Rumor: Ps4k

[kitler53]

Yeah, a lot of what was in that Osirisblack rumor is exactly what I don't want and is the stuff that I feel people are really going to be mad about. Potential $500 price tag, (currently) no trade in program planned and fudgy games that specifically target the PS4k already, which will make them run (the key word is "run") worse on the normal PS4, that's what people are really going to riot about. Also announced before October and released Q1 2017? Are you outta your mind Sony? Do you completely want to kill the PS4s momentum?

of course games will run worse on lesser hardware.  what is the point of better hardware if it isn't giving those buyers some advantage.  

but seriously who gives a fudge..

----->PS3
------------------------------>ps4
---------------------------------------------->ps4k


did we all forget how many games were cross gen with noticeable but also not that impactful changes in resolution and frame rate. if you are a 60fps baby than get yourself a ps4k. but I'll been playing games at 30 fps my whole life and just don't give a fudge. seriously, Internet calls a game unplayable if there are infrequent dips to 27fps.  the Internet is being just as dumb here too. 

[Legend]

of course games will run worse on lesser hardware.  what is the point of better hardware if it isn't giving those buyers some advantage.  

but seriously who gives a fudge..

----->PS3
------------------------------>ps4
---------------------------------------------->ps4k


did we all forget how many games were cross gen with noticeable but also not that impactful changes in resolution and frame rate. if you are a 60fps baby than get yourself a ps4k. but I'll been playing games at 30 fps my whole life and just don't give a fudge. seriously, Internet calls a game unplayable if there are infrequent dips to 27fps.  the Internet is being just as dumb here too.

Smart people don't care about missing 60fps. They care about standard PS4 games being given the cold shoulder with optimization like what's happening with 3DS vs New 3DS.

Upgraded system gets 30 fps, while standard system gets ~15fps.

[DerNebel]

of course games will run worse on lesser hardware.  what is the point of better hardware if it isn't giving those buyers some advantage.  

but seriously who gives a fudge..

----->PS3
------------------------------>ps4
---------------------------------------------->ps4k


did we all forget how many games were cross gen with noticeable but also not that impactful changes in resolution and frame rate. if you are a 60fps baby than get yourself a ps4k. but I'll been playing games at 30 fps my whole life and just don't give a fudge. seriously, Internet calls a game unplayable if there are infrequent dips to 27fps.  the Internet is being just as dumb here too.

Yeah, pretty much what Legend said I'm not worried about games being 60fps on the PS4K and 30 on the normal PS4, I'm worried about games being optimized for 30fps on the PS4K and then actually running like shame on the normal PS4, or looking like shame.

[kitler53]

Smart people don't care about missing 60fps. They care about standard PS4 games being given the cold shoulder with optimization like what's happening with 3DS vs New 3DS.

Upgraded system gets 30 fps, while standard system gets ~15fps.

it won't happen. Sony will mandate the ps4 as the required min. Nintendo just can't make good games. 

[Aura7541]

it won't happen. Sony will mandate the ps4 as the required min. Nintendo just can't make good games.

That was what Zoetis hinted at and I hope it's true.

[Legend]

it won't happen. Sony will mandate the ps4 as the required min. Nintendo just can't make good games.

That's what we hope, but there's no guarantee. Sony can't control 3rd parties.

[DerNebel]

I'm at this weird stage right now where I'm trying to make scenarios in my mind in which Sony doesn't fudge this up (they could sell this as the PS4 Elite and make it clear that this will not have any negative effects on games on the standard PS4, as well as follow through with that of course), while at the same time having this small part in me that thinks Sony might just be leaking this stuff themselves to gauge reactions (seriously how can there be so many sources leaking similar but still kinda different things here? It's just super weird to me).

[DerNebel]

Zoetis is still saying this is just for 4k... this is why I'm so confused here, so much conflicting information.

Edit: I must say though, while I can fully understand people having worries and doubts about this, I can really just say that there's nothing more annoying than people that are entirely against this on a basis of principle and that feel without a shadow of a doubt that there's nothing potentially positive about this. If you can't even remotely see how this could be entirely harmless and even positive then you're really just unimaginative and jaded.

[DerNebel]

NeoGAF - View Single Post -  PS4K information (~2x GPU power w/ clock+, new CPU, price, tent. Q1 2017)

I got a bit more information today but I am trying to find out who all knows about it before posting.
 Also the word "Sacrifices" is being blown out of proportion. There are sacrifices made when making a console version of a game as compared to a PC game or when making an XB1 game as compared to a PS4 game. Don't expect PS4 games to all of a sudden become shame just expect them to run better on PS4K. I would expect a game that is really pushing the graphics envelope to run at 1080p 60fps on PS4K while the same game might run at 900p 60/30fps on PS4. Just the way I took it.
 

I'm not even sure why I'm still doing this, this is giving me a headache.

[ethomaz]

That is what I expected.

1080p 60fps PS4k
1080p 30fps or 900p 60fps PS4

Both with solid performance and same assets.

[kitler53]

That's what we hope, but there's no guarantee. Sony can't control 3rd parties.

yes they can.  it is a closed platform.  also games already have to pass sony's minimum quality requirements,.. you should know that.



just back the fudge up 1 year,... big demanding games are expensive to make and therefore need a large user base to sell to.  the entire industry refused to go "next gen exclusive" for at least 2 years even though the uptake of next gen consoles was great.  still, financially they refused to not include last gen console ports because they needed to guarantee a decent userbase in order to recoup their investment.

if you think there is anyone willing to develop a game that is demanding enough to require the ps4k's status to run (aka next half-gen exlusive) in the context that the jump in power is even smaller than the just from last gen and in the context that the architecture is waaay more similar making porting waaay easier then (and i'm being as polite as i can) you are a fudgy moron.

sony doesn't need to police this even though they will because demanding games are too expensive not to support ps4. 


the internet will be filled with hate but it is the same guys that will say that 30 fps is a performance issue.  30 fps is not a performance issue and those guys are stupid elitiest that frankly shouldn't own a console if framerate is that important to them.  consoles have always been a compromise in performance to have plug and play and cheap hardware.  DF will shame on the ps4 in every review but it still won't change the fact that ps4 will have the same performance console gamers have found acceptable for the last 3 decades. 

ignore the stupid haters and keep an eye on the benefits of MSony adopting the smartphone hardware cycles.   fully BC hardware in the future.  forward compatible hardware that means for non-graphic whores your hardware will last a lot longer (9-12 years instead of 6).  for graphic whores better performing games and a shorter waits for even better performance.   no software glut at generation transitions because developers can target specs a lot easier when they aren't guessing what the architecture/power of a next gen console will look like in 5 years when the software they start today will actually be releasable.  peripherals like psvr will be an easier investment too because we can know it will be forward compatible just like software and thus have a long life not artificially cut by a generation change.

[DerNebel]

I just realized something, imagine if all of this was the build up for a super elaborate April fools prank, lol.

Also another thing I realized is that if what Osirisblack says is true then he just casually confirmed GoW4 and Deep Down for Q1 2017, as well as a GT Sport delay to that time frame (or its VR update will only launch around then).

[Legend]

yes they can.  it is a closed platform.  also games already have to pass sony's minimum quality requirements,.. you should know that.



just back the fudge up 1 year,... big demanding games are expensive to make and therefore need a large user base to sell to.  the entire industry refused to go "next gen exclusive" for at least 2 years even though the uptake of next gen consoles was great.  still, financially they refused to not include last gen console ports because they needed to guarantee a decent userbase in order to recoup their investment.

if you think there is anyone willing to develop a game that is demanding enough to require the ps4k's status to run (aka next half-gen exlusive) in the context that the jump in power is even smaller than the just from last gen and in the context that the architecture is waaay more similar making porting waaay easier then (and i'm being as polite as i can) you are a fudgy moron.

sony doesn't need to police this even though they will because demanding games are too expensive not to support ps4.  


the internet will be filled with hate but it is the same guys that will say that 30 fps is a performance issue.  30 fps is not a performance issue and those guys are stupid elitiest that frankly shouldn't own a console if framerate is that important to them.  consoles have always been a compromise in performance to have plug and play and cheap hardware.  DF will shame on the ps4 in every review but it still won't change the fact that ps4 will have the same performance console gamers have found acceptable for the last 3 decades.  

ignore the stupid haters and keep an eye on the benefits of MSony adopting the smartphone hardware cycles.   fully BC hardware in the future.  forward compatible hardware that means for non-graphic whores your hardware will last a lot longer (9-12 years instead of 6).  for graphic whores better performing games and a shorter waits for even better performance.   no software glut at generation transitions because developers can target specs a lot easier when they aren't guessing what the architecture/power of a next gen console will look like in 5 years when the software they start today will actually be releasable.  peripherals like psvr will be an easier investment too because we can know it will be forward compatible just like software and thus have a long life not artificially cut by a generation change.

Sony doesn't have minimum quality requirements.

What you're thinking of is certification. That's a huge long checklist to make sure the game doesn't destroy hardware nor open Sony for a lawsuit. IE no killing kids, loading icons mandatory, correct use of tokens with PSN, etc. This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the software. Poor resolution, framerate, and even crashes can be OK.

PSVR is the only case where they'll fail games for bad performance.


No publisher is going to skip making a standard PS4 version. We agree that'd be stupid. The problem though is that devs have less reason to push graphics on standard PS4 games. Why waist money heavily optimizing an inferior version? Ship it with problems and assume the people who care the most about graphics have already upgraded.



It really depends on how Sony handles PS4.5. It could be good, but the reaction almost everywhere is really negative. Sony has a tough sell.

[DerNebel]

Sony doesn't have minimum quality requirements.

What you're thinking of is certification. That's a huge long checklist to make sure the game doesn't destroy hardware nor open Sony for a lawsuit. IE no killing kids, loading icons mandatory, correct use of tokens with PSN, etc. This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the software. Poor resolution, framerate, and even crashes can be OK.

PSVR is the only case where they'll fail games for bad performance.


No publisher is going to skip making a standard PS4 version. We agree that'd be stupid. The problem though is that devs have less reason to push graphics on standard PS4 games. Why waist money heavily optimizing an inferior version? Ship it with problems and assume the people who care the most about graphics have already upgraded.



It really depends on how Sony handles PS4.5. It could be good, but the reaction almost everywhere is really negative. Sony has a tough sell.
 

To be fair, with at least 50 million standard PS4 owners at release of this thing publishers are very unlikely to just stop optimizing for the standard PS4, for starters the better question would probably be "why optimize for an upgraded PS4 if hardly anyone owns it anyway?".

It's definitely not unreasonable to worry though.

[Legend]

To be fair, with at least 50 million standard PS4 owners at release of this thing publishers are very unlikely to just stop optimizing for the standard PS4, for starters the better question would probably be "why optimize for an upgraded PS4 if hardly anyone owns it anyway?".

It's definitely not unreasonable to worry though.

Upgrade for ps4.5 because that's the version you can use in trailers and marketing. "OMG look how amazing this game looks!"