PeterLegend
Member
I got another job just to pay for this PS4K.
Take my money!
Take my money!
Colin Moriarty of Kinda Funny: source says "most developers are not happy with PS4.5"
- Thread starter Chobel
- Start date
Cherrypicked? I'm talking in general terms. How is that "cherrypicking?" It's the opposite. If I was stating certain ports being really good, while the majority are bad that would be cherrypicking. When the majority of xb1 ports are decent, how is stating that not a fact? How is stating that the xb1 is a weaker console than the ps4 not a fact? How is stating that the xb1 has sold way less than the ps4 not a fact?
Where did I compare XB1 to last gen ports? The PS4neo is not equivalent to a console generational leap and I never mentioned last gen in any of my posts. I don't consider it to be the same situation as "cross-gen" at all. Especially due to the fact Sony is mandating that the game be developed on the ps4 first and then optimized for the ps4neo later.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
yes, but none of that contradicts what i said.
PSVR games can look better on a PS4K because regular games can look better on a PS4K. the fact that there isn't a distinction between the two is irrelevant.
as for your bit about PSVR games already being shown at 60fps- yes this is true, but the graphics haven't exactly been mind blowing have they? obviously fidelity and detail had to be sacrificed in order for devs to meet the 60fps requirement, and with PS4K they will be able to make the games look a little bit more pretty.
PSVR game X on PS4: 60fps reprojected to 120fps, and looks okay.
PSVR game X on PS4K: 60fps reprojected to 120fps, and looks great.
edit: also, you seem to be confused as to what im saying with the 60fps requirement straining devs. i mean that most games on PS4 that have a lot of graphical detail don't run at 60, they run at 30. in order to get those games running at 60 you'd have to cut down on the graphical detail. if you require PSVR games to run at 60fps or they won't be certified, then you have a low ceiling on how pretty your game can be, because you don't have the option of kicking it down to 30fps in order to improve graphics. with the PS4K in the picture now, devs have a higher ceiling for the graphical detail, and can make games look a little more pretty than on the PS4. it's very simple.
WordsintheWater
Member
I never made any definitive assumptions on what this means, your first posts reads like those things you said are set in stone. Of course what I am saying is unfounded, that's why I never claimed that they were indeed true.
Portugeezer
Member
Of course not, Sony is making it mandatory, holding gun to developers head i.e. publishers want to be on PS4 so they will reluctantly do this (in the beginning anyway).
I just hope developers continue to squeeze what they can out of OG PS4 and not just do simple ports with graphics options, IMO PC ports are already unimpressive as it is currently.
I just hope developers continue to squeeze what they can out of OG PS4 and not just do simple ports with graphics options, IMO PC ports are already unimpressive as it is currently.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
i think the games are required to WORK on the PS4K, but aren't required to make use of the extra horsepower. so it's entirely likely that a lot of games will just ship looking identical on both systems.
unless i'm missing a stipulation about requiring the games take advantage of the higher spec.
Nope, there is no stipulation that states that. All it says is that it can't run worse on the ps4k. I wouldn't be surprised if we get a good amount of games where the ps4 and ps4k versions are on par. But if a dev has a marketing deal with sony or a stage presence on their e3 (or other) conference, it'd probably be a good idea to work on a better looking/running version on ps4k and have that version be the ones that gets advertised. I think the bigger publishers are very likely to be the ones giving decent improvements on the ps4k versions. Whereas the smaller devs may just go for parity.
The only requirement is that performance of games needs to be at least identical between the two platforms, so that's completely reasonable.
Glorified G
Member
Actually it does. You stated the alternative would shrink down the PS4 APU and keep everything as is but PSVR games suffer until PS5. If this was the case not only the documentation would state something regarding PSVR but it wouldn't mandatory for devs to develop for both versions.
Yet devs are required to develop for both. If the OG PS4 version doesn't meet the PSVR fps requirements then neither version gets certified. This PS4 spec bump was coming regardless if whether Sony decided to release PSVR or not. The details released for the documentation backs this up.
Psychoward
Banned
Sorry I misread this:
But you implied that the difference in power between the Xb1 and the Ps4 is comparable to the jump between the PS4 and PSNeo and that ain't true
Firmus_Anguis
Banned
It's hard not to get riled up when you read about developers potentially not liking this at all. That, to me, is the thing that bugs me the most.
If the devs don't like it, why the hell would you go through with it? But if the market is there, they'll just have to put up with it I guess. Hopefully it works out for everyone, especially the devs. It all depends on how Sony handles it.
I could see some VR games using reprojection at 60fps on PS4, while native 90fps on PS4k. Would be a better experience. Might give the smaller games enough juice to bump up to the 120fps its allegedly capable of. But yeah I highly doubt there would be a PSVR game that is PS4k exclusive, that doesn't seem to be the road Sony is walking down
Langdon Alger
Banned
This whole PS4.5 this is really depressing. I just want a normal console cycle.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
i think you're reading way too deep into what i'm saying and extracting make believe information. literally nothing i said has anything to do with what you're saying lol.
it's like im talking about an apple pie recipe and you're getting on my case about marinating the meat for too long.
It's all good.
I didn't mean to imply that if that's what you got out of it. I was just showing a case where a weaker hardware that has sold significantly less than the ps4 has been getting decent ports, so there's no reason to expect baseps4 ports to be bad all of a sudden as it'll be in a better position against ps4neo, than the xb1 is against the ps4 market wise right now, when all things are considered.
PeakPointMatrix
Member
gundamkyoukai
Member
5 to 6 years was ideal in the past .
Do you know why ?
Because of die shrink and other factors which have change since then .
Lets say MS bring out the next Xbox next year it's not going to be a massive jump over PS4k orther than using HBM.
Must've... otherwise... yikes.
I don't blame developers for not being happy with this at all.
Psychoward
Banned
Yeah but that's a false equivalence because the PSNeo> PS4 gap is much, much more noticeable than the PS4> XB1 gap
And if you ignore PS4K's existence, you will still get that. You can wait until PS5 with nothing changing, as PS4 is still the base spec for development and games must continue to fully work on that. Its also easier for devs to continue how they have been doing and port up to PS4K. PS4K will do better with games that have PC graphics settings that go beyond what PS4 and XB1 can do, but otherwise there should be no issue.
The existence of something doesn't make your purchase invalidated. Infact, Sony making sure PS4 is supported until PS5 should cheer you up. It cheered me up.
Because devs know that Nintendo won't create a big push for people to upgrade to even be able to play games in the future. It's the definition of optional.
The writing on the wall is that PS4K is a soft launch of a new generation for them. Sony has too much riding on it for it not to be (PSVR, 4K content). They want it to push that stuff like they wanted the PS3 to push Blu-Ray and if history is anything to go by, they don't care how heavy handed their tactics are since the ends justifies the means in their eyes.
I mean, with how big the PS4's install base is, how small the PS4K's install base will be initially, and how little demand for a new expensive console with be for a lot of that same user base who bought that console not long ago (in comparison with the beginning of a normal console cycle) I don't see why most devs would care to devote much resources to this new console at the moment if it was just a PS4 Slim essentially unless they so anticipate Sony pushing their own resources to this new console and try to push people away from the PS4.
This is about as optional as the DS was when Nintendo said the Gameboy line would still exist and the DS was the "3rd pillar".
Glorified G
Member
It's more of the fact that you stated this:
When both Giant Bomb & DF went out of their way to state that nothing in the documentation mentions PSVR. We're almost past the point of speculation phase. We now have two publications go into detail about what Sony is requiring from devs for this device. From suggestions to reach 4K/UltraHD resolutions to requiring no gameplay exclusive features. Making this about PSVR is extracting make believe information.
It's nice to see one of the people that was vehemently against this come around. I hope some others start to see things this way or at least stop panicking.
You can't have an 1:1 equivalent and it was not meant to be taken as an equivalent either. Just describing the general situations. There's also a false equivalent that comes in when talking about the porting process. A PSNeo & PS4 port would be much easier than making a ps4 and xb1 version, as both PSneo and ps4 largely have the same design/instruction set, whereas for the xb1 they'd have to work with different systems/quirks despite it also being x86.
The OG PS4 will look like complete shit starting this October compared to the Neo.
Seriously though, too many people in here are falling down the slippery slope argument of the games are going to automatically look like shit when the Neo comes out. They won't.
Because Sony mandates it and wants double dippers, plus a section of the public that will go for a more powerful unit, so they have more flexibility.
It does not supplant PS4 or the PS5 in anyway, and the argument to the contrary brought up doesn't make much sense.
Nintendo is the one who tried to have features the 3DS did not have and games the 3DS could not run. They have no bearing on what others do.
gundamkyoukai
Member
You would have a point if Sony stop selling normal PS4 which they won't .
Sony is not going to give up having a $250 to $200 consoles this black friday or next for $400 only piece of hardware .
killatopak
Member
Of course they're unhappy.
But if they wanna sell then they better work.
Still pretty bad though. There's just no easy way around this.
But if they wanna sell then they better work.
Still pretty bad though. There's just no easy way around this.
Absolutely. That generation overstayed it's welcome and went on far too long, and I feel like as a result of the PS4K, this one may also do the same.
In pretty sure on both cases they're referring to the internal inclusion of the PSVR breakout box in the Neo - any improved PSVR performance will be in the 'Neo mode' per other games.
I suspect in practice this will mean VR Neo mode being 90/90r rather than 60/120r (where 'r' is 'reprojected'), 90/90r being preferable but not necessary for a decent VR experience, given the potential for artefacts reprojection introduces.
I did panic initially, when i first heard about the concept of PS4K...but the Giant Bomb memos changed my attitude. I was mainly concerned about how Sony would handle compatibility and how delicate and accommodating they would be to PS4's current userbase.
If they had basically changed all the components to be significantly more powerful but non compatible with the PS4 OG and priced out of common sense land with exclusive games to itself, yes i would probably be on the opposite side right now.
But it seems they are really taking into consideration (based on what we know anyway) the needs and concerns of all their player base.
You don't have to upgrade, if you want to upgrade the upgrade is there, it seems reasonably priced, and is not intended to negatively affect gaming in general beyond giving Sony a more powerful unit with better performance metrics, probably for their VR push and for the performance oriented gamer who cries about "durg this weak generation!" every time DF articles about badly optimized games come out.
I just feel that the ps4k is a result of the launch of psvr, and sony wanting to extend the generation by an extra year or so, so that the ps5 will be a significant jump compared to the ps4.
Before all this ps4k stuff I was expecting a ps5 to release holiday 2018. Now I expect it to be 2019.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
okay, this is becoming a bit comical.
one last try: i'm trying to discern why Sony would include performance increases in their Slim PS4 rather than just release a Slim PS4 that is a simple die shrink and nothing more. my theory here is that the 60fps minimum requirement Sony has in place for all PSVR games has created a situation where PSVR games aren't looking as pretty as generic PS4 games, because in order to get *ANY* game to run at a higher fps you have to sacrifice some graphical fidelity. thus, PS4 games WILL be looking better on average than PSVR games. with the PS4K in the picture now, PSVR devs have the opportunity to have their games look a little better on PS4K than they would on a PS4og. that's it. that's all. that's the entire theory. nothing about devs being forced to do anything. nothing about documentation saying devs have to do anything with PSVR. nata. that's why i said you're taking crazy pills because the documentation not talking about PSVR doesn't mean that devs making PSVR games can't make their PSVR games work better on a PS4K than a PS4og.
i'm going to leave it here because i'm starting to think that i'm being trolled and you're not actually trying to engage in any sort of productive discussion and are hung up on some weird points that you can't wrap your head around. i'm not trying to rile you up or rustle your jimmies here, i'm just genuinely baffled as to how you can't get it despite me clarifying things again and again.
edit: just checked your post history, and not only do you seem defensive when anyone wonders if PS4K will help make PSVR games look better, but you even posted yourself the same line of thinking i have been struggling to explain to you.
so yeah, i have zero idea why this is even a debate/argument/whatever at this point.
like.a.ser
Member
My fears were assuaged by the news that there won't be PS4K exclusives, but I still can't help but feel like "New PS4" and "New Xbone" are going to bomba. Or at the very least, fail to meet expectations. Outside of enthusiasts (GAF) and those who don't already have the first iteration of the system, it's hard to imagine most owners being willing to shell out more money for the same console just for a comparatively negligible increase in power. I'll be very surprised if this is successful.
On the contrary, one possible argument for the PS4K is specifically BECAUSE of what happened last gen and how badly the PS3 and 360 were stretched. This is to stretch out the gen for a few more years. So unlike when PS3 and 360 got long in the tooth and devs really had to do tricks to really compromise their games, performance metrics of games for PS4K will still be good and they can still give a bigger jump from to PS5 from PS4...remember the baseline will be the PS4 until PS5 comes out, and PS4K will still be restricted to current gen games, so its not like the concept of gens is changing.
Sony doesn't need it to sell gang busters. They just want the option of another userbase who would potentially buy it. That is why PS4 is going to continue and they wont stop it for this new unit, they are still getting PS4 sales regardless of if its from the new unit or the old unit.
But Sony also had their 10 year plans for past Playstations. You could still buy those older consoles when the next generation launched, but it didn't mean that Sony, the rest of the industry, and most of the user base didn't already move on.
Raonak
Banned
Honestly yeah.
You could apply the same logic to any enhancement aka;
most developers were not happy with PS3 trophies. because it meant extra work :/
If devs are too busy, they could easily make the Neo mode be identical to Base mode. IIRC there's nothing in the dev notes forbidding that.
Glorified G
Member
It's an interesting theory, and I'm not saying you're not entitled to it, but my point is that this theory is based on nothing. It's one thing if you expanded on this based on the new information that was released in the last 24 hours on the PS4.5, which this thread is about. But everything you posted is baseless and and the actual facts released in the last 24 hours contradicts your theory to a great degree.
Even though you said you're done I wanted to clarify and state that I wasn't trolling you but stating your analysis is unfounded, especially with the recent events and details released.
I didn't bother to check your post history myself because I don't think you're relevant enough but I believe the issue is that haven't read any of the articles released by Giant Bomb or DF. If you did your posts wouldn't lack so much substance.
Fushichou187
Member
Devkits are going out. Horse is out of the stable I'm afraid.
Also, they aren't listening to meltdowns on GAF; particularly from people who are coming at the issue-- understandably-- from a consumer-centric standpoint. This is a business decision that Sony is making, with a longview towards how they want to approach their gaming platform for the foreseeable future. The Angry Internet isn't going to stop that. You either buy the machine or you don't.
gundamkyoukai
Member
Are there any signs to show that PS4 user base is not active ?
Also we are not talking about a full gen jump which why it going to be easy to port software .
Compare to new gen where after 6 to 7 years the user base is not as active .
It's another test surface to account for, for a small sliver of the PS4 install base, but one you'll get raked over the coals for by a loud but tiny group if you don't justify people's luxury purchase for them.
So yeah, while those with PC dev will mostly just adjust some settings.. it's STILL a version that goes through cert separately, from all we've seen. If Sony is smart, they'll let developers patch in 4K mode after the release of the base game.
Inuhanyou wasn't against it so much as he wanted reassurance from Sony that 100% they will support both PS4 and 4K fully before committing. He wasn't against the idea of a 4K by itself.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
What's the point of having a video games forum if we can't voice our opinions? Or does having a positive opinion the only thing that should be tolerated?