New PS4.5 rumors getting specific... (2 Viewers)

[buzd]

If this happens, console gaming is getting the same crap that PC gaming has had for years. i.e. useless and costly graphical upgrades that do not really effect the enjoyment of gaming and only make gaming more expensive. And, pushing Blu-Ray with the PlayStation is when made Sony lose the console battle in the last generation. It appeared that they had learned their lesson in this generation, but now they are going to risk their big lead in console sales so they can push the 4K capabilities of Blu-Ray? That seems to be the hubris before the fall.

Probably the most successful game in the last 20 years that has had the largest cultural impact is Minecraft and ti uses 64 bit graphics. Gaming is not made better by higher frame rates or more pixels on the screen. We don't need prettier pictures, we need better and more interesting games. That's the lesson that should have been learned from Minecraft, but people like you are so dumb they are stuck staring blankly at pretty pictures on the screen.

I agree that the quality of games should trump graphics and associated upgrades, but why can't we have both?

 

[St. Widge]

But I don't think anyone has said that the capabilities of the machines or games would be significantly different other than the 4k capabilities of the 's' model. If there isn't a compatibility issue, you might as well let the select group of those who choose to upgrade to the better video quality.

It's not like PC at all where the current system is out of date. And anyway, there is already precedent for incremental console upgrades - PS2 and PS3 both came out with "slim" versions with improved hardware, and the xbox 360 continually stepped up the hardware built in to the system after the RROD debacle.

According to what wdf posted (so TTFWIW), the GPU will be twice as fast. If that's the case then it would seem that they would develop games that use that better GPU and leave the PS 4 in the same situation the PS3 is now in. Of course, if it plays the same games and uses the same live gaming network, it won't really matter. But, given the small number of 4K TVs out there I could see Sony using a different network to force people to buy the 4.5.

And the Slim and new versions of the 360 are different issues. They didn't fundamentally change how the games were played the way a GPU upgrade could. The slim just made the machine smaller and the newer 360 just wouldn't catch on fire. It didn't change what games could or could not be played.

So, in my eyes, the better GPU could easily lead to games that can only really be played on the 4.5 which is the same basic situation as you have with PCs where you have to upgrade your graphic card to keep up. Only in this situation, that graphics card comes wrapped up in a new console.

 

[St. Widge]

I agree that the quality of games should trump graphics and associated upgrades, but why can't we have both?

We could, but if they keep changing the tech that those games are played on, developers have to spend their time writing for a new system rather than making better games.

 

[antipop]

i need another ps4 anyway

 

[whodatfever]

It didn't change what games could or could not be played

This shouldn't either. The article states that any game released after the 4.5 streets will run at increased graphical settings on the newer system but will still RUN on current systems. Any game currently out can be patched to run at a higher resolution or FPS on the new hardware but will be done via patch by the developers at their discretion.

We could, but if they keep changing the tech that those games are played on, developers have to spend their time writing for a new system rather than making better games.

I think you might be confused, the same game will be developed to run on the same architecture, just at 2 levels of graphical capability. One higher than the other. I hope that helps clear it up.

 

[Saint_Ward]

You didn't get a PS4 until 10 years after it came out, so of course your electronics would be antique.

Also,

2 years.

I have a preference for Plasma, and the one I bought in 2010 was a very good model and still looks great. Why get an early gen 4k TV just because?

By 2014 only 1% of homes had an UHD TV (4k). The estimates are 10% of households will have one by 2016 (can't find a more recent number). And 50% by 2020.

It makes sense to just add this capability in about 4 years, when it should be time to consider a PS5.

This article is from the fall, but the point is still true. Sony should wait on this for the PS5, vs trying to be an early adopter.

You Shouldn't Buy a 4K TV Until 2016 (Maybe Even 2017)

Also, lag is a major concern...

We've had a number of PCs come in for review that perform even better in the 4K games ─ the Alienware Area-51 clocked in at nearly 30 fps with its three Nvidia 980 cards joined together. It also costs $4,500. That's 10 times the cost of a PlayStation 4, and a heckuva lot of money just to get a lousy 30 fps.

But the real kick in the pants for 4K gaming on televisions is the lag. Many 4K monitors retail for the same as 4K televisions despite being more than half the size. One of the big reasons companies can afford to charge so much is because of the wicked-fast response times of their displays.

In our response test at Tom's Guide, monitors average 16 milliseconds between the press of a button and the corresponding action on screen. For 4K televisions, that number skyrockets to a glacially slow (and unacceptable) 108ms. With that kind of lag, you'll spend more of your time dying than playing. Some manufacturers are working to rectify that. Vizio's 4K models average a more reasonable 23.5ms and Sony's latest $4,000 set managed a decent 27.3ms ─ which is still twice the 13ms the human eye can perceive. That means players could be disadvantaged in "twitch"-style games like Call of Duty and Street Fighter, where those miniscule milliseconds count.

 

[Saint_Ward]

This shouldn't either. The article states that any game released after the 4.5 streets will run at increased graphical settings on the newer system but will still RUN on current systems. Any game currently out can be patched to run at a higher resolution or FPS on the new hardware but will be done via patch by the developers at their discretion.



I think you might be confused, the same game will be developed to run on the same architecture, just at 2 levels of graphical capability. One higher than the other. I hope that helps clear it up.

No, it said this...

Dev Kits and Existing Games

Developers already have development kits for the new PlayStation 4 and are making games that will directly target and take advantage of its higher specs. These games will work on the current PlayStation 4, but with considerable sacrifices made to performance.

Current games will not receive any performance upgrades by being played on the newer system. Any upgrades that come would do so via game-specific patches released by developers. When asked if this was going to happen, the response was, “It’s a possibility but doubtful with the exception of a handful of games.”

Read more at Rumor: PS4.5 to have twice as powerful GPU; Deep Down and God of War 4 among launch titles - Gematsu

 

[whodatfever]

No, it said this...

One of us is putting the other one on

:blink1:

 

[Saint_Ward]

One of us is putting the other one on

:blink1:

Well, to me, graphics aren't performance. Performance is how smooth, fast, etc it runs.

Just like how Battlefield 4 was on PS3 vs PS4. BF3 ran like a champ on PS3, but BF4 ran like crap, because it was designed for the PS4, then dumbed down. It's not just a skin pack difference.

If that's all they do, then fine. But if it gets into other parts of the game mechanics, I'm staying leery of this.

 

[Brennan77]

I'll wait to judge this when we get more details. If it is largely oriented toward upgraded video capability, fine. But if it starts affecting the way games are developed, it will be interesting. Sony will have to be very careful not to divide their own market.

 

[authentic]

I own a 70" 4K tv, it's amazing and there is zero lag with my GTX980TI or my PS4. That's some outdated info. I bought mine in July of 2015. I also get well more than 30 FPS. I run the Division at 3840x2160 at well over 50 FPS and it looks incredible.

 

[whodatfever]

I own a 70" 4K tv, it's amazing

I'm sure the picture is nice. I've seen beautiful 4K content.

there is zero lag with my GTX980TI or my PS4. I also get well more than 30 FPS.

The 980ti is a dilly of a card but limited in effectiveness EVEN at 1440p. However, some older or less demanding games should render playable fps at 4K.

I'm sure you realize that the PS4 is not playing your content at 4K. That is absolutely NOT happening.

I run the Division at 3840x2160 at well over 60 FPS and it looks incredible.

Ok. Ok. I'm going to remain calm.

I assume you mean your graphics are maxed out. I'm just going to quote one of the MANY references online as to how that AAA title plays at a SUPER-DEMANDING 4K resolution:

"I was getting 32-34 FPS in 4k, everything up but AA and i have TWO 980tis ..."

The Division Benchmarks Videos @ 1080p/4K - GTX 980 Ti | N4G

I'm WITH you on the PC gaming glory, I am and have been for years. But dude, come on.

Now I know that being a PC Gamer comes with the a terrific feeling of superiority over console players due to a number of reasons anyone can find over at S/PCmasterrace, but engaging in gross hyperbole tends to weaken our arguments when we ARE right.

 

[St. Widge]

I'm sure the picture is nice. I've seen beautiful 4K content.


The 980ti is a dilly of a card but limited in effectiveness EVEN at 1440p. However, some older or less demanding games should render playable fps at 4K.

I'm sure you realize that the PS4 is not playing your content at 4K. That is absolutely NOT happening.



Ok. Ok. I'm going to remain calm.

I assume you mean your graphics are maxed out. I'm just going to quote one of the MANY references online as to how that AAA title plays at a SUPER-DEMANDING 4K resolution:

"I was getting 32-34 FPS in 4k, everything up but AA and i have TWO 980tis ..."

The Division Benchmarks Videos @ 1080p/4K - GTX 980 Ti | N4G

I'm WITH you on the PC gaming glory, I am and have been for years. But dude, come on.

Now I know that being a PC Gamer comes with the a terrific feeling of superiority over console players due to a number of reasons anyone can find over at S/PCmasterrace, but engaging in gross hyperbole tends to weaken our arguments when we ARE right.

You don't even own a PS4 or a 4K TV. Moreover, you don't game on a PC or any other platform.

But, you are dumb and bald, and that has to count for something.

 

[Twenty]

You don't even own a PS4 or a 4K TV. Moreover, you don't game on a PC or any other platform.

But, you are dumb and bald, and that has to count for something.

He doesn't game because his PC is absolute junk.

 

[kcirdor]

I own a 70" 4K tv, it's amazing and there is zero lag with my GTX980TI or my PS4. That's some outdated info. I bought mine in July of 2015. I also get well more than 30 FPS. I run the Division at 3840x2160 at well over 60 FPS and it looks incredible.

Who is this guy?