By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
archbrix said:

Wow, rough day today? Your last paragraph is quite ironic considering you accuse others of childish behavior, not to mention irrelevant to my point, so there’s no need to address it any further.

Getting to the part of your post germane to the issue, if developers start making games run stable based on Pro specs, the base consoles may take performance hits that otherwise could have been avoided. For example if I remember correctly, Resident Evil 2 ran solid at 60fps on PS4 Pro, but struggled on the base model. I don’t remember if the frame rate was unlocked or what (someone will know) but I do remember Digital Foundry or someone showing that the game’s performance on base PS4 was not good as far as 60fps gameplay and that does matter to me.

On the other hand, Resident Evil 7 before that had no problem running well on base PS4 at 60fps; PS4 pro had just released a couple of months earlier at that point. It makes you wonder if Capcom could have optimized RE2 better or changed it up a bit to run flawlessly on the base PS4 if a higher spec model didn’t exist. Meanwhile, Resident Evil 8 on PS5 gives us the option for a glorious experience at 60fps from the start. It’s like having the Pro model right away, which is why I don’t personally think Pro models are really necessary this time.

If it was strictly just higher pixel counts or fancier ray tracing with a Pro model, then I don’t want to take away people’s choices if that’s what the market wants, and like someone else mentioned, Sony could opt to treat it strictly like an enthusiast model. But companies won’t always stick to that; I do seem to recall several games DF showed where the PS4 Pro and XOX versions appeared to be the targets for stability itself and not just higher resolution.  That is where it could affect me and the games I want.

So I stand by my original post: While I’m all for people having choices, I do still prefer the more traditional method of a universal system that ages gracefully.

That ship has already sailed with VRR :( There are very few games already that have locked 30 or 60 fps modes. I rather spend another $500 on a pro console than replace my TV again. I'll keep my quality tv, not gonna replace it with a budget hdmi 2.1 monitor or tv, while a pro will also improve visuals on PSVR2.

About RE7 and RE8, there were made to run at locked frame rates, 60fps, so they can work in VR. You can thank VR for stable performance :)

What system before pro models aged gracefully? Maybe you have rose tinted glasses, yet ps3 and 360 generation ended in sub 720p resolutions with frequent frame drops down to the low twenties. SotC on PS2 ran terribly (didn't take away the fun though), Skyrim on PS3 was practically unplayable and had to be restarted every 20 minutes.

Game development moves on, pro model or not. People want more from games all the time, developers keep competing on graphical fidelity. A pro model is actually a nice alternative to early adopting. Go from pro model to pro model and you already have a whole library of games to play for a lot less, and are guaranteed good performance during the next cross-gen period.

@JackHandy I would agree with you had I not just played RE8 on PSVR2 and still playing it. All the innovation, big leaps, excitement (and experimentation mishaps) are in VR nowadays. PSVR1 to PSVR2 feels like going from PS1 to PS3, VHS to DVD. Still so much room for improvement, already knocking my socks off in nearly every new game I try.

It's not just diminishing returns that dampen the 'excitement' in flat screen gaming. It's more playing it safe with 100 million dollar budgets. Repeat what worked with minor iterations. A flop in VR with its small user base is far easier to get over than a 100 million dollar AAA game flopping. Indies are the place to find new game ideas, AAA games are for pretty graphics :/

Last edited by SvennoJ - on 19 March 2023