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

Forums - Sony - Rumour: PS4 to feature AMD GPU a gen ahead of nextbox

VGKing on 28 March 2012
Skeeuk said:

IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY

fail move otherwise, if chipset is completly different could they not emulate?


LOL! Of course not. They can't even properly emulate PS2 games yet. It has to be done on a game by game basis.



Around the Network
VGKing on 28 March 2012
Joelcool7 said:
Sony appears to have learnt absolutely nothing from the PS3 if this console is more powerful then the Nextbox anymore powerful then .5x. Sony does not need a super power console supporting such high resolutions is a future proofing attempt but today how many consumers have these TV's? 1080p was barely supported last generation and that was with 1080p already becoming the standard. Retailers were already selling 1080p TV's as the new standard. The lack of 1080p support didn't adversely effect any of the consoles even towards the end when 1080p is now very common. Do we need such high resolution capabilities? Will consumers in large enough numbers have the TV's to actually play the games in such high resolutions?

The power capabilities are very very impressive. But will developers fork over the needed R&D budget to make state of the art software for the console? How expensive will software have to become to give developers a chance at breaking even let alone turning a profit?

On the flip side I always predicted Sony would slightly beat Microsoft power wise. I expected a nextbox roughly 6x the power of 360 and the PS4 being 8-10x the power. But when I hear Epic stating that the Nextbox is running Samaritan at full power which Epic stated was 10x the power it scares me. Then Epic stated Unreal4 will make Samaritan look like a piece of shit.

How powerful are these new machines going to be? How expensive will the software need to cost?

Then Sony not including backwards compatibility again. How good did that work out with PS3? I remember tons of complaints about the PSOne software not running on PS3's and PS2 software not working well. When backwards compatibility was cancelled millions were royally pissed. I know employees at retailers who began advising people to buy 360's because they had at least some backwards compatibility.

I have no doubt if PS3's backwards compatibility had been fixed and implemented at an affordable price the hardware would have sold better. PS2's would have remained on store shelves far longer and software sales would have been maintained.

Then this whole locking the software crap. I did see this coming I suggested making the software playable on up to five machines but not locking it to a single PSN account. I can see the advantages to linking it with PSN it allows the customer to download the title to the hard drive meaning scratching the disk or losing it won't matter. However what if I want to bring the game to a friends house, I need to put my PSN account on his console? If I chose to lend the game out to other friends they will also need my PSN, like hell I want that. Now the question would be how.many hardware units will it be playable on? One hardware unit with my PSN or five like DLC is allowed.

Either way linking the games play ability to a PSN account is suicide. At least if it was playable on five pieces of hardware not linked at all to PSN at least then consumers could lend out the game and play it on other hardware while also preventing used sales.

But either way its risky. However Microsoft is supposedly implementing similar tech so it would not surprise me.

But if Microsoft and Sony both put an end to used game sales in any fashion it gives Nintendo a massive advantage. To my knowledge Nintendo is not implementing such features. GameStop would promote Nintendo at all costs it would benefit them more. GameStop makes so much money off of used games and they would give Nintendo anything Nintendo wanted to keep up the sales. We'd see retailers that sell used games giving Nintendo twice the shelf space the advertising and the retailers would promote the shit out of Nintendo.

Which would be bad for Sony. Especially if the hardware costs are significantly higher then Nintendo. Then if software costs are driven higher and Nintendo not only has cheaper new software but also used games Sony is screwed.

The economy is not doing well and while their will always be consumers for high end content. That market is far smaller and Nintendo will be able to produce high quality software at affordable prices.

If this is true I deem Sony will have to launch the console at 399.99$-450$ tops. Game prices will have to cost between 69.99$-79.99$ higher will make the software to expensive for the majority of consumers. While real gamers will be willing to part with 100$ a game they are not the average consumer. At 79.99$ game publishers and studios simply won't be able to create state of the art content taking advantage of the hardware. Every single title being released on the PS4 would be a risk. A title would have to sell 2-4 million copies to break even or be a success at the prices of development on a next generation system. That is simply to high for most developers and publishers.

This is bad news for the consumers and developers. I suspect THQ, Atari, Majesco, Sega and many other publishers simply won't be able to take such high risks. Ubisoft, Activision, EAGames and maybe Take-2 will be the only big publishers able to support the new hardware fully out of the gate. Which will be exactly what happened when PS3 launched very few publishers were able to support the hardware and big guns like Midway died trying!


yes they will have to price that high if the used games market keeps being left alone.
If Sony and Microsoft both implent this universal online pass-like system, it means publisher will make a lot of money from used games.(a lot more than they made this gen) Which means there is no need to price games at $70-$80. I know I wouldn't buy any games that expensive.



VGKing on 28 March 2012
Solid-Stark said:
VGKing said:
Solid-Stark said:
So it begins, PS4 will actually come out
The resolution part makes this rumor seem false though, and that it wont be backwards compatible.


How does it make it false? You do know the new iPad resolution is beyond 1080p right?  2048×1536 to be exact.

No B/C isn't a surprise. The PS3 is hard to work with and the only way to have B/C would be to put the PS3 CPU and GPU into the PS4 which would raise the cost by $50-$100. I say good riddance.

Come to think of it, I withdraw that part of my statement. Reason is, the PS3 can output 1080p but no game runs native on it. So I guess the PS4 can output that resolution but It wont have games running native at that res. Bottomline, the majority of PS4's will be connected to 720/1080 tv's anyway.


Wipeout HD does....I'm sure a lot of other PSN games do as well.



VGKing on 28 March 2012
disolitude said:

Here is a way for Microsoft and Sony to sell gazillion next gen consoles and come out at affordable price point and still satisfy the power/performance hungry users.

Launch Xbox 720/PS4 with lower tier hardware and 299 price point. All current gen and next gen games are compatible with it, with next gen games running 30 fps and 720p.

However allow enthusiasts to SLI/Crossfire 2 their consoles together for hefty performance boost. Making next gen games 1080p and up to 60 FPS with other goodies like dual screen support.
You want power, fork out 600 bucks and buy 2 consoles. Problem solved.


UGH. No. That whole point of a console is to avoid stuff like that. There's a reason PC gaming isn't mainstream..its too complicated and you never know if your computer is up to date and able to run that new game at good speeds.



VGKing on 28 March 2012
zero129 said:
I think alot of them rumors are false, no way does sony want to launch another $600 Console. Look how doing that helped the PS3..


No they don't. 

This rumor doesn't mention anything about price. 
PS4 price will definitely be premium but it won't go that high.



Around the Network
Deoz on 28 March 2012
VGKing said:
Joelcool7 said:
Sony appears to have learnt absolutely nothing from the PS3 if this console is more powerful then the Nextbox anymore powerful then .5x. Sony does not need a super power console supporting such high resolutions is a future proofing attempt but today how many consumers have these TV's? 1080p was barely supported last generation and that was with 1080p already becoming the standard. Retailers were already selling 1080p TV's as the new standard. The lack of 1080p support didn't adversely effect any of the consoles even towards the end when 1080p is now very common. Do we need such high resolution capabilities? Will consumers in large enough numbers have the TV's to actually play the games in such high resolutions?

The power capabilities are very very impressive. But will developers fork over the needed R&D budget to make state of the art software for the console? How expensive will software have to become to give developers a chance at breaking even let alone turning a profit?

On the flip side I always predicted Sony would slightly beat Microsoft power wise. I expected a nextbox roughly 6x the power of 360 and the PS4 being 8-10x the power. But when I hear Epic stating that the Nextbox is running Samaritan at full power which Epic stated was 10x the power it scares me. Then Epic stated Unreal4 will make Samaritan look like a piece of shit.

How powerful are these new machines going to be? How expensive will the software need to cost?

Then Sony not including backwards compatibility again. How good did that work out with PS3? I remember tons of complaints about the PSOne software not running on PS3's and PS2 software not working well. When backwards compatibility was cancelled millions were royally pissed. I know employees at retailers who began advising people to buy 360's because they had at least some backwards compatibility.

I have no doubt if PS3's backwards compatibility had been fixed and implemented at an affordable price the hardware would have sold better. PS2's would have remained on store shelves far longer and software sales would have been maintained.

Then this whole locking the software crap. I did see this coming I suggested making the software playable on up to five machines but not locking it to a single PSN account. I can see the advantages to linking it with PSN it allows the customer to download the title to the hard drive meaning scratching the disk or losing it won't matter. However what if I want to bring the game to a friends house, I need to put my PSN account on his console? If I chose to lend the game out to other friends they will also need my PSN, like hell I want that. Now the question would be how.many hardware units will it be playable on? One hardware unit with my PSN or five like DLC is allowed.

Either way linking the games play ability to a PSN account is suicide. At least if it was playable on five pieces of hardware not linked at all to PSN at least then consumers could lend out the game and play it on other hardware while also preventing used sales.

But either way its risky. However Microsoft is supposedly implementing similar tech so it would not surprise me.

But if Microsoft and Sony both put an end to used game sales in any fashion it gives Nintendo a massive advantage. To my knowledge Nintendo is not implementing such features. GameStop would promote Nintendo at all costs it would benefit them more. GameStop makes so much money off of used games and they would give Nintendo anything Nintendo wanted to keep up the sales. We'd see retailers that sell used games giving Nintendo twice the shelf space the advertising and the retailers would promote the shit out of Nintendo.

Which would be bad for Sony. Especially if the hardware costs are significantly higher then Nintendo. Then if software costs are driven higher and Nintendo not only has cheaper new software but also used games Sony is screwed.

The economy is not doing well and while their will always be consumers for high end content. That market is far smaller and Nintendo will be able to produce high quality software at affordable prices.

If this is true I deem Sony will have to launch the console at 399.99$-450$ tops. Game prices will have to cost between 69.99$-79.99$ higher will make the software to expensive for the majority of consumers. While real gamers will be willing to part with 100$ a game they are not the average consumer. At 79.99$ game publishers and studios simply won't be able to create state of the art content taking advantage of the hardware. Every single title being released on the PS4 would be a risk. A title would have to sell 2-4 million copies to break even or be a success at the prices of development on a next generation system. That is simply to high for most developers and publishers.

This is bad news for the consumers and developers. I suspect THQ, Atari, Majesco, Sega and many other publishers simply won't be able to take such high risks. Ubisoft, Activision, EAGames and maybe Take-2 will be the only big publishers able to support the new hardware fully out of the gate. Which will be exactly what happened when PS3 launched very few publishers were able to support the hardware and big guns like Midway died trying!


yes they will have to price that high if the used games market keeps being left alone.
If Sony and Microsoft both implent this universal online pass-like system, it means publisher will make a lot of money from used games.(a lot more than they made this gen) Which means there is no need to price games at $70-$80. I know I wouldn't buy any games that expensive.

I doubt used game's buyers are going to buy games at their initial price. If they are buying used games its because they dont have or are not willing to spend that much money, if used games dont exist, we wont see them buying new games because no pption left, they just wont buy them at all or will wait until the prices drop a lot. This wont change a lot how much money publishers will make, will juts make retailer lose a source of profit.



disolitude on 28 March 2012
VGKing said:
disolitude said:

Here is a way for Microsoft and Sony to sell gazillion next gen consoles and come out at affordable price point and still satisfy the power/performance hungry users.

Launch Xbox 720/PS4 with lower tier hardware and 299 price point. All current gen and next gen games are compatible with it, with next gen games running 30 fps and 720p.

However allow enthusiasts to SLI/Crossfire 2 their consoles together for hefty performance boost. Making next gen games 1080p and up to 60 FPS with other goodies like dual screen support.

You want power, fork out 600 bucks and buy 2 consoles. Problem solved.


UGH. No. That whole point of a console is to avoid stuff like that. There's a reason PC gaming isn't mainstream..its too complicated and you never know if your computer is up to date and able to run that new game at good speeds.

There is nothing complicated about it.

Nintendo 64 had the RAM cart which you was essentially the same thing as did Sega Saturn. An add on which you connect to make existing games look better.



Viper1 on 28 March 2012
disolitude said:
VGKing said:
disolitude said:

Here is a way for Microsoft and Sony to sell gazillion next gen consoles and come out at affordable price point and still satisfy the power/performance hungry users.

Launch Xbox 720/PS4 with lower tier hardware and 299 price point. All current gen and next gen games are compatible with it, with next gen games running 30 fps and 720p.

However allow enthusiasts to SLI/Crossfire 2 their consoles together for hefty performance boost. Making next gen games 1080p and up to 60 FPS with other goodies like dual screen support.

You want power, fork out 600 bucks and buy 2 consoles. Problem solved.


UGH. No. That whole point of a console is to avoid stuff like that. There's a reason PC gaming isn't mainstream..its too complicated and you never know if your computer is up to date and able to run that new game at good speeds.

There is nothing complicated about it.

Nintendo 64 had the RAM cart which you was essentially the same thing as did Sega Saturn. An add on which you connect to make existing games look better.

Adding a RAM pack is one thing.   Dual linking 2 consoles to increase performance is a totally different beast.    The whole master/slave thing would be one problem.    Opening up console A at the commands from console B is asking for all kinds of hacking problems.    Programming your game to allow for it just doubles your QA load and expect far more patches than we already deal with.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

usrevenge on 28 March 2012
Deoz said:
I doubt they will go selling at loss again, specially with their situation right now.


of course they will sell at a loss.. every console does except nintendo and that is because they are usually 8 years behind the current tech.
the reason PS3 was so expensive was the terrible cell processor and R&D of Cell, a PS3 at launch was probably worth $1000 in parts. in fact the US government bought hundreds of them to make a super computer because it was the cheap, hence selling at a loss.
they make up the loss if people buy enough games, which for the most part didn't happen for ps3.

will ps4 be $600? no, unless they have some super awsome combo package, probably the system 2 controllers year of PSN+ and 2 games and large HDD... it won't be.
i called it now, most expensive console will be under $500 unless there is an ultra premium package.



crissindahouse on 28 March 2012
VGKing said:
disolitude said:

Here is a way for Microsoft and Sony to sell gazillion next gen consoles and come out at affordable price point and still satisfy the power/performance hungry users.

Launch Xbox 720/PS4 with lower tier hardware and 299 price point. All current gen and next gen games are compatible with it, with next gen games running 30 fps and 720p.

However allow enthusiasts to SLI/Crossfire 2 their consoles together for hefty performance boost. Making next gen games 1080p and up to 60 FPS with other goodies like dual screen support.
You want power, fork out 600 bucks and buy 2 consoles. Problem solved.


UGH. No. That whole point of a console is to avoid stuff like that. There's a reason PC gaming isn't mainstream..its too complicated and you never know if your computer is up to date and able to run that new game at good speeds.


here in germany pc gaming is mainstream. i would say it's as big as playstation and xbox together if i think about pc games as retail and downloads. most of the people i know play the "big" games on their pc. it was always like this here. and i think in some other european and asian countries as well.

it's very small compared to console gaming in usa and some other countires but here it is mainstream like console gaming. gaming as whole is smaller here because it doesn't have such a good reputation because of some stupid politicians but pc-gaming doesn't have a disadvantage here because it's complicated or whatever. ok people who only play wii fit wouldn't play games on pc but they wouldn't play with xbox 360 or playstation 3 as well.

the only reason many of my friends have a console is because some games aren't on pc and because the pc market did suffer a lot because of huge console sales in uk/usa/japan.