Support NeoGAF

[HeisenbergFX4]

Ok, His opinion clearly is shared by many people across the internet and when someone says performance it is wrong to expect 60FPS from a £700 console. I understand now.

Of course its shared by many as this machine is likely going to be 10% ish of total PS5 sales

Plus determining if $700 is worth something to someone varies wildly person to person

$700 to some is a lot of money and to some its not

 

[DenchDeckard]

No shit. The opinion that the Pro isn't for everyone is shared by me as well. I've said that countless times. I don't know who said it is "wrong to expect 60FPS from a £700 console". Sounds like more shit you just made up.

You are literally in this thread coming down on me for questioning sonys marketing. Like someone could be upset that Sony "IMPLIED" that this console will deliver performance settings with fidelity style graphics.

I bet if I asked 100 people what that meant they would think it was minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings. What do you think?

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Ok, His opinion clearly is shared by many people across the internet and when someone says performance it is wrong to expect 60FPS from a £700 console. I understand now.

 

[mayham2199]

The option Topher mentioned would be nice but lets be honest, many would have complained about that. We'd be hearing how they are selling a digital console with only 1tb in 2024.

Honestly the 2TB was part of the reason for my upgrade. I know I can do it on my own but it was nice to just get a pro and have my storage upgraded as well. 1TB wasn't to bad for me though and if that's what the pro had I could have lived with it. My internet is very fast so deleting and redownloading games isn't really an issue.

Oh well with 2TB now I can download all the games I want even those I just hop in every few months and not have to worry about redownloading.

 

[Topher]

You are literally in this thread coming down on me for questioning sonys marketing. Like someone could be upset that Sony "IMPLIED" that this console will deliver performance settings with fidelity style graphics.

I bet if I asked 100 people what that meant they would think it was minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings. What do you think?

Why the hell are you trying to redefine "performance mode" into "minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings" when that has rarely ever been the case for any game this gen? If you asked people that who had actually paid attention to the DF threads the last four years then they would say you are full of shit if that's what you think "performance mode" has been.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Why the hell are you trying to redefine "performance mode" into "minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings" when that has rarely ever been the case for any game this gen? If you asked people that who had actually paid attention to the DF threads the last four years then they would say you are full of shit if that's what you think "performance mode" has been.

Fuck me, dude. This is beyond a joke. Im bowing out and leaving you too it.

 

[Mayar]

And so those who don't have a PS5 and those who have a PS5 clashed in battle, they were joined by those who bought a PS5 PRO and those who refuse to buy a PS5 PRO because they already have a PS5, seeing a bloody battle PC fans decided to join the fight, because without them, no one will figure it out. And there was no end to this battle...

God, I love Neogaf

 

[FrankWza]

Why the hell are you trying to redefine "performance mode" into "minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings" when that has rarely ever been the case for any game this gen? If you asked people that who had actually paid attention to the DF threads the last four years then they would say you are full of shit if that's what you think "performance mode" has been.

I think some warnings expired and they're back to GR levels. Same with arthand. He even took a break from PSVR2 bashing to focus on the Pro

 

[DenchDeckard]

I think some warnings expired and they're back to GR levels. Same with arthand. He even took a break from PSVR2 bashing to focus on the Pro

Agree with a video that dares mention some short comings about a Sony console.......

Same old with some of you.

 

[ReBurn]

You are literally in this thread coming down on me for questioning sonys marketing. Like someone could be upset that Sony "IMPLIED" that this console will deliver performance settings with fidelity style graphics.

I bet if I asked 100 people what that meant they would think it was minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings. What do you think?

I'm a bit disappointed that we're seeing "fidelity pro" and "performance pro" modes in some games. Cerny made a point in the PS5 Pro technical presentation concerning 60 FPS being the minimum performance target and "removing the decision, or at least narrowing the divide" between fidelity and performance modes to give players the higher performance and higher fidelity at the same time. I think patched Sony first party games are doing that better than third party games, so there are some examples of the benefits we will see in the future.

I don't think it's an issue with the PS5 Pro itself, though. I think it's some developers either not understanding how to make it happen just yet, or it not being worth the time to really dig in and make more improvements. I'm guessing future titles will benefit more than existing ones.

 

[Woody337]

For me, trading in my launch PS5 and a launch series x (that I didnt play) I ended up paying $40 for it. Well worth that for me.

 

[FrankWza]

Agree with a video that dares mention some short comings about a Sony console.......

Same old with some of you.

Nobody who ever defended the series s should have a negative opinion on the PS5 Pro. If THAT was worth $300 4 years ago you're embarrassing yourself saying the Pro is not worth $700 in 2024.

 

[TGO]

I'm sure future PS5 Pro games will show it's value but currently with what's on offer?
Almost fidelity at 60fps isn't gonna cut it.
There needs to be upgrades across the board, not do what the base model does just at a higher frame rate.

 

[FrankWza]

For me, trading in my launch PS5 and a launch series x (that I didnt play) I ended up paying $40 for it. Well worth that for me.

You basically got to rent a PS5 and Series x for $200 or so for 4 years. Not bad.

 

[Woody337]

You basically got to rent a PS5 and Series x for $200 or so for 4 years. Not bad.

Thats how I saw it. Easily justifiable

 

[DenchDeckard]

I'm a bit disappointed that we're seeing "fidelity pro" and "performance pro" modes in some games. Cerny made a point in the PS5 Pro technical presentation concerning 60 FPS being the minimum performance target and "removing the decision, or at least narrowing the divide" between fidelity and performance modes to give players the higher performance and higher fidelity at the same time. I think patched Sony first party games are doing that better than third party games, so there are some examples of the benefits we will see in the future.

I don't think it's an issue with the PS5 Pro itself, though. I think it's some developers either not understanding how to make it happen just yet, or it not being worth the time to really dig in and make more improvements. I'm guessing future titles will benefit more than existing ones.

You're going to upset Topher with this post. Don't say anything against Sony and lord Cerny. Even if the majority of the internet/customers seem to agree with your opinion.

I too fell for the video, where I am sure Cerny implied that games would target as close to 60FPS as possible with fidelity graphics, but I have been told I am wrong.

 

[Topher]

I'm a bit disappointed that we're seeing "fidelity pro" and "performance pro" modes in some games. Cerny made a point in the PS5 Pro technical presentation concerning 60 FPS being the minimum performance target and "removing the decision, or at least narrowing the divide" between fidelity and performance modes to give players the higher performance and higher fidelity at the same time. I think patched Sony first party games are doing that better than third party games, so there are some examples of the benefits we will see in the future.

I don't think it's an issue with the PS5 Pro itself, though. I think it's some developers either not understanding how to make it happen just yet, or it not being worth the time to really dig in and make more improvements. I'm guessing future titles will benefit more than existing ones.

To be clear, Cerny never said 60fps was the "minimum performance target". Cerny characterized performance in terms of what it currently is on PS5 which is simply "targets" 60fps. Obviously Sony is giving devs a lot of freedom with that which means they can still improve fidelity further than what is available on PS5 rather than just combine performance and fidelity like what Cerny talked about. I really don't have a problem with that as there are still that 25% of gamers who prefer the higher fidelity.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

To be clear, Cerny never said 60fps was the "minimum performance target". Cerny characterized performance in terms of what it currently is on PS5 which is simply "targets" 60fps. Obviously Sony is giving devs a lot of freedom with that which means they can still improve fidelity further than what is available on PS5 rather than just combine performance and fidelity like what Cerny talked about. I really don't have a problem with that as there are still that 25% of gamers who prefer the higher fidelity.

I seem to remember team Green making this statement though

 

[Pedro Motta]

Not providing locked 60FPS with fidelity style graphics is a complete failure on the marketing of this machine.

As that alone, it has failed.

Good to see more people complaining about the lack of drive and stand.

Basically, this guy does not recommend it to anyone with its current offerings.

 

[AW_CL]

I can’t remember a console ever causing this much salt, aggression, and hate.

 

[Bojji]

I can’t remember a console ever causing this much salt, aggression, and hate.

Series S. Still sucks...

 

[FrankWza]

Series S. Still sucks...

Again though, that anchored a generation. We knew it then and we know it today. If you're on this enthusiast site and your outlook on the Pro is negative you should not have had a positive outlook when it came to the s. If you did you obviously have a bias.

 

[Topher]

You're going to upset Topher with this post. Don't say anything against Sony and lord Cerny. Even if the majority of the internet/customers seem to agree with your opinion.

Nah....I respect ReBurn and his takes. He isn't trying to push silly narratives that performance mode means "minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings".

I too fell for the video, where I am sure Cerny implied that games would target as close to 60FPS as possible with fidelity graphics, but I have been told I am wrong.

You went from "locked 60fps" to "minimum 60 to 120 FPS" to "as close to 60FPS as possible". lol

 

[HogIsland]

Series S. Still sucks...

but xbox sucks as a whole. playstation is generally very good and ps5 pro is bad for playstation.

 

[Bojji]

Again though, that anchored a generation. We knew it then and we know it today. If you're on this enthusiast site and your outlook on the Pro is negative you should not have had a positive outlook when it came to the s. If you did you obviously have a bias.

Ohhh, I hate this thing with a passion. You can find my old posts.

Series S will still hold back this gen in 2028 (and cross gen later?), while Pro is just better version of PS5.

but xbox sucks as a whole. playstation is generally very good and ps5 pro is bad for playstation.

Series X is a very good console from hardware perspective. MS fucked it up when it comes to games, market appeal etc.

 

[BlackTron]

It seems to be worth $700 plus misc costs to enough people, so their asking price is valid. Demand for a souped up game console that doesn't leave so much on the table vs a PC is very real. And there's no other option, because MS didn't even show up this time, they already locked in a two-tier system and it was the wrong one. Not sure how they would have a Series XX that still puts it on devs to make X and S version, come on. They're already straining with these requirements.

 

[kaizenkko]

That isn't realistic. Base price is $500 with the drive. The 2TB upgrade alone would push the price to $600. They are not going to give you the other upgrades for free, nor should they. As I've said before, I think the price without the disc should have been $600 but with 1 TB rather than 2TB. But yes, the fact there is no competition in this space is probably what allowed Sony to force the 2TB and the extra $100 price hike that came with it.

I'm sure that Sony could sell this console for at least $600, with 1TB SSD and the disc drive. It's basically the same specs than base PS5, except for the GPU. At this point they should be capable of reduction production costs.

But they don't need to think about price that much, because if you like consoles and want to play in the best possible quality on these machines, there's no other option besides PS5 Pro.

 

[HogIsland]

Series X is a very good console from hardware perspective. MS fucked it up when it comes to games, market appeal etc.

xbox is a cursed platform since 2013

 

[DenchDeckard]

Nah....I respect ReBurn and his takes. He isn't trying to push silly narratives that performance mode means "minimum 60 to 120 FPS with high settings".



You went from "locked 60fps" to "minimum 60 to 120 FPS" to "as close to 60FPS as possible". lol

FFS dude, no I didnt. I said that if you/I asked 100 people what they thought a performance mode was, that most of them would say 60 to 120FPS on consoles.

Would you consider a 120FPS mode in a console game a performance mode or do you want some special label for it like ULTRA performance mode?....lap it up console gamers a new buzz word

At least read what I am actually saying before you attack me.

If this console sells well, I'll eat crow. But, I do not want to see "What did Sony expect selling this for £700 with no disk drive" if any reports of lacklustre sales come out.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

I'm sure that Sony could sell this console for at least $600, with 1TB SSD and the disc drive. It's basically the same specs than base PS5, except for the GPU. At this point they should be capable of reduction production costs.

But they don't need to think about price that much, because if you like console and want to play in the best possible quality on these machines, there's no other option besides PS5 Pro.

Which they likely would have done if they were trying to sell to the masses

 

[FrankWza]

I'm sure that Sony could sell this console for at least $600, with 1TB SSD and the disc drive. It's basically the same specs than base PS5, except for the GPU. At this point they should be capable of reduction production costs.

But they don't need to think about price that much, because if you like consoles and want to play in the best possible quality on these machines, there's no other option besides PS5 Pro.

At this price it would be sold out and on reseller sites selling for current retail with a disc drive.

 

[ReBurn]

To be clear, Cerny never said 60fps was the "minimum performance target". Cerny characterized performance in terms of what it currently is on PS5 which is simply "targets" 60fps. Obviously Sony is giving devs a lot of freedom with that which means they can still improve fidelity further than what is available on PS5 rather than just combine performance and fidelity like what Cerny talked about. I really don't have a problem with that as there are still that 25% of gamers who prefer the higher fidelity.

I didn't say Cerny said it was the minimum performance target. He said their intention was to give gamers the higher frame rates they prefer after he kind of threw the base PS5 under the bus for being choppy at 30 FPS. It wasn't a criticism of the PS5 Pro or Sony. At the end of the day developers still have a power budget and they're going to use it the way they use it. Not all developers are going to do the best they can on it.

For myself, all I really want from PS5 Pro is 60 FPS most of the time with good AI up scaling and I think I'll get it eventually. The thing only just released. In time, when developers are building for it alongside base PS5, I think we're going to see some really nice games on it.

 

[analog_future]

Series S. Still sucks...

Series S: "Too slow and cheap! Fuck Xbox!"

PS5 Pro: "Too fast and expensive! Fuck Playstation!"


aka gamers are a bunch of whiny twats

 

[Topher]

FFS dude, no I didnt. I said that if you/I asked 100 people what they thought a performance mode was, that most of them would say 60 to 120FPS on consoles.

That's a bullshit expectation that I have yet to see anyone suggest is what they would get with PS5 Pro. If you didn't even believe that was the expectation then why would you think anyone else would?

I didn't say Cerny said it was the minimum performance target. He said their intention was to give gamers the higher frame rates they prefer after he kind of threw the base PS5 under the bus for being choppy at 30 FPS. It wasn't a criticism of the PS5 Pro or Sony. At the end of the day developers still have a power budget and they're going to use it the way they use it. Not all developers are going to do that.

For myself, all I really want from PS5 Pro is 60 FPS most of the time with good AI up scaling and I think I'll get it eventually. The thing only just released. In time, when developers are building for it alongside base PS5, I think we're going to see some really nice games on it.

That's what I want as well. I'm encouraged by what I've already seen frankly. For all its ills, Dragon Age Veilguard is a damn good looking game on Pro and the framerate is rock solid.

 

[Humdinger]

I can’t remember a console ever causing this much salt, aggression, and hate.

You new here? ;p

 

[Bojji]

Series S: "Too slow and cheap! Fuck Xbox!"

PS5 Pro: "Too fast and expensive! Fuck Playstation!"


aka gamers are a bunch of whiny twats

SS - too expensive for what it offers and fix entire generation into 8GB of RAM limit
PS5P - too expensive for what it offers. Power jump is smaller than what it should have been.

Regular disc PS5 is the sweet spot this gen when it comes to price, power and features (disc drive - so 1994!).

 

[Three]

Worth $700? Of course not. The right price would be $550~600 WITH the disc drive. But that's what happens when you have no competition.

The "competition" that had a 2TB XSX for $600 and you think the PS5 Pro should be $50 cheaper with its better GPU, Wifi 7, more RAM, etc?

If "competition" was so effective the xbox would be offering a cheaper 2TB XSX to undercut regular PS5 yet it's charging those prices.

 

[kaizenkko]

The "competition" that had a 2TB XSX for $600 and you think the PS5 Pro should be $50 cheaper with its better GPU, Wifi 7, more RAM, etc?

If "competition" was so effective the xbox would be offering a cheaper 2TB XSX to undercut regular PS5 yet it's charging those prices.

It's clear that at this point Microsoft is not even trying. zzzz

 

[Rush2112]

I would only recommend this to someone who is a massive Sony exclusive fanboy and goes on reddit talking about spiderman 2, Gow: ragnarok, horizon and TLOU. That guy would love this system. To a real gamer, no I wouldn’t.

 

[Mayar]

So, has the winner been revealed or is it too early? =)
But seriously, without jokes, I understand that for many this concept will be wild.

1) If you want, buy
2) If you don't want, don't buy

The main thing is that the purchase brings joy and not regret.
And yes, the price is very wild for a number of countries, considering the domestic earnings.

For example, my brother bought it for himself, but I won't buy it for myself, although I can, but I have a reason that will greatly puzzle half of the neogaf, so I won't voice it =)))

The only thing that confuses me in all this is exactly one moment, this is how the market works, if Sony likes the result, which will show PRO. Then most likely next time they will ask for 900, since according to the rules of the market, you need to feel out the consumer demand framework.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Seems the tl;dr that most are saying is that it's worth it if you game a lot. But if you're more casual and you're happy with the base PS5, it's a skip.

Sounds fine to me - the PS5 Pro is aimed at the hardcore gamer, not someone who turns it on to play games a couple of times a week.

So not for people not addicted to gaming? What about people that don't often game but would like good IQ? Chances are non-hardcore gamers can afford the nice TV to play these games on.

 

[violence]

I’m waiting on the PS6

 

[Mister Wolf]

After more people see how awful Wilds runs on PS5 they will want a Pro.

 

[Mayar]

After more people see how awful Wilds runs on PS5 they will want a Pro.

This is a very bad example, I'll tell you right away, it will work extremely badly everywhere because of Capcom's unwillingness to change the engine, which can't work with open spaces. Neither PRO nor PC will save you here, everyone will suffer.

 

[DenchDeckard]

That's a bullshit expectation that I have yet to see anyone suggest is what they would get with PS5 Pro. If you didn't even believe that was the expectation then why would you think anyone else would?



That's what I want as well. I'm encouraged by what I've already seen frankly. For all its ills, Dragon Age Veilguard is a damn good looking game on Pro and the framerate is rock solid.

I don't want to argue with you at all. Cerny mentions 60fps multiple times. I think it's a shame that the end user is supposed to take that as anything less than 60 fps.

I guess vrr displays are pretty much a must have for your 700 pound console now?

Poor Ricky

 

[Pedro Motta]

I don't want to argue with you at all. Cerny mentions 60fps multiple times. I think it's a shame that the end user is supposed to take that as anything less than 60 fps.

I guess vrr displays are pretty much a must have for your 700 pound console now?

Poor Ricky

Has any first party game failed to deliver 60 fps at fidelity (or close to) settings?

 

[Mister Wolf]

This is a very bad example, I'll tell you right away, it will work extremely badly everywhere because of Capcom's unwillingness to change the engine, which can't work with open spaces. Neither PRO nor PC will save you here, everyone will suffer.

Sure. But it will look and run a lot worse on PS5. The Beta ran fine on PC for me.

 

[Pedro Motta]

Sure. But it will look and run a lot worse on PS5.

It will look and run a lot worse on Series S. PS5 has the 40 fps mode that IMO is great for a base console.

 

[Topher]

I don't want to argue with you at all. Cerny mentions 60fps multiple times. I think it's a shame that the end user is supposed to take that as anything less than 60 fps.

Cerny describes "performance mode" as the same as it has been described all gen long as "targeting" 60fps. If anyone takes that as minimum 60fps then they are simply uninformed.

I guess vrr displays are pretty much a must have for your 700 pound console now?

Poor Ricky

What are you yapping about now?

 

[Mister Wolf]

It will look and run a lot worse on Series S. PS5 has the 40 fps mode that IMO is great for a base console.

Who told you Wilds had a 40fps mode?