Pemalite said:
AsGryffynn said:
Native 4k is confirmed. As is the very likely pricing of $400...
Embedded systems drop in price monthly...
Finally, we will have Fallout 4 VR...
|
Scorpio and Playstation 4 Pro can do 4k and will do 4k in various titles. Scorpio will have more of them.
The Xbox One and the Playstation 4 could do 4k as well, albeit limited to 30hz due to the HDMI specification.
StokedUp said:
Except the reality is, to get this sort of performance and visuals, it's not going to cost $400/£350 for 90% of gamers,. Most of them don't have a capable TV. Sadly and unfortunately it's the reason I've decided no longer to get one. I have a Samsung 55inch full HD tv but it isn't 4K or HDR so it's completely pointless get a PS4 pro. And there's no way I'm spend £350/$400 on a console to have to spend another £600/$700 on a new TV
|
You will still see a significant increase in visual fidelity, there is more to graphics than just resolution that your display outputs.
Besides, the console will *always* render the game at the same resolution regardless of what your display resolution is, then the scaler will downscale or upscale it from there.
If your display has a lower resolution than the games rendered resolution, then the console will downscale it... This isn't something that is to be understated and pushed away... This is actually how many forms of anti-aliasing fundamentally works.. And is how "Bullshots" are created.
Intrinsic said:
Now anyone that takes the time to think about that will at the very least admit that the more pixels being rendered, the harder it will be to tell the difference between resolutions. Take a 4k smartphone and a 1440p smartphone at the same size. It's impossible to tell the difference in resolution. The same applies with TVs.
Hence I find it funny when I read people talk about the PS4pro's faux4k (which in truth has it rendering more native pixels than 1440p) as if the IQ difference between it and native 4k is like night and day. Ah well, I guess we have to quibble about something don't we?
|
The PS4 Pro's "fake" 4k gives a slightly better result than 1600P in the real world. (Aka. 2560x1600)
It still falls short of 4k. It will always fall short of true 4k, it's not meant as a 4k replacement, it's meant to help get around the Playstation 4's real hardware limitations.
As for smartphones... Not an accurate representation of the argument here.
And here is why:
yvanjean said:
Too bad I just bought a new 1080p TV two years ago. It means nothing until you have a 4K TV at home.
Then again Sony is probably downplaying the benefits of PS4 Pro on 1080p TV, as to not alienate PS4 and PS4 Slim owners. We will know soon enough. |
You will still see benefits. In some cases massive increases, depending on how much work a developer puts into the assets.
Ruler said:
The PS4 Pro 4K upscale rendering is almost equal according to DF its just when you move around with your body you can see a difference like with 3D glasses
|
No it's not.
Digital Foundry found it impressive. It didn't find it to be on equal footing with native 4k.
Checkerboard is used to help get around the consoles inadequate hardware... And for the most part it does a good job at that.
But if you have ever played a PC game at true 4k, you will know it's got it's limitations.
SvennoJ said:
From watching many blu-rays I can say from experience that there is a big difference between movies shot at 6K or 65mm and those shot at 3K or 35mm, all downsampled to 1080p. The picture quality of The Revenant on standard blu-ray is amazing. Supersampling will do the same for games on 1080p.
|
It's even more pronounced when rendering a game though, aliasing isn't as big of an issue for films. :)
Lawlight said:
There's no way you can possibly spin PS+ as a negative. Just look at the games provided in the past year. Surely there's more than $50 worth of games in there. Just Yakuza 5 should be enough to redeem what you pay.
|
The fact it's a pay wall and you don't keep the games when your subscription runs out can be regarded as a negative.
With that said, the Xbox isn't much better as that also has a paywall and you don't get to keep your Xbox One games, only Xbox 360.
That said, it's not an issue for most, but it can be seen as a negative.
AsGryffynn said:
You do know the difference in price between GPUs is negligible, yes?
Wallow all you can, Scorpio superiority is undeniable. It's here to crush the competition... Of course, if you want to mention the release date advantage, go ahead. I am sure it won't last forever.
|
Outside of PC gaming, Scorpio will be the platform with the best graphics.
The delay in it's hardware release could also mean more development time for the games to be released on that hardware, but we will need to see how the cards fall when that box releases.
I'm of mixed opinion about it. I don't like the fact that console hardware is starting to fragment... But I am also liking the fact that the baseline is going to be bolstered which benefits the PC and graphics in general. Less stagnation. Yippy.
|
