I would be fine with a PS4 iteration that gave me this for all the games, including console-exclusive titles.
I honestly don't care about FPS, but it's becoming an issue with console versions like Just Cause 3 that slow to a crawl whenever major action is happening in the game. 30fps locked should at the very least be the standard. The new Hitman game even lets you toggle a locked 30fps or a higher one that warns you it could dip below at certain points.
If it's legitimately only for VR that I don't want then I'm okay. If we get into a scenario where "No dude, that's a PS4K game" then I'll be pretty upset.
+4
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
If it's legitimately only for VR that I don't want then I'm okay. If we get into a scenario where "No dude, that's a PS4K game" then I'll be pretty upset.
Based on the information out there, VR, 4K media and faster UI seem to be the main focuses of the additional power.
It seems to me that this would be a lot easier to pull off if, from the start, dev teams were at least aware of the possibility that their games might run on different hardware.
I guess Sony and MS could ask devs to provide profiles that attempt to optimize their games on the new HW. Hmmmmmm.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I would be fine with a PS4 iteration that gave me this for all the games, including console-exclusive titles.
I think this is actually a pretty good standard--but obviously it could have some problems.
Right now, we could make every game on the PS4 (and the Xbox One) hit 60 FPS, but no matter what, there's a finite amount of power to use. So we borrow from visual polish, resolution, on-screen actors, world size, etc. Not unreasonable, if you borrow from all categories, the individual concessions will be pretty minimal.
It's doable, but I can see the potential argument against it as well ("There's no pleasing everyone."). More worrying, I guess, are when you get into games by nature that just don't run at consistent framerates. Unmodded console-releases of Bethesda games are a great example of that: I sort of wonder if getting one of those to consistently hit 60 FPS is possible, and if so, at what cost, because of the way the game is designed on PC.
Invariably, it'll keep some games from coming to console--probably very few, towards the end of middle-size developers who have the ability to put extreme requirements on hardware, but not enough money to optimize everything to hell and back. By the nature of the medium, PC gaming can't have these requirements I imagine. There's a case to be made that console accessibility for development should only increase as the years go by and consoles become more like PCs in their own right.
Doesn't mean that it's not a good goal, or even a requirement.
0
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
Properly optimised games with large amounts of mechanical complexity and visual panache already run at 60 FPS at this point in the console generation. I'm not going to ever consider myself some sort of expert on games development, but isn't it the nature of the beast for general performance teething issues to work themselves out over time?
I imagine given how everyone claims that the consoles are practically PCs we could easily see different boxes running at different graphics presets, making them accessible between generations, with the main limiting factor behind optimizing for various presets being time. Of course, time is a huge factor for anything but between the whole UWP thing and Sony confirmed to gear up for a 4k box (which I think is probably absurd and very much a device for the 1%) I think there's going to be a whole lot more focus on cross-compatibility of software between devices.
If it's legitimately only for VR that I don't want then I'm okay. If we get into a scenario where "No dude, that's a PS4K game" then I'll be pretty upset.
I'd be surprised if they made games that aren't backwards compatible with the previous generation. I think the bigger question is what happens a few years later. Do they put out a PS5, or another iteration of the PS4? In either case it's likely that new games would eventually no longer be supported on the first model PS4.
My guess is that Sony wants make to make a Kinect bundle but with the VR functionality. They need to add encoding/decoding chips and optimize it for the VR experience; specially if they want it available for more than one device.
This interview came out a while ago: "Phil Spencer Talks the Future of Xbox One and Windows 10".
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
0
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
At best, I think this is going to be some manner of controlled mess, like diverting a river or something.
Incremental upgrades could serve to enable some weird outcomes. Some games could get-released on the .5 setup, and some games could be simultaneously developed, and then not unlike the last-to-current gen experience, new releases will likely begin landing on those .5 machines months ahead of the launch-grade consoles.
Gnashing of teeth will be heard, but most likely this method will prove successful for certain flagship titles if nothing else, driving the demand for the newer consoles to enable playing the biggest games sooner, getting all the benefits, season packs, exclusive gear and maps and so on...the right set of online multiplayer games would cement the relationship for how things get done going forward.
If it's legitimately only for VR that I don't want then I'm okay. If we get into a scenario where "No dude, that's a PS4K game" then I'll be pretty upset.
I completely agree. If they add the equivalent of the PSVR breakout box, a scaler for 4k, and a 4k capable BD-ROM drive, I'm cool with it. That doesn't change how my launch PS4 functions fundamentally.
As long as the performance/quality of a game at 1080p is on parity with a 4k upscaled game, I'm ok.
If they start releasing games that only work with the new hardware, or games that are watered down for the "old 1080p" versions, then I'm gonna be upset. At that point I'd rather they just make a hard break and release a PS5 that I don't have to buy because I'm moving to PC due to their shenanigans. :P
Definitely a scaler, but I don't like that it seems to be getting a horsepower boost as well that will benefit PSVR and PS4.5 specific games.
I'm going to wait for E3 for details, but it looks like I may be canceling that PSVR pre-order. $500 for the VR bundle plus "Yeah, you're going to want the PS4.5 to get the best PSVR experience" another $400 is firmly in the "Nope, I'll buy an HTC Vive/Oculus instead" territory.
Honestly, I really don't like this. I bought a PS4 this holiday because of Black Friday discounts, and now they announce a Super PS4. Fuck that noise.
OTOH, I don't own a 4K TV, so eh?
Why don't you like this? I mean, you bought a PS4 using the information that you had at the time.
This sort of thing happens... a... lot... especially with phones. really weird seeing it happen on a console.
edit: I'd still buy an xbox two before a PS4.5 though, heh.
It happens on phones, but for iPhones, at least, you know that a new model is going to come out each year, so it's not really a surprise. This is probably the first time...ever that this has happened to a major console. The closest is probably the N64, and that didn't require getting a new damned system.
If it's legitimately only for VR that I don't want then I'm okay. If we get into a scenario where "No dude, that's a PS4K game" then I'll be pretty upset.
I completely agree. If they add the equivalent of the PSVR breakout box, a scaler for 4k, and a 4k capable BD-ROM drive, I'm cool with it. That doesn't change how my launch PS4 functions fundamentally.
As long as the performance/quality of a game at 1080p is on parity with a 4k upscaled game, I'm ok.
If they start releasing games that only work with the new hardware, or games that are watered down for the "old 1080p" versions, then I'm gonna be upset. At that point I'd rather they just make a hard break and release a PS5 that I don't have to buy because I'm moving to PC due to their shenanigans. :P
I might just lack imagination, but--while I agree with this position--I think it might not be that easily doable.
What we want (I'll agree with the sentiment, so I'm put that of that 'we') seems to be this: PS4 plays games. PS4.5 plays the same games, but has a technological expansion that takes those existing, unmodified or nearly-unmodified games, and upscales then to the 4K resolution standard. It does not divide the customer base. I, too, like this idea.
When current PS4 games don't even consistently hit 1080p natively (like any console), how do you introduce this technological base without leading games to be redesigned in some way to work not as well with the earlier hardware? It seems like, at the very least, it'd add to the development cost by requiring two versions of the game (or worse). Otherwise, it sounds like you're just plugging your PS4 into a larger, better display.
Or maybe I'm completely misunderstanding the design challenge of creating a game that can 1) run at 4K 2) also run at 720p or 1080p, as the hardware allows. We see this with PC gaming of course (and typically a bunch of other resolutions), but there's a reason why console development is often thought of as an easier venture from a design standpoint, right?
Obviously, introducing 4K assets (as oppose to just using the existing assets in a more-capable engine) is a development cost nightmare all its own.
I think that's the thing. For the 4k upscaler to look its best, it's going to NEED a 1080p source. While 1080p is a 4x upscale, 720p is a nearly 9x upscale to 4k. Games which render currently at 720p are going to look like smeared messes upscaled on a 4k display.
Sony wants to make sure there's enough horsepower to render the source at 1080p, therefore we're actually getting a half step console rather than just some quality of life updates.
I predict games won't have separate versions, they'll just build for the 4.5 hardware, 1080p/60, and include a PS4 profile that will lower the resolution, framerate, and draw distance.
I don't know. I mean, while adding a new hardware quasi-iteration(?) that also kind of features stuff that games would be modified/optimized for (that video mentions games being developed to specifically leverage the PS4.5's capabilities), it doesn't mean that we're going to see a lot of it going forward. If anything, first party and exclusive games would be the ones that are made in such a fashion? It'd mean more testing, etc too for games, so I don't think you're going to have a ton of PS4.5 games.
Maybe it'll be a situation similar to the upscale/high-res option in the PS2 as far as the games go?
It does kind of defeat the purpose of the console though. So... I don't know.
tastydonuts on
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
That's the thing. If they want this to not be a complete mess, it will have to be basically seamless from the consumer side. If we hit a point where you have to check to see whether or not your PS4 or XB1 can run a PS4 or XB1 game, or if you have to mess around with settings to get it to work properly, that's going to be an issue for a non-trivial segment of consumers.
I think that's the thing. For the 4k upscaler to look its best, it's going to NEED a 1080p source. While 1080p is a 4x upscale, 720p is a nearly 9x upscale to 4k. Games which render currently at 720p are going to look like smeared messes upscaled on a 4k display.
Sony wants to make sure there's enough horsepower to render the source at 1080p, therefore we're actually getting a half step console rather than just some quality of life updates.
I predict games won't have separate versions, they'll just build for the 4.5 hardware, 1080p/60, and include a PS4 profile that will lower the resolution, framerate, and draw distance.
This is what I think will be the problem. Game development costs are already painfully high as it is--this is pretty much a surefire way to drive them up, short of mandating all developers heat their offices by setting fire to piles of investor money (and then use said fires to power a turbine to generate electricity for A/C in the summer).
Hopefully they've learned from Nintendo's iterative hardware and do not make any games exclusive to the 4.5/One.5. If they run better, sure why not that's swell as heck, but exclusivity just fragments the user base and the games won't sell as well as they could.
I don't know. I mean, while adding a new hardware quasi-iteration(?) that also kind of features stuff that games would be modified/optimized for (that video mentions games being developed to specifically leverage the PS4.5's capabilities), it doesn't mean that we're going to see a lot of it going forward. If anything, first party and exclusive games would be the ones that are made in such a fashion? It'd mean more testing, etc too for games, so I don't think you're going to have a ton of PS4.5 games.
Maybe it'll be a situation similar to the upscale/high-res option in the PS2 as far as the games go?
It does kind of defeat the purpose of the console though. So... I don't know.
It does sound like the tech features will be more along the lines of of the New 3DS. It can make some games run better, but it's usually not necessary. Hell, it may not even be enough to push games from 30 to 60 fps. It may just prevent framerate drops.
Of course, I could just be saying this to make myself feel better.
Hopefully they've learned from Nintendo's iterative hardware and do not make any games exclusive to the 4.5/One.5. If they run better, sure why not that's swell as heck, but exclusivity just fragments the user base and the games won't sell as well as they could.
Well, Nintendo doesn't even really do that. Xenoblade Chronicles 3D is the only first party game exclusive to the New hardware. Some games like STEAM and Hyrule Warriors run better, but even then...
They've done it in the past with DSi exclusives, and even the N64's Expansion Pack with Majora's Mask and Donkey Kong, granted those games sold well (enough), but that barrier to play was lame.
They've done it in the past with DSi exclusives, and even the N64's Expansion Pack with Majora's Mask and Donkey Kong, granted those games sold well (enough), but that barrier to play was lame.
Donkey Kong came packaged with an expansion pack. And I cannot off the top of my head think of a single worthwhile 1st party DSi exclusive.
The New 3DS is garbage for the same reasons. There's only one N3DS exclusive (that I know of), but now if I'm shopping it nags at me that I have to verify whether my 3DS can play that 3DS game.
The New 3DS is garbage for the same reasons. There's only one N3DS exclusive (that I know of), but now if I'm shopping it nags at me that I have to verify whether my 3DS can play that 3DS game.
Well, two, if you could Hyrule Warriors Legends since it runs vastly better.
Go figure, running on new hardware makes games run better.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
The New 3DS is garbage for the same reasons. There's only one N3DS exclusive (that I know of), but now if I'm shopping it nags at me that I have to verify whether my 3DS can play that 3DS game.
Well, two, if you could Hyrule Warriors Legends since it runs vastly better.
Go figure, running on new hardware makes games run better.
Runs better I don't mind as long as the earlier hardware runs the game acceptably. Only runs on iterative hardware defeats the big draws of a console and the fix is easy. Give the new platform a clearly different name. PS4.5 and New 3DS are not those names.
+3
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
Is there any point to 4k upscaling games? Do w really want to go back to blurry visuals?
I didn't like this idea when Microsoft was floating it around.
I don't understand how the fuck Sony thinks this is a good idea right now, especially after seeing the reaction to Microsoft. This will likely hurt Sony's hold on the console market right now.
I didn't like this idea when Microsoft was floating it around.
I don't understand how the fuck Sony thinks this is a good idea right now, especially after seeing the reaction to Microsoft. This will likely hurt Sony's hold on the console market right now.
Its a good idea to them because it doesn't take a lot of extra effort comparatively speaking, and by selling them, they have something that their VR tech (that they spent a ton of money in) will run on. Also as Beltaine mentions, it may help sell 4K TVs.
If they needed something for PSVR then it should be _just_ for PSVR. That fracture you can't avoid. Don't open those resources up to non-VR games because eventually some studio is going to put out a game targeted at the PS4.5 that technically works but isn't worth jack shit on the regular PS4 and that's just going to piss people off.
Posts
I would be fine with a PS4 iteration that gave me this for all the games, including console-exclusive titles.
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
I honestly don't care about FPS, but it's becoming an issue with console versions like Just Cause 3 that slow to a crawl whenever major action is happening in the game. 30fps locked should at the very least be the standard. The new Hitman game even lets you toggle a locked 30fps or a higher one that warns you it could dip below at certain points.
A consistent 60 fps that never dips would be especially desirable.
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
Until someone goes "hey, we can get 30% more widgets if we unlock the framerate to free up some power!" and you're back to exactly where you started.
I mean, just think of how realistic the hair could be...
http://www.shacknews.com/article/93849/wsj-playstation-4k-will-be-announced-prior-to-ps-vr-release
Twitter: Cokomon | dA: Cokomon | Tumblr: Cokomon-art | XBL / NNID / Steam: Cokomon
Based on the information out there, VR, 4K media and faster UI seem to be the main focuses of the additional power.
I guess Sony and MS could ask devs to provide profiles that attempt to optimize their games on the new HW. Hmmmmmm.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I think this is actually a pretty good standard--but obviously it could have some problems.
Right now, we could make every game on the PS4 (and the Xbox One) hit 60 FPS, but no matter what, there's a finite amount of power to use. So we borrow from visual polish, resolution, on-screen actors, world size, etc. Not unreasonable, if you borrow from all categories, the individual concessions will be pretty minimal.
It's doable, but I can see the potential argument against it as well ("There's no pleasing everyone."). More worrying, I guess, are when you get into games by nature that just don't run at consistent framerates. Unmodded console-releases of Bethesda games are a great example of that: I sort of wonder if getting one of those to consistently hit 60 FPS is possible, and if so, at what cost, because of the way the game is designed on PC.
Invariably, it'll keep some games from coming to console--probably very few, towards the end of middle-size developers who have the ability to put extreme requirements on hardware, but not enough money to optimize everything to hell and back. By the nature of the medium, PC gaming can't have these requirements I imagine. There's a case to be made that console accessibility for development should only increase as the years go by and consoles become more like PCs in their own right.
Doesn't mean that it's not a good goal, or even a requirement.
I imagine given how everyone claims that the consoles are practically PCs we could easily see different boxes running at different graphics presets, making them accessible between generations, with the main limiting factor behind optimizing for various presets being time. Of course, time is a huge factor for anything but between the whole UWP thing and Sony confirmed to gear up for a 4k box (which I think is probably absurd and very much a device for the 1%) I think there's going to be a whole lot more focus on cross-compatibility of software between devices.
I'd be surprised if they made games that aren't backwards compatible with the previous generation. I think the bigger question is what happens a few years later. Do they put out a PS5, or another iteration of the PS4? In either case it's likely that new games would eventually no longer be supported on the first model PS4.
This interview came out a while ago: "Phil Spencer Talks the Future of Xbox One and Windows 10".
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
Incremental upgrades could serve to enable some weird outcomes. Some games could get-released on the .5 setup, and some games could be simultaneously developed, and then not unlike the last-to-current gen experience, new releases will likely begin landing on those .5 machines months ahead of the launch-grade consoles.
Gnashing of teeth will be heard, but most likely this method will prove successful for certain flagship titles if nothing else, driving the demand for the newer consoles to enable playing the biggest games sooner, getting all the benefits, season packs, exclusive gear and maps and so on...the right set of online multiplayer games would cement the relationship for how things get done going forward.
I completely agree. If they add the equivalent of the PSVR breakout box, a scaler for 4k, and a 4k capable BD-ROM drive, I'm cool with it. That doesn't change how my launch PS4 functions fundamentally.
As long as the performance/quality of a game at 1080p is on parity with a 4k upscaled game, I'm ok.
If they start releasing games that only work with the new hardware, or games that are watered down for the "old 1080p" versions, then I'm gonna be upset. At that point I'd rather they just make a hard break and release a PS5 that I don't have to buy because I'm moving to PC due to their shenanigans. :P
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
Definitely a scaler, but I don't like that it seems to be getting a horsepower boost as well that will benefit PSVR and PS4.5 specific games.
I'm going to wait for E3 for details, but it looks like I may be canceling that PSVR pre-order. $500 for the VR bundle plus "Yeah, you're going to want the PS4.5 to get the best PSVR experience" another $400 is firmly in the "Nope, I'll buy an HTC Vive/Oculus instead" territory.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
OTOH, I don't own a 4K TV, so eh?
Steam: pazython
Why don't you like this? I mean, you bought a PS4 using the information that you had at the time.
This sort of thing happens... a... lot... especially with phones. really weird seeing it happen on a console.
edit: I'd still buy an xbox two before a PS4.5 though, heh.
It happens on phones, but for iPhones, at least, you know that a new model is going to come out each year, so it's not really a surprise. This is probably the first time...ever that this has happened to a major console. The closest is probably the N64, and that didn't require getting a new damned system.
Steam: pazython
I might just lack imagination, but--while I agree with this position--I think it might not be that easily doable.
What we want (I'll agree with the sentiment, so I'm put that of that 'we') seems to be this: PS4 plays games. PS4.5 plays the same games, but has a technological expansion that takes those existing, unmodified or nearly-unmodified games, and upscales then to the 4K resolution standard. It does not divide the customer base. I, too, like this idea.
When current PS4 games don't even consistently hit 1080p natively (like any console), how do you introduce this technological base without leading games to be redesigned in some way to work not as well with the earlier hardware? It seems like, at the very least, it'd add to the development cost by requiring two versions of the game (or worse). Otherwise, it sounds like you're just plugging your PS4 into a larger, better display.
Or maybe I'm completely misunderstanding the design challenge of creating a game that can 1) run at 4K 2) also run at 720p or 1080p, as the hardware allows. We see this with PC gaming of course (and typically a bunch of other resolutions), but there's a reason why console development is often thought of as an easier venture from a design standpoint, right?
Obviously, introducing 4K assets (as oppose to just using the existing assets in a more-capable engine) is a development cost nightmare all its own.
Sony wants to make sure there's enough horsepower to render the source at 1080p, therefore we're actually getting a half step console rather than just some quality of life updates.
I predict games won't have separate versions, they'll just build for the 4.5 hardware, 1080p/60, and include a PS4 profile that will lower the resolution, framerate, and draw distance.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
Maybe it'll be a situation similar to the upscale/high-res option in the PS2 as far as the games go?
It does kind of defeat the purpose of the console though. So... I don't know.
This is what I think will be the problem. Game development costs are already painfully high as it is--this is pretty much a surefire way to drive them up, short of mandating all developers heat their offices by setting fire to piles of investor money (and then use said fires to power a turbine to generate electricity for A/C in the summer).
It does sound like the tech features will be more along the lines of of the New 3DS. It can make some games run better, but it's usually not necessary. Hell, it may not even be enough to push games from 30 to 60 fps. It may just prevent framerate drops.
Of course, I could just be saying this to make myself feel better.
Well, Nintendo doesn't even really do that. Xenoblade Chronicles 3D is the only first party game exclusive to the New hardware. Some games like STEAM and Hyrule Warriors run better, but even then...
Steam: pazython
Donkey Kong came packaged with an expansion pack. And I cannot off the top of my head think of a single worthwhile 1st party DSi exclusive.
Steam: pazython
Twitter
Well, two, if you could Hyrule Warriors Legends since it runs vastly better.
Go figure, running on new hardware makes games run better.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Also I liked Dark Void Zero, even though it wasn't first party.
Runs better I don't mind as long as the earlier hardware runs the game acceptably. Only runs on iterative hardware defeats the big draws of a console and the fix is easy. Give the new platform a clearly different name. PS4.5 and New 3DS are not those names.
Selling 4k TV's.
Don't forget Sony still manufactures TV's and Media players.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
I don't understand how the fuck Sony thinks this is a good idea right now, especially after seeing the reaction to Microsoft. This will likely hurt Sony's hold on the console market right now.
Its a good idea to them because it doesn't take a lot of extra effort comparatively speaking, and by selling them, they have something that their VR tech (that they spent a ton of money in) will run on. Also as Beltaine mentions, it may help sell 4K TVs.