PS4.5 / PS4K is codenamed NEO, more info

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

1 minute ago, George P said:

No one expects it to be cheap, but price is always a factor in the success of these things, specially in the console space.  PC gamers are fine will paying crazy prices on things to game better, like that 1k Titan X, which just sounds silly to me, maybe I'm not hardcore enough?   If you have to pay that 350 or so for the VR and another, 400 at best for the neo to get the best VR version, I don't know how much success you'll have, at least to start.  

To start they are relying on current PS4 owners at 40m units to buy headsets. Seems to be working as pre-orders are sold out. Those who currently do not own a PS4 will have the decision to make of PS4 and PSVR or Neo and PSVR. There will no doubt be bundles with slight reductions in RRP.

 

"The best VR" version is only going to apply to either the new buyers of PS4 overall, or current PS4 owners with the cash to upgrade to Neo. 

 

Without a doubt they are relying on the hardcore to prop up the PSVR in the first 6 months, who else would be crazy enough to spend £350 on an addon? 

[Veiva]

24 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

I'll agree to disagree then. I don't necessarily think you are wrong, I just think to feel such strong entitlement is strange in the tech industry from a £300~ purchase.

I'm pretty sure your usage of entitlement is not ideal.

 

Companies are selling products and services, not doing charity. When I buy a console, I have the expectation that the hardware will be the same for some years (within the generation) until a completely new iteration. That has been the idea since the beginning of the modern gaming industry (NES or so). By no means is it entitlement for me to be upset that a product I bought (PS4) is going to be inferior three years into its life.

 

Do you think it's entitlement when airlines are late or other nuisances? Many tickets are sub-$300 (or sub-300GBP, whatever). Or do you think it's entitlement when an order at a restaurant is wrong or unsatisfactory? Most orders are under $300, definitely.

 

Making existing PS4 owners second-tier is a diversion from the "console product." Until now, I could buy a console at any point in its lifetime and not have to worry about a superior version (better computational power--energy savings, form factor, etc have no effect on games) being released until the next generations of consoles. Similarly, generations were marked by incompatibility due to major architectural changes. A "PS4.5" changes what the product actually is.

 

In honesty, I find it pretty unnerving to consider valid criticisms of unceasing corporate greed to be entitlement. The criticism is valid.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

6 minutes ago, Veiva said:

I'm pretty sure your usage of entitlement is not ideal.

 

Companies are selling products and services, not doing charity. When I buy a console, I have the expectation that the hardware will be the same for some years (within the generation) until a completely new iteration. That has been the idea since the beginning of the modern gaming industry (NES or so). By no means is it entitlement for me to be upset that a product I bought (PS4) is going to be inferior three years into its life.

 

Do you think it's entitlement when airlines are late or other nuisances? Many tickets are sub-$300 (or sub-300GBP, whatever). Or do you think it's entitlement when an order at a restaurant is wrong or unsatisfactory? Most orders are under $300, definitely.

 

In honesty, I find it pretty unnerving to consider valid criticisms of unceasing corporate greed to be entitlement. The criticism is valid.

Well I'm not going to compare gaming to those examples as 

 

a) Your PS4 will still work fine and considering how Uncharted 4 looks at 1080p you'll still have great looking games (95% native res of 1080p)

b) Things can change and coming closer to the PC market isn't suddenly shocking or unexpected for me, especially considering Sony's only VR competition exists via PC. MS as of yet have no VR.

 

But still fair enough entitlement was maybe a bit strong. 

 

I'm more interested in what those genuinely angry about it are going to do? MS are following suit. Go to Nintendo? 

[Veiva]

7 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Well I'm not going to compare gaming to those examples as 

 

a) Your PS4 will still work fine and considering how Uncharted 4 looks at 1080p you'll still have great looking games (95% native res of 1080p)

b) Things can change and coming closer to the PC market isn't suddenly shocking or unexpected for me, especially considering Sony's only VR competition exists via PC. MS as of yet have no VR.

 

But still fair enough entitlement was maybe a bit strong. 

 

I'm more interested in what those genuinely angry about it are going to do? MS are following suit. Go to Nintendo? 

Current PS4 games will work fine. Future PS4 games will be inferior. And how will the fragmentation of a single platform affect developers? As it stands, developers have to consider the worst specs across the supported platforms as a ceiling of sorts. Unless the PS4.5 is a negligible spec bump (which would make enforcing fragmentation absurd), fragmentation will happen. For example, if a stronger CPU means more complex AI, then one version is getting a worse game.

 

As far as what I will do? I'm going to refrain from purchasing Sony consoles until the next generation in the future. There's a handful of Sony exclusives I will miss playing near release, but iterative consoles is a terrible idea for consumers and I will not support it. Unless Nintendo pulls the same, they will be the only company I will continue to support. Already I don't support micro-transactions, piecemeal games/DLC, pre-orders, and mobile games--this is just another on the list.

[+Asmodai MVC]

24 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

I'll agree to disagree then. I don't necessarily think you are wrong, I just think to feel such strong entitlement is strange in the tech industry from a £300~ purchase.

I don't see it as "entitlement" at all.  I see it as one of the fundamental premises of a console.  You buy a console instead of a gaming PC so that, among other things, you don't have to worry about upgrading every 6 months, 12 months, 3 years, whatever.  From the first console of that generation to the last the performance is the same and those generations last from 5-10 years.  You buy a console with the understanding that it's going to perform worse than a gaming PC in a few years (if it didn't already at launch) but knowing that AAA games released for that generation of console will play just as well on the first console of the generation manufactured as it does on the last.  Try playing a new release AAA game on PC 5-10 years after you bought your gaming PC without doing any upgrades... that's a fundamental trait that defines console gaming in my mind and while I don't claim everyone agrees with it I know I'm not alone in that opinion and I don't see it as "entitlement". 

 

24 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

I get that console cycles tend to be 5 years, but this isn't stopping God of War 4, The Last of Us 2, The Last Guardian and whatever other Sony exclusives come out in the next 2 years from working for you. Unlike a generational gap that can end up with exclusives you have to buy a new system for. This isn't ending the current cycle, it's not a PS5.

Again I'd have LESS of an issue with a PS5 then a PS4k for reasons I already outlined in the prior post.

 

24 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

 If you care that much about graphics then one would say that unhappiness should just look to your wallet to be prepared to pay more for prettier things. Sony can't make PS4 games look any more prettier via magic, tech specs change that (other than modest leaps seen as a generation slogs on).

If you care more about graphics and are willing to pay more or more often for prittier things then you should buy a gaming PC not a console.  I want each console generation to have the absolute best graphics they can get in for a reasonable price but believe that a console is supposed to be a fixed platform, it's one of it's primary strengths, to the graphics quality shouldn't change within a single generation.  Again I don't expect everyone to agree with me, you've made it clear you don't and I'm cool with that, I'm not the one saying people who don't agree with me are "entitled" or should "grow up".  My point is just that I'm sure I'm not completely alone in my opinion and as such it's going to cost Sony sales.  If we agree the PSVR was already a "real wildcard" (your words, not mine) even before they announced existing PS4s would have a lesser experience (see, I avoided saying "second class" this time) then it makes it even more uncertain now.

 

24 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

As for the sales numbers, there is a way to know, how well this sells when it comes out and how well the PS4 continues to sell once it's price is slashed. Not sure how you can lose sales, where is everyone suddenly going? To Xbox?

There is no way to know many people would have bought PSVR if there wasn't a PS4k and now won't.  That's what I'm calling a "lost sale".  I thought that was pretty clear but I'm sorry if it was confusing, hopefully that clears it up for you.  I know they exist because I'm one of them and I'm absolutely positive I'm not the ONLY person that feels that way though I have no way of telling exactly how large or small that pool of people is.  As a "lost sale" (was going to buy it and give Sony my money, now I am not) I don't need to suddenly go anywhere.  I don't NEED a PSVR or any virtual reality for that matter.  They would have got my $400 later this year and now they won't.  Sale lost. (again, assuming the rumors are even true)

 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

16 minutes ago, Veiva said:

Current PS4 games will work fine. Future PS4 games will be inferior. And how will the fragmentation of a single platform affect developers? As it stands, developers have to consider the worst specs across the supported platforms as a ceiling of sorts. Unless the PS4.5 is a negligible spec bump (which would make enforcing fragmentation absurd), fragmentation will happen. For example, if a stronger CPU means more complex AI, then one version is getting a worse game.

 

As far as what I will do? I'm going to refrain from purchasing Sony consoles until the next generation in the future. There's a handful of Sony exclusives I will miss playing near release, but iterative consoles is a terrible idea for consumers and I will not support it. Unless Nintendo pulls the same, they will be the only company I will continue to support. Already I don't support micro-transactions, piecemeal games/DLC, pre-orders, and mobile games--this is just another on the list.

How do you feel about multiplatform games that run at 1080/30 on PS4 and then 2k/60FPS on PC? In choosing to play on a console instead of a PC you're playing inferior every day already.

 

Current Neo specs are same CPU, but overclocked, and a pretty big GFX card jump. Devs will have tools to scale up, but you're giving them too much credit if you think any will take time to advance AI. It will be a higher resolution/higher framerate affair.

 

That's fair enough, you'll miss out on a ton of games but voting with your wallet is the best consumer choice.

 

13 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

I don't see it as "entitlement" at all.  I see it as one of the fundamental premises of a console.  You buy a console instead of a gaming PC so that, among other things, you don't have to worry about upgrading every 6 months, 12 months, 3 years, whatever.  From the first console of that generation to the last the performance is the same and those generations last from 5-10 years.  You buy a console with the understanding that it's going to perform worse than a gaming PC in a few years (if it didn't already at launch) but knowing that AAA games released for that generation of console will play just as well on the first console of the generation manufactured as it does on the last.  Try playing a new release AAA game on PC 5-10 years after you bought your gaming PC without doing any upgrades... that's a fundamental trait that defines console gaming in my mind and while I don't claim everyone agrees with it I know I'm not alone in that opinion and I don't see it as "entitlement". 

 

Again I'd have LESS of an issue with a PS5 then a PS4k for reasons I already outlined in the prior post.

 

If you care more about graphics and are willing to pay more or more often for prittier things then you should buy a gaming PC not a console.  I want each console generation to have the absolute best graphics they can get in for a reasonable price but believe that a console is supposed to be a fixed platform, it's one of it's primary strengths, to the graphics quality shouldn't change within a single generation.  Again I don't expect everyone to agree with me, you've made it clear you don't and I'm cool with that, I'm not the one saying people who don't agree with me are "entitled" or should "grow up".  My point is just that I'm sure I'm not completely alone in my opinion and as such it's going to cost Sony sales.  If we agree the PSVR was already a "real wildcard" (your words, not mine) even before they announced existing PS4s would have a lesser experience (see, I avoided saying "second class" this time) then it makes it even more uncertain now.

 

There is no way to know many people would have bought PSVR if there wasn't a PS4k and now won't.  That's what I'm calling a "lost sale".  I thought that was pretty clear but I'm sorry if it was confusing, hopefully that clears it up for you.  I know they exist because I'm one of them and I'm absolutely positive I'm not the ONLY person that feels that way though I have no way of telling exactly how large or small that pool of people is.  As a "lost sale" (was going to buy it and give Sony my money, now I am not) I don't need to suddenly go anywhere.  I don't NEED a PSVR or any virtual reality for that matter.  They would have got my $400 later this year and now they won't.  Sale lost. (again, assuming the rumors are even true)

 

Those fundamentals were set by the console makers because financially it made sense after the R&D to stretch out a generation for as long as possible before going back to the drawing board and designing a new console. Not to mention having to wait years for good enough tech to be shrinkable to a small box (that isn't as much an issue now with the acceleration of even powerful phones year on year, that is what I mean by technology being faster now to improve). I know we've been conditioned to expect 5 years without any sort of change at all (other than slimming down), but if the console makers set the expectations in the first place, and it's a system we've had for what, 20 years? Why should we expect them to never change it again until the end of time? That is what I was trying to get at with entitlement, it's being treated as an unwritten rule that the original stance taken by these console developers can never change. If it ever does, it's immediately unfair.

 

I'm not quite sure how announcing a PS5 just now wouldn't garner a bigger ****storm than a PS4 Neo? By announcing a PS5 you'd immediately get "Sony are killing PS4 development, no more PS4 games!". This is the opposite of enforcing a new generation start right now. They've committed to not releasing exclusive PS4 Neo content and therefore NOT shutting down PS4 development and allowing the PS4 to tick along fine as is.

 

Like I said to the poster above, again, it's your wallet to vote with, but overall what determines success or not is what the masses do. Right now I'm hedging my bet on this being quite successful alongside a PS4 price cut, and if it is, the plan worked. For better or worse for people that don't want it, but if the console market goes this way and it's instant bailout for you guys, then you better start wondering where you are going to game next. PC is even worse, so it leaves mobile and Nintendo really.

[+Asmodai MVC]

12 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Those fundamentals were set by the console makers because financially it made sense after the R&D to stretch out a generation for as long as possible before going back to the drawing board and designing a new console. I know we've been conditioned to expect 5 years without any sort of change at all (other than slimming down), but if the console makers set the expectations in the first place, and it's a system we've had for what, 20 years? Why should we expect them to never change it again until the end of time?

Why does anyone expect anything?  What you expect to happen in the future is based off of what you know has happened in the past.  That said I'm not saying console makers can never change it again until the end of time.  I'm saying any change from what consumers expect is likely to effect sales.  Ask Microsoft how it went for them when they announced a console where things worked differently from how their customers expected a console to work.

 

12 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

I'm not quite sure how announcing a PS5 just now wouldn't garner a bigger ****storm than a PS4 Neo? By announcing a PS5 you'd immediately get "Sony are killing PS4 development, no more PS4 games!". This is the opposite of enforcing a new generation start right now. They've committed to not releasing exclusive PS4 Neo content and therefore NOT shutting down PS4 development.

I made no comment on what other peoples reaction would be.  Neither you or I KNOW how other people would react.  I said I personally would rather have a PS5 early than split the PS4 community into two different performance levels. Again though I think BOTH a PS5 now and a PS4k with a different games performance level then a launch PS4 are BAD ideas.  I just think the PS5 is the better of two BAD options.  At no point did I say anything about Sony shutting down PS4 development so I'm not sure why you even brought that up.

 

 

12 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Like I said to the poster above, again, it's your wallet to vote with, but overall what determines success or not is what the masses do. Right now I'm hedging my bet on this being quite successful alongside a PS4 price cut, and if it is, the plan worked.

That's  the point I've been trying to make.  There are going to be people upset that their 3 year old (or less) console now runs PS4 games worse than people that buy a PS4 later this year or next year... the same exact disc even.  Some of those people are going to vote with their wallets, neither of us know exactly how many.  As an example I'm not going to buy the PSVR if all this turns out to be true next week where before I was.  That's a "lost sale" ($400 of my money that they would have had had they not announced the 4k) on a platform that's already "a real wildcard" and again I'm certain not alone but I'm also fully aware that others, such as you, disagree.  How much of the masses agree with me and how much agree with you is unknown to either of us, or Sony, or anyone else at this point.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

18 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

Why does anyone expect anything?  What you expect to happen in the future is based off of what you know has happened in the past.  That said I'm not saying console makers can never change it again until the end of time.  I'm saying any change from what consumers expect is likely to effect sales.  Ask Microsoft how it went for them when they announced a console where things worked differently from how their customers expected a console to work.

 

I made no comment on what other peoples reaction would be.  Neither you or I KNOW how other people would react.  I said I personally would rather have a PS5 early than split the PS4 community into two different performance levels. Again though I think BOTH a PS5 now and a PS4k with a different games performance level then a launch PS4 are BAD ideas.  I just think the PS5 is the better of two BAD options.  At no point did I say anything about Sony shutting down PS4 development so I'm not sure why you even brought that up.

 

 

That's  the point I've been trying to make.  There are going to be people upset that their 3 year old (or less) console now runs PS4 games worse than people that buy a PS4 later this year or next year... the same exact disc even.  Some of those people are going to vote with their wallets, neither of us know exactly how many.  As an example I'm not going to buy the PSVR if all this turns out to be true next week where before I was.  That's a "lost sale" ($400 of my money that they would have had had they not announced the 4k) on a platform that's already "a real wildcard" and again I'm certain not alone but I'm also fully aware that others, such as you, disagree.  How much of the masses agree with me and how much agree with you is unknown to either of us, or Sony, or anyone else at this point.

Yeah that is true, but I guess where you and me part is following onto something negative happening to sales. Worst case scenario for me is not many people buy Neo and continue to buy a cheaper PS4. For better or worse for gamers Sony pretty much have this generation tied up. Rejecting Neo doesn't mean rejecting Sony if the original PS4 still continues to top NPDs and global sales. With Neo and PS4 games on one disc, it's not as if shelf space is taken up by Neo games on a Neo console not selling too great.

 

I know you didn't, I'm offering a counterargument that if you think reaction to the Neo is bad, Sony putting out something labelled a PS5 would be worse. And one of the biggest complaints I think you'd easily see is "Sony are abandoning PS4 development to focus on PS5". I'm not saying you are wrong to say it's your lesser of two bad choices, I'm saying the community at large would react far worse. 

 

I'll agree everything is unknown till it happens, but as I said for better or worse Sony pretty much steamrolled this generation. There's a big roster of well sought after games to hit the next 1~2 years and I do not expect to see console sales slow down. To walk away now is either to go to a competitor (for most gamers, MS, who are going to do the same), or to stop buying Sony stuff and leave console gaming which means you miss out on some great upcoming games. If that is what someone wants to do over this, their loss on the gaming side.

 

As for VR all we can go on just now is pre-orders have sold out (so good luck pre-ordering that next week if Neo doesn't happen :P). Those usually do anyway though.

[Veiva]

1 hour ago, Audioboxer said:

How do you feel about multiplatform games that run at 1080/30 on PS4 and then 2k/60FPS on PC? In choosing to play on a console instead of a PC you're playing inferior every day already.

 

Current Neo specs are same CPU, but overclocked, and a pretty big GFX card jump. Devs will have tools to scale up, but you're giving them too much credit if you think any will take time to advance AI. It will be a higher resolution/higher framerate affair.

I only have consoles for the assortment of exclusives that are not on the PC. If a game I want is on the PC and consoles, I'll always get the PC version. The console versions are always worse. Therefore, I never play a game on a console when there is a PC alternative.

 

The AI bit was simply an example. Generally, features that take more computational power (physics, math, logic, rendering) will have to be simpler on worse hardware in games.

[+Asmodai MVC]

11 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Yeah that is true, but I guess where you and me part is following onto something negative happening to sales.

This is a complete contradiction.   Either you agree that "some people will vote with their wallets",  which would negatively effect sales, or you disagree which I can absolutely disprove because I'm living proof.  I will not but a PSVR if the 4k performs better than a launch console so that already negatively effected sales right there (1 PSVR sale lost).  Now obviously I alone won't make a significant difference to Sony but I'm absolutely positive I'm not completely alone on that opinion.  Neither of us, or Sony, or anyone else knows exactly how big or small the group of PS4 owners that believe as I do is.

 

11 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Worst case scenario for me is not many people buy Neo and continue to buy a cheaper PS4. For better or worse for gamers Sony pretty much have this generation tied up. Rejecting Neo doesn't mean rejecting Sony if the original PS4 still continues to top NPDs and global sales. With Neo and PS4 games on one disc, it's not as if shelf space is taken up by Neo games on a Neo console not selling too great.

I have NEVER claimed rejecting Neo meant reject Sony.  Where do you come up with this stuff?  I own a launch PS4 and I'm not going to stop using it if the Neo rumors are true.  I'll still buy PS4 games, etc.  That doesn't change the fact that Sony lost the $400 of revenue from me because I'm not going to buy a PSVR where before the 4k I had planned to do so.  They still lost A $400 sale even if I buy 100's of PS4 games going forward.  Also when the PS5 comes around I'm not sure Sony won't turn around and release a better console 3 years later so I'll likely give their competition more consideration (if they don't do the same) than I would have before, figuring I can always pick up the better PS5 3 years later and not have to deal with the lesser version of the same games going forward.  I have no idea what shelf space has to do with anything.  I keep saying same disc simply to underscore how it's the same game vs. your prior attempt to relate PS4 to PS3 and Xbox and all the other apples to oranges comparisons you were doing. 

 

11 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

I know you didn't, I'm offering a counterargument that if you think reaction to the Neo is bad, Sony putting out something labelled a PS5 would be worse.

You seem to just assume that the majority agrees with you whereas I'm saying you have no way of knowing that.  I'm not so egocentric to make such an assumption and I'm saying neither of us, or Sony, or anyone else know how the masses would or would not react.

 

11 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

And one of the biggest complaints I think you'd easily see is "Sony are abandoning PS4 development to focus on PS5". I'm not saying you are wrong to say it's your lesser of two bad choices, I'm saying the community at large would react far worse. 

Again I'm saying I don't believe either you or I have any way to know how the community at large would react.  If we look at history though Sony doesn't have a history of immediately abandoning a console generation as soon as the next one appears.  I think it all depends on sales.  If they release a PS5 and reduce the price of the PS4 and the PS4 sells better they'll likely continue to support it until sales dry up.  If they release the PS5 and the PS4 tank then they'll likely focus on the PS5.

 

11 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

 

I'll agree everything is unknown till it happens, but as I said for better or worse Sony pretty much steamrolled this generation. There's a big roster of well sought after games to hit the next 1~2 years and I do not expect to see console sales slow down. To walk away now is either to go to a competitor (for most gamers, MS, who are going to do the same), or to stop buying Sony stuff and leave console gaming which means you miss out on some great upcoming games. If that is what someone wants to do over this, their loss on the gaming side.

No argument here about Sony steamrolling this generation.  That's what makes this even crazier in my mind.  They're already selling great with existing performance and outperforming their competition.  Why then do ANYTHING that has the potential to alienate any of their customers?  Also again I NEVER said "stop buying Sony" stuff.  You've jumped to an absurd extreme.  Saying Sony will lose sales doesn't mean PEOPLE WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER SONY PRODUCT as you seem to think.  They lost my PSVR sale, that's $400 of revenue they would have had but I'll still buy PS4 games going forward.  I would have bought those games if Neo came out or not so that isn't a loss or gain but since I was going to buy the PSVR prior to the 4k announcement and now I'm not due to the segregated platform then they lost a sale.  Again I'm just using myself as an example I'm sure there are others that agree as well as those, such as you, that don't but neither of us know how large either group is.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

22 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

This is a complete contradiction.   Either you agree that "some people will vote with their wallets",  which would negatively effect sales, or you disagree which I can absolutely disprove because I'm living proof.  I will not but a PSVR if the 4k performs better than a launch console so that already negatively effected sales right there (1 PSVR sale lost).  Now obviously I alone won't make a significant difference to Sony but I'm absolutely positive I'm not completely alone on that opinion.  Neither of us, or Sony, or anyone else knows exactly how big or small the group of PS4 owners that believe as I do is.

 

I have NEVER claimed rejecting Neo meant reject Sony.  Where do you come up with this stuff?  I own a launch PS4 and I'm not going to stop using it if the Neo rumors are true.  I'll still buy PS4 games, etc.  That doesn't change the fact that Sony lost the $400 of revenue from me because I'm not going to buy a PSVR where before the 4k I had planned to do so.  They still lost A $400 sale even if I buy 100's of PS4 games going forward.  Also when the PS5 comes around I'm not sure Sony won't turn around and release a better console 3 years later so I'll likely give their competition more consideration (if they don't do the same) than I would have before, figuring I can always pick up the better PS5 3 years later and not have to deal with the lesser version of the same games going forward.  I have no idea what shelf space has to do with anything.  I keep saying same disc simply to underscore how it's the same game vs. your prior attempt to relate PS4 to PS3 and Xbox and all the other apples to oranges comparisons you were doing. 

 

You seem to just assume that the majority agrees with you whereas I'm saying you have no way of knowing that.  I'm not so egocentric to make such an assumption and I'm saying neither of us, or Sony, or anyone else know how the masses would or would not react.

 

Again I'm saying I don't believe either you or I have any way to know how the community at large would react.  If we look at history though Sony doesn't have a history of immediately abandoning a console generation as soon as the next one appears.  I think it all depends on sales.  If they release a PS5 and reduce the price of the PS4 and the PS4 sells better they'll likely continue to support it until sales dry up.  If they release the PS5 and the PS4 tank then they'll likely focus on the PS5.

 

No argument here about Sony steamrolling this generation.  That's what makes this even crazier in my mind.  They're already selling great with existing performance and outperforming their competition.  Why then do ANYTHING that has the potential to alienate any of their customers?  Also again I NEVER said "stop buying Sony" stuff.  You've jumped to an absurd extreme.  Saying Sony will lose sales doesn't mean PEOPLE WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER SONY PRODUCT as you seem to think.  They lost my PSVR sale, that's $400 of revenue they would have had but I'll still buy PS4 games going forward.  I would have bought those games if Neo came out or not so that isn't a loss or gain but since I was going to buy the PSVR prior to the 4k announcement and now I'm not due to the segregated platform then they lost a sale.  Again I'm just using myself as an example I'm sure there are others that agree as well as those, such as you, that don't but neither of us know how large either group is.

Some will, but those that do will get eaten up by new customer sales in no time. NPD sales for May are just out, Sony won again. Again you won't be completely alone, but in the grand scheme if you're negligible enough, it's not going to hurt them.

 

Not that your opinion isn't valued, but if you keep pouring hundreds into games, even if not on VR, Sony will be more than happy to take your hard earned money that way.

 

Cheers for clarifying the rest, I jumped the gun a bit on assumptions of what you were going to be doing. We'll see how it ends up soon enough anyway. The only point I can't bend on giving you is a PS5 announcement. Nothing can convince me that wouldn't have been more catastrophic than Neo. It's almost akin to MS dumping the Xbox and jumping to 360 after 3 years. That moved killed the Xbox. People would fear the same if Sony jumped to PS5 now. Hence why those that are optimistic about Neo are largely so because leaked docs say no exclusive games. I don't know how you can have more confidence of being continued to be supplied all the latest releases on PS4 if Sony do a PS5 now. How? Wouldn't you worry about exclusives going PS5 only? Games are what matters most, I can't see how anyone would be satisfied by being able to say this PS4 is still being supported, but TLoU2 is PS5 exclusive, but it doesn't matter, my PS4 is still being supported by FIFA, NFL and COD...

 

A new console is largely going to have the latest everything, not just a CPU overclock and new graphics card. That is why it's "easy enough" to have scaling games, but a PS5 with all new tech? Good luck getting devs on board there this early. If you're going to say PS5 as per Neo specs, then that is a bit daft given that the whole point of leaping to the new generation is really to see a massive improvement in specs. Neo is a good bump, but it's more the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS in games more than anything. Not 4K/60FPS, or even 4K/30FPS. I still think the later will be rare due to the dated CPU still being used (Jaguar).

 

PS5 should wait till 4K can be done as standard, at a minimum of 30FPS, 60FPS preferred. So most likely 2018~2020.

[+Asmodai MVC]

12 minutes ago, Audioboxer said:

Some will, but those that don't will get eaten up by new customer sales in no time.

You have no way of knowing that.  You don't know how many of the PS4k "Neo" new customers would have just bought a regular PS4 if the Neo didn't exist.

You have no way of knowing how many new PSVR customers would have still bought it to run on the regular PS4 if the PS4k didn't exist.

 

Quote

NPD sales for May are just out, Sony won again.

This has nothing to do with anything.  First of all nothing has even been officially announced yet.  Second I'm not saying sales are going to drop so low that MS is going to pass them.  I have little doubt that they continue to win NPD with or without the Neo, it's completely off topic.

 

Quote

Again you won't be completely alone, but in the grand scheme if you're negligible enough, it's not going to hurt them.

Again you have no way of knowing that.  You seem to confuse your personal option with fact.

 

Quote

Not that your opinion isn't valued, but if you keep pouring hundreds into games, even if not on VR, Sony will be more than happy to take your hard earned money that way.

Of course they will, at no point did I say Sony would not be happy to take my hard earned money.  Can you please try to stay on topic.  I'm just saying they'd get LESS (NOT NONE) of my (and others) hard earned money then they would have.  Sony would be more than happy to take MORE of my hard earned money than LESS.

 

Quote

Cheers for clarifying the rest, I jumped the gun a bit on assumptions of what you were going to be doing. We'll see how it ends up soon enough anyway. The only point I can't bend on giving you is a PS5 announcement. Nothing can convince me that wouldn't have been more catastrophic than Neo.

See the difference here is I'm not trying to convince you.  I'm saying NEITHER OF US (or Sony or anyone else) know one way or the other while you seem to believe that you speak for the masses.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

15 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

You have no way of knowing that.  You don't know how many of the PS4k "Neo" new customers would have just bought a regular PS4 if the Neo didn't exist.

You have no way of knowing how many new PSVR customers would have still bought it to run on the regular PS4 if the PS4k didn't exist.

 

This has nothing to do with anything.  First of all nothing has even been officially announced yet.  Second I'm not saying sales are going to drop so low that MS is going to pass them.  I have little doubt that they continue to win NPD with or without the Neo, it's completely off topic.

 

Again you have no way of knowing that.  You seem to confuse your personal option with fact.

 

Of course they will, at no point did I say Sony would not be happy to take my hard earned money.  Can you please try to stay on topic.  I'm just saying they'd get LESS (NOT NONE) of my (and others) hard earned money then they would have.  Sony would be more than happy to take MORE of my hard earned money than LESS.

 

See the difference here is I'm not trying to convince you.  I'm saying NEITHER OF US (or Sony or anyone else) know one way or the other while you seem to believe that you speak for the masses.

Fine dude, I'll check back in on this argument at the end of the year when sales of everything are going out and we can just talk facts.

 

Also for as much as you're trying to knock me down a peg, which is fair enough, I can be a bit abrasive, you do seem to value your money highly in the eyes of Sony. Reality is they'll go where they can make more money overall and if a net gain is to be had putting out Neo over carrying on as is (to support hardcore/PS VR/whatever other argument for Neo), an individuals personal commitment is not really a stumbling block. You're not alone, no, and as you keep hammering me with we'll see the facts of sales soon enough. My personal bet is they'll make bank by the end of the year across PSVR/PS4 and Neo, but I'm happy for the facts to let me eat crow, and allow you to have your say on how I was wrong (if you want).

 

And as for why I've bought in NPD, because Neo leaks were confirmed around around the start of April (concrete ones with specs and dev documents), we're now in June, and nothing has slowed sales. Yes we need confirmation to hit mass market, but all the rumours flying around on social media and other places haven't even slowed down sales a bit as people wait for Neo instead of buying now. Unless of course One sales are just that crap even pretty concrete info a new PS4 is months away won't allow the One even a few months on top.

 

edit: For what it's worth now that I've mentioned NPD, this is the second month in a row Sony have won and not released an official comment. Strange behaviour, but I guess food for thought at why they might have gone PR quiet (Neo coming, don't want NPD statements read between the lines).

[+Asmodai MVC]

1 hour ago, Audioboxer said:

Fine dude, I'll check back in on this argument at the end of the year when sales of everything are going out and we can just talk facts.

No we can't.  We will never have what the sales would have been if they didn't release the NEO for comparison.  You won't be able to point to how the sales were less then they would have been because we have no way of knowing what they would have been.  Even if sales are great there is no way to know they wouldn't have been ever better if they didn't segment the community.  I'm really not sure how else to say that.

 

1 hour ago, Audioboxer said:

Also for as much as you're trying to knock me down a peg, which is fair enough, I can be a bit abrasive, you do seem to value your money highly in the eyes of Sony.

I value my money highly in my eyes, because I'm me and it's my money.  I think I've made it pretty clear I'm NOT trying to speak for the masses as you are though and I'd have to strongly disagree if you're seriously trying to say I haven't.  Also I know Sony, and every company values every (potential) customers money and would like to make MORE money even if they are already making a lot.  Sony doesn't know how sales are going to go either, no one does.  Just like they had no idea they were going to "steamroll" this generation (again, your word for it) like they did before the PS4 launch or that the PS3 was going to do as poorly as it did at launch.  Just like MS didn't know the Xbox One was going to do as poorly in relation to the PS4 as it did either.  No one knows what the masses are going to do in the future.

 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Sony confirm it is real, but sadly say no announcement at E3... Gamescom it is then

 

Quote

 

Andrew House, president and global chief executive of Sony Interactive Entertainment, told the Financial Times that the “high-end PS4” would be more expensive than the current $350 version.

 

“It is intended to sit alongside and complement the standard PS4,” he said. “We will be selling both [versions] through the life cycle.”

 

The new console, which is codenamed “Neo”, will target hardcore gamers, he said, as well as consumers with a 4K television set looking for more high-resolution content.

 

 

Quote

 

However, in a move that may disappoint some fans, Mr House said that Sony would not be unveiling its new console next week and refused to say when or at what price the unit would go on sale. “We want to ensure we have a full range of the best experiences on the new system that we can showcase in their entirety,” he said.

 

Nonetheless, he downplayed concerns that the move would cause interoperability problems between the old and new PS4 hardware.

 

“All games will support the standard PS4 and we anticipate all or a very large majority of games will also support the high-end PS4,” he said.

 

 

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/aca45ff2-2ea0-11e6-bf8d-26294ad519fc.html#axzz4BAsObibW

[George P Global Moderator]

This bit of news just made Sony's E3 event way less interesting for me.    Gamescom sounds like the next logical event but who knows?  If they're waiting for new games or something to show off the new abilities it might not be at Gamescom either.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

26 minutes ago, George P said:

This bit of news just made Sony's E3 event way less interesting for me.    Gamescom sounds like the next logical event but who knows?  If they're waiting for new games or something to show off the new abilities it might not be at Gamescom either.

Who knows, but 1st party content should be easy to show. Slap UC4 running at 1080/60 and you can show off Neo.

 

Businesses being coy no doubt. Maybe to see if MS take their foot of the gas and delay announcing a 2017 console in a few days. Maybe Sony are delaying to 2017 now. It's all a mystery till we have answers. Still this is the first confirmation it is real, so a step forward somewhat.

 

Some other bits from the article which has now gone behind a paywall

 

Quote

Both PS4 variants will also support its forthcoming virtual reality headset.

Quote

Developers should also see a "seamless" experience between the two versions, he said, requiring a "small but manageable" amount of extra work when creating a game for both.

Quote

As with the current PS4 and its forthcoming VR headset, the new console will be standalone profitable at the time that we launch it.

edit: full article

 

Quote

Sony is developing an upgraded version of its PlayStation 4 gaming console that will offer ultra-high definition 4K resolution and richer graphics, according to the unit’s chief executive, as the company strives to maintain its lead over rivals Microsoft and Nintendo.

The plan marks the first time that Sony has improved the processing power of a PlayStation midway through the usual console cycle, as it looks to keep up with the more rapid pace of product launches in the smartphone and PC sectors.

Andrew House, president and global chief executive of Sony Interactive Entertainment, told the Financial Times that the “high-end PS4” would be more expensive than the current $350 version.

“It is intended to sit alongside and complement the standard PS4,” he said. “We will be selling both [versions] through the life cycle.”

The new console, which is codenamed “Neo”, will target hardcore gamers, he said, as well as consumers with a 4K television set looking for more high-resolution content.

As well as new hardware, Sony is also seeking to broaden the appeal of the PS4 through new services such as its PS Vue internet TV and a PS Music partnership with Spotify, the streaming company.

Reports of the new console emerged in March on gaming news site Kotaku after Sony began talking to developers about creating games that were compatible with the improved hardware.

Anticipation intensified ahead of next week’s E3 gaming conference in Los Angeles, where Microsoft is also believed to be planning to launch an updated Xbox One console.

However, in a move that may disappoint some fans, Mr House said that Sony would not be unveiling its new console next week and refused to say when or at what price the unit would go on sale. “We want to ensure we have a full range of the best experiences on the new system that we can showcase in their entirety,” he said.

Nonetheless, he downplayed concerns that the move would cause interoperability problems between the old and new PS4 hardware.

“All games will support the standard PS4 and we anticipate all or a very large majority of games will also support the high-end PS4,” he said.

Both PS4 variants will also support its forthcoming virtual reality headset, which will go on sale later this year.

Developers should also see a “seamless” experience between the two versions, he said, requiring a “small but manageable” amount of extra work when creating a game for both.

Mr House did not go as far as Xbox chief Phil Spencer in saying that consoles would become more like PCs, seeing regular improvements to their components rather than jumping between generations as they have for the last 30 years, he saw an opportunity to deliver “some additional benefits” to both consumers and developers within what is usually a five to six year lifespan.

“The consumer is attuned to a different cadence of innovation in technology thanks in great part for the upgrades cadence on mobile phones or PCs,” Mr House said.

Despite a resurgence in PC gaming and the popularity of smartphone games such as Angry Birds and Candy Crush Saga, PlayStation 4 become Sony’s fastest-selling console yet, reaching cumulative sales of 40m last month — far ahead of its rivals. Analysts at IHS, a consultancy, estimate that Microsoft’s Xbox One had sold 21m units at the end of March, while sales of Nintendo’s Wii U have struggled.

Even as overall console sales growth in the US, the largest gaming market, slowed in May, according to market researcher NPD, PS4 continued to grow, boosted by the success of its new Uncharted 4 game, which is not available on other platforms.

As with the current PS4 and its forthcoming VR headset, the new console will be “standalone profitable at the time that we launch it”, Mr House said. In past generations, Sony subsidised the cost of the console in the hopes of turning a profit through software sales. The investment required to develop the new PS4 is already accounted for in Sony’s latest financial results, he added.

 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

I can imagine they will delay and beef up specs, then release alongside Scorpio to dampen any "second class citizen" drama aimed solely at them. If both manufacturers release together, it sets a new precedent and does not give an upper hand to their competitor. Not to mention PSVR is the holiday product they've been planning all along.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

21 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

Sorry I just can't take "second class citizens" seriously. It's in the vein of PC master race. When used as a joke it's funny, when used seriously it screams entitlement mentality.

 

If I'm wrong, and Sony are, we will all eat crow. I'm not going to go around screaming second class citizen though as that is just childish in the world of consumer electronics.

somehow people think that companies work for them and are looking out for their best interest. in reality, they arent. theyre companies that are solely trying to make money. they dont care about you. if they want they'll release a new console every year w/ better specs just to sucker people into buying again - just like nvidia and AMD, right?

 

im still not sold on VR at all. i think it's just the next "thing" in the industry like Kinect, PS Move and 3D. it'll be hot for a minute then no one will care. i just cant imagine that if no one wanted to wear lightweight glasses to watch a movie or game in 3D, then they wont want to wear a giant, heavy headset that's tethered to a PC or console.

[soniqstylz]

edit: saw it posted earlier.  

[Emn1ty]

11 hours ago, Jason S. said:

somehow people think that companies work for them and are looking out for their best interest. in reality, they arent. theyre companies that are solely trying to make money. they dont care about you. if they want they'll release a new console every year w/ better specs just to sucker people into buying again - just like nvidia and AMD, right?

 

im still not sold on VR at all. i think it's just the next "thing" in the industry like Kinect, PS Move and 3D. it'll be hot for a minute then no one will care. i just cant imagine that if no one wanted to wear lightweight glasses to watch a movie or game in 3D, then they wont want to wear a giant, heavy headset that's tethered to a PC or console.

I think it's safe to make the distinction about how a company cares about its customers. They care about them as a group, not as individuals (though sometimes that's not really the case). They do have some form of reputation to uphold, to say that companies don't actually care about their customers is a bit daft and ignorant at best. While I agree Sony probably cares the least, it's a bit overreaching to generalize such a statement to every company.

[Vandalsquad]

Nothing at all interest of Sony E3 now. If they pulled 2 days out from presentation because of Microsoft it will show in the show. I don't think that's the reason behind pulling but. If they want to schedule for a christmas release like everyone's been harping on about, developer kits are already in the wild we know the specs. What changes can they make over 4 months before production starts? And what's the point when Microsoft would just beef their specs again to counter?

 

I think it mainly comes down to not having enough games or content to show. They could bump Uncharted to 60fps but will there be enough of an upgrade from what we already see that would be presentable in trailers to make people drop another $400? They'll be waiting on some kind of content directed mainly at release on this console to show off before showing the console its self off.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

2 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

developer kits are already in the wild we know the specs. What changes can they make over 4 months before production starts? And what's the point when Microsoft would just beef their specs again to counter?

Well the PS4 had half the memory just months before launch, a switch even to dev's surpise we were told. Hardware is not final until it's in production.

[George P Global Moderator]

Well whatever it's worth, no one is expecting MS to talk about Scorpio at E3 either.  It doesn't make much sense for them to do so when they've got the new mini coming which they'll want to push first and in the process get rid of any current stock before they talk about what's next.

 

I bet their E3 will be games, new mini, and the rumored streaming devices, and any coming features between Xbox and Windows 10.   If Sony isn't going to talk Neo then MS doesn't have to talk Scorpio either.

[Vandalsquad]

On 6/12/2016 at 0:39 AM, Andrew said:

Well the PS4 had half the memory just months before launch, a switch even to dev's surpise we were told. Hardware is not final until it's in production.

Ah yes, was that after the Australian dev kit leaks by that kid in Perth on the Xbox one to match? My memory isn't quite what I remember it being. 

 

Needless to say if Sony bump the specs again since they want to release we'll ahead of Scorpio then Microsoft will follow. They don't want the stigma of being the under powered console again. I do see them trying to bump even harder with the One Slim even having 4K video now.