Mister Megative
Banned
If you prefer Xbox, why buy one to begin with?
PS4K information (~2x GPU power w/ clock+, new CPU, price, tent. Q1 2017)
- Thread starter OsirisBlack
- Start date
If you prefer Xbox, why buy one to begin with?
Negotiator
Banned
It's still a shitty move, though. Who knows if it'll happen again with Pascal and Maxwell?
Polaris (GCN 1.3) is also more efficient than GCN 1.1, but that doesn't mean that Sony should abandon the OG PS4.
As I said, they supported the PS3 for too long (Gran Turismo 6 came out after the PS4 launch), so chances are they won't abandon the OG PS4 too quickly.
nVidia sells hardware, while Sony sells both hardware (consoles) and software (games). They need to sell games to 40 million OG PS4 owners to earn royalties, so yeah... it doesn't make any sense to abandon them.
It has a proprietary DSP than transmits 7.1 positional audio via a wireless dongle. The headset also has a switch between stereo and surround (7.1) audio.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Oh, stop it.
Glorified G
Member
With a PS4.5 will console gamers now need to bring a mouse & keyboard into the living room and juggle three separate gaming clients (uplay, Steam, Origin) to play all the popular third party games with fractured online ecosystem. And consistently switch between two input methods (gamepad + keyboard and mouse) just to navigate the three different gaming clients UI's along with an OS (Windows) because there isn't a universal control method?
Were you asking a rhetorical question?
It's a completely different process with different end results. Positional, or binaural audio as it's been called for nearly fifty years is not something that happens on the headset that I quoted about.
That fakes a 7.1 setup (very badly) but even if it was a real 7.1 setup, it's still not what binaural audio is.
Exactly, that's not positional audio.
EDIT:
There just seems to be confusion here about what the technical reality of positional audio is that fact that you just use a standard stereo headset.
I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about people dismissing the idea of switching to PC like it's nonsense or something
So can players with low-latency Internet connections and HDTVs, as well as players with customized controllers, using performance enhancing substances, and any number of other variables. Sure.
geordiemp
Member
LOL wireless dongles, no.
. Positional tracking is done using a mix amp to create positional stereo - I use Sennheisser G4me ones attached to astro pro mix amp in COD - I have a KD of 3 as I know exactly where all enemies are, not just infront but at 3 o clock and 15 ft away....its a massive advantage (and is a common competitive set up)
Best sound is optical dolby to a good mix amp and then high quality stereo cans, all wired as wireless is not as good. Pros callout to each other so they dont always need it, not sure if its allowed either.
Anyway, back on topic, your ping to a server is more important than any other parameter for PVP. The server tickrate is the effective multiplayer frame rate - does not matter if locally your running at 60 or 144 Hz, the game sees the action at the tick rate and everything inbetween is lag comp.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Shhh, all TV's are the same size, with same response times, and input lag.
Guess we should not game on the Xbox then, for fear of the (optional) mighty Elite Controller, and the competitive advantage it brings to the table.
Glad this shifted to audio now, I was getting bored with the spinning right round arguments, of back to the 'competitive advantage' again.
I also learned a bit about things on the audio side as well.
Negotiator
Banned
Then what is it? Using a pseudo-surround headset is better than using TV stereo speakers, since it allows you to locate various sound sources (bullets, vehicles etc) with pinpoint accuracy. Isn't that a competitive advantage?
Most headsets only have 2 speakers, so they have to "fake" surround by utilizing proprietary DSP algorithms. Very few have multiple drivers positioned in different places, as Lukas Japonicus said.
PeterLegend
Member
Last years E3 was pretty hyped, this year itll be super hyped.
geordiemp
Member
No, the best positional head sets use quality amps like astro's into cans of your choice, the sky is the limit.
Negotiator
Banned
Optical/Toslink is limited to 5.1, while I was talking about 7.1 (2 extra channels). Either way, both of them have to fake surround in a stereo headset.
And yeah, I agree about the tickrate. TLOU MP has 15 Hz tickrate (bullets follow you behind walls), even though the graphics engine renders at 30 or 60fps. Most people don't even know what the tickrate is.
Do games straight up not run on Kepler cards now? That's actually really surprising to me.
Do you realize navigating the different PC vendors and control methods isn't nearly as unintuitive as you're making it out to be? If anything this is where the lines have blurred between consoles and PCs with updates, DLC, and services like the PSN store. Or the option of using M/KB on consoles. I agree with the living room sentiment - but that isn't a huge enough reason for people not to make comparisons.
Negotiator
Banned
https://www.playstation.com/en-us/e.../pulse-elite-edition-wireless-stereo-headset/
https://www.playstation.com/en-us/explore/accessories/audio/gold-wireless-stereo-headset/
https://www.playstation.com/en-us/explore/accessories/audio/silver-wired-stereo-headset/
All of them support 7.1 virtual surround. There's even a wired version, although that doesn't matter. As long as wireless bandwidth is enough, they can transmit even lossless audio.
The more that I think about this, the more excited I get about it and want it to be true. I'm totally fine with this as long as there aren't any ps4k specific game releases and it's regular ps4 discs and digital releases that are run on it.
As for the some devs are happy about it, and then that subsequent post for a dev saying he (or she) wouldn't be.I can see how that could be the case (some being happy about it). It is entirely optional to a dev if they want to create and include some sort of setting template for the ps4k on the disc or through a patch that enhances performance/fidelity.
Some devs may forgo adding in enhancements whatsover, which would be a bit disappointing, but understandable, especially if it's a smaller dev.
Some devs may do a bare minimum type deal where they let the hardware to the heavy lifting rather than optimize every little thing. Like say the ps4 version is running at an unlocked framerate (with a 60fps cap), just leaving the game that way would the ps4k brute force its way to 60fps, and it will do that with ease if the game runs above 30fps on the ps4 as it is. Others may implement some better form of AA. Others may simply improve the resolution.
And some devs may go the extra mile and properly optimize for the system, and it may feel like a worthwhile proposition to them if they have a marketing deal going on with Sony, as they can then use this better looking/performing version of the game to market/demonstrate it.
And of course there are some who just like having some more power to work with while making a game.
(But yes, this doesn't mean that I think that all devs would be happy or indifferent about this.)
As for the some devs are happy about it, and then that subsequent post for a dev saying he (or she) wouldn't be.I can see how that could be the case (some being happy about it). It is entirely optional to a dev if they want to create and include some sort of setting template for the ps4k on the disc or through a patch that enhances performance/fidelity.
Some devs may forgo adding in enhancements whatsover, which would be a bit disappointing, but understandable, especially if it's a smaller dev.
Some devs may do a bare minimum type deal where they let the hardware to the heavy lifting rather than optimize every little thing. Like say the ps4 version is running at an unlocked framerate (with a 60fps cap), just leaving the game that way would the ps4k brute force its way to 60fps, and it will do that with ease if the game runs above 30fps on the ps4 as it is. Others may implement some better form of AA. Others may simply improve the resolution.
And some devs may go the extra mile and properly optimize for the system, and it may feel like a worthwhile proposition to them if they have a marketing deal going on with Sony, as they can then use this better looking/performing version of the game to market/demonstrate it.
And of course there are some who just like having some more power to work with while making a game.
(But yes, this doesn't mean that I think that all devs would be happy or indifferent about this.)
Your experiences doesn't matter to the general console gamer that also don't know the difference between a GPU and a CPU. Guys I work with wouldn't dare even open up their 10 year old Compaq let alone play games on it. Of course they are on the extreme end but I think people put too much stock in most peoples knowledge of computers.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Yep.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I honestly think this is best news ever for people like me that want better performance, but prefer console.
Yes it is mostly nonsense. I have no issue with people switching to PC but acting like a mid generation refresh with a power bump is somehow sacrilige is crazy talk. It will be no different on PC. I also think these people are lying or at least greatly exaggerating their outrage. I would put $ on nobody ever saying that in real life.
CosmicQueso
Member
Sony won't really miss the dozens that go to PC.
And those that do go PC will see that it's the best place to play if you want flexibility, fidelity and compatibility. So everyone will win.
And those who need a little push to get into 4K.
Directv has been advertising the hell out of the masters being in 4K on directv during baseball today. That won't get a lot of people under 50, but this would.
And those that do go PC will see that it's the best place to play if you want flexibility, fidelity and compatibility. So everyone will win.
And those who need a little push to get into 4K.
Directv has been advertising the hell out of the masters being in 4K on directv during baseball today. That won't get a lot of people under 50, but this would.
Yeah, I mean I have a PC that outperforms the current gen systems quite easily, and games can be gotten for much cheaper on it (if it's a game that I forgot to preorder) if you look around enough, but I still prefer buying and playing games on console.
Prisoner KSC2-303
Member
If indeed it's iterations on the same architecture from this point, with backwards compatibility at least to the last mid-gen refresh, then from a personal point of view it'll be nice not having to keep an old console just to play the latest Yakuza game, as it limps its way through the localisation process.
switching to PC wouldn't be about trying to escape upgrades, but whatever. Talking in circles at this point.
Glorified G
Member
So console gamers still don't have to do any of what I previously posted? It takes one controller and a few buttons to navigate and buy a third party game on PSN and a two button presses to have a console go into rest mode while game updates download in the background. And they'll switch to a platform that is unintuitive to their own experience? For what? Because a refresh is coming after 3 years for a couple of consoles? Which would take a total of 4 consoles with half of them sharing identical hardware for a generation?
Let's say your right and devs cannot focus on providing the best output for consoles anymore. Even though third parties in the past developed for MS, Sony & Nintendo when all of them shared three different architectures and would still support Nintendo today if they provided an audience for their home console audience. Console gamers are now going to decide to take the time and learn how to build their own PC, which parts are needed, and actually attempt to build it themselves? Or buy a prebuilt PC that has a higher entry level price than a console? When happens when they need an upgrade? Do they spend the same amount on a GPU that they would on a console and take the time to swap it out with their current one? Or do the simpler method and and buy a prebuit PC that they could have already done with a new console refresh.
If anything, this will drive more console gamers away from PC. Want to play the latest console games with better fidelity? Spend $500 on the new console refresh that comes with a controller and plug it to the back of your TV or spend the same amount for a GPU along with other parts and learn how to build your own or spend even more on a prebuilt PC and have a more complicated user experience playing games.
Csgo players using headphones /= 5.1/7.1 have no advantage. You'd need to do some studies.
Admiral Woofington
Member
Prisoner KSC2-303
Member
If it is releasing soon, it may explain why they didn't show any plans for UHD BD players at CES. May as well sell people a console as well.
There's no advantage regarding positional sound that a home theatre has over stereo headphones. In fact headphones with good soundstages (HD598 or higher, AD700's) are better than your average home theatre setup (read: average, not high end).
Plug in a set of stereo cans, turn off any virtual surround sound if you have enabled (mixamp, soundcard...etc), and listen to this:
http://youtu.be/IUDTlvagjJA
CosmicQueso
Member
Unless someone has studied this, it is all conjecture.
All I know is a nice sound system letes me know that Sylvester Stallone's helicopter goes from back left to front right and headphones didn't.
I wonder though if game devs would spend any resources on proper positional 5.1 audio when 99% of the audience won't be using that.
...
Movies with already calculated sound is a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittle bit different than games that have sound engines that process sound in real time, and we are talking about identifying positions of bullets and explosions and footsteps in games.
And the sound manipulation is done using mathematical algorithms and physics, and sound physics. The engine uses formulas according to the laws of physics and the human brain does the interpretation of positioning.
Oh and there's engines for sound, developers don't have to make their own (like Havok for physics).
Steam controller sez hi.
* * *
Man, whenever I see these 'PC easier than console' comments, I'm going to be thinking 'used car salesman' now. Thanks SmiteofHand.
Obliterator
Member
Yep describes me exactly. I have a beast PC but still prefer console due to ease of use, thats where my friends are for multiplayer, and Trophies. The one let down is just sitting waiting forever for new hardware.
This is like a dream come true for me
Regardless of the impacts on optimization or development I hesitate to embrace this news as a net positive for the industry or Sony simply because the potential this has to blow up in their faces. Marketing will have to be absolutely flawless in order to avoid a decline in consumer confidence and a potential drop off for sales. To me, it seems far more likely that the marketing and message will stumble and I shudder to think about the implications of such a thing and what that means for the industry as a whole. This is, by all accounts, a pivotal moment in the future of console development and impeccable messaging is going to be the difference from market acceptance and failure. So, when I ask myself: Do you really believe Sony or any other current HW manufacturer is capable of the sort of flawless execution that this transition requires? I have to be honest and answer no and as a result such a drastic shift that has the potential to either be a big boon or an anchor in already turbulent waters for the industry frankly terrifies me.
Crimson_Gold
Member
I feel like all that is said they all games are forward compatible and each console will be supported for 5-6 years.
SmiteOfHand
Member
For the record, I think PC gaming is the bomb. Just some of the evangelist freak me the fuck out. Some of us choose to believe in private. Don't need you pounding on my door with reading materials.
The experience of launching a game or running Steam or any service platform on PC is not nearly as excruciating as you state. You turn it on and double click the game launcher icon. Updates are as easy as clicking 'check for updates' or 'install update' and we've been able to have them download in the background since well before 7th gen consoles. I didn't say anything about providing the best experience for consoles.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1202382
I'm mostly a console gamer, and a diehard jRPG fan - for me, these exclusives are why I have a PS4. I don't believe the arguments of ease of use or simplicity apply anymore as advantages over PC, and going iterative erases yet another perceived benefit many people valued in consoles versus PC. The evangelism I'm seeing is from the opposite side.
Ironic, considering the consistent questioning of anyone who isn't wholly on board with this thing, just like a car salesman demanding to know why you don't want to buy the extra insurance plan he's trying to sell you.
Just guessing here, but both the PS3 slim and the PS3 super slim were announced during Gamescom in August and then released in September. I don't really have any reason to believe this new model will be any different.
Especially not since WSJ claims it will be released before the Playstation VR, which is released in October.
BoxManLocke
Member
This is a much bigger deal than a simple Slim version though. E3 would be the place to do it IMO. Really get the messaging right and keep repeating it until release (Sep/Oct seems right to me).
Maybe use the time to show some new games running side by side on PS4/PS4K to reassure people.
Nostremitus
Member
If they've already designed for the existing thermal budget I don't see why it's strange. AMD's new CPUs are more energy efficient and produce less heat. (That's assuming the new CPUs being considered are Zen based, what could their other options be?)
TetraGenesis
Member
There is clearly some conflicting information coming from multiple parties but being funneled through the same insiders. I kind of like that there's still a bit of mystery to it.
To be fair, I don't think there's been a single challenge to anything along the lines of "meh, not for me" or "I'll pass." It's those that are decrying the very idea as the end of consoles, the downfall of Sony, or insisting that nobody is allowed to have anything better for six to seven years after the launch of a console that are drawing the majority of the feedback.
Glorified G
Member
How do you get those services on a PC? The user has to use a mouse and keyboard in the living room and manually install all three clients to play the most popular games. Want to play the latest FIFA? Well, need to boot out of Steam's big picture mode put down the controller and pick up the mouse and keyboard again and navigate another client with a different interface and ecosystem in order to purchase it.
These are not arguments, they're reality. Whether you choose to accept it is irrelevant. And you provided nothing to suggest any of this will go away.