RVDondaPC said:
dahuman said:
RVDondaPC said:
dahuman said:
RVDondaPC said: If the PS4 supports 4K, then it would make sense that it is a high end spec console like the PS3 was at launch. And as a result will cost more money. But when it does get ready to launch it makes much more sense for Sony to support the PS4 with it's big hitters rather than make another Uncharted/Killzone/Gran Turismo for the PS3. The reason is that the PS3 now has the install base to sell and survive on third party games. GTA V, Modern Warefare 4, Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell and Rainbow 6: Patriots, Fifa 14, Madden 14, Dragon Age III, and many others are more than enough to keep the userbase playing games. But since it's Sony's job to sell hardware and third party publishers to sell games, Sony is going to have to put full support behind the PS4. Even though Uncharted is my favorite PS3 series, I don't think it would be smart for them to rely on it in the early stages of the PS4. Not because the game wouldn't sell, but because it's a short linear single player game and the multiplayer is a secondary focus to the majority of it's fans. But because there will undoubtedly be not very many games for each user's tastes, they should release games like Gran Turismo or Killzone which users tend to eat up a lot of hours playing and will be satisfied for a longer period of time and will encourage friends to get the same games to play online with them while other games are being developed. Games I would use to Support PS3 in 2013/14 are mostly well established single player games and casual party games like Uncharted, God Of War, InFamous, Sly Cooper, Ratchet & Clank, MediEvil, Syphon Filter next Quantic Dream game, Singstar, Buzz!, Sports Champions 2, Start the Party 2, Ape Escape, Little bIg Planet 3. Obviously not all those games, but games of that nature. Games I would use to support the PS4 in 2013/14 are mostly games with online multiplayer and more for the "hardcore" or the niche audience with games like KIllzone 4, Gran Turismo 6, Playstation All Stars, a new Japanese style RPG, a SOCOM/MAG type game, and a few other new IP with elements of multiplayer and a sense of community. |
Just because something can output 4k resolution, it doesn't mean it can actually run games that look awesome at that resolution(If current PCs can't do it effectively, then next gen consoles sure as hell won't be able to), it'd most likely be movie playback capabilities if it does 4k res, and also, you can't see a real difference until you get a 80inch+ TV which most people won't have.
|
Just like most people didn't have HDTV's when the PS3 was released. Why would they push a tech that only benefits those who have a large expensive HDTV, while completely targeting the exact opposite consumer with it's video game capabilities? I'm not saying it would be able to make games look amazing at 4K, but if it's targeting the high end TV consumer wouldn't it make sense to also target those people with the development of their game capabilities so that their games look good on those televisions?
|
Because the hardware isn't good enough to the point where it'd be at a reasonable price point even in 2015+ for a console, let alone 2013 or 2014. It would sell like shit and die, Sony studios make good games in general, I don't want them to fail due to that kind of stupid ass decision. Not to mention, to this day, a lot of high profile games still run in upscaled sub HD on the PS3 and 360, it would be a terrible waste of money both for Sony and us consumers.
|
The article assumes that it will be able to do 4K, not me. Are you arguing with the article or me? I'm saying that if it does 4K, that the console wil have other high end specs for gaming. You're saying that it will be able to run 4K but wont have the hardware for a game to run 4k like the PS3 has the ability to run in 1080P. If they were going to have average specs, then they wouldn't bother making a console that could output at 4k.
|