Support NeoGAF

[jeffram]

I read somewhere here that the 4K player is 15 bucks.

Even if, there's licensing fees to consider as well. Let's just say it's $5, so $20 total. They are probably going to sell 50 million more consoles.

That's a BILLION DOLLAR BET on physical media. Sony is going to push streaming, and it's probably the right call.

 

[kikonawa]

actually with a 1TB drive is $50 more expensive with 3x the power

I this thread somehow only xbox fans have a problem with ps pro's lack of uhd drive

Like you point out the difference between a ps4pro and ps slim is only 50$ €

 

[cyen]

Even if, there's licensing fees to consider as well. Let's just say it's $5, so $20 total. They are probably going to sell 50 million more consoles.

That's a BILLION DOLLAR BET on physical media. Sony is going to push streaming, and it's probably the right call.

Not the right call at all and considering the history of ps2 and ps3 when it comes to push new media formats, the right call would be to included the new uhd format.

99% of the people would pay 20$ extra for uhd playback, i and my friends would.

Right now instead buying only a ps4 pro i will have to add the cost of an Xbox one s.

 

[paperspace]

I know the Pro is nice for the price, but how much does an actual UHD blu-ray player cost? People seem to think that it's expensive and that's why it's excluded, but I don't see how that's possible when XB1S cost $299.

Lets look at the Slim's

Xbox One S $299 with UHD drive
PS4 Slim $299 without UHD drive

If the UHD drive IS expensive then why isn't that shown on the Slim's?

And if it's NOT expensive, then why didn't Sony include an UHD drive in the Pro?

People believe anything to defend anything, it seems.

 

[MisterXDTV]

I this thread somehow only xbox fans have a problem with ps pro's lack of uhd drive

Like you point out the difference between a ps4pro and ps slim is only 50$ €

I meant $50 between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One S 1 TB.

But still, even the PS4 Slim is a better gaming machine than the Xbox One S. A 4K TV already upscales from 1080p to 4K. No need for the console to do that....

It's your choice: a better gaming machine (2 models) VS a better media player

As far as I know, consoles are gaming machines first and foremost

 

[Gamezone]

But what about the non-uhd devices? That sounds like a mess. And 99% of day one patches have nothing to do with disc capacity.


It would be better if Sony were include a uhd player, it would also be better if they included hdmi pass through, connect, etc... but all of those things cost money.

It would also be better if Ms, in 2016, was selling a console with more than 1.3Tf , it would be better if they had something better than gddr3 memory, but those things cost money.

Now think about it, who is making the right decisions for their games console in 2016?

The none-UHD devices is the problem. It`s impossible because of that. I know that patches has nothing to do with the size, but we are getting close to the 50 GB limit on Blu-ray discs becoming an issue.

 

[ReBurn]

Even if, there's licensing fees to consider as well. Let's just say it's $5, so $20 total. They are probably going to sell 50 million more consoles.

That's a BILLION DOLLAR BET on physical media. Sony is going to push streaming, and it's probably the right call.

It's not actually a billion dollar bet. They aren't buying 50 million drives all at once, so there's no actual investment other than the units already produced and not sold since costs would be recouped via sales. Cost of materials would drop as economy of scale is established, so it probably wouldn't cost $15 more for the entire marketable lifespan of the product. I also think 50 million Pro units is ambitious considering it's competing with a lower priced unit that plays the same games.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

Not the right call at all and considering the history of ps2 and ps3 when it comes to push new media formats, the right call would be to included the new uhd format.

99% of the people would pay 20$ extra for uhd playback, i and my friends would.

Right now instead buying only a ps4 pro i will have to add the cost of an Xbox one s.

So if the PS4 doesn't play UHD your only choice is to buy another $300 console? Lawl

Edit: mistake on my part price was wrong

 

[jeffram]

Not the right call at all and considering the history of ps2 and ps3 when it comes to push new media formats, the right call would be to included the new uhd format.

99% of the people would pay 20$ extra for uhd playback, i and my friends would.

Right now instead buying only a ps4 pro i will have to add the cost of an Xbox one s.

I bet that $419 would lose themmore sales than the uhd player would gain them sales.

I'm in the same boat as you, I will probably get a uhd player, and it would have been nicer to have it in the ps4p, I would pay more. It's a nice to have. But at the end of the day, we're both still buying a ps4p. That might say it all right there.

 

[Chû Totoro]

If you don't need or want the feature that's ok but acting like having it would be sort of bad ?!?

Some people are really weird.

Also why HDR would be good for games as a better res (even if not native 4K) but should be sort of useless for movies ?!?

Again this thread is loco

 

[Raymo]

You can get a stand alone player for around $100 bucks.

This is not true.

 

[MisterXDTV]

This is not true.

Not yet. But the first Samsung UHD-Player is falling down in price rather quickly.

 

[SolidusDave]

For the people who defend the omission with the argument "sony/anyone doesn't care about discs" etc, do you think the next PS4 model and/or the PS5 won't have a 4K blu-ray drive? I.e. within 2-3 years.
Because it will.

 

[MisterXDTV]

For the people who defend the omission with the argument "who cares about discs" etc, do you think the next PS4 model and/or the PS5 won't have a 4K blu-ray drive? I.e. within 2-3 years.

In 3 years the 4K drive will cost nothing especially if the format bombs, so yeah their next console should have it unless they ditch the drive completely...

 

[JetBlackPanda]

This is not true.

You're right sorry those are upscale players. I haven't bought a physical disk for movies in 5 years. If an UHD drive is so cheap why are stand alones 300 dollars?

I think it would be nice to have one in the pro but most people don't seem to care or buy films on disk. 4K steaming and Netflix seems like a better option to me.

 

[jeffram]

It's not actually a billion dollar bet. They aren't buying 50 million drives all at once, so there's no actual investment other than the units already produced and not sold since costs would be recouped via sales. Cost of materials would drop as economy of scale is established, so it probably wouldn't cost $15 more for the entire marketable lifespan of the product. I also think 50 million Pro units is ambitious considering it's competing with a lower priced unit that plays the same games.

i was counting PS4 pro and PS4 slim as new consoles not getting uhd players, but I get your point. It doesn't matter if the cost is all at once or not, they have to consider the entire cost of the life cycle. Costs will come down yes, but so will the cost of non-uhd players, the difference between the two is the cost to consider. Let's just say it's 500 million dollars then. Think of what Sony can do with that money? They could secure 3rd party exclusives, have marketing deals, fund what? 3 AAA games?

You honestly think that the money is better spent betting on physical media to generate sales?

 

[EmiPrime]

If you don't need or want the feature that's ok but acting like having it would be sort of bad ?!?

It's bad if it puts the price up or comes at the expense of something else in the machine as gaming is the focus. Sony didn't want to exceed $400.

 

[tapedeck]

Good God..the efforts people have put in to defend this move is hilarious.

Bottom line, PS4Pro is being advertised as a 4K device for the high-end consumer. Logic would tell anyone who is even remotely interested in purchasing one that of course it plays 4K Blu-Rays. $15 or whatever the cost is per unit doesn't magically erase that fact and the omission is an obvious negative to the appeal factor of the systems target audience.

You can type a 3000 word reply and it still won't change this.

 

[paperspace]

It's bad if it puts the price up or comes at the expense of something else in the machine as gaming is the focus. Sony didn't want to exceed $400.

So I guess you'll be disappointed when the PS5 has UHD included.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

Good God..the efforts people have put in to defend this move is hilarious.

Bottom line, PS4Pro is being advertised as a 4K device for the high-end consumer. Logic would tell anyone who is even remotely interested in purchasing one that of course it plays 4K Blu-Rays. $15 or whatever the cost is per unit doesn't magically erase that fact and the omission is an obvious negative to the appeal factor of the systems target audience.

You can type a 3000 word reply and it still won't change this.

Its being targeted at gamers that have a 4K set. It's obviously not being targeted at high end consumers that want UHD disks. They aren't hiding the fact it doesn't have one and $399 is the same price the launch unit sold for. Nothing here screams high end consumer.

 

[tapedeck]

Its being targeted at 4K gamers that have a 4K set. It's obviously not being targeted at high end consumers that want UHD disks. They aren't hiding the fact it doesn't have one and $399 is the same price the launch unit sold for. Nothing here screams high end consumer.

Except Sonys entire PS4P presentation.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

Except Sonys entire PS4P presentation.

You mean the one that showed all games?

 

[jeffram]

Good God..the efforts people have put in to defend this move is hilarious.

Bottom line, PS4Pro is being advertised as a 4K device for the high-end consumer. Logic would tell anyone who is even remotely interested in purchasing one that of course it plays 4K Blu-Rays. $15 or whatever the cost is per unit doesn't magically erase that fact and the omission is an obvious negative to the appeal factor of the systems target audience.

You can type a 3000 word reply and it still won't change this.

No, PS4Pro, in sony's own words is a gaming device for people who are more more concerned with graphics. No one is calling it the be all 4K media device. It supports resolution up to 4K, and supports HDR, which is best experienced with a UHD tv.

The PS4 Pro is being advertised as a powerful gaming system, and is literally 320% more powerful than their competitors system that's only 15% more expensive (1tb Xbox one s).

PS4 has never pushed media first, it doesn't even play CDs.

 

[shouamabane]

70 pages later the first page of replies are still the most honest and sane ones imo.

haha This thread did go pretty Lord of the Flies.

Who knew there were so much GAF members more qualified than Sony at picking and balancing their console features and price.

There certainly are a lot of "market analysts" in here.

 

[tapedeck]

You mean the one that showed all games?

Yes?

Maybe you should re-watch it.. Andrew House goes all in on who the device is aimed at and the incredible advantages of '4K Media', 4K streaming and HDR..it was entirely separate media portion..

 

[EmiPrime]

So I guess you'll be disappointed when the PS5 has UHD included.

Not really because in 3 years time UHD drives will likely be the only parts available to them and they'll be able to leverage the extra disc space for games as it will be a new generation. Games consoles aren't set-top boxes or media hubs for me, they are for games. I have a Chromecast for everything non-gaming.

I already have the ability to play UHD Blurays via my Xbox One S and I would have gladly sacrificed that feature for £15-20 worth of gains elsewhere that would have been relevant to gaming.

 

[tapedeck]

No, PS4Pro, in sony's own words is a gaming device for people who are more more concerned with graphics. No one is calling it the be all 4K media device. It supports resolution up to 4K, and supports HDR, which is best experienced with a UHD tv.

The PS4 Pro is being advertised as a powerful gaming system, and is literally 320% more powerful than their competitors system that's only 15% more expensive (1tb Xbox one s).

PS4 has never pushed media first, it doesn't even play CDs.

Amazing how you've ignored the 4K media parts of Sonys press conference that hurt your argument.

Besides that..are you flat out denying that the target audience would expect and want this device to play 4K blu-rays?

 

[ReBurn]

i was counting PS4 pro and PS4 slim as new consoles not getting uhd players, but I get your point. It doesn't matter if the cost is all at once or not, they have to consider the entire cost of the life cycle. Costs will come down yes, but so will the cost of non-uhd players, the difference between the two is the cost to consider. Let's just say it's 500 million dollars then. Think of what Sony can do with that money? They could secure 3rd party exclusives, have marketing deals, fund what? 3 AAA games?

You honestly think that the money is better spent betting on physical media to generate sales?

Personally, given the choice, I would have preferred a 500 GB HDD, external drive support and a UHD Bluray drive instead of a 1 TB internal HDD and a standard Bluray drive. I would prefer they allocate the spend to things I can't upgrade myself and give me the option to spend more on the things I can. But I'm the exception. I'm one of those people who prefers the higher bitrate of physical media.

 

[Panajev2001a]

actually with a 1TB drive is $50 more expensive with 3x the power

Wow, sure... somehow I think that they are not paying $50 for what would probably end up being the cheapest volume 5400 RPM drive they can find and why wouldn't they, the HDD can be replaced and the consumers who will buy the Pro are likely going to do it sooner or later. This is called increasing perceived value without adding much extra cost.

Real reason for not putting the UHD drive in? Their electronics division did not want competition, the PlayStation division wanted higher profit margins, they thought they could without losing sales, and they need the price flexibility next year if they want to drop in price to steal a bit of spotlight away from Xbox Scorpio. Also, they can still tweak their offering, cut the price to $349 or less next year and refresh the $399 model with a UHD Blu-Ray then... everything else is pretty much fluff.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

Yes?

Maybe you should re-watch it.. Andrew House goes all in on who the device is aimed at and the incredible advantages of '4K Media', 4K streaming and HDR..it was entirely separate media portion..

I believe in the presentation he even said "best in class multimedia features" LOL.

 

[phant0m]

Got my XBO S yesterday, Deadpool looks real nice in UHD. I have a Shield for other 4K streaming needs, going to pass on this one Sony.

 

[SkoomaSuckinSwit]

Disk movies on XboxOneS look great.
Video games on PlayStationPro look amazing.
Got it.

 

[jeffram]

Amazing how you've ignored the 4K media parts of Sonys press conference that hurt your argument.

Besides that..are you flat out denying that the target audience would expect and want this device to play 4K blu-rays?

I'm not ignoring that. Yes, they highlighted their 4K streaming services, it would have been stupid if them not to.

However, you are acting like they said "have a 4K tv? Here's the only device you'll ever need" they didn't. The messaging was here's a PS4 that can produce games at higher resolutions and it streams 4K content.

I'm not denying the target audience, I am one of them. I would LOVE to have a uhd player built in, and not have to buy one separately. I expected it to have support.

The thing is, is I don't blame them for excluding it. It's a smart move. Physical media is dying.

 

[gtj1092]

Do people understand what defend means? Calling something a defense force doesn't invalidate an argument. Anyone arguing it was a business mistake has yet to show any evidence there is a large burgeoning UHD market. If you don't like that it doesn't have a Blu-ray player that's fine the problem is when you try to apply your feelings to the wider market.

 

[cyen]

Personally, given the choice, I would have preferred a 500 GB HDD, external drive support and a UHD Bluray drive instead of a 1 TB internal HDD and a standard Bluray drive. I would prefer they allocate the spend to things I can't upgrade myself and give me the option to spend more on the things I can. But I'm the exception. I'm one of those people who prefers the higher bitrate of physical media.

This is also my take.

 

[Nategc20]

So if the PS4 doesn't play UHD your only choice is to buy another $300 console? Lawl.

You can get a stand alone player for around $100 bucks.

OR spend 200 bucks more to gain access to the Xbox library?

 

[JetBlackPanda]

Disk movies on XboxOneS look great.
Video games on PlayStationPro look amazing.
Got it.

This is what it comes down to. If 4K physical disks are that important by all means pass.

I just don't think not having it is doomsday for the pro.

 

[family_guy]

Even if, there's licensing fees to consider as well. Let's just say it's $5, so $20 total. They are probably going to sell 50 million more consoles.

That's a BILLION DOLLAR BET on physical media. Sony is going to push streaming, and it's probably the right call.

Cost goes down over time. They won't be selling 50 million consoles in the next year. I think it's a small price to pay considering people are more likely to utilize a feature if they already have it as opposed to going out and spending hundreds of dollars to get that one feature. I have about 40 Bluray movies that were all played on my PS3, a third of them are from Sony Studios, so any initial loss they incurred was offset by my movie purchases.

 

[Smether]

It was disappointing to hear, but then I realized I watch 1 or 2 blu-rays a year, so it's not a dealbreaker for me. I suspect most gamers are the same.

 

[Grim_Reaper]

I see no good argument here for why the PS4 needs a UHD player. I don't see games requiring a UHD player so why should I have to burden the extra cost for a market I have no interest in.

Not sure on the reason people want UHD in PS4 when they have purchased a 4k TV yet have not bought anything to play 4k content on it. This reminds me of the days people buying 1080p TV and watching standard definition tv and DVD's on them.

This just screams of desperation of saying Sony have screwed up. As far as I am concerned its a success with ps4 pro as I have pre ordered already as I want gaming first and foremost in its sights.

I think this is just a small minority of people that actually care about UHD and making a fuss.

 

[tapedeck]

I'm not ignoring that. Yes, they highlighted their 4K streaming services, it would have been stupid if them not to.

However, you are acting like they said "have a 4K tv? Here's the only device you'll ever need" they didn't. The messaging was here's a PS4 that can produce games at higher resolutions and it streams 4K content.

Sony presented the PS4P as a 4K media device, not specifically a 4K streaming device, they clearly sent a message that led people to believe it played 4K discs...that's actually how this thread started, directly after the conference ended a media person asked, got the disappointing answer and the madness ensued..

I'm not denying the target audience, I am one of them. I would LOVE to have a uhd player built in, and not have to buy one separately. I expected it to have support.

The thing is, is I don't blame them for excluding it. It's a smart move. Physical media is dying.

Fair enough, you admit the target audience expects and would prefer the feature but claim it's a smart move on Sonys part to exclude it because of the what..15 dollars..? I mean I just flat out disagree with you, I think it was a very dumb move but that of course remains to be seen, there's not much else to say really.

 

[The_Lump]

This is what it comes down to. If 4K physical disks are that important by all means pass.

I just don't think not having it is doomsday for the pro.

Of course it isn't.

But - and I only have my own anecdotal evidence to hand - I'm a PS4 owner and I just ordered my very first Xbox console, and it was a One S. Why? Because I wanted a UHD player to go with my first 4K HDR TV that I ordered at the same time (which alot of people will be doing in the coming months).

Now had PS4 Pro had a UHD player then I would definitely have held out a month and paid the extra money for a PS4 Pro. As it stands though, I've just become an Xbox user for the first time in my life purely because I could pick up what I percieve to be a worthwhile new feature, for about £190.

Assuming I'm not the only one, Sony may have at least lost a few sales this holiday and for no apparent reason.

 

[MaulerX]

OR spend 200 bucks more to gain access to the Xbox library?

Don't listen to him. The cheapest stand alone 4K UHD player is $300, not $100.

 

[EmiPrime]

Of course it isn't.

But - and I only have my own anecdotal evidence to hand - I'm a PS4 owner and I just ordered my very first Xbox console, and it was a One S. Why? Because I wanted a UHD player to go with my first 4K HDR TV that I ordered at the same time (which alot of people will be doing in the coming months).

Now had PS4 Pro had a UHD player then I would definitely have held out a month and paid the extra money for a PS4 Pro. As it stands though, I've just become an Xbox user for the first time in my life purely because I could pick up what I percieve to be a worthwhile new feature, for about £190.

Assuming I'm not the only one, Sony may have at least lost a few sales this holiday and for no apparent reason.

That's fair enough if 4K Blurays are more important to you than 4K gaming.

Spoiler

Please buy Sunset Overdrive.

 

[Metfanant]

Not the right call at all and considering the history of ps2 and ps3 when it comes to push new media formats, the right call would be to included the new uhd format.

99% of the people would pay 20$ extra for uhd playback, i and my friends would.

Right now instead buying only a ps4 pro i will have to add the cost of an Xbox one s.

Wow, can we squeeze a couple more made up statistics into that post?...

$399 is the console sweet spot, period...

It's been explained to DEATH the different situation this is compared to the PS2 with DVD (the console leveraged the additional storage space FOR GAMES of DVD over CD)...and the PS3(again storage space AND as a massive loss leader/Trojan horse to win a format war)...

The PS4P doesn't need to do EITHER of those this time...it CANT use additional storage of a new disc, because they need to play on all PS4's...and there is no format war to win...

Would I have personally paid an extra $20? Absolutely...bit $399 is the sweet spot and I can't blame Sony for sticking to it...

It's not actually a billion dollar bet. They aren't buying 50 million drives all at once, so there's no actual investment other than the units already produced and not sold since costs would be recouped via sales. Cost of materials would drop as economy of scale is established, so it probably wouldn't cost $15 more for the entire marketable lifespan of the product. I also think 50 million Pro units is ambitious considering it's competing with a lower priced unit that plays the same games.

SONY DOESNT EVEN PRODUCE A CONSUMER UHD DRIVE YET....

For the people who defend the omission with the argument "sony/anyone doesn't care about discs" etc, do you think the next PS4 model and/or the PS5 won't have a 4K blu-ray drive? I.e. within 2-3 years.
Because it will.

I think you have some comprehension issues...

1. There is a difference between understanding how a decision makes business sense, and supporting that decision...I would certainly have preferred the UHD drive be included...but that doesn't lrevent me from understanding WHY Sony made this choice...

2. Yes, I expect the PS5 to absolutely include a UHD drive...the market for the media will be much more.mature at that point, and PS5 games will be able to take advantage it without being tied to existing discs for games..

It's not that Sony doesn't care about discs...but I don't think Sony believes it's a viable enough market at this juncture to include the cost of the drive...

As I already said...Sony doesn't even SELL a UHD Bluray player at all yet...and won't be until next year...that tells me they don't feel in any rush to get themselves into this market at this time...

Was I surprised they didn't include a UHD drive? Yes..did I want one to be included? Absolutely..but I'm still able to understand WHY it wasn't included

Besides that..are you flat out denying that the target audience would expect and want this device to play 4K blu-rays?

Yet we have reports in this very thread from people that actually work in retail (and bish approved) that have flat out said that people coming in are seemingly not confused, or concerned by this omission...weird huh?

 

[dano1]

Disk movies on XboxOneS look great.
Video games on PlayStationPro look amazing.
Got it.

Yep.

 

[Valonquar]

I own about 6 Blu-ray discs that I rarely, if ever watch. Non-issue IMHO

 

[bebop242]

I see no good argument here for why the PS4 needs a UHD player. I don't see games requiring a UHD player so why should I have to burden the extra cost for a market I have no interest in.

Not sure on the reason people want UHD in PS4 when they have purchased a 4k TV yet have not bought anything to play 4k content on it. This reminds me of the days people buying 1080p TV and watching standard definition tv and DVD's on them.

This just screams of desperation of saying Sony have screwed up. As far as I am concerned its a success with ps4 pro as I have pre ordered already as I want gaming first and foremost in its sights.

I think this is just a small minority of people that actually care about UHD and making a fuss.

Glad it works for you, but my perpective is that its a failure. All the people i know in real life are passing on the PS4 Pro. It varies between keeping what they currently have, buying a Xbox One S, or upgrading their computer and focusing more on pc gaming. Why? No UHM player.

 

[tapedeck]

Yet we have reports in this very thread from people that actually work in retail (and bish approved) that have flat out said that people coming in are seemingly not confused, or concerned by this omission...weird huh?

Oh gee well that settles it, looks like myself and my friends and the countless negative reactions on the internet and almost every games site I've bothered to read about the issue are just picky outliers and no one actually cares about UHD playback on PS4P.

 

[gamz]

Good God..the efforts people have put in to defend this move is hilarious.

Bottom line, PS4Pro is being advertised as a 4K device for the high-end consumer. Logic would tell anyone who is even remotely interested in purchasing one that of course it plays 4K Blu-Rays. $15 or whatever the cost is per unit doesn't magically erase that fact and the omission is an obvious negative to the appeal factor of the systems target audience.

You can type a 3000 word reply and it still won't change this.

Period.