I'm not sure either, but it makes more "sense". After all 2*1920=3840 and 2*1080=2160 so 3840x2160 is 4*1920x1080.

And as far as I know it's not that hard expensive to make it compatible. The HDMI 1.4 spec supports 4K, so any device with an HDMI 1.4 should be able to work.

I doubt the mass market is ready for another new TV after HD Ready, Full HD, 3D. Of course you need a new BluRay Player to watch a handful of movies that support this resolution, and a new HDMI cable as well.

All of that for something 99% of the people can't see an improvement. Of course the PS4 would have at least a $600 price tag and we all know how that worked out. Sony can't afford to lose 2-3 billion USD with one single product in times like these.

4k has two different meanings if i'm not wrong^^

quad full high definition (qfhd) with 3,840 x 2,160 or full aperture 4,096 x 3,112

it's called 4k because it's around that in pixels as horizontal not because it's 4x as much as 1080p.

Yeah. 1080p and Blu-ray hasn't even got its definite break-through yet. Today, 6 years after the PS3 was released most people still watch their content in SD. DVD's still outsell Blurays and many TV channels don't broadcast in HD and when they do, you often have to pay extra for HD, even in tech-advanced countries like Sweden.

calling this a fail is a fail itself. this is just video output. just the ability. and noone knows when people will start to buy 4K televisions. sony has to make sure their playstation4 is a good choice as a blurayplayer in 7 or 8 years. and don't think this feature will make the ps4 significant more expensive. no game will run at this resolution, but you won't have to buy another piece of hardware once 4K becomes state of the art.

There filming The Hobbit Trilogy in 4K so i believe this tbh. Games not so much but blu-rays.. yes

Even if true it'll probably be about movies alone or maybe some cheap upscaling for games like the X360 does with 1080p. Someone blew it out of proportion.

Do PC gamers even play games at 4K currently?

Personally, I wouldn't argue that people can't see the difference but would generally find the trade-off between 720p@30fps and 1080p@60fps unacceptable ...

Using the Wii U as a base system, if you launched a system that could maintain the same quality of graphics as the Wii U can output at 720p@30fps it would probably be released 1 to 2 years later, cost $100 to $200 more, be significantly larger and use far more energy.

At the same time if the hardware is constant you can render far more polygons, with far higher texture detail, with more effects that are more advanced at 720p@30fps than is possible at 1080p@60fps; and there would be a substantial downgrade in graphical quality from rendering at the higher resolution.

Before everyone gets all worked up this is for video play back only. Games will be in 1080.