Topic: PS4pro | OT

@Scollurio: Firstly the PS4 and Pro are literally the same in terms of 'generation' and whilst the Pro may have more power, its still locked to the PS4 in terms of software. Sony assure us its not going to receive any software that the PS4 won't. Its not going to have exclusive games or extra features that only work on PS4 Pro from a gaming perspective - it may have a few 'gaming' cosmetic options (as seen in Tomb Raider - a few different selectable Resolution/frame rate options or HDR on/off) but as far as gaming goes, the games will have exactly the same content, play on exactly the same servers etc...
Its only last gen that really lasted a 'Long' time before the 'next gen' released but even in the past, a lot of consoles had 'upgrades' to try and keep up with the technology. Last generation was one of the most 'static' periods of console gaming but that in part was helped by the fact that at launch, both the XB360 and PS4 were, in terms of gaming, ahead of PC's. Games looked and ran better but they were also 'complex' which meant developers had to learn the system and then push it. This generation though, games are 'scaled' back for consoles. Even the PS4 Pro won't deliver the 'games' at their 'full' potential but will be scaled back to run on the hardware.

With the technological advances - things like 4k HDR TV's, VR etc, games need a lot more power than was possible to offer at a 'competitive' price in 2013. Sony (and MS) could have built a console to last 5yrs+ and deliver the high-end gaming experience but the costs involved would have priced them way above what consumers were willing to pay. If you consider that last years top end GPU, the Titan X, was $1000 yet this years GTX1070 is around $400 but beats it in gaming terms, that shows how technological advances have leaped and how the next Gen chips perform. In terms of tflops, the Titan X actually has more but the 1070, with the new architectural advances can beat it with less 'raw power'

This gen consoles are effectively using GPU's from 2011 and, if we look at the PS4, has 1.84tflops. Its amazing that this is 'enough' to play games like the Witcher 3 at 1080/30. The equivalent PC build wouldn't probably run the game at all. I feel that both Sony and MS had to do something to stop gamers migrating to PC. Games as console versions can't offer the Full HD and maintain a high frame rate - at least not without compromising on visual quality - reducing and/or removing the visual effects.

That means they have 3 options,
1 - do nothing and hope people don't migrate whilst games gradually diminish in quality that becomes increasingly obvious - particularly to those with 4K TV's and those that can watch 4k Youtube to see how 4k games on PCs run...
2 - Release a 'next' gen console - effectively ending this gen early but able to offer a significant upgrade - maybe add in BC so it doesn't annoy as many people, say a few 'buzz words' like not left behind but ultimately release a 'next gen' system
3 - make a 'half-way' upgraded console that offers an 'enhanced' gaming experience but also protect the 'inferior' hardware by putting in 'rules/regulations'

Sony have opted for '3' and in doing so should prolong their 4th gen console and its user base for at least another 2years. PS4 Pro is the 2nd Best Selling item on Amazon in Video Games - behind Fifa17! I don't think its going to struggle with adoption rates. It will be interesting to see the sales figures of this and/or pre-order numbers...

@BAMozzy: You forget or didn't mention that PCs have generic OS's which aren't catered to gaming. They do things like have virus scanners running in the background monitoring all disk activity. They have all sorts of stuff that takes away from the raw gaming power, where the console is basically dedicating all its attention to the game. That's one way that consoles squeeze more out of the same cpu compared to a windows box, and its why you can't directly compare a cpu specs between pc and console.

Honestly I'm curious what the demand is for better graphics outside of enthusiasts. I mean, current ps4 games have downright stunning graphics, and does the average person really care about 4k or clearer textures on foliage or better shadows? I'd argue probably not.

They probably don't realize how much they care about 60+ FPS but they would if they saw the side by side comparison...
(edit: that GIF was just too #$@ large http://www.geeksaresexy.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/fpsdem...
but that begs the question... when its time for ps5 how much will people care? The ps3 was really showing its age, the ps store was embarassingly slow, games seriously held back, etc. Will there be the same demand for the ps5, or will people be content with the 1080/30 from the ps4?

@Mega-Gazz: I didn't mention. I know that consoles are 'optimised' purely for gaming where a PC is designed to carry out many other tasks and why you can't directly compare 'like for like' but I was trying to show that if you look back at last gen, the consoles (although lower spec) were actually better at gaming than the majority of gaming PC's which helped give them a bit more longevity. That combined with the more complex (at least compared to PC's) programming, meant there was a longer learning curve too which also helped prolong the life span.

As for 4k and better visuals overall, I would argue that those things do matter. Maybe not THE most important but they obviously do. The amount of people that 'compare' visuals across various platforms, the amount of people that complain when a game gets 'downgraded' from the original reveal, the amount of people that buy or want upgraded visuals on old games and the fact that 'first impressions' (which are generally a screen shot or video) appear to matter, then I would say visuals are important. Ever since I have been gaming, 'graphics' have mattered. So many reviews also refer to the graphics. Like I said though, it may not be the most important but it is still important. Even at the start of this generation, a lot of the games were released on last gen but people still wanted the 'new' gen because games looked better. If everything else was equal (such as content, fame rate etc) wouldn't you rather play in 4k with Ultra settings, 1080p (or lower) with low settings?

Frame rate to me is important - probably more important than 'resolution' alone. I don't mind playing games at 30fps and it seems that most people don't mind either as virtually all game of the year winners have been at 30fps. It didn't affect the Last of Us on PS3 winning, the entire Uncharted Series are also 30fps (at release - not inc the remasters). If you look at most peoples top 5 lists of games this and last gen - a lot are 30fps. Given the choice of a locked 30fps OR an unlocked 60fps that fluctuates frequently down to 40fps, I would choose a locked 30fps. I would of course prefer a locked 60fps to a locked 30fps but stability is the most important aspect to me. I hope The Last of Us adds HDR to that as I would like to see how it looks at 4k/30!

We have seen a lot of games this gen with unlocked frame rates and a lot of games struggling to keep to even 30fps at 1080p. The PS4 Pro should (at least) limit or even prevent any frame rate drops without a patch. The XB1s had a 7% boost and games (with unlocked frame rates and/or Dynamic resolution - another new thing this gen) have a 7% improvement so I am optimistic that similar games will be a lot more stable.

I know the PS4 has some stunning games - Uncharted 4 is the best looking game on console in my opinion. I spent a large part of my time in that game just looking at the visuals in amazement but I must admit, I am excited to replay the game in HDR - its like getting a remastered version without the need to re-buy. Its not without issue though with texture pop-in and can't always stick at 30fps (although dips are rare). Given the choice of 4k (or 1800p upscaled) with HDR, I would opt for 4k HDR. In fact I can't think of any game that I would prefer to play at (sub) 1080p without HDR if I can play this way - maybe Minecraft but I don't play that. I know what 1080p, 900p and 720p games look like upscaled to 4k. I know what 4k and HDR looks like too.

Of course as soon as the PS5 is announced, people will be interested - not just because of the 'exclusive' to that generation games but because of how they look too. E3 before this generation (games like Witcher 3, Batman: Arkham Knight, Watchdogs etc) looked amazing and people couldn't wait to play. Their first impression was based purely on the visual upgrade a new gen console offers.

More power has 'never' been a bad thing as far as gaming goes. Limited power though does affect gaming significantly!

I hear what you are saying, but I remember in the past we cared about graphics because it was a drastic improvement. I remember being amazed at Ultima III because the graphics were so good the people actually had eyes, and there was a blue dot in the middle to represent the iris! We're so far past that now, and while better graphics are better, I do feel we've started to plateau in terms of how much of a difference we're seeing and how much people really care about the difference. I mean now its "amazing vs really amazing" instead of the difference between 16 colours and 256 colours.

Of course, the proliferation of pixel graphic indies still make me angry, so I'm definitely in the "care about graphics" side of the equation, and I suspect most people reading this are... But I bet the general population either doesn't care or only cares because they're told to.

So, the pictures of the ps pro seem to lack the slide-off top that lets you change the hard drive easily? Anyone see anything about this? Because I have a 2 TB hdd in my ps4 now that I'd probably want to swap over.

@Mega-Gazz: They've actually changed it so it makes it easier to change the hard drive. There's a clip on the back that can be removed and you can then slide the hard drive out nice and easily.

nice, thanks!

Interview with Naughty Dog’s Christian Gyrling

http://www.vg247.com/2016/09/12/ps4-pro-and-hdr-this-is-the-f...

"HDR games from now on, moving forward – I think almost every single game will start supporting HDR. This is the future. We see little to no reason to not support this. It’s almost no cost, close to zero cost, to expose the HDR… but it’s an enormous benefit."

I'm leaning towards getting the Pro and upgrading the HDD first and then getting a new TV. I want to get the TV first and be ready to go day one but it's just so much money to do it all at once. I will probably get the Pro day one and pick up a TV around Black Friday.

Like someone else pointed out Sony planned the PS4 PRO after launching the PS4 as they wanted a console on the market that could take advantage of 4K HDR in this generation, its still the same generation of console's hence the name PS4 PRO. You'll also see the benefits in terms of graphics if you don't own a 4K HDR TV, also Sony console's are not going to be like the mobile market a new console releasing every few years, will you see PS5 PRO highly unlikely as the PS5 will already support 4K HDR from day one.

@banacheck: will you see PS5 PRO highly unlikely as the PS5 will already support 4K HDR from day one.

Highly unlikely? If you say so lol. If it's not HDR it will be the next thing. (Not that I'm complaining.)

@Mega-Gazz: People do notice better graphics, I'm not that bothered anymore as I'm tending to play more and more gameplay orientated games with the odd story based game now and again. But speaking to colleagues in work its all about Fifa, Unchartered, GTA etc they dont play your Resoguns, Hotline Miamis or Videoballs. Thats predominantly down to marketing and graphics. Plus when the next console comes out streaming tech and 4k will probably be standard ways to play so you will need to upgrade to play the latest games.

So the PS4 doesn't support 4K streaming Via the Netflix app because apparently the PS4 doesn't like certain file formats/Sony are lazy. My TV streams it just fine straight up without any daft boxes. Apparently the PS4 Pro still doesn't stream 4k from any apps but they're 'working on it' as it states in their official FAQ. Pretty pathetic, hopefully it'll be sorted by launch.

@BAMozzy: Was just about to post this. Good video from DF yet again which explains a lot.

@get2sammyb: Certainly is a good video. Again DF are very informative and essentially reaffirms my decision to pre-order.

Shame about the lack of focus on the framerate, and more shame about that video basically saying it won't be able to do 1080/60 locked. Very informative though, and explains basically why they are marketting about 4k and not really talking about everyone with 1080p screens.

@Mega-Gazz: It is capable of doing 1080/60 in a lot of games. Rise of the Tomb Raider though is very CPU heavy and why certain scenes/areas cannot maintain 60fps in the 'unlocked' setting. Games that run on the GPU primarily should and could run at 60fps. Some games, like Horizon:ZD, are built to run at 30fps.
What they say is that its a shame that Sony haven't stipulated to developers that 1080/60 is the minimum standard for ALL games running on the Pro instead of giving them the freedom to use the power how they see fit.
Of course Sony are focussing more on the 4k and HDR side as that is where the console is going to see the most benefits and showcase its potential. 4K and HDR are the 'future' too so these are great buzzwords too. Seeing games running in higher resolutions, with more detail etc, is going to look more impressive than focussing on 1080p visuals. Some of the 1080p TV versions will be using the higher resolution versions but 'shrunk' to fit - so why show that off when you can show the 4k version running on a 4k TV?
I would be very surprised is PS4 Pro enhanced versions are not used by Sony when it comes to promoting games and of course the brand as opposed to standard PS4 visuals. To sell something like a console or games, you show it at its 'optimum'. Developers often have to show console versions because of partnerships but I bet if they could, they would show 4k Ultra Setting versions for the same reason.

I agree that 4k/HDR are sellable buzzwords, and obvious/easy things to show.... And by all accounts HDR is much more than a buzzword. I liked the way he tried to demonstrate it there.

I'd like to see more focus on 60fps personally. Not only does it improve the experience visually but in some games it is arguably a functional thing not just fashion (shooters, for example where you are tracking fast moving targets while moving yourself).

Also a shame about the RAM, how they pointed out there may be a RAM limit on loading textures... seems so obvious and easy to make sure there is plenty of RAM, its not expensive.

@Mega-Gazz: 60fps in some games is vital and why many developers have targeted this as a priority - CoD, Battlefield, Titanfall etc - often at the expense if the visuals - CoD, whilst good looking can't match some 30fps games, BF and TF won't hit 1080p on PS4. Games like Killzone:SF and Uncharted 4 are 900/60 MP whilst the main campaigns are 30fps but 1080p. This to me shows that developers understand when 60fps is most important.

30fps hasn't stopped a number of games winning Game of the Year - in fact most of the games in the past 10yrs that have won awards are 30fps games - particularly on console. I much prefer my racers to have 60fps but games like Forza Horizon prove that having a locked 30fps can still provide a very smooth and polished, fast paced experience.

I am not saying I wouldn't want 60fps to be the 'standard' by choice but I can accept a 30fps game - particularly if its locked to 30fps as any dips are far more impactful than a 60fps game. A locked 30fps though can feel a lot better than a 60fps game that is constantly dropping as low as 40fps.

The RAM issue is a bit disappointing but so is the CPU. Both though received a 'similar' upgrade as these have received a boost over the PS4. Also an additional 512mb has been made available for the PS4 Pro. At the end of the day though, Sony are not building a 'next' gen system, but a PS4 with enhanced performance. It is a mid term console - a half-way point between the 'old' (PS4) and 'new' (PS5?). Anymore power and the chance that the Pro would end up 'replacing' the PS4 increases. If it had say 6tflops+, more RAM with a higher bandwidth, a new faster CPU, then what happens when the PS4 can no longer run games/features but the Pro could very adequately? Sony no doubt will deliver a PS5 in a few years that will be full 4k. Lets not forget they have built a console for just $400 that can do native 4k (as Last of Us and ESO prove) but is more than capable of delivering the full 1080p experience. Its only $100 more than the Slim, only $50 more than the XB1s and yet delivers a lot more to gaming.

I don't expect Sony to release a PS5 for at least 2 more years - some think longer. I can see games having to drop to 900/30 or 720/60 on the PS4 yet the Pro will hit at least 1080p and most likely give the highest (average), most consistent frame rates too. Its designed to be a halfway step and on that score, I think it will deliver - hence my pre-order