KBG29 said:
A stand alone PS5 at $1,000 would be a terrible decision. A PS5 as part of Sony's Elevated Standards line, that sits as an enthusiast level option, along side a $399.99 PS5 Basic, and a $599.99 PS5 Pro, that would be a worthwhile market. I have said this a thousand times. I don't get why Sony sells enthusiast level products in their Walkman Line, Xperia Line, and Bravia Line, yet we still don't have an enthusiast level PlayStation. PlayStation sells more than the rest of these products combined, and is actually a profitable business, with a very loyal fan base. If any product Sony sells should have an enthusiast level offering, it is PlayStation. With games being built with dynamic frame rates, and resolution, needing nothing more than additional power to achieve locked performance (as seen with non enhanced games on PS4 Pro, XBO S, and XBO X), you can not convince me that there are not a few million PlayStation Fanatics out their that would not plop down the cash for a PS5 that could deliver uncompromised performance.
One Day!!! |
It's because you ignore it every time it's explained to you. Unlike their Walkman, Xperia and Bravia, the people making content for the Playstation have to develop for each and every performance specification. Just like the PS4 Pro, everyone besides Sony and other rare exceptions would support this high performance console in the most minimal way they can get away with and nothing more.
Console video games don't scale the way you believe they do. If they did, the Nintendo Switch would be getting pretty much every multi-platform third party title, or at least ones that use multi-platform focused engines like unity. But you don't see that, do you? Developers have to put in the same special effort they always did. It doesn't appear to be any meaningful gains in development to port a PS4 game to the Switch than there was to port a PS3 game to the Vita. How do you explain that if " games [are] being built with dynamic frame rates, and resolution, needing nothing more than additional power to achieve locked performance" the opposite should be true, shouldn't it?
You're more likely to see Sony drop the pro model next time around than you are to see them make a super high performance model. The Pro experiment was not a success. Third parties have largely ignored it. Sony had to figure out a way to do additional post-processing to render in 4K while emulating regular PS4 functionality because third parties weren't supporting it any more than they had to. You know that"enhancement" feature actually runs games poorer than they would if developers actually took the time to support the PS4 pro properly, right?
