• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mat Piscatella: PS5 Pro Has Fallen Behind PS4 Pro Launch Aligned in the US

PS4 pro was an easy buy. Barely more expensive than the launch ps4 and was easy to tell the ps4 to buy a pro.
The PS4 Pro was the original PS4's launch price, they just dropped the base PS4 to $299 and inserted the Pro at the $399 price. Sony kept the pricetag in line with the industry norm and expectations for 2016. PS5 Pro kinda seems like this is Sony's way of establishing a new baseline going forward. Get the sticker shock out of the way mid way through this cycle when they aren't depending on the Pro to be the primary hardware sales driver, so that it will seem 'normal' whenever PS6 comes out. At minimum, I can't see the next Playstation being under $600.
 
Last edited:

FoxMcChief

Gold Member
I'm the opposite. I can't play a game with a TV or movie going on at the same time. Too distracting.
I get that totally. Everyone has heard me preach about remote play on my phone since I arrived. It’s absolutely vital to my gaming these days. It’s allowed me to keep up with my sports as well. So I can play while I watch the Dodgers, Lakers, Kings and Raiders, while I play a game. Especially right now as I now have so many sporting events to watch. Not to mention AEW and UFC.

I think the problem ultimately is that there’s not enough hours in a day.
 

Gaiff

SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Sure, there are bound to be applicable use cases and some individuals who value the benefit above others, but I think, by and large, you're looking at a fairly uncompelling proposition for the price point. At the end of the day, DF wouldn't have to blow these things up to such a degree if the difference was immediate and self-evident.

It's just the old diminishing returns issue.

Season 5 Idk GIF by NBC


Also, if you've shelled out cash for a half-decent PC, why shell out another $800 just so you don't have to use it?
Those zooms are for mobile users who represent a large portion of the audience. On a normal monitor, it's very obvious.

Take this shot for example and go watch it on a phone screen. Now go watch it on a monitor or TV. The difference is glaring and it isn't zoomed in.

yF96y8i.jpeg
 

BbMajor7th

Member
Those zooms are for mobile users who represent a large portion of the audience. On a normal monitor, it's very obvious.

Take this shot for example and go watch it on a phone screen. Now go watch it on a monitor or TV. The difference is glaring and it isn't zoomed in.

yF96y8i.jpeg
This is the difference between framerate mode, which runs between 720-900p, and fidelity mode, which runs over 1600p, A five-fold increase in pixel density. It also uses FSR1, which is not a particularly good upscaler. The difference is stark because, in raw pixel counts, it's like going from PS3 to PS4 Pro - nobody is arguing that wasn't a noticeable leap, even for the layman. I was talking about going from a well-treated 1440p/60 image in something like Demon's Souls to a well-treated 2160p/60 image on Pro. Yes, there is a difference, but the returns are diminishing. Most users won't notice the difference and those who do likely wouldn't think it was worth $800.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom