Does the PlayStation 4 Need 4K Resolution?

Push Square: "As expected, Sony’s CES press conference focused heavily on 4K resolution. Like 3D before it, the manufacturer spent the majority of its showcase demonstrating a new line of Bravia televisions that will attempt to drive the standardisation of the burgeoning format. The company also touched upon re-mastered Blu-rays, video cameras, and more, all emphasising the importance of the technology going forward. But with the impending PlayStation 4 rumoured to support the new fangled feature, do we really need it?"

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
iamnsuperman1680d ago

No because this resolution needs a 60 inch or bigger TV for humans to really notice any significant difference over 1080p which is too big for the average consumer. This with the massive price of these TVs means no consumer will have one and so means putting it in the PS3 is a bit pointless.

4K is great for movie theatres with the big screen but for the home/consumers it isn't worth it because the differences on smaller screen is hard to notice

Army_of_Darkness1680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

Just give me 1080p at a solid 60fps in normal mode or 3D and I will be happy.

Anon19741680d ago

Agreed. I don't see any use for it, but at the same time those lucky enough to own 4k tv's, it would be nice to have something that supported it.

Mind you, maybe it couldn't hurt to future proof. If it comes out in 2014 and is expected to last 10 years again, who know's what TV's will be like by 2020?

chun-li1680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

PlayStation 4 needs as much cutting edge tech as it can get but it just needs to balance affordability and be around 600 quid or so for a lot of consumers. I don't care how much the ps4 is just as long as its powerful with cutting edge tech to last for years like the ps2. I understand some people like good things for peanuts but either save or get a job.if youcan't afford a ps4 on release then wait or buy something else its a free world

Most people that would rail against 4k are people who know they won't be able to afford 4k tvs so they'll rather not be tempted by something they can't readily buy when it hits mass consumer availability pricing.

If ps4 could do 8k and toast my bread I wouldn't mind just as long as I can buy it and it gets a lot of software support and be cutting edge enough to last years down the road

Ps4 will support 4k resolution games and movies and judging by sonys ces 2013 press conference they'll be at the forefront of the 4k revolution resolution with the PlayStation nation.

I remember when people said hd was unnecessary but look where we are now. With sony being at the forefront of pushing 4k tech with upscaling blue rays to 4k, 4k native content, a 4k streaming service coming this year, 15000 blue rays being updated to 4k this year, releasing 55 and 65 inch 4k tvs to cost 4-7 thousand this year then ps4 is coming this year its only natural for them to make games in 4k resolution. the price of 4k tvs will go down because of a lot of competition so just like hd tvs which once cost 20k and up the price will be going down as there are more competition. Their are 4k monitors at 32 in for 4thousand at the moment and by next year 4k tvs will be quite affordable.

It would be way less of an incentive to own a ps4 if it'll never have games that could support blue rays. I know some angered sorts who have no love for Sony would be quick to talk about how they can't have an expensive system or can't pack too much tech in the ps4 but they are mostly fearful of Sony making tech far above whatever console they love. Sony have been taking a loss on tv sales and other things but it doesnt mean they'll make shoddy tech. They'll just try to reassess but continue to push cutting edge tech. The name Sony is synonymous with cutting edge so if they stop that they wouldn't be Sony

shoddy1680d ago

But the nextgen start when Sony say so.

Diver1679d ago

yes it needs it. those saying no are the same ones that said the 360 didn't need HDMI or a decent size hdd or wifi an the ps3 didn't need bluray. sorry but to be future proof for a 10 year console you need it.

the next PlayStation an Xbox won't launch until next year an by then 4k TVs will be down inprice by quite a bit. an screens will keep growing. look at the ces trend.

The_Infected1679d ago (Edited 1679d ago )

Like most gamers say 1080p/60 is perfect. 4K is just not practical now and probably want be for at least a few years from now. Next gen consoles would be better running at 1080p/60 than 4K/30 struggling with frame rates just like this gen is.

morganfell1679d ago

Welcome to 2005. These same arguments were made against the need for HD, HDMI, and expanded disc space. And everyone of those argument, just like those against 4K, are invalid. Sony has screwed up some things, this much is true. But they have also been right about the de facto standard every single generation - CD, DVD, Bluray. Now 4K and they are right again.

clearelite1679d ago

I agree. I wouldn't mind it being able to output 4k resolution, but pushing 4K games would be a bad decision at this point. Being able to play top notch 1080P/3D games would already cost a lot right now. Not to mention the fact that cheaper game development costs lead to more unique, creative, and fun gaming experiences.

pixelsword1679d ago

@ iamnsuperman:

"resolution needs a 60 inch or bigger TV for humans to really notice any significant difference over 1080p"

That sounds logical, but a lot of people who primarily game on PCs say that they get resolutions above 1080p and notice a difference, why wouldn't this?

Would increasing the framerate on a small 4k tv be visually distinct (less blurriness, etc.)?

blackbeld1679d ago

Well Said Chun-Li.

I Cant say it better. Sony should make it for the long run like they always do.

TAURUS-5551679d ago

what a ridiculous question ?

of course the PS4 and us need 4K resolution, its going to be there cuz thats how tech works, new, improved and better.

PS4 + 4K = unbeatable.

cant wait to get an OLED 4k tv.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1679d ago
dedicatedtogamers1680d ago

I don't think PS4 needs it, and here are several reasons:

- A lot of games nowadays aren't even native 720p, let alone 1080p. Additionally, a lot of games nowadays already struggle to maintain 30 frames per second, let alone 60. Let's get that taken care of first, please.

- Sony, as a company, has been losing a TON of money. Kaz Hirai recently said that "Sony as a company needs to be more focused". Pushing 4k resolution and 4k TV sets and 4k gaming with the PS4 seems like a step backwards. Blu Ray and 1080p resolution with 60 fps will be fine for next gen consoles

- HD TVs have not been on the market for much more than a decade, and HD TVs have been "standard" for not even half that time. The majority of people aren't interested in upgrading TVs AGAIN.

cl19831680d ago

Also most people updated for digital not hd.

LackTrue4K1680d ago

That's what I'm saying. If it can push it why not have it. It's like a car with lots of hp and torque,

"it's always nice to have extra then to come up short"

pixelsword1679d ago

IF the PS4 comes with a 60-inch 4K TV and be at or under $600, I'd get it.

RedDevils1679d ago

It not gonna hurt if Sony allow the PS4 to integrate the 4k support, better than making the same mistake that Microsoft doing when they didn't included the HDMI, I say future proof FTW!

Bordel_19001679d ago (Edited 1679d ago )


Well said.

Sony should focus on delivering good gaming experiences. They should not repeat all the stupid hype that surrounded the PS3 before launch. Dual 1080p 120fps games, hyping meaningless specifications like the Cell being 2 times faster than the Xbox 360 processor, showing pre-rendered graphics claiming it to be all done by the Cell processor, RSX giving movie quality graphics etc. etc.. all this hype and bs that was never delivered has left a bad taste in my mouth.

PS3 and X360 are about on par gaming wise, with their own strengths and weaknesses.

This time around Sony should cut the bullshit.

Give me the Sony exclusive games and shut up about how much better than the competitor you think you are, specially when you are not. Something that this generation should have taught them.

I'm all for 4K support for movies even though today I don't think it's necessary.

Hyping 4K gaming on PS4 would be meaningless. Keep it real with beautifully rendered 720p/60fps and 1080p/30fps/60fps.

GribbleGrunger1679d ago (Edited 1679d ago )

I absolutely agree with you but one of the things that will guarantee that getting sorted out is if games could run in 4k at 30fps. Pushing for that high spot would benefit developers who want to make 1080p at 60fps games, rather like 3D has helped 1st party devs to maximise code.

As far as what the eye can 'really see', I have one small story to relate: I was sat at a friends house playing on his brothers PC. I was having a fun time when in he walked looking very happy. He asked me if I liked the game and I said yes. He then explained to me what resolution it was in. I said to him that there wasn't that much difference between 600 by 800 and the ridiculously high resolution he had the game running in. Instantly he sprang to the screen, his podgy little finger prodding the detail. 'Look at that detail', he proclaimed, 'Can't you see how much better it looks?' He went on and on and on, pointing to this and that. He made me feel really stupid so I just mutely walked away from the Monitor and sat elsewhere. And the moral of the story? I'd lowered the res to 600 by 800 just before he walked in to see if there was a difference.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1679d ago
tdogchristy901680d ago

Does this bigger screen theory also translate to the oled tech. I guess I'm just curious which is more future proof and likely as the next great tv. Most TVs sales are the 32s, so 4k would be out. So oled would be the new standard?

cervantes991680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

OLED is just a better screen technology that gives brighter, more vibrant colors and supreme black levels. Also very energy efficient and allows very thin screens - like 3mm thick.

Both OLED and 4K are similarly priced $10,000+ for a 55 inch screen. OLED will show visible improvements at smaller screen sizes though.

4K is more future proof though.

piroh1680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

it´s kinda pointless, but as i know Sony they will include 4k support to PS4. as i know people we will be grateful for this in the upcoming years, look at The Cell and Blu-ray

sadly the only developers supporting 4k will be Sony´s first party studios

get2sammyb1680d ago

Some digital games with "simpler" graphics might opt to support it, but, yes, I generally agree.

piroh1680d ago

plus all PS3, PS2 and PS1 games throughout Gaikai

pandaboy1680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

wait what, the cell? that is dated and dead technology... nobody is thankful for that...

piroh1680d ago

now i see why you have only one bubble

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1680d ago
jujubee881680d ago

What? That sounds like a bogus stat you just made up. No offense (this is no attack on you personally), but if you are going to make that kind of claim, you better back it up with some scientific fact(s).

iamnsuperman1680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

I can't find the original thing posted by the BBC which gave me this information but this source might help

"Abbott expects to see 4K used extensively in cinemas long before it makes its way to the consumer space, if it ever does on a large scale. He says it makes more sense in the cinema environment, particularly because of the larger screens and the distance viewers sit from them."

"Kotsaftis says manufacturers will probably begin shipping and promoting larger TVs. “In coming years, 50-inch or 55-inch screens will have become the sort of standard that 40-inch TVs are now. To exploit 4K, you need a larger form factor. You’re just not going to notice enough of a difference on smaller screens."

"But most us don’t get all that close to big screen TVs. The 4K sets being shown at CES are big. Samsung has an 85 inch set, Sony is already selling an 84 inch model. About the smallest set you’ll find is 55 inches but even with that size screen, people tend to sit a bit from the screen. I have a 55 inch 1080p set perched several feet in front of my living room couch so I rarely get close enough to my TV to notice any gaps between pixels."

"Another big factor, and why 4K and 8K sets may have a hard time gaining traction in the home space, is viewing distance. You'll notice in a lot of press images for 4K and 8K sets, that the viewer is standing right in front of the screen. You really need to be that close to notice the extra pixel density. For most consumers that is just not a feasible viewing distance for the living room.
Some 4K booths had ropes in front of them, not allowing you to get close, and for those the difference between 4K and standard HD was barely noticeable. That's because at a typical viewing distance our standard 1080p HD set is very near Retina display quality, "Retina display" being a term coined by Apple to define a resolution where the human eye cannot resolve individual pixels at a typical viewing distance."

from a consumer point of view we really do not see a big enough difference to warrant a buy a 4K tv unless the screen is massive

jujubee881680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

"The 4K sets being shown at CES are big. Samsung has an 85 inch set, Sony is already selling an 84 inch model. About the smallest set you’ll find is 55 inches"

The smallest 4k display is NOT 56 inches, it is 30 inches.

"Another big factor, and why 4K and 8K sets may have a hard time gaining traction in the home space, is viewing distance. You'll notice in a lot of press images for 4K and 8K sets, that the viewer is standing right in front of the screen. You really need to be that close to notice the extra pixel density. For most consumers that is just not a feasible viewing distance for the living room. "

To be fair, that link did not take into consideration stuff like motion blur where pixels can look like a blur and details decrease. When shooting and getting native 4k, every single pixel location (on a denser panel) is crisp which translates into the entire array of a 4K panel. But, that's just in theory (I don't know if the processors in these 4K TV's can get a better "hz" refresh rate). And, yes, I would need to compare my 1080p Bravia vs a new 4K Bravia in both the living room and in a smaller room of the house.

I am not buying into any new technology that just comes out, but I can see the difference a 4k display can make. If something seems better replicated on a 4K vs a 1080p display in my room (not only the living room) than that would be awesome.

joab7771680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

What? When ps3 launched, they made it capable of 3d with a blue ray player because they were betting on the future. Not many ppl were spending thousands at the time for 3d tv's. And 4k tv's will come down in price. And I just got my first 55" tv. If it's really good tech and the price is right, ppl will buy it. Why not have the capability. It also helps push the tech. The real question is whether it's worth increasing the price of the console or taking a loss to get the tech out there. Yes, they have great studios, but it's nice to have new tech to separate yourself from the Xbox, steambox, PC gaming etc. And it helps leverage the future. If it doesn't sell well at launch, u have a chance that many will buy it as a 4k player later on.

iamnsuperman1680d ago (Edited 1680d ago )

"Not many ppl were spending thousands at the time for 3d tv's"

3D tvs really are not selling because they cost a lot (and issues with glasses). 3D was that fad and now 4K is and adding it into a gaming device (like 3D isn't going to make people by into 4K