Visually, I'd say this leap is similar to the last leap (I'd probably say more so the top Xbox games -> 360, rather than PS2 -> PS3, though late PS2 games like GoW2 did look fantastic). As I pointed out in an earlier post, keep in mind these are games ~9 months before release (and seemingly developed with worse specs in mind than what PS4 will offer). Remember what early 360/PS3 games looked like. We weren't getting visuals on par with God of War Ascension, Uncharted 3, Last of Us, Beyond, etc., at PS3's launch. We got this: Spoiler (and I LOVE Resistance FoM, maybe my favorite FPS of the generation) Let's compare that to what we got at this event: Spoiler I do agree with you on the gameplay though. I was a little disappointed with what they showed. Killzone hasn't been known for the best, most innovative gameplay, so I guess no surprise. But I wish they could have shown some newer types of gameplay. This too isn't really that different from early in the generation (early 360/PS3 games were just "HD" ports of PS2/XBX games), though it might have been a little easier to come up with something new and exciting. I have no doubts whatsoever that developers (from within Sony and from other studios) will come up with some fantastic new experiences that are only possible on PS4/Durango (and high-end PCs), but unfortunately, we haven't really seen a lot of good examples of that yet.
Yup, just like controlling a movie. The hardware in the ps4 is soo out of this world we have never seen this in a pc before. Because you know PC gaming has never had the best gaphics and fps. Also because Pc does not offer the ability to share media online and connecting a controller to it is absurd.
Ok not hardcore Quake 2 FPS people, but console shooter is completely ruled by COD, either platform, you know this fact. we're talking multiplayer, nobody cares about the story I'm pretty happy with my 360 now, i got my media with netflix, hbogo, youtube, then I got some games, plus the thing works with my ipad too. the last game I played was max payne 3 and that had great graphics, don't know if i need shell out $500. we all know that it's better to wait to see how these systems mature . saw those sony 4k tvs at CES, i imagine ps4 will support that resolution.
I hear ya, the graphics are going to be insane and easy to get into unlike a pc. I am just saying so far they have done nothing to beatout microsoft. I have been an xbox and xbox 360 owner and actually tuned in to see if playstation was doing anything to change what I am going to buy next. Nope.
Oh...didn't realize this was a console war argument. Sure, depending on what you like, PS4 either destroys the new Xbox, is on par with the new Xbox, or is destroyed by the new Xbox. As with this generation...and maybe more so...I expect both consoles to be very similar, and the difference will basically be what games are made for each system. God of War, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, etc., for PlayStation and Halo, Forza, Gears, Fable, etc., for Xbox.
It'll support 4k for video playback but won't support 4k for games. I've heard several Sony execs say that over the past two days.
That reminds me of how awesome Yoshida is. Too lazy to find the article, but I think they asked him about 3D support on PS4, and he said it wasn't really a focus, but it could do it and it would be better than PS3. They focused on it a bit with PS3 because the whole company was pushing 3D (and wanting to sell 3D TVs), but now they've moved on to something else, so 3D isn't really important anymore. I just like how honest he was. Glad they're not trying to push 4K games.
4K resolution was nice. however it was not the leap from normal tube tvs to HDTV. 4K only works well if it's a really large screen. Which they did show off. The coolest thing at CES was the cloud gaming at NVIDIA, tried out Skyrim with full graphics on on a macbook. the whole thing was rendered server side.
If I'm not mistaken, Gaikai actually uses (or did use) some of that Nvidia tech (think it is called Grid). Gaikai was usually offering better quality streams than OnLive, and I think that tech was partly why.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zkAJNUMGZgU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
There's no point (at least with current hardware and the TVs out there) to push 4K games. I don't think there's really anything to prevent it (i.e., I think a dev probably could put out a 4K game if they REALLY wanted to), but it is not at all being pushed by Sony. And that's the smart thing to do. As tinman stated, you'd need a REALLY big screen to really get the benefits, and thanks to the need to process all those pixels, you'd end up with a very barren game (but a 4K game). As it is, I expect a lot of games to still be @ 720p instead of 1080p, though we should get more 1080p support than during this generation. Hopefully fewer/no <720p games. Durango's hardware will be similar...so the same more or less applies. I don't think the (likely) GPU can push quite as many pixels, so it will be a little tougher, but again, no reason to really push 4K gaming anyway.
Sony got their mojo back on TVs. Check out this 4k tv http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/st...reId=10151&langId=-1&identifier=S_4KTV#navTop
Was skimming over some PS4 news... We already know that PS4 won't be compatible with PS3 games (BTW, this includes downloadable games if you didn't realize this). I assumed they still might make it compatible with PS1 games (should be easy to emulate, especially with existing x86 emulation software), and possibly even PS2 (also some good x86 emulators). I guess PS2 is still possible, but it turns out the PS4 can't read CDs. It can only read DVD and Blu-ray discs. So that rules out disc-based PS1 games (and some PS2 I think). Unless they make changes. Not sure about the PS1 classics that you can download. Since I'm not too optimistic about streaming being available (and good) for a few years, we may need to keep around our PS3s and possibly PS2s. Enough of that, how about the new Xbox? Sounds like MS might schedule an event in April: http://www.computerandvideogames.com/392950/industry-expects-microsofts-response-to-ps4-in-april/
Are you mother fudging serious, Mr. Cola?!?!!?? That's not good. That's like saying YouTube can't show 320p videos... or that I can't install an 8-track system into my Lamborghini... Man, that would SUCK major Eskimo ass. I hope there's at least SOME backwards compatibility.
Don't be surprised if Sony cuts the amount of GGDDR5 because is super expensive. If they put 8 GB of that ram, it is estimated to cost $125-$150 PER CONSOLE. They would have to START the console at $500 or lose a **** load of money. One of the reason MS is expected to go with 8 GB ddr3 and use a 32MB eSRAM (on GPU) to help with bandwidth bottleneck. Again, MS could got he same route as Sony, but I think they are trying to hit the $399 price point...
I just read on ign that games would still be at 60 bucks. That's good because I thought that they would be 80-90 price range. Does suck that there is no backwards compatibility because if you get any good games this summer or fall, you can't play them on your new box and I'm sure a lot of publishers won't be putting out ps4 games and ps3 at the same time. Kinda curious about nba 2k14. It's usually an October launch and soon after is when the ps4 comes out. Wonder if they have been working on the next gen or if we want sports games we need to hang on to our older system
They're not going to cut the amount of GDDR5. They JUST upped it. They were planning 4GB (and devs were targeting it), and pretty much everyone would have been happy with that (even with that, it likely would have done very well against 8GB of DDR3...probably better for most games). They decided to up it for some reason, and whatever reason that is, it was apparently important enough to increase the PS4's cost quite a bit (I think the cost will probably be more on the lower range of what you provided, but it will be a lot regardless). This was a very deliberate decision. If cost is a concern, they'll cut something else, or they'll increase the cost of the console and/or services. But I'd definitely be VERY surprised if Sony somehow decided to cut back on the GDDR5 at this point. Depends on what all they include (like the PS Eye), but I could see it costing ~$500 to make (just the parts, not putting it together, shipping, etc.). $500/$550 would allow for little/no loss on the system. $450 probably not too tough to do, but $400 would put it at a pretty decent loss. Sony has taken some huge hits in the past (PS3 was extreme, though PS2 and others were in that $100-$200 range IIRC), but not sure they're willing to do that here. If they do, it might be due to substantially lower R&D costs, and possibly the ability to create new revenue streams with PS4 (pay to play/share, cloud services, etc.). They can replace the GDDR5 with DDR4 at some point I think (conceptually anyway...not sure if it could be done easily), but not sure that's good enough. Likely will be easier for Durango to hit $400, though they seem much more likely to bundle Kinect (and that will be somewhat costly). eSRAM isn't too cheap either, though their RAM setup should be much cheaper (though on a sidenote, even with the eSRAM, there will be huge bottleneck in comparison to PS4...even the eSRAM isn't as fast as the GDDR5). As with Sony, I'm not sure how much of the costs MS would be willing to eat (they've been aggressive before, but will that continue?). They could push the "contract" model too. Sony has the edge with hardware expertise, but Durango should have cheaper parts overall (Kinect being somewhat of a wild card, but can't see it inflating the cost more than 8GB of GDDR5) and MS might be more willing to swallow big losses. There will definitely be PS3 and PS4 games out. Watch Dogs, Destiny, and Diablo 3 will be out for both, and presumably released at the same time (or around the same time). I'd assume there will be a PS4/Durango version of 2K14, along with a new Madden. Maybe not something that really uses the new hardware very well, but they should have something.
