Grinchy
Banned
I feel like 60fps on PS2 was more common than 60fps on PS3.I remember when the PS2 specs came out (6.4 GFLOPs!!!) and thinking to myself that all future games would be 60 FPS with that much power.
I feel like 60fps on PS2 was more common than 60fps on PS3.I remember when the PS2 specs came out (6.4 GFLOPs!!!) and thinking to myself that all future games would be 60 FPS with that much power.
You think this will be teased at E3?
You think this will be teased at E3?
I still see a Nov 2020 release date; 2019 will be the year of some of the best PS4 exclusive games; also, it takes some time to develop games for a new console, so if the 1st devkits start to be released now, it will take at least 2 years or more to have some good games available for Launch.
About the specs, I'm still dreaming for a GPU with 20TF, and the "micro GPU" concept to make it possible.
I feel like it would be a dumb move. "Hey here's TLoU2 and Days Gone and all our big games that are finally coming out. But, you'd be crazy to buy them this holiday season when they release because we have a PS5 coming out next year that will have remastered versions of all of them!"You think this will be teased at E3?
The big difference between PS4 and PS5 this time round because the iterative nature of the x86/PC GPU tech will be they can go much later with dev kits especially for third parties and announce later too if they want. So hearing things later would only be natural.
I don't understand this point? What do you mean "they can go much later with dev kits"?
exactly! to be honest i haven't seen any need for the ps4 graphics compared to the PS3 as I have been 100% underwhelmed. I play AAA once in a while but enjoy indies regardless of technically OVERWHELMING BEAUTIFUL GRAPHICSCan't agree there, even if I don't even look at the top lookers like God of War 4, going back to the 7th generation looks pretty ugly to me nowadays. Blocky often sub 720p resolutions by the end of the generation, muddy textures, poor filtering, etc etc. The PS3 in particular had framerate issues in a lot of titles too.
If the 7-8G jump underwhelms you, I guess this might too, or maybe it'll be better because advancements in graphics don't seem to impress you but this will also be a major leap in CPU performance that should allow more dynamic worlds or whatever devs choose to do with it.
For various reasons I agree that late 2020 is very possible but everything I have seen so far indicates late 2019 and all the main things outside of Sony's and Microsoft's hands like 7nm maturity, RAM chip availability etc are all falling nicely into place. Also remember that the whole PS5 talk started now almost a year ago with the Pachter article in July last. Matt (a legit dev insider) then commented in the thread to hint/indicate games were already being worked on.
We know from history that for PS4 the one big first party game (KZ:SF) started development after Killzone 3 shipped in March 2011 so the above would be perfectly in-line time wise with a late 2019 launch.
The big difference between PS4 and PS5 this time round because the iterative nature of the x86/PC GPU tech will be they can go much later with dev kits especially for third parties and announce later too if they want. So hearing things later would only be natural.
Ok, that's just a thought, could The Last of US 2 and/or Days Gone be either 2019 PS4 games and few months(or weeks) later PS5 Launch Titles, but(of course) in full 4K glory at 60fps(PS5 assets, geometry, lighting, etc) ?!
You think this will be teased at E3?
You think this will be teased at E3?
I still believe in 60 fps. This current gen, getting to 60 fps was a bitch because the CPU was utter trash from the beginning. That won't be a problem with the PS5. At some point, visually you get into high diminishing returns territory and it doesn't make sense to sacrifice frames. It's like comparing ultra vs very high details on pc, where ultra tanks the performance by a lot but looks barely any better.
Then why do we have a ton of games with performance option to choose? They can do exactly the same with PS5 and Xbox 2.Optimising a game to run at 60fps is much harder, more time consuming and more expensive (at least for big AAA games), it's not just the graphics, all logic needs to be updated within the same time frame (or should be, for Better results) . With AAA becoming more expensive to produce, I really don't see any big publisher going for 60fps on console games. Graphics sell to the masses, not Framerate. You are setting yourself for a big disappointment.
I still believe in 60 fps. This current gen, getting to 60 fps was a bitch because the CPU was utter trash from the beginning. That won't be a problem with the PS5. At some point, visually you get into high diminishing returns territory and it doesn't make sense to sacrifice frames. It's like comparing ultra vs very high details on pc, where ultra tanks the performance by a lot but looks barely any better.
How many of those games run at LOCKED 60fps?Then why do we have a ton of games with performance option to choose? They can do exactly the same with PS5 and Xbox 2.
Most of the horsepower will be going to pushing a standard native 4K with improved visuals @ 30fps. MS will obviously have a 4K standard required on it's next system, with even the 1X already proving just that. The 4K marketing sales push will be huge on these next-gen systems. So SONY will have to follow through as well. That alone makes no room for this 60fps on 90% of PS5 games you talk of.
The point is we increasingly have that as an option now, whereas it almost never was the case in the past. So demand is definitely recognized and tended to a lot more. I'm hoping this trend continues with nextgen consoles and have at least 2 options readily available for every game, either locked 30 or locked 60; resolution or performance as they are called now mostly.How many of those games run at LOCKED 60fps?
On a console if it is not locked 60, then you either have screen tear, judder or increased latency (triple buffer + v-sync), that's why it's an option.
Even if next gen supports freesync, only 1% of players will have tvs that support it, so unlocked frame rates will not be the standard.
Demand? lolThe point is we increasingly have that as an option now, whereas it almost never was the case in the past. So demand is definitely recognized and tended to a lot more. I'm hoping this trend continues with nextgen consoles and have at least 2 options readily available for every game, either locked 30 or locked 60; resolution or performance as they are called now mostly.
Samsung announced in January they had started mass production of GDDR6Yeah many keep missing it for some reason. Even Richard at DF IIRC talked about GDDR6 only going into production later this year.
Samsung announced in January they had started mass production of GDDR6
https://news.samsung.com/global/sam...6-gigabit-gddr6-for-advanced-graphics-systems
I feel like it would be a dumb move. "Hey here's TLoU2 and Days Gone and all our big games that are finally coming out. But, you'd be crazy to buy them this holiday season when they release because we have a PS5 coming out next year that will have remastered versions of all of them!"
I know what you're going for here, but honestly if the PS5 isn't backwards compatible and they try to push us more remastered versions of everything I'm fucking done with consoles and Sony can suck my balls.
Well, I don't know where you got these numbers from, but all I care about is what I see actually happening; devs are giving us performance choice and even Sony added a boost mode on system level which clearly mentions framerate. So to me this is a good trend and I hope it continues.Demand? lol
There is no demand. Only a bunch of people in gaming forums demand it, and that doesn't even represent 1% of sales. 99% of gamers are uninformed or can't even tell the difference. Publishers make more money with graphics, and money is more important for them than pleasing a tiny percentage of gamers.
Even with mass production of 7nm CPU/GPUs and GDDR6 this year, i don't think it will release in 2019, it would be too expensive, even selling at cost and only with 10Tf.
Production process takes time to mature, then you have other materials+assembly, distribution is a huge costs too and retailers need to have their profit since consoles take display and storage space. Seems impossible to have all that at 399$ without a loss, i don't see Sony selling for 499$ and after the Ps3 i really doubt they will ever sell anything at loss anymore.
I'm totally expecting backwards compatibility on top of some games having patches that unlock framerate and increase resolution. It's just obvious that Sony isn't going to reveal the PS5 until it is months away from releasing. They're not going to reveal it 1.5 years before.I know what you're going for here, but honestly if the PS5 isn't backwards compatible and they try to push us more remastered versions of everything I'm fucking done with consoles and Sony can suck my balls.
Stop being so pessimistic. I have already said that the PS5 will have something between 14Tflops and 16Tflops and will have 24GB DDR6.
SONY will not launch a console unable to deliver 4K 60fps. Or 4K 30fps + Next Gen graphics...
Stop being so pessimistic. I have already said that the PS5 will have something between 14Tflops and 16Tflops and will have 24GB DDR6.
SONY will not launch a console unable to deliver 4K 60fps. Or 4K 30fps + Next Gen graphics...
This is what sony needs andshewill do![]()
Much better to think conservative on specs and get more than assume bleeding edge. If they come in below your specs we won't hear the last of it will we!?
I will not be disappointed if the specs are lower than I've speculated before. But I hope the console is actually capable of delivering next generation graphics. Otherwise we will only see games in 4k 60fps of the current generation.
Even with mass production of 7nm CPU/GPUs and GDDR6 this year, i don't think it will release in 2019, it would be too expensive, even selling at cost and only with 10Tf.
Production process takes time to mature, then you have other materials+assembly, distribution is a huge costs too and retailers need to have their profit since consoles take display and storage space. Seems impossible to have all that at 399$ without a loss, i don't see Sony selling for 499$ and after the Ps3 i really doubt they will ever sell anything at loss anymore.
Like I keep saying, 2020 is perfect, 7nm EUV is a substantial leap over 7nm gen 1, and 2020 gives some time for it to mature.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11337/samsung-and-tsmc-roadmaps-12-nm-8-nm-and-6-nm-added/2
If they wait for EUV they can better get to the higher end of the 11-15tflop expectation with the power reduction (higher clocks if the four shader engine limit of GCN is still in play).
Nope. PSX.
2019
Are you convinced PS5 will be late 2020 now then? (sorry if I already asked this of you before!)
I can't see how third-party devs having kits early this year if so. Sony just doesn't make them available so early to TP. Matt even said this.
I've always stated I expect it to be revealed no early than late 2019 for a late 2020 launch.Are you convinced PS5 will be late 2020 now then? (sorry if I already asked this of you before!)
I can't see how third-party devs having kits early this year if so. Sony just doesn't make them available so early to TP. Matt even said this.