Need High resolutions for big screens...only pc gamers play with smaller screens...never wathced a dvd on a 40" fhd screen? Is the same quality of a blu ray disc?
4k is the standard? All cable networks broadcast in 720p or 1080i. Netflix 4k looks like an upscaled decent 2k blu ray at BEST. Oftentimes they look significantly worse. Tell me again that 4k is the "standard". Please tell me more of your sweet lies. And I still buy physical blu rays due to the quality difference in picture and sound. That and they can't be taken away from me because a streaming service didn't renew it.
To be fair, PS4 Pro doesn’t support true and native 4K. It’s just this checkerboard fake 4K.
Xbox one X on the other hand supports true native 4K, e.g. RDR2 runs native 4K only ok Xbox one X.
You are being purposely obtuse. Clearly the poster you quoted is referring to TVs being manufactured and not "TV" as in cable network television. The fact that cable is still in 720p and 1080i is an embarrassment. You yourself said that you buy Blu-Rays (I still do as well, 200 and counting, though some are now UHD/4K). Would you want your TV to only show 720p/1080i (basically what the OP is arguing, just one "generation" prior when your preferred source of movies is 1080P?
Limitation is not always comes from tech. It also about budget, time and man power, not all developers have the luxury for that. Star Citizen suppose to have the most advance graphical feature and using full power of PC but look how long is taking for the game to come out. Do you think all developers have the luxury to spend crazy amount of money and time to create their games?To get a rough idea how much developers are limited today
They're always limited by tech. That's why today's game engines have advanced realtime debug tools that helps you to see the limit of how much stuff you can have on screen at once in real time and not go above target frametimes.Limitation is not always comes from tech. It also about budget, time and man power, not all developers have the luxury for that. Star Citizen suppose to have the most advance graphical feature and using full power of PC but look how long is taking for the game to come out. Do you think all all developers have the luxury to spend crazy amount of money and time to create their games?
Let me ask you this, why Far Cry 2 has much more interactive in its open world compare to Far Cry 5? The 5th game is running in much more powerful machine. I saw the same conversation near end of PS3/360 and they said how developers no longer have to worry about "limitation" and yet here we are talking about same shit and don't worry we going to have the same exact conversation near end of PS5 or whatever next Xbox is going to be called.They're always limited by tech. That's why today's game engines have advanced realtime debug tools that helps you to see the limit of how much stuff you can have on screen at once in real time and not go above target frametimes.
You're obv. right that some devs like R* are capable of achieving more than others having superior RAGE engine and budget allowing to have more devs working on one game. Having more devs allows you to pump more lod's so game looks way better at the distance just one example. GTA5 on box360 and ps3 was a monumental achievement no doubt.
Lowly clocked notebook cpu in current gen + lazy devs. Ryzen is over twice faster at only same clocks [2 GHz] and it will likely to run at least 3 GHz on next consoles, so we're looking at minimum 3 times better perf from CPU. Let's take GTA5 as example. It runs 30 fps on PS4 - you could run that at 90 fps on PS5 , if you wanted or more precisely if devs allowed that.Let me ask you this, why Far Cry 2 has much more interactive in its open world compare to Far Cry 5? The 5th game is running in much more powerful machine. I saw the same conversation near end of PS3/360 and they said how developers no longer have to worry about "limitation" and yet here we are talking about same shit and don't worry we going to have the same exact conversation near end of PS5 or whatever next Xbox is going to be called.
And you think we going to have 4K with high FPS as standard with PS5? I'm pretty sure for developers with extra power going to push more for higher texture more detailed models and even bigger open world rather than high FPS and advance AI because the reality is more "pretty" and "shiny" graphics is much more marketable than high FPS and advance AI.Lowly clocked notebook cpu in current gen + lazy devs. Ryzen is over twice faster at only same clocks [2 GHz] and it will likely to run at least 3 GHz on next consoles, so we're looking at minimum 3 times better perf from CPU. Let's take GTA5 as example. It runs 30 fps on PS4 - you could run that at 90 fps on PS5 , if you wanted or more precisely if devs allowed that.
I want to believe there will be way more 60fps games. To my eyes there is nothing wrong in having RDR2 visuals at native 4K and locked 60 fps, but we know many devs will push graphics further and just lock to 30 which is a shame.And you think we going to have 4K with high FPS as standard with PS5? I'm pretty sure for developers with extra power going to push more for higher texture more detailed models and even bigger open world rather than high FPS and advance AI because the reality is more "pretty" and "shiny" graphics is much more marketable than high FPS and advance AI.
This is false.Biggest issue is that 4k requires a large TV to clearly see the difference. Not many have space for that
LOL are you just pulling stuff out of your ass? PS4 Pro does support native 4K...
PS4 Pro 4 released in 2016 , Nintendo Switch released 2017 & Xbox One X released 2017
PS4 Pro / Xbox One X main selling point is that they are 4K versions of PS4 / Xbox One & I doubt if either one of them has sold 10 million units yet but Nintendo Switch can barely do 1080P when docked but Switch is somewhere around 28 million sold as of now & there is nothing standing in it's way or making it to 40 - 50 million by time the PS5 & Xbox Next come out. Also Xbox One S & Xbox One X both play 4K UHD Blu-rays but no one really care.
Next generation is the time to make a move like Nintendo made with the Wii & Switch because not enough people will care about 4K in 2020 the same way the none HD market was still bigger than the HD market in 2006.
This is false.
To be fair, you are wrong:
I think it's a weird assertion that the new consoles need to be disruptive to be successful. PS4 wasn't disruptive in any meaningful way and it has moved 80 million units. Nintendo's luck with being disruptive is mixed. Gamecube and WiiU didn't make the same impact as other efforts. People expect quirky changes from Nintendo because of their culture, but they're not expecting that from the other companies.
Disruption is good when it works. It can revive flagging markets or create new ones. But disruption for the sake of disruption probably won't be effective, and the change gamers want when purchasing new hardware isn't a gimmick or new way of playing the same games. It's more stable gameplay with better graphics and performance. It's the capacity for larger and more detailed experiences. Maybe that's just what I want. Who knows.
Before PS4 came out people was worried about a casual gaming takeover , Wii U tried to fit in with the tablet gaming & Xbox One was trying to be the iPad of the living room with Kinect 2.0. PS4 making it's self look like it was all about hardcore gaming was disruptive at that moment because everyone though gaming was going in a different direction.
There's a reason why no one is following up on what the Wii started -- not developers, not Microsoft, not Sony, and not Nintendo. It was a mistake, and everyone knows it. If it was really as impactful as many like to proclaim, it would have made a difference in gaming today, but motion control games have thankfully been relegated to side show status and thank God for that.Please don't use the wii for an argument. Was gaming dumb downed and sold to the masses of non gamers. Sold tons of units but software sales were not exactly strong.
There's a reason why no one is following up on what the Wii started -- not developers, not Microsoft, not Sony, and not Nintendo. It was a mistake, and everyone knows it. If it was really as impactful as many like to proclaim, it would have made a difference in gaming today, but motion control games have thankfully been relegated to side show status and thank God for that.
EDIT: The Wii is actually an argument against disruption; because it was made to disrupt rather than enhance. It was designed to stir everyone's shit up rather than make gaming better. That's my honest take on it. There wasn't one noble thing about the Wii.
wipeout omega runs at native 4k 60 fps and hdr on ps4 pro. Same for bound and burnout paradise remaster
pretty sure others do but I don't have a list
Is it really? I've got more than a few games on it and none of them use motion controls appreciably. I would say it's more akin to a Wii U, which was a system that was like the Wii in name only when it comes right down to it.The Switch is basically a portable Wii & it's selling like hotcakes
Is it really? I've got more than a few games on it and none of them use motion controls appreciably. I would say it's more akin to a Wii U, which was a system that was like the Wii in name only when it comes right down to it.
The best selling games on Switch use motion controls
The best selling games on Switch use motion controls
OP is dead wrong. Next generation of consoles will be the 4K generation.
Yes they need more than 4K to sell, which is why Sony is investing so much in PSVR2.
But 4K will be much, much bigger towards the end of next year.
Before PS4 came out people was worried about a casual gaming takeover , Wii U tried to fit in with the tablet gaming & Xbox One was trying to be the iPad of the living room with Kinect 2.0. PS4 making it's self look like it was all about hardcore gaming was disruptive at that moment because everyone thought gaming was going in a different direction.
Nobody was seriously worried about a casual gaming takeover, Wii U didn't seriously make an attempt at tablet gaming and Microsoft didn't try to be an iPad. If any of them tried to be an iPad it was Wii U, but like I said, Nintendo didn't try to take on tablet gaming. With Wii U Nintendo seems to have tried to test to see if people would adopt touch like they did motion controls, but as you can see that failed. Waggle controls on PS3 and PS4 went nowhere. The only Microsoft technology that was somewhat disruptive was Kinect on 360, but Microsoft clearly overestimated the long term appeal of arm flailing as evidenced by the poor launch of Xbox One with Kinect as the focus. Microsoft got it wrong, but they didn't try to be an iPad. I don't even know what that means.
Hardcore being overtaken by casual is not a real struggle in gaming and console gaming was never in any danger of falling to the casual side during the previous generation. We didn't need PS4 to save us from that fate. Lots of what would be considered hardcore games released on PS3 and Xbox 360 leading up to and after the launch of PS4 and Xbox One. The only real casual focus was the Wii, and that's because Nintendo abandoned it to waggle shovelware when the fad ended. Major publishers of hardcore games didn't want to try to shoehorn motion controls into games, and the Wii lacked the horsepower to make it worth attempting ports beyond the first couple of years of its life. I don't see any real evidence where that had any threat to console gaming as a whole. Even Nintendo invested in better hardcore content on the Wii's successor by publishing Wii U titles like Bayonetta and Xenoblade Chronicles X, so even they understood what people wanted.
To be fair, PS4 Pro doesn’t support true and native 4K. It’s just this checkerboard fake 4K.
Xbox one X on the other hand supports true native 4K, e.g. RDR2 runs native 4K only ok Xbox one X.
PS4 Pro 4 released in 2016 , Nintendo Switch released 2017 & Xbox One X released 2017
PS4 Pro / Xbox One X main selling point is that they are 4K versions of PS4 / Xbox One & I doubt if either one of them has sold 10 million units yet but Nintendo Switch can barely do 1080P when docked but Switch is somewhere around 28 million sold as of now & there is nothing standing in it's way or making it to 40 - 50 million by time the PS5 & Xbox Next come out. Also Xbox One S & Xbox One X both play 4K UHD Blu-rays but no one really care.
Next generation is the time to make a move like Nintendo made with the Wii & Switch because not enough people will care about 4K in 2020 the same way the none HD market was still bigger than the HD market in 2006.
$299 4k 50" smart tv with less than a minute of searching.
To put this into perspective I paid the same amount for my old 32" CRT screen in 2005.
I bought a Panasonic 27" CRT in 2001 for $600-700 cdn. Needed two people to haul it.$299 4k 50" smart tv with less than a minute of searching.
To put this into perspective I paid the same amount for my old 32" CRT screen in 2005.
Wii U controller was a tablet with buttons lol
This isn't about people not having 4K TVs it's about selling consoles