Eddage Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 If 4K is the goal (hence PS4K) then I honestly don't see how they can push towards 4K levels and FPS at the same time. The horsepower to pull off 4K 60 FPS would be tremendous - leaves me thinking resolution will more likely take precedent. It will no doubt output at 4K but I think that will mainly be used for Ultra HD Blu Rays (which will almost certainly be playable) and streaming 4K content. Hopefully as far as games go they will focus on making it run smoothly before trying to up the output to 4K. Probably have a built in upscaler that will make 1080p games look better and not rely on the TV to upscale the image. For games I'd rather have prettier 1080p games than the current games just at 4K!
Agent Gibbs Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 I guess my main concern now is online multiplayer. If the Neo versions of games run at better frame-rates online then those players will have an advantage over Base players.If this is the case then I'll not be happy at all! I Posted almost the exact same thing but it was lost in the argument How does it work on PC?Is it a complaint in the PC community? can't say I've ever heard of it being. Hmm i'd say it is - Lag - either local (due to hardware) or internet connection based are common place, but usually most people who have a PC not capable of running a game at the same level as others will lower the graphical fidelity in favour of FPS The closest equivalent with PS4 i can think of is Remote play - with my vita its too laggy to play any PVP, so the division and Destiny are nigh on impossible to play competitively in such realms - passable and manageable but you are limited compared to using the PS4 directly and in comparison with other plays. If the PS4 to PS4K/Neo offers up 30fps to 60fps in online multiplayers it will give an advantage to those running at the higher fps surely? unless i really misunderstand the concepts behind them
Happenstance Posted April 21, 2016 Author Posted April 21, 2016 We have to remember as well that PS4K is just what everyone else decided to call it based on the initial rumours. We'll need the actual word from Sony before we know what the actual focus of the extra power is.
Retro_Link Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 NEO... clearly it allows us to enter The Matrix. PSVR is just a cover-up... plug that shit into me.
peterl0 Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 Whilst Sony have not substantiated all of this, the rumour does seem to be very likely to be the reality. Eurogamer seem to have gotten developer guidelines for games that suggest that Sony is trying very hard to ensure they don't split the userbase and there are no NEO only or PS4 only features. From these guidelines it does seem very likely that there will be more of a focus on 1080p/60fps than 4k support. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-how-playstation-4k-neo-and-the-original-ps4-will-co-exist Specifically: Games running in Neo mode must operate at a native rendering resolution of 1920x1080 (1080p) or higher. A game's frame-rate must meet or exceed its equivalent performance level on base PlayStation 4 hardware.
Ronnie Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 There certainly will be Neo exclusive features, games will look and run better!
Eddage Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 There certainly will be Neo exclusive features, games will look and run better! Do you just try to be provocative on purpose? You know that when people say exclusive features they mean gameplay, you know that no one is talking about the games looking a bit better, yet you still post this shit to try and get a rise out of people.
Sheikah Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 Whilst Sony have not substantiated all of this, the rumour does seem to be very likely to be the reality. Eurogamer seem to have gotten developer guidelines for games that suggest that Sony is trying very hard to ensure they don't split the userbase and there are no NEO only or PS4 only features. From these guidelines it does seem very likely that there will be more of a focus on 1080p/60fps than 4k support. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-how-playstation-4k-neo-and-the-original-ps4-will-co-exist Specifically: The guidelines make it sound like it could go either way (it says resolution should be 1080p at a minimum). If you look at PS3 most games were around 720p and 30 FPS. Start of this gen they have stuck to 30 FPS for many games but increased resolution to 1080p. From a marketing perspective, it feels like resolution is always given priority. I dunno, the "PS4K" to me sounds like they are keen to push resolution for these 4K TVs. It would also bypass the potential FPS issue in multiplayer too. Of course, they could also do both.
peterl0 Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 The reason I thought that they were not really pushing that hard for more than 1080p was that they mention 1080p but don't directly suggest trying for higher. It seems to me that if they can have games at 1080p/60fps and a 4K output, they could push it as a 4K media player at the same time. Then they might also see some mainstream success in the same way as they did for PS2/DVD and PS3/Bluray. If 4k or high resolution film disks came out at the same time I would have thought it might soften the blow to anyone worried about the cost or need to upgrade.
Sheikah Posted April 21, 2016 Posted April 21, 2016 See, if they are pushing TVs over 1080p in resolution then I would think it makes most sense to show as many things making use of those higher resolutions as possible (e.g. films and games). Mind you, it does make sense that an FPS boost would also attract people other than 4K TV owners to buying the revised model. May well be both - time will tell.
Nolan Posted April 22, 2016 Posted April 22, 2016 Not sure if this was posted but eh. http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/sources-the-upgraded-playstation-4-is-codenamed-ne/1100-5437/ Came across it in a thread speculating on AMDs upcoming GPU line. People are going with the idea that this could be their new Polaris chip on a new fabrication process (FINFET). FINFET is suppose to be much more efficient and current rumors and slides about the chips are saying 2.5x performance/watt. Working out to around 1.5x overall performance. If they're right though, this Polaris chip is meant to be around AMD 390 performance, which is a VERY large step up from the original PS4 GPU. But. Rumors are just rumors so eat some salt.
Happenstance Posted April 22, 2016 Author Posted April 22, 2016 Not sure if this was posted but eh. http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/sources-the-upgraded-playstation-4-is-codenamed-ne/1100-5437/ Yeah it was, thats the article that started this all.
Ronnie Posted May 26, 2016 Posted May 26, 2016 With the rumours of a new Xbox in 2017 which is pretty much a start of a new generation So not only screwed by Playstation, screwed by Microsoft as well. Awesome.
Sheikah Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 So not only screwed by Playstation, screwed by Microsoft as well. Awesome. Still don't get this argument. How is ending a generation early a la Wii U better than this? With Neo at least, games will still run on the original consoles so what is the issue exactly?
Ronnie Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 The issue is they've cut a generation in half, one that consumers expected to last 5-6+ years, not two and a half. Sure games will carry on running on the old hardware, but that's just another form of backwards compatibility. I bought my PS4 6 months ago, and it's already out of date.
Sheikah Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 The issue is they've cut a generation in half, one that consumers expected to last 5-6+ years, not two and a half. Sure games will carry on running on the old hardware, but that's just another form of backwards compatibility. I bought my PS4 6 months ago, and it's already out of date. Nope, if anything they have extended the generation - I can easily see a refresh keeping this generation going for longer as it keeps the current system family relevant. While we might have seen a new generation of consoles in 3 years, now that there is a refresh planned I am led to doubt that very much. I think the fundamental problem with your argument is that you don't understand what a generation is. It's not a new generation of consoles, because they're still running the same games as each other. It's not backwards compatibility at all, because the refreshed hardware isn't additionally running new games. The comparison you are looking for is PC, where games can run at different graphical levels, depending upon your rig. This is nothing new; and importantly, nobody in their right mind would say this feature on PC is somehow detrimental to the consumer or gaming. So what gives? Choice is a good thing, no? I bet people would have given their right arm for a Wii+ that played the same games but in HD, with the option of sticking to the old model if you wanted. And back to my previous point - optional upgrade after a short period is by far preferable to a forced upgrade after a short lifespan (forced as in, if you want to continue to play Nintendo software). That's why I don't get your singling out of console refreshes while totally ignoring something far worse.
liger05 Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 Still don't get this argument. How is ending a generation early a la Wii U better than this? With Neo at least, games will still run on the original consoles so what is the issue exactly? I don't even think the wii u is ending in generation early. By the time NX hits the wii u will be over 4 years old. The last overly long generation seems to make people think console generations are 7 years long but this was if anything an anomaly.
Blade Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 I don't even think the wii u is ending in generation early. By the time NX hits the wii u will be over 4 years old. The last overly long generation seems to make people think console generations are 7 years long but this was if anything an anomaly. I take the view that the Wii U's life has been short. I mean it was only a short time when it was fully supported. The future doesn't look particularly busy for the console either.
drahkon Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 and importantly, nobody in their right mind would say this feature on PC is somehow detrimental to the consumer or gaming. This. It's actually the complete opposite of detrimental. It's very pro consumer. I haven't upgraded my rig in years and can still play new games at medium quality.
Debug Mode Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 Consoles are slowly becoming like mobile phones because the reality is, they're losing their edge too quickly in this day and age. It's annoying, but it's the future and as long as you can still play these games, who cares? If you want more performance, upgrade to the next. I'm still happy with my Galaxy S4 and it runs pretty much everything I need to and the S7 is out. Generations are not going to be a thing any more, just be glad we're still not at the point of steaming boxes where you will never touch a new physical game again.
Goron_3 Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 So not only screwed by Playstation, screwed by Microsoft as well. Awesome. No need to spam. Nintendo will very likely go down the forward compatibility route too. Even Iwata openly spoke about how we will likely see more form factors from Nintendo. It means they can keep generations going for longer as they are built around an OS instead of starting again every 4-6 years.
Sheikah Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 I don't even think the wii u is ending in generation early. By the time NX hits the wii u will be over 4 years old. The last overly long generation seems to make people think console generations are 7 years long but this was if anything an anomaly. As Blade touched on, the Wii U lifespan has for all intents and purposes, even if not officially, been very short. The Wii U effectively died quite a while ago in terms of support and is merely on life support until NX. Them announcing the NX next year does not suddenly make the Wii U situation any better. Also: By the time NX hits the wii u will be over 4 years old. The last overly long generation seems to make people think console generations are 7 years long but this was if anything an anomaly. Actually, given the way console gaming has matured, 7 years does not feel like an anomaly but the new standard. Let's see if I'm right by seeing how long it takes until the actual PS5.
Serebii Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 Be fair, one instance of it happening doesn't make it the new standard.
liger05 Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 As Blade touched on, the Wii U lifespan has for all intents and purposes, even if not officially, been very short. The Wii U effectively died quite a while ago in terms of support and is merely on life support until NX. Them announcing the NX next year does not suddenly make the Wii U situation any better. Also: Actually, given the way console gaming has matured, 7 years does not feel like an anomaly but the new standard. Let's see if I'm right by seeing how long it takes until the actual PS5. I think the conventional generation is over. The market is changing a new box every few years which is backwards compatible is the future.
Recommended Posts