It surprised no one, but Sony’s official announcement of the PlayStation 5 has extended the millennial video game console war for another generation, and it could be the last.
The Human Eye can’t see past 30 FPS
I could have sworn 60 was the magic number. But yes I agree though buying tech you can't even notice is a waste of money and time.
"PlayStation 5 is coming. Will it be the last one?" NO! Now the start of the troll articles by the mainstream media that don't know what they're talking about. People asked the same question about the PS4 /XBO generation and yet they're still here. Will cloud gaming offer more options to play console games? The answer is yes. But it certainly won't kill off traditional consoles in the space of a generation. VENOM says you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a PlayStation 6.
I thought it was either 85 or 120.
bu bu... https://neurogadget.net/wp-...
Didn't articles like this come up when before the PS4 arrived? and After the PS4 arrived articles said it's likely to be the last console gen lool Spoiler alert there will be a PS6, PS7, PS8 and on and on. The console market is thriving and there will always be room in homes for consoles. #dealwithit
This is all that matters, right here. The console market is making billions of dollars every year for Sony, Nintendo, and Xbox. Why would they stop making consoles as long as they are making that kind of money?
@CorndogBurlar Not to disagree. There will be a PS6. Just like as Spencer noted there will be a next console after Scarlett. But if these companies could make the same money selling it as a service (PSNow or XCloud) over having to do it with local hardware they would drop the consumer hardware aspect of it. Hardware and support of that end is the most expensive part and, in most cases, with very little return. And as streaming (again years off for this) takes a greater grab of the pie, it means the consumer consoles will become even more expensive to support as that population dwindles. This is not a Microsoft or Sony or even a Nintendo thing. If any of these companies (which they probably all do at the same time because it will be apparent the end is near) saw streaming and other services taking over on the money end with the added bonus of not dealing with the constant need to update the a consumer hardware to keep up, they do it in a second. Far easier to just update the server hardware at any time then to replace a consumer line every 6+ years. Moving on would be a no brainer (from a business perspective). Thankfully, that time is far, far, far off (not just pass the PS6 but the PS7) but, that day will come. That is the problem with Stadia. Not that streaming isn't the future of gaming (sorry but streamnig will be whether that is Sony, Microsoft, Google or others). No, it is the problem that it is streaming without the local game play to make up for the problems of the service is a losing proposal. Streaming only option is not going to win the day. That is what is wrong with Stadia it is too early for an only streaming option. Just like being a streaming service in 2014 (PSNow) but with a console support was not ready to be accepted by mass consumers five years ago. But, that time where game streaming combined with a strong console is now. Streaming is good option for gaming it is not something that will work as the only option in the coming yearsg. Over time the console aspect will dwindle away (or very least play a minor role in gaming).time for game streaming requires a the local aspectalso was
.. I hope you’re trolling. It’s probably a joke, in which case; haha. 😅 For anyone who believes this myth though: If you can’t see a difference between 30 and 60fps (let alone 100fps) your vision is substandard. “ The human eye can physiologically detect up to ~1000 frames per second. The average human, tasked with detecting what framerate he/she is looking at, can accurately guess up to around 150 fps. That is, they can see the difference in framerates all the way to 150 fps.” Some people can tell a difference way above the average too.
LOL. No. People can't just guess a frame rate. Company I work for has done extensive testing on this kind of stuff. A person trained to notice the differences in different frame rates could probably do it, but anything past 45 is probably just a best guess based on commonly recognized frame rates. One doesn't have to be a professional graphics person of some sort to be trained, but what people really see is the way the rendering process is affected by different frame rates, not the individual or collective frames themselves.
Rainslacker: Can’t vouch for that source, the guessing part is secondary to the point I’m making.. Though I’m sure it was multiple choice. The difference between 30, 60 and 120fps is plainly obvious. The cut off point when it goes over 60fps differs from person to person. Some people get a perceptible difference between 120 and 240. If anyone can’t see a difference between 60hz and 120hz they have substandard visual perception. It is absolutely, completely obvious the difference. I’m just talking about simple motion, things moving around. Nothing complex. You can test this easily with modern devices.
That is a myth. The human eye is not limited to 30 FPS (or 60FPS, for that matter). Below are some links which you might find interesting if you want to learn more: Link 1: http://www.100fps.com/how_m... Link 2: http://www.diva-portal.org/...
Please tell me you're joking. I have a 144hz monitor, and I can tell the difference between 30, 60, 90, and 120, and even 144 purely on a visual level.
Wait a minute I thought PS3 was Sony last console/S With a title like that I’m not going to waste my time clicking on it but knowing my self I will eventually just for the 😂 LOL Here is the meat of their claim lol Many gaming executives are predicting this to be the last generation of consoles, although it’s not the first time this prediction has been made. Ubisoft chief executive Yves Guillemot told Variety last year that an all-streaming future will make gaming more accessible to players. Executives at large software publishers like Square Enix and Take-Two Interactive Software also expressed doubts about how much excitement another generation of consoles can offer. They end it with a statement that PS5 will have tech not yet available to pc,weird how that = last gen 😂
Jet fuel can’t melt steel beams.
A quick google search will show you that the human eye can see up to 150fps.
Sow how can I see 60fps?
"“The middle part of your vision, the foveal region, which is the most detailed, is actually pretty much garbage when it comes to detecting motion, so if you’re watching things in the middle of the screen moving, it’s not that big a deal what the refresh rate is; you can’t possibly see it with that part of your eye.”" -- You might be correct if focused strictly in the middle of screen. I'd argue for a competitive shooter 60-100fps would be ideal, better response time with other aspects of vision. Not to mention, some games such as borderlands feel horrid at 30. Not sure why, Destiny I am fine. https://www.pcgamer.com/how...
The human eye can't, but it can cause inconsistencies in movement when it comes to the rendering process. I do think that those that act like it makes a huge difference in some games though, because the game input loop is still often locked to 30fps.
It will be the *first one* I buy between it and PS9 with it's organic, programmable spores. Hope I don't have to take a antihistamine so that I won't sneeze out my games.
Xyzal, 5mg, take twice at launch day, then reduce dosage to one pill per day after that.
I swear these journalists will not preach that consoles will die out with each new generation
I really wonder what all these journalists would do without their primary customers, which is console gamers. PC gamers do have their sites, and there are mobile sites, and while PC gamers are engaged in such things, mobile gamers are. PC and console gamers tend to be very active, and give a good amount of revenue to these sites, so why do they keep trying to predict the death of the market. Instead, they should be trying to promote the market, and all that is good in gaming. Instead they constantly try to say how fucked up it all is.
Lack of vision and credibility. They live in their own clickbait universe, insulated from the real world.
Not even close to being the last one lol
Not this shhhh again, wonder how long we gonna keep getting this article's this time.
Haha yeah you can swap a couple of words and rerelease the same article again and again.
I guess we will know when the PlayStation 6 is announced......
They said that about the PS4 too...
Before that, the PS3 as well and they will keep saying it with the PS6, PS7 and so on.
Will this article be the last one about this s***?
Yes Playstation 5 will be the last Playstation 5. Playstation 6 will be the last Playstation 6 too
No. Will that be the last dumb question?
Please stop with the dumb questions.
No, and it's a stupid question btw, even though "concerned" game journos like to ask it every gen.
More chance of Nintendo going third party tbh...
Doubtful, Playstation makes more money for Sony than anything else they own. Worst case scenario, everything becomes closer and closer to PC and Playstation becomes Sonys pre-made PC brand. To a point, we're kind of already at that point so I doubt anything will change. The services the platforms offer will change though and in my opinion, that's where the real argument is.
I think they make more from music, but PS is one of their three pillars, so chances are they won't leave the market. It doesn't mean they will always be a console maker, but not much has changed in the console market this gen, despite all the new tech, to suggest that another 5-6 years will mean that the console market collapses into obsolescense. Chances are, Sony is going to want to be there, since they are always strong in the market.
The future of console is streaming. It's only a matter of time. Those who purely play on console submit to a closed experience only able to be had via that one company. Eventually, and it's already been thrown around by at least both MS and Sony, they're going to cut costs and make the Xbox and Sony brands a "service". This will go to Nintendo as well, I am assuming. Just the way of the world, folks. Money talks. If you want Last of Us 5, or Halo 9, chances are you have to download the app.
People can disagree with me here. For your sake, I hope you're right. I'm not saying this in the hopes I'm right; just me in watching the industry. I see console manufacturers cutting the cost of console development entirely, and going the steaming route.
The future of consoles is a service which isn't really meant for consoles? Makes sense. You act like the market for consoles is going to disappear. This is despite the fact, that without fail, every console generation has grown in revenue. Sales wise, Last gen was higher because of the Wii anomoly, but the market isn't shrinking, it's growing. How, or why, would streaming change that? Explain to me, please, why there will be a mass exodus from consoles to streaming, to the point that consoles are no longer made. The logic makes absolutely no sense.
It makes no sense if you don't want to follow the logic that I literally already stated. There's less risk of profit loss in removing the manufacturing costs altogether. Companies, outside of Nintendo, tend to lose money for years before the consoles themselves become profitable. With both companies looking into streaming services already, there's a logical argument to be made that they might go that route. Hmm? You want to play our exclusives? Well, download the app. Don't have to deal with manufacturing, creation of discs, retail. A lot of headaches out of the way. If nothing else, we're getting very close to a purely digital console space, though it's of my opinion something like streaming wouldn't be far behind. And try to remove the arrogance from your posts. I've had multiple conversations with you, and it's becoming more and more apparent you have an extremely high opinion of yourself, and it comes out in a subtly obnoxious way in how you present your point of view on here.
It doesn't makes sense from the viewpoint that it assumes a major shift in customer demand from one thing to another. That doesn't happen that often in a short time frame, and with consoles bringing in more revenue with each gen, and with the likely eventuality that they'll still be in demand by the end of next gen, it makes no sense to assume that these streaming services will supplant the traditional console. Some companies may chase after a bigger potential market as their primary goal. Others will still want to make money off the proven market they are already a major part of. Sony is likely to fall into the latter, while MS is already showing signs of the former.
Not a chance it will be the last playstation, profit continues the way it did this gen I can see new iterations for the foreseeable future. But i do think this may be the last numbered Ps console. ps6,7,8,9,10 naming ways you can only play by the book so long before you need something fresh.
Is that even a question, the last one, too much money still in the business for it to be the last one.
No it cannot be as long as Sony is a making hardware with profit...in reality computational models are evolving, there is still more to come in technologies and use of AI for example. I believe that consoles could serve as a good model for home computing too. Why would it be difficult for Sony to offer a PS5 derived computer with its own OS and creative tools (ahhh back in the times of the HitBit MSX 1 and 2 from Sony). I would love that, instead of the clunky PCs. That would benefit them a lot as it would allow for an expansion of creative developers, indies as well as open door to many other new utilization of their hardware....Rhaaa I would love too, even would be happy to participate in its concept, who wants to join?
Wasn’t this same question posed for PS4? As long as there are games, consoles will exist. They offer a cheaper alternative to gaming.
They've literally been saying "the last one" since the PS3. And digital was supposed to ruin physical games five years ago, yet both next gen systems will have a disk drive.
They've been predicting the death of consoles since the Genesis/SNES days. Last gen was when the internet really exploded, and of course, it was mobile gaming which was going to crush consoles. Yet, this gen has set records in terms of revenue. Go figure.
Ah, another dumb article from Washington Post. Will it be the last one? I sure hope so.
If playstation ever had low sales like the Xbox One Sony would cut the Playstation from the market.
If tvs are released monthly for streaming video... There will still be a need for consoles. Regardless, we need a device to provide the best case scenario dedicated to its needs. Home PCs might, keyword might, see an increase per some of the gaming community, but over all home PCs are still declining for your average home. So unless every game provider partners with tv manufacturers to be able to provide a healthy gaming environment AND the average consumer would get said tvs(not gonna happen), there will be a need to provide hardware to your average living room gamer.
The last console, perhaps. Will have to see how big their streaming service becomes.
The internet won't allow that
Keep in mind, they said this before ps3 launched. If theyre making money, then it'll never end.
every gen the same question. oh brother!!!
Another inane article from the Washington Post? Will this be the last one?
The PlayStation 3 is coming, will it be the Last one? ...No. The PlayStation 4 is coming, will it be the Last one? ...No. The PlayStation 5 is coming, will it be the Last one? ...No. The PlayStation 6 is coming, will it be the Last one? ...I’m seeing a pattern here.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.