Apparently most people would prefer to waste another 400+ bucks rather than have their games be 720p. Also, crappy devs that don't know how to manage their art direction and work around the limitations of the hardware they're using. Also, gamers.

I don't think he meant just DVD playing. The GC's discs could only have about 1.5GB of data, while the PS2 DVDs could have around 4.5GB or even 9GB if they were dual layered. The tiny amount of data made the GC lose out on a lot of good games that just didn't fit.

First, they do it because they can. They don't have to invest a lot in an inner-house technology, new production line, heavy launch marketing, they don't break compatibility of games (x86), it's mostly ordering a better APU to AMD.
Clearly having the more powerful console helped them a lot, they have an excellent market share, and they don't want to lose it to a better, early coming console (NX, Xbox Two ?), to PC, or to an XBOne 1.5.
Also it's not in contradiction with still supporting the current PS4 (including a price drop), but a big proportion of heavy buyers like high specs. We don't know if they want to migrate, if they just want to address a niche market, or if it is a way to increase the PS4 lifespan.

But clearly, they take a risk regarding their current market. Still, that's a first in the console world, but it has been common in PC worlds for decades, low-end, high-end specs for premium buyers.

If the PS4k was only for 4k movies, why would a game developer ( main deepthroat) have any knowledge about it? Something is not adding up in the whole rumour.

Hype. When you have a product basically selling itself, anything with PS4 on it will move units. Why do you think Sony are pushing VR with the PS4. I can garentee that if it wasnt selling well, VR will be left for the PS5 and the PS4K will most likely be the PS5 too. Its marketing, try and nickle and dime your customers while there buying.

I think main reason is need for stronger hardware for VR, second reason is 4k support for media.

not to mention it was a $30 add on compared to a $400 console.

There is a strong need for better hardware because while PS1, PS2, and PS3 were state of the art and very powerful at release while the PS4 was already outdated with its slow but cheap APU design.

The PS4 hardware is so weak that it even has to struggle with 1080p games with heavily downscaled graphics compared to PC. With VR (=2x1080p) and 4K (=4x1080p) gaming as the next big innovations in the industry, better hardware is required because both are impossible to render on a standard PS4.

I keep getting the feelings this is going to be one of those times again where some of us warn about it not being capable of this or that and allot of people ignore it like it's some magic box. I hate that people keep calling it PS4k. =p

Anyway, In all honesty if the end goal is to have a counter against NX and a possible new Xbox while at the same time utilizing the PlayStation brand to push 4k TV's and 4k players (likely not for 4k gaming. lol). I imagine we may be seeing a PS4 slim never come and a eventual discontinuation of the original PS4. Pushing "PS4k" even at a bit of a loss may work out very well for them by having it possibly help build strong branding in the 4k TV's, ect, markets... while not having to put up with the costs of developing a brand new PS platform or "PS5".  It has another benefit of helping to rectify the weak hardware problem that would have shortened it's lifespan in the market before a PS5 would need to be made.

In my mind this is how they come out gaining more then they lose and ultimately gaining more then they are now with the PS4 while possibly extending the PS4 platforms life. Regardless of if they drop the original sku it is still going to be using the PS4's foundation instead of pushing a brand new platform.

I don't like this direction for many reasons and I only see it ending poorly for consumers. Reminds me of how Microsoft succeeded in making people pay to play games online which still sickens me today that such toxicity happened and I view "PS4k" as a toxic thing to consumers at present. I guess not the thread for more of that talk though.

Ps4 hardware so weak? What handbook are all you guys following? Ps4 at launch was by no means weak.

Psvr doesn't need rendering at 1080p X2 so the Ps4 can render it's vr just fine.

Simplifyed, any struggling the Ps4 or xbone for that matter are having rendering anything this generation is purely on the deveopers. Many deveopers these days are so stuck using all Middleware tools and pre-purchased engines, their games are more like mods than games, then they just lazily compile out using preset setting for each console, and then scratch there heads in  wonder while it runs horrible on whatever device vs the beast of a pc they developed on.

You can't just come up with whatever your heart desires and expect it to run on any hardware. You have to cater your design to the hardware your game is running on. There has always been sprite, polygon, texture or memory limitations, or cpu bottlenecks, a good developer works WITH these limitations.

It's the publishers (bean counters) forcing out lazy cross platform ports that hurt the most these days.

Sony built a "profitable" console finally which I think is a good thing for survival, and at a price vs power perspective, you still can't build a pc from scratch equal to the ps4, for the price of a ps4.

Anything other than 4k media output upgrade in a ps4k will destroy the console market next generation. All those fools who said console gaming was dying would be right, only because they did it to themselves. Worldwide public is not in a financial position to upgrade consoles on a 3 year cycle.

I thought the younger generation was all about environmental protection. Cycling hardware on such short and unnecessary timetable just means more garbage for the landfill.