Sony PlayStation execs Shawn Layden and Jim Ryan sat down with Business Insider to discuss the end of console generations and Microsoft's next Xbox.
A whole article with nothing to say
I didn't really understand the point of the article. I read it a couple times to see if it was sarcasm. Jim Ryan said Sony doesn't believe in changing hardware generations like Microsoft by releasing mid-gen upgrades as powerful as Scorpio which plays all Xbox One games and used all Xbox One accessories so they released the Pro which is much more powerful than PS4 a year sooner instead. I can't tell if he's being a hypocrite or just really misinformed. Both companies are clearly doing the same thing by releasing mid-gen consoles, Sony just did it earlier with less of a performance increase. If anything Microsoft is trying yo extend our game libraries lifecycle while Sony wants to end them with each hardware generation.
What is really going on is that Sony cheapened out with PS4 Pro (less hardware, cheap design, and no UHD 4k Blu-Ray drive) trying to ride on their success, and got caught with their pants down. So now the excuse is, we don't believe in what MS is doing, but we, Sony, believe in PS4 Pro.
"while Sony wants to end them with each hardware generation." Was wondering why you were getting so many disagrees. This is something MS has adopted, is retrying, this gen, versus three generations of out of the box BC on Playstation consoles. Something that only ended because the PS3 crashed if not burned as many critics and fans alike insisted BC wasn't needed. Hell, the whole nature of simple BC changed because Gamestop, downloading as an option, and IP holders wanting money.
@Godmars, Which 3 gens of Playstations had native b/c? Gen 1 is the original Playstation which was the first and not b/c. Gen 2 is the Playstation 2 which did indeed play PS1 games. Gen 3 is the Playstation 3 and b/c lasted less than a year before the Emotion Engine was removed and replaced by software emulation. Software emulation was removed a couple months later when the 40 gig released and they started to phase the 80 gig out. Gen 4 is the Playstation 4 and not b/c. Your 3 generations is actually 1 generation and a year. I don't think you are trying to be misleading with your statement, you are clearly remembering things how you want to and not as they were.
There's a difference between releasing a mid-gen upgrade and releasing an end-of-gen upgrade that is still bound by the technical limitations of the previous generation before it.
I promise that this isn't a mid generation thing, this is the new console cycle. They are turning their console into a closed PC and I am okay with that, I love it.
'The notion of the game console "generation" hasn't really changed, says Layden, it's just that "tech cycles are getting shorter."' It's one more testimony of Sony supporting traditional console generations as opposed to Ms supposedly blurring the line between generations as they put it.
Why would anyone want console generations? It marks the lack of compatibility for consumers and huge cost for developers to start over with new design. There is no benefit that is going to outweigh the cost to consumers or developers. I don't even think the console maker benefits from it.
Yea that's not a good argument there. Tech cycles will always get shorter, been happening with pc's for awhile, although pc's are starting to hit a slight wall now. But to say you want to wait seven to eight years for a new console is dumb, the tech is moving too fast for consoles to stay up to date. I actually was hoping microsoft does a modular console, I think that would be awesome, but that's just me.
a modular console is a PC lol
Ok ob1biker. If it's a testimony to Sony supporting the traditional cycle, what the hell is the pro representative of?
@father' It's in the quote and also in my previous comment. The Pro is a 'tech' upgrade to keep up with 4K TV, 4k gaming. As opposed to a new gen console that keeps up with a new generation of games made for it and that older consoles can't run.
Ob1, you say, "...supporting traditional console generations..." like it's a good thing. Are you serious? Your defense of Sony for making a console to cater to 4K when it doesn't do native 4K or support UHD is golden! 😆 Say you like Sony's games all you want. Hell, say MS doesn't have any if it makes you feel better. But lying to yourself about abandoning your software library being better simply because, "it's traditional" is just mind boggling. There's no way in hell it's better than keeping your library of games you paid for as you invest in new hardware. Also, by your definition, Scorpio is just a tech upgrade to keep up with 4K: Native 4K, UHD, 4K Streaming, 4K/60 video capture, and yet it still plays XB1 games with enhancements to users of 1080p tvs. PS Pro more is more of a cash grab than a tech upgrade for 4K by comparison. One more thing: I remember when Nintendo wanted to stay traditional by opting for cartridges on N64. They were stubborn and thought, "people will still buy it because we're Nintendo". Same thing is going to happen here if people realize that their library of games don't go with them on Sony's platforms. Breaking tradition is what got Sony into the industry, and breaking traditions is the only place innovation comes from.
@TheCommentator 'abandoning your software library being better simply because, "it's traditional" Wth are you talking about? A new gen doesn't necessarily mean no BC. On the opposite its very likely next gen will have BC. And yes the Scorpio is a tech upgrade, not a new gen
Look, these are your quotes: - Tech cycles are getting shorter... One more testamony of Sony supporting traditional console generations. (Meanwhile, Sony releases the Pro which breaks console traditions in the most fundamental sense already.) - MS (is) supposedly blurring the line between generations. (What exactly is the difference between Sony and MS' design philosiphy then?) I already pointed out that Pro is not designed to cater to 4K while Scorpio is, but tell me, how is MS blurring the lines between console generations if Sony is not? Do you think that when Scorpio is replaced that MS will still support it and the Scorpio 2, while Sony will just abandon PS4 and make PS5 only games? Still pretty shitty, considering Sony pretty much won't ever do BC because people don't want it then, huh? MS' slogan: No one gets left behind. Sony's Slogan: We got yo' money, bitchez!
@TheCommentator 'MS' slogan: No one gets left behind. Sony's Slogan: We got yo' money, bitchez!' Haha don't get me into your crappy fanboy wars pls ;) It's in the companies official approach an messaging. Sony believes in traditional console GENERATION (don't put the emphasis on tradition just because it suits you. Maybe things are clearer by saying games using the new potential and can't be played on previous model? That what new gen is. Ms said many time they don't want new generation any more and also their moto 'gaming beyond generation'
Yip, almost like when Spencer is interviewed or when he tweets.
@Death: Okay, two gens of BC. Point was that it was day-one out of the box versus a trickle a year or two after release. BC is most effective when present day one.
With console generations becoming shorter, Sony absolutely needs to ensure that the PS5 is fully backwards compatible with PS4 and that should include the peripherals as well as the games. If they ignore this, then I can foresee a significant portion of their current install base switching to Xbox.
That doesn't make sense because their current base won't be able to play their games on Xbox either. And 1.5% of Xbox users taking advantage of BC doesn't seem entirely promising for Microsoft either. That being said, with the huge catalog of exclusives for PS4, one can only hope they are also playable on PS5. Then again from a business perspective this keeps the value of the PS4 higher than the Xbox One. I see the PS4 hitting 100 million for sure now.
Eonjay, "And 1.5% of Xbox users taking advantage of BC doesn't seem entirely promising for Microsoft either." It's not 1.5% OF USERS, it's 1.5% OF 1.65 BILLION TOTAL MINUTES OF Xbox usage : "In the end, only about 1.5 percent of the more than 1.65 billion minutes of Xbox One usage time we tracked was spent on the 300+ backward-compatible Xbox 360 games, in aggregate. That translates to an average of just 23.9 minutes per sampled active Xbox One user spent on Xbox 360 games out of 1,526 average minutes of Xbox One usage during the sampling period." https://arstechnica.com/gam... -I keep hearing ps guys mis-stating this analysis over and over again trying to make it bad when in fact it actually goes against the ps fanboy narrative that Xbox has no games so that's why Xbox fans support BC. In fact what the analysis highlights is that over a 5 month period EACH INDIVIDUAL XBOX GAMER AVERAGES ALMOST 25 MINUTES OF GAMEPLAY TIME WITH A LAST GEN GAME.= That is great, because the same analysis shows Xbox gamers are spending the lions share of their time playing NEW Xbox games daily, then every once in a while they say cool I havent played Alan Wake in years, let me go rock that guitar scene again.....that nakes perfect sense, that likely what Microsoft expected; which is exactly how I use it and these statistics that's WHY it's a very nice feature to have. bu, bu, but just let Sony tell YOU, 'meh you don't *really want it, EA Access isnt for you either, blah, blah, blah, etc= yeah but you really do want ps now, $$$cha-ching.
Well. I admit to being wrong on the 'significant portion' remark, though for some gamers, switching from PS to Xbox and vice versa, hasn't been too difficult. A lot of PS2 gamers switched to the 360, and the following gen, maybe quite a few sold it on and purchased a PS4 instead. I agree with the other points you make.
Edit: Wrong post
"1.5% of Xbox users taking advantage of BC" Yes, but that's in the present - which is almost 4 years after the release of XO - when they've finally got a library enough to support their own games. Let's not act like a console's launch line-up is always satisfying enough for new customers. Backwards compatability is always a good thing.
the 1.5% figure has more holes in it then a cheese grater, you cant figure data the way the tried to and has already been called out on it. Heck even this site has had articles that poked holes in how they came up with their numbers. Dont believe everything you read
Historically, console generations have only been 4-6 years. Last gen was out of the ordinary in terms of length. This gen will probably be 4-7 years even with the mid-gen upgrades. I don't really see how the generations are getting shorter. I think that Sony should make the PS5 and onward backwards compatible just so we can put an end to this constant console war tripe. But if new hardware came out that was significantly better than x86, I'd be willing to give that up for the opportunity to achieve more through the games themselves. That'll likely take a while, nor not happen in my lifetime though, at least not to the point that it becomes reasonable for the mass market console industry. However, I don't see a significant portion of people switching to XBox if Sony doesn't include BC, doesn't support ongoing peripherals, and I don't see why games are an issue for Sony, as they have always had high output there. There is no data right now that suggests anything MS is doing is enticing people away from PS in droves. The promise of BC peripheral support I doubt most people care about, and BC isn't really something that drives people to buy consoles.....it's just a nice feature to have that adds value to the system.
I don't see how it is getting shorter either. If anything, it is getting longer, unless Sony considers PS4 Pro a new generation, but they already said in the past that PS4 Pro is mid-gen. It seems Sony is confused. Obviously this year is the 4th, and Sony isn't releasing a new console, so it can't be 4-years. My guess is, Sony will release a new console in the 6-8th year i.e. 2019 and beyond. Also, why would you want PS5 to be forwards compatible, but not PS4? That would be disaster, and despite Sony indicating compatibility is not something they really care about, I think they will have a poor attempt at one, just like boost mode on PS4 Pro.That will likely be enough to appease the masses. It is hard to say what will drive consumers to Xbox, and it might not be MS strategy to go after Sony's consumers. It seems to me they are looking at the broader market, but we just have to wait until E3 to find out. MS is holding everything tight to their chest until E3.
I think what Sony is talking about here is a different mentality on how they handle generations compared to what MS stated they intend....which is doing away with the traditional console cycle. While some aspects of MS "plans" are still a bit vague beyond the Scorpio, and Scorpio isn't considered a new gen in a traditional or even the non-traditional sense, I think Sony is simply saying they still want to have a defined console generation which will be a clean break from the prior gen...like we've become accustomed to. I don't know which paradigm would be better, because there so far isn't any way to judge the benefits or feasibility of MS own plans based on what they said, or what they've done so far. There are some aspects of MS plan which I do like....like peripherals which don't become obsolete, and the idea of forward compatibility being an ongoing thing, although I feel that can potentially bring it's own drawbacks which I've discussed elsewhere. I'm not saying I believe the PS5 should be forward compatible, but would say that if they keep the a similar hardware set, then offering BC would be expected, maybe with updates for the PS5 for cross gen purposes for games that release within that early window. Obviously, depending on the game itself, and how it's designed, moving the mid-gen principal to a single release of cross generational releases to be handled better than the paradigm of simply having two separate releases, and potentially even just offering up some updates to some older games to capitalize on the typical after launch drought, and could help make the transition better. But eventually, I'd say that a clean break does need to be made, and any compliance mandate should be removed with the start of a new gen, and leave it up to the devs/pubs. I do agree one can not say for sure what will drive consumers to one product or another, and next gen we could see a major shift back to MS, or potentially Nintendo. Lots of variables, and it's rarely so black and white as many make it seem in forums.
I agree. I don't see generations getting shorter either. PS1 was in the market for around 10+ years (1994-2005). PS2 was around 12+ years (2000-2013). PS3 was around 10+ years (2006-2017). PS4 launched in 2013, and the historical pattern we can see from the dates above, has been to launch a next gen system 6 years after the launch of the prior gen (PS4 was an anomaly at 7 years after launch of PS3). That would put Sony on track for PS5 in 2019. Seems about right considering Sony hasn't even hinted at PS5 anytime soon. If it is coming in 2019, then that would likely mean 3 more E3's between today and launch. We might not get any talk or teasers about it this year. They just launched PS4 Pro last year, so they're gonna want to ride that for at least another year before talking about the next big thing. I'd expect teasers next year with full reveal at 2019 E3 along with an "Available in November for $500" tag on it. As usual, there has been some speculation about maybe being time for a new portable. Sony has said publicly that a new portable is not really on their radar, but they've also been asking game journos, "Is that something you want to see?" I think the lack of success with Vita and overwhelming success with PS4 has left them gun shy on the portable biz. Sony corporation-wide has had a lot of fat to trim the last several years and I think the portable market will be hard to justify for them after what they did to/with this Vita. They need to do what they can to keep PlayStation biz profitable. I think the only reason we got a mid-gen hardware bump this time is because the cadence of console generations was getting out of step with major tech upgrades in the PC and television markets with the recent adoption of affordable 4K resolutions and they needed a "reset." 4 years ago, these things were outside the price range for most gamers, but since then prices have crashed to right around where decent 1080P hardware was at the time PS4 launched. Also, affordable VR tech with generally acceptable performance and visual fidelity came at a point in the generation that was too late to support adequately at launch, but too early to wait several years for the next generation. This is tech they couldn't afford to wait to support. That said, I do think MS has made some significant advances toward blurring the lines on console generations going forward that Sony hasn't matched. MS's has added their cross-buy functionality for games on Xbox and Windows PC and they've added some other PC functionality to Xbox, too. It really is finally starting to look like their vision from many years ago of having a set-top box PC for your TV. I expect MS will continue to blur that line until it's eventually gone and Xbox is literally just a Windows PC for your TV. MS has talked about shifting the hardware/software generations to be more Apple iOS device-like. Hardware and the OS gets refreshed each generation, but software keeps working. Software is often forward compatible unless it relies on a new piece of hardware, and is almost always backward compatible. And they usually go for a couple generations before support for older apps is eventually abandoned. This is a great way to treat customers and developers alike. Sony hasn't explicitly said anything similar, though they have mentioned the possibility of backward compatibility being easier to implement in the future the more PC-like the hardware becomes. And maybe that's enough for them and their customers. Too soon to tell, I think.
I doubt it. As we've learned recently, BC isn't nearly as popular as Xbox fans would have you believe, and even if it were, it will always be a distant secondary concern behind new games, an area which Sony is dominating in.
Not now, not ever. If MS wants me to buy their console, they will really need to increase their gaming catalogue. Scalebound was a promising start, but yeah..., and after that there is nothing that has caught my attention.
what else can Sony say since ps4 pro didn't work for them? a rush product to take the attention away from the Scorpio that's all.
I'm glad Sony isn't dropping the concept of console generations.
Microsoft is only doing what they're doing because they see it as an easy way to make a profit. Microsoft has two choices: Invest in new exclusives and new IP's or create Game Pass and backwards compatibility in order to re-sell old games DIGITALLY Which one would be the easiest path to the highest profit margins? Answer that and reasons why Xbox is the way it is will become as clear as day.
Rubbish. They support BC because they CAN, by following a similar hardware configuration from gen to gen (360 - X11) it's allowed them system emulation which means games can be added/supported with minimal effort. It's also likely that most BC games sold are used copies. They're cheap and in abundance. Next gen, when Sony supports BC as they will follow x86 architecture from the PS4 to PS5 people will celebrate them for giving them the option where as because they currently don't people have to demonise the 'others' that do rather than just accept that it's nice to have additional (free) features.
@Hugs, Profit driven is saying no one wants to play old games on their new systems, but creating a way to charge for it. Profit driven is releasing games you know are not finished or simply bad. Profit driven is wanting a console cycle to end so the games end with it and customers get to begin anew. Profit driven is not allowing third party services that would compete with your own like EA Access. Profit driven is mocking your competitor for talking about having unique TV shows on their console while secretly making your own and creating a cable TV replacement service. Sony's future is very clear. They spent $380 million dollars because they believe physical copies of games are in the past. Look at how excited they got when they seen 1 million digital copies of Horizon sold. Sony wants a future where game ownership is a thing of the past and where they control how long you can keep and play your games. People like you are to blame for enabling this. You attack Microsoft when they look to extend game ownership and praise Sony when they take it away. I'll be honest, I like the future where the investment I already made has value. This insures any future investments are held the same way.
MS will have their generations as well. It's unrealistic to expect hardware to indefinately be supported. They're changing up some of the paradigms involved in the traditional generational shift, but eventually, they're going to drop support of the old. It's not bad to drop support to move forward, but MS has a bad habit across their entire company of dropping it much sooner than they really should. Windows and their productivity software in particular, the OGXbox in the console space. While I'd like to think that MS will indeed support the OGX1 for the duration of what's left of this gen, I don't have too much faith in it if they feel it's more beneficial for them to simply move on. The customer is often not even a consideration when MS deems it necessary to move on.
You just cut clean through all the BS & hit the heart of it.
They've learned that they can't compete with Sony any more, so they're trying to carve out their own "games as a service" niche in the market.
@fishy, Both the Xbox 360 and PS3 used modified PowerPC architecture. The Xbox One and PS4 use x86 architecture. Xbox One is emulating Xbox 360 via software. It wasn't an easy solution, but it works very well. Each game is downloaded digitally with the disc being used to verify ownership. If you purchased the game digitallly, it simply shows up in your game list for download at no charge if you want it. Sony could adopt a similar solution if they wanted to, but the customer base makes it very clear it can't and shouldn't be done. There is nothing stopping them from reading your PS3 disc and then not charging you to stream it or in the case of the "classics" that are re-released with trophy support from being re downloaded if you already bought it digitally from Sony.
***Sony could adopt a similar solution if they wanted to,*** Nope. Cell architecture requires a beefy CPU for emulation. Trying to make the 360 look like the PS3 isn't going to change that and is extremely misleading. I get the disagreements with Sony's remarks, but it is not possible for them to emulate PS3 games on PS4. It would require complete ports of the games.
Some here really need to drop their Console war arguments at the door and the necessary need to justify their plastic machine of choice. I'm a person that loves tech no matter the platform and just love games in general (especially retro stuff) and have no need to be a fanboy and worship an item I prefer or own, but it would benefit others to at least do a bit of digging before spouting off nonsense they don't understand. Whenever I see people bring up backwards compatibility, you'll see hand in hand some bring up Microsoft's excellent miracle of a feature of disc-based/digital backwards compatibility (something PC has had in like forever) vs Sony's decision to do this in a streaming fashion via PS Now for PS4 like it's some sort of way to earn a paycheck from said companies (corporate slave like). Does anyone even know the purpose of Sony buying Gaikai? Some would go into the fanboy category and say $380 million was used for PS Now only and misinform others (and repeat in nauseum). In reality, Sony purchased Gaikai for it's tech alone for future services they had in the future. There are currently five services utilizing it, one we have already been talking about with some using it for attacking purposes for some reason. https://www.gaikai.com/#!/p... PS Now - A way to play PS3 Games via streaming on Consoles (PS4), Mobile (Xperia Phone and tablets), and PC (No longer shackled in needing to buy a plastic box to play Playstation titles) Remote Play - Continue playing your PS4 away from the console, same platforms as above Shareplay - Play “Couch Co-op” with a friend over the internet, can also pass the controller to a friend to help you out or try the game before buying PS Vue - Watch live TV or record your favorite shows on an unlimited DVR http://fortune.com/2014/11/... Playstation Store - Videos streaming in the background per game So let's try to at least have a bit better conversations now and stop dragging up information we know little about to protect our feelings toward a device one owns. @Death , please do some dang research before you start talking about what Sony spent $380 million on, you sound foolish every time I see you post, like you know little to nothing about the subject matter.
'it takes developers time" to get started on new platforms, Layden says.: And that's what defines a new gen. Good job Sony in defending a traditional console gen even if the tech constantly evolves to support 4K for example. Supporting new TV standard is different than supporting a new generation of games and that's when a true new gen cycle starts.
But the problem is that the ps4 and xbox one are already becoming dated. Look up some great unreal engine 4 games that are pc exclusive, they are leaps above both consoles. It's just nice to have a choice, I would actually prefer from now on if both companies could release two consoles each generation; you can have the base model and the upgraded one.
Last of us 2 is gonna look awesome. Horizon looks great. GOd of War is gonna look great, Spiderman is gonna look great. Nothing wrong with the graphics of UC4 or Nier. Nothing at all actually. PC have always and i mean ALWAYS been leaps and bounds over consoles after 2-3 yrs of console releases. ut then we get things like GOW2 at the end of ps2 and Last of us at the end of ps3.
"And when it comes to games, well, Ryan says Sony has them in spades, and that's what matters." And yet the Xbox fan-club seems to ignore this vital piece of information. Because its all about POWER!
2013-2016 was all power, games didnt matter. How come it switched?
No, it was an argument about an actual new gen system and price. The Xbox one is basically a hd 360 that can barely do 1080p and it cost more... The next argument, and the same argument for 6, going on 7years, is that Microsoft is not a gaming company. But, the flip flopping awards this gen go to Microsoft fans.
But with you guys it was all about "PS4 has no games", "I play games not resolution", "900p and 1080p look the same". Now it's all about 4K and exclusives are bad. How come it switched?
I never said I care about power. I care about the games. The reason I prefer Xboxone over PS4 is because of the games. Im a multiplayer gamer, but I still play PlayStation exclusives im interested in and have fun for a day with them. Its all about the games.
It never switched. Power was supplemental to games and had it's benefits in it's own right. Sony gamers have been saying it's all about the games since before the gen started, and often cited Sony's history of delivering compelling content. Yes, many Sony fans did indeed make a big deal about the power difference, but never did they say it wasn't about the games....at least generally speaking. Even with the new argument of most games being multi-plat for the Xbox side, Sony gamers were very much about the exclusives, with the 3rd party also being available.
So it comes down to gamers are patient for Sony to have games the first time after 3 years in. But its HORRIBLE when MS doesn't push out all games at the beginning of 2017? Ok got it.
Um, not only did the PS4 have plenty of games between 2013 and 2016, it had more than the competing system you so starkly defend. Get back to us when your Xbox sees its next major exclusive release, while I continue to bump on games like Horizon and Ni-oh. Certainly a can of worms you should have avoided!
Like all xbox fanboys you missed the point. It wasn't that PS4 was more powerful. it was that PS4 was more powerful and cost $100 less. Sony's machine was just by far and away a better value. Also, to a later point you made, Sony has been getting games for PS4 through out it's release. But if you remember it was the xbox crowd downplaying it saying things like Japanese games don't count, indie games don't count, remasters don't count. And now they're the ones clinging onto games like ori 2, below and cuphead (indies), defending backwards compatibility (remasters). and getting all excited because Phil took a trip to japan (Japanese games).
I have over 200 games on my xbox; I'm tired of fucking hearing this. I own both consoles but to say there is nothing to play on xbox is wrong. I play on xbox more because I feel like the online is better, the controller is better, and the OS is better. So again, just because xbox doesn't have sony's japanese games, and let's be fair that's what most of the exclusives are, doesn't mean there are no games to play. For some people it's a preference.
"The notion of the game console "generation" hasn't really changed, says Layden, it's just that "tech cycles are getting shorter." In the old days, from 2000 to 2012, you could release a new console every five to 10 years and roughly keep pace with major advances in technology, Layden says. "Those days are just gone," says Layden." Why is the PS4 Pro such a weak upgrade then? When technology is making these huge steps, you shouldn't come up with a very weak upgrade.
Price and timing.
Imagine a PS4 update as strong as the Scorpio. Most guys here on N4G would give their left arm for it.
Premium consoles only appeal to the minority. Games are more important.
you are totally missing the point. Powerful hardware does not mean less games. Think about The Last of Us 2 on a machine as powerful as the Scorpio... Don't tell me you wouldn't go nuts about it.
New hardware costs money to make, that money would be better spent on games. Same thing applies to the Pro. I wouldn't care about TLoU2 on a Scorpio equivalent, just like I don't care about the PS4 Pro, the base system is fine for me. Besides you don't even know how games will perform on the Scorpio, all you've seen is 1 screenshot of Forza.
PS4 Pro is just a incremental, mid-gen upgrade to PS4. It's not meant to be a new generation but a upgrade to play exsisting PS4 games with better framerates and higher resolution, which is why it used a souped-up Jaguar CPU and a dual GPU. When Sony releases PS5 it will be a substantial upgrade with a new CPU (possibly Ryzen), new GPU (Vega or Navi - 12 to 15 TF, probably more), more and better ram (32 GB GDDR6, HBM3), and new features overall, built on 7nm or 10nm technology. Thats what a new gen would look like
Yeah, but Sony said the console lifecycles are much shorter now. Read the quote I posted. So, if that is true, the upgrade after 3 years should be somehow significant. And not like the PS4 Pro.
@DiRtY: Significance is subjective. The Pro is clearly an upgrade. Not as big of a difference as the Scorpio-XBone but what's on screen is noticeably enhanced thus it is significant. What you are arguing is just your bias.
It came out three years after the initial PS4, and is more than twice as powerful. That pretty much lines up with Moore's law in terms of R&D, sourcing, manufacturing, and distribution. If MS had released their mid-gen at the same time, it'd probably be the same kind of jump....although potentially a bigger jump over the stock X1. PS4P isn't a weak upgrade though. It's pretty sufficient for the level of games being made today, and 4K isn't as much a consideration as many claim it to be. The market penetration of 4K TV's is fairly low right now, and while gamers are more likely to have one than the mainstream, 4K TV's still make up less than 10% of overall TV's in the home, where HDR capable TVs sit at less than 3%. If MS were not releasing the Scorpio, or they released it last year, then the specs themselves would not be considered weak by console standards. It'd actually be ahead of the game in terms of console power vs. current commonly used PC power. Scorpio jumps ahead of that quite a bit. But the power itself is referenced by the competition to be had.....much like how X1 seems to be doing poorly in relation to Sony's rather large success this gen, even though, overall, the X1 isn't doing that badly. To be 100% honest, the stock consoles of this gen could have been fine for the next 2-3 years giving us a more traditional console cycle, at which point we'd see an even bigger jump in power like one would expect from a generational shift. These mid-gens actually prolong the generation, meaning we'll have to wait longer for a true next gen, as the mid-gens aren't likely to fill that need due to the mandate of forward compatibility.
Is it confirmed that MS will be going full iterative consoles life cycles from now on? I don't recall hearing this from them but then again I didn't hear the opposite either.