Support NeoGAF

[amstradcpc]

A customer is angry that we're being forced to upgrade if we want to play games? How barbaric. I mean, c'mon, this is console gaming, not PC gaming. We, as consumers, shouldn't have to upgrade to a .5 model. Either go PS5 or go home.

Then dont upgrade and go on running the games on your PS4.

 

[Marvel]

Praying this happens, best thing ever if so.

 

[Symphonia]

Then dont upgrade and go on running the games on your PS4.

Has it been confirmed that the games developed for 4.5 will run on 4?

 

[Ivan]

So... What would be a list of obvious pros if they go this way? A few key ones.

 

[amnesiac]

I have no interest in getting a 4K TV in the next few years, so I will not buy this if the big selling point is 4K.

If there is a significant power difference and games clearly run better on the new console, then I'll consider it. For example, 30fps on PS4 vs 60fps on PS4.5.

 

[mrklaw]

One important thing to consider is that a ps4.5 should still allow you to play online with ps4 owners. So it is still growing the user base, not fragmenting it like the usual generation switch overs

 

[krang]

A customer is angry that we're being forced to upgrade if we want to play games? How barbaric. I mean, c'mon, this is console gaming, not PC gaming. We, as consumers, shouldn't have to upgrade to a .5 model. Either go PS5 or go home.

The suggestion with a .5 upgrade is that you're NOT being forced to upgrade to carry on playing. A lack of resistance to new shiny toys isn't a gun to the back of your head.

But you then say you'd be happy with a PS5 instead, which would force you to upgrade to play the latest games. Wut.

 

[Stilton Disco]

i think all three are doing this because they recognize this as the future of the industry.

And yet, if this generation has proven anything so far, it's that people really want a traditional approach to console gaming and that gimmicks and unique hardware are irrelevant.

Hell, even the fact that the PS4 is the most powerful system is irrelevant when you compare its success to the PC market, where you can get significantly more powerful hardware for well under a grand, in the same price to power range a hypothetical PS4.5 would operate, and yet the PS4 is still the leading enthusiast gaming device.

It makes sense for Nintendo and Microsoft to be trying this idea out. Because both have completely fucked up this gen so far.

But let's be realistic, and Xbox One Point One is not going to magically save the Xbox brand when all their marketing, exclusive games, dodgy deals, double speak, water muddying and a lower price haven't moved the needle, and simply having a more expensive, more powerful system won't either. Hell, worldwide, that brand is dead, it's never going to be a competitor with Playstation again.

Nintendo are worse off, because, let's be honest, short of a miracle where they blindly luck out on another cultural zeitgeist like the Wii, the NX is going to be a failure. It'll sell worse than the WiiU and 3DS, and those proposed incremental system upgrades we're all speculating about will likely drive them into the red faster, not keep them afloat. They don't want to make the traditional, third party focused home console that the market wants, and their handhelds are only going to lose more and more marketshare to iOS and Android.

There is no incentive for Sony to bother with the same desperate tactics when the new generation of GPU's and HBM are just around the corner, and they can just leverage that to make a legitimate PS5 with full backwards compatibility (thanks to it's PC like architecture) after a normal 5-6 year generation length.

This idea is not the future, it's a desperate last move by companies that are throwing as much shit at the wall as possible in the hopes enough sticks to reverse their losing streak. Microsoft are Clearly done throwing billions into the bottomless pit Xbox has been for them, and Nintendo have just flat out made themselves irrelevant through sheer pig headedness.

For the market leader to suddenly start following the actions of those it's trouncing is just insanity, and far more likely to lead to the same balls ups that it's competitors are so adept at creating.

 

[KZObsessed]

I think if MS plans to do this then Sony need to follow suit. I also don't think it's necessarily a bad thing from either company, as long as every game will always work on every system.

I'd personally upgrade to a PS4.5 on day one. Already my favourite console and if I end up getting really into VR it'll provide a better experience.

 

[kyser73]

Has it been confirmed that the games developed for 4.5 will run on 4?

Nothing - literally nothing in either the OP article or in zoetis' post - has been confirmed, verified or even mentioned sotto voce by anyone at Sony.

The thread is 50 or 100 pages of anger at a rumour.

And yes, I know that the writer and zoetis both have good track records & given the comment by the Sony exec some time ago it would add up, but at present it is all unsubstantiated rumour.

 

[Asd202]

And yet, if this generation has proven anything so far, it's that people really want a traditional approach to console gaming and that gimmicks and unique hardware are irrelevant.

Hell, even the fact that the PS4 is the most powerful system is irrelevant when you compare its success to the PC market, where you can get significantly more powerful hardware for well under a grand, in the same price to power range a hypothetical PS4.5 would operate, and yet the PS4 is still the leading enthusiast gaming device.

It makes sense for Nintendo and Microsoft to be trying this idea out. Because both have completely fucked up this gen so far.

But let's be realistic, and Xbox One Point One is not going to magically save the Xbox brand when all their marketing, exclusive games, dodgy deals, double speak, water muddying and a lower price haven't moved the needle, and simply having a more expensive, more powerful system won't either. Hell, worldwide, that brand is dead, it's never going to be a competitor with Playstation again.

Nintendo are worse off, because, let's be honest, short of a miracle where they blindly luck out on another cultural zeitgeist like the Wii, the NX is going to be a failure. It'll sell worse than the WiiU and 3DS, and those proposed incremental system upgrades we're all speculating about will likely drive them into the red faster, not keep them afloat. They don't want to make the traditional, third party focused home console that the market wants, and their handhelds are only going to lose more and more marketshare to iOS and Android.

There is no incentive for Sony to bother with the same desperate tactics when the new generation of GPU's and HBM are just around the corner, and they can just leverage that to make a legitimate PS5 with full backwards compatibility (thanks to it's PC like architecture) after a normal 5-6 year generation length.

This idea is not the future, it's a desperate last move by companies that are throwing as much shit at the wall as possible in the hopes enough sticks to reverse their losing streak. Microsoft are Clearly done throwing billions into the bottomless pit Xbox has been for them, and Nintendo have just flat out made themselves irrelevant through sheer pig headedness.

For the market leader to suddenly start following the actions of those it's trouncing is just insanity, and far more likely to lead to the same balls ups that it's competitors are so adept at creating.

Well Sony sees it as a chance to solidify them as the market leader. Whether there are right or wrong remains to be seen.

 

[mrklaw]

Hey, I don't care who you are but this better not happen this year. Fall 2017 the earliest. I'll blame you if this happens this year (or doesn't happen at all).

This year is the weird bit. I like my tech and I have a launch ps4 (actually I don't, i swapped it for a white one). But if there was an improved model I'd want it *improved* - a noticeable benefit to get me interested to buy it, and to differentiate from the usual mid-generation cosmetic refresh/cost reduction.

A Fall 2017 refresh should have access to relatively mature 16 or even 14nm dies which would provide a decent increase in available performance for a similar power budget (in watts)

But a fall 2016 machine likely wouldn't. We still don't see 16nm PC GPUs, HBM is still getting going. I just dont see where you'd get a meaningful increase in performance for this year

 

[Paganmoon]

-you don't have to fork over more money!
-your existing ps4 will still be the base for ps4 games!
-this is not a new gen, they have 30m+ userbase on existing ps4 consoles!
-there are only some issues if you're jealous!

Please explain how a game running at 1080p and 30fps is going to run at 4k on a new PS4. If it's just "make the game on the lower spec and it will automatically run at 4k on the new one", you need massive GPU power. If it needs to scale back to hit it's 4k mark, it needs to be tested, and devs would have to allocate specific time on that, or you'll end up getting really unstable games.

This whole idea sounds implausible. I was extremely skeptic of a UHD/4k output PS4 before, and I'm willing to concede that in this case. We might see a UHD/4k PS4, that supports UHD and native 4k for video, but -upscales- games to 4k, not a chance in hell we're seeing native 4k games from a console within the foreseeable future.

 

[Man]

So... What would be a list of obvious pros if they go this way? A few key ones.

• If they keep it to a three year cycle and not annual then you will still enable devs to fully optimize each platform (annual would be too often).
• More up to date technology-wise consoles at any time (usually it's around year four one feels that they are long in the tooth with some hardcore going on a PC hiatus).
• More healthy for console makers as hardware changes can be introduced more often, it also forces them to have more profitable hardware which is more stable grounds.
• Games will still be playable across consoles sharing same major version (4.x) so customer-pool is not reduced. Plug and play and console simplicity is not endangered either.
• Peripheral cycles (like PSVR) flow separately from the base console unit.

 

[wapplew]

I think if MS plans to do this then Sony need to follow suit. I also don't think it's necessarily a bad thing from either company, as long as every game will always work on every system.

I'd personally upgrade to a PS4.5 on day one. Already my favourite console and if I end up getting really into VR it'll provide a better experience.

Why Sony need to follow? PS4 have the most install base, which will be the target hardware in the foreseeable future. This will make sure not much dev will fully utilize upgraded Xbox one.
It will not be 360 one year head start situation, it's not HD(360) vs SD(PS2).

They just need to release PS5 in 2018 have full BC and lost nothing to competition.

 

[Lingitiz]

I don't entirely disagree but if they arent targeting the regular Joe, why the hell are they bothering? Fragramentation of advertising, fragmenting developers time, fragmenting audience - Sony have more to worry about than the equivalent problems in the PC market.

Well there's factors we don't know about yet. Sony has been all about making devs happy this generation, maybe the extra horsepower is something they are asking for? What about the competition? Obviously with the VR push, Sony is trying to stay ahead of industry trends and not be late to the party. MS is going to iterate their system, no doubt about that. Sony would do right to match them. Then there's the NX which is a huge question mark.

 

[UrbanRats]

Neither can Sony. People are just creating these artificial situations to show why this is a bad thing. A new machine would be aimed at people that have disposable income to spend in upgrading tech, and those that bought a Ps4 three years ago - not someone that just bought one

Upgradable consoles just become bad PCs, in my eyes.
Maybe they'll convince me otherwise.

 

[TLZ]

I'm ready.

If you don't want it, don't buy it and just play the games on PS4.

Simples.

I on the other hand want to play games on the latest hardware.

 

[Ferr986]

One important thing to consider is that a ps4.5 should still allow you to play online with ps4 owners. So it is still growing the user base, not fragmenting it like the usual generation switch overs

Can't wait to play a competitive match with my dirty peasant PS4 at sub 30 fps against a PS4.5 masterrace playing at 60 fps.

• If they keep it to a three year cycle and not annual then you will still enable devs to fully optimize each platform (annual would be too often).
  

Games nowadays can take +3 years to finish. It's one of the reason why gens are getting longer compared to the retro eras.

 

[pelican]

I have no interest in getting a 4K TV in the next few years, so I will not buy this if the big selling point is 4K.

If there is a significant power difference and games clearly run better on the new console, then I'll consider it. For example, 30fps on PS4 vs 60fps on PS4.5.

I would imagine 4K would not be the only end result. 60fps would be a goal too @ 1080.

 

[benny_a]

A Fall 2017 refresh should have access to relatively mature 16 or even 14nm dies which would provide a decent increase in available performance for a similar power budget (in watts)

But a fall 2016 machine likely wouldn't. We still don't see 16nm PC GPUs, HBM is still getting going. I just dont see where you'd get a meaningful increase in performance for this year

I usually share your skepticism, but don't forget Samsung (and by extension AMD) announced mass production for their 2nd gen 14nm FinFET manufacturing node more than two months ago.

 

[amstradcpc]

Has it been confirmed that the games developed for 4.5 will run on 4?

Read Zoetis first post in this page.

 

[Bl@de]

-you don't have to fork over more money!
-your existing ps4 will still be the base for ps4 games!
-this is not a new gen, they have 30m+ userbase on existing ps4 consoles!
-there are only some issues if you're jealous!

I wake up and the ride continues. I thought no more information

 

[Sodding_Gamer]

Not sure they can get a PS4.5 to run 4K games and be at the right price point for the mass market. Unless they sell it at a loss.

 

[Man]

I feel it would be best though to keep console versioning to whole (non-decimal) numbers. PS5 releasing this or next christmast for example instead of "4.5". Then the games can be labeled by which platform they support on the boxart.

Games nowadays can take +3 years to finish. It's one of the reason why gens are getting longer compared to the retro eras.

Yeah bit similarly no one is starting game engines from scratch anymore. Those days are over.

 

[Mac@NeoGAF]

If they just want to push resolution and nothing else it's also not dumb. A better GPU (and faster RAM) would be enough for that.

No it wouldn't.

Some of the biggest visual downgrades on consoles take place with things like shadows,draw distance and overall geometry detail because the CPU can't feed the GPU fast enough.

PS4 is hideously CPU bound in some areas.

 

[amstradcpc]

Not sure they can get a PS4.5 to run 4K games and be at the right price point for the mass market. Unless they sell it at a loss.

Price will be high.Marketing differenciation.High price also allows Zen cores,no APU,bespoke 14nm GPU(ditching completely DP compute for example)...
Cerny must be quite busy.

 

[Stilton Disco]

Well Sony sees it as a chance to solidify them as the market leader. Whether there are right or wrong remains to be seen.

But they've already done that, and the PSVR is a hardware upgrade that does more to cement that lead and differentiate them from the competition than a small boost in raw power ever could.

Hell, even if the XO upgrade means MS can get Oculus Rift working on it, the huge pricetag that would involve would automatically kill any momentum it could generate compared to the PS4 and PSVR. A PS4.5 would only legitimise MS's tactics and draw attention away from PSVR.

Add to that the the splintered user base, games running like shit on the PS4 or no better on the PS4.5, and confusion it will cause when an actual PS5 gets released that will have a much harder time getting any excitement behind it, and there's just no real positives to this plan.

This model works for phones because the high price is obscured by contracts and monthly payment plans. Getting an upgrade every year or two when you can trade the old one to the carrier for either a small fee or nothing is very different to expecting people to fork out hundreds on an expensive, large, stationary, home electronic device.

A console is more like a Television, Stereo or Microwave, these are big purchases people want to make maybe twice a decade, not a phone that you get tricked into thinking costs you 20 quid due to its monthly payments and that you can just pop into a ship to get a new one for nothing every year or two.

Sony have more to lose than gain from this, and they already dealt an Ace with PSVR, and have others up their sleeve with bundles, Software and price cuts. Grabbing a random card from the deck just because the people they're playing with did it, when those people already lost almost all their chips, is just asking for trouble.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

Would be hilarious if Nintendo finally decided to make a competitive console from a hardware perspective only for MS and Sony to decide to cut the generation extra short with a half step up.

 

[DrXym]

Predictable really. VR on a PS4 will be strictly baseline so it makes sense they'd want to bump the power up to improve it and also incorporate all that processing into the base unit. I expect every game will have to support the base spec and then choose to support a higher res if the device claims to support it.

 

[DieH@rd]

I'll be laughing so hard if the Xbox 1.5 is more powerful than the ps4.5

If both aim at largest APU upgrade they can get during same time period [!], PS4K will still be faster since MS needs to "waste" significant transistor numbers on ESRAM. Current console APUs:

Xbone [larger than PS4] 28nm APU
8 core Jaguar CPU
12 CU GPU
1.5Bil transistors dedicated to ESRAM
http://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Xbox_one_SoC_Microscope.jpg [2CUs are for manufacturing redundancy/yield increase]

PS4 [smaller than Xbone] 28nm APU
8 core Jaguar CPU
18 CU GPU [a bit upgraded over xbone, supports better Async Compute]
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ps4-reverse-engineered-apu.jpg [2CUs are for manufacturing redundancy/yield increase]

I rather have 1080p 60 fps than any 4k stuff =p

That is a given. Even if they release PS4K at the end of 2017, vast majority of people will still use 1080p screens.

With all this GPU talk, no one wants to talk about the real elephant in the room: Netbook class CPUs charading as something remotely capable for gaming in PS4/XB1. So much so, that PS4 was designed around offloading CPU tasks onto the GPU. The largest upgrade PS4.5 will see is in the CPU department, and perhaps the bandwith numbers if they can play their cards right with HBM 2.0.

You need to think of this proposed console as a upgrade, not a redesign. To remain compatibility with software they will bump what they have, not switch architectures. Yes, I expect faster CPU, GPU, faster memory and more memory, but I presume they will not go for exotic stuff but choose the hardware that AMD can deliver inside 14nm APU in 2016 [for deployment in 2017, or if miracles happen at the end of this year].

This makes no actual sense. New GPU different code and code that has to work on two consoles.

Im out.

Wut? Do you need to get "new code" for playing PC games when you upgrade your GPU? Game and its API calls stay the same, but what change is the driver [software layer between code and GPU]. If there is no major changes in architecture [I don't think there will be], old PS4 app could work fine on newer hardware.

The whole point of moving to X86 was to gain access to upgradeable hardware that is hosting lightweight gaming services and gaming apps. If sony was smart, they started thinking about creating base for "forward compatibile" software years before PS4 was released to the public.

Graphics card and CPU power hasn't changed much in the last 3 years.

But this year's switch to 14/16nm GPUs is a big deal, offering 2x performance boost per watt. That is the only reason why this "upgraded console" talk even makes sense.

-you don't have to fork over more money!
-your existing ps4 will still be the base for ps4 games!
-this is not a new gen, they have 30m+ userbase on existing ps4 consoles!
-there are only some issues if you're jealous!

Well... there it is.

Hey, I don't care who you are but this better not happen this year. Fall 2017 the earliest. I'll blame you if this happens this year (or doesn't happen at all).

Lets first wait and see if they did it right. I don't want half assed upgrade during any year.

 

[Pop]

No way I am forking over thousands of dollars to play games at 4K.

But all the power to anyone who wants to.

 

[Aostia]

I am ignorant but: is this similar to the possible Xone upgrade route discussed last week?

 

[jeff_rigby]

I usually share your skepticism, but don't forget Samsung (and by extension AMD) announced mass production for their 2nd gen 14nm FinFET manufacturing node more than two months ago.

Remember that the second generation 14nm FinFET is the FIRST that can support high performance CPUs with ZEN scheduled for late this year. High performance APUs are scheduled for late 2017. A 4K APU is going to be a monster and expensive if it even surfaces in 2017.

Reread posts: 3922, 4412,4416 and 4417

It's pretty clear to me that the rumor is about a PS5 two years out. Naming conventions will probably change to allow the consumer to know that PS4 software works on a PS 4.5.

It is possible in 2016 to have a slightly upgraded PS4 but not possible for it to support 4K games. That's the key here to define the rumor. It also takes time to develop the assets for 4K games. It does makes sense that about two years before release that developers are getting info on a new console.

This October we will get VR with Firmware 4 also due during the same time period. I'd point out that embedded Playready and HTML5 <video> EME MSE has still not been implemented; neither has a video chat program which depends on WebRTC. The industry is still fine tuning both standards and Sony usually waits till standards are released before implementing them. They should both be available as well as HTML5 with attention shifting to HTML5.1 late this year.

The decision to focus on a fixed set of standards for HTML5 and have incremental upgrades for additional features was because the CE industry needed a set of HTML5 features to support TV; IPTV, Antenna, UHD Blu-ray, Cable TV and in home media sharing.

 

[Sodding_Gamer]

But they've already done that, and the PSVR is a hardware upgrade that does more to cement that lead and differentiate them from the competition than a small boost in raw power ever could.

Hell, even if the XO upgrade means MS can get Oculus Rift working on it, the huge pricetag that would involve would automatically kill any momentum it could generate compared to the PS4 and PSVR. A PS4.5 would only legitimise MS's tactics and draw attention away from PSVR.

Add to that the the splintered user base, games running like shit on the PS4 or no better on the PS4.5, and confusion it will cause when an actual PS5 gets released that will have a much harder time getting any excitement behind it, and there's just no real positives to this plan.

This model works for phones because the high price is obscured by contracts and monthly payment plans. Getting an upgrade every year or two when you can trade the old one to the carrier for either a small fee or nothing is very different to expecting people to fork out hundreds on an expensive, large, stationary, home electronic device.

A console is more like a Television, Stereo or Microwave, these are big purchases people want to make maybe twice a decade, not a phone that you get tricked into thinking costs you 20 quid due to its monthly payments and that you can just pop into a ship to get a new one for nothing every year or two.

Sony have more to lose than gain from this, and they already dealt an Ace with PSVR, and have others up their sleeve with bundles, Software and price cuts. Grabbing a random card of the deck because the people they're playing with did it, when they already took almost all chips, is just asking for trouble.

This is bang on imo. Honestly don't see many positives from this at all either.

 

[OléGunner]

wrong

Haha holy shit.

I still need to gather my thoughts on this.

 

[Ferr986]

I feel it would be best though to keep console versioning to whole (non-decimal) numbers. PS5 releasing this or next christmast for example instead of "4.5". Then the games can be labeled by which platform they support on the boxart.


Yeah bit similarly no one is starting game engines from scratch anymore. Those days are over.

How are those days over when games releasing this years has been for +3 years? Dark Souls 3 started while 2 was still in development, even if it's already using Bloodborne engine. Uncharted 4 has been in development for +3 years too. Arkham Knight, MGSV... list goes on. At the end the big AAA games takes a shit ton of years to make even with an established engine.

 

[Ninja Sharingan]

So... What would be a list of obvious pros if they go this way? A few key ones.

You don't have to rebuyou re releases. Your content looks and performs better. You migrate smoothly with your online I'd to new hardware. No migration of friends lists etc. Ideally everything just works as you have now but the hardware is better and your games get to look better and better.

Also- people stop arguing about resolution and get to enjoy games more

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I think, for me, the main issue for me is that this goes completely against the idea of console gaming.

This isn't a phone that is subsidised by a contract and I upgrade ever two years, it's a piece of hardware I've put my own money down for with the expectation that, regardless of hardware changes, it will play the same games to the same level for that generation. Not to mention, the current PS4 is not an iPhone, it's not going to maintain value to make trading it in remotely viable to help subsidise a new PS4.5.

I think what I'm really getting at is, why would I even bother with a console if it's not going to be the same hardware for a gen, with a big upgrade after a few years. Why buy a PS5, if a PS5.5 will follow in a few years?

People are talking about additional RAM in PSP, that helped with load times, it didn't fundamentally alter the game (and, in fact, you could unlock that on the original PSP with CFW).

I'm really just venting though. I've been playing consoles since the NES and Master System and this goes against everything I've ever known about consoles. Not a form change or hardware streamlining or, even, removal of lesser used features, a hardware overhaul that leaves existing customers at a loss.

 

[AniHawk]

And yet, if this generation has proven anything so far, it's that people really want a traditional approach to console gaming and that gimmicks and unique hardware are irrelevant.

Hell, even the fact that the PS4 is the most powerful system is irrelevant when you compare its success to the PC market, where you can get significantly more powerful hardware for well under a grand, in the same price to power range a hypothetical PS4.5 would operate, and yet the PS4 is still the leading enthusiast gaming device.

It makes sense for Nintendo and Microsoft to be trying this idea out. Because both have completely fucked up this gen so far.

But let's be realistic, and Xbox One Point One is not going to magically save the Xbox brand when all their marketing, exclusive games, dodgy deals, double speak, water muddying and a lower price haven't moved the needle, and simply having a more expensive, more powerful system won't either. Hell, worldwide, that brand is dead, it's never going to be a competitor with Playstation again.

Nintendo are worse off, because, let's be honest, short of a miracle where they blindly luck out on another cultural zeitgeist like the Wii, the NX is going to be a failure. It'll sell worse than the WiiU and 3DS, and those proposed incremental system upgrades we're all speculating about will likely drive them into the red faster, not keep them afloat. They don't want to make the traditional, third party focused home console that the market wants, and their handhelds are only going to lose more and more marketshare to iOS and Android.

There is no incentive for Sony to bother with the same desperate tactics when the new generation of GPU's and HBM are just around the corner, and they can just leverage that to make a legitimate PS5 with full backwards compatibility (thanks to it's PC like architecture) after a normal 5-6 year generation length.

This idea is not the future, it's a desperate last move by companies that are throwing as much shit at the wall as possible in the hopes enough sticks to reverse their losing streak. Microsoft are Clearly done throwing billions into the bottomless pit Xbox has been for them, and Nintendo have just flat out made themselves irrelevant through sheer pig headedness.

For the market leader to suddenly start following the actions of those it's trouncing is just insanity, and far more likely to lead to the same balls ups that it's competitors are so adept at creating.

sony beginning incremental upgrades now means that they protect themselves in the future when they want to try out another handheld (this time it just plays ps4 games and it's digital only), or if they want to prepare playstation now as the actual playstation platform that matters - a storefront in which people can play games across multiple devices of hardware.

microsoft is doing it because xbox one is in trouble sure, but it also gives them the opportunity to help bring windows and xbox closer. it might mean eventually a couple products run 'xbox' as a feature.

nintendo is doing it out of necessity, since they can't support two platforms at the same time anymore. they saw this coming years ago though, before the ps4 or xbox one were officially announced, in january 2013:

What we are aiming at is to integrate the architecture to form a common basis for software development so that we can make software assets more transferrable, and operating systems and their build-in applications more portable, regardless of form factor or performance of each platform. They will also work to avoid software lineup shortages or software development delays which tend to happen just after the launch of new hardware.

Some time ago it was technologically impossible to have the same architecture for handheld devices and home consoles and what we did was therefore reasonable. Although it has not been long since we began to integrate the architecture and this will have no short-term result, we believe that it will provide a great benefit to our platform business in the long run.

sony is doing it because the writing's been on the wall all generation and they've felt it too. it would have meant they would be left in the dust if other platforms like this took off.

 

[jelly]

PS4.5 Exclusive- Antistrophic filtering.

Shadows quality still blows on consoles, that would be a nice improvement. I think that every generation but never gets better.

 

[krang]

Upgradable consoles just become bad PCs, in my eyes.
Maybe they'll convince me otherwise.

Updated consoles != upgradable consoles

 

[MicSte79]

I don't see why anyone would have an issue with this. PC Gamers regularly spend small fortunes on their setups because their graphics cards or whatever regularly need upgrading.

PS4.5. More power. More more more!

 

[Hermii]

Will it run broforce at 60?

 

[wapplew]

But they've already done that, and the PSVR is a hardware upgrade that does more to cement that lead and differentiate them from the competition than a small boost in raw power ever could.

Hell, even if the XO upgrade means MS can get Oculus Rift working on it, the huge pricetag that would involve would automatically kill any momentum it could generate compared to the PS4 and PSVR. A PS4.5 would only legitimise MS's tactics and draw attention away from PSVR.

Add to that the the splintered user base, games running like shit on the PS4 or no better on the PS4.5, and confusion it will cause when an actual PS5 gets released that will have a much harder time getting any excitement behind it, and there's just no real positives to this plan.

This model works for phones because the high price is obscured by contracts and monthly payment plans. Getting an upgrade every year or two when you can trade the old one to the carrier for either a small fee or nothing is very different to expecting people to fork out hundreds on an expensive, large, stationary, home electronic device.

A console is more like a Television, Stereo or Microwave, these are big purchases people want to make maybe twice a decade, not a phone that you get tricked into thinking costs you 20 quid due to its monthly payments and that you can just pop into a ship to get a new one for nothing every year or two.

Sony have more to lose than gain from this, and they already dealt an Ace with PSVR, and have others up their sleeve with bundles, Software and price cuts. Grabbing a random card from the deck just because the people they're playing with did it, when those people already lost almost all their chips, is just asking for trouble.

Can't agree more.
This is like someone losing a chess game and say fuck it, let's start over, this doesn't count.
Then the winning side just say, OK.

 

[Yakkity]

Personally, I can't wait to buy all new re-re-mastered editions of 6 year old games!

 

[Simply Sami]

Where are people getting that the older PS4 games will look better? I highly doubt developers are going to waste resources and patch them so that they run better on the new console. Some developers might.

 

[Hermii]

I don't see why anyone would have an issue with this. PC Gamers regularly spend small fortunes on their setups because their graphics cards or whatever regularly need upgrading.

PS4.5. More power. More more more!

That's why they choose to be pc gamers. Lots of console gamers just want a box that will play all games coming out the next 5+ years.

 

[wapplew]

sony beginning incremental upgrades now means that they protect themselves in the future when they want to try out another handheld (this time it just plays ps4 games and it's digital only), or if they want to prepare playstation now as the actual playstation platform that matters - a storefront in which people can play games across multiple devices of hardware.

Sony is well prepare for incremental upgrades, PS4 is x86, they can do it without release a PS4.5.

 

[krang]

Where are people getting that the older PS4 games will look better? I highly doubt developers are going to waste resources and patch them so that they run better on the new console. Some developers might.

It will work pretty easily for any non-locked variables. Such as frame rate or variable resolution. You'd expect those games to just hit the top bar with no dips.

Going from 30 to 60fps or from 1080 to 4K is a whole other story, though.