Support NeoGAF

[Darklor01]

And this right here is why mid gen refreshes are dumb. I want confirmation that it's a one off and Sony won't release a ps5 pro or else I refuse to buy a ps5.

I agree that I don't like mod-gen refresh, however, I've seen many speculative articles pointing as to why Sony created the Pro. Pretty much a boost in power for their VR and kind of as a 4K pitch towards their TVs. They don't have something like that as part of their next gen plan as of yet that anyone of us knows of.

Microsoft, I'm not sure why they didn't wait until the jump to Ryzen. I think that's a mistake, but, they will still move units. I'm buying one, I'm sure others will too.

On topic: PS5 will still be far behind what PCs can do because of the need to keep consumer costs down to what the market will bare. I think holiday 2020, $500, as powerful of a machine as that will buy.

 

[FleckSplat]

Doing the math, two half steps since PS4 = a full step?

5-4 = 1

Just checking.

 

[Polygonal_Sprite]

I'm way behind. Is a PS4 Pro+ in development been leaked or hinted at by an insider or is it just speculation?

Thanks.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I'm way behind. Is a PS4 Pro+ in development been leaked or hinted at by an insider or is it just speculation?

Thanks.

No. By 2019/2020 there will be a full blown PS5.

 

[Polygonal_Sprite]

No. By 2019/2020 there will be a full blown PS5.

I see. Thanks.

 

[onQ123]

And this right here is why mid gen refreshes are dumb. I want confirmation that it's a one off and Sony won't release a ps5 pro or else I refuse to buy a ps5.

Actually mid gen refreshes is a lot smarter than jumping to a new generation.

 

[jackal27]

Ugh. Really hoping this isn't true, because I am not down. Especially when they're no doubt charging the same price that full console generation upgrade would cost.

Obligatory how many flops?

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Ugh. Really hoping this isn't true, because I am not down. Especially when they're no doubt charging the same price that full console generation upgrade would cost.

Obligatory how many flops?

There isnt going to be a big mark up if thats what you're worried about. They're going to use the best parts they can for a $399-$499 console.

 

[jackal27]

There isnt going to be a big mark up if thats what you're worried about. They're going to use the best parts they can for a $399-$499 console.

How is $399-$499 not the price of a full generation upgrade? That's a ton of money for half step in my opinion.

 

[Colbert]

Very interesting to me with the PS4 Pro out for just 7 months people are start talking about a PS5 out of the sudden. This includes non-tech savvy Michael "I need attention" Pachter. There will be PS5 no doubt, it will have those 8TF Cerny said would needed to support 4K and it will not have HBM in any form. I doubt Ryzen cores until AMD manages to reduce the die size for each core and we have mature node process at 7nm. If we look into the roadmaps say goodbye to a release before 2020 even that seems to me a little bit early if I think Sony is eager to offer us a new console at again $399. (Assuming ryzen cores, if they go Jaguar again which I doubt release could be 2019)

Spoiler

if sony is really that big fan of no bc gen consoles they even could change to the competition with Intel and Nvidia and still be x86.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

How is $399-$499 not the price of a full generation upgrade? That's a ton of money for half step in my opinion.

Because it will be compare to PS4 and not PS4 Pro .

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

How is $399-$499 not the price of a full generation upgrade? That's a ton of money for half step in my opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjjRdrVAHCQ&feature=youtu.be Watch this video and look at how big of a difference a new CPU alone would make.

 

[onQ123]

Very interesting to me with the PS4 Pro out for just 7 months people are start talking about a PS5 out of the sudden. This includes non-tech savvy Michael "I need attention" Pachter. There will be PS5 no doubt, it will have those 8TF Cerny said would needed to support 4K and it will not have HBM in any form. I even doubt Ryzen cores unless AMD manages to reduce the die size for each core and we have mature node process at 7nm. If we look into the roadmaps say goodbye to a release before 2020 even that seems to me a little bit early if I think Sony is eager to offer us a new console at again $399. (Assuming ryzen cores, if they go Jaguar again which I doubt release could be 2019)

At some point it will become more beneficial to just go with the newer tech (Ryzen) than to keep making the older tech (Jaguar ) even if it's not as cheap at the moment.

 

[Qassim]

Yes, its a design decision taken with severely limited CPU power that impacts frame rate, AI and open world game design heavily.

I recall Naughty Dog taking the design decision to make UC4 60 FPS, I remember their comments, and they had to go back to 30.

Destiny 2 is 30 FPS due to CPU on consoles. I dont know why devs even have to defend 30 due to jaguar.

Yes it is a hardware problem. All those games on console run at 60 on PC.

We are done here.

It's kind of both. They could make a PS4 pro pro with 16tf gpu and it
Still couldn't run most PS4 games at 60 if it had Jaguar.

What is being done now is entirely irrelevant. As has always been the case in all of console gaming history, you give developers more powerful hardware - some will use it for higher framerate, others will use it for other things at the same framerate.

60fps standard won't happen on PS5 without Sony mandating it simply because many developers will not see 60fps being a useful use of the resources, and will design their games for 30fps, making use of those resources in other ways. As has always been the case.

The only way 60fps will become standard is either:

A) Mandating by the platform holder
B) A new technology requiring 60fps minimum for a good experience. e.g. a new display technology, but there's nothing on the horizon in that regard.

60fps could be standard right now on the PS4 if Sony mandated it, developers would just design different games. it's primarily not a hardware problem.

 

[truth411]

Yeah but PS5 won't be a Premium product aimed at just the core gamer, it will be a mass market product with the goal of selling lots of units, something which $499 limits them in sales.

$399 will just sell much better and can still be a good step forward over PS4 Pro / Xbox One X and a massive leap over base PS4 / Xbox One, which all current games are tied too / held back by and that won't be an issue for PS5, as games will be specifically designed for it.

The GPU will likely be around 10 Tflop (maybe more) which absolutely blows the PS4 / Xbox One away and that is still a good step up over Xbox One X aswell. People are already going crazy with Xbox One X's advantage over the Pro with a 1.8 Tflop difference, so a 4 Tflop+ advantage and a better CPU would still be a big step up.

If you considered $399 a great price point back in 2005 for the 360, then $499 will be fine in 2020. They will sell everyone they can make if the performance and hype is there.

Heck $599 might be OK in 2028/2029 for the PS6.

 

[Colbert]

What is being done now is entirely irrelevant. As has always been the case in all of console gaming history, you give developers more powerful hardware - some will use it for higher framerate, others will use it for other things at the same framerate.

60fps standard won't happen on PS5 without Sony mandating it simply because many developers will not see 60fps being a useful use of the resources, and will design their games for 30fps, making use of those resources in other ways. As has always been the case.

The only way 60fps will become standard is either:

A) Mandating by the platform holder
B) A new technology requiring 60fps minimum for a good experience. e.g. a new display technology, but there's nothing on the horizon in that regard.

60fps could be standard right now on the PS4 if Sony mandated it, developers would just design different games. it's primarily not a hardware problem.

I totally agree and doubt any platform holder would do A). If somebody is really into 60fps gaming (or more) I would recommend to play on a beefy PC anyway.

 

[Tal]

VR kind of fits the criteria for B, although obviously it's nowhere near popular enough at this point to drive all games to 60. But I really think it's going to be the main driver of increasing resolution and framerates ten years from now.

 

[Shin]

Don't forget that the console will ship with HDMI 2.1 most likely which brings variable refresh rate, 30/60FPS wouldn't be the only option devs have anymore.
It's always funny to me seeing others trying to shut others down in every PS5 thread, there's a interest in this topic if you're not interested in it why even reply?

 

[RoboPlato]

What is being done now is entirely irrelevant. As has always been the case in all of console gaming history, you give developers more powerful hardware - some will use it for higher framerate, others will use it for other things at the same framerate.

60fps standard won't happen on PS5 without Sony mandating it simply because many developers will not see 60fps being a useful use of the resources, and will design their games for 30fps, making use of those resources in other ways. As has always been the case.

The only way 60fps will become standard is either:

A) Mandating by the platform holder
B) A new technology requiring 60fps minimum for a good experience. e.g. a new display technology, but there's nothing on the horizon in that regard.

60fps could be standard right now on the PS4 if Sony mandated it, developers would just design different games. it's primarily not a hardware problem.

The only thing that Sony could do that would be proactive and unrestrictive is have their WWS focus on 60fps so that people start accepting it as commonplace on their platform.

 

[Giant Panda]

The only thing that Sony could do that would be proactive and unrestrictive is have their WWS focus on 60fps so that people start accepting it as commonplace on their platform.

Eventually, visuals will look so good that diminishing returns will take complete hold and devs would see no return to targeting 30fps. Then higher frame rates would become standard.

 

[RoboPlato]

Eventually, visuals will look so good that diminishing returns will take complete hold and devs would see no return to targeting 30fps. Then higher frame rates would become standard.

The Uncharted 4 60fps teaser is a good look into what I think we could see next gen. I actually really like the point we're at in terms of real time rendering. Making some refinements to that at a solid 4k solution at 60fps would be more than OK with me.

 

[Darklor01]

I don't think $600 is happening for the price of the next system. I don't think the market will bare that price. They won't make systems people aren't going to buy due to price constraints. I look at the reactions to the XBOX One X price initially as an example.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I think consumers would embrace $499 for an authentic leap.

I think a lot of Xbox One X reactions were due to an expensive mid gen refresh.

I just don't see 399 being viable for yet another gen, and there's enough pent up demand from the hardcore who will buy at that price.

I also don't think 2019 is realistic, and honestly there's no reason to launch that early given their lineup. I doubt they'd have authentic PS5 exclusives ready by then.

They should launch with Guerrilla Games and a Horizon sequel, which should take more than three years of development.

 

[Darklor01]

I think consumers would embrace $499 for an authentic leap.

I think a lot of Xbox One X reactions were due to an expensive mid gen refresh.

I just don't see 399 being viable for yet another gen, and there's enough pent up demand from the hardcore who will buy at that price.

I also don't think 2019 is realistic, and honestly there's no reason to launch that early given their lineup. I doubt they'd have authentic PS5 exclusives ready by then.

They should launch with Guerrilla Games and a Horizon sequel, which should take more than three years of development.

Holiday 2020 buddy, maybe holiday 2021 $499.99.

 

[Shin]

Just to give some insight of how much progress has been made since the launch of PS4 in 2013.

4 node shrinks: 28nm > 14nm > 7nm > 5nm
7 APU generations further (Jaguar > Ryzen)
2 to 3 memory architecture later: (GDDR5 > GDDR5x > GDDR6 / HBM/HBM2/HBM3/LCHBM)
6 to 7 GPU architecture improvements (HD 7850 all the way to Navi+)

On top of that the amount of memory that will come with the system, the bandwidth and most likely larger bus.
That's a big change from current generation, not sure what else people want or why some want to wait till 2023.

 

[Theonik]

I think 2020 is a good place for people to expect next gen. There won't be much to upgrade to that gives a good enough bump on a console form-factor at market friendly cost.
There is still also a lot of money to be made in the PS4 ecosystem to switch.

 

[RoboPlato]

I think consumers would embrace $499 for an authentic leap.

I think a lot of Xbox One X reactions were due to an expensive mid gen refresh.

I just don't see 399 being viable for yet another gen, and there's enough pent up demand from the hardcore who will buy at that price.

I also don't think 2019 is realistic, and honestly there's no reason to launch that early given their lineup. I doubt they'd have authentic PS5 exclusives ready by then.

They should launch with Guerrilla Games and a Horizon sequel, which should take more than three years of development.

I think they could do $499 in 2019 with essentially Remastered versions of the 2019 lineup at launch through the cross gen period and then drop to $399 once PS5 exclusive development kicks up.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I think they could do $499 in 2019 with essentially Remastered versions of the 2019 lineup at launch through the cross gen period and then drop to $399 once PS5 exclusive development kicks up.

In my view it's a mistake to launch a console and rely on cross gen ports for nearly a year. They need something like Horizon built from the ground up to show off what PS5 can do.

Just wait an extra year and get more tech for a better leap.

There's zero chance or risk of MS beating them to next gen, and I don't think there's much benefit to beating them to the punch.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

Jaguar

 

[RoboPlato]

In my view it's a mistake to launch a console and rely on cross gen ports for nearly a year. They need something like Horizon built from the ground up to show off what PS5 can do.

Just wait an extra year and get more tech for a better leap.

There's zero chance or risk of MS beating them to next gen, and I don't think there's much benefit to beating them to the punch.

Normally I would agree but when those games are stuff like TLoU 2 and Death Stranding, you'll get a lot more mileage out of that approach.

I'm just spitballing ideas too, not thinking that'll be their approach for sure.

 

[Hermii]

In my view it's a mistake to launch a console and rely on cross gen ports for nearly a year. They need something like Horizon built from the ground up to show off what PS5 can do.

Just wait an extra year and get more tech for a better leap.

There's zero chance or risk of MS beating them to next gen, and I don't think there's much benefit to beating them to the punch.

Since they're both most likely will rely on amd apu tech they will both be similar spec wise. If one is launching later it means they will have access to better tech,

Also developing something like horizon with unfinished tools, constantly changing devkits and pressure to have the game done by release date is next to impossible. There is a reason launch games are generally not very good.

 

[The Hamburglar]

Actually mid gen refreshes is a lot smarter than jumping to a new generation.

For who exactly? Certainly not the consumer.

Can you back up your theory instead of making bold claims without a reason.

 

[Herp Derpington]

For who exactly? Certainly not the consumer.

Can you back up your theory instead of making bold claims without a reason.

Allows quicker reactions to tech changes. Offers a step up option to justify a higher msrp. Creates choice. His answer seems more in line with reason than yours. Why do you believe the consumer doesn't benefit?

 

[Panajev2001a]

Allows quicker reactions to tech changes.

... which few developer will take advantage of as the user base is too small. Not being able to make and market exclusive software for it also reduces the ROI for big changes.

Offers a step up option to justify a higher msrp.

It sure beats consoles dropping in price quickly ... I think people wanted to know consumer benefits, justifying higher profit margins instead of being forced to lower the Console price is technically not a clear consumer benefit .

Creates choice.

... I guess... a console a day keeps the doctor away?

His answer seems more in line with reason than yours. Why do you believe the consumer doesn't benefit?

I see benefits for the corporation keeping the customer locked in and offering less and less actual benefit for the shiny new toy as the frequency of release / time between iterations shortens...

 

[leeh]

For who exactly? Certainly not the consumer.

Can you back up your theory instead of making bold claims without a reason.

Certainly not the consumer? Dont speak for us all.

The mid-gen refreshes are great. As someone who hasn't owned a big PC rig in years but still likes the latest and greatest, I love the idea of refreshes.

If the consumers didn't want them, there wouldn't be a market for them.

 

[Dboss2289]

These mid-generation consoles are like the S iterations of iPhone to me. If you dont have an Xbox One/PS4 and have the money the X/Pro isnt not a bad buy, but if you have one already, just hold out for the next one for the full step benefits.

 

[onQ123]

For who exactly? Certainly not the consumer.

Can you back up your theory instead of making bold claims without a reason.

For the industry: Devs get better hardware to push their games on while being able to sell that game to a large install base to make there money back. consumers get new hardware & don't have to suffer through the new console launch drought.

 

[sono]

Assuming he is right, I am not sure I follow how all these playstation releases will go down with developers and consumers

Well broken clocks and all that.

I miss those days of the PS3 too.

+10 year lifecycle

 

[autoduelist]

I'm way behind. Is a PS4 Pro+ in development been leaked or hinted at by an insider or is it just speculation?

Thanks.

No. By 2019/2020 there will be a full blown PS5.

While Arkham is correct we're all talking about a PS5, not a PS4 Pro+, he only half answered your question. The more important part is that this is all speculation, including his response to you.

Assuming he is right, I am not sure I follow how all these playstation releases will go down with developers and consumers

I miss those days of the PS3 too.

+10 year lifecycle

This is why I think many here are being overly optimistic about release dates. People are letting their own opinions of when they -want- a new console sway their opinion on when we'll get a new gen. But of course gaming enthusiasts on a forum are likely to be early adopters and want a new gen sooner - Sony needs to carefully weigh the full spectrum of buyers, most of whom buy in mid-late into a gen.

I've lived through a video game crash when the market got oversaturated and overextended, and I'd like to avoid seeing that happen again. I think $50 a year is about what people want to spend for their console [be it full price early on, or after a price drop]. I'm admittedly pulling that number out of my ass, but I know there -is- a number that is the sweet spot and it can't be too much higher based on what we do know of console prices points and sales history. More importantly, I'm sure Sony has researched that number to the best of their ability.

An 8 year cycle is about as close as I think they can cut it, though I realize that's an unpopular opinion around here where some seem to want 3-5 year gens. Maybe they think they can shave it down to 7 years [I find 6 extremely unlikely] but if gens get to close together, people will opt out. It's a luxury hobby, sure, but people still have budgets and families.

 

[Tyraniboah]

I think consumers would embrace $499 for an authentic leap.

I think a lot of Xbox One X reactions were due to an expensive mid gen refresh.

I just don't see 399 being viable for yet another gen, and there's enough pent up demand from the hardcore who will buy at that price.

I also don't think 2019 is realistic, and honestly there's no reason to launch that early given their lineup. I doubt they'd have authentic PS5 exclusives ready by then.

They should launch with Guerrilla Games and a Horizon sequel, which should take more than three years of development.

No way the next PlayStation launches above $399. Enough hardcore gamers might bite at $499, but they'd be pricing themselves out of the casual/CoD demographics for certain if Microsoft launches at $399. PS4 is not selling at the rate it is because of the hardcore fans and Sony would do well to remember this if anyone there thinks launching at $499 is a good idea.

Agreed that a launch isn't happening before 2020 though. Games take too long to develop now and nothing good would be ready for a 2019 launch. No sense in rushing the hardware out when the PS4 is still selling well and when the upcoming lineup is as good as it is.

 

[jdstorm]

No way the next PlayStation launches above $399. Enough hardcore gamers might bite at $499, but they'd be pricing themselves out of the casual/CoD demographics for certain if Microsoft launches at $399. PS4 is not selling at the rate it is because of the hardcore fans and Sony would do well to remember this if anyone there thinks launching at $499 is a good idea.

Agreed that a launch isn't happening before 2020 though. Games take too long to develop now and nothing good would be ready for a 2019 launch. No sense in rushing the hardware out when the PS4 is still selling well and when the upcoming lineup is as good as it is.

The Last of Us part 2 and Succer Punch's next project would be ready. Thrown in Kingdom Hearts 3, Shadow of the Collosus remastered alongside the best versions of this generations best games (COD, FIFA, Assasins Creed ect) and thats a pretty compelling first year for enthusiest consumers.

Especially if the Dualshock 5 is actually good.

Edit: Anthem is also likely to be released then and after seeing bungie struggle to support next gen platforms might be inclined to just support next gen consoles.

 

[Renekton]

No way the next PlayStation launches above $399. Enough hardcore gamers might bite at $499, but they'd be pricing themselves out of the casual/CoD demographics for certain if Microsoft launches at $399.

Do casuals even year-one a new console anyways? They may join in only a couple years later, as shown by COD's prolonged PS360 support.

Might as well launch $499 and let the enthusiasts absorb it.

 

[The Hamburglar]

For the industry: Devs get better hardware to push their games on while being able to sell that game to a large install base to make there money back. consumers get new hardware & don't have to suffer through the new console launch drought.

Jumping from PS3 to PS4 was a big difference. Jumping from PS4 to pro isn't. Yet they charge the same if not more for the pro console at release.

lol devs get better hardware to push their games. No they don't as they have to cater to the base unit.

Talking about games. We haven't even had a current gen GTA yet. Can't imagine a whole gen without a single GTA.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

No way the next PlayStation launches above $399. Enough hardcore gamers might bite at $499, but they'd be pricing themselves out of the casual/CoD demographics for certain if Microsoft launches at $399. PS4 is not selling at the rate it is because of the hardcore fans and Sony would do well to remember this if anyone there thinks launching at $499 is a good idea.

Agreed that a launch isn't happening before 2020 though. Games take too long to develop now and nothing good would be ready for a 2019 launch. No sense in rushing the hardware out when the PS4 is still selling well and when the upcoming lineup is as good as it is.

Let's look back at history and see how long certain prices stick. $199 became $299 became $399

Most of these prices only stuck around for 1-2 gens tops. $399 has been a thing since the 360 days (discounting the cheapo model without the HDD).

Inflation does creep in to consumer prices, even if tech handles it differently. By 2020 I don't think $499 will be taboo. That's only a 25% increase over $399.

$399 in 2005 = $499 in 2017 just due to inflation.

 

[autoduelist]

Do casuals even year-one a new console anyways? They may join in only a couple years later, as shown by COD's prolonged PS360 support.

Might as well launch $499 and let the enthusiasts absorb it.

It's a bit more complicated that that.

You're right that 'casuals' don't year 1. They generally year 3 through 5, or even 3 through 6. But this does not mean you can necessarily rely on the enthusiasts - the PS3 is proof of that. You want the console to establish a footing quickly and strongly. The PS3 survived and ended up thriving because Sony successfully [and to many, surprisingly] overcame those early hurdles caused by a poor launch.

$600 taught Sony a lesson, and even $500 likely taught MS a lesson. On the flip side, the success the PS4 had at $400 also taught both quite a different lesson. I doubt we'll see a $500 console, though of course, anything can happen.

[Edit- but of course, as stated above, there is inflation to think about. however, a 25% jump gen to gen is still high]

 

[Matt]

$499 is certainly possible. There is going to be a more gradual changeover in gens next time around, and not exploding out of the gates will be less of a concern.

Nothing is fixed yet though.

 

[Tal]

499 would only work if both companies go for it. Otherwise the cheaper one will quickly become the market leader.

 

[onQ123]

Jumping from PS3 to PS4 was a big difference. Jumping from PS4 to pro isn't. Yet they charge the same if not more for the pro console at release.

lol devs get better hardware to push their games. No they don't as they have to cater to the base unit.

Talking about games. We haven't even had a current gen GTA yet. Can't imagine a whole gen without a single GTA.

PS4 came out 7 years after PS3 while PS4 Pro came out 3 years after PS4 & it costed the same price as the PS4 some people paid $399 for a PS4 less than a year before PS4 Pro was released.


Your last 2 comments didn't really make sense to me why are you arguing fact with "lol they have to cater to base unit?" they still get to push the games to higher resolutions & better performance. The GTA comment I don't even ...

 

[Tyraniboah]

Do casuals even year-one a new console anyways? They may join in only a couple years later, as shown by COD's prolonged PS360 support.

Might as well launch $499 and let the enthusiasts absorb it.

Hardcore gamers aren't carrying any console for two years and a $100 price drop isn't happening after one year unless the PS5 flops out of the gate. I'm not sure I've seen a recent successful console launch at $499. Xbox One is still trying to recover and the PS3 spent way too long coming back. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but I just don't see a $499 launch. Especially not if the console launches in 2020 or 2021, which I believe is more likely than 18/19.

 

[anothertech]

Holiday 2020 buddy, maybe holiday 2021 $499.99.

Holiday 2019 at $499 is my guess.