Support NeoGAF

[Obliterator]

Last post before I retire to bed.

Zoetis claim makes sense to me. This machine will be marketed primarily to people with 4k displays. Sony needs to provide content to increase uptake of their 4k tv's. Like Cosmos and others have stated, what better way to do this for Sony than using their current best selling electronic device as a trojan horse? Some times we forget, Sony have their fingers in other pies besides gaming.

Because if I'm a developer why the hell would I invest the extra time and money into making an entire 4k version of a console game when it will sell vastly lower than the standard 1080p version. 4k adoption rate is slowly climbing but is still a tiny fracture of the market. I see no reason why devs would even make games for this and incure the extra costs and resources when it will only appeal to a very small segment of the market. No one with a 1080p tv (the majority of the market) has any single reason to buy it

 

[pixellated_man]

Just to add, this uptake in 4K tvs will naturally increase uptake of 4k blu ray content, 4k streaming content via Vue and please partners like Netflix who will also provide 4k streaming soon.

Alright that's it. Going off to bed for realz this time. Catch up with you guys tomorrow!

 

[CosmicQueso]

Why would devs take extra time and money to develop a 4k version of their game when it will only sell to people with 4k tv? A tiny share of the market at large.

Tiny share now, sure, but growing. Doing the investment now, during main development, means that the asset can remain productive for a longer period (if 4k adoption takes off) with less work later in going back and reworking. Also, costs and time for supporting the kind of box referred to might be less than one might think, especially if the first party incentivizes such work happening now rather than later.

But you're right, we are not talking huge upgrades here, which is why it wouldn't be called PS5.

Allegedly. Of course. Because who knows.

 

[Obliterator]

Just to add, this uptake in 4K tvs will naturally increase uptake of 4k blu ray content, 4k streaming content via Vue and please partners like Netflix who will also provide 4k streaming soon.

Alright that's it. Going off to bed for realz this time. Catch up with you guys tomorrow!

But none of that means the actual system itself will sell. If this thing is only for 4k why not just wait 2 years or so for PS5? Because I don't forsee consumers flocking out to buy an exact same PS4 whose only advantage is 4k

Tiny share now, sure, but growing. Doing the investment now, during main development, means that the asset can remain productive for a longer period (if 4k adoption takes off) with less work later in going back and reworking. Also, costs and time for supporting the kind of box referred to might be less than one might think, especially if the first party incentivizes such work happening now rather than later.

I just dont think the market is there. I really dont. From what Ive seen the demand for such a device really doesn't exist. Might be the first truly miscalculation from Sony this generation imo

 

[demigod]

290X sells for sub 200 in a lot of places and is in the similar performance bracket as 970. Sony buying in bulk will probably reduce the cost substantially. The larger question is what sort of CPU dedicision is on the cards.

Ahh thanks. I haven't kept up with AMD cards since they've been lagging behind.

Because if I'm a developer why the hell would I invest the extra time and money into making an entire 4k version of a console game when it will sell vastly lower than the standard 1080p version. 4k adoption rate is slowly climbing but is still a tiny fracture of the market. I see no reason why devs would even make games for this and incure the extra costs and resources when it will only appeal to a very small segment of the market. No one with a 1080p tv (the majority of the market) has any single reason to buy it

So why are there 4k PC games?

 

[Obliterator]

So why are there 4k PC games?

Above 1080p monitors are a lot more commonplace than TVs

 

[onQ123]

So they can do native 4k but wont improve the assets.

That makes almost no sense. I felt pretty solid on what this thing was but am now getting confused

Sony has a patent for Up-rendering 1 pixel & 3 sub pixels into 4 pixels

METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR USE IN UPRENDERING MULTIMEDIA CONTENT

Read more: http://www.patentsencyclopedia.com/app/20160005344#ixzz43hRD2q6k

 

[Mushroom021]

Its not about a market for reselling, it allows them to keep the ps4 price up instead of price drops while selling to new customers.

 

[demigod]

Above 1080p monitors are a lot more commonplace than TVs

Lol, i doubt there are more people with 4k monitors than 4k TV. Hell i got a 4k TV before i even got a 4k monitor.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Thanks for sharing that onQ that is very interesting indeed.

I just dont think the market is there. I really dont. From what Ive seen the demand for such a device really doesn't exist. Might be the first truly miscalculation from Sony this generation imo

Maybe not. This is the company that is the king of producing tech products for no market. Mini-disc, new Walkman, I mean there are dozens and dozens of Sony products that were made for markets that ended up to not exist.

Still, lot of 4k tvs being bought, lots more will be bought this holiday and as more content comes online.

No one thought the Wii being 480p was a problem in 2006. But by 2011??

 

[UpUpDownDown]

Sounds like a big waste of money for Sony. Next gen isn't that far off and this is just distracting them from the plot.

I feel a good chunk of sonys success this gen can be attributed to their clear, simple, laser focused approach. This just serves to muddy things and divert massive funds to something that isn't necessarily going to be a success.

Stay the course, rack in the coin and build a fucking monster for next gen.

 

[Obliterator]

Lol, i doubt there are more people with 4k monitors than 4k TV. Hell i got a 4k TV before i even got a 4k monitor.

You owning a 4k tv alone makes you the exception. The market is still 90%+ 1080p or even 720p tvs. Its not expected for 4k TVs to account for over 10% of the install base for another 1-2 years.

I mean its some niche stuff for Sony to spend a lot of R&D on unless this was cheap and easy to manufacture

 

[CosmicQueso]

I mean its some niche stuff for Sony to spend a lot of R&D on unless this was cheap and easy to manufacture

Exactly. Stopgap, easy, relatively cheap. Only way it makes sense.

 

[Obliterator]

Exactly. Stopgap, easy, relatively cheap. Only way it makes sense.

Yeah I can see that. If this is something they didn't invest significant R&D into and want to use it as a Trojan Horse for 4k into the living room I can understand it more. As long as it was cheap for them.

 

[ChaoticBlue]

Because if I'm a developer why the hell would I invest the extra time and money into making an entire 4k version of a console game when it will sell vastly lower than the standard 1080p version. 4k adoption rate is slowly climbing but is still a tiny fracture of the market. I see no reason why devs would even make games for this and incure the extra costs and resources when it will only appeal to a very small segment of the market. No one with a 1080p tv (the majority of the market) has any single reason to buy it

sony is ambitious. ps3 was the trojan horse to bluray. ps4.5 will be the trojan horse to 4K.

 

[Mushroom021]

sony is ambitious. ps3 was the trojan horse to bluray. ps4.5 will be the trojan horse to 4K.

Its really not though. I just don't think this is going to be anything more than a minor upgrade to the GPU. It replaces the current model at 400 and the old model drops by 100 or so.

 

[MogCakes]

It very well may be like some were saying earlier, that this model will be specifically aimed at improving 4k adoption. I can't see how they intend to accomplish it.

 

[Hexa]

sony is ambitious. ps3 was the trojan horse to bluray. ps4.5 will be the trojan horse to 4K.

Sony isn't even sure they want to keep making TVs. I doubt they'd burn money in their second best division for that.
A PS4k would indicate that they think that having 4k features in itself adds strong value to the product. Not that they're trying to push 4k.

 

[HooYaH]

Whatever Sony does, I just hope they release a PS4 that can play UHD 4K movies this year.

 

[Glorified G]

Sounds like a big waste of money for Sony. Next gen isn't that far off and this is just distracting them from the plot.

I feel a good chunk of sonys success this gen can be attributed to their clear, simple, laser focused approach. This just serves to muddy things and divert massive funds to something that isn't necessarily going to be a success.

Stay the course, rack in the coin and build a fucking monster for next gen.

It seems pretty simple to me. Do you have a 4K TV or in the market for one? Here's a product that can take advantage of it. If you don't have a 4K TV and not interested? Don't bother. Outside of resolution there would be no quality or performance difference. That's pretty straight forward. It would be just another SKU.

Now if there is a performance difference with PSVR, then that it is a whole different story and brings quite a bit of marketing problems.

You have to explain to a fraction of 36 million+ current PS4 owners who are in the market for PSVR that there will be a quality difference with a new SKU. Even though most of those people have never tried VR in the first place an wouldn't how much better or worse the experience be with their current hardware. Do you have to pay another $400-$500 for the new PS4 on top of the $400-$500 you've already committed to PSVR? If Sony is this quick to update the PS4, will their be another expensive headset in a couple years that takes better advantage of this new PS4?

If this is just an updated PS4 that can play the same games in the same quality with the only difference being 4K resolution which the appropriate display is required, then this is fine. Anything more than that, especially with PSVR, it would be a big mistake.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Because if I'm a developer why the hell would I invest the extra time and money into making an entire 4k version of a console game when it will sell vastly lower than the standard 1080p version. 4k adoption rate is slowly climbing but is still a tiny fracture of the market. I see no reason why devs would even make games for this and incure the extra costs and resources when it will only appeal to a very small segment of the market. No one with a 1080p tv (the majority of the market) has any single reason to buy it

Apart from possible improvements in cooling and build quailty of course. Not to mention possible integration of the breakout box.

 

[MogCakes]

Apart from possible improvements in cooling and build quailty of course. Not to mention possible integration of the breakout box.

It would pretty much be a slim model with added 4k support and possibly something to help VR.

 

[omonimo]

Because if I'm a developer why the hell would I invest the extra time and money into making an entire 4k version of a console game when it will sell vastly lower than the standard 1080p version. 4k adoption rate is slowly climbing but is still a tiny fracture of the market. I see no reason why devs would even make games for this and incure the extra costs and resources when it will only appeal to a very small segment of the market. No one with a 1080p tv (the majority of the market) has any single reason to buy it

You seem to not understand how should work. Developers haven't to care of anything. It's the same game but the better hardware spit out a better res automatically. It's a ps4.5 not a new console.

 

[TheMan]

there's no way I'm gonna read through 75 pages, but at this point, is it safe to assume that this is actually happening>?

 

[KeRaSh]

I just want it to run all future games at 1080p60. No 4K games, higher quality assets or anything.
PSVR improvements would be a nice bonus but not a must. I'd upgrade just for that.

 

[kyser73]

I just want it to run all future games at 1080p60. No 4K games, higher quality assets or anything.
PSVR improvements would be a nice bonus but not a must. I'd upgrade just for that.

Soooo...again...

1080/60 on consoles is a design decision by developers. As someone mentioned upthread, you could sell people supercomputers and devs would still be aiming at 30fps for more shiny shiny.

A game that designed for VR that could also have a 2D variant would get what you're after because of the baseline performance requirements for good VR.

 

[Glorified G]

I just want it to run all future games at 1080p60. No 4K games, higher quality assets or anything.
PSVR improvements would be a nice bonus but not a must. I'd upgrade just for that.

There were 1080p 60fps console games almost 10 years ago. You can always push more at half the framerate. New hardware wouldn't change that.

 

[Hawk269]

Because if I'm a developer why the hell would I invest the extra time and money into making an entire 4k version of a console game when it will sell vastly lower than the standard 1080p version. 4k adoption rate is slowly climbing but is still a tiny fracture of the market. I see no reason why devs would even make games for this and incure the extra costs and resources when it will only appeal to a very small segment of the market. No one with a 1080p tv (the majority of the market) has any single reason to buy it

Well, right now I can play almost every game in my Steam Library (over 200 games) in 4k on my 4k display. The majority of those 200 games did not have the game originally or modified for 4k. Right now, the majority of games in 4k use the same assets as they do in 1080p, just the massive increase in resolution makes it look so much better.

So for you and the others crying over the poor devs having to make a 4k version and a non-4k version, it really is no big deal. As I stated, I can take a game made 8 years ago and run it in 4k with no extra effort on the devs part. Games scale up and down in resolution and it wold not be hard or much effort for devs to do this on console's as well.

If you have not seen a game in 4k, then you might not understand how taking a game with 1080p assets and moving into 4k makes it looks so much better. Granted, a game that would have 4k assets in addition to playing in 4k would take an extreme amount of GPU power. Improving the assets is not as important when moving a game to 4k. Yes, improved assets and 4k resolution would make it look even more amazing, but that majority of PC games that can be played at 4k are using the standard assets.

I am still skeptical about a console being able to do 4k/30fps and be under $800.00 (I am talking the system being able to render at 4k, not upscale to 4k), it just seems like it would be way more than that being that $600 GPU's alone have a hard time maintaining 4k/30fps as it is. But, if they can do it I will be there day 1.

 

[ReaperXL7]

This is a big thread to read through so while I catch up I guess i'll just ask what the chances are of this just being a slim model? We seem to be right around the right time for a slim version to be announced.

The thing that I guess I don't understand is that one of the things that has gotten Sony where they are with the PS4 has been the whole hearts and minds thing. Everytime MS made a step in a direction consumers didn't seem to like Sony to the opposite path. I know Sony is a corporation and their bottom line trumps many things but It seems strange to me that they might be willing to burn all or a lot of the good will they have built by disenfranchising their current install base or anyone who buys a console before they made an announcement for this new model.

E3 is going to be really interesting.

 

[Hawk269]

there's no way I'm gonna read through 75 pages, but at this point, is it safe to assume that this is actually happening>?

Possibly. We have some insiders claiming it exists, once specifically saying 4k gaming. But people have been wrong or have misunderstood what they were told in the past, so nothing is definite, but things seem to be pointing in that direction that it may happen. With MS first making comments and now this information from insiders saying Sony is doing something similar, it just seems that it looks likely.

 

[MicSte79]

I bought a 4K tv yesterday so am pretty happy they are going to be supporting it.

 

[KeRaSh]

Soooo...again...

1080/60 on consoles is a design decision by developers. As someone mentioned upthread, you could sell people supercomputers and devs would still be aiming at 30fps for more shiny shiny.

A game that designed for VR that could also have a 2D variant would get what you're after because of the baseline performance requirements for good VR.

There were 1080p 60fps console games almost 10 years ago. You can always push more at half the framerate. New hardware wouldn't change that.

I know that.
But isn't it less of a hassle for developers to enable 60 fps for PS4.5 instead of updating every asset of the game and have the majority of players (PS4) play with downgraded assets?
If a PS4.5 happens it will probably be a minor split of the userbase for quite some time and developers will keep targeting PS4/XBO hardware as a baseline.
Obviously the best case scenario would be that developers started adding graphical options to games. Better graphics at 30 fps or PS4 visuals at 60 fps? 4K at 10 fps?

 

[pelican]

I dont see a significant market for the device at all if the same asset quality is accurate. You have no incentive for anyone with a 1080p tv to buy one (the vast vast vast majority of the market) and the device appeals ONLY to people with a 4k TV. Why would devs take extra time and money to develop a 4k version of their game when it will only sell to people with 4k tv? A tiny share of the market at large.

There has to be more to it otherwise I dont understand this move at all

Would it not also benefit 1080p owners in guaranteeing stable framerates and hopefully achieving 1080p/60 across the board?

I would upgrade for 1080/60.

 

[dodgykebaab]

The dumbest thing about your posts -- which are remarkably, unbelievably dumb! -- is that you don't seem to realize the reason "industry players" (Bethesda and Ubisoft) are "avoiding" us is that we reported news about their unannounced projects, all of which turned out to be true. It's almost like we have a track record for this!

I'd just imagine that these days people see your gang and think "Uh oh, there's gamings TMZ; better not say anything".

 

[pswii60]

You owning a 4k tv alone makes you the exception. The market is still 90%+ 1080p or even 720p tvs. Its not expected for 4k TVs to account for over 10% of the install base for another 1-2 years.

I mean its some niche stuff for Sony to spend a lot of R&D on unless this was cheap and easy to manufacture

It's difficult to find TVs in the shops which aren't UHD now. It's now standard. And that makes PS4 behind the times as an all-in-one device. At the very least this update will ensure PS4 supports UHD for Blu-Ray and streaming services and will further encourage uptake of UHD.

 

[amstradcpc]

Would it not also benefit 1080p owners in guaranteeing stable framerates and hopefully achieving 1080p/60 across the board?

I would upgrade for 1080/60.

Yes, not allowing improve frame rates of vanilla PS4 at 1080p would be the most stupide thing ever. Looking at that Pollaris GPU machine without being able to surpass 1080p60 fps...the most stupid think ever.

 

[David Ricardo]

It seems pretty simple to me. Do you have a 4K TV or in the market for one? Here's a product that can take advantage of it. If you don't have a 4K TV and not interested? Don't bother. Outside of resolution there would be no quality or performance difference. That's pretty straight forward. It would be just another SKU.

Now if there is a performance difference with PSVR, then that it is a whole different story and brings quite a bit of marketing problems.

You have to explain to a fraction of 36 million+ current PS4 owners who are in the market for PSVR that there will be a quality difference with a new SKU. Even though most of those people have never tried VR in the first place an wouldn't how much better or worse the experience be with their current hardware. Do you have to pay another $400-$500 for the new PS4 on top of the $400-$500 you've already committed to PSVR? If Sony is this quick to update the PS4, will their be another expensive headset in a couple years that takes better advantage of this new PS4?

If this is just an updated PS4 that can play the same games in the same quality with the only difference being 4K resolution which the appropriate display is required, then this is fine. Anything more than that, especially with PSVR, it would be a big mistake.

I don't think Sony are going to release a new console, which is much more powerful (3-4 times faster than a PS4), possibly cannibalizing PSVR sales and alienating it's existing userbase, just so 4k tv owners can play the same games at 4k. That doesn't make any sense.

I think you may be right as in this is not about 4k, this is about VR.

Let's get deeply hypothetical here.
Let's suppose AMD has Polaris ready for this holiday season and it is all that AMD promised. Cheap, powerful, low consumption. So Microsoft (and/or even Nintendo) could have a 6tflop+ machine in stores for 450$ before the end of the year. If one or both of this companies partnered with Oculus for example, they could have a real next gen VR experience by the end of the year to compete with PSVR.

By real next gen I mean a machine capable of runing Battlefield 5, Forza 6, GTA V... any current gen game in VR. PSVR would look like Fisher Price VR in comparison, and it wouldn't be all that much cheaper.

In this scenario, it makes sense for Sony to release a backwards compatible PS4.5, so they have a product for everybody. Sony would be basically forced to release PS4.5 this year if they don't want to miss the VR train.

If this is the case, then everything makes sense and I understand Sony is forced to do this, and this doesn't necessarily mean that consoles are going the iterative way. I would be ok with it, but they are going to have a hard time explaining this to their millions of users that just bought a PS4 maybe in anticipation of VR gaming.

 

[MogCakes]

Even though I feel most of these concerns are unfounded, Sony will be keen to not alienate any of their loyal ps4 customers.

Dismissing consumer concerns as unfounded is a great way to lose business, I agree.

 

[lebowski4ever]

think it's past time for a bit of sony arrogance..last time, with the ps3, and now, possibly this. could backfire spectacularly..*insert cliched popcorn gif*

 

[Aceofspades]

think it's past time for a bit of sony arrogance..last time, with the ps3, and now, possibly this. could backfire spectacularly..*insert cliched popcorn gif*

Sony arrogance? why exactly?

 

[Alienware]

I think this will come down to a massive misunderstanding by some devs, and we will be looking at a slimmer machine with the same hardware and the capability of playing 4K Blu-Ray media stuff.

 

[GhostTrick]

290X sells for sub 200 in a lot of places and is in the similar performance bracket as 970. Sony buying in bulk will probably reduce the cost substantially. The larger question is what sort of CPU dedicision is on the cards.

The larger question is a TDP one. 290x is a 250W tdp GPU. And its reference design ran pretty hot, 94°C.
Not only that, it's a massive GPU.
It's not only a cost problem.

 

[Iztok Mravlja]

It's difficult to find TVs in the shops which aren't UHD now. It's now standard. And that makes PS4 behind the times as an all-in-one device. At the very least this update will ensure PS4 supports UHD for Blu-Ray and streaming services and will further encourage uptake of UHD.

That's a misleading way of putting it. Just because there's UHD TVs in stores, doesn't mean people are buying them. TVs aren't consumables, people used to replace them every 7-8 years on average (conventional wisdom among TV manufacturors), which dropped by a few during the HD era.

In my opinion, 4K isn't enough to upset the upgrade cycle like HD did, which was more than just a resolution upgrade.

I do agree that it makes sense for Sony to support 4K in some way, if nothing else, for video playback.

 

[David Ricardo]

The larger question is a TDP one. 290x is a 250W tdp GPU. And its reference design ran pretty hot, 94°C.
Not only that, it's a massive GPU.
It's not only a cost problem.

Polaris is supposed to be smaller and more power efficient

With two identical systems running Star Wars Battlefront, a reading of the active power usage of each system was recorded via a power meter. The Polaris – small Polaris i.e. Polaris 10 – equipped system recorded an average of 86W, while the Maxwell based GTX 950 machine recorded an average of 150W in the actual demonstration that saw, and 140W in AMD’s labs. This amounts to a delta of 53W if we go by the lower recorded average power of 140W and a 63W delta if we go by the reading the we saw during the demo.

Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-unveils-polaris-11-10-gpu/#ixzz43iMlvpf9

 

[Bitch Pudding]

1) GNM = Mantle/DX12-like API
GNMX = DX11-like API

2) 4k60? LOL, no fucking way! 1080p60 would suffice for me, as long as there are no strings atta.

Jup, 4k60 is PS5 territory; you'd need 8-10 times faster hardware in order to achieve that, that's a true generational leap.

I

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Soooo...again...

1080/60 on consoles is a design decision by developers. As someone mentioned upthread, you could sell people supercomputers and devs would still be aiming at 30fps for more shiny shiny.

A game that designed for VR that could also have a 2D variant would get what you're after because of the baseline performance requirements for good VR.

Not really. Most games so far have to sacrifice the Resolution and other stuff to achieve 60fps.
With new Hardware you could get both things improved.

I mean for example Quantum Break and Star Wars Battlefront are 720p! on XboxOne. If Microsoft releases new Hardware Devs could add some kind of new Hardware Profil to the game and allow it to run at 1080p/60fps on the new Hardware.

it shouldnt be much work for the Devs. They already use some kind Hardware Profiles. In every game you find this "Durango" or "Orbis" Profiles when you data mine a pc version of a multiplatform game.

 

[GamerMax73]

Just had a skim-read on the last page to catch-up on general conversation here. The one thing that strikes me is the most likely scenario is also the least logical.

Most likely - Sony will release a PS4 with HDMI2 support and a built in 4K upscaler. If PS5 is only 2-3 years out then why bother? New TV's are generally 4K now, the prices are dropping. By the time PS5 is currently expected to drop 4K TV's will be more common place.

Also why PS4.5? Why not just PS4 Slim, or what ever, if it really is a HDMI and upscaler boost?

If PS4.5 is actually a thing, which I doubt, then it has to be something Sony had been planning since before PS4's launch given the time and work involved and PS5 has to be further away than we currently expect.

In the Iteration thread I can see how they can make a PS4.5 work, Here I think there's something fishy in either the name or the nature of the 4K news.

 

[David Ricardo]

Just had a skim-read on the last page to catch-up on general conversation here. The one thing that strikes me is the most likely scenario is also the least logical.

Most likely - Sony will release a PS4 with HDMI2 support and a built in 4K upscaler. If PS5 is only 2-3 years out then why bother? New TV's are generally 4K now, the prices are dropping. By the time PS5 is currently expected to drop 4K TV's will be more common place.

Also why PS4.5? Why not just PS4 Slim, or what ever, if it really is a HDMI and upscaler boost?

If PS4.5 is actually a thing, which I doubt, then it has to be something Sony had been planning since before PS4's launch given the time and work involved and PS5 has to be further away than we currently expect.

In the Iteration thread I can see how they can make a PS4.5 work, Here I think there's something fishy in either the name or the nature of the 4K news.

Maybe AMD knocked at Sony's door with the recipe for a "PS4.5" 3-4 times faster than the PS4 at a reasonable price, which is perfect for next gen VR experiences.

 

[supernormal]

Not really. Most games so far have to sacrifice the Resolution and other stuff to achieve 60fps.
With new Hardware you could get both things improved.

I mean for example Quantum Break and Star Wars Battlefront are 720p! on XboxOne. If Microsoft releases new Hardware Devs could add some kind of new Hardware Profil to the game and allow it to run at 1080p/60fps on the new Hardware.

it shouldnt be much work for the Devs. They already use some kind Hardware Profiles. In every game you find this "Durango" or "Orbis" Profiles when you data mine a pc version of a multiplatform game.

It's still a choice by developers. They don't have to allocate the new resources to fps. You would probably still have sub-hd games at 30fps if you want to use really expensive effects.

 

[Planet]

An upscaler would actually make sense, if it is fast, as those in many in 4K TVs are not, causing input lag on 1080p sources. Then add native Blu-ray 4K support and of course for apps like netflix, put it in a slightly smaller casing - hopefully keep it cool and quiet in the process - and you have a nice PS4 revision. It could even contain the VR breakout box functionality with a second HDMI just to reduce cable chaos.

This is what would actually help the PS4, unlike most of the speculated things in this thread, which would plain kill off PlayStation. And it would explain the rumors. Everything will be fine.