Support NeoGAF

[ScherzoPrime]

Please Nintendo support UHD Blu Ray. Buying a PS Neo mostly for this is so frustrating...

I'd prefer to switch to PC + Nintendo combo. I've been hesitant during the whole previous gen, now's the right time to jump in tailored PC gaming.

I kinda doubt that's gonna be the case; weren't the figures being reported that it was 'about' as powerful as an X1? In terms of power, if it's first to the market at least, it'd be the Wii U all over again. I see Nintendo as the real loser of all the iterative console talk, because there's no way they could commit to releasing a console every 3 to 4 years. I'm sure the NX itself is extremely painful for it to do.

I mean, can the Wii U even support DVDs? I'm honestly not sure, but I sort of doubt it. Nintendo doesn't really give a fuck about media functionality.

 

[Risk Breaker]

Need Modnation Racers 2 before it's all over


If you're a "power user" it makes more sense to buy a PC than an upgraded console.

Millions of "power users" upgraded their PCs during the end of last gen or so just because consoles were way too long in the tooth. I know people that bough 960 rigs and will be very happy with them for a good while (it still costed 1000 euro as well).

If they can game at very high quality with a 399-499 machine and have exclusive games, why bother upgrading their PC for $$$ and minimal upgrades.

Difference between a PS3 and a 970 was HUGE. Difference between a Neo and a 1070 is not that big anymore, and the GPU alone will cost almost as much as the console.

Yeah. It seemed to me right from the start this was always the plan. A 3-4 year cycle.

It wasn't.

 

[wapplew]

I kinda doubt that's gonna be the case; weren't the figures being reported that it was 'about' as powerful as an X1? In terms of power, if it's first to the market at least, it'd be the Wii U all over again. I see Nintendo as the real loser of all the iterative console talk, because there's no way they could commit to releasing a console every 3 to 4 years. I'm sure the NX itself is extremely painful for it to do.

I mean, can the Wii U even support DVDs? I'm honestly not sure, but I sort of doubt it. Nintendo doesn't really give a fuck about media functionality.

What? Nintendo doing iterative hardware since Gameboy, they are like the master of it.

 

[ScherzoPrime]

It wasn't.

It certainly wasn't Microsoft's; I wonder how much of the gameplan had to be written on the fly.

At any rate; I actually have hope for this iterative console model. The 5-6 year console generation just wasn't sustainable; I think everyone could see that. And I think this new plan gives them confidence moving forward whereas several years ago there was very shaky ground. I think the dearth of support early on for the consoles is because of anxiety over whether there actually was going to be a future for console gaming. I think this new model can reassure publishers that console manufacturers have a plan to keep a stable, sustainable platform.

What? Nintendo doing iterative hardware since Gameboy, they are like the master of it.

On handhelds, yes. Consoles not so much. Even then most of the time it was mainly about form factor, not raw power boosts. Gameboy Color, DSi, and the New 3DS are the ones that stand out in power regard, and I'd say the Color was the one that brought the biggest enhancement. (Besides the N3DS being necessary for certain games being, you know, actually playable)

 

[geordiemp]

I see Nintendo as the real loser of all the iterative console talk, because there's no way they could commit to releasing a console every 3 to 4 years. I'm sure the NX itself is extremely painful for it to do.
.

Only Nintendo can get away with constant iteration and different SKU's for their fanbase imo. How many 3DS SKU are there again, I lost count.

 

[Risk Breaker]

It certainly wasn't Microsoft's; I wonder how much of the gameplan had to be written on the fly.

At any rate; I actually have hope for this iterative console model. The 5-6 year console generation just wasn't sustainable; I think everyone could see that. And I think this new plan gives them confidence moving forward whereas several years ago there was very shaky ground. I think the dearth of support early on for the consoles is because of anxiety over whether there actually was going to be a future for console gaming. I think this new model can reassure publishers that console manufacturers have a plan to keep a stable, sustainable platform.

Yeah, exactly. Great way to put it.

I'm really surprised so many people here, in a great community like this one, are so scared or concerned for this in a classical case of "old man yells at cloud".

Spoiler

I know half of them are "fanboy concerns", but still.

 

[Fafalada]

Proposal: The amount of people on the forum who are very concerned

You're going to want to run some statistics to back this one up - extrapolating purely from the amount of noise in forum threads only tells you that there are "some" people who are invested in the topic, but says nothing about the overall state of mind for the market (even for the enthusiast subset of the market).
If there's one thing that online-games industry taught me - the loudest people on internet are more often a tiny minority than the other way around.

It's always seems av silly comparison when most people have their phones subsidised on contacts.

I can't speak for US, but in every other country I've seen, "subsidized" contracts are a scam where you end up paying the phone prices regardless relative to avoiding the contract alltogether or using providers that have plans with no phones.
Of course - people can't be bothered with elementary school math, so they still do it anyway.

 

[ScherzoPrime]

Only Nintendo can get away with constant iteration and different SKU's for their fanbase imo. How many 3DS SKU are there again, I lost count.

Only the N3DS, in terms of 3DSes, has a raw power boost, and even then wasn't it rather mishandled in terms of marketing? I swear, Nintendo has gotten worse and worse at naming things.

 

[Chû Totoro]

I kinda doubt that's gonna be the case; weren't the figures being reported that it was 'about' as powerful as an X1? In terms of power, if it's first to the market at least, it'd be the Wii U all over again. I see Nintendo as the real loser of all the iterative console talk, because there's no way they could commit to releasing a console every 3 to 4 years. I'm sure the NX itself is extremely painful for it to do.

I mean, can the Wii U even support DVDs? I'm honestly not sure, but I sort of doubt it. Nintendo doesn't really give a fuck about media functionality.

Yeah I edited my post. It's really unlikely (and I wasn't even asking for 4K gaming... I just want UHD player capabilities. But like you're saying and knowing Nintendo, it probably won't happen.

Now I still have a few games I want to play on PS4 (TLG, Shenmue 3 and a few other interesting games) so the transition is still interesting in more ways that UHD compatibility.

I'm just hoping PS Neo is still 2016... else I may wait to know more regarding Microsoft's plans because their system will for sure support UHD.

Argh... this E3, no news, no hype, no megatons

There's still hope? (Geoff I'm looking at you )

 

[geordiemp]

Only the N3DS, in terms of 3DSes, has a raw power boost, and even then wasn't it rather mishandled in terms of marketing? I swear, Nintendo has gotten worse and worse at naming things.

You also got the L, Xl and different sizes, different screens and stuff as well. They seem to be masters at getting dedicated fans into buying multiple versions of the same thing (bleeding them dry). But thats not the topic, sorry to digress.

You're going to want to run some statistics to back this one up - extrapolating purely from the amount of noise in forum threads only tells you that there are "some" people who are invested in the topic

Go read the

what do you want for Uc4 upgrade

on Neo topic, its pretty clear what gamers want - I would be surprised if anybody did not say they would want 60 FPS for games like Uc4 or witcher 3. I would eat my hat.

 

[flipswitch]

Smartphone cycle is once a year isn't it?

 

[The God]

Millions of "power users" upgraded their PCs during the end of last gen or so just because consoles were way too long in the tooth. I know people that bough 960 rigs and will be very happy with them for a good while (it still costed 1000 euro as well).

If they can game at very high quality with a 399-499 machine and have exclusive games, why bother upgrading their PC for $$$ and minimal upgrades.

Difference between a PS3 and a 970 was HUGE. Difference between a Neo and a 1070 is not that big anymore, and the GPU alone will cost almost as much as the console.



It wasn't.

Those people will upgrade their PC instead because they won't have to cross their fingers for certain parts of their games to be upgraded, or for their games to be upgraded at all. They'll get to choose which parts of their system to upgrade and can
tweak the settings of their games to their liking. You're not doing any of this on an upgraded console. And then there's other benefits that a lot of PC players wouldn't want to leave behind.

This what people mean when they talk about consoles trying to be PCs without PC benefits.

 

[ScherzoPrime]

Those people will upgrade their PC instead because they won't have to cross their fingers for certain parts of their games to be upgraded, or for their games to be upgraded at all. They'll get to choose which parts of their system to upgrade and can
tweak the settings of their games to their liking. You're not doing any of this on an upgraded console. And then there's other benefits that a lot of PC players wouldn't want to leave behind.

This what people mean when they talk about consoles trying to be PCs without PC benefits.

But there's also the convenience factor of owning a console; that's definitely what appeals to me.

At any rate, I doubt any of this is about getting PC gamers to buy into a console ecosystem. It's about creating a new, more sustainable console business model.

 

[Risk Breaker]

Those people will upgrade their PC instead because they won't have to cross their fingers for certain parts of their games to be upgraded, or for their games to be upgraded at all. They'll get to choose which parts of their system to upgrade and can
tweak the settings of their games to their liking. You're not doing any of this on an upgraded console. And then there's other benefits that a lot of PC players wouldn't want to leave behind.

This what people mean when they talk about consoles trying to be PCs without PC benefits.

They'll get to cross their fingers that their 2 year old GPU is not obsolete with a newer, shinier release that is 400$ and their GPU will suddenly drop in value. And every game on PC is a performance lottery as well, depending also on which brand your GPU is

And I'm not saying these people wouldn't have a PC. They just will lose interest in upgrading to a, say, 1070, since they can buy a Neo for the same price almost.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Hmm they use smartphone a comparison but I explicitly remember apps becoming choppy or unplayable between iPhone iterations. Colour me worried.

 

[Sid]

So how long till they drop support for the 'base' PS4?

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

The chatter I keep hearing is that MS and Sony are switching to a mobile-esqe platform for content delivery, this is reflected in the messaging that House and Spencer have conveyed; that inherently demands more fluid compatibility between platforms. At the very least on MS's side, the development of UWAs seems to indicate that purchases are intended to be viable across different platforms.

"More fluid compatibility" doesn't equal either forward compatibility or perpetual backwards compatibility. There are other less radical benefits for having better compatibility, plain jane developer familiarity benefits, regular one generation backwards compatibility, or the ability to do a mid-generation update ala the Neo.

It's also a lot harder to mandate long-term compatibility when your hardware spans most of a decade rather than yearly updates, it leaves a lot of space for disruptive technological and market changes to derail indefinite compatibility plans.

I think a hybrid version of the traditional console generation is the more reasonable expectation at the moment, it gives Sony room to adapt without potentially creating brand confusion.

 

[The God]

But there's also the convenience factor of owning a console; that's definitely what appeals to me.

At any rate, I doubt any of this is about getting PC gamers to buy into a console ecosystem. It's about creating a new, more sustainable console business model.

Yeah the convenience is nice, but I don't think that's enough for a power user to go with an upgraded console over a PC.

 

[Risk Breaker]

So how long till they drop support for the 'base' PS4?

When PS5 comes out and PS4 ('s games) stops selling, duh.

 

[Volotaire]

Smartphone cycle is once a year isn't it?

Smartphone manufacturers release their flagships once a year with iterative upgrades every half a year or quarter, but the tech of smartphones and major releases follow a 6 month schedule (technology wise).

Samsung (S series) , Sony (not so much now), HTC , LG release in 1H and Samsung (Note series), Apple, Google in 2H. OnePlus , Huawei also are players. You'll see the 1H phones with Snapdragon 820 chips but the 2H with 821/823 chips. Next year you will see 1H phones with 830, and then 83x for 2H2017.

 

[Sid]

When PS5 comes out and PS4 ('s games) stops selling, duh.

Hoping that is still the case....

 

[KZObsessed]

So how long till they drop support for the 'base' PS4?

“It is intended to sit alongside and complement the standard PS4,” he said. “We will be selling both [versions] through the life cycle.”

From the OP.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

No, why would it be? The Neo isn't 24 months after the PS4. Where do people keep pulling this dumb 2 year number from? It'll probably have been 3 years at least by the time the Neo is out, I'd say a hair short at 35 months at absolute minimum. Then there's the Scorpio which will have been 4 years by the time it's out.

you could just reply without the insults and putting me in a group of people
I was just thinking if MS really has a stronger Scorpio Sony might rush out another step ahead to keep up with them

Maybe not in 24 months exactly but yes, 99% sure about that.

fair enough

IMO Probably 36 months between hardware launches, probably hear about it 6-12 months prior.

Should be a 'true' generational leap to - more to Neo than Scorpio's rumoured specs are to Xbone.

I guess I should have said 36 months

Because reading comprehension is at an all time low ITT.

There were people who read House's quote about the two consoles 'sitting next to each other' and thought he was talking about literally having the two sat next to each other in homes.

People see '...cycle similar to cellphones' and in their heads it becomes 'exactly like cellphones', hence the two year nonsense.

:|

I might just skip Neo and play wait and see for the first year at least

 

[Kyoufu]

In terms of Microsoft Xbox and PC will be one so I don't worry much about the exclusives on that side.

But if you're referring to Sony would it be wise to pay a $100-200 premium for weaker hardware just for about a few exclusives that will or will not be relevant? Not to mention the fact that in the next 5-10 years I might have the capability to play said exclusives on my machine later on via emulation, but that's not the relevant discussion.

It's not worth the price they are asking. Maybe if they subsidized it in some way through a trade-in program or subscription of sorts.

If you're only using the machine for exclusives then I don't see why you'd even consider PS4K unless of course you wanted its 4K media capabilities (assuming it has that). You'd be just fine with a regular PS4 unless you really wanted the best possible experience with the exclusives.

I tend to go for the best product possible. I don't game on PC all that much but I do keep it upgraded throughout the years, but that's just me.

 

[Cartho]

I think it's a pretty sensible decision to hold back on showing it to be honest. We've seen how announcements can damage a console (Xbox One) if not handled right and this is an entirely new model for how game consoles could work.

If they announce it too early and what they show doesn't meet people's expectations then the whole thing could be dead in the water. Better to wait for a few more months and come out swinging at, say, Gamescom or a later PlayStation Experience with some mind blowing stuff. Just showing off Bloodborne running at 60 FPS might be a system seller to people on Gaf (it would be with me!), but it probably wouldn't be for the general public at large. They need a whole host of games, both new and old, which showcase what it can do.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to keep saving pennies for the 1080Ti / big Pascal, whenever it arrives.

 

[Loudninja]

Hoping that is still the case....

Its right in the OP.

 

[Callibretto]

If you're only using the machine for exclusives then I don't see why you'd even consider PS4K unless of course you wanted its 4K media capabilities (assuming it has that). You'd be just fine with a regular PS4 unless you really wanted the best possible experience with the exclusives.

I tend to go for the best product possible. I don't game on PC all that much but I do keep it upgraded throughout the years, but that's just me.

Maybe if Scorpio somehow start kicking Neo's ass in sale number, than maybe Sony will fast track a new PS4 iteration after Neo.

But I really doubt that. Even if Scorpio become really competitive again in US/UK. I have hard time imagining it winning worldwide.

Sony didn't even try to fast track PS4 after PS3 blunder and wait it out for 8 years together with XB360. Partly because imo even though they lost in US/UK. The rest of the world pick up the slack.

 

[ScherzoPrime]

"More fluid compatibility" doesn't equal either forward compatibility or perpetual backwards compatibility. There are other less radical benefits for having better compatibility, plain jane developer familiarity benefits, regular one generation backwards compatibility, or the ability to do a mid-generation update ala the Neo.

It's also a lot harder to mandate long-term compatibility when your hardware spans most of a decade rather than yearly updates, it leaves a lot of space for disruptive technological and market changes to derail indefinite compatibility plans.

I think a hybrid version of the traditional console generation is the more reasonable expectation at the moment, it gives Sony room to adapt without potentially creating brand confusion.

The problem is it's no longer economical to future proof a console the way they used to; HW manufacturers can't afford to sell consoles at a loss anymore. Since the architecture is more and more like a PC's, there's not a lot of 'hidden potential' in consoles as much as there used to be; it's much more what you see is what you get.

 

[Memorabilia]

I it's a pretty sensible decision to hold back on showing it to be honest. We've seen how announcements can damage a console (Xbox One) and this is an entirely new model for how game consoles could work.

If they announce it too early and what they show doesn't meet people's expectations then the whole thing could be dead in the water. Better to wait for a few more months and come out swinging at, say, Gamescom or a later PlayStation Experience with some mind blowing stuff. Just showing off Bloodborne running at 60 FPS might be a system seller to people on Gaf (it would be with me!), but it probably wouldn't be for the general public at large. They need a whole host of games, both new and old, which showcase what it can do.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to keep saving pennies for the 1080Ti / big Pascal, whenever it arrives.

Some nice thoughts. I'd add that most likely the main reason they're pushing back any overly public reveals / announcements would logically be to avoid killing sales of the current PS4 between now n then. They'll want to time any reveals closer to the actual market availability so as to minimize cannibalizing the standard PS4.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

The problem is it's no longer economical to future proof a console the way they used to; HW manufacturers can't afford to sell consoles at a loss anymore. Since the architecture is more and more like a PC's, there's not a lot of 'hidden potential' in consoles as much as there used to be; it's much more what you see is what you get.

Hence why they are adopting the mid-generation update as made famous by the iPhone S...but using that to extrapolate there will be no traditional generation and there will be things like forward compatibility or perpetual backwards compatibility is a bit of a stretch right now.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

So they release Neo to keep up with tech and yet 5/6 years console leaps only marginal gains, technology advancement too fast or too slow?

Most of us fear that the new iterative model will have a negative impact on the overall technological development, thanks to the legacy platforms which still have to be supported.

But basically, things won't change that much, let's have a look at my updated roadmaps:

First, the classic approach, which already includes regular (2-3 year) upgrades of the "current console generation" in its classic sense:

As you can see, generations are clearly defined (PS4, PS5, etc) and have their own library, with PS5 platform being backwards compatible to play PS4 games, while PS4 cannot play PS5 games. In this model, we'll see a generational leap of games (!) each 5-6 years, while we get an upgrade of the new console generation after 2-3 years.


After reading the comments of the last months and in this thread, I come to the conclusion that a lot of people think that this is how things will turn out.


As I said before, I don't. I think Sony abandonend the classic hardware generation model and is going to switch to an iterative model. Main difference is that hardware and games generation are detached from each other:

Thing is, we still get a new generation of games which exploit the new power every 5-6 years, like we're used to. Due to the iterative hardware model, the differences will be more "fluent", hence the improvements between each new SKU will be incremental instead of revolutionary.


Any thoughts on that from you guys? Did I get something wrong?

 

[Omnistalgic]

It's supposed to be the same platform though.

Says who?

Y u no recognize sarcasm

lol I did...

The Cell Phone comment is just talking about how people’s purchasing habits have changed, how people upgrade more often now, not that Sony is releasing something every year or even 2 years. Dunno why that quote is in the title of the thread?

 

[Malakai]

I wonder how will the mainstream gamers receive this iterative update cycle for gaming colones? I feel like people are downplaying this? Furthermore, I don't trust this industry well enough with an iterative update approach to consoles. They are barely making working games out on timely fashion with solely a PS4 and Xbox One; now, all of a sudden it is beneficial for developers to add one another two platforms? Two, given how publishers take the easy way out--will this lead to a lesser experience of gaming software that runs on the original PS4 and Xbox model. Again, I wonder how will go over with gaming customers that aren't enthusiast? Non-enthusiast may not be able to directly tell if they are inferior experience with the original PS4 and Xbox One model; however, I'm will to bet they know when something is "off" (weather that is uptick of games with screen tearing, choppy frame rates, lack of AA and etc). Will Sony and Microsoft enforce standards for the original PS4 and Xbox One to run game at decent.

 

[SeanTSC]

Most of us fear that the new iterative model will have a negative impact on the overall technological development, thanks to the legacy platforms which still have to be supported.

But basically, things won't change that much, let's have a look at my updated roadmaps:

First, the classic approach, which already includes regular (2-3 year) upgrades of the "current console generation" in its classic sense:

As you can see, generations are clearly defined (PS4, PS5, etc) and have their own library, with PS5 platform being backwards compatible to play PS4 games, while PS4 cannot play PS5 games. In this mode, we'll see a generational leap of games (!) each 5-6 years, while we get an upgrade of the new console generation after 2-3 years.


After reading the comments of the last months and in this thread, I come to the conclusion that a lot of people think that this is how things will turn out.


As I said before, I don't. I think Sony abandonend the classic hardware generation model and is going to switch to an iterative model. Main difference is that hardware and games generation are detached from each other:

Thing is, we still get a new generation of games which exploit the new power every 5-6 years, like we're used to. Due to the iterative hardware model, the differences will be more "fluent", hence the improvements between each new SKU will be incremental instead of revolutionary.


Any thoughts on that from you guys? Did I get something wrong?

I don't think you got anything wrong and I'm with you on thinking it'll be the second model. I also think that any fears of it having a negative impact on tech development are highly exaggerated or even outright unfounded due to the X86 platform and engine scaling.

 

[family_guy]

Smartphones are subsidized on contracts.

They can also all fit in one drawer.

Most of them aren't anymore. You can do a payment plan though.

 

[mrklaw]

I might just skip Neo and play wait and see for the first year at least

As much as I love my tech, I might do this too. i like the idea of better detail in games, but also it'll be held back because no games will be targeted to its power so the baseline doesn't really get raised.

Having said with PS4 it has taken some time for that to filter through into PC games being more demanding and starting to benefit from more threads etc. So maybe it'll work out? Neo comes out and initially you get some settings turned up, and by the time Neo2 is due, the baseline starts to raise as the PS4 is slowly deprecated.

 

[rpg_fan]

It's starting to sound a lot like Intel's tick-tock model.

 

[sweetvar26]

These new rumors point out to life cycle of the consoles being more similar to cars rather than cell phones.

Cars usually have a life cycle of around 5-7 years. During their initial release, everything about the car is brand new starting with the platform. During the third or the fourth year, usually gets a facelift with cosmetic changes to it and probably tweaked power from the engines when they refine them a bit more based on the current specs. Eventually the platform changes during the 5-7 year period and then a complete redesigned car is released.

Pretty much the same, so with the PS4/X1 new architecture and console, PS4 Neo/X1 Scorpio, we get the minor changes to it with a power bump in specs, and then like always we might see a new generation of consoles in 2020 with new architecture.

I thought we would see them in 2019 this generation but considering they are releasing spec bump upgrades, they will wait for a 7 year cycle and more likely seeing the newer generation from 2020 and above. Obviously we can't expect the leap for the next generation to be as substantial as the PS3->PS4 or the 360->X1.

 

[DagnastyEp]

So how long till they drop support for the 'base' PS4?

Since, with Neo, all games need run on the standard PS4, I'm more interested in what happens after Neo. Is it continually iterative, where the there's a Neo 2 in 2-3 years, base PS4 support is dropped, and it's Neo and Neo 2 going forward with that cycle continuing. Or does PS5 come out in 3-4 years and is a massive leap, and support for both PS4 and PS4 Neo are stopped?

 

[Bitch Pudding]

So how long till they drop support for the 'base' PS4?

One way or the other, they'll stop "forced" vanilla PS4 support as soon as the PS4 Neo successor arrives.

 

[TrackZ]

This move will allow the console space to accommodate different types of buyers. It's good business. It's the business of every other consumer electronics device.

Exactly. 2 models at 2 price points is perfect. Those with the money can opt for the better spec, but there's still an accessible spec for others to enjoy. Then just trickle down and bring a new high spec model every 2 years.

This kind of product program may keep me from continueing with my PC.

 

[Kyoufu]

So how long till they drop support for the 'base' PS4?

When PS5 comes out.

 

[Sid]

These new rumors point out to life cycle of the consoles being more similar to cars rather than cell phones.

Cars usually have a life cycle of around 5-7 years. During their initial release, everything about the car is brand new starting with the platform. During the third or the fourth year, usually gets a facelift with cosmetic changes to it and probably tweaked power from the engines when they refine them a bit more based on the current specs. Eventually the platform changes during the 5-7 year period and then a complete redesigned car is released.

Pretty much the same, so with the PS4/X1 new architecture and console, PS4 Neo/X1 Scorpio, we get the minor changes to it with a power bump in specs, and then like always we might see a new generation of consoles in 2020 with new architecture.

I thought we would see them in 2019 this generation but considering they are releasing spec bump upgrades, they will wait for a 7 year cycle and more likely seeing the newer generation from 2020 and above. Obviously we can't expect the leap for the next generation to be as substantial as the PS3->PS4 or the 360->X1.

I find it hard to believe that the leap from base PS4 to base PS5 won't be as big as PS3 to PS4 especially if it comes out in 2020 or later.

 

[TrackZ]

Proposal: The amount of people on the forum who are very concerned that their PS4 will no longer be the most powerful PlayStation within six months and/or that the Xbox Scorpio will be more powerful than both their PS4 and the PS4K in 2017 suggests that hardware power is a really notable concern for many enthusiast gamers.

These people are not the enthusiasts though. If they were, they be excited for the powerful hardware and ready to open their wallets.

 

[RulkezX]

I can't speak for US, but in every other country I've seen, "subsidized" contracts are a scam where you end up paying the phone prices regardless relative to avoiding the contract alltogether or using providers that have plans with no phones.
Of course - people can't be bothered with elementary school math, so they still do it anyway.

I was basing it off the UK , where a sim free Iphone 6s will probably run you £700 but a 2 year contract with a free phone , unlimites calls , unlimited textstexts and 8GB data pm will cost maybe £850 over the duration of the contract.

Sure, you're largely paying for the phone, but you're not having to drop £700 every 2 years

These people are not the enthusiasts though. If they were, they be excited for the powerful hardware and ready to open their wallets.

The enthusiasts you speak of are opening their wallets for a GTX 1080 /s

What classifies as an enthusiast ?

I have bought every console from Sega , MS, Sony and Ninty day one, I own all the handhelds, a tablet, a smartphone and a high end gaming PC..... I spend hundreds every year on games and peripherals or whatever. I'm not unusual on this forum , at all.

It's a huge culture shift for console gamers , one that personally makes me think I'll just abandon consoles altogether seeing everything but Sony exclusives come to PC now anyway.

 

[Hermii]

When is Agent Smith coming out? Thats the one I want.

 

[Loudninja]

One way or the other, they'll stop "forced" vanilla PS4 support as soon as the PS4 Neo successor arrives.

Not going to happen.

It would be a new gen by then.

 

[mejin]

One way or the other, they'll stop "forced" vanilla PS4 support as soon as the PS4 Neo sucessor arrives.

I don't see it as sucessor for Neo. I expect a sucessor for PS4 platform. So, I do believe they'll stop production of PS4 OG sooner than Neo, of course. But I expect PS4 still getting all games coming for PS4 platform, no Neo exclusives with (possible PS5).

Sony should let people decide when it's time to get a new playstation, but not force them to do it. They'll be locked to the platform anyway or at least most of their public will upgrade to continue to play the games they already have (better) and for new games. Sony should just focus on their killer lineup, people will do the rest.

I do hope it works this way. I do hope that's their vision for their ecossystem.

 

[The God]

When is Agent Smith coming out? Thats the one I want.

That's the Vita successor

 

[Kyoufu]

Proposal: The amount of people on the forum who are very concerned that their PS4 will no longer be the most powerful PlayStation within six months and/or that the Xbox Scorpio will be more powerful than both their PS4 and the PS4K in 2017 suggests that hardware power is a really notable concern for many enthusiast gamers.

I've seen more people here unwilling to purchase another box than buying into the idea of a more powerful system for better performing games.

Hence why these PS4K/Neo threads seem to be filled with so much negativity. They don't want to spend more money.

I mean, it makes sense since usually the average console gamer will go for the cheaper product. A big reason why PS4 was welcomed with open arms when it launched.