Both Sony and Microsoft are pushing 4K gaming in the console market. But, is it really the right time for that?
I like it. Games look amazing on my 4K TV running on the Pro. Big deal or no, it's enjoyed by those who are using it :)
I don't know what the purpose of this article is. These things are organic. When we have games at 4K and 4KTV's for sale, people will make that decision at a personal level when they get to see footage. As a gamer, it would be difficult for me personally to see games like Anthem, Metro and Assassins Creed, looking so life-like and smooth, then to have to play them looking dull and jerky. Its like false advertising.
4k is rubbish. 8k is way better and I can't enjoy a game if it isn't in 8k at 120fps without any compromises. All the times I've been enjoying playing games in standard definition and then high definition with frame rates on games that would dip below 20fps was just silly. 8k is the best and if your gaming system of choice can't do 8k @ 120fps uncompromise then it's rubbish. /s
i can already imagine the post xbox x launch how the conversations are going to be - Game1 runs at 4K30 on PS Pro. Game1 runs at 4K60 on xbx. - Yay! We won! Beast! Game1 size is 100GB on PS Pro. Game1 size is 200GB on XbX. - Yay! We still won! Beast!
@nix, I'm fairly certain a games footprint isn't impacted by frames per second. Upscaled vs native footprints will be different though. To be fair it will most likely be [email protected] on PS4 Pro at 100GB vs [email protected] on Xbox One X at 200GB if it is an upscaled vs native argument. Realistically both will most likely rely on upscaling to different degrees though. If done properly though, Xbox One X games will have a larger footprint if the assets are higher quality.
4K IS a big deal but from a slightly different perspective. People will say you can't "see" a difference in 4K but you actually CAN so long as it has HDR enabled. HDR is something you can "see" more so than resolution alone. And since the only way to get HDR is by using a 4K set (that supports HDR) then if more people like what they "see" the more people will buy into 4K as a whole.
I think its a ps damage limitation argument type article
I like it too but not when it takes half Of my consoles power to do it, I'd rather use that power for something more than a resolution boost. Im on board with checker boarding and low cost alternatives though
It's not but it is available for those who want it. For a decent TV its still to expensive. The results are the same game with higher resolution and higher textures to match. It's not necessary to enjoy games and its driving us to higher prices. 4k doesn't make games better
Yes it does. 4k won't make the story better, it won't fundamentally change the game play. However, it will irrefutably improve the visual quality, which is a part of the whole package. The same game with better graphics is, in fact, better. Tbh it is hard to see your argument against it.
I'd say that 60fps makes a game much better than 4K does. I wish they'd focus more on that instead of resolution. 1080/60 over 4k/30 any day of the week. It's cool that some games will be 4k/60, but it's likely most won't.
I have 4k. HDR is as good an upgrade as 4k. The author is right about half baked experiences. But each know if they wait until they can fully achieve it the other guy will come out and get market share.
But of those better graphics tank the performance then is it really better?? Up to you. You obviously like high fidelity visuals, I'm with ya there. Others would rather go for a lower res with at least 60 fps. That makes a lot of sense as well.
no it does not the story and how the game plays is more important than how pretty the game looks. resolution only means something to a small number of gamers overall
Actually for Pro it's the same price as the PS4 launched, and the Scorpio is the same as the XB1 launched. So no, it's not 'more expensive' console wise. People also need to learn WHY things cost more. Is it costing more because the tech is at a higher level for the current times? I.E. is the tech a level higher then the PS4/XB1 was? NOPE. Or is it costing more because the value of the paper in your wallet or the 0's and 1's in your bank account are worth less then they used to be? The answer is #2. The tech is ACTUALLY getting cheaper and lower quality. But with advances, it's more powerful. 360/PS3 were pretty close to high end PC's. The difference between a high end GPU and what was in the consoles was the amount of ram in the GPU. PS4/XB1 were 2010-2011 mid range GPU's with sub 2008 CPU's. See, that's significantly 'cheaper' quality. If the 360/PS3 was the PS4, the PS4 would have had PS4 Pro GPU power level, with a better CPU then is in Scorpio, in 2013. The reason they can't? $$$$ Your currency (all currencies) are depreciating faster then wages are rising.... by quite a lot. So in order to make money, they can't keep that tech level in a console, because no one could afford to buy it. PS4 Pro/Scorpio are just the same mid level consoles that PS4 was, except they launch in 2016 and 2017, not 2013. But in a sense they are worse, since they use the same crap CPU. Still a good product that delivers better quality at a cheap price, but they are being undercut 20-40 percent by the crappy CPU. (and technically more, but you can't expect a top end gaming cpu in a console. A decent one would make 4k/60 possible with 2015-ish settings.)
I'm not saying that resolution is more important than any other factor, or that 4k/Pro/Scorpio are worth the cost of entry. I'm just refuting that "4k doesn't make games better", because that statement is illogical.
If you're buying a new TV over 40 inches and want to buy anything better than the absolute cheapest TVs available, then you're getting 4k whether or not you want it. The price difference is disappearing so manufacturers can't be bothered producing 1080 TVs, it's just not worth it anymore.
That's kind of what I'm thinking, don't know about where everybody else lives but 4k sets in the uk are mainstream now
I picked up a 8500 series 50" Samsung curved 4K UHDTV and a 55" Vizio M series 4K UHDTV both with HDR for under $600 each. I'm not sure if I would call those "too expensive". It's not "necessary" to play games in 4K, but it wasn't necessary to play them in 1080p upscaled or native either. The same argument was made when games went from SD to HD. Playing in 4K and HDR is a huge leap over 1080p in visual quality though. If you haven't tried it, obviously you won't see the need for it. Once you try it though, it's hard to go back. Can you give an example of higher prices with 4K gaming on console? Games are the same price with old games being updated for free. If you choose to buy a 4K console you will experience a higher price than a 1080p console, but that is still a choice. If anything, 4K consoles are driving down prices since the 1080p consoles were lowered when the new 4K consoles launched.
There's no way you got an 8500 for under $600. That things is worth over $2k.
Got it at Sam's Club last month. They were making room for the 2017 models. Awesome TV for the price. I'm using the Vizio as a gaming monitor. The Sammy is in my bedroom.
Hook me up with those deals. I was eyeing the lg uh7700. Under $700 with 4k hdr and some other stuff. Plus i love its design and stand.
799.99 is expensive for a tv? Are you joking? They want be amazing tvs but 4k tvs are not expensive.
To me it is. Getting a game to look incredibly beautiful is important to me. However there is absolutely no problem playing games that are good a low resolution. For instance I started playing ff7 again and I am having a wonderful time
I'm definitely not in the mood to get a 4K tv. There's little reason to do so and 1080p still looks awesome to me
Okay, but if your TV got fried from a power surge tomorrow would you buy another 1080p or 4k? Just because you arent in the market doesnt mean that no one is or that due to unforeseen circumstances you become in the market. I didnt want to buy a new car, until mine got totaled and boom, I'm in the market all the sudden.
I'd get another 1080p TV cuz it's cheap. I didn't say what other people are interested in, I said what I'm interested in.
Gaming is costly enough as it is already. I could really care less about 4K till it reaches extreme mainstream status. I didn't even hop on the HD train until the tvs regularly costed $100-$200
It completely agree. As much as I like the PS4 Pro am disappointed in some of the devs. Going for higher resolution rather than smoother FPS. Now I understand that some games rely heavy on the CPU and since the CPU in the Pro and all other current gen consoles are crap 60FPS it not an option for some games. Even on PC I currently have a GTX 1080 ti. This is a pure beast of a card. So far every game I have played on it has been able to do 4K 60FPS. However, If a time comes when I can't get a consistent 60FPS on a game at 4K. I have no problem what so every lowering the resolution down to get a solid 60. 4K in my opinion for games is not worth the effort. Sure it's got a little bit of extra detail over 1080p but noting really noticeable. There is a bigger difference (at least to me) between 720p and 1080p than 1080p and 4K. However, 4K for blu-ray movies and TV shows is amazing.
"but nothing really noticeable". Completely disagree. I set up my 1080p sammy smart set right next to my 4K one when a co-worker came over to play killing floor 2 one night. Taking into account HDR as well the differences were night and day. To each his own I guess. I personally think it goes like this for me: 720p>480p, 4K>1080p, 1080p>720p. There was a massive jump from the 6th to 7th gen in the fidelity of games. This 8th gen hasn't had the wow factor as we've seen games largely stay the same from a design perspective. The jump in resolution seems minute in contrast. 4K gaming has been my saving grace for buying a 4K set. Netflix 4K is overrated and the 4K movie library is deplorable at the moment. You're right though a stable framerate is preferable to resolution. But your also using PC features on one hand to solve console issues with the other. Save for a few games of late it's not possible to choose FPS over rez on consoles. Console gaming has always been about compromises so frankly I expected both these consoles to underperform in certain aspects. But I also see the Pro and 1X helping each other as I believe more devs will provide better support for these mid-gen models.
Netflix 4k is rubbish. Its all to do with the low bit rate. Now watch a 4k bluray (sorry ps4 peeps) and youll notice a huge difference. I was gobsmacked when a friend brought round an xb s compared to Netflix, night and day difference
The framerate is held back because of the CPU. The GPU lets them add more quality and up the resolution. Yes obviously a better GPU can take a 40-50 FPS game and usually let it hit 60, but it's a hard slog to get there. It's the CPU which is insanely bottlenecking the Pro and Scorpio. Hell it's the problem with the base PS4/XB1.
I agree with most of what you are saying. I'm the same with regards to dropping settings to get 60fps consistently. I do worry that with both the pro and x1x aiming for 4k that that might actually hold back PC gaming as less effort will go into maximising assets, because once the 30fps ceiling it hit they wont go further
Some games still can't run native 1080p yet. 900p here, 720p there...upscaled of course. So yeah, wait till 2020 when 4k TV's are $300-500.
Have you been to your local electronics store lately? You can get a Samsung 55" 4k TV for $600 I'm sure the 40" range 4k TVs are in the $400-$500 range
Just make sure to do research... Most cheap tvs come with some important stuff to think about... Latency is one and a big one if it is real high. Could be ok in game modes, but than defeats the purpose of hdr etc on a lot of those tvs as it turns it off. Tv can actually look worse if the guts of the tv are cheap. The picture can look horrible from upscaling. Not all, but most cheaper tvs have this issue.
@rude-ro HDR does not add latency to a tv in the same way other dsp stuff does
4ktv's have been as low as $269 since summer of 2014. Now they didn't have HDR or 60fps, but they were still good. Hell the Seiki I had at the time could do 1080/120.... actually 1080/136, 1440/80, 1620/63, 1800/52. Great little set until it died. The cheaper 4k/60 HDR tv's will be down at that price pretty soon.
You do realize 4K TVs at that price point are complete garbage. Only because it says 4K doesn't mean you're going to get quality. I guess people rather have 4K with crappy picture quality than anything else.
There are some gems in the mid range if you do your homework
These are the same TVs that at one point were $2000-$3000 Crappy or not all Tvs will eventually drop in price. Just because there are $6k-$10k Tvs in the market doesn't mean they're the absolute best
@Steveo123456 Mid-range 4K tv's don't cost $400-500. smh
Neither is VR.
I'm in no rush. 1080p games still look great. There isn't enough 4k video content to make it worth the money
If the new consoles could push 1080/60fps for every game it would be worth it. But after that whole Destiny locked 30fps debacle consoles are bottle necked regardless.
I like 4k, but not at the expense I'd frame rate. Feel like the gaming industry has lost focus on what really improves gameplay.
I can't imagine how games like Spider-Man, God of War, Days Gone, TLoU Part 2 will look in 4K with HDR, but I'm sure it'll be a pretty stunning experience. However, as someone who plays on 1080p, and was freaking blown away by game's like Uncharted 4/Horizon: Zero Dawn on a regular PS4, which are visual masterpieces in their own rights. And seeing the God of War trailer at E3 this year ( which was from the standard PS4 ) I'm Personally in no rush to get a 4K tv right now. It may not be a big deal to many, but for those who can afford to dive into 4K gaming, good on you. I genuinely hope you are truly impressed and are enjoying the experience.
Because most people don't own a 4k tv
But most people who have been buying a tv for the past year have been buying them.
Who's the idiot saying everything's rubbish if it's not 8k your living in a dream world, resolution makes a difference but if a games shit it's shit. Obviously your from the PC master race. Oh and the switch is selling amazing no 4K or 8K just GAMEPLAY!!, get over yourself.
Way too early to say how well Switch will sell. It's selling out in low numbers and is two product lines in one. It's a Nintendo device, and it serves that niche. But they haven't even made enough to sell it to it's most hardcore devotees. For me, I'll stick with my Wii U. There's literally nothing compelling me to buy a Switch even announced yet. Got Zelda on my Wii U and upgrading to the magical 720-900/30 isn't worth it. 20FPS, 30 FPS... both are completely annoying.
If you own the game and have a decent PC get cemu and play it at glorious 4k
Seems pretty important in the 'console wars', outside of that I don't think it's mainstream important but to those who have the option (or inclination) to experience it then it's certainly an improvement over 1080p.
for me i like that we have 4k consoles from sony and microsoft but i also disagree with the article about 4k isn't a big deal because when the base model ps4 and xboxone first came out alot people said the consoles were not powerful so its good now that we have more powerful consoles
4K is nice but I'd rather have 1080P (or 2K) and 60fps than 4K/30fps. 4K is my last priority behind framerate and HDR.
Not really. The 4k PR is just to sell more tv's and so on. What this GEN need are NEW amazing games and experiences!!!!! Less remakes from last gen and cash grabbers. Studios are having huge problems to create new cool IP's and 4k will only increase the price to make 4k blockbusters. The % of people with 4k TV is still very low, of course its increasing, but it will take years, because many really have good 1080p TV and there is also very few channels at 4k or with 4k content that make you want to buy a 4k TV. Im having huge problems to make my girlfriend understand that I NEED a 4k TV, because my latest TV got 2 years....
The sales of 4k TVs are rising but it's not for casuals yet. Although we have consoles that can do 4k, imo 4k gaming won't be mainstream until ps5/Xbox 2 where the install Base of 4k TVs will be around the 50million mark. I thought Sony made a good dicision leaving out the 4k blu Ray player to keep price down. My TV 58" Philips HD is awesome and only 3 yrs old, I will be in the perfect buying market for new TV in 2019/20 right on que for next gen :)
Because it's not as big as 1080P vs 900P?
I love it, but isn't necessary for everyone.
No, it isn't the right time. Even top hardware struggles to keep pace with the display's full refresh rate on demanding 3D content, when it has to fill 8,294,400 pixels every frame. First, get the all-important frame rate right (which means software renders locked to the hardware refresh rate, a minimum of 60 Hz). Then worry about upping the pixel count to levels that no one really needs on a home screen.
What I like is for my games to look its best on the system I'm playing on. Why settle when I don't have to. What I like about the upcoming One X is that even for non 4kTV owners, the console will super sample EVERY GAME, so even on a 1080p TV X will still
It IS a big deal. We need technologies like this to move us toward the future. Without innovation we'd be stucked playing games on CRT monitors. Coming from the playstation enthusiast site the author seems to be abit biased since the ps4 doesn't do alot of 4k games.
I want as much stuff in 4k or as close to 4k as possible. That's the point of a 4k screen. It doesn't change games, it just makes them look really sharp and clear. I get so used to 4k that when I look at 1080p content or a 1080p tv it's literally like going from bluray back to DVD. Everything feels softer and just less..... good. You don't have to have 4k, but if you care about quality, you should want one. Nobody with a regular HD tv loves watching SD channels. Same thing.
I find it weird how many stories are coming out against 4k when all the data trends points to the opposite. Even if you go to a retail shop, it's easier to find 4k tvs than regulars hd ones (which are usually piled in the back cheap section... at least here in Los Angeles) It's a natural evolution. Nobody uses VHS tapes anymore, or tube based tvs. HD tvs are just the most recent to begin a phase out process. Just like those tapes and DVDs and SD tvs and analog cell phones. Technology marches on to give us better stuff. It's also curious that the timing of this goes on as the One X looms closer and the PS4 pro has failed to truly hit a stride of real 4k (really UHD) games and it doesn't have a UHD bluray so no 4k there either.
It isn't! If it was the indie scene would be non existent.
Ridiculous article as 4K gaming becomes more affordable for PC gamers the consoles are already outdated.
It really isn't. Trust me I would love a PC that could play 4k 60+fps but realistically that'd be useful competitively more than anything. You don't need this to enjoy a good game... I just really can't see it. I want Dev's to use the power where it makes sense. I don't want a full year of tech demos...
"4K will eventually become the industry standard, but we just aren’t there yet." So why bother moving in that direction right? I mean it has to be ALL OR NOTHING now? Seriously this is the least progressive way to look at new technology.
Exactly. Holographic 3D displays and glasses free are the future. 2D displays will feel like black and white tv in a few years. When depth and head tracking is added to the experience it adds a whole other level of immersion, while 4x1080p in 2D is still the same ol' flat static image, just a bit sharper, nothing to run home about.