TheKastorian
Member
I am convinced that PS4K and the Nintendo NX are the same console:
Nintendo = Neo
Nintendo = Neo
There is a good reason to do it.
It's basically letting people drop softly, rather than all at once on announcement date.
Anytime there is major change people will get upset. And many will stay upset, but it will soften the blow when the change actually comes.
Such is life.
[...] The pace and cost of current tech means to make an affordable console these days, one that can sell well, it will at best match rather than supercede what's available on a triple the cost PC. So to make sure the console platform isn't years behind Sony are doing this, Microsoft and even Nintendo possibly following too [...]
I am convinced that PS4K and the Nintendo NX are the same console:
Nintendo = Neo
100:1 says if tweets made as representations for "most developers" disliking it never happened, the negative impact would be far, far less.
The internet in this case serves as self-validation for any negative feedback and many of us devs have stated the same thing over and over again as answers to a zillion different questions and the bottom line remains the same.
Truth is there is a "most developers" but it has to be on the other side by multiple counts. Neo, if true, would not be happening unless a majority of devs were on board. Unfortunately, hyperbole rules this conversation regardless of what is the truth. We see no corrections, no further discussions, only incessant, childlike rants and a bunch of developers wading in through this mess only to be told "NUH UH! BUT BUT BUT" by everyone.
Wait, isn't the OP of the post you're in right now a developer who did exactly that?
edit: well I guess one could argue gamasutra isn't a mainstream media elite since it's probably mostly followed by other developers...
A developer isn't going to update a ps4 game to make it look better on ps5 for free years after the release of the game. Just having BC will reduce these not FC.The problem with remastered is having to buy the game a second time to get whatever improvements the developer feels like adding. Forward compatibility solves that problem.
The problems with crossgen are more complicated. They're going to be substantially mitigated by numerous factors here: single software SKU supporting both products. Shared architecture, tools, and APIs. The games aren't "ported" in this case but rather you're almost certainly getting a single paramaterized executable that enables specific rendering paths but little else. The two systems in question represent only three years of technical evolution rather than an eight-year generational leap.
Interesting, whats your opinion on having a tool set evolve as opposed to say, starting again with a new system architecture? Has this accelerated you to put out products quicker or has that been offset by the increase in QA since you support multiple devices
No argument from me on those points
In my eyes, you have a 2 choices
(A) sit, accept it and deal the with the out-come:
> Poorly thought out Season passes
> Poorly thought out DLC
> Poorly thought out microtransactions
> Pay to play online multiplayer
or
(B) you can do something about them:
> The all digital future and used games fuss (see XB1 and PS4 reveals)
> vote with your wallet
Personally, I'm a choice (B) guy, i'll be voting with my wallet and soon hope to move to the glorious PC master race....cause lets face it, they were right... about everything
Fair enough, although there must be devs or publishers not under NDA that have an opinion on the matter
Yes. Sega tried mid-gen upgrades with 32X and SegaCD and both failed miserably. Every generation has lasted at least 5 years.
Well, before I go any further I should let you know that I'm still very early in my career (3 years in, so I haven't even worked through what you could call a "single" console iteration's time period) and there are many others out there that will have a much more informed opinion than myself. It's also that case that something that applies to mobile may not necessarily apply to a home console iteration, as some of the troubles are what you might call "bureaucratic" rather than technical.
To summarise though, it can be very convenient is some respects, as when a new device is released you don't have to change all that much to support it. Some releases incur more changes than others, but that's just how it goes.
It becomes difficult when you want to have a good player experience across a range of devices that can have up to 5 years between them, as despite your best intentions it can be incredibly difficult to get playable frame rates on the older devices whilst still trying to keep your games up to date with current visual standards. Obviously it's nice to have the extra horsepower to play with, but you're kinda castrated by the fact that you still need to ensure you're not alienating a large portion of your userbase who can't afford the latest device every year.
And as for QA, it takes ages. We've had points this year and last where we had builds ready to go for our various games, but we couldn't get them out due to the time it was taking to get them tested on all of the various devices/platforms that we support. I think what a lot of people don't realise is that you have to do the whole testing process for each platform, and believe me, that takes a long time!
Well, before I go any further I should let you know that I'm still very early in my career (3 years in, so I haven't even worked through what you could call a "single" console iteration's time period) and there are many others out there that will have a much more informed opinion than myself. It's also that case that something that applies to mobile may not necessarily apply to a home console iteration, as some of the troubles are what you might call "bureaucratic" rather than technical.
To summarise though, it can be very convenient is some respects, as when a new device is released you don't have to change all that much to support it. Some releases incur more changes than others, but that's just how it goes.
It becomes difficult when you want to have a good player experience across a range of devices that can have up to 5 years between them, as despite your best intentions it can be incredibly difficult to get playable frame rates on the older devices whilst still trying to keep your games up to date with current visual standards. Obviously it's nice to have the extra horsepower to play with, but you're kinda castrated by the fact that you still need to ensure you're not alienating a large portion of your userbase who can't afford the latest device every year.
And as for QA, it takes ages. We've had points this year and last where we had builds ready to go for our various games, but we couldn't get them out due to the time it was taking to get them tested on all of the various devices/platforms that we support. I think what a lot of people don't realise is that you have to do the whole testing process for each platform, and believe me, that takes a long time!
Each new device adds like 50% more QA work, yet our QA staff never grows by 50%. Sometimes it doesn't at all. That's an issue with this process.
That's not the device manufacturers fault (unless you happen to work for Sony). This is an issue you need to take up with your employer.
Thank you handsomecharles, Mo devices mo Problems as it were
Given the inability of some dev houses to put out a stable 30FPS with current hardware I start to become increasingly concerned that we may start seeing much MUCH longer periods to release..
But I'm just a consumer
Each new device adds like 50% more QA work, yet our QA staff never grows by 50%. Sometimes it doesn't at all. That's an issue with this process.
That's not the device manufacturers fault (unless you happen to work for Sony). This is an issue you need to take up with your employer.
The public has been outspoken due to a few pieces of hearsay by pundits. That sets the narrative to follow. Had the note been positive the reaction would differ. There was general and founded concern prior that got turned up to 11 in a heartbeat. My point for self-validation. We wouldn't have this entire thread or the zillion plus pages in Colin's thread if not for a few hyperbole laden comments made by he and others.My point, as a dev myself, is that the general public has been more outspoken on this than a usual console release. I'm not referring to developers at all. Truthfully, in the end our opinion matters very little to some kid buying a PS4. I'm referring to feedback I've seen from consumers on reddit, neogaf, facebook, twitter, etc.
As a consumer, I don't like it either. For no other reason than I feel bad for people who purchased a PS4 recently. I also don't get a PS4 for free.
A developer isn't going to update a ps4 game to make it look better on ps5 for free years after the release of the game. Just having BC will reduce these not FC.
Not only that, If he's retired it makes his opinion more trustworthy if he has absolutely no attachment or skin in the game, and just giving his candid unbiased opinion.
No. No no no.
A guy who hasn't been in the game for 4 years is one thing.
But a guy who hasn't ever been in the game at all has nothing to say that we should listen to.
His opinion isn't worth any more than that of any other poster here.
The public has been outspoken due to a few pieces of hearsay by pundits. That sets the narrative to follow. Had the note been positive the reaction would differ. There was general and founded concern prior that got turned up to 11 in a heartbeat. My point for self-validation. We wouldn't have this entire thread or the zillion plus pages in Colin's thread if not for a few hyperbole laden comments made by he and others.
Since then, there have been more than one article posted on the net other than Chubigans but because the narrative was set - poof. Makes no difference at this point.
The public has been outspoken due to a few pieces of hearsay by pundits. That sets the narrative to follow. Had the note been positive the reaction would differ. There was general and founded concern prior that got turned up to 11 in a heartbeat. My point for self-validation. We wouldn't have this entire thread or the zillion plus pages in Colin's thread if not for a few hyperbole laden comments made by he and others.
Since then, there have been more than one article posted on the net other than Chubigans but because the narrative was set - poof. Makes no difference at this point.
My point, as a dev myself, is that the general public has been more outspoken on this than a usual console release. I'm not referring to developers at all. Truthfully, in the end our opinion matters very little to some kid buying a PS4. I'm referring to feedback I've seen from consumers on reddit, neogaf, facebook, twitter, etc.
They were the first figureheads to spearhead the negativity. Until that point it was relatively balanced opinions between both camps from what everyone was reading. Since? Not so much.I completely disagree with this. The reaction was mixed from the get-go and just as intense if not more so. If anything it's lessened now that people have had time to think on it and vent; and it's still mixed, the lines have been drawn. It works both ways as well, GAF and the other gaming sites are echo chambers for opinions to fly and search for like-minded agreement. Don't lay the blame on pundits, the internet isn't a flock of sheep that follow the first public figure to speak.
Read above.Yeah, I'm not buying that at all. Before the comments were made by he and others we had threads that were 50/50 on here and on reddit specifically. They might have thrown gasoline on a fire with their comments but, that thing was already burning by then.
They were the first figureheads to spearhead the negativity. Until that point it was relatively balanced opinions between both camps from what everyone was reading. Since? Not so much.
If you don't believe that had anything to do with it, despite the fact that none of the threads even on here even made it close to the size of Colin's thread until after his tweet, I don't know what to tell you. It certainly stirred the hornet's nest and set the narrative.
Read above.
-
With this, I am out of this thread. There's little reason to keep talking in circles.
They were the first figureheads to spearhead the negativity. Until that point it was relatively balanced opinions between both camps from what everyone was reading. Since? Not so much.
If you don't believe that had anything to do with it, despite the fact that none of the threads even on here even made it close to the size of Colin's thread until after his tweet, I don't know what to tell you. It certainly stirred the hornet's nest and set the narrative.
Maybe step out of GAF once in a while. This is the only place where this topic is debated every day.With this, I am out of this thread. There's little reason to keep talking in circles.
Even ignoring the dozens of reasons that the phone market is not the same as the console market, and that Sony can't push fast mainstream acceptance in the same way that Apple can.......do you really want the games marketplace to turn into the iOS marketplace? Do you really want every game being written and designed for some junky 5 year old hardware because that's where the userbase is largest?
It seems to me the problem is that with incremental upgrades you end up being perpetually way behind the technology curve.
Each new device adds like 50% more QA work, yet our QA staff never grows by 50%. Sometimes it doesn't at all. That's an issue with this process.
Well with the current model, consoles were still hind the tech curb. Waiting years to release a new console only widened the gap. Unless we reach the point where users can swap out parts for better ones, consoles will remain behind the curb. That won't happen because the majority of people don't want to bother with all that technical stuff. Isn't that apart of what separates the console gamer base from the PC gamer base?
Why put a game on ps4 when ps5 comes out, unless your game easily fits within ps4 specs like some indies. You have an install base of 30 million ps4k. You target that and ps5. It solves the low initial install base risk problem. By then ps4k would come down in price to $299 or even lower. That makes upgrading easier for the 70 million ps4 owners.Iterative consoles with fc won't solve the cross gen games. They will still be there with ps5 even if the ps4k plays ps5 games.
There will be over 40 million ps4 out there when the ps4k is released and they will still sell the ps4 after it is released. So let's say both consoles combined will sell 100 million and the sales split between now and the ps5 release the sales are 50/50. That means there will be 70 million ps4s out there. With that amount of ps4s out there theres no way there won't be cros gen games the first 2 years holding some ps5 games back like it's happening now.
So now you still have held back games cause of cross gen but it will be held back cause of the ps4k also for the rest of the gen.
You do it cause it makes you more money even if you have to make sacrifices in the game like we have seen. Also if you are going to bring it down to ps4k why not just bring it down to ps4 cause then you would have over 2 times the install base.Why put a game on ps4 when ps5 comes out, unless your game easily fits within ps4 specs like some indies. You have an install base of 30 million ps4k. You target that and ps5. It solves the low initial install base risk problem. By then ps4k would come down in price to $299 or even lower. That makes upgrading easier for the 70 million ps4 owners.
Sales this gen have shown that early adopters were the big buyers. Ps4 and xbox1 games sold better than last gen versions as early as may 2014, just 6 months after release.You do it cause it makes you more money even if you have to make sacrifices in the game like we have seen. Also if you are going to bring it down to ps4k why not just bring it down to ps4 cause then you would have over 2 times the install base.
I don't think there are going to be PS4k games that don't run in the PS4 other than certain VR titles. If you are going to make the game run in the PS4k, why not go the extra mile and make it also available for the og PS4? It's the same architecture, same amount of RAM, same processor although slightly slower. The biggest difference would be in the GPU, but you can always lower some graphical settings and the resolution.Why put a game on ps4 when ps5 comes out, unless your game easily fits within ps4 specs like some indies. You have an install base of 30 million ps4k. You target that and ps5. It solves the low initial install base risk problem. By then ps4k would come down in price to $299 or even lower. That makes upgrading easier for the 70 million ps4 owners.
The box would be the version of the lowest working model. If it ran on Ps4 it would be a Ps4 game. If it ran on ps4k but not Ps4 it would be a ps4k game. This would only be after ps5 release. Before that all would be ps4 compatible.I don't think there are going to be PS4k games that don't run in the PS4 other than certain VR titles. If you are going to make the game run in the PS4k, why not go the extra mile and make it also available for the og PS4? It's the same architecture, same amount of RAM, same processor although slightly slower. The biggest difference would be in the GPU, but you can always lower some graphical settings and the resolution.
Also, what would you do with the discs. If there were hypothetical PS4k/PS5 games, would they be in the same disc? In a PS5 game box with a sticker saying 'PS4k compatible'. Or would the PS4k version have it's own disc with a sticker 'only for PS4k'?
I don't know, I don't think I see it.
The more I think about this, the more I notice it's going to be very difficult to explain to current PS4 owners without them feeling shafted.
Also, I don't understand how can somebody preorder PSVR now knowing that Sony is releasing a more powerful version of the PS4 at the same time. I see it as an indicator of PS4VR games looking bad, so that's why PS4k is there. If you buy PSVR, you are going to have to buy PS4k to fully enjoy it.
I don't think there are going to be PS4k games that don't run in the PS4 other than certain VR titles. If you are going to make the game run in the PS4k, why not go the extra mile and make it also available for the og PS4? It's the same architecture, same amount of RAM, same processor although slightly slower. The biggest difference would be in the GPU, but you can always lower some graphical settings and the resolution.
Also, what would you do with the discs. If there were hypothetical PS4k/PS5 games, would they be in the same disc? In a PS5 game box with a sticker saying 'PS4k compatible'. Or would the PS4k version have it's own disc with a sticker 'only for PS4k'?
I don't know, I don't think I see it.
The more I think about this, the more I notice it's going to be very difficult to explain to current PS4 owners without them feeling shafted.
Also, I don't understand how can somebody preorder PSVR now knowing that Sony is releasing a more powerful version of the PS4 at the same time. I see it as an indicator of PS4VR games looking bad, so that's why PS4k is there. If you buy PSVR, you are going to have to buy PS4k to fully enjoy it.
That's quiet a statement to make.
You're saying the former head of a large publisher has as much credit as an anonymous poster on a message board?!
Yeah, but when I bought PS2, PS3 and PS4 they weren't considered to be 'low tier' models, they were a five year promises, a unified box that will get all the necessary software, upgraded and perfected throughout console's lifespan and for the right price.
Yeah, but when I bought PS2, PS3 and PS4 they weren't considered to be 'low tier' models, they were a five year promises, a unified box that will get all the necessary software, upgraded and perfected throughout console's lifespan and for the right price.
Did you even read the article....
While not explicit promises, let's not pretend they're isn't an expected pattern that has existed since almost the entire existence of the console market.Nobody promised you anything.
I hate how some people consider people like me who don't wanna upgrade to be casuals. Another annoying thing from PS4K enthusiasts. It's either: "You're lying! You're gonna buy PS4K anyway!" which is NOT true. Or its: "You're a casual gamer if you don't think upgrade to PS4K"
It's not about being behind; it's about being more behind because you're still dragging the weakest model along. The current most recently released console will never be the baseline with an iterative model. At least with the current model, whatever model comes out becomes the baseline.
I hate how some people consider people like me who don't wanna upgrade to be casuals. Another annoying thing from PS4K enthusiasts. It's either: "You're lying! You're gonna buy PS4K anyway!" which is NOT true. Or its: "You're a casual gamer if you don't think upgrade to PS4K"