Colin Moriarty of Kinda Funny: source says "most developers are not happy with PS4.5"
- Thread starter Chobel
- Start date
GHG
Member
You can't fight this, it's the direction the whole industry looks to be going in. It's not one company attempting to exert control over something which will ultimately only benefit themselves.
This time it's not about consumer rights. The product you originally bought still works as advertised and you are not being forced to buy anything else if you don't want to. Retailers will be more for this move rather than against it since it will benefit them in a big way.
The reaction is not comparable. It's the same handful of people in every thread related to this complaining over and over again about things that simply aren't true.
"It splits the userbase" - no it doesn't.
"All the devs are unhappy" - how do you know, are you sure it's not just you who is unhappy?
"Devs have to make another SKU of the same game, it's like making a game for the PS3 and ps4 all over again" - Nope, all evidence points towards them still only having to make 1 game within the same SDK environment.
"The generation will be longer" - how do you know? Are generations even defined anymore?
"The ps4 and ps4k will never be used to their fullest" - again, how do you know?
"This will kill innovation" - No it won't. Ironically a big reason this is happening is to further enable innovation such as the PSVR.
"I can't afford a new console every 3 years" - Complaining on a message board isn't going to change that.
"I used to have the biggest dick" - newsflash, you never had the biggest dick.
All of this is being said over and over again. I mean it's ok to not like something and message boards are here for us to all voice our opinions (positive and negative) but give me a break... This thread is full of false dichotomy and hyperbole. What I find most ironic about all of this is that some of these people are the same people who have previously complained about things like the lack of backwards compatibility and having to rebuy peripherals at the turn of every generation.
Enjoy your new gaming PC's and new hobbies after you quit gaming I guess.
Why do we think there is going to be a ps5, what if this is the new strategy going forward, iterative upgrades every 3 years with backwards and forwards compatibility.
Sony may be following Apple's model of iterative upgrades.
farmerboy
Member
Agree. Firstly "most" devs could mean anything.
Secondly, if Sony wants to bring a new model to market then good for them. The market will decide if it succeeds or not. Sony has made a lot of good decisions this gen, I trust them to keep doing so. They got some balls bringing 2 major products to market at the same time.
I will, however, concede that their marketing department will have it's work cut out. I'll most probably buy one but even I don't know why. Simply I'm happy to buy a better version of a product I already love, to better play the games I know I'm gonna love, on a 4k tv that I'm pretty sure I'm gonna buy this year.
Shit, I've just worked out why I want the PS4K. Are we over complicating this arguement? Could it really be as simple as I've just discovered? Are there more of me?
Glorified G
Member
I'm talking about the comparison of DRM in the past being made at this moment right now. The reaction is not even comparable. Will it be when it is announced is not really the question here.
#PS4NoDRM had more to do with the concern of Sony following the same model as MS. There weren't even concrete rumors of Sony doing the same and there was huge uproar over social media about the potential of it being made. I disagree about the comments of DRM supporters being similar. I don't remember supporters using other successful DRM models in other entertainment mediums because it didn't exist. You can literally look at every other form of technology following the same iterative path as an example but you couldn't with DRM. What MS was doing was unprecedented in any form of entertainment.
Cthulhu_Steev
Member
How would you feel if Sony mandated 30fps on PS4, would you be thinking of the developers then or would you be thinking 'at last!'? Think of Neo mode like that.
Yeah, I'm good with this. I loved the crazy cycle of consoles burning everything down that went before, but I'm ready for continuity in my games collection now. I'm tired of losing Katamari and Gradius V.
Dirtyshubb
Member
I wonder if colins opinion will change once they actually realise that Microsoft are most likely doing the same thing, he kept saying 'why are Sony doing this, no one else is' during ps I love you xoxo.
Not saying anything fanboyish, just it changes the situation when it's the industry changing and not just one company so I wonder if his opinion will change.
Not saying anything fanboyish, just it changes the situation when it's the industry changing and not just one company so I wonder if his opinion will change.
Well, this is just about the most asinine thing I've read in this thread.
Consumers don't answer to manufacturers, manufacturers answer to consumers. When we were dissatisfied with Sony in 2006, we didn't buy their console and they hemorrhaged market-share. When we were unhappy with Microsoft's DRM and media focused Xbox One, they hemorrhaged marketshare and have spent the last few years trying to correct their mistake.
If consumers are unhappy with PS4 Neo, they will not adopt it at the rates Sony wants or needs, and they will rethink iterative console hardware. Simple as that. Whether or not people are unhappy enough for this to happen is anyone's guess - but the response has not been good.
As for this being the "way the industry is going", there are three hardware companies. The president of Microsoft Games Studios said he doesn't like the 1.5 concept. Rumors that it may exist are unsubstantiated and there's nothing real out there about it. Nintendo probably isn't doing it.
Who besides Sony is moving in this direction?
Glorified G
Member
This will end up being the biggest complaint when this is released. And it's primarily going to be from people who went out of their way to sell their PS4 for the upgrade. Outside of first party studios I don't think any studio is really going to go out of their way to utilize the spec bump.
NoctisVsStar
Member
Just making a shaky 30 or 60 fps solid with no dips is good enough.. with the extra particles.
Cthulhu_Steev
Member
ugh
If it dies, we go back to regular console cycles, or Sony leaves the console hardware business because it's tired of sinking cash into a hole to come up with something different every five years for a shrinking market.
Pathfinder
Member
The "lazy dev" argument will mutate into something worse than it is now.
SolidSnakeUS
Member
Nintendo making the NX is very much doing it. Hell, making a new console in less than 5 years time since the Wii U, and we're not even sure it will have backward capability of Wii U games. And even though Spencer said no, the FCC documents don't lie. Even if he says no, he's just covering himself and it will be revealed later. Bet on it. So no, Sony isn't the only one doing this.
Nah, I'd rather prefer that a new number means a cutoff point for forward compatbility. Especially since PS5 will/should be a much bigger upgrade than the Neo is. But yeah, it should have full backwards compatibility with ps4/neo.
First party titles definitely will. Large publishers/developers probably will (especially if they have a marketing deal with Sony). Console exclusives (as a result of a deal with Sony) probably will as well. So that accounts for maybe close to/less than half the games that get released? I don't know.
ninjablade
Banned
I find this very hard to believe considering most pc third-party games with weaker gpu's then then one in ps4k already look and run better then ps4 games.
SolidSnakex
Member
Consumers ultimately dictate what a company is going to do. A company isn't going to continually do something that consumers don't want and show they don't want by not purchasing it. Just speaking of Sony for example, it's pretty much safe to say that they're never going to make another handheld. Because consumers showed them that there just isn't enough interest. We don't see extreme sports games made anymore because consumers stopped purchasing them. Platformers don't have the sort of presence they once had for the same reason. Online passes stopped in part because they just weren't successful enough. On the other hand, things gamers often do complain about like day one DLC, season passes and so on continue to exist because enough people buy them to justify their existence.
So, ultimately this is something consumers will dictate. It's not a foregone conclusion in terms of the direction of consoles.
GHG
Member
If you really think that Microsoft aren't also going in this direction then I don't know what to say to you. They are perfectly geared up for this sort of shift with UWP and their desire to emulate what Apple have been doing in recent years. Phil Spencer has recently "backtracked" but look at his words carefully and also look at what he previously said:
Nintendo has already been doing it for a while with their handhelds.
Consumers do answer to manufactures in the electronics space. We don't dictate what is being made, we can only dictate what we choose to buy. If Sony (or Microsoft) want to make this thing happen, no amount of complaining is going to prevent that since it's actually a piece of hardware. It's not some software that can be altered because of consumer backlash prior to release (see Xbox One DRM). They are not going to cancel it all at the drop of a hat because a few dudes on Neogaf and Twitter said they don't like the look of it.
As for whether the shift will be a success or not, that is up to the public to decide. If it's not a success then nothing changes for us as consumers since the OG PS4 will continue to sell as it has been and Sony will gradually sweep this under the rug like they previously have with other hardware failures.
So we will see who is really being asinine and who isn't over the next 12 months.
So edgy I could shave with it.
True. There's no danger to Gamestop's existence this time around and the concept of buying and reselling used games is under no threat. I don't believe there will be an overwhelmingly negative reaction to the official 4K unveil. It will be as mixed as it is now, unless Sony markets it as the slim - which is actually a very crafty move that would work.
I joined GAF because of #PS4NoDRM. The comments from DRM supporters in the lead-up to the XB1 reveal were absolutely similar to comments I see now aimed at non-supporters. Of course, the PS4K isn't an anti-consumer ploy like the XB1 DRM scheme was. Once people realized MS's plan for the XB1 was actually real and not just rumors and that the reality was so much worse than they had envisioned, was when they made a decisive no. I don't believe that will happen with the Neo. But the comments at people who aren't onboard have been in line with those that I saw in early 2013.
Big-ass Ramp
hella bullets that's true
edit: nvm, I'm dead.
Clockwork5
Member
Have you heard of the New 3DS?
Okay, sure. The DSi and the New 3DS both sort-of, kind-of qualify here. We have no indication that they`re going to go this route in console hardware.
Mendax
Member
no, but there is also no indication they are going in a different route. so why assume the worst
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Exactly what I've been trying to express and completely failing.
Where is the incentive for those willing to fork out another $399/£349? If the rules from the SDK are true I wouldn't blame any studio for thinking it isn't worth the hassle and stick with the PS4.
Also would there be a point in the future like sales parity where the rules end?
The more I think about this the more of a headache it sounds for both OG PS4 and NEO owners. Sony are going to be so busy trying to satisfy both sides, neither will be.
I just can't get my head around the relatively huge bump in GPU specs for Sony then to limit its use unless it really is for VR and they don't want to admit it....
The instant they announce this thing, if it's not on store shelves right then and there, PS4 sales will slow.
I give Microsoft all the credit in the world for the 360 slim launch. That was huge.
Only if they announce an immediate price drop on the OG ps4, eg ps4 $299, ps4k $399.
Anyone who was price conscience will buy the now available cheaper ps4 and anyone wanting a more powerful 4k version would wait it out.
PS4 Neo is going to cost more than 2 New 3DS combined. And like it has been mentioned before, vastly different ecosystems.
well even apple has numbered iterations in addition to the s iterations so the next iteration of PS4 NEO could be called PS5.
That is true though my intent was that each iteration may not be generational leap we get between typical generations, it wouldnt surprise me if the eventual successor to the ps4 neo will have the same OS, store and even multiplayer infrastructure. I suspect Sony (and MS) are looking at Apple and realized that frequent hardware iterations are being accepted by the market as long as software is easily transferable between iterations (to an extent).
A completely optional model exists. How horrible and anti consumer!
If anything, devs should be the only one grumbling at this point.
I don't think that's going to happen. PS5 means a reset of the generation and base standard. PS4K is still an enhanced PS4, so they are not going to be 'targeting' PS4K when they get to PS5, they will be targeting PS5.
PS4K is only for enhanced versions of PS4 games. I expect PS4/K games to be compatible with PS5 however, so the library still continues.
It is just a choice, so ignore it if you don't like it. Its specifically so you can continue how you've been playing games if you want.
Audioboxer
Member
This.
i really dont care about that, actually i like how the games look on ps4, if the ps4k makes those games run with better fps and keep the 1080p.
i would be more than happy
UnrealEck
Member
I think if you're primarily or exclusively a PS4 gamer, the 'Neo' will still be a decent or good buy even if some of the games don't utilise its extra power. If you're playing PlayStation all the time then it's going to be worth having a better PlayStation. I guess somewhat similarly I bought a 980 Ti and I understood at the time some games won't utilise all that power over say, a 970.
For me I doubt I'll buy one because I'm primarily a PC gamer. I'd probably only buy one if I got almost the same as what I paid for the original PS4 (like £200 or something) off it for selling/trading it for 'Neo'.
So your saying, if your local retailer had a great trade in program where you would end up paying that amount or less, you'd buy the 4K?
Allow us to bang these drums until we get used to the shitty iterative model on consoles that nobody asked for, and only a select few predicted. But that switch to X86 should have been a warning sign.
Vincent Grayson
Member
At the very least, I would expect every other generation or so to be a cutoff point, where say, the PS4 runs PS4 games, and the PS4.5 runs the same games, but once there's a PS5.0, all new games use either that, or the PS4.5 as the new "minimum".
There's definitely scope for the cleanest or most universal 'upgrades' in the context of VR.
90fps games to 120fps should be practically a universal upgrade for starters, even in CPU limited scenarios.
60 to 90 may be a bit of a tighter ask in CPU limited scenarios, but many could make it.
Basically -> a boost up to the next tier of native framerate for VR games could be an extremely common enhancement on Neo.
This is before we mention other GPU-bound enhancements that would be welcome for VR - higher res, higher IQ settings, AA...
On the smaller end of improvements it is possible they could shave a little time off the fixed-cost reprojection end of the pipeline and reduce latency further (albeit in this case by a fraction of a millisecond
) (edit - apparently they do some of the VR tracking processing on the GPU too - this could also complete faster on Neo)So I agree. But I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. In fact it makes me more excited for PSVR.
Now you know how Nintendo fans have been feeling for almost a year.
Jacksinthe
Banned
I understand all of this but that doesn't answer my question. Why is the gaming industry immune to many behaviours in other industry?
I get people have expectations and I get things are done a certain way in regards to hardware and releases. We also rode horses and buggies at one point, too. That doesn't mean we can't or don't need to change.
What is so special about the console industy that it doesn't need change?
Again - I understand what you guys are saying, but expectation is never a reason to stagnate. Especially when nobody is getting shafted when all the same shit will be out for both systems.
-You get to play the same games on both
-It's optional - you don't need to buy it
I can never see an option being a problem, tbh.
Oh but some did. Many called for shorter gens provided BC was guaranteed and architecture similar.
Market is expanding for Sony, hence them investing more money into it.
They want to address both low and high end of the market.
Vincent Grayson
Member
That, and the more you move towards an all-digital future (which we're still quite a ways from), the more it feels important that the games you buy on a given store function with the main product(s) that link to that store. As we've all gotten more used to not even thinking of app support as "backwards compatibility", it feels that much more strange to pick up a new iPhone or iPad or Android device and have everything you bought with a previous device work fine, but a new console? Nope, gotta start that library over again.
Of course, PS4 titles in some cases have had crossbuy, and MS eventually added BC (though it's still limited). Going forward, I feel like we have to have a model where if I upgrade to a PS5 in a hypothetical future, my PS4 games (at least the ones purchased digitally) will all come over and play just fine on it.
There's definitely scope for the cleanest or most universal 'upgrades' in the context of VR.
90fps games to 120fps should be practically a universal upgrade for starters, even in CPU limited scenarios.
60 to 90 may be a bit of a tighter ask in CPU limited scenarios, but many could make it.
Basically -> a boost up to the next tier of native framerate for VR games could be an extremely common enhancement on Neo.
This is before we mention other GPU-bound enhancements that would be welcome for VR - higher res, higher IQ settings, AA...
On the smaller end of improvements it is possible they could shave a little time off the fixed-cost reprojection end of the pipeline and reduce latency further (albeit in this case by a fraction of a millisecond
So I agree. But I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. In fact it makes me more excited for PSVR.
If we read anything about psvr, we know they will do locked 60fps and reproject at 120fps... Everything extra will go to fidelity. This also works out easiest for ps4 vs neo.
I've seen a number of projects switch to target 90 instead of 60 since Sony announced that mode (e.g. Golem). It would probably actually be easier to auto-magic those titles up to 120 than to do anything else (33% framerate increase vs 30% CPU upclock).
Getting 60fps games up to 90 would be a little less obvious, but would be a bigger win than extra fidelity. In that case it probably wouldn't be an either/or though. Assuming there isn't a strong bandwidth-bound there there should be more than enough extra power to bump framerate and fidelity - the bigger question in the 60-90fps case would probably be the CPU (30% cpu upclock vs 50% framerate diff).
Something tells me the incentive will be stronger for VR devs wrt Neo - there'll probably be a stronger than average overlap between PSVR and Neo owners.
Teletraan1
Banned
Why are devs actually grumbling? Does someone not get paid for the extra work? I know that if my bosses wanted extra reports run I wouldn't be happy about it but I would suck it up and do my fucking job. The only people who should be grumbling about this are the people who are paying for the hours to implement it. They should only be grumbling if it is going to be a net loss. Indy devs is the only case where I see someone possibly getting fucked over on this. I am sure Sony can offer some support in these cases.
This site is very pro dev and while that can great, it also evokes some of the response this topic has received. Fear mongering for our poor indentured devs. If anything this should create jobs for people with the implementation and testing.
I remain skeptical about just how much work a different performance profile is going to be. For most multi-plats the game has to scale to PC so it isn't going to require new asset creation or any truely expensive work.
This site is very pro dev and while that can great, it also evokes some of the response this topic has received. Fear mongering for our poor indentured devs. If anything this should create jobs for people with the implementation and testing.
I remain skeptical about just how much work a different performance profile is going to be. For most multi-plats the game has to scale to PC so it isn't going to require new asset creation or any truely expensive work.
arturo2666
Banned
The game industry has a lot of issues with how it treats its workers. Obviously this is going to vary from company to company, but it is a trend that differs from other traditionally white collar jobs. Here is a pretty good write up.