Will you upgrade to a PlayStation 4.5 if it's released?

Benzino

I'd be surprised if it launched with The Last Guardian. You'd imagine they would launch it with a game that demonstrates it's power. Then again, the likes of GoW, Horizon and Gone Days seem too far off.

Oafley Jones

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I'd still put money on Neos being this year. I would say it'll release either with the last guardian, or maybe to go with call of duty or something big.

I'd say PSVR is the driving force behind the Neos release date. I think the PS4 is just too weak to really demonstrate the potential of the product. I have to imagine they'll be on sale fairly close together.

Myrddin

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I'd say PSVR is the driving force behind the Neos release date. I think the PS4 is just too weak to really demonstrate the potential of the product. I have to imagine they'll be on sale fairly close together.

Agreed. If indeed the regular PS4 just isn't powerful enough to provide the VR experience, then not releasing the Neo alongside PSVR is putting the PSVR product in serious jeopardy. It'd effectively be a peripheral with no usable parent product, & that's just bad business. I'd wager the PSVR & Neo will release alongside each other, based on the available info we have, they kind of have to.

Murseyless

The little brother is picking up the 4.5 but after the recent E3 it'll have to be another Xbox for me (when the Scorpio arrives). Their lack of transparency about the product to date has me very concerned.

Murseyless

Murseyless wrote: »

The little brother is picking up the 4.5 but after the recent E3 it'll have to be another Xbox for me (when the Scorpio arrives). Their lack of transparency about the product to date has me very concerned.

That's understandable, but from Sony's point of view, the focus right now is on PlayStation VR. It makes better business sense to not muddy the waters with details of too many products.

DARK-KNIGHT

Murseyless wrote: »

The little brother is picking up the 4.5 but after the recent E3 it'll have to be another Xbox for me (when the Scorpio arrives). Their lack of transparency about the product to date has me very concerned.

Come to the dark side mate. I hear the ms product has she wolves everywhere....

Agree though mark transparency from sony would be nice and the scorpio does sound beastly spec wise

DARK-KNIGHT

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

Agree though, transparency from sony would be nice and the scorpio does sound beastly spec wise

This:

Deleted User wrote: »

That's understandable, but from Sony's point of view, the focus right now is on PlayStation VR. It makes better business sense to not muddy the waters with details of too many products.

Myrddin

Might it have made more sense to just rule out VR for the existing PS4, & make it the sole domain of the Neo?

qrx

Isn't there a VR peripheral coming out for the PS4? They could still go ahead with that and then go back to the drawing board with PS4 neo, i.e. wait until MS have finalised their spec and then 1up it.

I think Sony have bigger problems though, with MS happy to sit in 2nd place and focus on increasing revenue from all their platforms, rather than just raw console sales. Sony are not a software company. They're literally 20 years behind MS on that front with regards to data centres and cloud services and of course OSes.

Games developers are going to give priority to the platform that will generate the most revenue. Doesn't necessarily equate to the console that sold the most.

johnny_ultimate

Myrddin wrote: »

Might it have made more sense to just rule out VR for the existing PS4, & make it the sole domain of the Neo?

Technically speaking, very possibly. But 40 million plus PS4s say no, whether we like it or not

A large core hardware base is going to be necessary for VR to take off, and while no doubt the existing PS4 will pose challenges for developers, it's also VR's best chance for mainstream success at the moment. Sony would definitely be playing a much riskier commercial game risking their VR bets on new and premium priced hardware. Same with software, actually: certainly going to be a tricky scene for developers to be able to afford VR games if the market doesn't grow soon.

DARK-KNIGHT

Deleted User wrote: »

This:

Missed that will

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Technically speaking, very possibly. But 40 million plus PS4s say no, whether we like it or not

A large core hardware base is going to be necessary for VR to take off, and while no doubt the existing PS4 will pose challenges for developers, it's also VR's best chance for mainstream success at the moment. Sony would definitely be playing a much riskier commercial game risking their VR bets on new and premium priced hardware. Same with software, actually: certainly going to be a tricky scene for developers to be able to afford VR games if the market doesn't grow soon.

If the PS4 can't really handle VR though, & the leaks/rumours thus far suggest that's the case, then for me, releasing VR for the existing PS4 will only serve to damage their entire VR investment. Anyone who tries it out, will likely be immediately turned off of it, as they're seeing it struggle & not produce the effect properly.

If VR was exclusive to the Neo, it'd give a much clearer indication to consumers as to what the Neo actually is, by reducing confusion. Again, if the existing console can't do it properly, what's the point shoehorning it in? Perhaps though the leaks aren't accurate in that regard, & but knowing what kind of grunt is required to push VR...I'd say they're accurate (we're talking about a generation of consoles that struggles to get 1080p @60fps...how they ever thought that kind of power would work for VR is beyond me...unless the PS VR really is crap compared to the pc solutions?

Myrddin

Myrddin wrote: »

Might it have made more sense to just rule out VR for the existing PS4, & make it the sole domain of the Neo?

Big risk to take though - isolating/fragmenting their user base.

qrx wrote: »

I think Sony have bigger problems though, with MS happy to sit in 2nd place and focus on increasing revenue from all their platforms, rather than just raw console sales. Sony are not a software company. They're literally 20 years behind MS on that front with regards to data centres and cloud services and of course OSes.

And MS are 20+ years behind Sony with TV. Apples and oranges, in that regard.

But to be fair, I can absolutely see how Sony need to up their game with data centres and cloud services. OSes... different story I guess. MS are looking to have Windows 10 "everywhere". The PS4 OS is far cleaner/easier/faster than the Xbox One OS. (Obviously, my subjective opinion.)

qrx wrote: »

Games developers are going to give priority to the platform that will generate the most revenue. Doesn't necessarily equate to the console that sold the most.

That's a good point. I guess there's a balance between sales volume and sales revenue. If they sell more, at a smaller profit, does that equate to more revenue? I think that's the point you're driving at?

And if MS really want to up revenue, they should take a leaf from Nintendo's book - back in the day they were absolute ***** with royalties, etc.

Myrddin wrote: »

If the PS4 can't really handle VR though, & the leaks/rumours thus far suggest that's the case, then for me, releasing VR for the existing PS4 will only serve to damage their entire VR investment. Anyone who tries it out, will likely be immediately turned off of it, as they're seeing it struggle & not produce the effect properly.

If VR was exclusive to the Neo, it'd give a much clearer indication to consumers as to what the Neo actually is, by reducing confusion. Again, if the existing console can't do it properly, what's the point shoehorning it in? Perhaps though the leaks aren't accurate in that regard, & but knowing what kind of grunt is required to push VR...I'd say they're accurate (we're talking about a generation of consoles that struggles to get 1080p @60fps...how they ever thought that kind of power would work for VR is beyond me...unless the PS VR really is crap compared to the pc solutions?

I could be wrong (feel free to correct me), but doesn't the PS VR have some on-board hardware to make up that deficit?

Perhaps you are right though - the Neo will be the "reference environment" for the PlayStation VR, with PS4 "Vanilla" lagging behind.

qrx

Deleted User wrote: »

And MS are 20+ years behind Sony with TV. Apples and oranges, in that regard.

Sony have spun off all their TV and hardware divisions, primed for selling. They've already sold their PC business.

Sony's core businesses are now Sony pictures, PlayStation and I believe something to do with Camera lenses.

sony need you to buy playstations. Lots of them. MS do not have the same dependence on Xbox hardware. They have explicitly stated they are not a hardware company.

They'd also like you to buy Sony Pictures movies and Playstation is a good outlet for that. Queue 4K video on the Neo.

qrx

qrx wrote: »

Sony have spun off all their TV and hardware divisions, primed for selling. They've already sold their PC business.

Sony's core businesses are now Sony pictures, PlayStation and I believe something to do with Camera lenses.
.....
They'd also like you to buy Sony Pictures movies and Playstation is a good outlet for that. Queue 4K video on the Neo.

Now that is interesting... I knew Sony had non-profitable divisions, but wouldn't have expected them to sell off their TV and hardware divisions.

Bit odd that they look like they're going to push 4K video on PS Neo, but (might) sell their TV division at the same time?

qrx wrote: »

MS do not have the same dependence on Xbox hardware. They have explicitly stated they are not a hardware company.

Genuine question: after E3, do you think MS are focusing more on making Xbox Live the product, with various platforms to run it?

I don't want to say that Sony have a more indie-focus than MS, but I think indie games are certainly higher profile on PS4 than Xbox One. Would you consider that part of Sony's software "strategy"? Or just using it to push consoles?

Oafley Jones

Myrddin wrote: »

If the PS4 can't really handle VR though, & the leaks/rumours thus far suggest that's the case, then for me, releasing VR for the existing PS4 will only serve to damage their entire VR investment. Anyone who tries it out, will likely be immediately turned off of it, as they're seeing it struggle & not produce the effect properly.

If VR was exclusive to the Neo, it'd give a much clearer indication to consumers as to what the Neo actually is, by reducing confusion. Again, if the existing console can't do it properly, what's the point shoehorning it in? Perhaps though the leaks aren't accurate in that regard, & but knowing what kind of grunt is required to push VR...I'd say they're accurate (we're talking about a generation of consoles that struggles to get 1080p @60fps...how they ever thought that kind of power would work for VR is beyond me...unless the PS VR really is crap compared to the pc solutions?

This is my concern: Playstation has an excellent chance for widespread adoption of the format, while carrying the risk of irreparably damaging it should the initial batch of games/experiences turn out to be half baked. I'm guessing that Sony felt tied to the promise of VR from three years ago. That they know the machine isn't up to spec and were forced to compromise with Neo. There will be some compatibility but at what cost. Even Neo seems to be really pushing it in terms of basic spec.

Reports on the games/experiences/demos so far have given me the fear e.g. The Batman one sounds like the stuff that developers were knocking out with the advent of CD-ROM. You can look around in 720?? degrees, but in order to move you have to look at a giant symbol at hit the trigger, at which point you're teleported there. That's fecking Myst. Stuff like Eve has the potential to be really cool, but it's still not exactly showing much innovation.

I wonder does Sony now regret PSVR. They've done spectacularly well this generation, but has the Neo gamble goaded MS into action that could screw them. Would MS have done this anyway? They've precedent for cutting losses before.

qrx

Deleted User wrote: »

Bit odd that they look like they're going to push 4K video on PS Neo, but (might) sell their TV division at the same time?

Possibly. They don't sell well apparently. Japanese tech is struggling to compete with the South Koreans. It could be this is the best time to sell it? When there is a high demand for 4K, a potential buyer is going to want a viable business, not a has been aging business with no future.

Deleted User wrote: »

Genuine question: after E3, do you think MS are focusing more on making Xbox Live the product, with various platforms to run it?

Yes I think MS are focussing on services and Xbox Live is a portal into their services driven Ecosystem. Even the games themselves use MS cloud computing. They want you to use their ecosystem and they don't care if you do that on an xbox, an OEM PC or even an iPad. For gaming (Xbox and PC) I see their main competitor as Steam. Sony is an old fashioned business model. MS tried to move on from that with the original design of the Xbox One, but people weren't ready. I think people are now ready and we're going to see MS push on. I can't see how Sony can possibly keep up. They don't have the Ecosystem. Their best bet is to always trump MS on spec and sell more consoles but I don't think that that business model has a future to be honest.

By unifiying xbox consoles and PCs MS will blow Sonys sales figures out of the water. Sony will have sold more hardware but MS will have the bigger audience and be the more attractive platform for developers and gamers.

Oafley Jones

Deleted User wrote: »

Now that is interesting... I knew Sony had non-profitable divisions, but wouldn't have expected them to sell off their TV and hardware divisions.

Bit odd that they look like they're going to push 4K video on PS Neo, but (might) sell their TV division at the same time?


Genuine question: after E3, do you think MS are focusing more on making Xbox Live the product, with various platforms to run it?

I don't want to say that Sony have a more indie-focus than MS, but I think indie games are certainly higher profile on PS4 than Xbox One. Would you consider that part of Sony's software "strategy"? Or just using it to push consoles?

Sony spun off televisions last year. The were haemorrhaging money. Thing about Sony; they don't really learn from their mistakes. They're currently trying to push a hugely expensive 4K video service that's certain to fail.

As for MS, well Nadella wants the company to focus on services. That is his focus and his pitch when he became CEO. He is already after shuttering the phones division. The man has zero interest in selling hardware.

Myrddin

Deleted User wrote: »

Big risk to take though - isolating/fragmenting their user base.

If the PS4 can't handle VR (and knowing the specs of PS4, it's incredibly unlikely to handle it in any meaningful sense), then there is no risk. If anything, they'd be safeguarding their VR product, by not having it running on hardware that can't really support it. There's everything to lose, & nothing to gain by having VR on the vanilla PS4.

I could be wrong (feel free to correct me), but doesn't the PS VR have some on-board hardware to make up that deficit?

It does, but it's not adding to the overall number crunching...it's something to do with the display itself I think.

Oafley Jones wrote: »

This is my concern: Playstation has an excellent chance for widespread adoption of the format, while carrying the risk of irreparably damaging it should the initial batch of games/experiences turn out to be half baked. I'm guessing that Sony felt tied to the promise of VR from three years ago. That they know the machine isn't up to spec and were forced to compromise with Neo. There will be some compatibility but at what cost. Even Neo seems to be really pushing it in terms of basic spec.

Reports on the games/experiences/demos so far have given me the fear e.g. The Batman one sounds like the stuff that developers were knocking out with the advent of CD-ROM. You can look around in 720?? degrees, but in order to move you have to look at a giant symbol at hit the trigger, at which point you're teleported there. That's fecking Myst. Stuff like Eve has the potential to be really cool, but it's still not exactly showing much innovation.

I wonder does Sony now regret PSVR. They've done spectacularly well this generation, but has the Neo gamble goaded MS into action that could screw them. Would MS have done this anyway? They've precedent for cutting losses before.

I think both were heading this way regardless. It's clear the current generation has plateaued already, in terms of visual fidelity; this is something we haven't seen before, as traditionally, it has taken developers time to get to know the hardware. With the PS4 & XBO, the x64 architecture was very familiar to begin with. I think both were, and more so are now, glaringly underpowered (it's 2016 & we're still not hitting a minimum 1080p @60Hz)...and so it was always going to be a short enough lift cycle. VR has possibly sped things up by a year maybe, but not majorly.

I also wouldn't worry about the likes of the Batman thing, those things are purely thrown together tech demos really. It's the hardware and ability of the hardware to do what its meant to do we should be concerned with - the software will come. If the Neo & PSVR can immerse you in VR, with good graphical fidelity & a silky smooth frame rate...the hardware will have done its job, & the software devs will get the best out of it later on. If however the hardware can't really do its job, the software will never work no matter how good it is.

Oafley Jones

Myrddin wrote: »

I also wouldn't worry about the likes of the Batman thing, those things are purely thrown together tech demos really. It's the hardware and ability of the hardware to do what its meant to do we should be concerned with - the software will come. If the Neo & PSVR can immerse you in VR, with good graphical fidelity & a silky smooth frame rate...the hardware will have done its job, & the software devs will get the best out of it later on. If however the hardware can't really do its job, the software will never work no matter how good it is.

It needs to come quickly, it's only three months away now. I question if the PSVR will be able to sustain a weak launch catalogue. Limited availability and bad word of mouth could bury the PSVR to CEX window display hell.

Varik

Myrddin wrote: »

Agreed. If indeed the regular PS4 just isn't powerful enough to provide the VR experience, then not releasing the Neo alongside PSVR is putting the PSVR product in serious jeopardy. It'd effectively be a peripheral with no usable parent product, & that's just bad business. I'd wager the PSVR & Neo will release alongside each other, based on the available info we have, they kind of have to.

Disagree, no mention of the of neo being needed and if it was very limited on the original PS4 which many people would have already had to use the apparently original PS4 compatible VR then there would be war.

Myrddin

Varik wrote: »

Disagree, no mention of the of neo being needed and if it was very limited on the original PS4 which many people would have already had to use the apparently original PS4 compatible VR then there would be war.

Look at the minimum specs for the Occulus Rift & HTC Vive...then look at the PS4 Specs...to call the difference a gulf would be understating it. I'm simply saying that if the PS4 isn't powerful enough to do it right (and there are suggestions it isn't), then they're going to damage their investment because there's going to be a lot more PS4's running PSVR out there, than there will Neo's running it...for the first while anyway.

It's a niche enough product anyway, I half think they'd have done better to just leave support for it to the Neo, rather than giving people a sub par experience for the €400 they've just dropped on the vr set. It's all speculation thus far, the only thing we do know though, are the requirements for functional VR on a PC, & the specs of the current PS4...

Oafley Jones

Myrddin wrote: »

Look at the minimum specs for the Occulus Rift & HTC Vive...then look at the PS4 Specs...to call the difference a gulf would be understating it. I'm simply saying that if the PS4 isn't powerful enough to do it right (and there are suggestions it isn't), then they're going to damage their investment because there's going to be a lot more PS4's running PSVR out there, than there will Neo's running it...for the first while anyway.

It's a niche enough product anyway, I half think they'd have done better to just leave support for it to the Neo, rather than giving people a sub par experience for the €400 they've just dropped on the vr set. It's all speculation thus far, the only thing we do know though, are the requirements for functional VR on a PC, & the specs of the current PS4...

That's it. VR is dependant on sheer computational horsepower in order to work at even the most basic hyper stylised level. The PS4 has no where near enough power to do the format justice. Even Neo seems lacking.

Varik

Myrddin wrote: »

Look at the minimum specs for the Occulus Rift & HTC Vive...then look at the PS4 Specs...to call the difference a gulf would be understating it. I'm simply saying that if the PS4 isn't powerful enough to do it right (and there are suggestions it isn't), then they're going to damage their investment because there's going to be a lot more PS4's running PSVR out there, than there will Neo's running it...for the first while anyway.

It's a niche enough product anyway, I half think they'd have done better to just leave support for it to the Neo, rather than giving people a sub par experience for the €400 they've just dropped on the vr set. It's all speculation thus far, the only thing we do know though, are the requirements for functional VR on a PC, & the specs of the current PS4...

The PS4 is a closed platform, it's powerful enough to run what ever they make to run on it. Consoles are limited, and content is built within that limitation.

Not a chance is hell they're going to release it with a little note saying "By the way you also need to spend the same again on a new console to play it"

Oafley Jones

Varik wrote: »

The PS4 is a closed platform, it's powerful enough to run what ever they make to run on it. Consoles are limited, and content is built within that limitation.

Not a chance is hell they're going to release it with a little note saying "By the way you also need to spend the same again on a new console to play it"

I was waiting for someone to throw this up. This argument was actually true for years. That the consoles could punch above well above their weight. It no longer applies, it died when consoles became PCs and with DX12 on PCs.

Varik

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I was waiting for someone to throw this up. This argument was actually true for years. That the consoles could punch above well above their weight. It no longer applies, it died when consoles became PCs and with DX12 on PCs.

Not remotely the same point.

Myrddin

Varik wrote: »

The PS4 is a closed platform, it's powerful enough to run what ever they make to run on it. Consoles are limited, and content is built within that limitation.

That's all well & good when it comes to pure software, a bit of scaling back here & there and you're grand. VR is a different beast altogether. You can't simply cut corners, well, not if you want to create an immersive VR environment & actually give people value for money. For VR to work, the image needs to be processed twice (one for each eye), the framerate needs to be way, way higher than 60fps (something the current PS4 can't do in all cases, and that's just processing the image once), and everything else into the mix.

I'd nearly go as far as to say if the PS4 could run VR effectively, there'd be zero point in r&d'ing the Neo. Why not just wait for another two years, & bring the PS5 along? Everything to me thus far, suggests the current PS4 will struggle, very, very, badly, in handling VR.

Oafley Jones

Varik wrote: »

Not remotely the same point.

It clearly is. You don't understand. Your argument is that console by their nature are "lightweight" and focused and therefore can eek out more performance from lesser hardware. This is no longer applicable. It's doesn't matter that a PC is running MS Windows Super Bloat Ware edition. The games are essentially coding down to the metal with the recent version of DX. You could stick exactly the same hardware and put Sony's PS operation system and Windows and you'll have the same performance.

Digital Solitude

Varik wrote: »

The PS4 is a closed platform, it's powerful enough to run what ever they make to run on it. Consoles are limited, and content is built within that limitation.

Not a chance is hell they're going to release it with a little note saying "By the way you also need to spend the same again on a new console to play it"

This is true, they will be able to make VR work on the PS4, no question about it. But games aren't going to look good, we're not going to have 8th Gen graphics, probably even 7th Gen graphics. The PS4 can push good graphics at 30fps generally fine, but PSVR needs 90fps, so graphics need to suffer quite a lot to be able to maintain that.

I wouldn't be surprised to have a general launch catalogue for PSVR and then soon after loads of Neo exclusive VR games

Oafley Jones

Digital Solitude wrote: »

This is true, they will be able to make VR work on the PS4, no question about it. But games aren't going to look good, we're not going to have 8th Gen graphics, probably even 7th Gen graphics. The PS4 can push good graphics at 30fps generally fine, but PSVR needs 90fps, so graphics need to suffer quite a lot to be able to maintain that.

I wouldn't be surprised to have a general launch catalogue for PSVR and then soon after loads of Neo exclusive VR games

Nearly all of the stuff demoed so far is 60FPS, which is kinda alarming. This is a corner you can't cut on.