-4 hours time instead of being snide about it.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Ummm... I'm all for this. Getting rid of console generations in a more fluid, dev friendly way. User friendly way as well. Old software being compatible with newer models. I just hope they retain PS4 software compatibility for as long as possible. At least give me five years of good support, and then so many more of spottier as people move to the more advanced hardware. Third even more advanced model will probably release around the PS4's five to six year mark. And software compatibility will be phased out for the PS4.

I'd be fine with a wide range of hardware models if software compatibility is ubiquitous during viability.

 

[MADGAME]

Obviously they'd prefer the newer technology, but they'll have to decide whether it's worth the cost. That has always been the way technical advances work.

Well, that's the risk of this whole thing isn't it? It's uncharted waters for the PlayStation base.

Sony put out a more powerful machine and also undercut MS and XB1 in both price and used game policies to "win" the install base of this gen. I would think they would do everything possible to keep that momentum going for the new iteration, and IMO the most important thing you can do is convey the perception of undeniable value. The current install base will have to view this as worth the cost as a majority, especially if pushing PSVR is a priority.

the PS4K won't be selling like that, most people will still be buying the og model.

Any business model requires sales to be successful and I'm sure the goal is to move as many of these as possible, no? If they won't sell as you suggest, wouldn't that be considered a business fail?

 

[MogCakes]

Lots of questions.

None that has an answer without someone actually going through with it.

If the evidence is to be believed we'll see that happen before long.

 

[ZehDon]

I'm on mobile and I didn't know you wanted my full thought process on this.

Give me 3-4 hours time instead of being snide about it.

Ironic attitude, given you're reply to me - mobile device or not.

In any case, when discussing something, it is good form to discuss a topic, rather than dismiss anyone who disagrees. I'm interested in discussing why you think a dual-hardware launch is likely, given the current and past realities of the consumer hardware market. I believe it would kill either device's chances of real success for the reasons I explained. I look forward to your thoughts.

 

[MogCakes]

Lots of questions.

None that has an answer without someone actually going through with it.

I think they're questions worth discussing and speculating about though, wouldn't you agree?

 

[The God]

Any business model requires sales to be successful and I'm sure the goal is to move as many of these as possible, no? If they won't sell as you suggest, wouldn't that be considered a business fail?

I guess it'll be intended as a real slow burn.

 

[z1ggy]

Lots of questions.

None that has an answer without someone actually going through with it.

Maybe SEGA does

 

[onQ123]

This generation won't last as long as the last one.

If Sony have people using the PS4 as their set top box & even got Amazon FireTV & Samsung TVs locking people into PSN for PlayStation Now & Vue & soon Ultra what rush will they have to move into PS5? PS4.5 will already allow them to have 4K gaming while people move into 4K & when the PS4.5 is too weak to satisfy the masses PlayStation Now can be used as a platform for devs to make higher spec'ed games that can be streamed in 4K until they release PS5.

 

[El_Chino]

The PS5 needs to be on a 7nm fabrication to offer a substantial generation leap. I don't see 7nm for APUs before 2019/ 2020. Also, if the PS4K exists there's no way the PS5 will release before 2020.

We don't even know if the PS4K will be 28nm or 14nm. I believe both companies have stated they don't see this generation lasting as long as the last one.

I'm sorry? The problem I highlighted has literally has nothing to do with what you're talking about. The problem is the amount of money the time line suggested exists within the console space, which has demonstrably contracted. Consumers are going to be hard pressed to buy a console, and then spend the same amount of money again on a console-priced peripheral, in addition the the games for either device. The PSVR is already pushing the absolute limits of what consumers are expected to pay. Launching the products side-by-side doesn't magically increase the amount of money consumers are spending on video game hardware. The adoption rates for either hardware are going to decrease significantly if launched at the same time. Sony are smart enough to understand this, and will launch each product spaced apart to give each product the highest chance of success.

You seem to be under the impression that everyone will want to buy a PSVR to go along with their PS4/K. You do understand that the PSVR is a add-on peripheral right? It's no way required to enjoy your PS4 games. It's all about options.

A) If you already own a PS4 then you can drop another $350+ and enjoy the VR experience.

B) Already own a PS4 and not interested in VR? then you don't have to buy it.

C) Never owned a PS4? Great, here's a more powerful one and pay either the same price or $100 more as the PS4 launch price.

D) Never owned a PS4 and are interested in VR? Cool. Spend $1000 and get the most out of your VR experience. (Still much cheaper than what it would cost to own a beast pc AND a Rift/Vive)

If Sony have people using the PS4 as their set top box & even got Amazon FireTV & Samsung TVs locking people into PSN for PlayStation Now & Vue & soon Ultra what rush will they have to move into PS5? PS4.5 will already allow them to have 4K gaming while people move into 4K & when the PS4.5 is too weak to satisfy the masses PlayStation Now can be used as a platform for devs to make higher spec'ed games that can be streamed in 4K until they release PS5.

That truly depends on what the internet infrastructure will be at the time.

 

[Crimson_Gold]

Maybe SEGA does

Different era of technology. Not exactly the same approach. Completely different financial situations. The list goes on and on

 

[castaction]

Just like with my 4K threads in 2012 they thought I was crazy when I made the GPGPU thread in 2011

could Next Gen see 1 of the biggest improvements between console gens do to GPGPUs?


I'm a Jr because people didn't understand yet & now we are right back to talking about the stuff that got me Jr'ed years ago

yep i remember reading this thread

 

[MADGAME]

I guess it'll be intended as a real slow burn.

I could maybe see that strategy if they were alone in releasing an iterative model, but if their competition does too I don't think it's a savvy approach.

 

[RK128]

If I looks at the landscape of competition and timing, I feel like this is the ideal timeline for Sony.

2013 :
- PS4

(3yr gap - mid gen cycle)

2016 :
- PS4K (new status quo of mid-gen new hardware)
- PSVR ( establishing new platform alongside competition in same year )


(3yr gap - end gen cycle)

2019 :
- PS5 ( new gen console, backward compatible with all PS4 features and software)
- PSVR2 ( new gen VR platform for PS5 & PC )


So a 6 year console cycle, with an upgrade path every 3 years. A 2019 generation upgrade also makes the PSVR iteration faster, and not have to lag behind competition too long as other companies are seemingly primed to do 2-3 year upgrade cycles.

You know what? Like this idea .

Allows people to have options all the while push the 3-year hardware refresh concept that both Sony and Microsoft want to try out.

I am interested with your point about PSVR2 though.....do you think we will get a new VR headset every three years? Or just one per generational cycle?

 

[z1ggy]

Different era of technology. Not exactly the same approach. Completely different financial situations. The list goes on and on

Yeah, today you can make moves without any risk.

 

[El_Chino]

Yeah, today you can make moves without any risk.

Any business decision has risk, its how much risk that makes the difference.

 

[Papacheeks]

What early adopter doesn't already own a PS4? By their very nature early adopters would have bought the PS4 at launch. People buying now are by the definition of the term late adopters. When the PS4K comes out there will be a $399-$499 high end PS4K and there will be the standard $249-$299 PS4. Late adopters are not the market for the PS4K, early adopters are. Late adopters are going to be eating up the lower priced PS4.

The PS4K is going to still be outsold by the PS4 not because it will be a flop, but because the PS4 is going to be hitting ever increasing mass market prices. On top of that the new console will not be a traditional generational leap. Nobody is going to miss out on playing a game because they own a PS4 instead of a PS4K. The PS4K will get an initial early push from the gaming enthusiasts who have to have the latest and greatest, but after that it is going to be a long slow burn before it even comes close to overtaking the PS4.

The PS4K can't fail because it is just the higher end version of the exact same PS4 product. Its relationship to the PS4 will be defined by the word AND not the word OR.

I don't think you understand where I was going. If it becomes something where they release this then release another revision at the end of PS4 GEN, then announce PS5. PEOPLE will wait for PS5.5. I think this will have an overall impact on early adopters for next gen. Not everyone who bought a PS4 AT launch is buying a PS4K. People who just bought a PS4 in 2015, and in 2016 will probably not buy a new console when PS5 comes out because there will be a PS4K.

Early adopters are what drive the start of each gen. If Sony had a beefier PS3 that was straight up 1080p 60fps in 2011-2012 you wouldnt have as many ravenous people buying PS4's at launch.
People now with PC's, tablets or whatever, are fine waiting for another refresh and then prices drop.

You have no clue how this will go down in the long run. i am confident the die hard tech people will buy this. What I do think though is it will have a negative impact on the next generation console when it's revealed, and PS4K is still being supported.
You or I have no clue until it's revealed and in peoples hands how this will effect long term console sales. And my inclination is overtime early adoption of next gen will suffer.

 

[z1ggy]

Any business decision has risk, its how much risk that makes the difference.

Yeah, seems like Sony got it right because we know what they are going to offer

 

[The God]

I could maybe see that strategy if they were alone in releasing an iterative model, but if their competition does too I don't think it's a savvy approach.

well making the PS4K & PS4 the same price wouldn't make sense. Discontuing the PS4 in favor of the PS4K would pretty much be a price increase, so that's out. The only option I see is to put both systems out and let the PS4K buyers trickle in as 4K display adoption goes up. The PS4 will be doing the selling.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Different era of technology. Not exactly the same approach. Completely different financial situations. The list goes on and on

Or the mere fact that the PS4K is not an add-on. It is a PS4 that plays the same software the PS4 plays.

If we are not allowed to mentioned cell phones and pretty much every other tech that has advancements we are conditioned with, then the 'd'oh 32x lulz' should be straight up disingenuous trolling.

 

[Kibbles]

Or the mere fact that the PS4K is not an add-on. It is a PS4 that plays the same software the PS4 plays.

If we are not allowed to mentioned cell phones and pretty much every other tech that has advancements we are conditioned with, then the 'd'oh 32x lulz' should be straight up disingenuous trolling.

Unless Sony has an upgrade program I wouldn't really compare it with phones since most people trade in their old device towards a significant discount on the next iteration (or even free with contract)

 

[dano1]

Unless Sony has an upgrade program I wouldn't really compare it with phones since most people trade in their old device towards a significant discount on the next iteration (or even free with contract)

Pretty sure you can sell your PS4...
I sold both my old iPhones.

 

[z1ggy]

Or the mere fact that the PS4K is not an add-on. It is a PS4 that plays the same software the PS4 plays.

If we are not allowed to mentioned cell phones and pretty much every other tech that has advancements we are conditioned with, then the 'd'oh 32x lulz' should be straight up disingenuous trolling.

I'm glad that we have confirmed whats the PS4K.

 

[Prisoner KSC2-303]

There really isn't a good comparison for this model.

 

[Crimson_Gold]

Unless Sony has an upgrade program I wouldn't really compare it with phones since most people trade in their old device towards a significant discount on the next iteration (or even free with contract)

It isn't as significant as one is led to believe. The newer plans that offer more frequent upgrades are nice. But you're still paying for the phone over time. I have said it before and will say it again, store 0% financing and trade in options can do the same thing

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'm glad that we have confirmed whats the PS4K.

Don't pretend to be so obtuse just to be argumentative.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Unless Sony has an upgrade program I wouldn't really compare it with phones since most people trade in their old device towards a significant discount on the next iteration (or even free with contract)

Didn't know TV's, Recievers, Media Players, Casting devices, Graphics Cards (as a whole not one select company with a mere 90 days), Labtops, Tablets, Musical Instruments, etc., etc., came with 'upgrade programs' either. Especially when a bunch of those all run the same media, albeit better than the previous with the better versions.

And how do we know if Sony is not doing an 'upgrade program'? Hell, they did offer the Vita through select cell carriers...

And maybe, just maybe this is why they were briefing the 'top 3 gaming retailers' this far in advance? (New theory as to why?)

Regardless, my point stands. A few concerns are valid, however, the '32X' drive by is bullshit in 2016.

 

[Lady Gaia]

Any business model requires sales to be successful and I'm sure the goal is to move as many of these as possible, no?

Not necessarily. Some businesses deliberately position prestige brands or products to draw attention to their more mass-market offerings. Given that Sony makes their profits off software I suspect they don't much care which model people buy, so long as it's part of the Playstation family. What's most important is that there's not a competitor that grabs the limelight.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Not necessarily. Some businesses deliberately position prestige brands or products to draw attention to their more mass-market offerings. Given that Sony makes their profits off software I suspect they don't much care which model people buy, so long as it's part of the Playstation family. What's most important is that there's not a competitor that grabs the limelight.

Very true as well.

 

[z1ggy]

Don't pretend to be so obtuse just to be argumentative.

Maybe we shouldnt take as a fact these rumours.

 

[MADGAME]

well making the PS4K & PS4 the same price wouldn't make sense. Discontuing the PS4 in favor of the PS4K would pretty much be a price increase, so that's out. The only option I see is to put both systems out and let the PS4K buyers trickle in as 4K display adoption goes up. The PS4 will be doing the selling.

I did not claim nor do I think they both should be the same price. My point was it does not make sense for PS4k it to be a "slow burn" if their competition also plans on releasing an iterative console. If PS4's will be doing all the selling as you claim then that can open the door to PS4 vs XB1.5 or whatever it will be called. If MS releases a new console in a similar fashion they are going to be aggressive as hell.

As I mentioned before, the undeniable perception of value has to be there. Value does not necessarily have to be price alone, Sony sold value on PS4 with a more powerful machine and no DRM on used games in addition to competitive price.

 

[wapplew]

Any business decision has risk, its how much risk that makes the difference.

Yes, its risky. But where's the reward?
What are the reward of release two different performance hardware within a gen instead of one?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Maybe we shouldnt take as a fact these rumours.

Or continue to specialate and have good dialogue without, 'derp 32x in disguise' shitposts.

Yes, its risky. But where's the reward?
What are the reward of release two different performance hardware within a gen instead of one?

My reward would be a box that plays UHD content on my new UHD TV, that still plays my PS4 library.

I'll admit, I was not on board 'too much' about this, until I got my 4K set on a steal earlier this week. And I am sure I am not alone as a 4K owner.

Oh, and on the Sony reward side, this post explains it perfectly, (just like they did with the PS2 and PS3)...

Not necessarily. Some businesses deliberately position prestige brands or products to draw attention to their more mass-market offerings. Given that Sony makes their profits off software I suspect they don't much care which model people buy, so long as it's part of the Playstation family. What's most important is that there's not a competitor that grabs the limelight.

...

Higher margins, assumption that new products either expand the audience or get a portion of your existing market to upgrade and earn you more profit per customer

All about them MAU's, hence why Spencer's recent (and misinterpreted comment) is full of shit PR spin so hard I am still dizzy (maybe it is the vodka), if the misinterpretation was indeed accurate.

 

[Nightengale]

Yes, its risky. But where's the reward?
What are the reward of release two different performance hardware within a gen instead of one?

Higher margins, assumption that new products either expand the audience or get a portion of your existing market to upgrade and earn you more profit per customer

 

[z1ggy]

Or continue to specialate and have good dialogue without, 'derp 32x in disguise' shitposts.

It was an answer to a question, not shitposting after shitposting about SEGA add ons.

Still, my take on this matter will be: Sony wont announce it at all or it will be end being a slim version of the current PS4 with new features for 4k media and not for gaming.

But if they are going for a more powerfull "premium" PS4 i really doubt it will succed. Why i think so? The whole idea doesn´t seem very hot even here, between "hardcore" gamers and theres gonna be too many options between this year and the next one. And the world isn´t doing very well. Too much risk to take in my opinion.

 

[maxiell]

It would have been silly for PS4 to play 4K blu-rays from day one. It would be just as silly for them not to offer a Playstation that does it now that 4K is becoming more common in homes.

This is really a no-brainer and once you understand that, whatever effect it has on PS4 sales is kind of besides the point given that it's still one platform for games.

I doubt whatever headache this is causing developers is anywhere near as painful as it was to develop for the PS3.