340°

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 >>
pushsquare.com
iamnsuperman4274d 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_Darkness4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

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

Anon19744274d 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-li4274d ago (Edited 4274d 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

shoddy4274d ago

But the nextgen start when Sony say so.

Diver4274d 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.

4274d ago
morganfell4274d 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.

clrlite4274d 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.

pixelsword4274d 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.)?

blackbeld4274d ago

Well Said Chun-Li.

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

4273d ago
+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 4273d ago
dedicatedtogamers4274d 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.

cl19834274d ago

Also most people updated for digital not hd.

LackTrue4K4274d 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"

pixelsword4274d ago

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

RedDevils4273d 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_19004273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

@dedicatedtogamers

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.

GribbleGrunger4273d ago (Edited 4273d 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 4273d ago
tdogchristy904274d 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?

cervantes994274d ago (Edited 4274d 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.

piroh4274d ago (Edited 4274d 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

get2sammyb4274d ago

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

piroh4274d ago

plus all PS3, PS2 and PS1 games throughout Gaikai

pandaboy4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

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

piroh4274d ago

@pandaboy
now i see why you have only one bubble

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4274d ago
jujubee884274d 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).

iamnsuperman4274d ago (Edited 4274d 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."

http://www.techcentral.co.z...

"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."
http://www.forbes.com/sites...

"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."
http://www.apartmenttherapy...

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

jujubee884274d ago (Edited 4274d 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.

http://www.theverge.com/201...

"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.

joab7774274d ago (Edited 4274d 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.

iamnsuperman4274d ago (Edited 4274d 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

joab7774274d ago

First off, 3d tv's are not expensive anymore. I will give you that it's a fad- somewhat and much more for gaming. My family likes the movies. 4k isn't anymore a fad than 1080, it's a natural evolution in tech. Now, u can argue the old fps argument that the natural eye doesn't need 60 fps etc, but it's headed that way. I can't imagine 4k will b all that bad. If u have had a 40" 1080 tv and a 55", there is a loss in quality. If u can buy a 60" 4k tv in 4 yrs for $1200-1500, that's your market and it will sell. And if it's it tech, why not have it in a ps4? Now, as I mentioned, is it worth the production costs or taking a loss right now to possibly leverage the future. That's a different argument. I am not an expert but with their woes and increased competition, I say go for it. The only other route is a kick ads machine for cheap because the new Xbox and steamboat, along with PC evolution, Sony is gonna have a he'll of a time next gen and it saddens me.

NeoBasch4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

@ iamnsuperman

uh... 3D TVs are actually doing pretty well. Most cost between $800 to $1500. I wouldn't call that expensive, and they're not dinky TV's either. Those ones I was referring to were anywhere from 40" to 55". That's pretty big. Most people won't even buy above those sizes anyways.

Besides, most retailers are switching their stocks out. They're getting rid of the regular LCD displays for Smart 3D LED or Plasma TVs. That's just the way things are, and I don't expect them to change.

Let me see, I'll give you some stats. If I remember right, the last couple high-profile 3D Blu-Ray releases were adopted at 23% (The Avengers), 25% (Prometheus), 37% (Titanic), and 48% (Finding Nemo). Now this is the percentage of total units sold on opening week. Most of these, increased their percentages in following weeks. For example, Prometheus was at 46% a month later.

That goes to show you that anywhere from a quarter to half of consumers are purchasing new media on a 3D format when available. Therefore, 3D is not a gimmick and actually holds quite a large share in movie sales. Oh, and just in case you're still stuck in the dark ages, Blu-Ray as a whole has a 75% share on new media on average week in and week out. I'll let that sink in for you.

3D isn't going anywhere. In fact, it'll likely increase its shares when The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is released, being that The Hobbit is one of the first movies to make use of native 48 FPS, which will translate into a more smooth and respectable 3D image (as I'm sure many movie-goers who watch on digital projectors can attest).

Speaking of which, The Hobbit series of films is being filmed from a 5K source, which I'm sure they've mastered to 4K for the future. If Sony plays their cards right, I'm sure this will be a big success for them if they make the 2160P master available (each movie takes up no more than 128 GB of space--mind you this is just for the video).

So yeah, I definitely see 4K as the future. Followed by 8K, which will complete the Ultra High-Definition phase. ;)

metroid324273d ago

PS4 is said to be around the same power as WiiU ? all 3 consoles will support 1080p Native at 60fps as that's almost twice the resolution the current 360/PS3 run at Natively.

WiiU will show off Amazing 1st and 3rd party games at E3 2013 that show off their new Game Engines from Retro studio's and that Starwars 1313 demo will look bland in comparison.

ElectricKaibutsu4273d ago

Metroid32... this isn't about the Wii U, man. I like my Wii U too but there's a time and a place.

I would be shocked if the PS4 couldn't play 4k blu-ray movies. I would also be shocked if it COULD play 4k games. That tech is just not cheap enough for a console yet, whether you want to believe it or not.

The people that are getting the agrees here are saying that price doesn't matter, they want the PS4 to be the most powerful console with all the bells and whistles. I can respect wanting that, but that would sure be bad for Sony's bottom line. The Xbox gained a ton of ground this generation for two main reasons: they were first to market; they were $200 cheaper. If they didn't push that cell processor, Sony would have released sooner and a lot cheaper and just utterly destroyed the 360. The 360 wouldn't have had a chance. Why would anyone buy a 360 when the successor to the PS2 is sitting right next to it for the same price?

My point is Sony is going to try to keep the price low which means: 4k movies, yes! 4k games, no.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4273d ago
NeoBasch4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

Well, I wouldn't say 60" (you do know 2160P contains 4x the amount of pixels as 1080P, right?). 50" would be pretty good though. I'm pretty sure you'd be able to tell the difference at 40" though, but 50" would be ideal, especially with the new OLED tech Sony and Panasonic are working together on (56" is the largest 2160P OLED TV they've managed yet).

Regardless, 2160P would most definitely be for videophiles like me. No games would support it as that would require top of the line GPUs and CPUs. Most games have a hard enough time running in 1080P native.

Also, the selection for movies shot natively in 4K is pretty limited. It'll expand rapidly now with the introduction of digital 4K projectors (though 99% of theaters do not have any) and affordable lightweight cameras in the movie industry. Prime examples would be Argo, Skyfall, The Life of Pi, Drive, Melancholia, Hugo, and The Avengers. Matter of fact, I've seen more TV shows use these cameras like Game of Thrones (would be the big one), Fringe (season 4 and onward), Person of Interest, Downton Abbey, Once Upon a Time, Revenge, and Homeland. All of these should have 2160P masters.

I know Sony has been tinkering with their Blu-Ray disc specs so they can keep up with the changing times. I think they managed a 1 TB disc, but I can't say for sure. Even so, they'll need to update the profile. So I'm guessing more firmware related to this. From Sony's eyes, it's better that than losing out to HVD (Holographic Versatile Disc) for the coming generation (Ultra High-Definition: 2160P and 4320P).

In summary, it would be a nice feature to add for the upcoming release of 2160P movies (though I'm not exactly sure how Sony plans to release them, this is the best I could find for now --which is a cheat --downsizing 2160P masters to 1080P for a more rich and accurate color pallete, so not true 2160: https://blog.sony.com/press... ).

aquamala4274d ago

why not? we have tablets now that have higher resolution than 1080p . ipad 3 is 2560 x 1600.

Muffins12234274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

Not if your upclose,On a computer monitor i can tell if something is 4k or 1080p and its only 27 inches...half what you say the human eye can see...phhh bullshit.

wastedcells4274d ago

Why not. People said PS3 didn't need bluray or Hdmi. Times they change fast. More tech the better I say. F@ck the hatters. Gimme bleeding edge. I work hard to be able to afford it.

kupomogli4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

People who are saying 4k doesn't matter are people who really know nothing about resolution types in games.

Let's say the latest Resident Evil was native 1080p. It's 720p but let's just say it's 1080p. If the exact same game was in 4k resolution, there's two ways it could be developed. It could have been developed in 4k the exact same way so less jaggies, better color, etc or, it could be the exact same graphics and you see four times more of the area.

Another way to describe 4k resolution compared to 1080p. Open a picture in an art program that is the exact same size as your PC monitor. Change the zoom to 400%. That right there would be considered 1080p. Now change it back to 100%. That would be 4k. The comparison is that you can see four times as much with 4k than you can with 1080p, so if a developer wanted to create a game that looks just as good as another game but allow you to see a larger area, they could do so.

DeadlyFire4273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

Need no? Will it have 4k games at 30 fps? Only way I see that being possible is with 4 Tflops in the console. There was an article I remember reading about next generation games being 30fps again. That would guarantee 1080p at 60+ fps. In a way that makes sense but its ultimately up to Sony to let us know so....

They lasted 7-8 years this generation before a new console with PS2 lasting 12 years. How many years are they aiming for with this new generation again?

4K playback and up scaling possible for movies definitely.

B-radical4273d ago

But think 3-5 years from now will 60inch tvs be standard? Blu-ray really hadnt taken of when ps3 was released but sony did a great job thinking ahead and it paid of

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

@iamnsuperman
Then why did they show a 55 inch?

Sony is really pushing 4k kinda earlier than I think they would.

If you watch the CES show( http://www.gsmarena.com/wat... they said they are launching a more consumer friendly 4k tvs end of 2013 and also they are starting a US only 4k streaming service and all their upcoming movies and recent movies(like spider man) will be available in 4k.
Also their new blu rays will upscale movies to near 4k resolution. All this ha\\announced for 2013.

I would buy a 4k tv if price is down to <$5000

lfclee4273d ago

Samsung have already released there 4k tv !

Gamer19824273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

4K will be supported but games will hardly use it like now no game uses 1080p. The reason is hardware like now. Unless it comes out with stupid hardware making the console cost over $700 its gonna be underpowered for 4k gaming. It might work fine for 4k TV and movies however there will be no movies and tv broadcasts for about 5 years so its completely pointless right now. You cannot even fit a 4k movie on a 25gb bluray. Plus movies and tv shows arent recorded in anything above 1080p right now. So lack of content even if the tv could show it.

Toolster4273d 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"

If that's true then why did Sony and Panasonic show there 4k sets only being 56" in size?

lfclee4273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

Yes I think Samsung and l.g have released there's haven't they already .

Crazyglues4273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

I don't know how this is even a question? for one PS4 is a system that is designed to last 10 years by definition of how Sony makes their systems with a 10 year cycle..

PS2 - 10 year cycle
PS3 - 10 year cycle
PS4 - What were you thinking 2 yesrs.. LoL

No it's a 10 year, so if you just think about that, it means you really have to think about the future for your system to last.

So in a year or two 4k will be what all HDTV's will be about as they become more affordable and consumers see them in person and see the value in 4K content.

This then becomes the standard for how you want all your movies - you can watch youtube 4k videos right now - http://bit.ly/HhX1fM - watch that video in 720p it looks amazing..

So if the system is going to be future proof then it needs 4k

When people say oh it doesn't need to do games bigger then 1080p .... LOL

I want to say you do know PC's have been doing higher res then 1080p for a long, long time.

And while right now thinking about a game running in 2k might seem crazy, 4 years from now that could be the new standard, especially if you have a 4k HDTV...

.____........___...____
.____||......||.......____||
||.........___||.......____||

hakis864273d ago

Yes it needs 4k - because all major TV makers are now pushing 4K, and TV's with 4K will get affordable soon. And there is a HUGE improvement in picture quality.

I sure as hell want 4K, at least video (not expecting to see 4K games).

GribbleGrunger4273d ago (Edited 4273d ago )

No, it doesn't 'need' it but it's likely to have it in one form or another. Sony have TVs to sell and many other companies rely on Sony to broaden the market. Sony did it with Blu-ray and now they're doing it with 3D. If we are to get what we want then Sony needs to get what they want. As someone else pointed out, I would be happy with 1080p at 60fps (providing nothing at all gets compromised such as lighting or AI)

We may just see the occasional PSN titles in 4k but that is likely to be all.

evilunklebud4273d ago

Maybe.... it appears 3d, in its current iteration, is failing to attach..... got to get people excited about something.....

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 4273d ago
chukamachine4274d ago

I have 4k eyes, so I can't wait.

Seriously though.

1080p 60fps with some aa would do for UNCHARTED4,KILLZONE4,BF4,RESIS TANCE4,MOTORSTORM4.

PS4.

Question_Mark4274d ago

You have four thousand eyes? Where do you put them?

ElementX4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

LOL the franchises. Is that all people want? More of the same?

FlyingFoxy4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

PC's sweet spot with a mid-high end video card is 1920x1080 for games to run at a consistent high framerate.

Go higher and you need a dual card, this introduces microstuttering. Until microstuttering is ccompletely eliminated i don't see a point in higher res for games.

For films yes, for games definitely not unless video cards can magically become over 100% faster on next release, and we all know each new card is usually between 10-20% faster than the last. So that aint gonna happen. But if you want a constant 60FPS you need to run full HD not higher, PC gamers should be fine because John Carmack even said next gen consoles will only run Doom 4 at 30FPS, so even the new consoles won't be capable of smooth framerates.

b_one4274d ago

if games will be made for 4k resolutions just imagine how maxed out specs will be to support such res.

Tzuno4274d ago (Edited 4274d ago )

They need 4k(more like a "brand" name) as a excuse for next gen.

Show all comments (121)
330°

Why do Sony keep making obviously bad decisions?

TSA writes: While the PlayStation 5 has been the runaway winner of the generation, running laps around Xbox for the last few years, it's been a pretty bumpy ride.

Read Full Story >>
thesixthaxis.com
darthv7216d ago

I disagree... Sony may make a bad decision now and then, but to say "keep making" implies they are doing it all the time. That is MS who does that. And to be honest, Sony gives every idea a chance, no matter how good or bad the end result turns out. The "bad decisions" are more associated with the teams who come up with them than Sony who just lets them do their thing.

pwnmaster300016d ago

100% agree.
One thing I like about Sony is they at least give it a try. No matter how much some fans disagree, they always take chances.

I mean look at Concord and Astrobot.
Two completely different games.

GhostScholar16d ago

Concord is the whole point of the article and no one wanted it and no one is playing it.

outsider162416d ago

They should have researched how the fanbase would react to it.
Would the game be better as a f2p model or paid.
100 million or more spent, they could atleast have done that.

Chevalier16d ago

I think people forget the original Uncharted opening month only sold 50,000, but, Sony believed in the series and built it up from nothing.

They could have been complacent and said no to TLOU when Uncharted blew up too.

Cacabunga16d ago

It’s ok to make bad decisions, the important thing is to learn from them and improve from there.. grants you more respect

fr0sty15d ago

Jim Ryan steered them off course with the GaaS BS, and once you start up several projects and dump hundreds of millions into them, you have to try to at least make something back off of them. Now that these games are releasing, we can start to move past them, and back to what made Sony so great to begin with.

thorstein15d ago

Concord was made by a studio that Sony bought a year ago. This entire article makes no sense in that context.

Tankbusta4015d ago

Concord wasnt a chance it was a idiotic cash grab that was 5-7 years too late to the hero shooter genre...a chance would be creating a game in a genre that wasn't established

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
GhostScholar16d ago

But people blasted Microsoft when they let the redfall devs “do
Their thing” lol

Rude-ro16d ago

Big difference in waiting a decade for a new AAA ip from Microsoft for it to be redfall vs A game that got hammered non stop from the beginning from Sony.
Huge difference.

DodoDojo16d ago

Let them do their own thing? Lol Microsoft had them rush it outdoor when clearly they needed more time and according to reports many of the devs left during development because they didn't want to make a multi-player game.

pwnmaster300016d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Yeah like how everyone busted Sony for the same thing.

But also Sony didn’t really hype up concord. It was already blasted to hell.
Now MS hyped up redfall fully knowing it was ass.

Also red fall was really bad at launch unlike concord.

The only thing that saved red fall from having the same fate as concord was game pass. If Sony put concord on plus it would have a way more active fan base and be alive still

For me redfall is far worse then concord.

TheNamelessOne16d ago

@pwn

Sony didn't hype Concord? Open and closed beta, tons of advertising. They even spent the money to get it featured on that upcoming Amazon tv show - Secret Level. They outright bought the studio.

The hundreds of millions of dollars Sony spent around the Concord IP says otherwise.

derek16d ago

Neither the maker of Redfall or Microsoft are the victims of unfair treatment.

pwnmaster300016d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Thenamelessone.

I rarely saw any ads for concord, compare to other games like god of war, spider etc. tons of advertising??? Literally just normal advertising for a game they own.

Open and close beta, of course they will do an open beta. It’s a multiplayer game. Has any multiplayer game not have that?? The purpose of it is to work out the kinks that people didn’t like. That is not hyping a game up. Your reaching.

They literally just released how a normal multiplayer game should be. of course they will market a game they own, it’s literally their job to do so, but they did not overhype it to be something more then it was.
Redfall had more advertising then concord and that’s fact.

16d ago
Einhander197216d ago

Ok, Redfall and Concord are totally different problems.

Redfall was rushed by Microsoft so much that the game was completely and obviously unfinishe. You might remember they had to put a sticker on the box because it didn't have the promised 60FPS mode, as well as the game being so broken the games enemy AI didn't work as well as textures that took minutes to fully load and many other problems, the game was barely even a beta build on release.

Concord was a fully finished and highly polished game that consumers simply didn't want. The game was not bad on the technical level at all, it was 100% made to Sony's highest standards.

FinalFantasyFanatic15d ago

@pwnmaster3000

I think I only ever saw one or two ads before Concord released, and even then, I saw more from streamers talking about the game, otherwise it's like this game barely existed, or at least the marketing barely existed.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
CrimsonWing6916d ago

Jim Ryan has been a complete sh*t show from the very start. In fact, this whole Gen has been maybe the weakest I’ve seen since… well, ever for Sony. I thought with Jimbo out things would be brighter, but… well, we’ve got a bunch more GaaS coming our way. Let’s just hope it gets balanced out with their stellar traditional games.

DarXyde15d ago

Frankly, we shouldn't really care if they do GaaS. Why not?

The issue, for me, is having the very competent non-GaaS studios work on GaaS. If they want Haven to do Fairgame$, I really don't care. Bungie can make Destiny and Marathon forever. But when you try to get Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Insomniac, Guérilla, etc etc on that?

Now we have a problem.

CrimsonWing6915d ago (Edited 15d ago )

@DarXyde

What is the point of the GaaS business model vs just making a traditional game? I guess the real question is why would you choose to develop GaaS games? I’ll give you a hint, it’s to f*cking continuously milk consumers through recurring revenue on a budget stretched thin over years.

The model is disgusting and quite frankly it’s some Frankenstein’d concept stemmed from the mobile game design model. I don’t care how fun a GaaS game is, it’s a model that is the cancer of this industry and the fact that they keep forcing it after failure after failure is revolting.

DarXyde13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Mate, I'm not a fan of GaaS games. I also don't like online multiplayer or first person shooters.

So what do I do?
Avoid all of them. I just pretend they don't exist. And really, I don't care for the studios making them either. Never played a Treyarch, Bungie, or whatever game I couldn't just tune out.

Same deal. Allow them to exist, but don't engage. They can be super scummy pay to win models, but we've got to let the community decide. Sony has already learned the hard way that a great single player studio doesn't mean they're a great GaaS studio.

I think they're learning the lessons quickly, really. Even if they still have some GaaS in the pipeline, we see how quickly they pulled the plug on Concord. They've been letting Insomniac cook, so I tend to believe they're being cautious and not letting their golden geese make those games.

0hMyGandhi16d ago

why do I get the impression that no one actually reads the articles anymore.
Read the article.

BehindTheRows15d ago

They'd rather argue with each other. If it wasn't so typical, it'd be funny.

Jin_Sakai15d ago

You don’t keep making bad decision when you just released one of the best games of the generation.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 13d ago
Goodguy0116d ago

This gen has all but been odd.

Philaroni16d ago

I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this. I don't want to even guess what's next. For all I know we could finally divide by zero. And the Mc Flurry machine will work at every Mc Donald's.

FinalFantasyFanatic15d ago

I don't even know what's going on anymore, it seems like dumb decisions all around despite clear warning signs, from Microsoft/Sony, from multiple developers, etc... The entire gaming landscape is just baffling at the moment.

VivaChe16d ago

The writer's take on PSVR -- totally true. But it's not just PSVR; for whatever reason all the VR companies just don't invest and support the platform like they should. Even the mighty Oculus Quest 2 + 3 have oddly feeble software support. I see mostly the same games and apps on the store now as I did 3 years ago. PSVR is another one of Sony's "abandonware" examples (along with Vita, PS TV, etc. etc.) that are just head scratchers. Like why even develop and release a piece of hardware if you're not going to support it? I don't know.

But the writer isn't correct about the Portal. That one has been a success I think. It works pretty well, and lots of people love it. Now notably, that one doesn't require much ongoing support from Sony -- it has one purpose and it does it fine enough -- so maybe that has helped.

ChasterMies15d ago

VR companies are appropriately investing in and supporting the platform. VR is still niche, generally uncomfortable to wear, difficult with glasses ,still causes motion sickness, and requires a play space that a lot of people don’t have.

TheNamelessOne16d ago

They've definitely fumbled hard in the live service space (buying Bungie, the utter failure of Concord, spending years on Factions 2 just to cancel it), Even Helldivers 2, which was a hit at launch, has lost most of its user-base due to weak post-launch support.

Other than that though, they've been doing well.

RhinoGamer8816d ago

Spoiled and arrogant. PSVR failures should have resulted in a house cleaning. The Discord Sony team should be fire...lots of talent on the market.

Show all comments (67)
170°

Sony Executive Admits Company Needs To Work On Having More Original IPs

Sony CFO says that the company lacks the creation of enough original IPs, but this statement spans more than just Sony's gaming division.

-Foxtrot17d ago

The thing is they do have a lot IP wise but most of them aren't be used

Legend of Dragoon? Syphon Filter? Resistance? Dark Cloud? Ape Escape? Heavenly Sword? The Getaway? LocoRoco?

You have the IPs, you just don't try to use them

How long have we been wanting Bloodborne 2 or even a remaster?

Whitey2k16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Or just buy a publisher that do have IPs

EA
Capcom
Sega

These 3 publishers has tremendous amount of ips and not just gaming ips but also for sony movies entertainment and for Esports aswell that includes Live services aswell looking at EA apex titanfall etc etc

Tbh I'm getting sick of remasters it be like gta 5 , ps3 , ps4 , ps5 , eventually ps6 and 7

tehpees316d ago

No. Just no. The first parties cannot afford to buy out major publishers so stop pushing this practice. It’s BS!

Microsoft closed so many because the amount they bought was not financially sustainable.

The only benefit to the buyer is they inherit their IPs. It’s bad for gamers and it’s bad for workers. Enough with the ‘revenge buy’ nonsense

KyRo16d ago

Buying whole publishers is lazy AF. Sony has some incredible IP that people love but they refuse to use them. GoW was reinvented. There's a lot of other IP that could reinvented and modernised too.

The one thing that has let Sony down this generation is staggering out PS first party games (remasters don't count like TLOU, Until Dawn). Were a bit starved of them. Let's hope this state of play fixes some of that.

Profchaos16d ago

How's that working out for Microsoft hasn't killed their platform and forced them to go multi plat because they had to make a return on invest at all right ?

MrDead16d ago

Why would they need to buy those publishers when Sony are their lead platform in the console market? They already make games for the PlayStation, all that would happen is what we've seen with MS, a handful of already rich people getting wealthier at the cost of industry consolidation and thousands more devs being fired.

Whitey2k16d ago

@Mrdead and others Microsoft are a bunch of fools and they don't know what there been doing since xbone all I'm saying is just one. there not just for us gamers but it would probably help them alot more within the movie space and Esports arena if there concerned about the lack of ips not just for games but movies aswell

15d ago
+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
Profchaos16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Nintendo have successfully recycled their legacy IP since the 80s if an IP is good it will have staying power

Sony for some reason love to run with a particular mascot or game series for a generation of two then send them out to be retired.

It's also funny timing this was said right after the launch of the highest metacritic rated game of the year which happens to be their IP

FinalFantasyFanatic16d ago

I honestly don't know why they've benched all these IPs, there are lots of people who would clamour for a new entry from any of them. I already bought some of these games as Playstation Classics on the PS4, I also believe they don't need to spend AAA budgets on them, some of them can easily be done on a AA budget.

raWfodog15d ago

New IPs are always welcomed but, as Foxtrot pointed out, Sony has a vast library of proven IPs that they can draw from. Whoever is in charge of making these decisions needs to get their head out of their you-know-what.

15d ago
DOMination-15d ago

Unquestionably, Sony are sitting on a lot of unused IP .but how many of those games would go on to be commercially successful? I feel like this is the reason why we don't see them being greenlit (even though nearly all of them were critical hits).

Out of all of the ones listed by users, Syphon Filter imo has the potential to be a big hit if they made it a AAA game. There's an obvious hunger still for that genre and there's a gap in the market with Ubisoft continuing to sit on/screw up their Tom Clancy games.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
Lionsguard16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

It just still irks me that they have something like Astrobot for YEARS now and they've really done JACK with it. They could have had a Fall Guys game with the Astrobots before Fall Guys were a thing. They have something great and they're just sitting on it like idiots, that is until the recent Astrobot game and even then... they ignored any VR compatibility...like, what are they thinking? Do the people in charge just hate money or something? That must be it if they sat there and thought Concord was going to do gangbusters. Still no Bloodborne 2, not a damn thing from Naughty Dog or Insomniac other than Spider-man. This entire generation has been a bust.

porkChop16d ago

"they ignored any VR compatibility...like, what are they thinking? Do the people in charge just hate money or something?"

Bro the PSVR2 failed. It was DOA. They aren't going to waste a bunch of extra resources on making the game VR compatible.

And, sure, they could have done a Fall Guys-style game with Astro Bot. However if you just pump out trendy games like that under the Astro Bot name it'll devalue the brand. It's called milking, and it's what killed a lot of great franchises.

Profchaos16d ago

I agree they wouldn't waste a bunch of money on making it compatible but they should it's about respecting the fans that outlayed hundreds of dollars for a headset that they dropped within a year.

If Nintendo can respect it's fanbase enough to release multiple huge games on the Wii U with 13 million sales Sony should be able to respect it's fans who brought the psvr2 also

Lionsguard16d ago

It wouldn't have failed if you know...they made games for it but now we know where all the money is going, crapfest GaaS games. You also can't devalue something if they never really valued it in the first place. Also, is Nintendo devaluing Mario? The ONE thing Sony has going for them and all of a sudden you're protective of it? I'm not saying they have to cram Astrobot into everything, but to also neglect it to this degree is also criminal.

UltimateOwnage15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

PSVR 2 was never going to reach a bar critics would say is a success. Even the PS Vita didn’t achieve that and it was still a fantastic platform with excellent games. PSVR 2 shows Sony is willing to take risks to make new types of content. MS basically bowed out of VR completely and it’s kind of baffling.

Michiel198916d ago

i honestly dont give a fuck about their ips and which they use, just give us more games that aren't 3rd person action games and stop thinking that if you wan't to revive an IP, you need it to be the biggest blockbuster game ever with budgets in the hundreds of millions.

RaiderNation16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

Sony has a blue billion IP's that have been in friggin "cryosleep" for years! I'd rather see them revisit some of those before adding new ones...

Killzone
Resistance
Socom
Syphon Filter
Dark Cloud
Bloodborne
Motorstorm
Mod Nation Racers
Wipeout
Warhawk
Legend of Dragoon
Jack And Daxter
Sly Cooper
Infamous
Twisted Metal
Patapon
Fat Princess
Puppeteer
Jumping Flash

And I'm sure there are more that I'm forgetting!

bRuud8316d ago

They have enough IP's but nog enough studio's to actually make them.

RaiderNation16d ago

I don't expect ALL of those. I'm just pointing out that they already have a ton of existing IP to choose from that are known quantities. I'd rather see them resurrect some of those before choosing to add more to the list.

red2tango16d ago

The fact that we don't have a SOCOM game yet since Confrontation is bull$hit.

porkChop16d ago

We got SOCOM 4 after Confrontation. Though it wasn't so good, and it released the day before PSN went offline after the big PSN hack. Terrible timing and it was DOA.

red2tango13d ago

porkchop, Nocom 4 wasn't socom. That was a lame ass attempt at COD in 3rd person.

GOULDYBOBS16d ago

I played nearly all of this list and yet wouldn't be interested in remake or prolonged sequel! I want something new

RaiderNation16d ago

I don't believe you at all. The law of averages alone say there's at least SOMETHING on that list you'd be interested in playing a new iteration of. I think you're just being hyperbolic to make a point.

Show all comments (35)
120°

Sony Patents Controller With Movable Grips To Improve Vibrations

A new Sony patent wants to bring movable grips to controllers to keep the vibration quality consistent regardless of how you hold them.

OtterX41d ago

"Keep the vibration quality consistent regardless of how you hold it."

I'm on board. 👍😁

Jin_Sakai41d ago

Just give me Hall effect sticks!

Vits40d ago

No. And you know what? Just because you asked, the newer variant will use run-of-the-mill potentiometer-based components that are not only soldered to the motherboard but also glued with epoxy so you can't remove them. /s

S2Killinit40d ago

What is hall effect sticks?

sagapo40d ago

@s2killinit:

Hall effect sticks use a hall effect sensor (which measures magnetic field changes) and a magnet. By moving the stick, you move the magnet in front of the hall effect sensor and that sensor translates those movements into electrical signals.

Stickdrift with hall effect controllers is very very rare.

Popsicle40d ago (Edited 40d ago )

Please. I have two controllers I swap in and out. My launch controller is drifting slightly, and the newer of the 2 is drifting so badly I need to replace it. Trigger tension is messed up on my launch controller so probably should replace that one also.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 40d ago
just_looken39d ago

If you want consistent vibration just get some sony stickers then head to a sex shop and get a vibrator that combo is cheaper than a ds5 better quality and does not uses a inbuilt battery pack.

OtterX39d ago

Not sure what you're going on about. I just enjoy a controller with good consistent vibration in my hands. ;)