Hahaha yes, if the curve is going the other way.
No that's not the problem. It's the fallout of Sony's plan affecting the future of the industry. This is much bigger than keeping up with the Jones
The Case for the PS4K: an important, and necessary, change for the industry.
- Thread starter chubigans
- Start date
Hahaha yes, if the curve is going the other way.
No that's not the problem. It's the fallout of Sony's plan affecting the future of the industry. This is much bigger than keeping up with the Jones
makingmusic476
Member
Yeah, if frequent revisions comes with an end to BC-less generational transitions, ala Android/iOS/Steam, I'll be happy with the change overall.
kungfuian
Member
SOME POSITIVES OF AN ITERATIVE CONSOLE CYCLE THAT JUMP OUT AT ME (Note; I have an equally large negatives list)
1. better looking games sooner than later, because NEO HORIZON is going to look kick ass and I don't care, I want it
1.5. better vr- because duh
1.5.5 4k support- because also duh
2. Increased sales- Each iteration (yes this is likely the first of many) can be treated as a sort of re-launch (similar to how mid console revisions did in the past) and has the potential to insert new life into Sonys platform. There is no doubt it will increase sales of PS4s (likely both old and new models).
3. The base model (OG PS4) will still be supported and has the potential to stay relevant longer. While this may seem counter intuitive (I just got it and its being replaced), the OG PS4 will now be able to ride on the coat tails of it NEO brother, potentially longer than if left alone in the market. It has been argued by many that the PS4 was under powered upon release; which is not completely without merit. Due to this, along with console market trends, the chances of the PS4 era being a shorter console cycle may have been inevitable. The NEO and its successors have the potential to extend that.
4. Options for consumers. It's good to have options for both higher end and lower end consumers. This will play out similar to how Sony has supported its last gen and new gen consoles at the same time, but better for developers and gamers because the models will consist of a unified platform and play the same games.
5. No more crazy R & D costs
6. More flexibility to adapt to the market- The NEO helps solve the problems of old dated hardware & helps prevent Sony from being passed up or being late to the party. Simply put, quicker iterations mean more flexibility and a better chance of staying relevant to the demands of gamers. This means no more long in the tooth 8 year old PS3 type scenarios and no more 360 beat us to the market and is eating into user base type scenarios.
7. It helps create long term gamer investment in the PS brand. Built in up-gradable libraries and backwards compatibility leverage gamers sunk costs. Even if I never play my old games again, I bought them, and want them to have value if I upgrade. If I have a library of games that will not only still work, but actually see upgrades, it is an Incentive to stay with Sony. This move could help prevent the sort of console affiliation reset we've seen at the at end of each gen and will help keep customers coming back to Sony.
8. Increased active users. Games are more expensive to make than ever, and to justify this cost, there has to be a large enough pool of potential buyers. The start of new console cycles has been very challenging for developers due to a reset of the install base. Thus the need for cross gen games. An iterative but universally supported platform helps solve this problem. No more end of gen reset. Instead we get a sort of mid gen cross gen scenario, which will hopefully result in a higher use rate for the boxes out there. A well supported unified platform with new hardware staggered in every few years incentivizes a longer running more active user base. (Example; 100 million ps3s with only 40 million actively buying games is inferior to 90 million ps4 and ps4 Neos with 60 million actively buying games.)
Also NEO HORIZON, seriously though!
1. better looking games sooner than later, because NEO HORIZON is going to look kick ass and I don't care, I want it
1.5. better vr- because duh
1.5.5 4k support- because also duh
2. Increased sales- Each iteration (yes this is likely the first of many) can be treated as a sort of re-launch (similar to how mid console revisions did in the past) and has the potential to insert new life into Sonys platform. There is no doubt it will increase sales of PS4s (likely both old and new models).
3. The base model (OG PS4) will still be supported and has the potential to stay relevant longer. While this may seem counter intuitive (I just got it and its being replaced), the OG PS4 will now be able to ride on the coat tails of it NEO brother, potentially longer than if left alone in the market. It has been argued by many that the PS4 was under powered upon release; which is not completely without merit. Due to this, along with console market trends, the chances of the PS4 era being a shorter console cycle may have been inevitable. The NEO and its successors have the potential to extend that.
4. Options for consumers. It's good to have options for both higher end and lower end consumers. This will play out similar to how Sony has supported its last gen and new gen consoles at the same time, but better for developers and gamers because the models will consist of a unified platform and play the same games.
5. No more crazy R & D costs
6. More flexibility to adapt to the market- The NEO helps solve the problems of old dated hardware & helps prevent Sony from being passed up or being late to the party. Simply put, quicker iterations mean more flexibility and a better chance of staying relevant to the demands of gamers. This means no more long in the tooth 8 year old PS3 type scenarios and no more 360 beat us to the market and is eating into user base type scenarios.
7. It helps create long term gamer investment in the PS brand. Built in up-gradable libraries and backwards compatibility leverage gamers sunk costs. Even if I never play my old games again, I bought them, and want them to have value if I upgrade. If I have a library of games that will not only still work, but actually see upgrades, it is an Incentive to stay with Sony. This move could help prevent the sort of console affiliation reset we've seen at the at end of each gen and will help keep customers coming back to Sony.
8. Increased active users. Games are more expensive to make than ever, and to justify this cost, there has to be a large enough pool of potential buyers. The start of new console cycles has been very challenging for developers due to a reset of the install base. Thus the need for cross gen games. An iterative but universally supported platform helps solve this problem. No more end of gen reset. Instead we get a sort of mid gen cross gen scenario, which will hopefully result in a higher use rate for the boxes out there. A well supported unified platform with new hardware staggered in every few years incentivizes a longer running more active user base. (Example; 100 million ps3s with only 40 million actively buying games is inferior to 90 million ps4 and ps4 Neos with 60 million actively buying games.)
Also NEO HORIZON, seriously though!
Glorified G
Member
I love the fact that a closed platform & no third party stores are used as a downside for console gaming.
Yeah, go ahead and hand a keyboard and mouse to the gamer on the couch in their living and tell they no longer have to deal with the "downsides" of console gaming where they had one gamepad to navigate one online store for all access to the most popular third party games. Instead they can deal with the "goodness" of a navigating several different online gaming clients while juggling both a mouse+keyboard and gamepad in the living room and deal with the free fractured online ecosystems with several different friend lists between Origin, Steam & uPlay.
And I'm sure the only reason this iterative console exists is just for their VR to keep up with the big boys despite the fact Giant Bomb and Digital Foundry stated nothing in the PS4K documentation mentions VR and all devs will need to support the base PS4 regardless. But Sony just wants to sell you another $400-$500 box, yet since forever console hardware has always provided razor thin margins and it is only a gateway for to profit off software, which hasn't been a problem since PS4 is leading in third party sales.
Since the news broke out about this potential iterative console several people have been trying leverage this as a potential gateway for others to accept their preferred platform. When in reality they have no clue why their preferred platform has been largely ignored by the masses in the first place and still be ignored regardless if this iterative effort fails or not.
This thread got off to a great start, but a lot of people are pretty clearly married to their positions and are going to hold on until after the PS4 Neo actually launches. Perhaps well beyond.
At least it seems like some people who were worried initially are starting to understand that there's some potential upside, too. Cautious optimism is a perfectly reasonable position to take here, IMHO. Me? I'll be preordering the moment I can and look forward to having a growing catalog of titles that play on the PS4 family. I'll also be cringing every time I scan through another one of these threads until everything settles down again. Sheesh.
At least it seems like some people who were worried initially are starting to understand that there's some potential upside, too. Cautious optimism is a perfectly reasonable position to take here, IMHO. Me? I'll be preordering the moment I can and look forward to having a growing catalog of titles that play on the PS4 family. I'll also be cringing every time I scan through another one of these threads until everything settles down again. Sheesh.
I would prefer it as well. I like the fact phones and tablets come out regularly because I know when whatever I have now feels old and slow I'll be able to get somethimg new and up to date immediately without losing all my software. This puts the control in my hands, I upgrade when I'm ready.
& now that I'm used to the Android/iOS way of doing things, I really don't want to go back to the old way of console upgrade cycles. It seems so antiquated. If ps5 means I lose all my PS4 software...well IDK if I'm going to hop aboard that train.
I mean if one box offers b/c and regular upgrades with no generations, who is going to buy the other box that resets ever 4-7 years?
derExperte
Member
You're talking about PC? Just asking before falling off my comfy chair laughing.
David Ricardo
Member
One thing has nothing to do with the other. Sony could wait 2-3 years, release a true generational jump PS5 and still be 100% backwards compatible. Heck, they could even add a PS5 mode to some PS4 games, so you could play them at higher graphical settings or better frame rate using the same disc.
If anything this is moving the industry forward.
Take a look at the way things is as is
PC gamers are paying all this money for high end PCs but they make up such a small part of the market that devs can't depend on them to bring money back to them for making a game built around high end PC's 3Tflops & up so all you get is better Xbox One games on your high priced PC. no devs would reach for the stars knowing they are just going to get moon rocks in return but with PS4K raising the bar early PC devs can push for more across PC & PS4K after they are done pushing PS4 & Xbox One to the limit & see a return on the game because more people can actually play it as it was intended.
It is almost comical. "Ps4k will wreck console gaming. I'm going PC/Nintendo and you should too."
You don't have to update your console every 3 years.
Sure wait till 2 other version bumps and your system is running new games at 720p 28fps
gundamkyoukai
Member
The same can be said for PC .
If you wait for 6 years to update your gfx card you pc going to be running games like crap
It is different because ps4 won't be able to play ps5 games like Nexus 10 runs 99% of everything that runs on Pixel C.
I don't remember anyone acting like it was the death of handhelds & claiming that they was sticking to tablet gaming because of the handheld updates.
In fact I don't remember anyone really caring
The Destiny example isn't the best argument for making your case, considering the architectures for the PS3 and PS4 were so vastly different that it required additional teams, with an iterative upgrade model, e.g. ps4 to ps4k, it may require some more QA resources but not the substantial development resources as it required when creating cross-generation games as we have known previously. With the similarity in architectures between the PS4 and PS4k it should allow developers to easily provide better visuals on the PS4k, alot easier than it was between the PS3 and PS4.
The approach Sony may be taking is similar to that of a typically PC gamer who upgrades their GPU every few years. It shouldn't require the large development investment required that many here are suggesting, though it will still require some development work.
4K & HDMI 2.0 standards wasn't in place when they was releasing the new consoles.
This is an good debate, but at the end of the day the PS4 Neo is gonna sell like crazy. Same as what the PS4 is currently doing now. People love new tech. People love upgrades. Technology is ever advancing at such an fast rate these days, we have the choice to either upgrade or an have antiquated tech.
ZombieSupaStar
Member
Yeah, those days were over. Now they just want you to buy 2 consoles a generation.
gundamkyoukai
Member
The current PS4k specs would have cost way over $400 3 years ago.
So that was never going to happen , plus i don't even think apu were even that powerful back then .
They don't care if you keep the old console & not buy the new one. they get the same money when you buy a game on PS4 as they would when you buy a game on PS4K.
It makes a large amount of sense given the main narrative through this generation has been "underpowered hardware." I never really agreed with that, but to say they're scrambling in a market that they're currently winning by a large degree is overstating it a bit.
Slim revisions drive sales not because they are smaller, sometimes better versions of current hardware, rather they lead a strong marketing push with a lower price. I agree though: this is a play for the most loyal fans to secure their future with PS4, though that's certainly not the entire market this is aiming for. It renews interest in a console that's already three years old.
The problem is there's no generational leap to be had in the way that it was done in years prior. So that creates a new situation that Sony is responding to before we actually got there: a generational leap with PS5 that would have been the weakest jump in console history, should it arrive 5 years past the launch of PS4. Instead, they're going the iterative route.
No, the market isn't clamoring for this, and it will be up to Sony to convince them why they should be.
You're assuming a lot when it comes to how people decide to purchase consoles. Sure, theoretically I could have bought the PS3 on launch day for $500 and enjoyed the 8 years of games. Is that what actually happens with most people? No, because a lot of them jump in at the mid-point, when sales plateau.
You look at it and say that Sony is forcing you to upgrade, ruining your value proposition that you had at launch. I say that they extended the lifespan of the PS4 to a large degree because the cycle of iterative hardware is theoretically set to last forever. At some point they'll have to drop PS4 support, but that most likely won't happen for quite some time.
In all the time I've been a game developer I've never been questioned about my experience with game development. There's a first for everyone I suppose.
You're absolutely dead wrong here. Only the biggest publishers can do games like Destiny and the Division? Have you not seen the multitude of games on the XB1/PS4 store that have ever growing communities that have been growing for years now?
Honestly, everything that you mention about game development for the PS4 and PS4K and how it's more costly than the PS3/PS4 generational gap is wrong, wrong wrong. There is no headache involved in developing for something like the PS4k. More work, sure. But it is not a problem. Not something like a traditional PS5 that severs ties with the PS4 like all other generations would bring.
You cannot compare the moves MS made with the original XB1 with the moves Sony is doing here. MS threatened everyone's right to owning a game, selling it, and disrupting the used game industry solely for the purpose of their own gains. Sony is offering a new premium PS4. I fail to see how this will garner the kind of anti-consumer rights movement the XB1 did at its reveal.
As a developer, I disagree with you. I look forward to expanding my point in the near future.
I basically disagreed with everything, but I greatly appreciate the feedback and response. This is why I love GAF. It's great to just have a good conversation.
ZehDon
Member
Sorry, I might not have been clear. The cost of development due to the hardware difference between the PS3 and PS4, for example, was offset because Bungie sold more copies as a result of the multi-generational support. It was a nett gain for them and worth the cost. The PS4k doesn't result in more sales by design. Its not catering to two different user bases, giving access to different pools of potential customers. Total software sales won't increase, but the cost of development to get those sales does, of course by a smaller amount. That's the issue I was attempting to highlight in that section of my post.
Chiaroscuro
Member
That is my point actually. It does not happen in pc and its community is handling it since the beginning. Sure there is a lot of beneficts in a closed configuration box, but that model is showing its age. You cannot expect a five to ten product cycle anymore and a disruption between each cycle. If the dusruption is gone (it must be) then the longer cycles make less sense.
Plus inside a common brand range of devices the leveling of different systems can be achieved more easier.
Well, that's not entirely true. PS4K owners are gonna want to take their new system for a spin. If I go all out and support a high resolution or some kind of graphical fidelity for PS4K, I have a higher chance of getting more attention by all the new PS4K owners.
Now, is it compatible to a new system launch day game? No, but then again, I'm not developing for an entirely new system either. So it balances itself out in a way.
Refreshment.01
Member
It has happened this generation with some games and specially in one of the main consoles. And this is with no console revisions.
i already adressed you in regards to this earlier in the topic, yet you chose to ignore it.
Yes, people were outraged, going on to claim stuff such as: "i' ll never buy products from Nintendo again..." , "it will bite them in the ass because the maket will get split" and "the consumer will be confused causing a negative impact in sales".
Like it or not, iterative dedicated gaming devices in an old practice introduced decades ago before Sony's Neo. Analising those past trends gives us an answer on what might actually happen now, people (from both perspectives) are just over analysing things.
Links to any of those threads?
What options were there back in 2011-2013?
- 20nm was a dud, 28nm was the only feasible option
- Intel and Nvidia are too expensive and won't play ball
- IBM scaled back on chips and Cell was relegated
- PowerVR and ARM still firmly in mobile space
- Sony near bankruptcy
- Cannot push high TDPs else risk another X360 YLOD fiasco
- Only willing vendor is beleaguered AMD whose Bulldozer is hot and underpowered
- Us cheap-ass consumers won't pay more than $400
Refreshment.01
Member
i won't search those threads sorry. Because there's no need to, is just standard human nature and behavior. Just look for the New 3DS announcement thread i guess, probably you'll find some there if you are so inclined.
It's an old on going debate. And i did participate in both real life and online threads about them even before joining Neogaf.
i remember Xenoblade been used as proof number 1 of old 3DS owners getting screwed... and well here we are today.
Edit: i shouldn't but here's the first result among many:
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=884771&page=1
Here's a quote similar to other posts referencing the Neo:
It seems way more extreme in this instance. But yeah, the eventual outcome will probably be close to the same.
XxRampage07xX
Member
Isn't checking system requirements a very basic fundamentals of PC gaming? Meanwhile, checking to see if a game is compatible with the owning system will be a totally new experience with console users because they haven't done that for a decade. Gosh just imagine how disappointed many people will be when they find out that a new game that they've long anticipated turns out to be unsupported on their system, even though they were promised that the console they bought had forward compatibility and could play new games even when a newer console would be released.
About the box art too. Here is the PS4 box art template Sony is currently using:
As you say, if they want to inform their customers about which systems that the game supports, they will have to say "Only available on..." But why the hassle of confusing customers with their purchases? Why not just use PSx and the buyers will know immediately know whether they can buy the game?
How is this different from what happens at the end of every generation up to now? Some developers push the hardware and we wind up with stunning titles that feel like they're struggling to run. Other developers focus on framerate for twitch titles and compromise on visuals. Everybody winds up eager for the next generation to begin.
So nothing will have changed except you have the option to move more often if you like.
kungfuian
Member
CHALLENGES WITH NEO AND AN ITERATIVE CONSOLE CYCLE (counter points to my positive list)-
1. Its never been done; at least not quite like this before. Simply put, is an unproven strategy and therefore risky. For Sony in particular this seems especially stupid since they currently seem to have been making all the right decisions and are dominating sales. A move like this exposes them to all kinds of problems they might otherwise avoid. In addition; due to being a New strategy, their will likely be a lot of room for error due to the lack of establish road map. The chance of them making mistakes is high. Or, depending on your perspective, the chance of them getting everything right is low.
2. Messaging and market back lash. The concept is a very challenging thing to sell. Because the list of negatives is fairly large (lots of legit reasons not to like this) the internet response may very likely be a problem. If the X-box One launch has taught us anything its that the messaging has to be spot on. Gamers are a complain-y bunch, we generally distrust companies, we dont like having anything taken away from us (even if we get something in return), and we like new but not too new. Too new is scary.
3. Developers- Whats to be said; the cost and time vs. return on investment is a tough balancing act. In a situation like this it sounds like more work for the same pay. IMO Its really up to Sony to produce effective very streamlined tools for developers to reduce this impact. If done wrong its going to be bad for devs. And for any dev launching anything anytime soon, or for anyone with anything in development for that matter, the time frame and budgets may have to be adjusted which is NO BUENO
4. Parity across units- this version runs like crap, lazy developers didnt optimize it, weve been abandoned, why get a NEO when all the games are held back by PS4 I wasted my money, the upgrades are barely noticeable etc. etc. We are going to hear this on every game release going forward. It will be a resolution and frame rate complain-a-thon to the end of time, only now it will be PS4 community against each other (or pretend internet troll PS4 owners against real PS4 owners).
5. Early adopters and the loss of perceived value- damn I have to buy another one, I just got this, what a waste of money.
5.5 My hobby just got more expensive and the case of the wife not understanding why I have to spend more money
5.5.5 The waiting game- Ill just wait a few more years and get the better one (or in year 2-3 after NEO launches maybe wait for NEO 2 or whatever).
6. Loss of simplicity- Consoles offer up a unique parity of experience, rich, poor, it doesnt matter, your PS4 plays the same games as mine. This has allowed a shared gaming experience and community to exist; which is very good for gamers and platform holders. But no longer; the Playstation community runs the risk of being split. They will now be the PS4 community and PS4 NEO communities. Of course Sonys going to try and prevent and keep some level of parity and shared experience but lets get real. OG PS4 players can come to the party but PS4K owners are going to make fun of your slow ass car and cheap clothes you poor sad peasants.
7. Power, timing, and pricing. If gold-e-locks has taught us anything its that too hot and too cold is bad. This is a real challenge as everything has to be just right. Do we get iterations every year, every three years, x2 revisions a cycle before PS5, x3 revisions, endless revisions, $50 price gap between models, $200 apart, marginally more powerful and not worth it, way more powerful with the risk of making the older model look like crap, should have waited longer, etc, etc.
8. PS5 and the loss of the wow factor- 4.5 to 5.0 isnt as big of a gap as 4 to 5. This is sad because the iterative console model may mean those wow moments of new console reveals may be gone forever, and with them a little loss of excitement (OK a lot of excitement and a little bit of my gaming soul!). But what effect do these jumps have on the market as a whole? Do we need them? and will lack of big jumps hurt the industry?
9. PSVR or NEO- launching at or near the same time seems like a very bad decision
Conclusion- Problems bla..bla..Who cares, NEO Horizon is going to look kick ass! Give it to me NOW!
1. Its never been done; at least not quite like this before. Simply put, is an unproven strategy and therefore risky. For Sony in particular this seems especially stupid since they currently seem to have been making all the right decisions and are dominating sales. A move like this exposes them to all kinds of problems they might otherwise avoid. In addition; due to being a New strategy, their will likely be a lot of room for error due to the lack of establish road map. The chance of them making mistakes is high. Or, depending on your perspective, the chance of them getting everything right is low.
2. Messaging and market back lash. The concept is a very challenging thing to sell. Because the list of negatives is fairly large (lots of legit reasons not to like this) the internet response may very likely be a problem. If the X-box One launch has taught us anything its that the messaging has to be spot on. Gamers are a complain-y bunch, we generally distrust companies, we dont like having anything taken away from us (even if we get something in return), and we like new but not too new. Too new is scary.
3. Developers- Whats to be said; the cost and time vs. return on investment is a tough balancing act. In a situation like this it sounds like more work for the same pay. IMO Its really up to Sony to produce effective very streamlined tools for developers to reduce this impact. If done wrong its going to be bad for devs. And for any dev launching anything anytime soon, or for anyone with anything in development for that matter, the time frame and budgets may have to be adjusted which is NO BUENO
4. Parity across units- this version runs like crap, lazy developers didnt optimize it, weve been abandoned, why get a NEO when all the games are held back by PS4 I wasted my money, the upgrades are barely noticeable etc. etc. We are going to hear this on every game release going forward. It will be a resolution and frame rate complain-a-thon to the end of time, only now it will be PS4 community against each other (or pretend internet troll PS4 owners against real PS4 owners).
5. Early adopters and the loss of perceived value- damn I have to buy another one, I just got this, what a waste of money.
5.5 My hobby just got more expensive and the case of the wife not understanding why I have to spend more money
5.5.5 The waiting game- Ill just wait a few more years and get the better one (or in year 2-3 after NEO launches maybe wait for NEO 2 or whatever).
6. Loss of simplicity- Consoles offer up a unique parity of experience, rich, poor, it doesnt matter, your PS4 plays the same games as mine. This has allowed a shared gaming experience and community to exist; which is very good for gamers and platform holders. But no longer; the Playstation community runs the risk of being split. They will now be the PS4 community and PS4 NEO communities. Of course Sonys going to try and prevent and keep some level of parity and shared experience but lets get real. OG PS4 players can come to the party but PS4K owners are going to make fun of your slow ass car and cheap clothes you poor sad peasants.
7. Power, timing, and pricing. If gold-e-locks has taught us anything its that too hot and too cold is bad. This is a real challenge as everything has to be just right. Do we get iterations every year, every three years, x2 revisions a cycle before PS5, x3 revisions, endless revisions, $50 price gap between models, $200 apart, marginally more powerful and not worth it, way more powerful with the risk of making the older model look like crap, should have waited longer, etc, etc.
8. PS5 and the loss of the wow factor- 4.5 to 5.0 isnt as big of a gap as 4 to 5. This is sad because the iterative console model may mean those wow moments of new console reveals may be gone forever, and with them a little loss of excitement (OK a lot of excitement and a little bit of my gaming soul!). But what effect do these jumps have on the market as a whole? Do we need them? and will lack of big jumps hurt the industry?
9. PSVR or NEO- launching at or near the same time seems like a very bad decision
Conclusion- Problems bla..bla..Who cares, NEO Horizon is going to look kick ass! Give it to me NOW!
Isn't checking system requirements a very basic fundamentals of PC gaming? Meanwhile, checking to see if a game is compatible with the owning system will be a totally new experience with console users because they haven't done that for a decade. Gosh just imagine how disappointed many people will be when they find out that a new game that they've long anticipated turns out to be unsupported on their system, even though they were promised that the console they bought had forward compatibility and could play new games even when a newer console would be released.
About the box art too. Here is the PS4 box art template Sony is currently using:
As you say, if they want to inform their customers about which systems that the game supports, they will have to say "Only available on..." But why the hassle of confusing customers with their purchases? Why not just use PSx and the buyers will know immediately know whether they can buy the game?
Yeah, I hope this doesn't happen. Isn't Sony going to have developers make games for the regular & the 4K version of the ps4?
I don't expect this unless a new console (PS5) comes out. A lot of people will be pissed I think.
Why do you talk as if you're actually telling someone something they don't know? I said "I" don't remember anyone caring.
Omnistalgic
Member
Great post OP well said. Can't wait to see how it all pans out.
I don't have a problem with the concept of iterative consoles, and chubigans makes some thoughtful points in the article. My problem is that they weren't up front about this plan from the beginning. If they had said in February 2013 that this new architecture will allow them to iterate on the console every couple of years and retain backwards compatibility and (as chubigans suggests) extend the life of the PS4 and its games far beyond the usual 5-7 years... Then I think this would be a different conversation. But doing it midway through a console generation that has otherwise been signaled as traditional feels almost like a bait and switch. That's perhaps a bit dramatic, but it is still a tough pill to swallow
I'm also super curious to know how they plan on handling the eventual cutoff of vanilla PS4 support. Or on the other hand, once we've had two or three iterations of the console, I have to wonder how much of a headache it would be for developers if Sony still mandates that the vanilla PS4 be respected. Will it be as simple as dropping the settings in a PC game from Ultra to Low, or would there be more to it?
Lots of questions. Their official messaging seems long overdue at this point and will be really interesting to see
I'm also super curious to know how they plan on handling the eventual cutoff of vanilla PS4 support. Or on the other hand, once we've had two or three iterations of the console, I have to wonder how much of a headache it would be for developers if Sony still mandates that the vanilla PS4 be respected. Will it be as simple as dropping the settings in a PC game from Ultra to Low, or would there be more to it?
Lots of questions. Their official messaging seems long overdue at this point and will be really interesting to see
People look happy in that thread to me lol
ArkhamFantasy
Member
This is a great post.
Refreshment.01
Member
ANd previously to you saying: "i don't remember anyone caring" i told you that infact people did care, as they always do once they feel threatened in the slightest way. Add to that hiding behind an online persona and they take those threat levels to astronomical extremes.
Yet, you continued posting with the same train of thought as if nothing happened.
In the end both sides of the debate are over reacting and chosing to ignore valid arguments from the other, so they can vent and carry on with their agenda.
And you get to choose how far up to move. Just say ps5 comes out and support for AAA titles drop ps4, but keep PS4k support, while smaller indies keep ps4 support until ps5.5. If indies are your thing keep ps4 till ps5.5 and only upgrade to ps4k, buying it used at a drastically reduced price. If AAA is your thing but you are cash strapped or don't care about visuals as much upgrade to ps4k when ps5 comes out, also buying used at half launch price. If visuals are your thing, upgrade every launch. Or upgrade at every other release just like now. The choice is in the hands of the consumer.
I was replying to this post & had nothing to do with whatever you're talking about
I don't follow the hardware space close enough to refute anything here but in the end these kinds of issues are not my problem as a consumer. Previous generations all had much bigger generational leaps (HD last gen, quality 3d graphics 2 gens ago, first 3d systems before that, etc.). Console makers found a way to make a big leap each generation and with less time between generations than this one and the previous one. I understand the business rationale from Sony's perspective but from the consumer's perspective there is a diminishing value proposition and I don't see how more frequent hardware upgrades fixes that problem. But maybe that deserves it's own separate discussion.
I don't see it as a good thing at all. People say you don't have to upgrade, but lets face it, not much effort is put into the last gen versions of games.
Current gen ports to PS3/360 are mostly handled by second tier devs, or small teams without much effort or money put into it by the publishers. Sometimes they come out okay, often not.
On the New 3DS, there hasn't been that many new games since it's release, but for Xenoblade they flat out made it exclusive to the console, and Hyrule warriors plays kind of poorly on old devices.
There's just nothing there to give me hope that suddenly developers/publishers are going to make two really fantastic versions of games and the PS4 isn't going to be handicapped.
More over, as a PC gamer who keeps their PC fairly up to date. I just don't see the point in spending money on upgrades for consoles.
I already do it for PC and I get way more out of it. On PC you get a lot more control in how games play, due to the sheer amount of graphical options in the majority of modern games. You just don't get that on consoles, you don't get the choice of whether you prioritise frame-rate of resolution, or what other special settings you may or may not want to increase performance. Back when I used to have an out of date PC, I'd always prioritise resolution above any special fancy graphical settings, in fact, I'd wager most PC gamers do. I doubt they'll let me do that on PS4, considering no other console game has given such customisation. The only way to keep the resolution would be to upgrade to the new console.
Current gen ports to PS3/360 are mostly handled by second tier devs, or small teams without much effort or money put into it by the publishers. Sometimes they come out okay, often not.
On the New 3DS, there hasn't been that many new games since it's release, but for Xenoblade they flat out made it exclusive to the console, and Hyrule warriors plays kind of poorly on old devices.
There's just nothing there to give me hope that suddenly developers/publishers are going to make two really fantastic versions of games and the PS4 isn't going to be handicapped.
More over, as a PC gamer who keeps their PC fairly up to date. I just don't see the point in spending money on upgrades for consoles.
I already do it for PC and I get way more out of it. On PC you get a lot more control in how games play, due to the sheer amount of graphical options in the majority of modern games. You just don't get that on consoles, you don't get the choice of whether you prioritise frame-rate of resolution, or what other special settings you may or may not want to increase performance. Back when I used to have an out of date PC, I'd always prioritise resolution above any special fancy graphical settings, in fact, I'd wager most PC gamers do. I doubt they'll let me do that on PS4, considering no other console game has given such customisation. The only way to keep the resolution would be to upgrade to the new console.
-hadouken
Member
Perfectly stated.