Slashdot Mirror
Sony Confirms It's Making a 'High-End PlayStation 4' With 4K and Richer Graphics (ft.com)
Sony has confirmed it is working on an upgraded version of its PlayStation 4 gaming console (could be paywalled; alternate source). The company says that the upcoming console dubbed Neo is intended to sit alongside and complement the standard PS4. Touted as the "high-end PS4", the gaming console will support ultra-high definition 4K resolution and richer graphics, and will certainly cost more than PlayStation 4's $350 retail price.
The move might upset many PlayStation 4 owners, especially the ones who have purchased the console in the recent months. One of the perks of purchasing a gaming console from Sony and Microsoft is knowing that neither company will launch an upgraded version of their respective console for around six to seven years. Sony realizes that it is playing with fire here, so it assured that all forthcoming games -- including the VR ones -- must support the older version of the console as well. The company says that the new PS4 console won't be unveiled at E3 tradeshow next week, however.
The move might upset many PlayStation 4 owners, especially the ones who have purchased the console in the recent months. One of the perks of purchasing a gaming console from Sony and Microsoft is knowing that neither company will launch an upgraded version of their respective console for around six to seven years. Sony realizes that it is playing with fire here, so it assured that all forthcoming games -- including the VR ones -- must support the older version of the console as well. The company says that the new PS4 console won't be unveiled at E3 tradeshow next week, however.
If all games released from this point on will support both the Neo and Original PS4, then what is the point of buying the Neo if you already have an Original?
...and if they're better in 4K, I'll buy it. Otherwise, it's still lipstick on a pig.
So which advertised features will be the first to get disabled in a few months? So sorry, Sony. "Fooled me once, can't get fooled again."
So they said it will complement the original; is this an add-on like the 32X or the SegaCD was for the Genesis? If so, that's not so bad for current owners.
-SaNo
So first we get a report of an XBox One Two, and now a Playstation Four Two. I predict that the next go around, people won't even bother buying the first release with the expectation of a more powerful half-way release of the same system.
I had may as well go back to PC gaming. I went to consoles expecting the simplicity and ease of the traditional 5-year life cycle and standard hardware.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
The company says that the upcoming console dubbed Neo is intended to sit alongside and complement the standard PS4.
Is that supposed to a metaphor, or a literal truth? Is it designed to be put next to/connected to a PS4? And then say nice things about it?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
One of the perks of purchasing a gaming console from Sony and Microsoft is knowing that neither company will launch an upgraded version of their respective console for around six to seven years.
Launching a 32GB WiiU Delux alongside the 8GB WiiU was a bold move for Nintendo; previously, they'd only released handhelds in multiple colors or with smaller or larger form factors. The Wii got a mini-version that nobody bought; the Gameboy got the Gameboy Pocket, while the Gameboy Advance got the Gameboy Advance SP and Gameboy Advance Micro. Even the DS only got the DSXL (bigger screen), while the 3DS got the 3DSXL and the 2DS (runs 3DS software without 3D display). These are all budget options or larger screens on handhelds, which can only output to their built-in screen; the WiiU Delux was the first Nintendo console to offer a functional upgrade (all other revisionary hardware ran the same software with the same results if following the same actions).
Sony and Microsoft have a long history of upgrading consoles to have bigger and better specs, rather than simply slimmed form and budget options. A lot of "you bought an XBox so you can have an XBox until the next console comes out, but not really, because you're going to have to buy a new XBox because new games are going to preload 60GB of content to the hard disk and you're going to experience 40 minute load times without XBox with HD-DVD!"
Support my political activism on Patreon.
If you were aching for 4k gaming you probably would have already done this.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Is it really that bad is a new version comes out every three years, but each model still supports all of the older games and gets new games going forward for 6-8 years?
You could skip every other release and still play everything. This will also help PC games, as newer hardware will drive developers to actually support new graphic capabilities. Unlike in the PS3/360 generation which went on way to long and held the PC back.
It's not just about graphics, it's about memory and processing power too, and what developer is going to limit their games to the specs of a ps3 when a ps4 is around? None. So why on earth would they produce games for the ps4 when the 4k edition is going to be the dev kit they are building on. your statement only makes sense if you know nothing about games and game design. A kickass idea, with great gameplay, is still a steaming pile of shit at 15 FPS with long load times, and that's exactly what ps4 owners can expect once the NEO dev kits are shipped, shitty half assed ports with lower res textures and absolutely NO testing. Consoles aren't PCs, you can not have 2 consoles from the same developer last, you will always see the better performing device win out.
PC gaming is cheaper. Online multiplayer is without monthly fees. There are truly free games with no subscription fees on Steam, GOG and Origin, maybe others. Build your own PC for the same price as a console with more power and greater functionality. Replace your own parts... yada yada yada . . .
mainly for blu ray 4k / streeming 4k?
I had may as well go back to PC gaming. I went to consoles expecting the simplicity and ease of the traditional 5-year life cycle and standard hardware.
That's quite a bad reason to go to console gaming. A gaming rig that's just a little more expensive than the Xbox or Playstation will last ten years or more (i.e. you can play games 10 years later at near-max settings without much problem). Plus you get an awesome desktop for when you're not gaming.
Is when this is required for PlayStation VR. Hell, my GTX970 has trouble keeping up with games like Elite: Dangerous in VR; I have no idea how the current run of consoles are expecting to pull that off.
In the past we had long console life cycles because Sony et al. had to recoup their investment in developing that hardware in the first place. Nowadays it is AMD doing all the development, so a quick platform upgrade is as simple as calling AMD and asking for the latest chips. And why wouldn't they? Especially since the competition is going to be doing the exact same thing... So in order to avoid falling behind, there is only one choice: upgrade.
Long life cycles were never an intended goal of consoles to begin with. They were an _accident_, and since everyone has now standardized on PC hardware they are no longer necessary or even desirable.
Considering consoles have been holding back PC's for the better part of a decade, you'll easily find that your 5 year old PC is still good enough to play today's titles without too much of a problem. My dad got my old PC to game on, it's a Phenom I X4-945BE w/560Ti in it and it does everything he wants. My sister built a similar PC, it ran her around $110 for all the parts and still does a just fine job.
Consoles haven't offered anything over a PC in nearly 15 years, and have handily made themselves less competitive by doing things like charging for multiplayer or attempting to lock all your games to only your account. Nevermind backwards compatibility, something that you can do on a PC.
Om, nomnomnom...
Lets not forget their removal of backwards compatibility for all the later models. If they wanted to pull out the hardware for it, that's fine, but even dropping the software support for it? Weak.
See, I kind of think of it in the opposite way. What I want most from consoles is just the fact that I don't have to wonder "will it run?" It would make sense to me if Sony released a new Playstation model every year with better capabilities, but maintaining compatibility. Sort of like what smartphone vendors do-- Apple releases a new iPhone every year, but I don't have to buy all new apps every time I get a new iPhone. With every new iPhone, I get something a little faster and with new features, but apps almost always work with an iPhone that's a few years old. I don't have to buy a new iPhone every year, but I can if I want to.
I'm glad to hear it. You'll find playing games that don't discriminate against minorities and avoid uses of offensive and discriminatory language much more appealing when you switch to Politically Correct gaming.
That's either the worst joke, or the biggest troll I've seen today. I'm betting on the latter. Especially considering the politically correct and their pro-male killing, pro-sexism, pro-racism, statements that continually pop out of their mouths. Then again, not sure what's worse. That I can't tell the difference between a politically correct person and a bigot/racist/sexist from the 1950's, or that they think they're actual champions of inclusivity while they push for anti-egalitarian ideals.
Up in next reply: Parent post cries that people who dislike new ghostbusters movie are sexist, then virtue signals so hard that they nearly self-combust.
Om, nomnomnom...
Despite their godawful handling of my beloved Playstation Vita, I had been eyeing a PS4 so that I could play Final Fantasy XV this fall. I'm starting to think I shouldn't bother with a PS4 at all if they're trying to pull this cell phone upgrade every year or two bullshit.
I already have a WiiU, and with the rumors flying around that Microsoft is also thinking about these shenanigans, the WiiU might be the only console I get this generation.
I'd compare it to a Game Boy Color (GBC), whose games fell into two categories:
Dual-mode games These run on pre-GBC systems (the original Game Boy, Super Game Boy, and Game Boy Pocket) but have additional features on GBC. The cartridge has the original mold shape with an "innie" grip, and most are black (as opposed to gray for original Game Boy games). All dual-mode games have severe motion blur on the original Game Boy (but not on SGB, Pocket, or GBC). Some dual-mode games had slowdown on pre-GBC systems for any of three reasons: a slower processor (4.2 MHz vs. 8.4 MHz for GBC), lack of VRAM DMA, and intentionally reduced frame rate to accommodate the original Game Boy's severe motion blur. Early on, most GBC games were dual mode because of the massive installed base of pre-GBC systems. Exclusive games These run only on GBC. They display an error message if used with pre-GBC systems. The cartridge has a new mold with an "outie" grip, and most are transparent. Starting a couple years after the GBC's release, most games were exclusive.Likewise, dual-mode games for Neo may slow down or have reduced graphical complexity when run on an original PlayStation 4. And starting a couple years after the Neo's release, SCE may end up reversing its stance and allowing Neo-only games.
If you haven't done your research prior to making the purchase, you only have yourself to blame. This news has been in the rumor mill for a while now. I've decided that I'll buy the PS4 once GT7 releases, PS4K notwithstanding.
Moreover, if you always sit and wait to buy the next big thing, you'll be waiting forever and never buy anything.
PCs also have exclusive titles. There are plenty of games on Steam that don't appear in PlayStation Store. Mods are PC-exclusive as well; without mods, there'd be no Team Fortress and Counter-Strike. The question then becomes which platform has the exclusives most appealing to you (especially if they're Nintendo's), as well as whether games are intentionally crippled on one platform (such as removal of split-screen only on the PC version).
Is it really that bad is a new version comes out every three years, but each model still supports all of the older games and gets new games going forward for 6-8 years?
You must have forgotten what site you were one. Sony or Microsoft could give away bars of gold and someone on /. would complain that they were too heavy and strained their back.
Just keep playing games on your iPad.
A touch screen like that of the iPad is not the ideal input method for all game genres. It's good for the same kinds of games that can be played with a mouse: point-and-click, endless runners, and certain kinds of shoot-em-up that use the touch screen like a trackpad. But something with a keyboard or gamepad works better for, say, platformers. For this you may want a PlayStation 4 or a PlayStation Vita.
PC gaming is cheaper. Online multiplayer is without monthly fees.
Which platform is cheaper for offline multiplayer? Especially if you have kids, it may be a choice of one console, a few controllers, and one copy of each game, or two to four gaming PCs and copies of each game.
Giving Sony better chips that can be over clocked. It makes perfect sense for Sony to sell these at a premium. I'd be mad, but given that most modern games couldn't give a toss about frame rates above 24fps I don't see the problem. Plus if you're one of those folks who don't care you're about to see an abundance of cheap used PS4s.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Looks like you can't think. "Support the high-end PS4" means to have a code path for it to enable better graphics, enhanced features, or whatnot. Games that do not "support the high-end PS4" will simply run on the Neo in the same way they do on an original PS4. The only exception I could think of would be if there's a title that has some bizarre licensing agreement that only allows it to be sold for the original PS4. Considering the past decade of having a digital platform, I doubt this would be the case. Even Nintendo has gotten this right after a few fuckups with the Wii and DSi. (Certain early titles were locked to that exact platform/system and couldn't be transferred. Thankfully, those systems were hacked and not tied into online accounts, so I didn't lose anything.)
Honestly, this has been a PR shitshow.
They should have simply said "we've started working on Playstation 5, it's still a ways out there so we won't be showing it at E3 this year, but we're going to promise you right now that it will be backwards compatible with all PS4 games."
Sure, having a short PS4 life cycle will be a shitshow of its own, but at least it'll be a shitshow with an end in sight and the promise of compatibility should prevent a revolt from developers with games in the pipeline. Having PS4 and PS4 "plus" will be an unending shitshow, pissing off players and developers alike.
In the end, same shitty game play, same 2-3 hours of a game 'til you're done with it and most games simply counting up a number in their name without changing anything but sticking another gimmick in it.
Seriously, what's the point? I've had more fun with indie games in the past year than with AAA titles.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Crysis is almost 9 years old now.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Simplicity and easy with consoles? That's a thing of the past.
Yeah, I'm old, I remember the times when you stuffed a cartridge into that console, turned it on, picked up the controller, played 'til your brain turned to mush, then turned it off and went to bed.
Today it's more like... turning on the console, trying to find the menu for "I wanna play a game" between the thousands of blinking icons that want you to "socialize", navigating there with the motion-sensitive (read: wave like an idiot) input system du jour, slipping the disc in, waiting half an hour for the copy protection to recognize it, having to download an update for the console, waiting for it to download, waiting for it to install, reading the damn disc again, the game realizing that there is an update for it, waiting again for the game update to download, waiting for the install (oh, I forgot: Turning the damn thing off and on between every single fucking update and going through the 8 ballet positions to navigate back to "lemme finally play the fucking game") and then finally, FINALLY, you can ... go to bed 'cause it's midnight.
In all seriousness, "ease to use" when it comes to gaming is today PC gaming. Turn on the computer, 2 seconds later, thanks to SSD, it's there, click Steam, click favorite game, play 'til brain rots.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
They'll still produce games for the original PS4 because that's what their user-base owns. No one wants to trash their sales by narrowing compatibility to a console that most Sony gamers won't own. The only people who will buy this will be PSVR users and people with 4K TVs. This will be a fraction of the PS4 user-base.
If you're not broke, it means getting any console (or PC) that has exclusives that appeal to you - or that the friends you want to game with have, not just the one with the most exclusives. Gaming isn't just for kids who have to beg their parents to buy a console anymore. I expect that plenty of people have a nice gaming PC, an Xbox One, and a PS4.
Its not gaming in 4k. Only video and menu output. Games are still going to be 1080p.
Most running some kind of variable resolution.
Its not 4k gaming, though. Think about what that requires for PC... There is no way they could get a console at a reasonable price that could do that.
I wish I had mod points for this.
I was thinking PS4 Neo might be more targeted towards the Japanese market which has been lackluster this generation. VR Anime.
It's not just about graphics, it's about memory and processing power too, and what developer is going to limit their games to the specs of a ps3 when a ps4 is around? None. So why on earth would they produce games for the ps4 when the 4k edition is going to be the dev kit they are building on. your statement only makes sense if you know nothing about games and game design. A kickass idea, with great gameplay, is still a steaming pile of shit at 15 FPS with long load times, and that's exactly what ps4 owners can expect once the NEO dev kits are shipped, shitty half assed ports with lower res textures and absolutely NO testing. Consoles aren't PCs, you can not have 2 consoles from the same developer last, you will always see the better performing device win out.
Why? Because millions of their users will have the 1080P console. Would you produce a game that only works on the 4k for a limited number of people or for both? Just like PS4 games are released on the PS3. When you turn down the resolution that extra power won't be necessary so it should be easy to port it to the PS4.
Its not 4k gaming, though. Think about what that requires for PC... There is no way they could get a console at a reasonable price that could do that.
No, but you could double the price of a PS4 easily make it work. They said it would be more expensive so don't expect it to only be a $100 or $200 price hike.
I think that is the whole point here. Suppose Sony sells a 4k for 600$ and continues to sell and support the HD version... the impact on game developers is really small and not a bad deal for the HD users who more likely than not don't have a 4k TV.
love is just extroverted narcissism
It would be closer to $1000. If not more. For 30 FPS 4k gaming, you need a 980 TI (or possibly a 1070 depending on how it actually benchmarks). Add in a better CPU to be able to handle a GPU that is that powerful, and you already hit double the price without factoring in any other parts. Then you would have to consider how much heat a box like that is generating. So no, its not 4k gaming at even double the PS4 price.
From what I read, its really only 4k for video and the menu systems anyways. The console is supposed to hit 1080p/60FPS on demanding games which is a monstrous improvement over the current gen consoles. Its really not a bad buy, but the 4k claim is very misrepresented.
PC gaming = requires to maintain Windows, anti-virus crap, security updates otherwise your computer gets owned by hackers and starts sending spam or become part of a botnet, etc.
These aren't two radically different pieces of hardware like the PS3 and PS4, it mostly looks like a bump in graphics capabilities. It seems fairly plausible that games will run well on the PS4 in HD and on the new machine at 4K. I have a PS 4 and am not particularly worried about this. Maybe if the VR is better with this on or if I decide to get a 4KTV at some point it might be worth the upgrade. Otherwise I expect to be happy with my PS4 and expect a lot of people will still continue to buy the cheaper PS4 because they only have an HD TV which will keep the PS4 as the most common PS4 platform (and therefore the one game makers consider the primary target) for quite a while.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
And by that you mean "reboot once a month when it asks you to". That's about it.
Yup. The irony is now I use a Steam link connected to my PC as "my console" and its easier to use with less bullshit than my PS4.
Push the button on the controller, pick "resume playing", done. PS4's collecting dust (though there are a few...very few, but a few, exclusives I want to play)
Its not 4k gaming, though. Think about what that requires for PC... There is no way they could get a console at a reasonable price that could do that.
No, but you could double the price of a PS4 easily make it work. They said it would be more expensive so don't expect it to only be a $100 or $200 price hike.
Say just for argument sake that the Neo will be able to play 4k games at 60 fps and the machine costs $1000. There definitely would be people who would buy such a machine, however, they would be in the minority because most PS4 owners would not see the value of paying two to four times the price of the PS4 which is good enough for their HDTV.
Maybe if the console owner had a 4k TV they may be tempted but for most people who already have an HDTV why should they replace it when it already works and most TV content today is still 720p or less for most shows unless you pay for a subscription for services that will provide higher graphical content.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
He's already had to send his PS4 back for warrenty work. Now when you turn it on there's a good
chance the fan will spin up and the PS4 shut down (cold system).
I've never had a problem with any of the previous PS controllers they last forever. I bought a PS4
controller to play with on his system, when I'm not there his son use(s/d) it. Not one month later
the right joystick stuck to the left -if controlling a person you will just start spinning to the
left.
I'm not impressed at all with the PS4, going to stick with my supposedly coveted backward
compatible PS3 (I bought a backward compatible PS3 from Game Stop for $120 as a replacement
recently (in stock)).
Interesting bit of Gameboy history - thanks!
Yesterday I picked up my kids' old GBA and rummaged through their stockpile of games, which inludes original GB stuff. I never noticed the innie vs. outie grips until you pointed them out. Another big differentiator is that the GBA (GBC?) carts are half-length, relative to the "big" GB carts.
Its not gaming in 4k. Only video and menu output. Games are still going to be 1080p.
Where did you hear that?
TFA said "4K resolution and richer graphics, according to the unit’s chief executive".
Build your own PC for the same price as a console with more power and greater functionality.
More power and greater functionality is easy enough, but for the same price as a $350 PS4?
It is difficult for individuals to compete with Sony's volume purchasing power. Even a low-end $100 PC motherboard is certainly more than Sony spends on their motherboard.
http://m.ign.com/wikis/playsta...
Sorry for double post, but use your head. It still costs arou d $2000 for 4k gaming on a PC. What makes you think a $400 console could handle it?
Good link - thanks. Better info than TFA!
Well, nobody thinks a $400 box will do 4K. Double that, at least.