Support NeoGAF

[Elandyll]

You cant market a product as 4K when it's not, at least here.

I think people need to drop the PS4K it's a name given to it by people making shit up.

If a PS4 can barely do 1080p at 30fps how is a console equal to 2 X PS4 going to push 4 X the resolution at 30fps??

Everything points out to a UHDBR player (beside it not being in the dev kit, which means little), on top of 4K streaming support, and 4K upscale for games.

So yes, it will most probably be marketed as a 4K product, and as long as no game tries to pretend it is 4K native while it's not, it'll be fine.

Here it's about marketing toward what the product is intended to be connected to/ ecosystem it's supposed to live in.

Again, no confusion here, but I'm sorry if the whole 4K market placement is distressing to you... confusing maybe?

 

[Audioboxer]

You think Abdiel is trying to sell you the PS4K in a GAF thread?

And you think this whole thing is somehow comparable to the MS 2013 reveal?

Ohboy.gif

Honestly, there's a river of bookmarkable remarks. As usual though with any leaked stuff, people are all over the shop with opinions and comparisons. Time machines were invented for projecting like we do on GAF, but alas we just have to wait x months and see.

 

[Servbot24]

It's just bad as a long term strategy. You are poisoning the well with your userbase, which is a terrible idea for a product line that essentially has a complete reset every 5-7 years.

Why should I buy a Playstation 5 if I suspect that Sony will just release a better model a couple years down the line? These incremental upgrades will prevent early adopters from signing on, and thus prevent/slow the userbase from reaching the critical mass necessary to support AAA development.

You'll buy it when you're ready to buy it. You'll almost never have to. It will be up to you. Just like TVs and phones. If you decide not to buy PS5 and wait for PS5.5 that's absolutely fine with Sony.

Technology has always advanced and new products have always (well, for the last 30 some years) come out quickly. I don't get why people suddenly expect that to halt, just so they can feel neat-o about having the newest thing. The insecurity and the personal identity people are vicariously finding through electronic products is indicative of problems with the fan base more so than the market in my opinion.

 

[Teletraan1]

If this leads to say a 20% increase in production costs of a game by a developer/publisher (increased development time, increased QA time, increased certification time), they need a means to make that money back. This could mean a stronger push for microtransactions (most likely), maybe even increased retail cost (unlikely).

I think people are grossly overestimating the costs of adding a different performance profile for a game. The game is already made, most of them are also releasing on PC with higher quality effects etc so that work is already done. Companies can outsource their QA to minimum wage jobs. I know that it takes considerably less fucking around to achieve acceptable performance for a game if I had a 970 than it does trying to wring every last bit of juice out of my 670 to run modern games. Having the actual game code rather than user settings is obviously not the same thing but it should not be some herculean effort required.

 

[barit]

You think Abdiel is trying to sell you the PS4K in a GAF thread?

And you think this whole thing is somehow comparable to the MS 2013 reveal?

Ohboy.gif

No but he speaks from the perspective of retailers or not?

And yes that all sounds VERY similiar in terms of ignorance and downplaying "this won't be such a bad thing"

 

[wapplew]

I share your concerns on PS5, although forcing every game to run on PS4 and PS5 doesn't sounds rather unlikely.

So how about we just put a pin in that discussion, for now, and focus on the immediate impacts.

I have no doubt PS4K will sell very very well, that one immediate impact we can agree on.
But I doubt PS4K can do 40m in 2 years like OGPS4. If they follow mobile business model, PS5 or the iteration after PS4K will sold at similar pace.

The real challenge is the iteration after PS4K.

 

[Audioboxer]

I think people are grossly overestimating the costs of adding a different performance profile for a game. The game is already made, most of them are also releasing on PC with higher quality effects etc so that work is already done. Companies can outsource their QA to minimum wage jobs. I know that it takes considerably less fucking around to achieve acceptable performance for a game if I had a 970 than it does trying to wring every last bit of juice out of my 670 to run modern games. Having the actual game code rather than user settings is obviously not the same thing but it should not be some herculean effort required.

Without any insight though the social forums can start chucking around any unfounded figures, especially when based in fear or to push a narrative. We really do need proper dev insight into how their costs may be impacted. Hopefully we will get it from someone. Even if it's an indie dev opening up.

 

[family_guy]

But if we're talking about the difference between a $400 console now and a $400 revision a little later, I think that's a difference that will encourage people to hold out.....especially if they already feel burned by the swift introduction of the PS4K.

At the end of the day we buy these devices to play games no? If there's compelling exclusive software at the launch of PS5 and PS5 plays all PS4 games, then why would people hold out for a PS5.5? It's not like the value of their old PS4/PS4k is going to increase, only decrease. Best to part with it sooner to save money towards the next iteration. If PS4 played all PS3 games, then Sony would have even sold more at launch through to date. In any case, most of what I'm reading the past few weeks has been a bunch of "What ifs?" People are so scared of what might happen down the road. Just enjoy games now. Who the hell knows what the market will be like in 5 years? All of a sudden we have a bunch of Michael Pachters depicting the doom of the console market if things change to be outside their comfort bubble.

 

[Bits N Pieces]

There is lots of speculation both positive and negative surrounding the rumours of these iterative consoles and though it's good to have someone from retail chime on with their thoughts, this is all just speculation still.

No one knows anything 100% for any of these consoles that's posting on Twitter or forums.

It's going to be a long couple of months until E3

 

[Abdiel]

No but he speaks from the perspective of retailers or not?

And yes that all sounds VERY similiar in terms of ignorance and downplaying "this won't be such a bad thing"

I'm speaking from the perspective of working with the public and the consumer base. Trying to put things in a different lens for GAF which tends to be very insular about the larger impressions.

I'm not somehow trying to say I speak on behalf of Best Buy as a corporation. I know what is good for our store goals and how I train my employees to sell products effectively, which includes being aware of what the market realities are.

I'm not for or against the ps4k. This will sink or swim on its own merits, and I say in this thread that Sony has to justify its existence to consumers, demonstrate its role in the market and leverage those strengths.

What I've tried to do is offer more balanced perspective regarding this, weighted with the longer analysis of my experience of these types of trends and products.

Do not take this as a sales pitch in any respect.

 

[Gono]

I'm willing to bet that PS4 owners will get the short end of the stick when it comes to performance/optimization. I hope not, but I'm not holding my breath.

Probably. But this is one thing that is making me going nuts, cause it's gonna be a mess. Some devs would do ok with both iterations (first party always deliver) but some would probably decide to just make some rushed/subpar downgrade. Not a really awful 640p - 20fps downgrade, but definitely not the best they could.
I dont see Sony pushing devs to work their best on both systems.
Somehow the original Ps4 is gonna get the "sub-product treatment" and we all know it.

 

[timmyp53]

I think people are always failing to realize that their probably won't be a ps5.

 

[The God]

Yeah, it is.

Look, if a dev is going to write a game that has shit code, pushes the console too hard or some wild combination of both, it'll still be ass on the Neo - just less ass.

Which wouldn't be violating Sony's mandate.

 

[Primethius]

No but he speaks from the perspective of retailers or not?

And yes that all sounds VERY similiar in terms of ignorance and downplaying "this won't be such a bad thing"

I guess if it sounds like that then it sounds like every instance of people being advised not to overreact ever, no matter how right either party ended up being.

Seems like a strange comparison since there aren't many actual similarities between the two outside of that.

 

[The_Lump]

Interesting thought; How might a future of iterative high performance (relatively speaking) consoles effect the prices of iterative smart phones? Suddenly their respective price points start to seem more directly comparable than they are currently. When consumers get used to paying ~$400 for an upgraded console every 2 years, it might not look as attractive to be paying ~$600 every couple years for an upgraded phone.

 

[...Scatter...]

I think people are always failing to realize that their probably won't be a ps5.

Or at least not as we knew it.

 

[Nikodemos]

Well I guess 20+ odd years of console warfare have taught us that 4 years is too short, while 7 is too long for a 'full' leap in terms of performance. Also that tech advances have slowed down over time, and now progress comes at an uneven pace. This last point is particularly problematic. Remember how the X360 was the most advanced gaming platform in the world when launched, yet barely one year later it had become decidedly midrange. And loss-leading is a bad business model if something goes wrong with your product, or, rather, if everything doesn't go right with it.

All the above combined have brought us to this moment in console gaming history.

 

[UpDownLeftRight]

I'm speaking from the perspective of working with the public and the consumer base. Trying to put things in a different lens for GAF which tends to be very insular about the larger impressions.

I'm not somehow trying to say I speak on behalf of Best Buy as a corporation. I know what is good for our store goals and how I train my employees to sell products effectively, which includes being aware of what the market realities are.

I'm not for or against the ps4k. This will sink or swim on its own merits, and I say in this thread that Sony has to justify its existence to consumers, demonstrate its role in the market and leverage those strengths.

What I've tried to do is offer more balanced perspective regarding this, weighted with the longer analysis of my experience of these types of trends and products.

Do not take this as a sales pitch in any respect.

Generally speaking though, aren't the core userbase more likely to spend larger amounts, hence frequent forum goers and such would be large pools of revenue? My suspicion currently for the larger section of the market, those who don't frequent forums etc and buy a few games a year, is that they may see now value proposition at all here. My other concern is the amount of parents who will have their minds blown when their kids start asking for a new Playstation this year considering many of them will have bought them the old model rather recently. The setup for how the games are playable on both is neither here nor there in that scenario and I just feel like it's going to get a fair bit of backlash from that, and possibly the larger section of the market even if the core eat it up.

You're right that it's on Sony to sell the idea, but for certain segments, particularly parents purchasing for their children, I just can't see a scenario where it's going to go down easily unless the person in question is quite comfortable spending that much yearly during the holidays anyway.

 

[Ryng_tolu]

Thanks for this thread abdiel, can't read it now but i will when is possible.

 

[SmokedMeat]

It's just bad as a long term strategy. You are poisoning the well with your userbase, which is a terrible idea for a product line that essentially has a complete reset every 5-7 years.

To me poisoning the well is doing a complete reset every few years. Telling people that not only are their physical games useless on the new hardware, but your digital purchases as well. Just because it's the norm doesn't make it ok.

By doing a complete reset you're hoping your customers return for the new generation, and not head elsewhere. With a new forward compatible model you're locking customers to your ecosystem. They're more likely to continue with you.

 

[SensibleSucker]

The problem with how you're filtering this perspective is that Sony will be continuing to provide you with the best available content for your existing hardware. You're not losing anything. This is an option for those that wish to pay to get a premium option, they'll be able to take advantage of improved hardware. But it doesn't take away from those existing customers.

Not only that, this only incentivizes Sony to keep the base model as lucrative as possible, because if they can keep the price lower and more accessible, it only further accelerates those sales, which in turn builds software sales and growth. It's good for their entire platform if they can do so properly.

Leveraging this effectively would give them new ways to expand their base for the whole platform, not just the new side.

But they won't be providing me with the best version of THEIR software. Which is what I bought a PS4 for. Otherwise, when I cracked last year and thought I had to get The Last of Us, I'd have just got an old PS3 to play it on. The same principle applies to the next phase of games.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not totally against incremental improvements. But if you improve by increments, I'll only pay by increments. If they want to keep up with PCs, they have to make their systems modular and upgradable or offer buy-back option. When I bought my new £600 phone, the shop gave me £250 for my 2 year old one. Plus I didn't pay for the new one at all as it was free with a contract.

Let me keep up for £100-£150 every 3 years and I'll stay with you. Having to purchase another entire console at what will effectively be the typically bloated launch price every 3 years is a massive no-go. I'd rather play in the nice stable 6 year walled garden over there, even if that walled garden has less pretty flowers. As long as the flowers are the best that that particular gardener is growing.

 

[wapplew]

To me poisoning the well is doing a complete reset every few years. Telling people that not only are their physical games useless on the new hardware, but your digital purchases as well. Just because it's the norm doesn't make it ok.

By doing a complete reset you're hoping your customers return for the new generation, and not head elsewhere. With a new forward compatible model you're locking customers to your ecosystem. They're more likely to continue with you.

How's that working for PS3 fat?

 

[potatohead]

To me poisoning the well is doing a complete reset every few years. Telling people that not only are their physical games useless on the new hardware, but your digital purchases as well. Just because it's the norm doesn't make it ok.

By doing a complete reset you're hoping your customers return for the new generation, and not head elsewhere. With a new forward compatible model you're locking customers to your ecosystem. They're more likely to continue with you.

I agree.

This is a long-term strategy and one that will work well in the increasingly digital age.

People who have committed to other digital ecosystems, whether it is on phones or on PC with services like GOG or Steam, they are not leaving because their established ecosystems are not leaving anytime soon.

This is the future. And honestly with 3 year refreshes, they are being pretty responsible with the hardware refresh unlike the 6 months or 12 months refreshes on phones.

Backwards compatibility better be guaranteed on PS5 I hope though.

 

[tr00per]

Why should I buy a Playstation 5 if I suspect that Sony will just release a better model a couple years down the line? These incremental upgrades will prevent early adopters from signing on, and thus prevent/slow the userbase from reaching the critical mass necessary to support AAA development.

You articulated my feelings pretty well so I'll just quote you and add that there may be consequences that we didn't forsee as well. Especially as game budgets only expand.

Why not just wait two more years and do a ps5 with better tech?

 

[wapplew]

I agree.

This is a long-term strategy and one that will work well in the increasingly digital age.

People who have committed to other digital ecosystems, whether it is on phones or on PC with services like GOG or Steam, they are not leaving because their established ecosystems are not leaving anytime soon.

This is the future. And honestly with 3 year refreshes, they are being pretty responsible with the hardware refresh unlike the 6 months or 12 months refreshes on phones.

Backwards compatibility better be guaranteed on PS5 I hope though.

Again, they don't need frequent hardware upgrade to achieve full backward compatible. They can do that as long as they stay within same architecture.

 

[NHale]

I've enjoyed your retail perspective as a seller of the product and the advantages to retail and new customers but you really are jumping out for some conclusions that will only have answers in the next 5 years, like:

Pay a bit more, get more out of it, but you have the exact same library, play the same games as your friends. There's nothing lost for the existing market.

And most of those customers won't even care that there's a premium model *on* the market! They will see that a more costly model came out and ask why people would bother to pay more, even if it gives slightly prettier graphics. It's not going to matter, because the primary justification for most customers in the market, is the core balance of price and the fact that the games are coming to both.

People will care if PS4 base model versions start to get neglected and not show the proper care they 95% of the time had. And there will no be excuses about this. If Sony starts allowing unplayable games to ship like Broforce or Just Cause on PS4 base mode while running great on PS4k, you can't tell me with a straight face that current customers won't care. If you create a clear segregation wall between PS4 base and PS4K owners, you effectively created a different ecosystem between something you say is the same and then you can't say nothing is lost.

This is all great and fantastic if indeed everything turns out ok in 5 years, like not having those disparities between games or them changing the rules again by allowing PS4K exclusives. Right now you can't actually tell me that is not going to happen, because only Sony knows what business decisions they make and as this shows nothing is "sacred".

Also while it might be great on a short term for those living from selling consoles and console games, it will be a huge challenge beyond hardcore fanatics to actually be excited about the new PS5 with 10 launch titles, 8 of which are also on PS4 and 2 of them are below average typical early title games. But long term is never a worry until what was once long happens to be right now.

 

[SmokedMeat]

How's that working for PS3 fat?

Sucks. My PS3 digital purchases never carried over to PS4. I can't play my PS3 discs on PS4 either.

You tell me how resets are great?

 

[bbalde]

I just finally bought my PS4, literally beginning this month, playing all this time with previous generations. This news doesn't upset me at all, I don't fall into that category of consumer. I know buying late an electronic device you are bound for this happen. I don't jump quickly in to new hardware. Now I already have 12 great games, bought on the cheap. It's all good

If I had the console since launch I would probably be excited by this news.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Again, they don't need frequent hardware upgrade to achieve full backward compatible. They can do that as long as they stay within same architecture.

PS3 wasn't the same architecture as PS2. It simply had the PS2 chips inside. That's how you got your bc.

Now we're moving to the same architecture.

 

[Serpens007]

I think Sony will succeed in this. Which makes me sad, because I don't like the idea of upgrading every two years. It doesn't appeal to a consumer like me, but oh well, I'll wait more next time before jumping into a Sony console.

I think I will skip PS4K (with the exeption of the case of my current PS4 dying). If the NX is really more powerful than the current PS4, then I'll just better jump into that console, and if not, well, welcome PC gaming again I guess.

 

[Boke1879]

I think Sony will succeed in this. Which makes me sad, because I don't like the idea of upgrading every two years. It doesn't appeal to a consumer like me, but oh well, I'll wait more next time before jumping into a Sony console.

I think I will skip PS4K (with the exeption of the case of my current PS4 dying). If the NX is really more powerful than the current PS4, then I'll just better jump into that console, and if not, well, welcome PC gaming again I guess.

You don't have to upgrade my friend. That's the beauty of the whole thing

 

[TGO]

Good post fellow retailer!
While I'm not happy about it (I feel PS4 is still a new purchase) I can see the bigger picture of what they trying to do which is good for them(Sony) but has zero effect on us until refreshes become even shorter and thats
what people fear, PS4 is barely 2/half years old and we are getting a new one already? What happens when its yearly? and think that what people fear.
A system releasing really weak because its gonna be refresh constantly, but it's not a Phone upgrade we're talking about, it's £400 every 2 years or every year if they can get away with it.
but this PS4K has gotta show it's worth, a framerate improvement that most people aren't gonna tell the difference isn't gonna cut it, people are gonna think it's a rip off.
Damn ACunity running at 1080p60fps on PS4K would be a hard sell to most people and I can see that not even being possible with PS4K so the actual returns of owning one is unknown because the specs indicate it's not much of an upgrade.
I'm personally on the fence about it, I need to see more but can understand peoples fears, and the "just because you don't want it" isn't a good reply to them, people didn't want horse armour and look what happened

 

[wapplew]

PS3 wasn't the same architecture as PS2. It simply had the PS2 chips inside. That's how you got your bc.

Now we're moving to the same architecture.

Yes, we are moving to the same architecture. If PS5 will stay within same architecture, we will get full BC.
That way Sony will lock down those customers regardless of PS4K, don't you agree?

 

[The God]

You don't have to upgrade my friend. That's the beauty of the whole thing

He doesn't have to upgrade, but he doesn't have to be happy with this new direction either.

 

[deadlast]

I'm speaking from the perspective of working with the public and the consumer base. Trying to put things in a different lens for GAF which tends to be very insular about the larger impressions.

I'm not somehow trying to say I speak on behalf of Best Buy as a corporation. I know what is good for our store goals and how I train my employees to sell products effectively, which includes being aware of what the market realities are.

I'm not for or against the ps4k. This will sink or swim on its own merits, and I say in this thread that Sony has to justify its existence to consumers, demonstrate its role in the market and leverage those strengths.

What I've tried to do is offer more balanced perspective regarding this, weighted with the longer analysis of my experience of these types of trends and products.

Do not take this as a sales pitch in any respect.

Thanks abdiel... Your perspective is appreciated. I'm interested to see how this will be marketed. Do you know when we should expect to see marketing for the PS4k/XB1.5?

 

[Serpens007]

You don't have to upgrade my friend. That's the beauty of the whole thing

And I probably won't. If I'm going to spend that amount of money in a new console, I'd better just try something different this time.

But that's just me, anyway. As I said, I don't think it's a bad move for Sony. People love to buy the most new tech stuff, social media like to talk about it, and if Sony makes the PlayStation brand a "social status" brand like Apple made their iPhone to be, then they are going to make even more money with that.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Yes, we are moving to the same architecture. If PS5 will stay within same architecture, we will get full BC.
That way Sony will lock down those customers regardless of PS4K, don't you agree?

As long as your old games carry over yes. That's how you get consumers invested. Especially when they have a library of digital games.

 

[kaching]

People will care if PS4 base model versions start to get neglected and not show the proper care they 95% of the time had. And there will no be excuses about this. If Sony starts allowing unplayable games to ship like Broforce or Just Cause on PS4 base mode while running great on PS4k, you can't tell me with a straight face that current customers won't care. If you create a clear segregation wall between PS4 base and PS4K owners, you effectively created a different ecosystem between something you say is the same and then you can't say nothing is lost.

I most certainly can tell you with a straight face that at least some current customers won't care, because I've been the guy playing the supposedly "unplayable" games many times and having a blast doing so. Broforce for example is not in the least bit "unplayable" to me on the PS4. That's not to say I can't acknowledge its glitches but they're not dealbreakers for me and they certainly didn't stop me from enjoying the game.

And that's the fundamental problem with arguments like this - you're all so stuck in your own personal perspective, you assume everyone is as finicky and as sensitive to these issues as you are. But a lot of people simply aren't going to care that much that there's a marginally better version of the game out there, or that the version they're playing is supposedly completely unplayable because #GAFSaidSo.

 

[Boke1879]

He doesn't have to upgrade, but he doesn't have to be happy with this new direction either.

Why not when literally nothing changes for him if he decides not to upgrade?

 

[Negotiator]

Damn ACunity running at 1080p60fps on PS4K would be a hard sell to most people and I can see that not even being possible with PS4K so the actual returns of owning one is unknown because the specs indicate it's not much of an upgrade.

AC Unity won't even run at constant 30 fps with an overclocked Jaguar.

This game is coded in DX11/GNMX and this causes bottlenecks with too many draw calls/NPCs. It needs DX12/GNM for proper multi core utilization and decent framerates.

This is a prime example of why we don't need iterative consoles to get shitty games. We already have them!

Still though, I would prefer Zen or even Puma+ instead of Jaguar.

 

[Notor!ousG]

Great read and I hope that the whole console business will move into this direction. The next major step is full backwards compatibility. Waiting 5-7 years to have any improvement on the hardware is outdated, espdcially in a digital world where everything keeps moving faster.

Anyhow, I think alot of the negativity comes from people not willing to spend any more money on it while at the same time envying those who will upgrade.

 

[Serpens007]

Why not when literally nothing changes for him if he decides not to upgrade?

That's still to be seen, anyway.

Maybe exclusive features, or even games, for NEO would make me unhappy to have bought the console early and feel/see that it's value has been lowered in that regard.

 

[Audioboxer]

Great read and I hope that the whole console business will move into this direction. The next major step is full backwards compatibility. Waiting 5-7 years to have any improvement on the hardware is outdated, espdcially in a digital world where everything keeps moving faster.

Anyhow, I think alot of the negativity comes from people not willing to spend any more money on it while at the same time envying those who will upgrade.

Ironically IMO a lot of these gamers who are invested enough to be on GAF and other online forums, will be some of the first to buy it.

Not wanting to spend money doesn't always mean not having the ability to. A lot of it will be the MW2 boycott meme all over. I don't speak for everyone, but I can just see this happening.

That's still to be seen, anyway.

Maybe exclusive features, or even games, for NEO would make me unhappy to have bought the console early and feel/see that it's value has been lowered in that regard.

4K will be an exclusive feature... you can't patch that shit in. Point being it's going to have exclusive features. Gaming wise, well Sony are apparently keeping exclusive games away.

 

[The God]

Why not when literally nothing changes for him if he decides not to upgrade?

Because things do change for him. This is a HUGE new change for consoles. It's cool that nobody has to buy the Neo, but that doesn't mean people have to be comfortable with this and its potentially slippery slope.

 

[StarBlazers1]

I did a lot of thinking about this last night. I've come to the conclusion that we may never see a PS5. Look, Sony has got a huge hit on it's hand with PS4. It may just become Playstation, just like Android or ios. New Hardware comes out every 6 months to a year and will run all of the old games and apps, all the while new games that take advantage of the new HW will come out. No one is going to want to give up their library, so they stick with the same platform.
Now, I'm not saying they will iterate the hardware every 6 months or a year. It will probably be every 2-3 years, but like people who have apple or android phones, they rarely switch.
A consumer will be either a Playstation, Xbox or Nintendo gamer going forward. SW and HW features will soon decide which system people choose.
Of course this is all speculation, but I can see it going this way soon.

 

[Audioboxer]

Because things do change for him. This is a HUGE new change for consoles. It's cool that nobody has to buy the Neo, but that doesn't mean people have to be comfortable with this and its potentially slippery slope.

For gaming, no they don't. UC4 still runs the same as it always would on a PS4 if the Neo never existed. So the only way gaming actually changes for you is if you actually buy a Neo. That's the irony there. It's business as usual if you stick to an original PS4.

 

[Sterok]

Abidel, was there notable confusion or negativity regarding the New 3DS (both for hardware and exclusives)? It's still the closest comparison point we have to this, and I haven't heard of any actual issues regarding it.

As long as Sony doesn't do something stupid, and all PS4 games are automatically playable on the Neo, I don't see the issue from a consumer perspective. If you want something cheap just to play games, the standard model will be available and relevant for awhile still. If you want something new or powerful, well now you have another option to suit your tastes.

 

[Notor!ousG]

Ironically IMO a lot of these gamers who are invested enough to be on GAF and other online forums, will be some of the first to buy it.

Not wanting to spend money doesn't always mean not having the ability to. A lot of it will be the MW2 boycott meme all over. I don't speak for everyone, but I can just see this happening.

True, but if the leaked info is legit, nothing will change for them. Developers still will have to make sure that the games on the base model are running as they should be. There will be no exclusive games or features, and the online will be operational for both. The only thing they will be missing are some improvement framerates and IQ.

 

[Audioboxer]

True, but if the leaked info is legit, nothing will change for them. Developers still will have to make sure that the games on the base model are running as they should be. There will be no exclusive games or features, and the online will be operational for both. The only thing they will be missing are some improvement framerates and IQ.

But it's nice to want things... without ever spending money.

 

[Shin-Ra]

If a PS4 can barely do 1080p at 30fps

PS3 can comfortably do beautiful 1080p at 60fps. You've mistaken developer intent with hardware capability.