BadLuckBrian.gif
Nintendo has been doing portable refreshes for decades now, no one bats an eye.
Microsoft announces console refreshes first, no one bats an eye.
Sony announces it, savior of the industry.
Well consoles are the industry, this could have a bigger impact on PC then you think especially if generational jumps stops and we start getting little upgrades.I want traditional consoles to fall, not the industry.
You want the industry to fall?
Honestly if you are used to using an iPad with iOS then iterative consoles would probably be even simpler then that.
Not only that, we had the same reactions to stuff like the GameBoy Color, GBA SP, DS Lite, DSi, PSP 2000, New 3DS, etc.Oh so you haven't seen any of the threads with people upset or "concern" about a new PS4 coming out?
Cost of making ps4 is 250 and they will likely sell it at 299 retail going forward
Cost of making ps4k is 300 or even 325 and they will likely sell it at 399 which means a higher profit margin
This is reliant entirely on the publishers going back and supporting old games to take advantage of the extra power, and I very much doubt AAA publishers are going to make a serious effort at that while they're trying to get people to spend $100+ on whatever new title + season pass they're trying to sell that year.
Not really sure how feeling locked in an ecosystem is at all a good thing for a consumer. Ecosystem benefits as cool things--sure. Ecosystem continuity as a ball and chain--why is this a good thing?! That's only a good thing for a corporatist hack. I am one console now, Nintendo, after two generations of having all three. Sony and Microsoft can win me back with software. Nintendo could lose me with software. That's how it should be.
Also, what's wrong with disruption for consumers?! No Genesis, PSX, Xbox 360, Wii?!
Perhaps PS4K does nothing to destroy console gaming as we know it. I'm open to that. But the reasons in the OP as to why it's a good thing are dubious.
You point out the "good things" and don't even counter with the possible downsides to this. Constant immediate console refreshes is a absolutely terrible idea and if you think the general consumer is going to see this as just 2 options (which will eventually be multiple configurations) all of you are going to be in for a mighty surprise. All this does is benefit the manufacturer, publisher, and developer with too many possible fuck overs to the consumer.
I'm tired of debating this one sided topic with bullshit illusions that everything is going to be ok.
Not only that, we had the same reactions to stuff like the GameBoy Color, GBA SP, DS Lite, DSi, PSP 2000, New 3DS, etc.
Basically, the butthurt reactions are just from people that feel their investment isn't the new latest and greatest, they haven't been able convey what the issue is exactly. When it has been said multiple times, that games will run on all itetrations of hardware within the same generation.
Some said tech grow too fast, console have to be iterative to keep up, some say tech grow too slow, console power jump won't be as big.
Which is it?
True, don't see how get lock into ecosystem good for customer.
Let them fight the shit out. Why should we care for which company get to retain their customers? Sony might lose all their lead they build with PS4? So what?
If they lost it, that's mean someone else have a better product, and better product deserve to win, not the product that lock you down.
If I understand the OP, this could be the last generation. Anything from now on, could just be a beefed-up version of the current systems. That means, for most consumer the ps4 could potentially be the last console that they need to buy for future PS titles. Imagine the current ps4 playing new PS games in 20 years time, that would be a great investment for casual gamers.When it has been said multiple times, that games will run on all itetrations of hardware within the same generation.
This is not a Apple thing, Mobile phone companies have been doing this since before the iPhone even existed, just facetime, applepay and many other things existed years before apple did it.So essentially Sony is going forward with a "PlayStation ecosystem" philosophy for the PlayStation brand, just like Apple has done with the iOS platform since the beginning. If all goes as it logically should, the original PS4 should be able to play all the same games as the NEO, until the release of the next hardware iteration, whether it's called PS5 or whatever else (I'd expect iteration cycles to stay at 2,5-3,5 years). At that point I'd expect Sony to remove the requirement for developers to target PS4 as the baseline. So with the newest PlayStation-platform being x, the development baseline required would always be x-1, but with the developers being free to extend their support to even the oldest platform in the ecosystem (PS4), as long as the platform is still supported by Sony (meaning that is still receiving software/firmware updates).
You point out the "good things" and don't even counter with the possible downsides to this. Constant immediate console refreshes is a absolutely terrible idea and if you think the general consumer is going to see this as just 2 options (which will eventually be multiple configurations) all of you are going to be in for a mighty surprise. All this does is benefit the manufacturer, publisher, and developer with too many possible fuck overs to the consumer.
I'm tired of debating this one sided topic with bullshit illusions that everything is going to be ok.
This is not a Apple thing, Mobile phone companies have been doing this since before the iPhone even existed, just facetime, applepay and many other things existed years before apple did it.
Some said tech grow too fast, console have to be iterative to keep up, some say tech grow too slow, console power jump won't be as big.
Which is it?
OP I think your whole conclusion and opinion is based on unfounded assumptions
-there is nothing pointing to a ps5 being BC with ps4 (your entire OP is based on this assumption)
-for a ps5 to be compatible with ps4 you wouldn't need a ps4.5.
Ps4.5 or ps4k or w/e you want to call it is completely unrelated to ps5 BC.
-you're also suggesting that ps4 will be forward compatible with ps5 (play ps5 games) , which is pretty unlikely
As for games as a service? that whole concept can go die in a fire as far as I'm concerned, it's not good for consumers.
Yes, I agree with you and OP 100%.When PS4 came out, people thought "OK i'll spend the $500 or so to get my system and a game, be all set for the next 5 years". Now there's talk of maybe having to spend $500 more for an update to the system, which nobody was expecting.
I change my phone every year or two, and though it's expensive and I hem and haw about it, don't want to spend the money, it's always worth it. My old phone works fine, it's a little slow, but that new phone is so much faster and has new features I want. And every time, within a month I think, good thing I upgraded, I use my phone so often, it's paid for itself, just in the enjoyment I've gotten from it.
If you can't afford to upgrade to Neo, then the 2013 PS4 will be fine for now, but like with an old phone, eventually you'll upgrade. I think it's great Sony is thinking about upgrading the systems earlier, waiting 5 or 6 years for new tech to be implemented is not the way things are done anymore.
And if we do stay on the same " platform" with incremental upgrades every couple years, at least as have guaranteed "backwards compatibility" with older games, like with PC.
So Sony, announce this thing so I can get my preorder in...
OP I think your whole conclusion and opinion is based on unfounded assumptions
-there is nothing pointing to a ps5 being BC with ps4 (your entire OP is based on this assumption)
-for a ps5 to be compatible with ps4 you wouldn't need a ps4.5.
Ps4.5 or ps4k or w/e you want to call it is completely unrelated to ps5 BC.
-you're also suggesting that ps4 will be forward compatible with ps5 (play ps5 games) , which is pretty unlikely
As for games as a service? that whole concept can go die in a fire as far as I'm concerned, it's not good for consumers.
Sorry I forgot that's the only way some understand, I have to call my tablet a ipad for my bother to know what I'm on about lolComparing Sony to what Apple has done with iOS was just the most simple and clear comparison I could make. I didn't mean to say that Apple was the inventor of this business model, and that's beside the point of my post anyway.
Developers "speaking out against this in secret" is blatantly false, as Colin (who made that infamous tweet) later clarified to my knowledge that it was one guy, who asked another dev.
Grandi said:So essentially Sony is going forward with a "PlayStation ecosystem" philosophy for the PlayStation brand, just like Apple has done with the iOS platform since the beginning. If all goes as it logically should, the original PS4 should be able to play all the same games as the NEO, until the release of the next hardware iteration, whether it's called PS5 or whatever else (I'd expect iteration cycles to stay at 2,5-3,5 years)
I feel this is a very important point. Sony want to desensitise the console-buying public to the idea of buying iterative versions of whatever tech they're pushing. Sort of like how video card makers desensitized the buyers to the idea of obsolescence: "Buy now or later, it's irrelevant. There will always be something stronger, or something weaker than what you have".Remember you can just wait and buy PS4K part 2 or whatever.
Agree with everything that chubigans said. Had also the same idea.
Gabe Newell had a similar analogy in the past. He described the console business with building your dream house - and after 7 years when everything is perfectly arranged - you tear the house down and start from scratch.
This is IMO great for consumers. I buy less and less games on the PS4 - because I realized, that they might not work anymore on a PS5. There is so much great stuff on PS3 that I own - but I won't probably ever play it, because I don't want 2 consoles under my TV or I am just too lazy to hook the ps3 up.
When I buy a game for PC - it is mine - for a lifetime. I'd also want to see forward compatibility. If there is a new Telltale game or an indie title released in 2020 for the PS5 - it should be playable on my PS4. So I think this step is great - although I won't get the PS4K when it launches. Still have a decent PC - not a Masterrace PC - but i2500k +970 gaming. Should be still better than the PS4K. Will have to uprade the PC at sometime as CPU is more than 5 years old and there will USB 3.1 and stuff like this.
Especially when you are used to pc gaming you know that you never will have the best possible experience. Doesn't bother me at all. Even if you buy a Titan on day one, then there will be someone that has 2 or 3 in SLI. And there is also somebody that has an extreme 1000$ CPU, an SSD raid, 3 monitors ... and so on.
Think I will upgrade my PS4 when I see signs that it might break and if there is a great deal. The current model doesn't feel obsolete to me, just because there are better ones.
Developers "speaking out against this in secret" is blatantly false, as Colin (who made that infamous tweet) later clarified to my knowledge that it was one guy, who asked another dev
X86 architecture would be one.
As for games as a service? that whole concept can go die in a fire as far as I'm concerned, it's not good for consumers.
I feel this is a very important point. Sony want to desensitise the console-buying public to the idea of buying iterative versions of whatever tech they're pushing. Sort of like how video card makers desensitized the buyers to the idea of obsolescence: "Buy now or later, it's irrelevant. There will always be something stronger, or something weaker than what you have".
The big problem with PS4k is that Sony isn't allowing it to replace the PS4 like they should be. Forcing everything to be compatible with the base system is only holding the PS4k back in a misguided attempt to keep the PS4 relevant for longer. Sony is trying to move to the iterative model without really fully accepting the consequences of doing so.
And all that is a good thing for customers.
Brand loyalty is an inherently bad thing for everyone except for the owner of the brand.
The big problem with PS4k is that Sony isn't allowing it to replace the PS4 like they should be. Forcing everything to be compatible with the base system is only holding the PS4k back in a misguided attempt to keep the PS4 relevant for longer. Sony is trying to move to the iterative model without really fully accepting the consequences of doing so.
Yes x86 architecture is the reason why they can make a BC ps5 quite easily, because the ps4 is x86 and the ps5 will for sure be too.
The ps4k is not a factor in that that was my point