Quantcast
Sony is focusing on Hard-Core Gamers for PS5

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony is focusing on Hard-Core Gamers for PS5

asqarkabab said:
More brainless shootbangs incoming :(

Sony doesn't really invest in too many shooters. Most of their 1st party games spread along a wide selection of genres.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Around the Network

It's going to be very interesting to see what the sales are going to look like for the PS5 compared to its predecessor. It seems like the industry is going to be on the decline in favor of more mobile counterparts and gaming as a service, but hopefully Sony can use their dollars to draw more attention to keep traditional gaming on a television set relevant. They are our last hope.

(I added that last part for dramatic effect.)



wow, didn't know that sony will stop producing consoles and instead will enter the PC-market. :O

but PS5 seems to be a strange code word for that...



Train wreck said:
asqarkabab said:
More brainless shootbangs incoming :(

I doubt it, Sony's days of chasing Microsoft are long over.  That period from 2006-mid 2011 won't return.

I hope it 



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

I Hate REMASTERS

I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS

drkohler said:
Pemalite said:

Once you hit 1GB of used capacity on each chip, then you can only start filling up the 2GB chips...

And this is when you switch from clamshell mode to non-clamshell mode on the 2GByte chips on both channels, putting the 1GByte chips onto high impedance.

As you say, it is really very complicated implementing such shenanigans and I doubt they are going to implement this. 

I see either 16Gbyte on a 256bit bus or 24Gbyte on a 384bit bus, leaning towards the 16GByte solution which is obviously much cheaper. Also with the "superfast ssd" solution combined with improved memory compression technology leads me to think 16GByte will be enough memory for a console.

Pemalite said:
drkohler said:

And this is when you switch from clamshell mode to non-clamshell mode on the 2GByte chips on both channels, putting the 1GByte chips onto high impedance.

As you say, it is really very complicated implementing such shenanigans and I doubt they are going to implement this. 

I see either 16Gbyte on a 256bit bus or 24Gbyte on a 384bit bus, leaning towards the 16GByte solution which is obviously much cheaper. Also with the "superfast ssd" solution combined with improved memory compression technology leads me to think 16GByte will be enough memory for a console.

Microsoft's E3 trailer shows us that Scarlett is possibly using a mix of 1GB and 2GB chips.
Digital Foundry mentions it here even: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-project-scarlett-spec-analysis

Whether they employ a 256bit or 384bit bus remains to be seen... And again, I am not asserting anything as fact, just hypothesizing on possibilities.

As for the SSD... That isn't a replacement for Ram.

With the recent "Flute" leak for PS5 I'm pretty sure I know what Microsoft is doing mixing 1 and 2GB Vram. As you 2 said, you can't mix those memory types and run them at full speed. So the only solution that make the most sense is 18GB of VRAM on a 256-bit bus, basically you use 8 2GB Gddr6 chips which give you 16GB of vram and run them at full speed, than you just add 2 1GB ggdr6 chips to those memory controllers and run them at slow speed and use this for the OS. This give 16GB Vram for games at 448 GB/s memory bandwidth speed and 112 GB/s with 2GB Vram for the OS. With a SSD they probably won't need more than 2GB for the OS.

Second solution I come up with which is unlikely is a 320-bit bus with 12GB Vram, this gives 560 GB/s memory speed, you use 8 1GB vram chips + 2 2GB Vram. You can use something called FLEX MODE and use all 10 Gddr6 chips and run 10GB Vram at full speed and rest 2GB Vram at slow speed. Which gives 10GB available for games and 2GB for the OS. Only reason I see Microsoft doing this is either Gddr6 chips are very expensive or they doing a powerful gpu with low amount of memory but as I said the first solution is very likely what microsoft is doing.



"Donald Trump is the greatest president that god has ever created" - Trumpstyle

6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

Around the Network
Pemalite said:
Azzanation said:

Okay so than we can safely agree on and say Halo is in decline on the physical sales front only but not as an IP since current Halo is making more money than it even has before?

The data is undeniable at this point that sales as they are tracked currently (Which may/may not include digital) and are thus represented in the data points provided are certainly in the decline.

Azzanation said:

The IP is not in decline much like many would like to believe however physical sales is in decline ironically since we move closer and closer to a heavy digital future. But lets ignore the millions of digital sales here and just count physical charts.

Even if we were to assume that Halo 5 had a 50/40 split of Physical/Digital sales, it's still going to come up short... Plus we don't actually know if the tracking encompasses digital or not in any of the data tracking already.

Azzanation said:

The IP is not in decline much like many would like to believe however physical sales is in decline ironically since we move closer and closer to a heavy digital future.

The games themselves with the data we have currently have been on a sales decline.
Digital tracking is another kettle fish entirely...

Azzanation said:

Also just to add, physical sales does not determine a IP decline. Halo as an IP has most likely grown bigger and bigger through the years. Don't be surprised if Halo Infinite sells less copies to Halo 5 but break a Halo profit record next gen. Because like this gen pushed digital sales heavily, next gen will be pushing not only digital sales, but game services (Game Pass) and Streaming services (xCloud)

Halo 3 did $300 million in it's first week.
Halo 5 did $400 million in it's first week.

But adjusting for inflation that would be the equivalent of $370.54 million for Halo 3... So not that much of a step up.
But where Halo 5 has an advantage is the amount of cash Microsoft has managed to spin via microtransactions, which muddies the profits water.

Either way, Halo 5's multiplayer population hasn't been retained... And Halo: Infinite's success is unlikely to be based on any of the other games prior sales precedents, thus it may outsell Halo 5 by a massive margin, especially as it gets a PC, Xbox One and Scarlett release... Provided it reviews well, Halo 5 had some detractions afterall.





From what we know we are comparing Halo 3 SW revenue to Halo5 SW+HW revenue. There is no way that two games with very close price tags one selling 3x the other would have similar revenue. Plus if we are talking profits, gen7 budget of Halo3 was smaller than Halo 5 and X1 cost would severely eat up the profit margin of that 400M.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994