• 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.

Would you pay an additional 100$ for a PS6

Would you pay an additional 100$ for a fully backwards compatible PS6

  • Yes

    Votes: 242 66.3%
  • No

    Votes: 111 30.4%
  • There won’t be a PS6 🤡

    Votes: 12 3.3%

  • Total voters
    365

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Idk. I will probably wait a bit. The cross gen period was more like a year because you started accruing a lot of games that were flat out better than last gen. Still technically cross gen but made the PS5 worth it. So at very least, I'm going to be motivated if games start looking shitty on PS5.

Also there is the lack of price drops. Almost better to sell your last gen one ASAP to get the most money. I was surprised a PS4 with three (very good, but old) games would get $200 so quickly.

A ps6 is hat does all that you're talking about? Sure, I guess. But the extra $100 will make me hesitate/wait more. I guess a lot of it would be if Microsoft brings the heat by then. I'll be looking $500 gpu. Mine is not going to keep up with next console gen, bit it will be alright through this one, so that would be the time.
Prices of console have held up great for a while. And that helps anyone reselling.

Series X was $600 CDN. I sold my One X to someone on Craigslist with an extra controller and a bunch of old disc games where half were already on GP all for $450. I couldnt believe it when I saw on resale sites how well PS and Xbox systems were holding up in price everywhere. And when I did the sale, it was already into 2021.
 
Last edited:

SoloCamo

Member
Sony fanboys/stans will pay anything for a PS.

I've resold a few PS5's to these idiots during covid times.

Essentially making my xbox and ps5 free of purchase.

They're the Apple fanboys of gaming.

Sounds silly. I'm a pc guy through and through but the PS5 has plenty of value especially when GPU's were (well quite frankly still are) out of control as far as pricing is concerned.
 
The console was too expensive.

In Europe, it launched at 500/600€, with months of delay, and with an half-assed BC compared to the rest of the world. Honestly, I am looking forward to Sony making the same mistakes as with PS3, as this would lead to a very entertaining generation without a doubt.

Unfortunately for you, Microsoft has a monopoly on repetitious mistakes 😉
 

Winter John

Member
Nope. As I said before I wouldn’t pay any more than 400 bucks for a console. Why? They’re subpar pcs with subpar frame rates, subpar graphics and they charge extra for a subpar online performance.
 

DJ12

Member
I would pay 100 more for a better ps5, but being able to play any playstation disc in it just doesn't appeal.

I always used to keep a few games but after the new consoled library had a couple of games I liked I never played them again.
 

Puscifer

Member
Sony fanboys/stans will pay anything for a PS.

I've resold a few PS5's to these idiots during covid times.

Essentially making my xbox and ps5 free of purchase.

They're the Apple fanboys of gaming.
I paid off medical and credit card debt and paid the rest off my old car loan during COVID, I was flipping consoles like mad for 6 months.
 

SoloCamo

Member
Nope. As I said before I wouldn’t pay any more than 400 bucks for a console. Why? They’re subpar pcs with subpar frame rates, subpar graphics and they charge extra for a subpar online performance.

I can emulate most of Sony's titles but the convenience at that price and and on one official system? Come on now. The MP experience is dead on the majority of any of those remotely old titles anyways.
 

Edgelord79

Gold Member
At that point I’m looking harder at going back to PC and staying there. $100 this year usually means $100 the next gen and so on.

Not saying no definitely, but there would be a hard pause.
 
Last edited:

Eiknarf

Banned
PlayStation 1: 1994
Six years
PlayStation 2: 2000
Six years
PlayStation 3: 2006
Seven years
PlayStation 4: 2013
Seven years
PlayStation 5: 2020

Don’t expect a PS6 until 2027 at the earliest. I say 2028.

It might be 2024 right now, but we literally just began the PS5 generation because the first three and a half years were upgraded PS4 games, remakes, remasters and people getting used to the Dualsense haptics and trigger effects.

There is zero reason to rush out a PS6 when 2023 was the first year the average person was able to walk into a store and grab one. Units were hard to get for the two years prior.

So with the trajectory of inflation the way it is today, $100 more in 2028 is what it will be
 
Last edited:

Ozzie666

Member
PlayStation 1: 1994
Six years
PlayStation 2: 2000
Six years
PlayStation 3: 2006
Seven years
PlayStation 4: 2013
Seven years
PlayStation 5: 2020

Don’t expect a PS6 until 2027 at the earliest. I say 2028.

It might be 2024 right now, but we literally just began the PS5 generation because the first three and a half years were upgraded PS4 games, remakes, remasters and people getting used to the Dualsense haptics and trigger effects.

There is zero reason to rush out a PS6 when 2023 was the first year the average person was able to walk into a store and grab one. Units were hard to get for the two years prior.

So with the trajectory of inflation the way it is today, $100 more in 2028 is what it will be

Expect the same with PS5 to PS6 transition, plenty of cross gen games, it's the only way some developers survived this generation. Big market of slow adopters around the world. Long as they stick to easy PC backwards compatiblity hardware, prepare to disappointed again. Personally, I don't care and I keep wondering why it upsets so many people. But I hope Sony studios finally release some games on PS6.
 

GymWolf

Member
I would pay 1000 dollars for a decently powerfull console that has to last for 5 to 8 years.
 
Last edited:

nkarafo

Member
Why?

So the devs can brute force more un-optimized code that gets more and more bloated as you give them more powerful hardware to work with? That's how you get games that look the same as before or worse but require twice as much VRAM or more.

Graphical generation "gaps" are getting smaller and smaller, with the last one (PS4 to PS5) being the least noticeable yet. You can't even tell the difference by comparing two pictures or even videos anymore. You have to go full Digital Foundry mode to tell which is which. Member when you could see how much better the graphics are on a next gen console by looking at crappy quality pictures in magazines?

I think the PS5 hardware is good enough for another 5 years at least, as a target platform. Emphasis on target platform. The hardware is powerful enough to handle the most realistic visuals a developer can make right now, we have reached the ceiling where hardware can make the visuals by itself, now more realistic visuals are a talent/skill and optimization issue.
 

Spyxos

Member
If it cost 600, I would definitely not buy it on day 1 anymore, I would wait for a discount and more games.
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
I don't care for PS1,2,3 back compatibility, as long as my current PS4/5 PS+ library is able to come across then I'll be buying one day 1, though tbf that's pretty much a given
 
Both of them failing would be even more entertaining.

A sadist for dead plastic. Never thought I'd see the day 🤣

Why?

So the devs can brute force more un-optimized code that gets more and more bloated as you give them more powerful hardware to work with? That's how you get games that look the same as before or worse but require twice as much VRAM or more.

Graphical generation "gaps" are getting smaller and smaller, with the last one (PS4 to PS5) being the least noticeable yet. You can't even tell the difference by comparing two pictures or even videos anymore. You have to go full Digital Foundry mode to tell which is which. Member when you could see how much better the graphics are on a next gen console by looking at crappy quality pictures in magazines?

I think the PS5 hardware is good enough for another 5 years at least, as a target platform. Emphasis on target platform. The hardware is powerful enough to handle the most realistic visuals a developer can make right now, we have reached the ceiling where hardware can make the visuals by itself, now more realistic visuals are a talent/skill and optimization issue.

Facts. Again, go look at stuff like RDR2 or TLOU Part 2. Those two games are still unmatched in many areas by games coming out today, and they were made for consoles as 'weak" as 1.84 TF and 4.2 TF, significantly less RAM bandwidth, slower HDDs, lower pixel and texture fillrates, etc. So how did they accomplish what they did?

Easy. A combination of talent, innovation, large team sizes, tons of funding money, technical support, and a shitload of dev time. I bet if they had another 3-4 years they could've gotten those games to look and run almost as well on a PS3 as they did on a PS4. So if consoles next-gen are smart about actually addressing the needs of the market, they'll realize the last thing needed are super-beefy 100 TF systems with 64 GB RAM trying to push the biggest marketing bullet point numbers around, because it'd take even the most talented devs 10+ years to make a AAA game fully exploiting the power of that type of game.

And that's assuming they don't go bankrupt in the process trying to spend $1 billion developing it with project member counts reaching 4,000.
 

KiteGr

Member
I'm currently transitioning to Steam since their plus membership increased in price and physical games are discouraged anyway.

Besides, there is a point to be made recently that the AAA games that can take advantage of a consoles full power can keep up with the ridiculous budgets required.

Perhaps the "There shouldn't be a PS6... Yet." is ironically the correct option.
 

Fbh

Member
I'd pay an extra $100 for better hardware .
I don't really care that much about Ps1 and 2 backwards compatibility (emulators on PC are good enough for me).
Ps3 compatibility would be nice but if it's between that or getting a more powerful box I'd go with the specs.

Also Ps3 backwards compatibility would only be worth it if it comes with built in enhancements. I can't think of any Ps3 games right now that I'd like to go back and play in 720p and 25fps.
 

digdug2

Member
I'd pay an extra $100 for better hardware .
I don't really care that much about Ps1 and 2 backwards compatibility (emulators on PC are good enough for me).
Ps3 compatibility would be nice but if it's between that or getting a more powerful box I'd go with the specs.

Also Ps3 backwards compatibility would only be worth it if it comes with built in enhancements. I can't think of any Ps3 games right now that I'd like to go back and play in 720p and 25fps.
The only game I miss playing on PS3 is 3D Dot Game Heroes. I really wish they'd port it for modern hardware.

Regarding the question at hand: I would consider paying an additional $100 for a PS6 in about 3.5 years, provided they don't make 80% of games nearly indistinguishable on PS5 3 years into PS6's life. I don't feel like I've even gotten my money's worth out of PS5 yet, truth be told.
 

sendit

Member
Yes. Increase that to 300+. FE, an 800 dollar console over a span of 7 years is ~11 dollars per month. If you can't afford that, stick to playing thumb wars with yourself.
 
Last edited:

cireza

Member
A sadist for dead plastic. Never thought I'd see the day 🤣
Oh yeah. We need a whip :messenger_heart:

But give it a second of thought, and admit that it would certainly be very interesting because of how much it would shake the current landscape and give opportunities for other companies :messenger_winking: And if it becomes ever more shit ? Well who cares ? Nothing of value will be lost anyway...

I am in a state where I already have everything I need in terms of video-games, and the current landscape is so boring, anything that shakes things up would be a godsend honestly.
 
Last edited:

Edgelord79

Gold Member
I think I am done with consoles and this gen will be my last one and move to PC so I don't care.
There is definitely a good argument to be made that Sonys exclusives don’t matter as much anymore if they are coming out on PC.

While Sony’s console has been really good this generation, there is still a lot of games I like that aren’t on there, but a lot of Sony’s games are on PC. It’s going to be a tough decision for me.

Plus the oldest boy prefers gaming on the PC to the console it seems.
 
Oh yeah. We need a whip :messenger_heart:

But give it a second of thought, and admit that it would certainly be very interesting because of how much it would shake the current landscape and give opportunities for other companies :messenger_winking: And if it becomes ever more shit ? Well who cares ? Nothing of value will be lost anyway...

I am in a state where I already have everything I need in terms of video-games, and the current landscape is so boring, anything that shakes things up would be a godsend honestly.

Well there's nothing stopping other companies today from jumping in, it's just I think most don't have a compelling point to addressing needs the current platforms don't already address. And it'd be very hard to know what blind spots aren't being served if you don't have actual gamers or people who actually follow the industry & hobby in the decision-making process.

I doubt there are any such people at, say, Samsung or Google, LG, whomever. Maybe at Nvidia, but they've got no game development experience (not anything beyond tech demos).
 

twilo99

Member
Would you pay $200 more for extra performance on top of the base model? Talking 120fps GTA 6

Do the poll and you will get “overwhelmingly yes”
 
You keep the price as low as possible at launch so no is my answer for the general public. But it will be comparable with ps4 forward.
 

Bigfroth

Member
I'd pay 100$ more for a PS5 PRo, Bring on the new hardware, and we'll be able to pre-order this summer for a winter release.
 

Leonidas

AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
Yes. Increase that to 300+. FE, an 800 dollar console over a span of 7 years is ~11 dollars per month. If you can't afford that, stick to playing thumb wars with yourself.
Sticking to the same hardware for 7 years would be an abysmal experience.
 

mdkirby

Gold Member
That is fully backwards compatible with PS1, PS2. PS3, PS4, and PS5.

You just insert the disc or download the game that you’ve previously purchased and you start playing.

Would you be interested in a hypothetical PS6 legacy edition that plays all your previous games whether discs or digital versions?

I would buy it in a heartbeat.
Yea tho I don’t want a disk drive. I have one on the ps5, but not by choice, only because on launch day they seemed to release 10x more with the drive, so it was the only option.
 

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
I'd pay $1000. Make it powerful, use that power wisely.
Bidding Schitts Creek GIF by CBC
Give I Want One GIF
 

jonnyp

Member
That is fully backwards compatible with PS1, PS2. PS3, PS4, and PS5.

You just insert the disc or download the game that you’ve previously purchased and you start playing.

Would you be interested in a hypothetical PS6 legacy edition that plays all your previous games whether discs or digital versions?

I would buy it in a heartbeat.

Don't give a rat's ass about BC.

I'd like to the option of buying a more powerful console.
 
If it ran all releases at 60 fps, absolutely. But being as they said the PS4 pro would play games at 4k at 60 fps and it didn't, and they said the PS5 would run 4k 60fps, and it doesnt, I don't trust a word Sony says about the power of their consoles. Its absolutely absurd that in this generation of consoles, in order to get 60fps you have to play at 1080p. But I'd pay a premium price if they could somehow actually make a console that would play current gen games at 4k 60 fps.
 
Top Bottom