More confirmation, speculation on “PlayStation 4K” rumors

New sources add fuel to the mid-generation hardware refresh fire.

Read the whole story

 

[Quiet Desperation]

Playstation 4.5. PS4.1. Playstation 4000? PS4K?

 

[Zra]

This PS4K is going to be expensive methinks. How much lower could sony price the thing than a comparable 4k ready pc.

 

[Statistical]

4K sure. 4K at same quality as existing 1080p titles? No way. You are talking about needing 4x the GPU power (assuming nothing else needs to change). All of the possible routes in the article give you at most a doubling of GPU power.

So while I don't doubt Sony is considering a "4K capable" PS variant it isn't going to have 4x the GPU power maybe 2x. I could see something like rendering at some interim resolution (say 2560 x 1440) and then scaling to 4K.

 

[Akemi]

I'm still wondering about these announcements for both the One and PS4. You'll need a rather substantial update to play games at 4K with acceptable framerates on both the CPU and GPU side.

 

[ronin_cse]

I'm gonna go ahead and predict that this will mostly be a 4k video upgrade that also adds the ability to quasi-upscale games to 4k while still rendering everything at 1080p.

I feel like a real upgrade would just fracture the market too much and would cause too much chaos. Who knows though, hopefully we find out soon.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I expect this is mostly for 4k Blu-rays and Vue and less about 4K games, which would have to be real basic to run at a decent framerate on any hardware that could conceivably go into a console south of $1000.

 

[foxyshadis]

Statistical[/url]":h3bg7gm4]So while I don't doubt Sony is considering a "4K capable" PS variant it isn't going to have 4x the GPU power maybe 2x. I could see something like rendering at some interim resolution (say 2560 x 1440) and then scaling to 4K.

Yup, all it has to be is better than 1080p and people will still appreciate the extra resolution. I know I would.

ronin_cse[/url]":h3bg7gm4]I feel like a real upgrade would just fracture the market too much and would cause too much chaos. Who knows though, hopefully we find out soon.

I have a feeling Sony will make all game developers optimize for the 4 first, and then increase the resolution as much as they want to for their "4K Optimized" game branding. Or be playable normally on the 4, but have 1080p 3D capability for the 4K. I very much doubt they're going to allow most publishers to just leave the 4 in the dust, unless it's, say, a VR only game.

 

[marsilies]

ElectricBlue[/url]":bd2goer2]I expect this is mostly for 4k Blu-rays and Vue and less about 4K games, which would have to be real basic to run at a decent framerate on any hardware that could conceivably go into a console south of $1000.

Yeah, adding UHD Blu-ray capabilities to the system, with HDR output and such, could be a big boost to UHD Blu-ray adoption, and wouldn't take much more graphics capability and only a slight upgrade to the optical drive.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Shmerl[/url]":1g3qa53y]Good. It's interesting to see how MS and Sony rushed to announce more frequent hardware refresh cycles after Steam Machines were released. Competition in action. The days of stagnating consoles are over which is good for gaming overall, since games won't be held back by 7 year old hardware anymore.

Yeah I'm sure they're quakin in their boots over those Steam Machine sales.

 

[Rommel102]

I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

 

[Cederic]

I wonder if this will be required for a good quality VR experience.

 

[solomonrex]

ElectricBlue[/url]":12zd5tdu]

Shmerl[/url]":12zd5tdu]Good. It's interesting to see how MS and Sony rushed to announce more frequent hardware refresh cycles after Steam Machines were released. Competition in action. The days of stagnating consoles are over which is good for gaming overall, since games won't be held back by 7 year old hardware anymore.

Yeah I'm sure they're quakin in their boots over those Steam Machine sales.

Ok, but 'Only the paranoid survive'.

 

[Little-Zen]

Or, the new system could simply sport a slightly touched up version of the PS4's current processor, slimmed down with a new 14/16nm production process and with support for some new 4K and HDMI 2 output features.

I think this is the most likely possibility - preserve full hardware compatibility across the whole PS4 range, but add some new media features and cut power consumption.

"When [there is a] performance enhanced version of 'PS4.1' specific machine, what was 30fps in the current PS4 might be able to play at 60fps. In terms of 'PS4.1' specific machine has been enhanced performance, it might be to be able to play in 4K native if corresponding to the HDMI 2.0."

Steadier / higher frame rates would be a nice added bonus, though, and a good way to take advantage of extra GPU capabilities without alienating the existing userbase. All PS4 games play on all PS4 systems, but if you've got one of the new ones they just run a little smoother. Maybe some sort of dynamic resolution feature to make FPS more consistent? That would be a good use of extra hardware.

"native 4k" is a big question mark. As the article points out, that would require a lot more GPU power than we should expect to see without some extremely heavy alteration of the hardware underneath.

And then, unless you make all of this power unavailable to developers (so they continue targeting the "base" PS4 spec), and make the scaling all happen at the system/GPU level, it would be a different system - those new games might not work well or at all on the base PS4. So it wouldn't make any sense to call it a PS4 of any sort. It'd be a PS5 with backwards compatibility.

 

[Se'Sorrow]

ronin_cse[/url]":3tarkdqq]I'm gonna go ahead and predict that this will mostly be a 4k video upgrade that also adds the ability to quasi-upscale games to 4k while still rendering everything at 1080p.

I feel like a real upgrade would just fracture the market too much and would cause too much chaos. Who knows though, hopefully we find out soon.

Yeah, agree with this right here. 4K Video upgrade, but not games. Technology and market are both not ready for it, at this time. That being said, I would buy one anyway, just for the ability to put out 4K video to my 4K TV and play my PS4 titles without an additional box.

 

[solomonrex]

Rommel102[/url]":1evr8nep]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

I'll believe Rift/Vive on Xbox when I see it. Has MS's ambitions fallen so far?

 

[rabish12]

solomonrex[/url]":18d9ab2w]

Rommel102[/url]":18d9ab2w]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

I'll believe Rift/Vive on Xbox when I see it. Has MS's ambitions fallen so far?

I'm not sure how trying to support expensive high-end niche tech and trying to unify disparate platforms and audiences qualifies as having low ambitions.

 

[PAArs]

I'm calling it - PSX all over again!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSX_(video_game_console)

I, like many others, just got my PS4/don't plan to upgrade any time soon, don't own a 4K TV/don't intend to any time soon, etc. If it leaves Japan, I'll be surprised. If it makes it beyond a year, I'll be surprised again and totally wrong... -1 Internet Points for me in that scenario.

 

[Statistical]

ronin_cse[/url]":23fsnmfm]I'm gonna go ahead and predict that this will mostly be a 4k video upgrade that also adds the ability to quasi-upscale games to 4k while still rendering everything at 1080p.

I feel like a real upgrade would just fracture the market too much and would cause too much chaos. Who knows though, hopefully we find out soon.

Yeah, agree with this right here. 4K Video upgrade, but not games. Technology and market are both not ready for it, at this time. That being said, I would buy one anyway, just for the ability to put out 4K video to my 4K TV and play my PS4 titles without an additional box.

They wouldn't really need a hardware upgrade to do that. It has HDMI 1.4 which is capable of UHD (4K) @ 30 Hz. Obviously it would require some software support and UI changes but going to an entirely new hardware platform just to add 4K video when existing hardware is capable of that seems extreme.

 

[ElectricBlue]

rabish12[/url]":1el0qg32]

solomonrex[/url]":1el0qg32]

Rommel102[/url]":1el0qg32]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

I'll believe Rift/Vive on Xbox when I see it. Has MS's ambitions fallen so far?

I'm not sure how trying to support expensive high-end niche tech and trying to unify disparate platforms and audiences qualifies as having low ambitions.

Rift on Xbox 1.5 (most likely) seems like the 'me too' option, especially after being so bold on Kinect on XB1 and then Hololens and AR as the real future. Seems like the Xbox division has been humbled again and again as of late.

 

[Akemi]

Rommel102[/url]":30my5ppq]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

You keep parroting this without an inkling of just how much of an upgrade would be required to hardware. No console gamer is going to spend $600-$800 on a headset that also required a new $600+ box to use; at that point you may as well just transition to a PC, and that's not what console gamers want. Because you aren't going to be able to support the Vive or Rift at 90 frames per second at the resolution they require with a $300-$400 dollar bit of hardware.

 

[zombiedog]

I don't know why everyone insists this is some mysterious new mid generation refresh instead of just people poking their noses into early prototyping for an eventual PS5. It's not like they wait until a year before the generation ends and just pop out new hardware. Work on the "next next gen" begins almost immediately because its typically takes the duration of the existing generation to plan it all out.

 

[ElectricBlue]

zombiedog[/url]":2b855opb]I don't know why everyone insists this is some mysterious new mid generation refresh instead of just people poking their noses into early prototyping for an eventual PS5. It's not like they wait until a year before the generation ends and just pop out new hardware. Work on the "next next gen" begins almost immediately because its typically takes the duration of the existing generation to plan it all out.

They insist that because that's what people at Sony are saying with their mouths.

 

[dfjdejulio]

zombiedog[/url]":3vsxptza]I don't know why everyone insists this is some mysterious new mid generation refresh instead of just people poking their noses into early prototyping for an eventual PS5.

There are people who believe that those two things are actually going to be the same activity from here on out.

Now that both major consoles are running on such standardized components, the thought is that future iterations are going to be pure upgrades of previous ones instead of completely new platforms, providing (in theory) perpetual perfect backwards compatibility and not forcing developers to get entirely new dev kits or learn new dev environments. So the distinction between "mid generation refresh" and "early prototyping for an eventual successor" blurs until it disappears.

(We'll see. It's not a crazy thought, no, but there were people who thought similar things when the original Xbox was built on x86 chips.)

 

[ej24]

I feel like it'll just be a die shrink of the current APU or a transition to a comparable one on the new process. There's too much R&D in designing consoles and games to release a totally new piece of hardware. It'll probably have 4k playback capabilities for movies, hdr, hdmi2.0, and be more power efficient, maybe come with a faster or larger hdd. Every slim version has made incremental upgrades like this. But 4k gaming? Doubtful.

 

[jonah]

There is no chance existing games would receive the kind of resources they'd need to push out a major "patch" described in the article. You're talking serious, serious engineering resources needed to "update" an engine.

And for what payoff, you ask? So people who've already bought the game can give you no money and enjoy it.

I think not.

 

[TrumpZilla]

... our you could just get a PC.

 

[Rommel102]

Akemi[/url]":2qiso4hk]

Rommel102[/url]":2qiso4hk]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

You keep parroting this without an inkling of just how much of an upgrade would be required to hardware. No console gamer is going to spend $600-$800 on a headset that also required a new $600+ box to use; at that point you may as well just transition to a PC, and that's not what console gamers want. Because you aren't going to be able to support the Vive or Rift at 90 frames per second at the resolution they require with a $300-$400 dollar bit of hardware.

I've been a console and a PC gamer for a long time. I don't generally game on the PC any longer, due to time constraints and the fact that I want to sit my lazy ass on the couch and enjoy gaming and media content in one easy to use interface. I have the disposable income to build a kick-ass gaming PC, but I haven't and likely won't because it will be like having a Ferrari sit in my garage unused except on odd weekends.

I'm highly interested in VR and optimistic on VR as a huge industry in the future, but again not really looking to buy a gaming PC (even a low end one) unless there is no other choice. If Microsoft offered an upgraded Xbox that could handle Vive or Rift support? I'd buy that in a second. I don't think I'm the only one.

I've been talking about how the economics of it could work out in late 2017 for ~$500, and how the ecosystem could work out with UWP supporting the entire PC library of Rift/Vive games. But most importantly is the question that Digital Foundry is asking about the PS4K:

Why?

Why a hardware refresh that likely will not be able to support 4K gaming, and so is therefore merely an incremental upgrade for Sony? And my opinion is that they are doing an upgrade to counter Microsoft, who is already publicly talking about such an upgrade, which suggests that they are pretty far along in the planning. So why is Microsoft doing it? Just to boost graphics a bit to "match" PS4? Or to do something more ambitious? We know their plan for UWP, we know their plan for "One Windows"...well Windows already runs the Rift & Vive, which are technically superior to the PSVR. What better message at E3 to counter PSVR? "The Xbox Ultra will fully support the Rift & Vive and all their games. And these other 100 Steam games! Play your favorite PC games on your Xbox, with full cross-platform support."

That's a mic drop if I've ever seen one.

 

[usamaahmad]

I appreciate the forward thinking but this is sort of becoming a mess, I think.

Compatibility between the two Playstation systems (for current games) is critical if this is going to work. PS4 has the lead and to fracture the development now would help to undercut its own sales. Then Sony will try to sell the upcoming Playstation VR which needs an established Playstation instal base. Granted the VR system can probably run on a PS4K type system but again, why create new hardware when it's not necessary just right now?

I do want Sony to make a 4K Playstation, but not just so I can watch 4K content. I would prefer it be something they set aside for a next gen console where they can potentially bring 4K games on a TV and fully immersive VR (rather than what the Playstation VR has, which I think is just 180 deg?).

 

[t_newt]

Cederic[/url]":6sbndki3]I wonder if this will be required for a good quality VR experience.

Yes, and I think this is a clue:

what was 30fps in the current PS4 might be able to play at 60fps.

Sony has already said that they won't allow any VR games to run less than 60fps.

VR games and UHD 4K Blu Ray are just becoming available. Quickly coming out with an upgraded PS4 makes more sense than waiting years for a PS5 and missing the boat on both those technologies.

They can call it the PS4K.

 

[9Blu]

Statistical[/url]":2580qdyx]

ronin_cse[/url]":2580qdyx]I'm gonna go ahead and predict that this will mostly be a 4k video upgrade that also adds the ability to quasi-upscale games to 4k while still rendering everything at 1080p.

I feel like a real upgrade would just fracture the market too much and would cause too much chaos. Who knows though, hopefully we find out soon.

Yeah, agree with this right here. 4K Video upgrade, but not games. Technology and market are both not ready for it, at this time. That being said, I would buy one anyway, just for the ability to put out 4K video to my 4K TV and play my PS4 titles without an additional box.

They wouldn't really need a hardware upgrade to do that. It has HDMI 1.4 which is capable of UHD (4K) @ 30 Hz. Obviously it would require some software support and UI changes but going to an entirely new hardware platform just to add 4K video when existing hardware is capable of that seems extreme.

HDMI 1.4 can't do 4K HDR. It just doesn't have enough bandwidth to support it. I don't see Sony pushing out a UHD video feature without it considering how heavily involved they are in the UHD blu-ray standards.

edit: They will also probably want to support UHD Blu-rays, which will require a hardware upgrade as well.

 

[colin1497]

I'm guessing that we will see a design derived from the Carrizo-L design generation:

- 8 Puma+ cores (instead of 8 jaguar cores)
- maybe GDDR5X memory controller instead of GDDR5 in PS4
- some number of GCN 1.2 feature set compute units/stream processors

Essentially, you'd look at the updated versions of all the off-the-shelf AMD design components that AMD offered up to Sony last time around. While this is a serious project, all of the components of this design are already developed and mature at the current node. It's only "semi" custom. The real question is whether Sony would pay to develop them at 14nm and seriously update the GPU horsepower. My guess is that they won't up front, but that we will see a die shrink in the PS 4.5 generation before the PS 5 is released with a new SOC.

With regard to patches for old games, I wouldn't expect a lot, but you might see some here and there that make small improvements, maybe things developers know just wouldn't quite work on PS4. I wouldn't expect them to do too much on most games. On new games, I expect that PS4.5 becomes the new optimization point and that the PS4 optimizations will be conservative. This would mean that the PS4 never really sees the end of generation optimizations that you normally see late in console's life, and instead get chopped down versions of PS4.5 games going forward.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Rommel102[/url]":jz54qqim]

Akemi[/url]":jz54qqim]

Rommel102[/url]":jz54qqim]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

You keep parroting this without an inkling of just how much of an upgrade would be required to hardware. No console gamer is going to spend $600-$800 on a headset that also required a new $600+ box to use; at that point you may as well just transition to a PC, and that's not what console gamers want. Because you aren't going to be able to support the Vive or Rift at 90 frames per second at the resolution they require with a $300-$400 dollar bit of hardware.

I've been a console and a PC gamer for a long time. I don't generally game on the PC any longer, due to time constraints and the fact that I want to sit my lazy ass on the couch and enjoy gaming and media content in one easy to use interface. I have the disposable income to build a kick-ass gaming PC, but I haven't and likely won't because it will be like having a Ferrari sit in my garage unused except on odd weekends.

I'm highly interested in VR and optimistic on VR as a huge industry in the future, but again not really looking to buy a gaming PC (even a low end one) unless there is no other choice. If Microsoft offered an upgraded Xbox that could handle Vive or Rift support? I'd buy that in a second. I don't think I'm the only one.

I've been talking about how the economics of it could work out in late 2017 for ~$500, and how the ecosystem could work out with UWP supporting the entire PC library of Rift/Vive games. But most importantly is the question that Digital Foundry is asking about the PS4K:

Why?

Why a hardware refresh that likely will not be able to support 4K gaming, and so is therefore merely an incremental upgrade for Sony? And my opinion is that they are doing an upgrade to counter Microsoft, who is already publicly talking about such an upgrade, which suggests that they are pretty far along in the planning. So why is Microsoft doing it? Just to boost graphics a bit to "match" PS4? Or to do something more ambitious? We know their plan for UWP, we know their plan for "One Windows"...well Windows already runs the Rift & Vive, which are technically superior to the PSVR. What better message at E3 to counter PSVR? "The Xbox Ultra will fully support the Rift & Vive and all their games. And these other 100 Steam games! Play your favorite PC games on your Xbox, with full cross-platform support."

That's a mic drop if I've ever seen one.

I'm imagining a future where you bring a PC into your living room
*Thus Spake Zarathustra (Theme from 2001) begins playing*
You set it down next to the TV
The music crescendos as you plug the HDMI cable in to your video card
and reaches the climax as Big Picture Mode starts

 

[afanen01]

I don't know about you guys, but I would definitely buy a PS4.5 (PS4K sounds too rude ) if it offered higher performance, especially if it were backwards compatible to my current game library.

I don't have the time or patience to tweak my PC build everyday, and I use my PS4 for my gaming and media consumption needs, and it excels at this task.

I'd buy an upgrade in a heartbeat, provided it costs £500 or less, and I would like to not have to wait 7 guelling years like it took them to upgrade the PS3.

 

[PuiuCS]

colin1497[/url]":33piadh2]I'm guessing that we will see a design derived from the Carrizo-L design generation:

- 8 Puma+ cores (instead of 8 bobcat cores)
- maybe GDDR5X memory controller instead of GDDR5 in PS4
- some number of GCN 1.2 feature set compute units/stream processors

Essentially, the updated versions of all the off-the-shelf AMD design components that AMD offered up to Sony last time around. While this is a serious project, all of the components of this design are already developed and mature at the current node. It's only "semi" custom. The real question is whether Sony would pay to develop them at 14nm and seriously update the GPU horsepower. My guess is that they won't up front, but that we will see a die shrink in the PS 4.5 generation before the PS 5 is released with a new SOC.

With regard to patches for old games, I wouldn't expect a lot, but you might see some here and there that make small improvements, maybe things developers know just wouldn't quite work on PS4. I wouldn't expect them to do too much on most games. On new games, I expect that PS4.5 becomes the new optimization point and that the PS4 optimizations will be conservative. This would mean that the PS4 never really sees the end of generation optimizations that you normally see late in console's life, and instead get chopped down versions of PS4.5 games going forward.

i doubt they will change the hardware that much. all they need to do is use the 14nm node to to clock the CPU at 2.0 Ghz or higher and try to get 1.7-2x more GPU power from the same architecture. changing the architecture will cause many compatibility problems and headaches for developers. and if they want to keep the costs down upgrading to GDDR5X is not good, a slight bump in bandwidth is enough (or lower latency).

 

[Danrarbc]

9Blu[/url]":1dyrq7qk]

Statistical[/url]":1dyrq7qk]

ronin_cse[/url]":1dyrq7qk]I'm gonna go ahead and predict that this will mostly be a 4k video upgrade that also adds the ability to quasi-upscale games to 4k while still rendering everything at 1080p.

I feel like a real upgrade would just fracture the market too much and would cause too much chaos. Who knows though, hopefully we find out soon.

Yeah, agree with this right here. 4K Video upgrade, but not games. Technology and market are both not ready for it, at this time. That being said, I would buy one anyway, just for the ability to put out 4K video to my 4K TV and play my PS4 titles without an additional box.

They wouldn't really need a hardware upgrade to do that. It has HDMI 1.4 which is capable of UHD (4K) @ 30 Hz. Obviously it would require some software support and UI changes but going to an entirely new hardware platform just to add 4K video when existing hardware is capable of that seems extreme.

HDMI 1.4 can't do 4K HDR. It just doesn't have enough bandwidth to support it. I don't see Sony pushing out a UHD video feature without it considering how heavily involved they are in the UHD blu-ray standards.

edit: They will also probably want to support UHD Blu-rays, which will require a hardware upgrade as well.

Correct. Not to mention if you want to upscale games to 4k you're going to need 60Hz.

 

[Rommel102]

ElectricBlue[/url]":1a4z9ii4]

Rommel102[/url]":1a4z9ii4]

Akemi[/url]":1a4z9ii4]

Rommel102[/url]":1a4z9ii4]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

You keep parroting this without an inkling of just how much of an upgrade would be required to hardware. No console gamer is going to spend $600-$800 on a headset that also required a new $600+ box to use; at that point you may as well just transition to a PC, and that's not what console gamers want. Because you aren't going to be able to support the Vive or Rift at 90 frames per second at the resolution they require with a $300-$400 dollar bit of hardware.

I've been a console and a PC gamer for a long time. I don't generally game on the PC any longer, due to time constraints and the fact that I want to sit my lazy ass on the couch and enjoy gaming and media content in one easy to use interface. I have the disposable income to build a kick-ass gaming PC, but I haven't and likely won't because it will be like having a Ferrari sit in my garage unused except on odd weekends.

I'm highly interested in VR and optimistic on VR as a huge industry in the future, but again not really looking to buy a gaming PC (even a low end one) unless there is no other choice. If Microsoft offered an upgraded Xbox that could handle Vive or Rift support? I'd buy that in a second. I don't think I'm the only one.

I've been talking about how the economics of it could work out in late 2017 for ~$500, and how the ecosystem could work out with UWP supporting the entire PC library of Rift/Vive games. But most importantly is the question that Digital Foundry is asking about the PS4K:

Why?

Why a hardware refresh that likely will not be able to support 4K gaming, and so is therefore merely an incremental upgrade for Sony? And my opinion is that they are doing an upgrade to counter Microsoft, who is already publicly talking about such an upgrade, which suggests that they are pretty far along in the planning. So why is Microsoft doing it? Just to boost graphics a bit to "match" PS4? Or to do something more ambitious? We know their plan for UWP, we know their plan for "One Windows"...well Windows already runs the Rift & Vive, which are technically superior to the PSVR. What better message at E3 to counter PSVR? "The Xbox Ultra will fully support the Rift & Vive and all their games. And these other 100 Steam games! Play your favorite PC games on your Xbox, with full cross-platform support."

That's a mic drop if I've ever seen one.

I'm imagining a future where you bring a PC into your living room
*Thus Spake Zarathustra (Theme from 2001) begins playing*
You set it down next to the TV
The music crescendos as you plug the HDMI cable in to your video card
and reaches the climax as Big Picture Mode starts

Except Big Picture Mode still sucks, and I don't want a keyboard or mouse anywhere near me on the couch.

I'm fine with them bringing some more PC to the Xbox, but I don't want an actual PC connected to my TV. And my wife and kids definitely don't.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Rommel102[/url]":3ot1uyhn]

ElectricBlue[/url]":3ot1uyhn]

Rommel102[/url]":3ot1uyhn]

Akemi[/url]":3ot1uyhn]

Rommel102[/url]":3ot1uyhn]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

You keep parroting this without an inkling of just how much of an upgrade would be required to hardware. No console gamer is going to spend $600-$800 on a headset that also required a new $600+ box to use; at that point you may as well just transition to a PC, and that's not what console gamers want. Because you aren't going to be able to support the Vive or Rift at 90 frames per second at the resolution they require with a $300-$400 dollar bit of hardware.

I've been a console and a PC gamer for a long time. I don't generally game on the PC any longer, due to time constraints and the fact that I want to sit my lazy ass on the couch and enjoy gaming and media content in one easy to use interface. I have the disposable income to build a kick-ass gaming PC, but I haven't and likely won't because it will be like having a Ferrari sit in my garage unused except on odd weekends.

I'm highly interested in VR and optimistic on VR as a huge industry in the future, but again not really looking to buy a gaming PC (even a low end one) unless there is no other choice. If Microsoft offered an upgraded Xbox that could handle Vive or Rift support? I'd buy that in a second. I don't think I'm the only one.

I've been talking about how the economics of it could work out in late 2017 for ~$500, and how the ecosystem could work out with UWP supporting the entire PC library of Rift/Vive games. But most importantly is the question that Digital Foundry is asking about the PS4K:

Why?

Why a hardware refresh that likely will not be able to support 4K gaming, and so is therefore merely an incremental upgrade for Sony? And my opinion is that they are doing an upgrade to counter Microsoft, who is already publicly talking about such an upgrade, which suggests that they are pretty far along in the planning. So why is Microsoft doing it? Just to boost graphics a bit to "match" PS4? Or to do something more ambitious? We know their plan for UWP, we know their plan for "One Windows"...well Windows already runs the Rift & Vive, which are technically superior to the PSVR. What better message at E3 to counter PSVR? "The Xbox Ultra will fully support the Rift & Vive and all their games. And these other 100 Steam games! Play your favorite PC games on your Xbox, with full cross-platform support."

That's a mic drop if I've ever seen one.

I'm imagining a future where you bring a PC into your living room
*Thus Spake Zarathustra (Theme from 2001) begins playing*
You set it down next to the TV
The music crescendos as you plug the HDMI cable in to your video card
and reaches the climax as Big Picture Mode starts

Except Big Picture Mode still sucks, and I don't want a keyboard or mouse anywhere near me on the couch.

That's why you use an Xbox controller, most games work just as good or better on PC than they ever will on an Xbox

 

[Rommel102]

ElectricBlue[/url]":3lwrpay2]

Rommel102[/url]":3lwrpay2]

ElectricBlue[/url]":3lwrpay2]

Rommel102[/url]":3lwrpay2]

Akemi[/url]":3lwrpay2]

Rommel102[/url]":3lwrpay2]I'm calling it a reactionary measure to Xbox One refresh. Sony got wind of it months ago and knows that they cannot be left out of such a move.

Thing is, my call is Xbox Ultra or whatever will include enough graphical horsepower to run Rift/Vive, and support a ton of other UWP PC gaming stuff. Not clear why Sony would need a refresh other than to keep up with the joneses...and maybe to help their own PSVR throw out some better visuals.

Interesting times.

You keep parroting this without an inkling of just how much of an upgrade would be required to hardware. No console gamer is going to spend $600-$800 on a headset that also required a new $600+ box to use; at that point you may as well just transition to a PC, and that's not what console gamers want. Because you aren't going to be able to support the Vive or Rift at 90 frames per second at the resolution they require with a $300-$400 dollar bit of hardware.

I've been a console and a PC gamer for a long time. I don't generally game on the PC any longer, due to time constraints and the fact that I want to sit my lazy ass on the couch and enjoy gaming and media content in one easy to use interface. I have the disposable income to build a kick-ass gaming PC, but I haven't and likely won't because it will be like having a Ferrari sit in my garage unused except on odd weekends.

I'm highly interested in VR and optimistic on VR as a huge industry in the future, but again not really looking to buy a gaming PC (even a low end one) unless there is no other choice. If Microsoft offered an upgraded Xbox that could handle Vive or Rift support? I'd buy that in a second. I don't think I'm the only one.

I've been talking about how the economics of it could work out in late 2017 for ~$500, and how the ecosystem could work out with UWP supporting the entire PC library of Rift/Vive games. But most importantly is the question that Digital Foundry is asking about the PS4K:

Why?

Why a hardware refresh that likely will not be able to support 4K gaming, and so is therefore merely an incremental upgrade for Sony? And my opinion is that they are doing an upgrade to counter Microsoft, who is already publicly talking about such an upgrade, which suggests that they are pretty far along in the planning. So why is Microsoft doing it? Just to boost graphics a bit to "match" PS4? Or to do something more ambitious? We know their plan for UWP, we know their plan for "One Windows"...well Windows already runs the Rift & Vive, which are technically superior to the PSVR. What better message at E3 to counter PSVR? "The Xbox Ultra will fully support the Rift & Vive and all their games. And these other 100 Steam games! Play your favorite PC games on your Xbox, with full cross-platform support."

That's a mic drop if I've ever seen one.

I'm imagining a future where you bring a PC into your living room
*Thus Spake Zarathustra (Theme from 2001) begins playing*
You set it down next to the TV
The music crescendos as you plug the HDMI cable in to your video card
and reaches the climax as Big Picture Mode starts

Except Big Picture Mode still sucks, and I don't want a keyboard or mouse anywhere near me on the couch.

That's why you use an Xbox controller, most games work just as good or better on PC than they ever will on an Xbox

Oh, can you turn on your PC with an Xbox controller? Can you open steam and select a game to play with an Xbox Controller? Can you switch to Netflix with a controller, or seamlessly transition to live TV?

Yes, I know there are duct-tape methods to do some of this but the experience of a console versus a PC hooked up to a TV is night and day.