Lionel Richie
Member
You fail to see the difference between more hard drive space and games running better on a hardware revision?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
SCE Executive Vice President: Possible enhanced version PS4, no first party for Vita
- Thread starter miku
- Start date
You fail to see the difference between more hard drive space and games running better on a hardware revision?
Kun Aguero
Member
"So in other words, it is possible."
It's also possible that half the poster's in this thread will lose their virginity tonight. Very unlikely, but still possible.
It's also possible that half the poster's in this thread will lose their virginity tonight. Very unlikely, but still possible.
Joke
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Happens with cell phones and PC's all the time. Nobody gives a shit with that.
autoduelist
Member
Cell phones are subsidized by contracts and serve as many people's technological hub -- camera, computer, phone, social apps, calculator, etc, etc, etc. They are considered by many to be vital not only for their career, but for their social and family life.
Consoles are a luxury item that sits under your TV. Most people don't even buy very many games for it. That's why so many people just want to buy one and be done with it for 5-7+ years. It's why people don't mind waiting 3-5 years to even buy into a gen.
I realize we're on a gaming forum here, so everyone is tightly tuned in to gaming... but in general? Most people only think about consoles when a super big must-have game comes out [GTA, etc] and/or a pricecut makes the news. Longterm, these people are the primary market and iterative consoles would push them away because the very thing they want to buy into is simplicity... a $300 or so console per decade, give or take. The mistake many here are making is asking for what they want (new tech! more power!) without taking the actual average console buyer into consideration. Sure, if you have disposable cash buying a new console (more power!) every year is fine. But if you can't see how terrible that is for the primary market, you're too close to it and you need to step back.
captainraincoat
Banned
ps4 32x
sounds like a silly idea to have a slightly better version of a ps4 as you then break the userbase into 2 groups and effectively create another console....sony need to concentrate on the ps4 and only the ps4 as everything outside is a failure
sounds like a silly idea to have a slightly better version of a ps4 as you then break the userbase into 2 groups and effectively create another console....sony need to concentrate on the ps4 and only the ps4 as everything outside is a failure
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
And we will be 3-4 years in and will not hear a thing about this.
Console makers are going to be switching to a more service style product (not unlike cell phones) in the near future, all the pieces of the puzzle are in place. Whether you like it or not, that is more profitable and sustainable for these companies with growth.
Gaming PC's are a luxury item that people upgrade or do not upgrade. If all the games still work on the OG box, but run better and offer more visual flare on the faster box, this still does not effect the person that bought the OG, other than wanting the visual flare, which again, is an OPTION of luxury.
Pretty much this. Would be an option for those who are hardcore enough on the tech side.
PS4.5 would be an incremental upgrade. You wouldn't even have to buy it, but people holding off might be interested in it.
If you did buy the new version all games on PS4 would still work with the PS4.5 with likely improvements. If it's still running on the same architecture and OS, it could be very easy for games to scale between them without segregating the userbase.
If you did buy the new version all games on PS4 would still work with the PS4.5 with likely improvements. If it's still running on the same architecture and OS, it could be very easy for games to scale between them without segregating the userbase.
mumbles365
Banned
High Performance PS4?
Fuk that shit.
If I wanted to upgrade my console every few years I'd go get a PC. Gimme PS5 or nothing, if we go down this route this industry will probably fail. The biggest reason why people like console gaming is because it's 'cheap' convenient and a long term investment. It's just plug in and play ... Are we going to divide the fan base even further by introducing two kinds of the same console.
Fukk right off. Anyone that supports this needs to have their head examined.
Fuk that shit.
If I wanted to upgrade my console every few years I'd go get a PC. Gimme PS5 or nothing, if we go down this route this industry will probably fail. The biggest reason why people like console gaming is because it's 'cheap' convenient and a long term investment. It's just plug in and play ... Are we going to divide the fan base even further by introducing two kinds of the same console.
Fukk right off. Anyone that supports this needs to have their head examined.
If Sony does it, it might be because it's a need of Japanese developers asking for it. Userbase resets are becoming detrimental and keeping so many games cross-gen because it's risky to release a game on a system with low userbase in Japan.
Why are people talking about userbase resets and such? You can keep your ps4 and it will play all ps4 games just fine. The "new ps4" will simply play some of them a bit better. It's entirely optional. There is no userbase split. You're just simply using whatever ps4 you happen to own as access to Sony's services and games
Userbase resets of generation to generation. Hardware refreshes and upgrades are what's being asked for by some. But yeah, there will be no split between a PS4 and a PS4.5.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Yep. This is the direction all 3 are headed in. I would not be surprised they license their services to other hardware makers, just like Steam. Gaming is going to be service based on ALL platforms (phone, PC, "console", etc) in the near future.
More profitable, more licensing control, and potential for much more growth.
(And I called it last gen with the usher of the digital push, now game streaming services, MSFT's a generation or two too early always online, Nintendo's NX platform and mobile phone talks, etc).
Exactly.
No I agree with your post above - there is no need for resets anymore. The concept of generations become obsolete as gaming turns into a service industry. Whether you choose a service on an open platform or a closed one is up to you and your costing and software preferences.
Jacksinthe
Banned
I don't know how I feel about hardware revisions. I would rather see proper generational jumps. Keep it to every 5 years and it's all good. BC should be thought of moving forward but I know that's asking a bit much.
I hope the higher performance PS4 is just him talking out his ass.
I bought my PS4 early on so I'd be set for the rest of the gen.
If they're going to do stop gap consoles from now on I'm just going to say fuck it and start playing on PC. I'd be getting the same treatment there anyway but with more freedom.
Maybe I'd just stop gaming all together.
I bought my PS4 early on so I'd be set for the rest of the gen.
If they're going to do stop gap consoles from now on I'm just going to say fuck it and start playing on PC. I'd be getting the same treatment there anyway but with more freedom.
Maybe I'd just stop gaming all together.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
So a PC basically with an equivalent of a Steam box's Big Picture Mode? Or like that one Alienware gaming PC box?
I guess it could work. Although that's going to be a very interesting timeline w/ the NX. If it (the NX) turns out to be very powerful compared to PS4 and XBO, and releases a year before (I'm definitely thinking it comes out in 2016), that could make what you're proposing redundant to early adopters if the NX turns out to appeal to them, and being a better value proposition.
In that caes the XBO would need to be quite more powerful than even the NX, and releasing at that point, might as well be an Xbox Two, which I guess could be a lot closer to what you're proposing given that the current gen systems are already so much like PCs.
The problem is the hardware will be worth nothing if it's simply there; Sony will need to justify its existence with quality games that actually take fuller advantage of the extra hardware. So essentially, the games will need to be scalable.
Basically, if it's the equivalent of what the PS2 did with most PS1 games, there's no need to really go for it IMHO.
copelandmaster
Member
Agreed. No exclusive games, no split user base, no problem.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Well this is exactly how it would be, considering they are now x86 infrastructures, it would allow the same scalable engine scenarios like a PC game. Kind of like the option to have 60 or 30fps in The Last of Us Remastered, only instead with the current gen games.
Driveclub as an example is rock solid without a single dip 30fps. That would mean it probably averages at around 45fps right now on the PS4, so a heftier box would be able to have the game vsync'ed at 60fps for those who need that in their racing games, with all those bells and whistles still active.
He said it was a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question for how easy it would be with the new x86 chipset. He also said there is no plans or talks about it, supposedly. That headline is clickbait. And sadly people get their news from just the headlines nowadays.
(However as a few of us mentioned above, it will more than likely happen [possibly next generation] as gaming even on consoles evolves into a service like the big 3 want.)
dr_rus
Member
Not the best example as Crysis wasn't a typical 2007 game really.
neogaffer1
Banned
just stating something i noticed? someone's angry.
I wouldn't mind a faster PS4 but I assume it's only real capability over what we have now would be higher frame rate. I don't see them managing a higher frame rate and visual upgrades unless it's AA or something.
They would have to give me at least $250 for my PS4 for me to consider getting one though. I'm still curious what they plan on doing for Morpheus based on what oculus is saying is required to properly run a VR panel. They have to be offloading a bunch of the processing onto a chipset in the actual head unit or something...
They would have to give me at least $250 for my PS4 for me to consider getting one though. I'm still curious what they plan on doing for Morpheus based on what oculus is saying is required to properly run a VR panel. They have to be offloading a bunch of the processing onto a chipset in the actual head unit or something...
Why stop there? Surely the revision after it will offer more bang for the buck.
Astral Dog
Member
FF VII REmake exclusive to high performance PS4?
RoninChaos
Member
Aren't they doing new vita colors though?
250...what? That's not how new product launches work...
You should ask square if it will even be done in half a decade
RichiRamjag
Member
Most likely. I don't see it happening tbh.
Firmus_Anguis
Banned
An "enhanced" PS4 is a bad idea. Period.
That shit didn't fly for SEGA, it sure as hell won't fly for Sony either. Bad Sony, bad!
(I'm well aware that it'll probably never happen, but still).
That shit didn't fly for SEGA, it sure as hell won't fly for Sony either. Bad Sony, bad!
(I'm well aware that it'll probably never happen, but still).
I wouldnt. I spent 400+ doll hairs on this fuckin thing and they better work with what they got god dammit mother fuckers
Sorry about your 400 doll hairs (that's a lot of doll hairs) but your ps4 won't stop working or getting software support on this scenario
True, but sony could possibly release "enhanced ps4 only" titles and fucking shaft early adopters
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
I think current PS4 owners who doesn't want an enhanced PS4 is holding technology back. That's like late PS3 owners demanding all PS4 games to be playable in a downgraded form on their PS3.
Me and my siblings play on a single PS4. We'll continue to play on our PS4 until it breaks down and then we'll just buy whatever the latest model of the PS4 there is on the shelf. Its pretty selfish to disallow future PS4 fans to play games in a better form than what you have now. You're an early adopter, you should have know better.
Me and my siblings play on a single PS4. We'll continue to play on our PS4 until it breaks down and then we'll just buy whatever the latest model of the PS4 there is on the shelf. Its pretty selfish to disallow future PS4 fans to play games in a better form than what you have now. You're an early adopter, you should have know better.
They could also release "VR only" titles and Fuck over early adopters. Man wouldn't it be such a Piss off if they supported their new platform with a few titles that take advantage of the hardware, even though the vast majority of support wouldn't cut off the other platform
As i was saying earlier, they might as well just wait for PS5 and have complete BC at that point, which i think they will do anyway.
Although a PS4.5 is possible, its probably highly unlikely, they are all hands on deck for PS5 is my viewpoint.
One of the reasons consoles are considered entirely separate from PC's and cellphones is because of that specifically.
Although a PS4.5 is possible, its probably highly unlikely, they are all hands on deck for PS5 is my viewpoint.
One of the reasons consoles are considered entirely separate from PC's and cellphones is because of that specifically.
High performance PS4 sounds like a stupid idea, however the consoles had outdated hardware even before their release so maybe it is time for an early generation jump. Consoles need to be more powerful if they want to get on the VR band wagon, and it would give a chance for Microsoft to see if they've learned from their mistakes.
Setting standard console specs for a few years isn't "holding technology back".
Liberty4all
Banned
One of the reasons people buy consoles is the knowledge we don't have to worry about upgrading. There is a big difference between a "slim" versus a console re release that enhances graphics or worse has titles that won't play on the older version.
Regardless I've bumped this thread to the attention of the powers that be so at the very least your feedback is heard. Personally though I'd put the OP waaaay into the rumors category.
Edit: thinking about it, it wouldn't surprise me to eventually see PS4 VR upgrade units for older PS4s, and a newer integrated PS4 that has VR built in. Pure speculation on my part though. Maybe that's what that VP was hinting at?
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
No real reason to artificially set the console specs as standard for few years.
There's nothing to worry over, unless you are the sort that wants the latest toy in town/wants to be among the first to play a game. The current PS4 will still last through the next few years. You can still play those exclusive games few years down the road when they are cheap enough for you to buy too.
Fredrik
Member
I would buy a PS4S day 1! The only problem PS4 have right now is first party exclusives with great graphics but low framerates, a PS4S that could run Driveclub, Second Son, Killzone, Uncharted 4, The Order, Bloodborne, Horizon, etc in 60fps would be the best thing ever.
But those who usually don't care about the low performance but like PS4 because it's simply the best console out there might still be annoyed to constantly hear the PS4S owners mock the PS4 original for the crappy performance, kind of like PS4 owners do to XB1 today. They would go from having the best console to the second best. It'll definitely split the userbase. In the worst way possible. First party games would probably run okay on both platforms but third party devs might have PS4S as the lead platform and the games might be badly optimized for PS4. I suspect that many of the most loyal and previously satisfied PS4 fans will feel betrayed. Not ideal.
The next problem is getting people to jump in when PS5 finally comes out when they know from the PS4 generation that PS5S might come out in a few years. Maybe it's better to wait for the software lineup to get better and always jump in at the S launches instead? And what if the devs do the same? What if third party devs hesitate to jump in if a console sells poorly from the start until the S version comes out? It'll essentially be like the real generation starts at the S launch.
A risky move.
chrisPjelly
Member
Man seeing the reaction to a possible mid generation PS4 hardware for makes me worried for Nintendo. This clearly what they're aiming for in the NX (not just cross compatibility between handheld and console), so I really don't know if people are willing to buy consoles like that they would with phones/computers. Regardless, x86 hardware should make it easier for Sony to build on top of the PS4 for their next generation, so that's should be a huge plus.
That would be great, although I doubt it would be a huge upgrade, else it would make things a bit complicated for devs I assume, although I'm not sure what the minor update would enhance. Whichever the case I don't mind it, it'd be nice to pick up a more powerful ps4 somewhere down the line assuming it's the same price.
There are real economic reasons why tech progression in video game consoles are the way they are.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
The only way I think they would do this is if VR really takes off, or they feel really threatened by the NX in some regard.
AMD woudl have to spit out a faster version of the current APU somehow, or they woudl need more GDDR or something. I think they woudl be better off just freeing up resources via OS firmware updates and such, you know, less memory footprint, overcloking the APU a bit, etc.
.
AMD woudl have to spit out a faster version of the current APU somehow, or they woudl need more GDDR or something. I think they woudl be better off just freeing up resources via OS firmware updates and such, you know, less memory footprint, overcloking the APU a bit, etc.
.
Similar threads
- Poll