Support NeoGAF

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

No it absolutely won't be as much trouble as coding for an all-new APU with its own unique development environment. This seems that its going to be piggy-backing off of the current build deployment software & systems the PS4 utilizes. There is just another platform that SDK will support.

However, it still is a new build that'll have to go through the same submission process a game undergoes, and it'll have to go through a proper QA cycle as well. I'm sure a few issues will pop-up behind the scenes that will likely be ironed out before release.

yeah, and considering how focused on devs Sony has been with the PS4 design and development tools, it wouldn't surprise me if they were making the development/QA/submission/cert stuff as smooth and easy as possible.

it makes no sense for Sony to be focusing so much on devs from the inception of the PS4, it's release, and beyond, only to turn around and do some shit that's going to make their jobs a living hell. the supposed reactions from devs that Colin claims to be hearing about has GOT to be just general "what do you think about new consoles releasing every 3 years instead of 6?" and them saying "booo!".

i have a feeling that once the kits and tools and guidelines are in their hands from Sony they'll be singing a different tune. they may not be jazzed about being REQUIRED to add Neo support, but i don't think it will be as shitstormy as it's currently being painted.

 

[Lady Gaia]

Sure, most indie devs are going to opt to have their games be universal between both systems, outside of the mandatory resolution on the PS4K. However, it still means they have another build that they'll have to QA & debug.

I would be shocked if Sony actually expects developers to do different builds for Neo and Base modes. It seems far more likely that they'll be different runtime behaviors. If a developer wants to conditionalize behavior they can but they won't be forced to.

The significant difference in performance characteristics between the two could cause issues. You definitely wouldn't want game clocks to be tied to frame rates or everything would move faster on the Neo, race conditions might be more apparent on one system or the other, etc. Actually testing on both systems is likely the biggest hurdle for an indie, but if your testers alternate what system they're using on a given day you'll get quite a bit of extra coverage. The cost and complexity of having the extra hardware around is one area that's unavoidable.

My guess is that developers will have concerns going in but that they'll be pleasantly surprised and will learn to cope with a minimum of extra overhead. Anything less means that Sony hasn't done their job here.

 

[wapplew]

What do you mean by that? Expecting PS5 in 2020 or later? No way! If MS and Nintendo go that same route, I expect PS5 in 2019. Traditional console cycles are now officially messed up forever. I wouldn't be suprised to see new hardware every year from now on, if the launches of the three are not aligned - For example: PS Neo 2016, Xbox2 2017, NX2 2018, PS5 2019

I wonder how much money console users have left for actual video games after sky rocket hardware cost.
We might be even more careful on games, maybe only buy a couple of the biggest titles every year, which already cost more than $60 with all the nickel and dime.

 

[pastrami]

Because by releasing it they don't need to make a "generational leap" in order to follow their VR projects at the cost of splitting the userbase.

Sorry, I'm still not following. How does releasing the PS4K extend the generation if all games will also be on PS4?

 

[Markoman]

Because by releasing it they don't need to make a "generational leap" in order to follow their VR projects at the cost of splitting the userbase.

That's the part where I can see the bullshit blow up:
there are going to release VR this year and everyone expects it to work with PS4 just fine.
We won't see major AAA type of games in PSVR and there is no way of downgrading the PS4 VR games, because people will just start to throw up an never go back to that shit again.

You are suggesting that PS4 won't be able to give you the real VR experience and this is the point where all the negative expectations would be legit.

This rather small technical step won't change anything for VR unless Sony is lying and planing to release some tripple A games on PSVR like UC4 (bad example) that will only be supported by NEO.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Guess what? The PC version suffers from many of the same issues.
It isn't strictly a PS4 thing.

Those were just two examples. There's plenty of others. Why be concerned about crap ports when Neo arrives, when you're already receiving them now?

 

[Curufinwe]

The fury when the PS4K sells out at launch is going to be something to behold.

 

[SolidSnakex]

The fury when the PS4K sells out at launch is going to be something to behold.

How it sells initially won't mean anything. Pretty much any console sells out at launch.

 

[Movalpolos]

Still waiting on that number of devs from Colin that his source spoke with.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

I wonder how much money console users have left for actual video games after sky rocket hardware cost.
We might be even more careful on games, maybe only buy a couple of the biggest titles every year, which already cost more than $60 with all the nickel and dime.

Most consoles gamers don't buy that many games each year .
5 or 6 disc base game the most , which is not much comapre to some of us on gaf .
Plus if they trade in there old system it not going to cost as much .
We are looking at a extra $200 to $300 every 3 years if you want the latest console .
Which is less that $5 dollars a week .

 

[GHG]

How it sells initially won't mean anything. Pretty much any console sells out at launch.

Yeh, don't read too much into it.

Spoiler

 

[SneakersSO]

I would be shocked if Sony actually expects developers to do different builds for Neo and Base modes. It seems far more likely that they'll be different runtime behaviors. If a developer wants to conditionalize behavior they can but they won't be forced to.

The significant difference in performance characteristics between the two could cause issues. You definitely wouldn't want game clocks to be tied to frame rates or everything would move faster on the Neo, race conditions might be more apparent on one system or the other, etc. Actually testing on both systems is likely the biggest hurdle for an indie, but if your testers alternate what system they're using on a given day you'll get quite a bit of extra coverage. The cost and complexity of having the extra hardware around is one area that's unavoidable.

My guess is that developers will have concerns going in but that they'll be pleasantly surprised and will learn to cope with a minimum of extra overhead. Anything less means that Sony hasn't done their job here.

Defining the differences as different runtime behaviors is a much more apt description than calling them separate 'builds' like I was. I mean, there is no other way to do this and have it be the same disc unless it were separate runtime behaviors.

It seems like the standards that we heard about, such as no drastic gameplay differences in online spaces, means that performance for online games or features will only ever be as strong as the base PS4 allows. This really only affects framerate, although an argument could be made that higher resolutions give some gameplay advantages in specific games.

Like i've maintained throughout this entire discussion, even going back to the original thread where MS discussed iterative hardware, the biggest hurdle for this has always seemed to be a QA/debugging issue, given the APU & SDKs were equivalent to the base models.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Yes. AMD badly needs to improve their ALU efficiency. Nvidia did it with Maxwell but AMD didn't. I expect Polaris (both 10 & 11 but that case it is 10 that interests us) to significantly improve that.

So when people compared it to the Titan, they were not off base after all if this is what bodes to be true with their Polaris goals.

I'm sorry, but that's a real dumb tweet. Early adopters of anything know what they're getting into. Sometimes it bites them in the ass (see: XB1 price slash with tons of bundled games within the first year). Most of the time it's a bad idea.

The fact that he thinks a three year timeframe merits "early adopter" status is kind of hilarious.

Given this entire generation has been nothing but "underpowered machine" rhetoric that is plainly untrue.

Agreed.

Where Colin's assumption (as well as yours and many others) is wrong is that consumers will be looking at this as a middle finger at all. People keep ignoring and hand waving it away, but cell phones, cars, and TVs are all real quantifiable examples of what is going on with Neo. We are no getting to a point with technology that having 6-8 years between generations is no longer sustainable in terms of developer needs and this is the result of that. People are having a hard time grasping this because they are only seeing that $400 they just spent somehow not mean anything anymore just because a new version of it has been released. Do the people who buy the new Galaxy S6 or iPhone 6 get pissed when the next iterations are released? No they aren't, because they realize that technology must progress forward.

So now we come to 3 years down the road and a improved version of the PS4 is released. It addresses those who are worried that their PS4s are going to become obsolete. It addresses those who are worried that the PS4 versions are going to look like total shit as soon as the Neo version is released. It addresses many things, yet people still show resistance and for the life of me, I really can't see why.

Agreed. Good post.

I think that argument has been beaten to death now and it's apparent it's not really the fact the status quo can continue on a PS4 that irks people. It's that someone somewhere else can experience something better.

This thread is this:

but full of people who want to do this:

 

[Markoman]

I wonder how much money console users have left for actual video games after sky rocket hardware cost.
We might be even more careful on games, maybe only buy a couple of the biggest titles every year, which already cost more than $60 with all the nickel and dime.

That's exactly my main complaint: in this gen of delays, technical fuckups and overall decreasing AA-AAA output they are just going to throw more hardware at us.....thanks for nothing.

For a person like me this is simple math: How many major exclusive AAA titles are we getting per year which can be considered "system-sellers" from Sony and MS? 1-2? Maybe 3? PS4 turns 3 years this fall and the only games which I consider console must-haves are Bloodborne and UC4! Man, I've bought a WiiU for Bayo2 and Smash4. I'm already tired of buying potatoe machines just to be able to play a handful of games. This shit sucks and it won't go away by just releasing more hardware. Wait for the big games in 2018 being pushed to 2019 just to drive PS5 launch. Some guys here are up for a nice surprise if they expect everything to run smoth with this new strategy.

 

[wapplew]

Those were just two examples. There's plenty of others. Why be concerned about crap ports when Neo arrives, when you're already receiving them now?

Because more configuration, more likely to get crap ports? Simple math

Ok, I can see many "infinite PC configuration" counter arguement coming, but that doesn't make my statement wrong thou.

 

[Playsage]

That's the part where I can see the bullshit blow up:
there are going to release VR this year and everyone expects it to work with PS4 just fine.
We won't see major AAA type of games in PSVR and there is no way of downgrading the PS4 VR games, because people will just start to throw up an never go back to that shit again.

You are suggesting that PS4 won't be able to give you the real VR experience and this is the point where all the negative expectations would be legit.

This rather small technical step won't change anything for VR unless Sony is lying and planing to release some tripple A games on PSVR like UC4 (bad example) that will only be supported by NEO.

Well... Yes, I'm not particular optimistic about what the "vanilla" PS4 will be able to do with VR.
I think of a situation where the first wave of VR content is going to be "smaller" projects that run on both consoles but don't have the magnitude of today's AAA titles. Later, we are going to see things like a new Killzone having a "VR Mode" exclusively for the PS4 Neo.

Hell, I think Gran Turismo VR is going to be one of this.
Because, you know, PS4 is not actually a beast...

 

[nib95]

What do you mean by that? Expecting PS5 in 2020 or later? No way! If MS and Nintendo go that same route, I expect PS5 in 2019. Traditional console cycles are now officially messed up forever. I wouldn't be suprised to see new hardware every year from now on, if the launches of the three are not aligned - For example: PS Neo 2016, Xbox2 2017, NX2 2018, PS5 2019

Jesus that sounds awful, and why I hate the idea of an iterative cycle. As a multi console owner, who appreciates value proposition, longevity, the closed platform nature and simplicity of consoles, this is just off putting. I can imagine it will be a nightmare for developers as well, and we'll end up getting sloppier releases with even less polish as developer time and budgets are spread across even more releases, with more and more fragmentation.

That said, if the PS5 did come out in 2019, that wouldn't be too bad. Though I'd be a little more wary about picking one up given there might be a PS5K a few years later, and with how slow Sony has been this generation with their first party releases. The fact that I'll potentially be playing games like God of War, Gran Turismo, Horizon and Detroit, not on the PS4, but the PS4K, is frankly pathetic.

 

[Hawk269]

That's exactly my main complaint: in this gen of delays, technical fuckups and overall decreasing AA-AAA output they are just going to throw more hardware at us.....thanks for nothing.

For a person like me this is simple math: How many major exclusive AAA titles are we getting per year which can be considered "system-sellers" from Sony and MS? 1-2? Maybe 3? PS4 turns 3 years this fall and the only games which I consider console must-haves are Bloodborne and UC4! Man, I've bought a WiiU for Bayo2 and Smash4. I'm already tired of buying potatoe machines just to be able to play a handful of games. This shit sucks and it won't go away by just releasing more hardware. Wait for the big games in 2018 being pushed to 2019 just to drive PS5 launch. Some guys here are up for a nice surprise if they expect everything to run smoth with this new strategy.

This is sad. You should just get out if gaming then. To me gaming and selection is not only about triple aaa titles.

 

[TalonJH]

Late reply, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

The giantbomb rumor said starting in October, all games must be compatible with Neo. If all PS4 games work on PS4N out've the box, there should be no requirement needed, which suggests that there will have to be more work done and not a simple copy and paste like there would be on all older PS4 games. Which seems really weird and dumb thing to do when all older PS4 games would work out've the box anywayz.

From the rumors it seems like Sony is forcing devs to have atleast a bit of difference since Neo is mandatory and you can't simply develop in "base" mode like every PS4 game so far.

I see where you are reading that from but I think it's just a misunderstanding. The next line says:

Games released previous to the NEO can take advantage of this hardware upgrade, but only if developers decide to patch their titles.

This leans toward all PS4 games work on the Neo by themselves out of the box. The patch is for graphic enhancements.

 

[pixellated_man]

The point about ps4k owners getting an advantage over vanilla ps4 owners in some online games, is fair to an extent.
But thinking more critically you realize there is no level playing field right now as it stands - it's just a fallacy console owners have come to accept as fact.

For example:

* Display's have wildly varying amount of input lag - the difference between say an older plasma display and one of Sony's modern LCD's is huge.

* There are already games that allow cross play between pc and ps4 owners and many more in the pipeline. You may note there has been no outcry over this. On the contrary it's seen as a positive by most on GAF despite the fact a pc decked with the latest in graphics, display and input technology will give an absolutely huge advantage over ps4. Add to that possible xbox / ps4 cross play (news that was met with excitement and positivity right here on GAF and elsewhere) in the near future.

* Your internet connection and how you are connected to it arguably has more impact alone than everything mentioned above. With a more global audience for gaming than ever before, can you imagine what it's like for those still stuck on 4-8 mb internet (or worse) in many territories? Add to that ethernet vs wifi connections, dodgy routers vs top of the line routers and it is clear that there is no level playing field for console owners.

PS4K will get a few online games with better performance (bearing in mind, most ps4 online modes are already 60fps), sure, but considering the above it's not a big deal for me at least.

 

[CosmicQueso]

How long do people have to keep repeating the same things over and over until they actually come true?

Because people are trying to do this, really, really hard.

 

[Markoman]

Jesus that sounds awful, and why I hate the iterative cycle. As a multi console owner, who appreciates value proposition, longevity and the closed platform nature and simplicity of consoles, this is just off putting. I can imagine it will be a nightmare for developers as well, and we'll end up getting sloppier releases with even less polish as developer time and budgets are spread across even more releases, go far more fragmentation.

That said, if the PS5 did come out in 2019, that wouldn't be too bad. Tough I'd be a little more wary about picking one up given there might be a PS5K, and with how slow Sony has been this generation with their first party releases. The fact that I'll potentially be playing games like God of War, Gran Turismo, Horizon and Detroit, not on the PS4, but the PS4K, is frankly pathetic.

Ha, a person who is willing to adapt to this new scenario will not fall for "Greatness awaits" bs again. From now on console gamers should learn to buy the hardware when the software they want is already there and not just on promises and teasers.

 

[SmokedMeat]

How it sells initially won't mean anything. Pretty much any console sells out at launch.

It's not a normal hardware launch. It's a premium model of existing hardware, that plays the same existing games. So it's not crucial that it sells strong out of the gate to establish an installed base.

Even if it's a slow steady adoption rate, that's fine. But once the bundles and sales start, I think you'll see the enthusiasts hopping on board.

 

[Stronty]

I think that argument has been beaten to death now and it's apparent it's not really the fact the status quo can continue on a PS4 that irks people. It's that someone somewhere else can experience something better.

Yep, that is what is going on, it is some sort of consumer compulsion mindset causing psychological stress on some early adopters, or more probably adopters from last week. Those of us who have been gaming on PC's know that the slight bump in specs of PS4K isn't a huge jump especially since the games will still be built to target the PS4 baseline. Thankfully they won't be using 'elite' as a branding term, we don't need any console version branded as elite.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I don't understand the people thinking Sony is going to release another revision 2 years after PS4.5 comes out. There would have been no point otherwise to make it on the cheap and give more life to the PS4 ecosystem at the same time.

They are going to wait for PS5 to be a significant jump, and then tell developers to move off of PS4 to that. Otherwise the rules they have made would have been meaningless to start.

That's what i am firmly in belief that this was partly to keep their consumer base engaged in the generation so there was no stagnation like last gen.

 

[Papacheeks]

Ha, a person who is willing to adapt to this new scenario will not fall for "Greatness awaits" bs again. From now on console gamers should learn to buy the hardware when the software they want is already there and not just on promises and teasers.

Then there wont be early adopters and the consoles will bleed the platforms holders dry as they stuff the channel that no one is buying.

Early adopters want new consoles, and the promise of the new generation. It's the whole point of having a vision for each product. This product has no vision, it's onyl purpose it for them to make higher margin and profit on hardware for gaming ,televisions, and 4k content.

It's bluray era all over again. Only the content change is taking much longer as bluray has been slowly over taken by streaming, download, and internet based content.

 

[nib95]

What do you mean by that? Expecting PS5 in 2020 or later? No way! If MS and Nintendo go that same route, I expect PS5 in 2019. Traditional console cycles are now officially messed up forever. I wouldn't be suprised to see new hardware every year from now on, if the launches of the three are not aligned - For example: PS Neo 2016, Xbox2 2017, NX2 2018, PS5 2019

As a result of the PS4K, yes I am expecting the PS5 2020, though I hope I'm wrong. But the way I see it is that the PS4K pretty much is a new, far more powerful piece of hardware, which is the purpose of generational refreshes. Only this time it's held back by the PS4. I can't see Sony wanting to jump ship to the next generation console so quickly, unless of course the PS4K does pretty poorly.

That said, there is always a chance that the PS5 comes out and isn't a proper generational refresh, and is instead held back by the PS4K, with the PS4 then being dropped, e.g. the iterative cycle continuing. That would be equally annoying for me, as the new generations would always be held back by the older one's.

 

[Markoman]

This is sad. You should just get out if gaming then. To me gaming and selection is not only about triple aaa titles.

I don't get your twisted argument. So you also like smaller titles? Indies? So why exactly do you think this type of games really scream for a hardware upgrade?

I love games like Spelunky, Rougue Lagacy and so on, but I did not buy my PS4 for those games. I don't care if Spelunky runs in 4k on Neo. I really don't get your point, man.

I will get all 3rd party games on PC and rather spend my money on PC upgrades. No, this is no contradiction, because 2 PC upgrades in 6 years will give me more than 2 new consoles in the same time frame.

 

[pixellated_man]

yeah, and considering how focused on devs Sony has been with the PS4 design and development tools, it wouldn't surprise me if they were making the development/QA/submission/cert stuff as smooth and easy as possible.

it makes no sense for Sony to be focusing so much on devs from the inception of the PS4, it's release, and beyond, only to turn around and do some shit that's going to make their jobs a living hell. the supposed reactions from devs that Colin claims to be hearing about has GOT to be just general "what do you think about new consoles releasing every 3 years instead of 6?" and them saying "booo!".

i have a feeling that once the kits and tools and guidelines are in their hands from Sony they'll be singing a different tune. they may not be jazzed about being REQUIRED to add Neo support, but i don't think it will be as shitstormy as it's currently being painted.

Excellent post.
If you believe some posters fear mongering you would think Sony no longer need developers good will and support which has been a large factor in their success this gen. Baffling lack of logic and understanding of how the modern console business works. Or
could be just deliberate fud on their part of course.

 

[Papacheeks]

I don't understand the people thinking Sony is going to release another revision 2 years after PS4.5 comes out. There would have been no point otherwise to make it on the cheap and give more life to the PS4 ecosystem at the same time.

They are going to wait for PS5 to be a significant jump, and then tell developers to move off of PS4 to that. Otherwise the rules they have made would have been meaningless to start.

That's what i am firmly in belief that this was partly to keep their consumer base engaged in the generation so there was no stagnation like last gen.

The point is they will be making more money on each console because the manufacturing of certain chips and components will have a much higher return now.

They also will be able to get another revision of VR out much quicker since they will have the extra horse power for it in these new revisions.

It's all about expanding hardware profits, and other divisions through gaming. IT's fucking clear as day, if you can't see that then you have not been paying attention the last 20 years.

This is what every platform holder has wanted since the beginning. Nintendo, and early Sega days were the only ones fully making profits off of their hardware. Sony and MS ate billions to just get some money back in services, software. Now with the architecture and advancements in tech through 14nm, they can make a hell a lot of profit off each device as does many other companies.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Then there wont be early adopters and the consoles will bleed the platforms holders dry as they stuff the channel that no one is buying.

Early adopters want new consoles, and the promise of the new generation. It's the whole point of having a vision for each product. This product has no vision, it's onyl purpose it for them to make higher margin and profit on hardware for gaming ,televisions, and 4k content.

It's bluray era all over again. Only the content change is taking much longer as bluray has been slowly over taken by streaming, download, and internet based content.

Early adopters like new tech or better versions of the tech they own .
Which is one of the reason for this device .

 

[NoctisVsStar]

I don't understand the people thinking Sony is going to release another revision 2 years after PS4.5 comes out. There would have been no point otherwise to make it on the cheap and give more life to the PS4 ecosystem at the same time.

They are going to wait for PS5 to be a significant jump, and then tell developers to move off of PS4 to that. Otherwise the rules they have made would have been meaningless to start.

That's what i am firmly in belief that this was partly to keep their consumer base engaged in the generation so there was no stagnation like last gen.

Because some gaf members are like Stan van gundy "master of panic" instead of waiting for Sony to do their pitch and explain their stance/vision they go nuts beforehand.. And later come around and forget all the panic they did (DS3 PC thread for ex) it's okay to have concerns and raise questions but some are just jumping straight out the window which I find amusing. If Sony deserves to get shit it's going to be after they explain everything (if it's deserved)

 

[Curufinwe]

How it sells initially won't mean anything. Pretty much any console sells out at launch.

Don't read anything into it, gotcha.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

I'm a dev. A few of the devs I am colleagues with that I have spoken to about PS4K seem okay with it. Some are annoyed, sure. But all the complaints I have heard come from the same place: a bunch of devs just got told they have more work they have to do, and the same amount of time to do that work in. If your boss comes over and tells you to get this extra work done before 5, work that only benefits your boss, you wouldn't be too thrilled about it either.

Honestly, going by everything we know and have heard about NEO, the only group of people I see this really affecting in a negative way is indie devs. Sure, most indie devs are going to opt to have their games be universal between both systems, outside of the mandatory resolution on the PS4K. However, it still means they have another build that they'll have to QA & debug. Going by the other standard being put in place here, where after some date in the fall, games won't be allowed to launch a PS4K compatibility patch (i'm sure unless its under special circumstances), this means that in order for the indie dev to launch their game on the PS4 environment, they'll have to have their PS4 & PS4K versions ready to go simultaneously. If you consider how many indie devs do staggered releases as is specifically due to lack of budget, this could be amount to a problem for a few of them.

Thank you for the feedback, it's not too surprising seeing indie devs getting the short end given the hurdles they already have to jump through.

 

[Lemondish]

The problem here is that the PS4K will have most probably extended the life of this generation. I very much doubt Sony is going to release the PS5 2 years after the release of the PS4K, only to irritate more consumers. My guess is the release of the PS4K will have inadvertently made this generation closer to 7-8 years long, instead of say 5-6. So whilst people could do as you've said, because of the PS4K, vanilla users will be stuck with the underpowered PS4 for longer now.



This is a very shortsighted way to look at it. It's about a lot more than a group of people having something better than another group of people. I'm one of those that will be buying it, but I still very much disagree with the strategy and release. To me it sets a potentially detrimental precedent, that diminishes console gaming value proposition from here on out, and has other negative ramifications too.

Some of the potential issues.

• It will likely lengthen the current generation.
• It will split development focus.
• It will also be held back by the PS4 the entire time.
• It also splits the user base.
• In online games etc, PS4K owners will likely have a potentially gameplay favouring experience.
• It will also cost a lot, and not be as subsidised, the way most new consoles are.
• It also comes out at a time where other more expensive hardware is releasing (NX,VR etc) that makes it more of a financial burden.
• This on top of the pay to play online subscription fee's which are already adding yearly costs.
• Upon release it will massively devalue the PS4, which unlike ordinary end of cycle pricing, still costs $350-$399.
• I suspect it will also lend to worse vanilla PS4 versions of games.
• If it is successful and the other manufacturers adopt a similar strategy with consoles, we'll have even less value proposition going forward, longer generational cycles, and more costs to consider.
• There's also less incentive for console vendors to get it right the first time.

This is a bad post. Real bad.

Where you have failed to support your assertions, you made things up or spread false information. I award you no points.

 

[Movalpolos]

Why do I see the same discussion here that we already have in other PS4K related threads?
Can we keep this thread about devs and Colin's tweet?

 

[Dahaka]

Just do it already.

 

[thelastword]

Thank you for sharing your perspective. Your thoughts on the challenges facing indies is an appreciated fresh take.

What's going on in this thread, is this sarcasm?.....lol.

I'm pretty sure Sony will assist indie devs. I'm also pretty sure it's exceedingly easier to QA a indie release and get it running at native 1080p for the PS4 or a higher resolution for the Neo even up to 4k native. I'd like to think the SDK streamlines that pretty easily for indie devs who don't need lots of processing power to hit their metrics.

A development strategy like AC unity, where workers are dispersed worldwide, where several pieces of the game are being pieced together all over is a different story entirely, but they can't blame Sony if they continue to have underperforming games, they have to blame their development strategy. In any case, these bigger companies won't have many issues because they have a million employees and they are used to PC development and also putting their product on a million platforms.

Indie devs though, I don't see how bad it can be for them, if they have a polished 1080 60fps OG release, Neo Code should not be a huge issue at all.

 

[Papacheeks]

Early adopters like new tech or better versions of the tech they own .
Which is one of the reason for this device .

True, but also a lot of early adopters are just people who want in on a new console because it's their console of choice. The xbox ellite controller/console have sold, but not in the droves I think MS expected, or wanted.

It died down rather quickly after those products launched. Which could and will more than likely be the same scenario when this releases. And if they launch a new console in 2019, with the Neo being touted more with games, I highly doubt people will jump ship to adopt the PS5 or whatever they call it when it launches. People will wait.

A lot of the PS4's early success were people who converted from xbox, or people who liked Sony's E3 messaging.

People didn't just go crazy over the wii because of it's tech it was because it was marketed well on a mass scale.

PS4 had the same marketing and it worked.

Early tech adopters are small compared to the overall market as a whole.

 

[wapplew]

Early adopters like new tech or better versions of the tech they own .
Which is one of the reason for this device .

How big is that market thou, how many of those are repeat customers instead of new customers?
Can they give you 60m install base in 2 years? Can it grow the market or just earn more dollars within a shrinking market?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Because some gaf members are like Stan van gundy "master of panic" instead of waiting for Sony to do their pitch and explain their stance/vision they go nuts beforehand.. And later come around and forget all the panic they did (DS3 PC thread for ex) it's okay to have concerns and raise questions but some are just jumping straight out the window which I find amusing. If Sony deserves to get shit it's going to be after they explain everything (if it's deserved)

That is societies conditioning to us, shaping our human nature. Ever since Abrahamic doctorates introduced Apocalypse scenarios into our psyche, anything that challenges the cognitive dissonance we are accustomed to, always has a tribal like, back to the wall conditioned response.

I agree is all I am saying, lol.

What's going on in this thread, is this sarcasm?.....lol.

I'm pretty sure Sony will assist indie devs. I'm also pretty sure it's exceedingly easier to QA a indie release and get it running at native 1080p for the PS4 or a higher resolution for the Neo even up to 4k native. I'd like to think the SDK streamlines that pretty easily for indie devs who don't need lots of processing power to hit their metrics.

A development strategy like AC unity, where workers are dispersed worldwide, where several pieces of the game are being pieced together all over is a different story entirely, but they can't blame Sony if they continue to have underperforming games, they have to blame their development strategy. In any case, these bigger companies won't have many issues because they have a million employees and they are used to PC development and also putting their product on a million platforms.

Indie devs though, I don't see how bad it can be for them, if they have a polished 1080 60fps OG release, Neo Code should not be a huge issue at all.

Thing is... they are not required to make it run better, or add anything that will hinder QA/Development time to the extreme case scenario. They just can't push the graphics envelope so it runs worse than the PS4. Essentially, they can have a 'copy/paste' job and have them both run the same. The game just has to run on both configurations. They are not forced to have better framerate or higher resolution.

So the panic is a little extreme with misunderstanding what they are required to do at this point. Especially when devs, even indie, glowed at how easy it was to get PC game code running on the PS4 (before it launched) and have it running in already high framerates in mere weeks after attempting it... I would assume it will be MUCH easier with the SDK for the 4K. Probably a lot like the remote play being built into the toolkit, where I do not see them complaining extra time is needed to test 'remote play' over the Xbox One without it.

 

[The Jackdog]

This is a bad post. Real bad.

Where you have failed to support your assertions, you made things up or spread false information. I award you no points.

i mean i see holes in a few of them but most of the bullets im looking at in that list can potentially be true

 

[Brinbe]

Not surprising at all. More unecessary dev costs/time sink. And this is for a real niche audience. They won't get much benefit at all.

 

[Cleve]

True, but also a lot of early adopters are just people who want in on a new console because it's their console of choice. The xbox ellite controller and console have sold, but now in the droves I think MS expected, or wanted.

Where are you getting that from? MS have stated that the elite totally exceeded expectations.

 

[nib95]

This is a bad post. Real bad.

Where you have failed to support your assertions, you made things up or spread false information. I award you no points.

They aren't all assertions or facts (though some are), many are simply my fears, assumptions and sentiments. You can feel free to disagree, but I'd be surprised if so much of the stuff in the list above doesn't come to pass.

 

[Markoman]

As a result of the PS4K, yes I am expecting the PS5 2020, though I hope I'm wrong. But the way I see it is that the PS4K pretty much is a new, far more powerful piece of hardware, which is the purpose of generational refreshes. Only this time it's held back by the PS4. I can't see Sony wanting to jump ship to the next generation console so quickly, unless of course the PS4K does pretty poorly.

That said, there is always a chance that the PS5 comes out and isn't a proper generational refresh, and is instead held back by the PS4K, with the PS4 then being dropped, e.g. the iterative cycle continuing. That would be equally annoying for me, as the new generations would always be held back by the older one's.

Why is Sony releasing Neo in the first place? I still stand by my initial idea that NX and MS's talk about hardware upgrades were pushing this idea. So, if I get this right we're up for an open arms-race in the next years. Sony initially was said to run this gen as long as possible. Why do you believe it is up to Sony to decide when PS5 is going to be launched? What if MS releases a true Xbox2 with 2-4x the power of NEO in 2018? Do you really think that Sony will just sit there and watch MS eat their lunch for 2 more years? And let's not forget about Nintendo....

 

[Papacheeks]

Where are you getting that from? MS have stated that the elite totally exceeded expectations.

Where is it now?

Where is the elite console now that comes with the controller and is suppose to be a premium sku like NEO is suppose to be?

Never said it didn't sell. But where are the numbers now for 2016?

Yea like anything new it sells well when it launches then dies down, and over time as a negative affect on overall sales as time goes on.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

Where are you getting that from? MS have stated that the elite totally exceeded expectations.

Shit, it's totally exceeded my expectations too. I still can't believe people will spend that much on a controller.

 

[Brinbe]

Why the fuck would you compare consoles to fucking cars, phones, PCs or anything like that. The market for those products are humongous and almost EVERYONE uses those. So you have millions of people that go years without upgrading that do jump in every other launch. That's how it works. Consoles aren't the same fucking thing at all. Only a small niche buys the damn things at this point, it'll be an even smaller niche (largely the types on this board) that are gung-ho about upgrading from what they already have.

I'm not discounting that NEO will be a success, and Sony, to their credit, is going out of their way to potentially handle this as best as possible to avoid any user fragmentation, but this continuous argument being made that just because this model works for phones so obviously work for consoles, is such horse shit.

Anyway, again, not surprised that devs aren't too happy with this. It only placates power users. Who are a significant minority.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

How big is that market thou, how many of those are repeat customers instead of new customers?
Can they give you 60m install base in 2 years? Can it grow the market or just earn more dollars within a shrinking market?

Well this has never been done before so when it comes out we will see what happens .
Still they also get repeat customers when they do a slim version but this time people get more out of it .
Also what they were doing was not stopping the market from shrinking .
So it's best to try out something new than do the same thing over and over again .
This also allows them to get up to date on things faster and have more room to play around with the price of the systems .