Consumer technology giant Sony aims to give its next-generation gaming console an up to 10 year shelf-life, according to the CTO of its Computer Entertainment division, Maasaki Tsuruta, speaking exclusively to E&T.
After Nvidia do it then? A bit weird to talk about it, obviously when the tech comes around the consoles will follow suit, as usual. Next gen SHOULD be 60FPS and 1080p standard. with a few games going beyond the standard like a few have this gen.
Sony equals technological insanity. I wish Sony made hair brushes because I know they'd fit a toothbrush and a teli to it. Imagine a world you can brush your hair,brush your teeth and chatting on the phone while watching tom and jerry but youre on a plane. Gloriousity I say, Sony should make it
While this sounds absolutely mind-blowing it also sounds like another $600+ console :( If the games are there at launch then I'm down for it, but if it takes 1+ year like all other console last gen then I'll wait. 8k 300fps seems farfetched right now, and I fell the PS4 is coming out holiday 2013. Also 4k HDTV's aren't even in mass production yet, and 3D TV's seems to finally be gaining a little bit of ground (for better or worse). So I'm expecting 4k 120fps to be a safer option. The highest this gen was 1080p 120fps, but that was Super Stardust 3D. But as far as full retail releases go then 1080p 60fps so next gen should be able to at least double that. It's nice to think big.
8k and 300fps is impossible in these days! Maybe ps5 or ps6 but no way the next console could support this.
Holy sh*t this is overkill.... Cant wait to some more info though
Way too high expectations I'm afraid, ABizzel1. Even today's high end PC's will struggle with 4K resolution at 60FPS if games are maxed out. IF the PS4 comes within 1-2 years, I think a much more realistic ecpectation is: 4K Video output/decoding(Blu-ray?) 1080p / maybe 4k 3D video outout (Blu ray) EDIT: video support that might match what James Cameron / Peter JAckson is doing? (4K/5K at 48 or 60FPS) GAMES: 1080p standard, locked at 60FPS at least, stereoscopic 3D games 1080p/30FPS at least. Maybe 120fps for some games, so they can be stereoscopic 60FPS? Takes a lot of horsepower though...
We'll be needing an update to the HDMI spec as I think the max frame rate at 4K resolutions is 24. And there is no support for 8K at all. Just did a little poking around and the HDMI TWG is supposed to announce something about HDMI 2.0 at CES and release the final spec mid 2012. So it seems the pieces are all falling into place for next gen consoles next year if Sony and Microsoft choose to launch then.
Awesome and all, sounds like some really expensive s***, crazy nonetheless :P
Seriously, this is nuts! I want, high resolution and high polygon count, but I don't think 60fps is a necessity. In fact i don't really like it much. It has an unnatural feeling to it. Some games perform well at 60fps, but others seem to do pretty well at 30. As long as framerate is stable, it shouldn't be a problem. I remember when there were rumors that the Ps3 would be able to perform at 120fps.
who the hell want 300FPS???? ur eyes only sees 60FPS
I think you're all missing the point here... Let's say a console has the processing power for 8k resolution and 300fps. Now, let's say you have a cable with the bandwidth for that. Now, let's say you have a 1080p TV. What does this mean? Well, it means that you could have full-screen, 1080p, 4-player multi-player sessions. Instead of split-screen and resolution compromises for delivering this kind of experience, everyone would get the SAME experience. Let's face it, gaming is going social, and having a console that can do this would be pretty cool...even for the cheesiest of games. For instance, imagine a 3D motion bowling game. Four people could play at a time. They could all have a 3D view of the TV with head-tracking (LEDs on the glasses), and there would be no loss in fidelity. I'd much rather have an experience like that than a single game running at resolutions and frame rates my eyes can't even keep up with.
Still waiting for the Toy Story graphics they promised in the ps2 days! And the uncharted series running [email protected] isn't exactly the dual [email protected] they promised is it? Sony doesn't have any credibility when it comes to these "promises".
I believe that is realistic vision. The only thing that scares me is what medium will it use. PS1 - CD PS2 - DVD PS3 - Blu-Ray PS4 - ? I hope it's still BR Disks but their track record doesn't support this. Could it be BR 2.0 that supports 4k native(movies not games)? Blah, when will someone leak the specs on both the PS4 and XBoX.
@grip Your eyes arn't restricted to a "FPS" the main thing when it comes to FPS is consistency a game running at 60fps can really hurt the eyes and brain if it has a slow down it's all relative. OT These specs do seem like overkill but the thing i got from the artical is the fact they want to produce hardware than when the tech is there and widely available the hardware can take care of it. how much of what he said is actually going to turn out to be true is another thing i don't think these kind of performances are going to come into fruition
@Blackmagic: Learn to read. These are not promises, these are stated ambitions. This is what they WANT to achieve, he never says that this is what they WILL achieve. They are restricted by cost and technology and make it virtually impossible for them to achieve these numbers next gen. The thing that threw me off was that the next PlayStation wont be called the "PlayStation 4". Whaaaa?!
''also sounds like another $600+ console'' PS3 was very expensive because of the Blu ray drive, in that time, a Blu ray alone was $800 in 2006. Now it cost $200. Sony will keep the Blu ray on PS4 with better reading data and is more cheaper compared to 2006. I think PS4 won't cost more than $500.
@ blackmagic TOY STORY GRAPHICS LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- The 2001 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) 5th paragraph down. http://www.wired.com/scienc... Gates said the 3-D chips in the Xbox would be three times faster than anything on the market and offer nearly unlimited graphical visuals. “We’re approaching the level of detail seen in Toy Story 2,” he said, referring to the computer-generated kids film from Disney/Pixar. PS3 GAMES AT 120FPS ? http://www.guardian.co.uk/t... 2nd paragraph down. Kutaragi also talked about the PS3’s capability to run games at 120 frames per second,” suggests the same article. However, this is slightly more contentious. An interesting post on the Beyond3D.com forum, complete with PowerPoint slides from Kutaragi’s presentation, suggests that the 120fps comments were limited to the Cell technology’s video/movie performance on forthcoming high definition TVs and didn’t directly refer to games. So, a comment by Ken Kutaragi that was taken out of context and a comment from Bill Gates relating to the original Xbox. The internet, a great source for those willing to hunt out the truth, but an even better place to pass misinformation and lies. Repeat these lies enough times over the years and gullible individuals will accept these lies as the truth.
Couldn't agree more RDD, 1080p and 60fps is more than enough on consoles. Consentrate on gameplay.
You forgot the bit where it says, "Yes, they’re planning to go beyond 4k to 8k but this isn’t going to happen any time soon, so expecting all this on the PS4 isn’t logical". I have a feeling the PS4 will support 1080p at 60fps, but it will also allow a 4k projector to be plugged in which upscales to be plugged in for those who are super rich (the 4k projectors cost around £25,000 i think).
Science is unique in that its methods demand not only that the ideas proposed be tested ... but everything science comes up with is also inherently falsifiable. In other words, unlike religion and politics, science has no ego, and everything it suggests accepts the possibility of being proven wrong eventually.
"Next gen SHOULD be 60FPS and 1080p standard" But the one with the lowest will probably still be the most successful. Price has always been a major factor in success of a console. So long as the games play presentably, I just want lots of games.
He isn't talking about the PS4 though, just the general future playstation technology.
The PS4 is future Playstation technology ;)
True, but they ain't stupid as well; SONY knows this tech isn't anywhere near available to be used on the PS4, not when SONY already lost so much on PS3 production. I expect to see this maybe in the next console cycle, if not, no more than 20 years from now, but the thought of something like this is truly insane. One can only imagine how far will the resolution go before we reach actual virtual reality.
Excellent article with really good insight. Who would have thought that they'd be packing the next processor in 3D. The idea of 4/8K resolutions is just crazy... but I found the haptics R&D even more exciting than the graphics. PS4 or whatever it is called, couldn't come sooner. It's looking awesome!
@xer0 Jumping the gun abit early arent we? From what i read, i could not draw a clear line that those features would be in the next PS4.
After seeing CES 2012 8K and 300 fps can come sooner than we think. Back in 2009, I felt 2012 will be the year ultra thin, hand carry OLED TV will be available for consumers and guess what, I was right. I can carry a TV Set to any country tax free! That was really unimaginable during the 1990's.
They need Krazy Ken, he'll make sure the PS4 has 8k and 300fps! but on a serious note, his ambitions are what drove the Playstation brand forward and I can't wait to see what the PS4 can do, even if it is 1080p and 60fps standard. Although it would be great if Ken was in charge of the PS4's development.
What is Ken Kutaragi even doing now? I think the PS4/720 will start off with 1080p and 60fps but over the consoles life cycle developers will bring it back down to 720p so they can push more higher res textures, 4x or 8x AA and more information on screen at once.
But power will be on the bleeding edge of mind blowing! They've always been the type to support and utilize future technology. I think this time around they want a faster turn around time... Currently, the PS3 supports 4k viewing in picture stills. The Japanese ps store had an app installed in it since September last year so saying the PS3 can't handle it is a bit far fetched in general usage. I'm gonna go out on a whim but i believe Sony in 2014 they will launch the PS4, with support for up to 4k hell maybe even 5k. At the very least will have stereoscopic 3d a more attainable and less taxing processing feature at 60 - 120 fps. I'm gonna say that 1080p at 240fps will be standard for most games but the sweet spot will be 1080p at 60, or 720p at 120fps for mindblowing. If they support 4k at 300fps, I reckon ND and GG, will go after it and make the console sing... I also believe Sony will allow the PS4 to be middleware friendly, UE4 and the next iteration of cryengine will be tailored well to its highs and lows and finally I believe the consoles life cycle may extend past 10 years to maybe 15 year. They are going big but knowing Sony they will have surely made the right choices. And judging by the vita they seem to have done just that!
@Sevir You know what kind of internals the PS4 would need to play games at 1080p at 240fps. I have a gaming PC with 2 HD 6970s. I run my games at 2560x1440 and for BF3 i get 50-60fps. I'll probably get 80fps running at 1080p. So if i wanted to run BF3 at 1080p with 240fps i would need maybe 4 HD 6970s, that would be £1200 on graphics cards alone. To run BF3 at 4k you would probably get 10-20fps. Not Going To Happen.
Is 300FPS really necessary?
60 fps runs flawless, wont see a difference between 300fps and 60fps. Just more strain on the hardware
well you will see some difference, but you also arent going to have 300 fps on a console.
The difference is when you have something running at such a high framerate as 300, when it dips you don't notice it. With 60 frames per second that is the beginning of purely smooth frames, so anything below it you notice it, and almost all games at 60 frames today on console go below it in areas with a lot going on.
120FPS is way more than enough when you consider that the Average Joes cant see the difference between 60FPS vs 120FPS
dips in fps is not an fps issue but a hardware and software optimization issue. If you can create an engine that goes up to 300 fps then i think you have the resources to make a game that is locked at 60fps or 120fps with not dips. please you all can get some rest, you need it
Hell tbh I can't really tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps, but that's besides the point. The human eye actual see see at 15-22 fps each, and then the brain outputs it to what we consider "higher" fps.
8k? Where is the TV as big as a football field that is needed to see the benefit? I don't think I'll ever need anything more than 1080p. The industry suggests more pixels are better. Yes they are better to feed their wallets but for nothing else. Just give me OLED and glasses free 3D.
Don't you watch sci-fi. Eventually your whole wall will be a TV :) And we have a 70" TV right now and 1080p is not high enough for that size of a TV.
well sony one step at a time , 1080 p /60 fps first then 4k / 8k / 300fps , anyways i think ps4 is closer than we think but hey we'll see about that at E3 can you guys imagine God of War 4 and the next motorstorm game looking more realistic and brutal than ever? man i can only dream
Kaz Hirai has already said that there will be no announcements this year at E3 with regards to a PS4.
I don't doubt that, but what did he say about TGS? With the Wii U launching late this year it wouldn't surprise me to see Microsoft announce at E3 and Sony at TGS. If they are targeting a launch next year it will cause some people to not buy a Wii U and wait for the other consoles. But if Microsoft don't announce at E3 then I don't expect anything from Sony this year. I don't think they want to be first, but I'm sure they also don't want to be 1-2 years behind like they were with the PS3 launch.
lol, yea like Kaz is gonna say " yea we will announce ps4 at E3"
How is that off topic talking about resolution? Isn't that what the whole article is about? I was just stating that I have a 5 year old xps with higher resolutions than console which a. is on topic and true and actually higher than HDTV's. How is that trolling? Real technology is awlways increasing at an alarming rate while consoles are locked in for at least 5 years. In 5 years a lot can happen.
Well i pretty much expected that sony would go with the best future proof technologies. Cheers gamers & happy gaming!
Given that 4k tv sets appearing here and there my bet is that ps next will be 4k capable
I reckon 4k would be noticeable only on screens above 60 inches, and only then if you sit directly in front of it. I can notice a difference between 1920x1080 and 2560x1440 @ 27 inches, but that's because it's a monitor and I'm sitting right in front of it. One benefit to this might be the ability to have one very large screen which can display a number of smaller screens @1080p or 720p, but that's my guess. The next important thing is affordable OLED, 4K can wait. Also, 300FPS is dumb. Most people will notice no more than 120FPS, few can see up to about 220FPS. That's just your eyes reaching the limit of what they can keep up with. 120FPS is fine.
But remember that for 3D content you will need to pretty much half the sesoultion/refresh, so 8k / 300fps would become 4k / 150fps...
my high end rig hits 100+ on most games(249$ gpu) but you don`t need much more then 80....what i really want to see is duel monitor options, and a oled set up that does`nt brake the bank.
keep dreaming ~
Is it possible to tell the difference between 4k and 8k? 720p and 1080p isnt always obvious unless you are fairly close. How close would you have to be to tell the difference between 4k and 8k?
Actually you do. First off, the standard 1080p is sharpest resolution for TV's. For those that have 1080p TV sets that are beyond 32" inches would see almost no disparity between a 720p (on a 32" or below). However, if you were to compare 1080p and 720p on the same sized screen, you would notice the higher "density" the pixels are compressed giving it a more vibrant look. This is far more noticable when playing on the PC. A 1080p resolution tends to be so fine in a 22" screen that hardly any AA is needed to be implemented. Compared to a 720p image, you can easily make a distinction as it does not contain the same image fidelity. The same concept in reverse could be applied to the Vita. The device is capable of 540p, but because the screen ratio is actually 4x smaller than a TV screen, the image quality would've been equivalent of 1080p on a standard LCD screen . Now consider that factor on a 4K and 8K scenario.
The ps4 will probably support those features, just like the ps3 supports 1080p 60fps. Its just that most games wont run it. I expect some psn games to support those features like wipeout was on the top end for resolution and fps. Dont expect something like battlefield to be pushing 4k 300fps though
Now thats bullshit!
Lol 300 fps and 4k resolution. Yea that is definitly true -_-
"Sony outlines future PlayStation technology - 8k, 300fps targeted" Once again Sony exaggerates. Remember: PS3: 120FPS @ 1080p... There is NO game in the PS3 Library running [email protected] So don't expect to see 8K-300FPS anytime soon from Sony or Any other console company that uses fixed static hardware such as consoles. You will see this type of gaming on the PC first.
Super stardust HD? I don't think it's that the console can't handle it, it's that MOST games nowadays are ambitious and require a lot of the memory on the system; devs are satisfied with games running at 30-60fps at 720p, why use more resources to push it into something that's not really needed. People like to assume because it's not widely done, it's impossible, NO, it just IMPRACTICAL.
Only a fly could see at that extremely high framerate. Next gen Playstation is officially Fly-Ready.
LOL and that 300 FPS would almost be useless with most of todays displays tapping out at 60 FPS. Even 99% of todays consumer level TVs touting 120, 240, 480 Hz are actually FAKE interpolated frames from 24p, 60p contents.
Some people say they can't even tell the difference between 30 and 60 FPS, so what's the point of 300 FPS?
Some people won't even buy a PS4 so why even make it? Actually most people won't, but for the ones of us that do we want tech that'll somewhat keep up with tech for at least 5 years. I think 120 fps is the sweet spot, but I'd also like to see that on stereoscopic output, also I think 4k is a little high but 2k would be great for 55-70" tv's. And if you say most people don't have 55-70" tv's you would be right, but when the PS3 released most people didn't have HDTV's so why did they make it capable of HD? In 5 years time 4k tv's will be out and at a somewhat reasonable price for the average Joe ($2-3k) however when they first drop they will be $7-10k
I dont care about 8k or 300fps... I just want to see the console makers focus on the promised delivery of games at 120fps and 1080p. That was supposed to be the "new" standard according to Sony this generation and yet we struggle to get anything beyond 30fps and 720P on a whole.
whatever the PS4 and beyond holds.... I cant wait to see what Gran Turismo would look like.......
and God of War , Motorstorm intense cockpick view , Uncharted and even killzone
i remember before the ps2 came out, they said that in ps2 games, ever brick (in textures) featured in games could be different. Even in ps3 games and high end pc games they still copy and paste textures. They also said every tree in ps2 games could be individual. Could in theory i guess, but no dev has ever done this. Everything is copy/pasted. Its laughable the claims developers make to hype up their consoles, people lap it up too.
Given how powerful smartphones are becoming, they have to aim high. Would be bad for business if a cellphone is more powerful than your console. This is why I expect PS4 to be very very powerful so it can last those 10 years. I know Sony will deliver a powerful system but that could come at a high price. I wonder what route Microsoft will take? Cheap and affordable or powerful at a premium price?
60fps is enough,400-450 dollars would be niceXD,1080p standard,and gt6,a new jak and dexter game or ratchet,and a shooter like a new killzone would be greeaaatttt.I am just scared they might put some extra things that aren't needed which end up increasing the price another 50-100 dollars.