Support NeoGAF

[-hadouken]

94% of games are 1080p

There are very few 1080P genuinely 60fps AAA games on PS4. For example - Battlefield 4 64 player modes run consistently sub 50fps (nauseating) at a slightly blurry 900P. I'm hoping BF5 PS4K can maintain a consistent 60fps at 1080 native. This simply wouldn't be possible with the current PS4 hardware unless there was a significant visual downgrade.

PS4k will more than likely be a slow burner anyway with only the hardcore opting in at first.

Agreed - that's the beauty of having a premium product - it doesn't have to sell gangbusters to bring the entire gaming population on board. Then all benefit from the hardware innovation down the track (instead of the stagnation we saw last gen.)

 

[mejin]

A company that has made a string of good decisions is more than capable of making a bad one

It happens all the time in this industry

Right now I feel it's more a wish than a prediction from some people.

 

[b3b0p]

All the meltdowns and switching to PC is Fucking hilarious! Keep it up guys!
Who would have guessed a gaming community would flip out over having an OPTION to possibly play games better if they CHOOSE to.

Nah.

It's people being selfish and no longer having the best, don't have bragging rights, and don't have a reason to show off. It's that feeling some get when they no longer have the fastest PC, the best phone, the newest Jordan's. It's only more apparent now given the current market of online attention whoring social networks, online and public forums improved technology and innovation has given us.

People need to chill and be humble and excited technology is improving and Sony is being aggressive at adopting and adapting instead of watching on the sidelines.

I personally wish with the improved technology, smaller, faster, and cheaper components that they do what they did with the Playstation 3 and put a Playstation, Playstation 2, and Playstation 3 inside. That way I can play all my old games again without resorting to Craig's List for parts or used consoles.

Does the Playstation 4 still play all the same games? Yes? Cool. It's more "snappy" to boot? Even cooler. My games will have a few extra vertical and horizontal lines of pixels? Nice.

 

[MikeyB]

People who don't want to upgrade will not be impacted by a mid model revision, as you can bet your house that devs will prioritise the PS4 whilst it has the larger playerbase - it's simple business. It will take years for PS4K to overtake the PS4 (maybe never), and by that time the luddites may be thankful that Sony had the foresight to move the game on.

The concern in these threads boils down to this: I don't want to upgrade, or I can't afford to upgrade, therefore if I can't have it, no one can. Thankfully all the jealous bellyaching on gaf is unrepresentative of the broader market. There's room for premium tier products - I can't wait to sell my PS4 and get in line for the upgrade. Looking forward to 1080P native games with more consistent performance, but hey, for those who find that unappealing - continue to enjoy your PS4.

I don't see how the PS4 users wouldn't be affected. I think that games will continue to be developed for the basic PS4, but the basic consumer experience of purchasing a game will be vastly different, even if the differences between version are minor. The non-enthusiast with a PS4 will be buying something that likely describes the product as missing certain features or at least makes them aware that it isn't the best version. That's very different experience than simply buying the PS4 version. The more informed a consumer with a baseline PS4 is, the more that they will be aware of their product being the inferior version. That's not a shiny happy feeling.

Each time there is an issue with the game, be it frame rate, online support, or whatever, the consumer with the baseline PS4 is likely to wonder if it is because they have the older model.

For over 20 years, Sony console purchasers have been able to expect that they wouldn't need to worry about specs if they bought launch for at least six years. That has changed. I don't think anyone really wants to deprive others of choice. I think what you're interpreting as jealousy is actually anger at Sony fundamentally changing the experience of buying a console game (outside of the new 3DS).

 

[cyberheater]

So could we be looking at online games running at a fixed 60fps on PS4K vs sub 60fps on PS4. Maybe even a at a lower resolution. Won't that give PS4K players a competitive advantage?

 

[Theonik]

I guess i understand what you are saying, but that is why i commented on how long games take to develope and how only there is one real wave of games for that console. I mean, is PS360 generation still goign since there are still games coming out for it?

As far as Sony's claim of a '10 year lifecycle' the PS3 is still going yes. They still support the system even if it's not their future or the focus of the company. PS4s will not spontaneously combust when the PS4K is released. Generations are kinda silly anyway and don't fully reflect the console business. Sony was making money out of the PS2 in Latin America well beyond its twilight years.

 

[Boke1879]

So could we be looking at online games running at a fixed 60fps on PS4K vs sub 60fps on PS4. Maybe even a at a lower resolution. Won't that give PS4K players a competitive advantage?

Maybe I'm speaking ignorantly here and please correct me if I'm wrong, but would that be any different than playing TLOU online among PS3 and PS4 users. Or games that are cross platform like Rockey League, etc.?

 

[The God]

So could we be looking at online games running at a fixed 60fps on PS4K vs sub 60fps on PS4. Maybe even a at a lower resolution. Won't that give PS4K players a competitive advantage?

You're about to have 25663478 people quote you saying "that's how it works on PC"

even though on PC steps can be taken to decrease the gap

 

[RoboPlato]

There are very few 1080P genuinely 60fps AAA games on PS4. For example - Battlefield 4 64 player modes run consistently sub 50fps (nauseating) at a slightly blurry 900P. I'm hoping BF5 PS4K can maintain a consistent 60fps at 1080 native. This simply wouldn't be possible with the current PS4 hardware unless there was a significant visual downgrade.

BF5 is actually one of the games that the 4k gets me excited about. Like you said, native 1080p and consistent 60 would be very nice and DICE seems like a studio that would be on board supporting a device like this.

 

[cyberheater]

Maybe I'm speaking ignorantly here and please correct me if I'm wrong, but would that be any different than playing TLOU online among PS3 and PS4 users. Or games that are cross platform like Rockey League, etc.?

So you are agreeing that PS4K players could have a competitive advantage.

You're about to have 25663478 people quote you saying "that's how it works on PC"

even though on PC steps can be taken to decrease the gap

Yes. You can turn down settings to keep a stable 60fps. One of the benefits of PC gaming.

 

[Chumpion]

We already have confirmation from the op that certain games (God of war 4, and deep down) are being developed for the ps4k and then being ported down to the ps4. After the release of this new system, I wouldn't be surprised at all if a lot more developers start doing the same.

PS4K: 1080p / 30 fps
PS4: 720p / 30 fps

 

[Inuhanyou]

We already have confirmation from the op that certain games (God of war 4, and deep down) are being developed for the ps4k and then being ported down to the ps4. After the release of this new system, I wouldn't be surprised at all if a lot more developers start doing the same.

That's also true....i had forgotten about GOW4 and Deep Down. So from the very beginning, they have a priority towards their new platform...and "downports"?...and how exactly that is going to affect the PS4's versions of games seems concerning.

Again your biggest concern I assume is that devs and publishers will abandon the OG PS4. That's not going to be the case. By the end of the year there will be probably something like 60 million PS4's sold. No one is going to forget that market and games will probably be made with the OG ps4 in mind with them adding a few bells and whistles to the PS4k like better resolution and framerate for one.

Again he's saying if the market accepts this then those who are upset have to deal with it. But that doesn't mean the PS4 will be obsolete. PS4k will more than likely be a slow burner anyway with only the hardcore opting in at first.

"Deal with it", probably the worst response to consumer concern of all time.

That's true. But even with things like level of development support. You can still farm downports out to lesser studios and get sub par products. That is what just happened when we went to the 8th gen. In house development studios by definition are going to be pressed for what they devote resources to and are going to have things farmed out, and unless Sony comes out with some kind of plan for addressing that, it seems like its starting from a bad place

 

[BruceCLea]

this thread is crazy. ha awesome

 

[Glorified G]

This has been happening the past half decade and will continue to happen, and happen at a faster rate once this becomes the norm. If all 3 console makers are now doing shorter refreshes in similar vein to PCs - why wouldn't someone who's discerning with their investments go for PC instead?

Because you don't understand the basic benefits consoles provides over PC that doesn't go away with a console refresh after 3 years that will play the same games. It certainty didn't drive consumers away when some consoles in the past were replaced in 4-5 years with different libraries. It's more wishful thinking than anything.

 

[-hadouken]

I think what you're interpreting as jealousy is actually anger at Sony fundamentally changing the experience of buying a console game.

I hear you, tho I'd suggest the anger is misplaced. People fear the unknown - they're inherently conservative. I feel that a PS4K revision has the potential to grow the market and the pool of people in the ecosystem. It also keeps hardware and software innovation moving forward. This isn't to be feared, as all playstation consumers stand to benefit in the longer term. Let enthusiasts and early adopters subsidise the future products that we all love.

 

[Inuhanyou]

There are very few 1080P genuinely 60fps AAA games on PS4. For example - Battlefield 4 64 player modes run consistently sub 50fps (nauseating) at a slightly blurry 900P. I'm hoping BF5 PS4K can maintain a consistent 60fps at 1080 native. This simply wouldn't be possible with the current PS4 hardware unless there was a significant visual downgrade.

So you went from 1080p native with "more consistent performance" in your previous post to "1080p 60fps"? Why did you move the goalposts so far?

This happens in every single console gen, and you'd probably be shocked to find out that literally no consoles have ever had default "native" rendering at 60fps unless we're going back to 2D era. Its not just the 8th gen. These standards of chasing technology are annoying.

These are the same arguments that if we didn't have "PS4K" news, we'd be having posts full of "buy a PC if you care about that".

Consoles have never been about chasing technology or having the best performance. You always end up behind the best of the best anyway. it all works according to the devs ambition and what they want to achieve.

 

[Boke1879]

That's also true....i had forgotten about GOW4 and Deep Down. So from the very beginning, they have a priority towards their new platform...and "downports"?...and how exactly that is going to affect the PS4's versions of games seems concerning.



"Deal with it", probably the worst response to consumer concern of all time.

That's true. But even with things like level of development support. You can still farm downports out to lesser studios and get sub par products. That is what just happened when we went to the 8th gen. In house development studios by definition are going to be pressed for what they devote resources to and are going to have things farmed out, and unless Sony comes out with some kind of plan for addressing that, it seems like its starting from a bad place

"deal with it" in the context of this thing will most likely get released and see success. It won't make your PS4 obsolete. That wasn't so much directed at you who has concerns. More so the people in this thread who want to outright see it fail for whatever reason.

 

[Negotiator]

So could we be looking at online games running at a fixed 60fps on PS4K vs sub 60fps on PS4. Maybe even a at a lower resolution. Won't that give PS4K players a competitive advantage?

Doesn't 5.1/7.1 audio give a competitive advantage (spatial awareness) compared to stereo audio? I don't see any difference.

 

[ViciousDS]

Doesn't 5.1/7.1 audio give a competitive advantage (spatial awareness) compared to stereo audio? I don't see any difference.

Ask pro gamers who use headphones...... It really doesn't. It creates immersion, but doesn't effect the comp scene. However picture clarity and frame rate massively does as it involves reaction time and the ability to spot the enemy

 

[Inuhanyou]

"deal with it" in the context of this thing will most likely get released and see success. It won't make your PS4 obsolete. That wasn't so much directed at you who has concerns. More so the people in this thread who want to outright see it fail for whatever reason.

Thanks for the clarification.

I dunno. I feel really annoyed and about down about this for various reasons.

 

[Maboroshi Daikon]

Not really... The benefits of PC are 30 years of BC, open platform, can be used for a lot more than gaming... at the cost of having to upgrade reasonably often.

The console verse is more stable, but it comes with it's own draw backs like less BC, can't be used for multiple purposes, etc etc... But the price of entry is stable, and you're 'guaranteed' a long lasting piece of tech.
(snip)

You're missing one huge advantage of a console VS PC in this argument and focusing on something pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. A game console is an appliance. You plug it in, hook up your HDMI cable and turn it on. Maybe it does some updates, but it does all that for you, just like your iPhone does.

Many people just want a plug and play experience with their game system. That's pretty much what everyone I know tells me when they talk about not wanting to game on their PC. They don't have to worry about viruses or whether this game is going to crap out on their system because of some weird configuration or if their crappy 5 year old computer with built in graphics is powerful enough to play it. They want to just plug it in and turn it on. That's not going to change even if they have 3 or 4 SKUs in the market.

 

[jhmtehgamr20xx]

If anything, this thread (and general forum response to this generation at large) shows how out of touch many gamers are with their own hobby, trends in the industry and world of consumer electronics.

I think for some of you, (yes, even the ones that are full of shit about a move to PC) the time to jump off and just primarly be a retro gamer is fast approaching.

The Market isnt the same as it was as the 90s and anyone thinking that this new approach to console gaming is going to fail is as deluded as the people thinking that the frogmarch to digital, always online, season passes, preorder culture and Microtransactions is going to be reversed.

Look im with you on some things. The rate gaming is going, I really cant see myself buying a PS5. This generation is probably my last.

but sitting here crying online doesnt mean shit. The opinions on a place like this only really matter at the start of a generation when the hardcore are the taste makers. Best believe is Microsoft had introduced an always online Xbox one mid gen they would not of got half the backlash they got.

Now these consoles have entered the mainstream, our opinions are irrelevant. The wider market has embraced iterative upgrades in tech and the PS4k will be nothing out the ordinary, especially from a CE company like Sony. As I said before, this is nothing to do with Playstation as a brand. This is something thats come from the mothership to bring Playstation in line with the overall company mission. The mission to push 4K at every opportunity.

As gamers and wider consumers, you have to decide if this is something you can put up with. If you think its a line too far, jump off. No one is forcing you to keep up. But crying into your beer here isnt going to change anything, nor is bringing up the misfortunes of gaming company over 20 years ago that didnt ever have the marketing muscle, the stable of products supporting the jump in visual standard or the wider consumer electronic market that had been conditioned to buy upgraded hardware every 3-4 years.

Honestly, reading some of your nightmare scenarios and arguements sound like you are trying to convince yourself this a bad thing not anyone else. The logic is often paper thin. Let it go. Things have changed. What you thought console gaming was about is dead and has been for over a generation. Either deal with it or move on. There are million other hobbies to have after all.

While I'm warming up to the idea of a PS4K, this line here is one of the sorts that can cool it all back down. Sony did this before, remember? PS3? And that gave Microsoft an opportunity to steamroll them in NA and UK, and gain incredible mindshare and marketshare last gen. PlayStation was a "sacrifice", so to speak, for the other media departments of the company then, and it costed them. Whatever happens here, they CANNOT let the other departments try to "cash in" on PlayStation's success and burden that brand with a ride towards their own success, or it could be a much more severe blow to PlayStation this time.

Yes, PS4 is doing exceedingly well, but shit can flip in an instant. People need to remember that.

 

[cyberheater]

Doesn't 5.1/7.1 audio give a competitive advantage (spatial awareness) compared to stereo audio? I don't see any difference.

What does audio have to do with framerate?

 

[CosmicQueso]

Your saying if the market 'accepts' a stopgap power increase, the original owners should not be considered in regards to support or priority?

No. That's not at all what I'm saying.

I'm saying that if the market accepts this, then a large number of the market will have seen whatever concerns, wants and desires met in a satisfactory way. If the market rejects this, like it did with the $599 PS3, then Sony will change its course. But Sony won't change a strategy unless they know it is not successful.

As for those holding on to OG PS4s, Sony will certainly track purchases, play time and overall engagement. If it sees these metrics fall off, then it will know that it is not meeting the concerns, wants and desires of its established OG PS4 base and will then either act to fix that situation or make the determination that the market is not worth acting to fix.

But company statements and promises and mandates are meaningless. Market forces, that you disparage, are what enact real and significant change.

No sense carrying on this discussion.

 

[wonderful103]

You're missing one huge advantage of a console VS PC in this argument and focusing on something pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. A game console is an appliance. You plug it in, hook up your HDMI cable and turn it on. Maybe it does some updates, but it does all that for you, just like your iPhone does.

Many people just want a plug and play experience with their game system. That's pretty much what everyone I know tells me when they talk about not wanting to game on their PC. They don't have to worry about viruses or whether this game is going to crap out on their system because of some weird configuration or if their crappy 5 year old computer with built in graphics is powerful enough to play it. They want to just plug it in and turn it on. That's not going to change even if they have 3 or 4 SKUs in the market.

My ps3 does more updates and patches than my pc, which mostly takes care of itself nowadays. I also don't recall getting any viruses on Steam.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Expecting Sony to stroke your head and tell ýòù it will be ok is unrealistic.

A new product on the market does not necessarily mean the old one will lose support, but expecting a explict mandate is wishful thinking.

 

[Negotiator]

Ask pro gamers who use headphones...... It really doesn't

It does. Multi-channel audio allows you to understand where bullets are coming from with pinpoint accuracy.

I'm not just talking about headphones and their pseudo-surround. Some people have 7.1/5.1 Home Cinema sets. It's been this way since the PS3.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

They also made early PS3, let's not go full fanboy here. Companies can fuck up and they need to be held to account regardless of the great memories or their position in our gaming circle.

The early PS3 was one of the best systems ever .
The only thing they fuck up was the price .
But from a hardware stand point it was great even had BC .

 

[Negotiator]

What does audio have to do with framerate?

Are you saying that audio spatial awareness is irrelevant in Competitive/PVP games?

Humans have 5 senses, not just one (sight). Video games utilize 3 of them (sight/image, hearing/audio, touch/haptic feedback).

 

[Summer Haze]

Ask pro gamers who use headphones...... It really doesn't. It creates immersion, but doesn't effect the comp scene. However picture clarity and frame rate massively does as it involves reaction time and the ability to spot the enemy

I don't use headphones, but I play BF4 daily with my 5.1 setup and it absolutely does give me an edge when it comes to locating enemies, tanks, chopper positions, etc. I've tried 5.1 headphones in the past and it just wasn't the same. Even the ones that have multiple drivers positioned in different places within the cup didn't compare.

 

[ViciousDS]

It does. Multi-channel audio allows you to understand where bullets are coming from with pinpoint accuracy.

I'm not just talking about headphones and their pseudo-surround. Some people have 7.1/5.1 Home Cinema sets. It's been this way since the PS3.

Yes and competitive players don't use surround sound..... It's been this way as well since the ps3. Most of them use headsets at home and then for competitions they use earbuds.....YES THATS RIGHT earbuds for sound. You don't need to sound whore to be good. Unlike frame rate and resolution which will 100% make a difference. Ever heard of virtual surround as well in most headsets? Good stereo headsets or headphones from sennhesier or any good audio company deliver good positional sound through stereo.


Vvvvvvv and what he said

 

[etta]

It does. Multi-channel audio allows you to understand where bullets are coming from with pinpoint accuracy.

I'm not just talking about headphones and their pseudo-surround. Some people have 7.1/5.1 Home Cinema sets. It's been this way since the PS3.

Errrrr, games' engines already create positional sound that can play through stereo.

 

[ninjablade]

PS4K: 1080p / 30 fps
PS4: 720p / 30 fps

Lol no. Both games will be 1080p/60fps on PS4K vs 1080p/30 ps4.

 

[Keihart]

Claiming that the concern is out of jelousy or envy is really condecending.

I can't speak for others but for me is not about how this affect me directly, to me is just an inconvinience, an extra hoop to jump, just that but i see it as a big change if they go full force with it and every other company follows, the industry won't be the same and not for the better in my opinion.

If the PS4K is just like some psp2001 version of the PS4 with no real impact on development i will buy gladly.

It's about how it affects the ecosystem and not just the system that i'll own.

 

[Maboroshi Daikon]

My ps3 does more updates and patches than my pc, which mostly takes care of itself nowadays. I also don't recall getting any viruses on Steam.

You haven't met the people I know. I've seen computers not even two weeks old with a list of viruses so long you'd wonder if they'd managed to get all of them.

Of course, they didn't get those viruses from Steam. It's a PC. They were browsing the internet or had an insecure firewall.

 

[Negotiator]

Errrrr, games' engines already create positional sound that can play through stereo.

That's like saying that you can create 4K resolution in a 1080p monitor (aka downsampling). It's not the real thing.

I don't use headphones, but I play BF4 daily with my 5.1 setup and it absolutely does give me an edge when it comes to locating enemies, tanks, chopper positions, etc. I've tried 5.1 headphones in the past and it just wasn't the same. Even the ones that have multiple drivers positioned in different places within the cup didn't compare.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. People who are stuck at stereo don't know what they've been missing.

Yes and competitive players don't use surround sound..... It's been this way as well since the ps3. Most of them use headsets at home and then for competitions they use earbuds.....YES THATS RIGHT earbuds for sound. You don't need to sound whore to be good. Unlike frame rate and resolution which will 100% make a difference. Ever heard of virtual surround as well in most headsets? Good stereo headsets or headphones from sennhesier or any good audio company deliver good positional sound through stereo.

Vvvvvvv and what he said

I beg to differ. I have a 7.1 HC and it makes a difference in my scores.

I understand that you're prioritizing sight over hearing, but for me, it all adds up. I want surround audio and haptic feedback (vibration) as much as I want 60fps. I want to take advantage of all senses, not just one.

 

[MikeyB]

I hear you, tho I'd suggest the anger is misplaced. People fear the unknown - they're inherently conservative. I feel that a PS4K revision has the potential to grow the market and the pool of people in the ecosystem. It also keeps hardware and software innovation moving forward. This isn't to be feared, as all playstation consumers stand to benefit in the longer term. Let enthusiasts and early adopters subsidise the future products that we all love.

Meh, I would prefer to see more games than shinier ones and have a beef with short lifespans for appliances. But we are down to taste at this point.

 

[etta]

That's like saying that you can create 4K resolution in a 1080p monitor (aka downsampling). It's not the real thing.


Yeah, that's what I'm saying. People who are stuck at stereo don't know what they've been missing.


I beg to differ. I have a 7.1 HC and it makes a difference in my scores.

I understand that you're prioritizing sight over hearing, but for me, it all adds up. I want surround audio and haptic feedback (vibration) as much as I want 60fps. I want to take advantage of all senses, not just one.

Hahah no.
Setting the game's audio settings to stereo and using stereo cans will still give you positional audio. The audio engine processes it and sends it to the headphones, and no it's not some faux-surround. You don't have just a left and right position just because you're using 2 channels.

Dolby Headphone is a virtual surround sound DSP for headphones which takes a Dolby Digital 5.1 channel signal and downmixes and processes into a special 2 channel stereo signal that any headphone can use. Since it's just a 2 channel stereo signal, any 3.5mm jack will output it and it will work with any regular stereo headphone (although some work better than others). Even though it's only a stereo signal, it still sounds like surround sound when used with headphones because the Dolby Headphone DSP adds head related transfer function cues to the signal, which fool the brain into the hearing the same surround sound that was in the original 5.1 signal

Stereo headphones and 5.1 or 7.1 headphones are the same. What I am trying to say is that the way our brain interprets positional cues means that 5.1 and stereo headphones are the same as far as our brain is concerned.
The way we do is by delay of sound reaching ear 1 and ear 2, as well as volume that reacehs ear 1 and ear 2. It has nothing to do with the angle at what the sound enters your ear.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/534479/mad-lust-envys-headphone-gaming-guide-3-18-2016-mrspeakers-ether-c-1-1-added

 

[CosmicQueso]

Meh, I would prefer to see more games

Well, in that case let me tell you why a PS4K could make you a happy person!

The market for gaming software on consoles has not grown at the same rate as development costs. This has led to a bottoming out in packaged game (the big AAA stuff) release count, from over 850 games in 2009 to just over 200 last year.

A PS4K allows publishers and developers to continue to make games over the next, let's call it, around 4-6 year period, that can be played on 4K displays somewhat well, with an increase in development cost at a fraction of what native 4K console development would cost.

This should allow for, if not the same number, hopefully more games to be made as the PS4 installed base continues to grow, supported by a PS4 designed for 4K displays.

And, as 4K adoption continues to accelerate, OG PS4s will benefit from having games that might not otherwise had been made were it not for this new 4K households segment entering the category.

This would also allow the release of the PS5 to be in 2020 or so which could take advantage of the expected technological breakthroughs others have pointed to in the thread.

A PS4K could be what actually enables OG PS4s to have a long and healthy, fully supported life.

 

[MogCakes]

Because you don't understand the basic benefits consoles provides over PC that doesn't go away with a console refresh after 3 years that will play the same games. It certainty didn't drive consumers away when some consoles in the past were replaced in 4-5 years with different libraries. It's more wishful thinking than anything.

Which consoles were these that were replaced in 4-5 years and PC was as accessible as it is now? My intent was not to say 'there's literally no reason to own a console over a PC now'. I'll rephrase it: 'what are the major differences and incentives to buy into consoles now that they have switched to an Apple-like business model, where before their simplicity and standard hardware configuration across the board were championed as advantages over the PC?' I've seen many denounce the latter part since the rumors of a PS4.5 began.

Apple has less devices to support and iOS is deemed to be more optimized than Android because of that.

I'm talking about abandoning Kepler in favor of Maxwell for example (GTX 970 >>> GTX 780 Ti).

iOS = consoles = closed platform/ecosystem
Android = PC = open platform, more fragmentation/anarchy

I see. AFAIK Maxwell offered a great improvement over Kepler though in power consumption, right? Would explain abandoning Kepler.

It's people being selfish and no longer having the best, don't have bragging rights, and don't have a reason to show off.

Or it's people reconsidering their investment and making a value decision for themselves about which platform option will give them a better experience given their preferences. I'd think 'stay up to date' is a fair point of reasoning for people who buy into console platforms. I also think they'd feel the same if they didn't post it on a public forum about the hobby they devote time and money to where they'd be ridiculed for daring to post their opinion about a topic that would potentially affect their purchasing decisions.

On the other hand are those who have invested emotions into Playstation/Nintendo/Xbox and that passion comes through in their posts as they're faced with a different image of what the brand means to them. They are not the same as those who are simply looking at their options with this new shift on the horizon.

That was not what I meant, I was being cheeky about people saying they don't want optional upgrades, then yell they are switching to platforms with... optional upgrades.

It's a disingenuous argument when said in the same breath.

Rock and a hard place as I see it. "I didn't want to buy in to iterations or upgrades before, but if it's being introduced to what was once completely a buy-and-forget product for me then I may as well go for the option that provides other benefits I may have been eyeing already and am interested in trying". Doesn't particularly mean they'll immediately chuck their PS4 out the window, but it does mean they may transition to PC gaming primarily and only buy consoles once in a blue moon well after launch.

 

[-hadouken]

Meh, I would prefer to see more games than shinier ones

That's the beauty of this rumoured sku - it can be targeted (and priced) at enthusiasts who do value higher fidelity, without forcing people who don't care into a more expensive box from the get go. Importantly the playerbase grows, and investment in innovation is greater due to enthusiasts and early adopters funding the forthcoming revision.

 

[Beerman462]

The competitive advantage bogey man is back.

 

[Negotiator]

Also, you guys are blowing this out of proportion, since most PS4 online games are already 60fps (last-gen most of them were 30fps).

Some of them are 900p (BF4, Uncharted 4), granted, but do you think that PS4.5 players will get such as huge advantage by playing in 1080p instead of 900p? Provided that they get patched of course.

Unless the PS4.5 offers rock solid 60fps with zero dips (Uncharted 4 beta had variable 60fps in certain moments) and the OG PS4 struggles to reach the 60fps goal... we'll see how the final game is, hopefully they'll optimize it a bit more with the unlocked 7th Jaguar core.

What's your suggestion? Do you want Sony to fracture the online community because "balance" reasons? Fragmentation hurts online games. It's the same thing with the paid DLC map packs.

Not everyone has the same hardware equipment and it's always been this way. Some people don't even know about game mode and they're playing with worse input lag than others. Some people use WiFi, while others use Ethernet. There are tons of variables that may affect online gameplay.

Hahah no.
Setting the game's audio settings to stereo and using stereo cans will still give you positional audio. The audio engine processes it and sends it to the headphones, and no it's not some faux-surround. You don't have just a left and right position just because you're using 2 channels.

I've tried it and it's not the same thing. I have a proper Home Cinema set and a Sony wireless headset to compare both.

 

[etta]

I've tried it and it's not the same thing. I have a proper Home Cinema set and a Sony wireless headset to compare both.

There's no difference in positional audio. CS GO pros use stereo Sennheisers and Audio Technicas. 5.1/7.1 setups add to the sound signature, not position.

 

[DavidDesu]

Is there any chance we might see more RAM to enable more multi tasking features, say keep a game running and more than one other app too? Maybe PlayStation Vue picture in picture with gaming would be cool.

 

[mugurumakensei]

So could we be looking at online games running at a fixed 60fps on PS4K vs sub 60fps on PS4. Maybe even a at a lower resolution. Won't that give PS4K players a competitive advantage?

Not in any way that's impactful in the average case. Distance from the server, bandwidth, ISP throttling, and a myriad of other factors impact play so much more substantially that the difference in frame rate is statistical noise. It'd have an impact on local play, but, since local play is local by definition of it being on the same console, there is no impact. LAN play doesn't really exist on the PS4 and XBox One.

 

[JP]

I've tried it and it's not the same thing. I have a proper Home Cinema set and a Sony wireless headset to compare both.

The Sony headset doesn't use positional audio, it's a simple stereo headset. Positional audio is an end to end process and when it's done well, it's far better than a home cinema setup.

 

[MrBlonde]

Well this is bullshit, guess I should have waited since I picked this up on Black Friday for $300 but hardly play it since I prefer the Xbox

 

[mugurumakensei]

Well this is bullshit, guess I should have waited since I picked this up on Black Friday for $300 but hardly play it since I prefer the Xbox

I've got good news for you. Thanks to AMD, we are pretty much guaranteed to get a new XBox 1.5 despite Spencer's comments which were more spin than anything.

 

[etta]

The Sony headset doesn't use positional audio, it's a simple stereo headset. Positional audio is an end to end process and when it's done well, it's far better than a home cinema setup.

No the positional component is already calculated by the sound engine before sending it to the headphones. I'm guessing there was placebo in his test.