PS5 And Xbox Series X Mid-Gen Refreshes Probably Won’t Be Necessary, Says Former Xbox Exec

This generation of consoles saw something a little different with the release of the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X. These mid-gen ‘refreshes’ weren’t just simple re-releases and redesigns of their respective consoles, but actually added addition power and support for 4K and improved HDR. Naturally, that’s made people wonder if we will see something similar with the upcoming PS5 and Xbox Series X. It’s hard to say, but one former Xbox Executive thinks it’s doubtful.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Jin_Sakai34d ago

I would still like the option for a more powerful mid gen console.

rainslacker33d ago

I'd rather spend more up front than a second console cost a few years in

Jin_Sakai33d ago

We’re not getting a more powerful, more expensive console up front so having an option for a beefed up mid gen console would be nice.

rainslacker33d ago

Guess it's a matter of perspective really. I got a PS4P this gen, and I really don't think it was necessary. While I'm fine with the performance gain, I don't feel it was worth paying double the cost over the entire gen to achieve it.

But, I was speaking more rhetorically. Unfortunately, most people don't see it like that, and if the price comes in too high, they'd just complain about it being too high, and the company being greedy.

34d ago
Imortus_san33d ago

The only time this was needed was with the PS3, the console worked and played terrible bad, Sony should have reinvented the console with a PS3 pro back in the day.

TheEnigma31333d ago

Ps3 played amazing. The Cell was just too difficult for third party devs.

Imortus_san33d ago

Amazing games at 5fps, yes I remember it well, 70%+ of the PS3 games are 720p only, tons os stereo games, most games pluged with frame rate problems, it sure was amazing.

Darkborn33d ago

It was just difficult to develop for and some devs like Bethesda make there games for Xbox and pc and have like a 3 person team port the version over to playstation in less than a month. They actually got caught doing that for skyrim ps3.

Minute Man 72133d ago (Edited 33d ago )

Too difficult? We had articles here on N4G which 3rd parties claimed no problem with the Cell. It was just hype and when they started to make games on the Cell 1st and port to 360 the Xbox had no problems running those games

tontontam033d ago (Edited 33d ago )

"Amazing games at 5fps, yes I remember it well, 70%+ of the PS3 games are 720p only, tons os stereo games, most games pluged with frame rate problems, it sure was amazing."

This must mean that other 30% of PS3 games that ran perfectly are so great that people can't help but buy the ps3 instead of waiting for next gen.

May I remind you that a chunk of gamers(even playstation fans) bought an xbox 360 because of the ridiculous $600 ps3. and when the ps3's priced was reduced to acceptable level a lot of xbox 360 owners were not satisfied with it and bought a ps3 and amazingly ps3 surpassed xbox 360's sales.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 33d ago
anonymousfan33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

A PS3 pro would have made zero sense. They had to go back to a more traditionnal architecture rather than produce a more powerful cell processor. It would have extended the PS3's life and delayed PS4 for no good reason. 720p on a 1080p TV is not so bad. Just like a 1440p PS4 pro on a 4K TV. I do believe however 8K TVs adoption will be slower and as such I agree with the author no need for PS5 pro in the foreseeable future.

Sunny_D33d ago

Lmao, what kool aid are you drinking? Most games performed perfectly fine on it for the time. The best looking and performing games came out on PS3.

JEECE33d ago

They're taking something that was true at the beginning of the generation and acting like it was never fixed, which it was. I guess Skyrim being screwed up is a late gen game that suffered, although that was the devs screwing up the save system to mess with the games memory (which is why it only messed up after you played a certain amount of time, the game didn't actually run worse from the start).

rlow133d ago

Actually, the 360 games always looked better and ran better. Especially third parties. PS3 did have some amazing games of course.

JEECE33d ago

Lol except you are literally describing the first 2-3 years of PS3. Once devs figured it out things were good. Don't get me wrong, I remember the issues in 2007 when multiplatform games came out late on PS3 and ran worse, but this just ceased to be an issue later.

Spikeantestor33d ago

I don't know how a mid gen refresh could have fixed the PS3's problems and still been a PS3.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 33d ago
Sunny1234533d ago

Doesnt matter if its necessary or not. Its a great marketing/sales tactic. Cash grab.

Ricegum33d ago

Pretty much. It's just a simple way of generating a fresh bit of buzz for the consoles. I wouldn't say it's a bad thing for us consumers though since it just gives us an option.

Sunny1234533d ago

I agree. Honestly if they make like a premium console for 1000usd, that actually beat pc specs I would go for it. Options are always better.

tontontam033d ago (Edited 33d ago )

I don't know if this is a negative comment or a positive one. that's entirely the point of these products.

I'm pretty sure that these refreshes were made to increase profits. technically a cash grab.

akaFullMetal33d ago

Not unless there is a compelling reason other than more power, then they won't make mid gen updates. They won't be able to push 8k as that's too soon,the only reason I see if they could do one is due to FPS. However, FPS is already hard to sell, as graphics can be seen and FPS can't.

Show all comments (39)
The story is too old to be commented.