Support NeoGAF

[krang]

Seriously dude, what the hell? You keep making this huge assumption, why? You say it's not simplistic and then you post that?

Firstly the ps4 and ps4k are going to be running on the same OS. What that means is that developers will not necessarily have to code 2 entirely different versions for the 2 SKU's but rather it will be a single version with device detect running. Once the software has determined whether you are running the game on a regular ps4 or the ps4k it will then select the appropriate configuration which have been pre-determined by the developer. This "extra work" you speak of is likely to only come into play at the optimisation stage of development. This is how it works in PC development and iOS/android development. To get the extra optimisation work done they might employ a few more people or outsource it. The complexity of this largely depends on how Sony handle things in their SDK. It doesn't need to change how things are done earlier on in the development pipeline as assets are generally created in much higher quality than necessary and in most cases there will also be a PC version in existence which will be able to take advantage of the higher quality models/textures/environments anyway.

Now of course, some developers might want to go the extra mile and do something special (limited to visuals) for the ps4k version but if this is the case they would be wise to build/create a small team to do so. It does not necessarily mean that they will pull people away from the regular ps4 version in order to achieve this, they might get some people in on a contract basis or even outsource this portion of the work. This commonly happens when developers want to do an extra SKU of a game they are making but do not have the in-house capabilities or resources in order to do so. Again, this commonly happens with PC ports of console focused games or even last gen ports of the game is cross gen.

It will be a similar story for Microsoft due to them having developed UWP for this very purpose. The only debate around UWP at the moment is whether it's a model that is also suited to the PC environment which is something they are attempting to force at the moment. For console/mobile applications it's perfectly fine however.

Based on your agruement we should all be pushing for every single game in existence to be exclusive to ensure no resourses are wasted in making multiple versions of the same game.

Yeah I don't get this complaint either. The PS4K, by all accounts, is running the exact same hardware configuration but with more CPU and GPU speed headroom. I can't believe that the drivers wouldn't be common, either.

 

[nib95]

Seriously dude, what the hell? You keep making this huge assumption, why? You say it's not simplistic and then you post that?

Firstly the ps4 and ps4k are going to be running on the same OS. What that means is that developers will not necessarily have to code 2 entirely different versions for the 2 SKU's but rather it will be a single version with device detect running. Once the software has determined whether you are running the game on a regular ps4 or the ps4k it will then select the appropriate configuration which have been pre-determined by the developer. This "extra work" you speak of is likely to only come into play at the optimisation stage of development. This is how it works in PC development and iOS/android development. To get the extra optimisation work done they might employ a few more people or outsource it. The complexity of this largely depends on how Sony handle things in their SDK. It doesn't need to change how things are done earlier on in the development pipeline as assets are generally created in much higher quality than necessary and in most cases there will also be a PC version in existence which will be able to take advantage of the higher quality models/textures/environments anyway.

Now of course, some developers might want to go the extra mile and do something special (limited to visuals) for the ps4k version but if this is the case they would be wise to build/create a small team to do so. It does not necessarily mean that they will pull people away from the regular ps4 version in order to achieve this, they might get some people in on a contract basis or even outsource this portion of the work. This commonly happens when developers want to do an extra SKU of a game they are making but do not have the in-house capabilities or resources in order to do so. Again, this commonly happens with PC ports of console focused games or even last gen ports of the game is cross gen.

It will be a similar story for Microsoft due to them having developed UWP for this very purpose. The only debate around UWP at the moment is whether it's a model that is also suited to the PC environment which is something they are attempting to force at the moment. For console/mobile applications it's perfectly fine however.

Based on your agruement we should all be pushing for every single game in existence to be exclusive to ensure no resourses are wasted in making multiple versions of the same game.

I don't know why you explained the disc thing, I never implied they'd actually be selling two different physical versions of a game, simply that there will be two different versions that run based on whether you're using a PS4 or PS4K, and creating the different versions will be part of the development process.

I don't think it'll be as easy as just outsourcing everything or making such simple changes either. The hardware is still different (isn't Polaris a newer architecture?), despite similarities, and these things will still have to be properly tested. Lest we get sloppy upgrades that have other issues and bugs similar to certain PC ports. I suspect first party devs will indeed go the extra mile, in house too in order to maximise output and results, which will inevitably mean less time, resources or whatever else on the PS4 version.

Lastly, multiplatform development is a completely different kettle of fish. Developers invest the time and money in to developing for a multitude of platforms to attract a bigger audience and sell more copies of their games, Eg to Xbox One owners as well as PS4 owners. This iterative upgrade doesn't really provide that same added increased adoption incentive to the said developers. They're unlikely to gain many new sales of their games that they wouldn't have already had with the PS4, had the PS4K not existed. Less we forget the PS4 is still selling really well in terms of both hardware and software, with no signs of slow down.

 

[Aters]

I will buy PS4K, but I think it's a bad idea. People who complain about graphics already get what they want on PC, and it's unlikely that PS4K will get them back.

 

[SeeNoWeevil]

I have a big backlog of pc games I want to play and very little interest in any 2016 ps4 exclusives. It seems prudent to sell my PS4 now and pickup a neo when something comes out I want to play. Although, I imagine that's only going to save me somewhere in the region of £100.

 

[Fredrik]

It's be shocking to see people this salty after the release of a new graphics card, I can't see why the same should be true for the new PS4.

On PC you can scale back the graphics so your old GPU still runs the games fine. On console you're stuck at whatever framerate and resolution the devs think is enough for your old console.

I've been requesting graphics settings on consoles for ages, but everyone here seems to hate it for some odd reason. I'd honestly be perfectly fine with PS4K and XB1.5 etc if I could tweak the games to run fine on my old consoles too.

 

[Moreche]

I have always wanted consoles to go this route.
Tech moves to fast for one part to stand still.
Phones, tablets, laptops and PCs are upgraded every year so why should consoles stay the same?
I can't wait to buy these new iterations of current hardware and if the originals are compatible then what's the problem.

 

[KingBroly]

I have always wanted consoles to go this route.
Tech moves to fast for one part to stand still.
Phones, tablets, laptops and PCs are upgraded every year so why should consoles stay the same?
I can't wait to buy these new iterations of current hardware and if the originals are compatible then what's the problem.

Because Consoles are supposed to be simple as hell. You buy the box. You buy the game. It works. When you start bringing in compatibility issues with games, you start losing people's interests.

 

[goomba]

this isnt how console generations should work

hopefuly this will push more people over to the pc /steambox master race

 

[Moreche]

Because Consoles are supposed to be simple as hell. You buy the box. You buy the game. It works. When you start bringing in compatibility issues with games, you start losing people's interests.

But where's the issues, if its say for devs to add the extra options then why not?
It's not as if and PS neon games won't run on PS4. Also it's not as if we didn't get some really shitty frame rates on and 360 or PS3 games that a new iteration wouldn't have helped with.

 

[wapplew]

I have always wanted consoles to go this route.
Tech moves to fast for one part to stand still.
Phones, tablets, laptops and PCs are upgraded every year so why should consoles stay the same?
I can't wait to buy these new iterations of current hardware and if the originals are compatible then what's the problem.

Show me one game made exclusive for IPad pro/Iphone 6S/980M/TitanZ

 

[Sad Affleck]

I would like to know what is going to happen once the PS5 rolls out. I assume backwards compatibility is a given, but will the PS4K be able to play PS5 games? If yes then won't the PS4k be holding back the new system significantly? If no them won't the PS4k seem like a product with a very short shelf life?

 

[ninjablade]

I don't know why you explained the disc thing, I never implied they'd actually be selling two different physical versions of a game, simply that there will be two different versions that run based on whether you're using a PS4 or PS4K, and creating the different versions will be part of the development process.

I don't think it'll be as easy as just outsourcing everything or making such simple changes either. The hardware is still different (isn't Polaris a newer architecture?), despite similarities, and these things will still have to be properly tested. Lest we get sloppy upgrades that have other issues and bugs similar to certain PC ports. I suspect first party devs will indeed go the extra mile, in house too in order to maximise output and results, which will inevitably mean less time, resources or whatever else on the PS4 version.

Lastly, multiplatform development is a completely different kettle of fish. Developers invest the time and money in to developing for a multitude of platforms to attract a bigger audience and sell more copies of their games, Eg to Xbox One owners as well as PS4 owners. This iterative upgrade doesn't really provide that same added increased adoption incentive to the said developers. They're unlikely to gain many new sales of their games that they wouldn't have already had with the PS4, had the PS4K not existed. Less we forget the PS4 is still selling really well in terms of both hardware and software, with no signs of slow down.

Only differnce is developers are not testing hundreds or thousands of pc gpu's, and even though it's different gpu architecture, it's significantly more powerful and the cpu is basically the same with 30% more power, basically most of the time is gonna be bug testing which should be a relatively easy process.

 

[Audioboxer]

I would like to know what is going to happen once the PS5 rolls out. I assume backwards compatibility is a given, but will the PS4K be able to play PS5 games? If yes then won't the PS4k be holding back the new system significantly? If no them won't the PS4k seem like a product with a very short shelf life?

Doubtful. PS4k is still a PS4 and therefore belongs to the PS4 family. If anything it will become the default PS4 to buy for years to come.

People kept buying the PS3 even when the PS4 launched.

 

[mrklaw]

People keep mentioning this but it's not the same scenario. The transition was often farmed off to other dev teams so the same dev team wasn't working on the PS3 and the PS4 version.

It's still a benefit for the publisher though - the cost of supporting two of these types of similar consoles would be way lower than needing two separate teams like with PS3/4.

I can see the appeal being different depending where you sit in the games industry:

- big games publisher (EA, Activision etc). Net benefit. Smoother transition between generations, more predictable costs, better capability for longer term planning.

- small publishers. Neutral/small benefit. The same benefits as for big publishers but these smaller ones are perhaps more likely to move onto a new generation and not support huge numbers of cross gen titles. But now with shorter release windows they'll have to start covering that

- large developers. neutral. Some additional cost but less impact due to larger size of team and larger development budgets so can better absorb.

- indie/small developers that self-publish. Small negative/neutral. Smaller teams so larger relative impact to support additional platforms. Advantages from previous generations not really relevant if they wouldn't have supported older generations with cross gen anyway, so it is all additional cost. Extra cost mitigated somewhat by likelihood they are using middleware that will update to new platforms rapidly, but still need to cover QA and possible increased TRC costs.


Sony could help by keeping TRC costs the same for smaller developers..

 

[family_guy]

Because Consoles are supposed to be simple as hell. You buy the box. You buy the game. It works.

Then nothing has changed.

 

[wapplew]

Then nothing has changed.

Something change, how they label the disc if PS5 game can play on PS4.5?

 

[family_guy]

Something change, how they label the disc if PS5 game can play on PS4.5?

When you buy physical PC software it lists what versions of Windows its compatible with on the box.

 

[M3d10n]

The biggest problem is having to buy extra dev/test kits. It's still in the air how this whole thing will be handled, but right now you have to test your game on both PS4 and NEO units to make sure it works on both, which increases QA costs. Combined with all games scheduled to release after a certain date having to support NEO mode, you suddenly have console developers in a situation similar to a new iDevice launch, where they aren't sure how their game will behave on the new system.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

Did Colin literally have a meltdown over this? That was waaaaaaay to emotional for me to listen to. I listen to podcasts at work and had to stop and just think about the tone of this. What the hell. I like Greg and Colin a lot but this was absurd.

Sorry rant.

I think some people are blowing this way over the top. Some people comparing this to the drm? I really hope Sony and MS can come out and talk about this better. MS and Phil seem to be taking some steps by being open about it. You think if Sony was doing the same this be a bit different?


I'd rather see a console industry that evolves with the rest of the tech industry rather than be stuck in the past for god knows how long. I am all for upgrades as long as they are clear about how long the system I bought get supported.

Maybe its because I've been listening to Kinda Funny since it launched, but that was not Colin having a meltdown or being overly emotional.

 

[odhiex]

Show me one game made exclusive for IPad pro/Iphone 6S/980M/TitanZ

What are trying to prove here, may I ask?

Ipad pro is still an ipad air with more power.

TitanZ is still an Nvidia card 900 series with more power.

PS4K/Neo is still a PS4 with more power.

Same generation with some more juice.

 

[wapplew]

What are trying to prove here, may I ask?

Ipad pro is still an ipad air with more power.

TitanZ is still an Nvidia card 900 series with more power.

PS4K/Neo is still a PS4 with more power.

Same generation with some more juice.

Because console is the only gaming device have games design exclusively for the lastest hardware from day 1 thanks to traditional genration cycle.
All that will lost if console adapt PC/mobile business model, all games become enhance version of lowest common denominator.

Just to be clear, I have no problem with PS4K or iterative console in general, as long as they keep tradition cycle.

 

[sense]

I know the constant question by Colin is why is Sony doing this so let me make some assumptions as to why Sony might be doing this and people can correct me if I am wrong

Cost of making ps4 is 250 and they will likely sell it at 299 retail going forward
Cost of making ps4k is 300 or even 325 and they will likely sell it at 399 which means a higher profit margin

There will always be people that are price conscious and don't care for extra bells and whistles so regular ps4 sales aren't going to suddenly take a huge hit and at the end of the day Sony doesn't care as long as you are buying one of them. I bought an iPad Air 2 knowing full well better versions were coming out the year after because it was good enough for me.

A lot of fans including myself would love to buy the ps4k because it is providing a meaningful benefit rather than just a slim version meaning they are getting people that were set for 6 or 7 years to think about getting new hardware. I stuck with my original PS3 for the entire gen and I am interested in buying a ps4k which is a win for Sony

4K support is something Sony has vested interest in and would want to incentivize people that own the older model to upgrade or people that are going to jump in to buy the newer model which provides them a bigger profit. There is also likely pressure from Netflix, Amazon, YouTube to support 4K streaming as I remember an article from last year that quoted Netflix ceo expecting newer machines with 4K streaming capability

Don't give people a chance to leave the ecosystem and join another by having frequent (3 years makes sense for consoles) iterative products that are backwards compatible. Why do you think most people are hesitant to jump from iPhone to android phones or vice versa because once you are familiar with an ecosystem and are given options to carry everything forward to the new device without additional cost they don't mind staying put and not want to put up with any hassle.

 

[Endo Punk]

Wow people really are dwelling on the worst case scenario. Such pessimists. Sure Sony could be lying but right now the facts are the facts, Future games WILL run on PS4 and have a Neo toggle. So what? Doesn't bother me at all if games have a few more bells and whistles as long as I can still play.

 

[Jacksinthe]

Not as simple as that, because whether PS4 owners choose to invest in the PS4K or not, they're still potentially being adversely affected. Firstly, it's not like developers can just click their fingers to ready an upgraded PS4K version, at the end of the day, the additional development time, money, resources, people and testing spent on the improved PS4K version, means less development time, money, resources, people and testing on the PS4 version, either that or a longer development cycle.

Add to that the PS4K literally devalues the PS4, as in, the moment the PS4K is out, chances are the trade in value, resale value etc of the PS4 will diminish as it's automatically relegated to being the inferior model.

Then there's a bunch of stuff that remains to be seen. Eg, will PS4 versions of games in future get less attention or be worse now that development time and budget is being split between the two consoles? Then there's the question of whether the PS4K will inadvertently extend the length of the generation. Whether it's success will mean other manufacturers follow suit, and multiplatform devs are left with even more platforms to consider, with even more fragmentation. And so on.

It's not quite as simplistic as you're making out. There's countless ramifications and potential issues.

I said before it has to be done flawlessly and if so - everything will be OK. All we have to go on is rumors and a guy that CAN do the legwork, but doesn't, then tweets about a guy who heard from other guys.

"Let me not confirm any of this and just tweet hearsay"

Boom. Now we have posts like yours.

If rumors of the tech are true - devs will have another SKU, sure - but the fact that 100% of all PS4 games work out of the box SHOULD (it really should) tell you something about its toolset and development profile.

New tech always devalues old tech from a trade-in standpoint. This isn't news. It doesn't fuck the consumer if all games are made available with all the same features across the board and doesn't affect the online experience. So it lowers trade in value. Darn.

Last, do you really think devs will be stupid and screw over 40-45m install base with a shitty PS4 version? Do you know how quickly they would implode?

There's a lot more involved with a new, more powerful SKU - yep. But by all accounts the transition will be pretty smooth for us devs, more options for the consumer is fine if they aren't forced and devs, if they are worth a fuck, won't be shitting on base versions if they care about sticking around.

All of this is subject to change if Sony and MS botch their 0.5 updates. For now, it seems like the largest hurdle is public perception of new tech which BS like this shit isnt helping. It's fine to be pessimistic but that shit has to be grounded somewhere and by all accounts that footing lies elsewhere unless you subscribe to hearsay.

 

[Lady Gaia]

The biggest problem is having to buy extra dev/test kits.

I'll be very curious to see how that works in practice. Given that the retail Neo units can run existing games in Base mode, I would assume the dev kits can as well. Sony's documentation states that you can't run newer titles on the retail hardware in Base mode but I wouldn't be shocked if the dev kits can. So in theory you could have 100% dev kit based testing and choose whether to launch your title in Base or Neo mode.

Speculation, of course, but grounded in what we know. Developers who already have dev kits would need newer ones but you might be able to get by with just the new ones from here on.

 

[tuxfool]

That doesn't really change the point. In fact, it supports the point.

Having more dynamic transitions means potentially lesser money to be spend on making a game across various machines, due to lesser manpower needed. Rather than hiring a port studio for help, they can just expand/create a small internal team for the work now, due to lesser compatibility/transitional issues.

This is very true. Then there is the fact that unless there are extremely long generations both the head and tail of each generation is comprised of cross-gen titles.

If we assumed a 6 year gen (because frankly these consoles wouldn't handle more than that), Both the first two years have had cross-gen games and the last year or so would have cross-gen titles with the following generation.

That leaves only 3 years focusing on one generation.

 

[tuxfool]

I will buy PS4K, but I think it's a bad idea. People who complain about graphics already get what they want on PC, and it's unlikely that PS4K will get them back.

Never stepped into a Console Digital Foundry thread?

 

[Conduit]

Moriarty is now bitching about PS4K and how Sony will screw up existing userbase.

But he will buy PS4K for sure.

 

[IndoAssassin]

I find Colin hyperbolizes a lot. There's over a thousand developers, he talked to all of them?
Did he do a poll or something?
Or is it anecdotal evidence based off 2 or 3 developers?

 

[Uncle Obscure]

First off, as an owner of two PS4's, I think this is a bad idea, but from a marketing standpoint, if Sony were able to call it a PS4K, and that is how they got to market it, they might have been okay. The problem now is that the genie is out of the bottle.

If Sony could say, "If you have a 4K television and you want a PS4, then the PS4K is the model to choose to obtain the best PS4 experience," I think there would be much less controversy.

Unfortunately, Sony can't do that now. The leaked specs clearly indicate that even if you don't have a 4K television, you still get an improved PS4 experience over the current model...and, that, makes this a real marketing challenge.

 

[TyrantII]

It's be shocking to see people this salty after the release of a new graphics card, I can't see why the same should be true for the new PS4.

Maybe because people own consoles because they DO NOT want to be dragged into the upgrade centric and compatibility issues reality of PC gaming?

I think its more shocking to see a minority of tech heads just brushing aside the valid concerns of how it might negatively impact the ecosystem; one that is a big reason people game on consoles in the first place.

It sort of reminds me of the water carrying done for the XBox One pre-launch. Iterative consoles could work, but it means Sony holding publishers closer to the QC cert fire.

Do we really believe that will happen when a 200 million budget rockstar game dips to 15FPS?

 

[...Scatter...]

I will buy PS4K, but I think it's a bad idea. People who complain about graphics already get what they want on PC, and it's unlikely that PS4K will get them back.

Have you seen any Digital Foundry thread? We complain about graphics all the time on the console side. I want powerful consoles. That's my jam. I don't really want a gaming PC. I'll be buying both upgrades just like you.

 

[Moneal]

Maybe because people own consoles because they DO NOT want to be dragged into the upgrade centric and compatibility issues reality of PC gaming?

I think its more shocking to see a minority of tech heads just brushing aside the valid concerns of how it might negatively impact the ecosystem; one that is a big reason people game on consoles in the first place.

It sort of reminds me of the water carrying done for the XBox One pre-launch. Iterative consoles could work, but it means Sony holding publishers closer to the QC cert fire.

Do we really believe that will happen when a 200 million budget rockstar game dips to 15FPS?

What compatibility issues? Ps4 an ps4.5 play the same games, use the same os, and the same network. As for upgrading compared to pc it already isn't much different. Upgrade gpu every 5-6 years just like consoles. An iterative console market wouldn't change that either, if cutting edge isn't an issue you care about.

 

[stilgar]

I have the feeling that many or you are making this bigger than it is.
It's a special version of an existing hardware,with more bells and whistles. Sort of like a better thought PSX, except you can play special editions of your games on it.
If you're not a developer, I don't think it's that big of an event.

 

[Jacksinthe]

Something change, how they label the disc if PS5 game can play on PS4.5?

"Requires PS4k or higher"

 

[Jacksinthe]

I find Colin hyperbolizes a lot. There's over a thousand developers, he talked to all of them?
Did he do a poll or something?
Or is it anecdotal evidence based off 2 or 3 developers?

Even my speaking with devs is anecdotal, despite me actually talking to devs and not just hearsay.

The thing a lot of people gloss over is that Sony and MS (if rumors are true) wouldn't do this unless they actually talked to 3rd parties first. It costs a LOT of money to bring a box to retail. They aren't going in blind no matter what anyone says.

 

[SpideySenses]

Moriarty is now bitching about PS4K and how Sony will screw up existing userbase.

But he will buy PS4K for sure.

Of course he will, he covers video games with an emphasis on Playstation, not to mention he shares a house with Greg who is positive about the console. I can understand some of the criticisms coming Colin's way but it's never been from a "I don't want it, so it shouldn't exist" place, he's been taking a step back and looking at it through the eyes of others consumers the whole time.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I would like to know what is going to happen once the PS5 rolls out. I assume backwards compatibility is a given, but will the PS4K be able to play PS5 games? If yes then won't the PS4k be holding back the new system significantly? If no them won't the PS4k seem like a product with a very short shelf life?

No? Provided there is a PS5(and i'm sure there will be), PS4.K is still a PS4. It runs all PS4games...so the shelf life means little when the library for PS4 is still huge. All it means is that after PS5 comes out, Sony would stop producing PS4's...and keep PS4K going or something like that and lower the cost substantially.

With PS5, that would also be compatible with PS4 and 4K games, but at a higher price once again using the 'premium unit higher cost economic unit lower cost' scale.

PS4K might play some PS5 games, but that would be cross generational in the same way PS3 was cross gen with PS4

 

[Moneal]

No? Provided there is a PS5(and i'm sure there will be), PS4.K is still a PS4. It runs all PS4games...so the shelf life means little when the library for PS4 is still huge. All it means is that after PS5 comes out, Sony would stop producing PS4's...and keep PS4K going or something like that and lower the cost substantially.

With PS5, that would also be compatible with PS4 and 4K games, but at a higher price once again using the 'premium unit higher cost economic unit lower cost' scale.

PS4K might play some PS5 games, but that would be cross generational in the same way PS3 was cross gen with PS4

It might not be cross-gen for ps4.5 to play ps5 games. I think we are done with exponential jumps. PS5 will probably only be 5 times ps4.5, if that. Ps4.5 would be able to play games at a reduced rez/frame-rate, just like Ps4 will with Ps4.5

 

[DannyDanger]

Only devs can speak on this situation, plain and simple... And even from devs it's speculation until they actually start doing the work.

And the fact that devs most likely agreed with it behind the scenes (or else why would Sony do it) reinforces that Colin is full of it here

Sony has been going all out to cater to devs wit ps4 and it's one of their reasons for success right now. Why would they just throw that out the window

 

[Elios83]

I think that Colin Moriarthy is mostly expressing his personal negative opinion on incremental consoles masking his opinion behind random sources talking to him about ''most developers''. Pretty much something baseless that can't be proved without him showing proofs and making names.
But developers/publishers are really unlikely to be against the idea.
If they were we wouldn't see most of them developing for multiple platforms including PC (with all its virtually countless combinations of hardware) and all the mobile ecosystems getting new models every year.
We would see them sticking to a platform of choice, taking the most out of it. That business model died with the PS2.
In such a context having a similar SKU with pretty much the same architecture but more powerful has little to no impact to them. It's close to changing the settings in some sliders.
Also publishers and developers have been the first ones to blur the line between different generations.
No one forced them to stick to PS3/360 for more than two years but they chose not to take advantage of the new hardware at launch for the sake of a bigger overall installed base.
In this sense iterative consoles are just the hardware side of the business catching up to the reality of software development already in place.
You can develop a superpowerful console but it's useless if most developers won't make games conceived for it because they have to reach the biggest possible market.
I still think that there will be future consoles bringing in more sizeable power gaps and new exclusive features compared to simple refreshes/upgrades, but software development will be conceived to support multiple devices across different generations so each console model will go through different phases (top of the line, midrange, low end/legacy support, discontinued support).

 

[kiguel182]

Smoother/no transition between gens would be very beneficial to devs. No more dealing with weird architectures and new APIs every 7 years or so.

We are moving to a more unified and uniform system and that's good. It allows developers to focus on making games instead of wrestling with the consoles.

 

[kiguel182]

It might not be cross-gen for ps4.5 to play ps5 games. I think we are done with exponential jumps. PS5 will probably only be 5 times ps4.5, if that. Ps4.5 would be able to play games at a reduced rez/frame-rate, just like Ps4 will with Ps4.5

This is my hope and what I'm waiting for. Backwards compability like the PC with the same basic arquitechture.

I'll jump on the next iteration before this one. Hopefully everything goes smooth with the original PS4 to make this model viable long term.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

A pro edition from last gen has nothing to do with what the ps4k will be.

My point was if the argument is people will be upset over one version of the console offering a better experience, we had the beginnings of that last generation with very little push back by the public.

We had two tiers (Pro/Elite/etc vs Arcade/Core) of the same console separated by price and features, some of which impacted performance. The performance and spec differences between the PS4 and the PS4k is just the next step in a trend that started and was accepted last generation.

 

[TGO]

Obviously Sony reads the boards I wonder whats their plans are now with unveiling this, has it changed what they was going to do terms of presentation

 

[TwilightPrincess]

Obviously Sony reads the boards I wonder whats their plans are now with unveiling this, has it changed what they was going to do terms of presentation

I hope they don´t cancel it.

 

[Daft Punk]

Because Consoles are supposed to be simple as hell. You buy the box. You buy the game. It works. When you start bringing in compatibility issues with games, you start losing people's interests.

Good thing Sony is building the Neo with compatibility in mind! Why are people making this seem like rocket science? You say the PS4 is weak and want an upgrade, but hold on! 3-4 years is too soon! Wait for another generation! Really? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

 

[HarryKS]

Obviously Sony reads the boards I wonder whats their plans are now with unveiling this, has it changed what they was going to do terms of presentation

I'm pretty sure they're quite happy.

PS4k leaks, if they were 'real' leaks at all, completely eclipsed any talk of the NX which was getting some traction.

When you have that much mindshare, you're gonna be ok.

 

[TGO]

I'm pretty sure they're quite happy.

PS4k leaks, if they were 'real' leaks at all, completely eclipsed any talk of the NX which was getting some traction.

When you have that much mindshare, you're gonna be ok.

I was talking more about how they present this to us, how they sell us on it now they know there's negativity around it.
Their presentation could have been big or small, had that changed will they spend more time hyping up the benefits or will they slightly announce it and Move on

Good thing Sony is building the Neo with compatibility in mind! Why are people making this seem like rocket science? You say the PS4 is weak and want an upgrade, but hold on! 3-4 years is too soon! Wait for another generation! Really? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

I'm no tech wizard, that went out the window when shaders became the language to translate lol
But even the PS4K is weak is it not?

 

[Audioboxer]

Obviously Sony reads the boards I wonder whats their plans are now with unveiling this, has it changed what they was going to do terms of presentation

Probably just hammer home how PS4 is still going to get all the games, and there will be no exclusive content.

It's not going to get cancelled because people are worrying about things Sony know themselves they won't be letting happen.