-
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.
500 USD PS4 that was even more powerful. Would that be better?
- Thread starter Exploratory
- Start date
AHA-Lambda
Member
We've had this topic before, and no it wouldn't the PS4 would then just be in the situation the XB1 was in. How is that better?
BloodMoney
Banned
We should just be able to daisy chain them together for 2x, 3x, 4x, the power... they do look totally boss whilst stacked.
edit: I would definitely have spent another hundo for a better GPU & CPU.
edit: I would definitely have spent another hundo for a better GPU & CPU.
We have a winner.
Yes, I definitely would.
I think 500 USD is still a commpetitive price, and it would be a significant performance bump. Seeing what devs can do with a 400 machine, think about a 500 one. God...
SmoothRunningGun
Member
No. Most realistic people are happy with it as is.
Remember the early marketing for the PS3 promising exactly this. Also, that "digital locker" shit was so dumb.
Why not? How would modular or upgraded hardware change any of this? I'm not trying to get Sony exclusives onto a PC. I'm trying to get a more powerful Playstation console while people are suggesting that I go for a PC instead.
outunderthestars
Banned
Didn't the Watch Dog devs says basically the same thing?
I would have preferred it.
But I understand why Sony didn't go that route. I don't think they'd have been as successful.
I think the CPU will limit the machine as much as anything else; I can't imagine a game like Civilization fairing well on the glorified tablet CPU of these next-gen consoles.
But I understand why Sony didn't go that route. I don't think they'd have been as successful.
I think the CPU will limit the machine as much as anything else; I can't imagine a game like Civilization fairing well on the glorified tablet CPU of these next-gen consoles.
I'd have bought it for $100 more if the specs were exactly the same, except it had 100% BC with PS1,2&3 games.
Aren't Ubisoft historically full of shit though when it comes to initial reveals?
Aren't Ubisoft historically full of shit though when it comes to initial reveals?
outunderthestars
Banned
I'd just be happy with PSN based PS1 game support.
Yes but they are not the only one. Remember killzone?
Yea I do, but I like to ignore that (and MotorStorm's) due how insanely BS that was. Only the Xbox Raven demo compares.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Yes. But up the HDD to 1tb as well!
Madrugador
Member
This. I'm already thinking about upgrading the HDD.
IAmRandom31
Banned
Another 100$ on the GPU would put it into 7990 type class yeah? It is in the 200$ range GPU power wise so that extra room could of pushed it to 300$ GPU range like a 280x or something.
Oh well what's done is done, I would have jumped on that in a heartbeat though
Oh well what's done is done, I would have jumped on that in a heartbeat though
nope, $400 was absolutely the right launch price for the PS4, and it seems sufficiently powerful.
How would it not? You said you wanted a modular console, not just a more powerful one. If all you want is a more powerful system that is $900 instead of $400, no problem. If you want the system to be modular, then things get significantly more complicated. Unless you also expect Sony to get in to the business of building their own GPU and CPU lines.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Probably.
Only gamers will jump at a more powerful machine but for the rest of the audience, the Madden, FIFA, Call of Dudebro audience, I think $399.99 was the right price.
It paid off and it worked!
I think you are generalizing people and their habits way too much.
Sony would control and sell the modules. It would not suddenly make the system a non licensed console.
And they would contract the module upgrades out to AMD just like they do the base design.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
No, because I kind of like Sony and don't want them to be forced to exit the gaming market.
Last gen was a warning about putting out a console box priced for the "This is Living" demographic.
The reality is that PCs have become much more attractive for general gaming over the last 8 years. Any mass market, well priced console device will now appear lacking to the power user, or people who simply want to know they have the best of everything.
Last gen was a warning about putting out a console box priced for the "This is Living" demographic.
The reality is that PCs have become much more attractive for general gaming over the last 8 years. Any mass market, well priced console device will now appear lacking to the power user, or people who simply want to know they have the best of everything.
You must have a pretty old computer.
It would be useless, developers aren't even using the power of what we actually got because they need to support old gen consoles and development costs going up.
Most japanese developers aren't even trying and we're waiting until 2015 to get real next gen games.
Having more powerful boxes would be useless, it would raise the price but not the quality of the games.
Still I'd put in a more powerful GPU, something like a GTX680 and a CPU with about double the power of what we got (unfortunately the CPU is really the weak element in the new systems)
Most japanese developers aren't even trying and we're waiting until 2015 to get real next gen games.
Having more powerful boxes would be useless, it would raise the price but not the quality of the games.
Still I'd put in a more powerful GPU, something like a GTX680 and a CPU with about double the power of what we got (unfortunately the CPU is really the weak element in the new systems)
sono
Member
No. Price performance is a key factor for volume sales of the platform.
The sales level of the platform means that it is credible for software houses to publish on and that is good for owners.
We are less than a year in and already some great titles and demonstrations of what this can do.
The sales level of the platform means that it is credible for software houses to publish on and that is good for owners.
We are less than a year in and already some great titles and demonstrations of what this can do.
Yeah, a $100 upgrade won't do much.
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
Nah, Sony exclusives are already 1080p and leaning towards 60fps. The only thing that could be improved is third party games and, as others have said, that's what PCs are for if you really care about what CPU and GPU are in the box.
False.
They haven't had time to take advantage of new architectures, but the basic features of the CPU/GPU are nothing new, and they'd be able to easily achieve better performance w/ extra options on with more powerful hardware.
Games that are locked at 30FPS might have been able to be released at 60FPS; games that are locked at 60FPS might have been able to have greater AA or AO or any number of other features enabled that the devs already have available to them in their engines.
Most PS4 games are on PC at this point with engines capable of doing more than the PS4 is rendering. With simply more power available and zero new features the games would get benefits at zero extra cost.
If anything it could make development cheaper, as less time would have to be spent to achieve the desired results.
Randolph Freelander
Member
No.
I'd much prefer the Xbox One and PS4 not existing as it is. PS3/360 are plenty powerful enough for me, more money on newer consoles is just a waste.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
They should have put 32 gb of ram in that shit
They could achieve 1080p/60FPS with more AA and other graphical features enabled.
1080p/60FPS is meaningless without taking into account what is being rendered. Games could be 1080p/60FPS on PS3/360 too.
Mass market adoption is more important than power, and the only thing that enables mass market adoption is a low price.
Sure, the games would look better on a theoretical $500 PS4, but there wouldn't be as many, because the install base necessary to justify said games wouldn't be present.
Also, as others have said, gaming PCs exist for people who aren't satisfied with the hardware performance of the PS4, and they can be bought at a wide range of price and performance points. That said, even early games are managing to demonstrate that there's lots of power to tap in that $400 box.
Sure, the games would look better on a theoretical $500 PS4, but there wouldn't be as many, because the install base necessary to justify said games wouldn't be present.
Also, as others have said, gaming PCs exist for people who aren't satisfied with the hardware performance of the PS4, and they can be bought at a wide range of price and performance points. That said, even early games are managing to demonstrate that there's lots of power to tap in that $400 box.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
Would it be more powerful? Sure. Would it sell worse? Most likely.
There's a reason that no such thing exists -- the licensing costs would be impossible. You see locked platforms which are proprietary, and you see modular platforms which are not proprietary, but modular platforms which are still proprietary is simply economically in feasible.Sony would end up paying AMD inordinate sums of money.
farmerboy
Member
Freeman is on the money. In 5 to 6 years we might see the ps5 and by then we'll get something with 10x the power at the same cost.
Till then, optimisations and the like will give us improvements over the next 3 years maybe the whole 5.
Markitron
Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
It's probably the most perfectly priced console, features and power wise, so I wouldn't change a thing. Tho with their track record of quality PS3 exclusives, I absolutely would have paid more for the machine
I don't understand your logic. Selling a modular device doesn't stop you from charging game license fees. Not in any way shape or form.
I don't think a modular console is a good idea; but you aren't making any sense. Just because once every 2-3 years Sony releases a GPU upgrade doesn't suddenly stop them from charging licensing fees on their closed platform.
Modular doesn't have to be infinitely expandable; small scale modular upgrades (not unlike we've seen in the past with N64 for instance) would not be economically in feasable. What is your logic? All you are doing is spouting facts with no reasoning.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Nope it's pretty great. I can't get 60fps with newer stuff anymore but a locked 30 with high settings is still no problem. My point still stands. Infamous looks better
Markitron
Is currently staging a hunger strike outside Gearbox HQ while trying to hate them to death
I would agree, the best looking game I have seen on PC was BF4 running on max settings (or close enough). Was not as impressive as infamous to me