Forums - Gaming Discussion - " Update "When Can Sony Deliver A True Generational Leap? - Digital Foundry & Gamer NX

Do you agree

Yes 12 57.14%
 
No 2 9.52%
 
In between 4 19.05%
 
See result 3 14.29%
 
Total:21
BraLoD said:

MS just launched a $500 XBX and is pretty happy about it.

Yeah.  But, that's not really a console launch in the traditional sense.  It is an upgraded, premium unit within an existing console family.  Just a few years ago they launched in the traditional way at $499 and regretted it.  A generation ago Sony launched at a relatively high price and regretted it as well.    



Around the Network
VAMatt said:
BraLoD said:

MS just launched a $500 XBX and is pretty happy about it.

Yeah.  But, that's not really a console launch in the traditional sense.  It is an upgraded, premium unit within an existing console family.  Just a few years ago they launched in the traditional way at $499 and regretted it.  A generation ago Sony launched at a relatively high price and regretted it as well.    

XBO problem was not the price, was that the price was inflated by a mandatory bundle with the Kinect which made it pricer even as it was weaker than the PS4.

With the PS5 and XB4 releases both can confortably sit at $500 and if one is $400 it would need to be stronger than the $500 of the other to make it a problem.

I have zero doubt both of them will be $500 as it's the sweet spot to bring more power and keep the other on track. If, for example, MS releases a $400 console and Sony a stronger for $500 I'm pretty sure the Sony one would sell the most, if they are equivalent in power they should sell similarly as PS is a stronger brand, and if Sony releases the $400 and MS the $500 and Sony's the weaker, it would be the same.

Both companies would want to not lose too much money on each console at release while still keeping the other on check, so none will want to have the weaker machine and going for $500 will be the safest bet for both, unless MS is willing to release a $500 machine for $400 to chew on Sony's market share, which I don't think they will do.



My money is on 2020-2021.  And I think both will go for the $499 price point.



I called it, this is pretty much what I have been screaming for a while now.... down to the specs. Especially the 15TF thing and HBM2/GDDR6 ram. And of course how no one should expect anything till 7nm fabrication reaches maturity which wouldnt be till like 2020.





KBG29 said:
Couldn't agree more. A CPU leap is no issue at all, but a GPU, Memory, and Storage leap is questionable. I hope they hold off until 7nm+ so that they can deliver a generational leap at every level. My PS5 would be Zen 3, NGGPU @ 20+TFLOP/s, with 64GB of RAM, and a 2 - 4TB NVMe SSD @ $400 - $500 in 2021 or 2022. That would offer a true genrational leapat every aspect.

As far as Ray Tracing goes, that is absolutely a requirement for the next gen. A next gen needs a generational leap in rendering tech. Ray Tracing will offer an undeniable leap over this generation that will be something that even the most casual consumer will be able to see and understand. That is where they can easily convince people to upgrade.

Pure Ray Tracing is still a long way away. So you might as well put that expectation to rest.

What we will get is a hybrid Rasterization/Ray Tracing approach... We started heading down that path with Battlefield 3/Frostbite 2 on the Xbox 360/Playstation 3... But there is so much more room to move forward as compute gets significantly better, the transition is going to take time, it's not going to be an instant jump to pure Ray Tracing.

Cerebralbore101 said:

All I want for next gen is backwards compatibility and a choice between true 4k, or 60 FPS in the options menu of all games. After that, just give us games on the technical level of GoW and I'm good. 


There should be a strong likelihood of backwards compatibility.
But just because the chips use the same ISA, doesn't guarantee it though, lots of other things can change that breaks it.


Cerebralbore101 said:


Aside from faster loading times, bigger HD and a billion times more RAM going from PS3 to PS4 wasn't that big of an upgrade. We're really running up against the wall here with graphics. Next gen, graphics won't depend on the hardware, but rather the talent of the studio behind the game. GoW looking as good as it does on base PS4 is proof of that.

I dunno. So many games ran at sub 720P and sub 30fps... Allot of the geometric details in worlds on the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 was relatively coarse.
It's so hard for me to go back to those old consoles, then again... I was also highly critical of them back in the day for the exact same reason.


VAMatt said:

That video was basically a whole lot of words to say "Sony (and MS) can launch consoles with a 'generational leap' whenever they way, if they're willing to lose a bunch of money on hardware sales."  Or, "about 2020 if they want to break even".

So, yeah, I agree.

Pretty much that. The technology for a generational leap has been around for years now.
It's just not affordable for a cheap device.

JRPGfan said:

Graphics are at a point where I honestly dont feel like I need much more.

Graphics has so much more room to move.
There is a stupidly massive amount of room to move in regards to simulation quality... But then again, you're still clinging to flops which wouldn't represent that.
The difference between PC and Console is startling, and they are games of the same generation, same engines etc'.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Johnw1104 said:

With the mid-gen refreshes that "generational leap" is a bit complicated... they'd have to wait a decent while before they could vastly outperform the Xbox 1 X while maintaining affordability.

I imagine the next generation of consoles will not be an enormous upgrade over the Xbox 1 X/PS4 Pro, but will still be substantially better. As they say in the video, the true "generational leap" will be when compared to the original models, and specifically will see a big improvement in the processors and memory.

Also, my lord look at that like/dislike bar on that video... Fanboys can be ridiculous, that was a very level-headed and informative video. Why is everyone so anxious for some miracle box to release so soon anyway? The Pro and Xbox 1 X already offer some very impressive visuals if that matters so much to you.

No. First off, not all TFs are equal. Basically 6TF on a polaris/vega architecture is very different from 6TF in a navi architecture.

Then there is also the fact that as far as GPU rendering, not all things scale up proportionately. Like next gen cosnoles wouldn't be pushing significantly more triangles than the current gen, not cause they can't but cause they don't need to. So that extra power would be going to other places or areas that the current gen consoles simply cant handle.

And most importantly, next gen CPU and memory will make all the difference.



JRPGfan said:

I must be the only one here.... who doesnt care too much?

I rather sony try to keep it at 400$, than do a 500$ machine thats more powerfull ect.
Graphics are at a point where I honestly dont feel like I need much more.

15 Tflops @499$
13 Tflops at @449$
11 Tflops at @399$

Which is best? imo the 399$ one.

On the money, 399 is a marketing sweet spot for home consoles.

 

I feel like the base model will have 4k 30 down pat and smooth, 4k 60fps being achieved in certain games.  The main focus will be more on special effects, enemy AI, physics, etc to enhance the experience (or at least I hope so).  Anything above 4K at this point is asinine to aim for over those other factors IMO.

 

I mean we already have dynamic 4K with Pro and SOME native 4K with X1X.  Smoothing that out should not be too much of a jump to focus on those other, more important factors with a full generational leap.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Pemalite said: 
Cerebralbore101 said:


Aside from faster loading times, bigger HD and a billion times more RAM going from PS3 to PS4 wasn't that big of an upgrade. We're really running up against the wall here with graphics. Next gen, graphics won't depend on the hardware, but rather the talent of the studio behind the game. GoW looking as good as it does on base PS4 is proof of that.

I dunno. So many games ran at sub 720P and sub 30fps... Allot of the geometric details in worlds on the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 was relatively coarse.
It's so hard for me to go back to those old consoles, then again... I was also highly critical of them back in the day for the exact same reason.

There is a stupidly massive amount of room to move in regards to simulation quality... But then again, you're still clinging to flops which wouldn't represent that.
The difference between PC and Console is startling, and they are games of the same generation, same engines etc'.

Yeah, there's some low poly assets hiding in the rafters of your PS3 games, or deep down in the basement. They had to cut the scene polycounts enough to get the games to run on 250 MB of ram. Same goes with textures in a lot of places. Look at the wooden beams in Dark Souls levels on PS3. They are PS1 level polycount, and PS2 level textures. Look at Sheperd's back armor in ME3 on PS3. It's a pixelated mess. Looks like a JPEG, not even 200 x 200 pixels across. Aside from that though, they are basically the same games as today (Not counting ridiculous tech masterpieces like Witcher 3, GoW, and Horizon). 

I'm not impressed at all by the differences between hardware these days. Even comparing base XB1 to a $3000 PC is 10% as big of an improvement as going from N64 to PS2. 



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

 

VAMatt said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

PS3, and XB1 both sold poorly, because they were relative rip-offs for their price point. PS3 was $500-$600 because of Blu-Ray. XB1 was $500 because of Kinect. Both systems lacked backwards compatibility to entice users to trade in and upgrade. 

Edit: PS3 had BC, but only the $600 model. 

Okay.  But, the crappy launch-window sellers in that bunch had one thing in common - higher prices than their competitors at launch.  

Hitler and Stalin had one thing in common. Mustaches. Therefore all men with Mustaches must be evil. 

Seriously though... 

I offer you two PC's for $1000. 

One PC is $1000 because it comes signed by me. It actually has $800 worth of hardware in it. 

Another PC is $1000, because it comes with $1100 worth of hardware in it. 

Which will you buy? 



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

 

Cerebralbore101 said:
Pemalite said: 

I dunno. So many games ran at sub 720P and sub 30fps... Allot of the geometric details in worlds on the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 was relatively coarse.
It's so hard for me to go back to those old consoles, then again... I was also highly critical of them back in the day for the exact same reason.

There is a stupidly massive amount of room to move in regards to simulation quality... But then again, you're still clinging to flops which wouldn't represent that.
The difference between PC and Console is startling, and they are games of the same generation, same engines etc'.

Yeah, there's some low poly assets hiding in the rafters of your PS3 games, or deep down in the basement. They had to cut the scene polycounts enough to get the games to run on 250 MB of ram. Same goes with textures in a lot of places. Look at the wooden beams in Dark Souls levels on PS3. They are PS1 level polycount, and PS2 level textures. Look at Sheperd's back armor in ME3 on PS3. It's a pixelated mess. Looks like a JPEG, not even 200 x 200 pixels across. Aside from that though, they are basically the same games as today (Not counting ridiculous tech masterpieces like Witcher 3, GoW, and Horizon). 

I'm not impressed at all by the differences between hardware these days. Even comparing base XB1 to a $3000 PC is 10% as big of an improvement as going from N64 to PS2. 

The Playstation 3 had 512Mb of Ram.

Clearly you haven't played a PC game at 15,360x2880 resolution. ;) (Neither have I actually, most was 7680x1440, but still more pixels being pushed than the 4k twins.)



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--