| RolStoppable said:
Let's compare: Old console cycle - Buy a new console every 6 years. Old - Get roughly 6 years of developers focusing on the console you bought. That's for consumers, but developers won't be happy that they basically have to work with a new hardware configuration for every game they make (assuming a three year development cycle which isn't farfetched in today's AAA industry). So who is going to benefit from this? Sony, as long as they sell the hardware at a profit. Gamers who don't mind to buy new hardware every 3 years because they want the best console graphics. I am all for it that Sony does hardware refreshes every 3 years. |
Here is how I see it.
When sony made the PS4. they expected it to be supported primarily for 6yrs.
The Neo is more future proofing than anything else (for now). But it's also a ay if killing two birds with one stone. They would have done a hardware revision anyway (the slim) but why not do that and future proof in the process.
the last 3yrs of the PS4 primary console life, the Neo just runs all games marginally better than the stock PS4. And those people that buy it are going to be OK with this. During this period the PS4 gets phased out and the Neo bcomes the primary console. So about 18 months before neo2 is released, you won't even see the PS4 available for sale anymore.
When neo2 is launched, the cycle changes. Now neo is the primary console. Neo 2 gets games running slightly better since it's hardware is under utilized. and the PS4 is now only aable to run games released at that time at 900p/720p with dialed back effects...etc. But remember, at this point the PS4 is a 6+ year old console.
By the time the neo3 is released, neo2 becomes the primary and so on. But at this point, due to whatever APIs Sony implents, the PS4 will still be able.o run Neo3 games.
