Sony's Sending out PS4K Dev Kits Right Now

@get2sammyb "And it's going to get crazier..."

I think it only gets crazier if you wait to post a new PS4K article after the comments in the previous one die down.

So how long before we get another survey article - "Are you going to buy a new PS4K based on current leaked specs?". Though I still think we have questions that nedd answering - UHD drive, 1TB, included game to get the ball rolling, PSVR support.

While - "everything that's been reported on is 100 per cent factual" - that doesn't mean all the questions have been answered. Price and date are big too. And PSVR internal box. I didn't think they could sell PS4K alongside PSVR, too much money, but maybe people with a large 4K TV don't want a tiny headset glued to their face, so it's 2 different market segments - big tvs vs little visor screens? I'm never getting PSVR so my path is clear.

People might complain about this, but I bet it's the #1 selling system this holiday. Unless it's priced outrageously.

Glad I held off. Now comes the wait to see if FF XV is announced for NX (it's a rumor), or if I'll get this system to play it.

As long as all the games will still be running smoothly on the regular PS4, I don't see the problem. Still, some dev is going to be the first to release a rushed and unplayable port for the regular version. Who will it be? EA? Ubisoft? SE? The race begins!

@Octane lol

@kyleforrester87 MS don't actually need to make an 'updated' XB1. It could very easily make a new console running Win10 and with its UWP, it would slot into the MS eco-system. We already see XB360 games running on an XB1 and cross generation gaming - MP lobbies for example have a mix of XB1 and XB360 gamers and its 'Party chat' already links up with other MS users. A new console 'could' slot in and effectively do the same as the PS4k is. It could also offer Oculus Rift support (if powerful enough) to rival Sony's PSVR. I can't see MS doing nothing and recent leaks suggest it is working on something. If it does nothing, I can see its monthly sales figures drop significantly - why buy the weakest console out there when Nintendo's NX and PS4k are available? Its already struggling to run games so maybe developers will opt to release on NX instead to recoup its losses from dropping MS. Games currently using DX12 - the 'saviour' of the Xbox haven't exactly helped the performance with both Star Wars:BF and Quantum Break both running natively at 720p. I know its 'comparable' in essence to the PS4 but the 'extra' power that has and the fact that the PS4k will be releasing, means that this generation for Sony at least will be prolonged.

The fact that NO game will release for the PS4k only, means that developers will concentrate on releasing games for the PS4 and it does have a bit more 'give' than the XB1 has. Maybe we will see a few less games hit 1080p over the next few years on PS4 - dropping to 900p (like Star Wars:BF) but on XB1, these are likely to be 720p IF they can run at all!.

A new console for MS means that for developers at least, they could opt out of a lower performance version and just release the version PS4k owners get. It could mean that they don't have to struggle to get games running at 720p (which are probably at 900p on PS4).

For those without a 4K TV, I do wonder if their will be any 'benefit' to a PS4k. Certainly none in games that already run at 1080/60. Maybe for some games they could run at 60fps instead of 30fps - games like Dark Souls 3, Uncharted 4 for example. We know Naughty Dog initially aimed for 60fps but had to settle for 30fps for its campaign.

FFxv is currently struggling to hit a consistent 30fps in its 'beta' build - although that could be resolved by the time it releases so we could see that releasing with a 60fps on PS4k. Until we see exactly which direction developers opt for with the extra power, its difficult to see if it will benefit non-4k TV owners. With double the power, 1080p could become 1440p or 30fps could become 60fps. Some of the 'extra' power from a faster CPU and RAM, coupled with the faster GPU and double the compute power could be used for the 'internal' upscaling process - whether this affects the output to 1080p TV's or not, time will tell. You don't want 3/4's of the image missing!

@rjejr I doubt the PS4k will have an 'internal' PSVR processor. The reason being is that it will want t keep all peripheral support the same. This means your PSVR, DS4, Camera and Move will all work in exactly the same way as they (will) do.

The selling point of course is that its a more powerful PS4 - able to run games at 'higher resolution and/or frame rate' - particularly of benefit to those with 4K TV's. If you have a 4K TV and interested in VR, this will work. If you have a 1080p TV and interested in VR, maybe the PS4 is best for you. If you get a 4k TV after the PSVR, then you could buy the PS4k and use that instead - no need to buy any new games, additional hardware or make parts of current hardware (like the PSVR processor) obsolete. The PSVR processor effectively is used to process the 3D sound space and convert the visual to a 'flat TV' so others can see what you see - no warping. I doubt that will be 'in-built' into the PS4k - firstly to keep the costs down and secondly to keep all peripherals the same. You wouldn't want to spend 'extra' on something you may never use (no interest in PSVR) or already have built in (buying the headset with the processor).

@BAMozzy What you say makes sense, and I agree with you. I guess my question of it went more to the general question - there have been people besides myself thinking that processor would be built in, and this might be called PS4VR. (OK maybe I'm the only one who called it that.) If PS4k launches this year it certainly wouldn't have that built in, not w/ so many PSVR on pre-order already. PS5 will have it built in if the fad isn't over by then.

I disagree w/ you on the selling point. I don't think "more power" matters if the games are the same. You can't market a $399 PS4k next to a $299 PS4 and say - this one gets 60fps, the other one only gets 30FPS. And you can't say 178GFLPs vs 218GFLPs either. I don't think marketing works that way. I dont' think it worked well for the $500 vs $600 PS3 or the 8GB vs 32GB Wii U. I do think a $200 12GB PS3 markets differently than a $250 500GB. Those are numbers people can easily relate too. That's why I found it odd that the GB article said "same HDD". I would think 1TB would be a given in the PS4k to help differentiate it. Or an UHD blu ray, but I think that may prove too expensive to add in. Adding in 4k streaming via their "Ultra" service and others helps market it a bit, which is why Ithikn they need to call it "PS4K Ultra" on the box, but I'm not sure that justifies a big difference in price.

Whatever they do decide, I just don't think - "Same games, only better resolution and more FPS" - is a very good marketing tool or slogan.

Yesss, I need a new consssole now! My two years old PS4 isss so old...
No, you don't need it! It's only two years old!
Yesss, I need more power to run my gamesss...
No, you don't. Life is good even at 30 FPS!

By now, I've come to realize that every time this website calls a rumor something that amounts to 'too crazy to be true' and makes sarcastic quips about it, it ends up being legit. I'll never forget E32015, nev-er. All that 'let's make fun of those rumour-leaks' news posts, and all of them ended up being true.

Keep going, PushSquare - you're awesome like that.

Microsoft if they are clever will wait.

Then towards the end of next year bring a better system to the table.

Then we may as well all buy a PC - end of console gaming.

@rjejr The whole 4k is a selling point. Whether it has a standard 500GB HDD or UHD Bluray player or not. Neither of these are actually affecting 'games' and therefore these 'specs' at the moment aren't essential.

The CPU is effectively 1 third faster, The RAM is essentially 20% faster and the GPU has double the Compute Units and running around 15% faster too. If you want a selling feature, how about saying its more twice as powerful as the current PS4? You could alsi sell 'games' on numbers IF needed too. Instead of saying 1080/30, they could say 1080-1440/60 upscaled to 4K. Obviously the games themselves won't have any 'differences' in their content, story etc, but the fact the games can look better and 'maybe' play at 60fps as opposed to 30, that's a selling point.

I am sure one of the things that has affected XB1's sales was the fact that games, despite the fact the content is identical (in 95% of cases - those 5% due to 3rd Party deals), don't look quite as sharp on the XB1. People don't need to know exactly how much more powerful the PS4 is - it actually has a slower CPU to be a runaway winner. Even though in a lot of instances, 900p is almost imperceptible compared to 1080p and that the games play 'identically' with exactly the same story etc, People bought the 'more' powerful console. If the rumours are true that the NX is around 30% more powerful than the PS4, All Sony would need to do is say the PS4k is the 'most' powerful console and no doubt it will sell...

@BAMozzy "say the PS4k is the 'most' powerful console and no doubt it will sell..."

But the people who care about that stuff are the 40mil who will have already bought a PS4 by the time PS4k goes on sale. The people who will have to decide between a PS4 for $299 and a PS4k for $399 are the late comers and a different audience.

I think more people bought the PS4 than X1 not b/c of "power", but b/c of MS horrible policies, since rescinded, the $100 cheaper price - $400 vs $500 - and of course the games. When choosing between a PS4 and PS4K I think Sony needs to find a marketable difference that jumps out at people. If people spend too much time deciding between a PS4 and PS4K they may just decide - the heck w/ it, I'll buy an X1. Or I'll buy an NX. I think having 2 price points at launch hurt both PS3 and Wii U. Consumers aren't good at choosing, they get frozen. People always say they want choice, but they really don't. If PS4 and PS4K are too hard to tell apart besides some esoteric gamer jargon people will just go for the cheaper one, and this will all be a waste. Sony needs to sell PS4K at a higher price over PS4 with something that instantly stands out and justifies the higher price. I don't think the letter "K" is any better at doing that than the letter "U" was.

@BAMozzy I envy your knowledge about gaming technology but at the same time I'm scared by it. I mean, last summer I bought an owned PS4 to play Bloodborne, forgetting it had a Blueray player, a 500GB HDD and ignoring the resolution/FPS standards.
PS4 and WiiU don't need hardware improvements: they need devs and players to agree upon what they want. If a console life span is going to be conditioned by other technologies (TV and PC) than we are doomed, since the market invents something every six months.
There's no way the NX can distract players and devs from PS4/XB1; the WiiU were a bit more powerful than PS3/360 but it failed. NX may be a bit more powerful than PS4/XB1, but it still will be just the console that old nintendo fans buy to play its first part games when they need to cool down their main console.

@rjejr I fully expect there to be a drop in the PS4's price and I expect it to be more than £100 difference. I wouldn't be surprised if the difference is more likely to be £150+. I don't know how many people you know but most of the people I know are well aware of the difference between something that can only deliver up to 1080p and something that can offer 4K - even for late comers to the gaming market. For 'kids' in their bedroom with a small-ish 1080p TV, a PS4 at 'say' £200 is great way to get into next gen gaming - especially if they haven't been able to yet. For those above junior school level, I am certain they know the difference between the two consoles and IF they haven't bought into the next gen yet, then its either for financial reasons - in which case I doubt they own a 4K TV and maybe gaming isn't 'that' important and so the 'cheaper' PS4 is a viable option.

For those with 4K TV's and/or those already into gaming, you would have to have been living under a rock to not know what the difference between a PS4 and PS4k is. Ever since this generation launched, we have had so much emphasis on the resolution/frame rate of games. Even if you don't know the 'technical' differences, you know the visual differences - just look at how the PS4 and XB1 have been compared.

If you haven't bought a console yet and faced with PS4, PS4k, NX, XB1 and whatever the next Xbox is called, then it doesn't take much effort to find out. In some cases, budget will play a major factor but if not, then it comes down to the games you like. The 4k on the box is a good indication and as that doesn't just relate to gaming, its pretty clear at which market they are aiming for. If you haven't got £350-£400 to spend on a console, then you can at least buy the PS4 and play all the games anyway - Its not like its a 'brand new, never seen before, console - its been around for 3 years now, advertised on TV etc so like I said you would need to have been living under a rock, in a coma or shipwrecked on a desert island to not know.

@andreoni79 The Wii U may have had more power than the XB360/PS3 but that power was used on other aspects - like the controller. It didn't get the third party support and the games it did get, didn't 'generally' run as well on the WiiU (as far as I recall - although not owning one I can't say for certain). The fact it didn't get the 3rd party games also gave the perception that it wasn't as powerful or as capable - even if technically it was more powerful. Perception is just as important.

Last gen, the PS3 was more powerful technically but because it was 'difficult' to programme for, games often didn't run quite as well as the XB360 version and so the XB360 was perceived to be the most powerful. It wasn't until later on when developers got to grips with it and of course, Sony's own developers could prove it with its own games.

As for whether or not 'hardware' needs an upgrade, I think that is determined by the technology and by the developers to a degree too. 4K TV's for example are on the increase. Developers already asked for Sony to release more power from the PS4 (they unlocked the 7th core) then we know we are at its limit. Uncharted 4 was intended to be a 60fps game but because of hardware limitations, its campaign had to dropped to 30fps. Its MP dropped to 900p. Granted you could just stick with consoles and watch the visual presentation gradually drop down 720p and lower. There is a massive difference between what Uncharted 3 achieved and what Uncharted 4 is offering - not just the Jeep, or wider play spaces but in so many other ways. Its why we can fit all 3 Uncharted games running at 1080/60 but can't get U4 running at 60fps.

Technology itself maybe making leaps every year but if you build something that's at (or very near) the bottom rung, its going to fall off the bottom far sooner than something built around the middle rungs. If you build a PC and spec it to the 'minimum', its not going to last 3+yrs. Even when the PS4 launched, for the same money you could build a PC that ran BF4 better for the same money - it probably couldn't run the Witcher 3

@BAMozzy All those arguments you give seem to give more of a reason to buy an older model PS4 for $200 - it's cheaper, and if you are cheap then you probably don't own a 4k tv anyway - than the newer model at $350. (I'm assuming those prices are what you meant by a $150 difference.) Gamers already have the PS4 either at launch or $349 or $299 BF sale. Yes, some gamers would "upgrade" from PS4 to PS4k just for "more power", but enough to justify making the system? If most people who haven't bought a PS4 yet are just going to buy the cheaper model, and some gamers w/o a 4k tv won't need a PS4k, then why make a PS4K at all?

I think there has to be a marketing plan other than "more power" if PS4k is going to be more expensive than PS4 but still plays the same games. (If PS4K is the new "Slim", same price, then it will sell b/c it will be the PS4 for people who don't have one yet.)

New 3DS at least had XC, but it was also the same price as the old model, both selling for $199.

I'm just not convinced "better graphics" is a reason for a significant number of PS4 owners to upgrade or PS3 owners to spend the extra money to get PS4K instead of the cheaper PS4. Has to be something more obvious for marketing to emphasize. Bigger HDD, UHD blu ray, something. The target audience is seemingly already limited to 4K TV owners, don't want to limit it any more, but to expand it.

@rjejr The price difference is more likely to be around $200 n the US. I live in the UK. The PS4k is for those gamers who want the best 'console' experience and to have the most powerful system as well. For those with a PS4K, it will no doubt have access to 4k Streaming - things like Netflix, Amazon and no doubt Sony's own 4K streaming too - something the base console can't do. The PS4 cannot output at anything above 1080p so whilst games may be 'identical' in terms of content etc, its media options could offer a lot more. I would expect a 4K bluray player - even though that's not confirmed or denied. The ability to play 4k blurays seems an obvious advantage and maybe even upscale standard blurays to 4k too is a real possibility - saves buying a new 4k Bluray player!

Better graphics is a big seller - otherwise we would all of stuck with last gen. I know some games only released for this gen but some of those could very easily have been on last gen too with some modifications...

I don't know yet if there will be ANY advantage to non-4k TV owners - maybe games could have the option to run at 60fps instead of just boosting the resolution. Games like Bloodboure, the Witcher 3, Division, Dark Souls3 and Uncharted 4 all run at 30fps and could run at 60fps on PS4k (still 1080p) and therefore benefit those owners. As games get more complicated, bigger etc, we could see games drop to 900p or even 720p on the PS4 so the difference will be far more noticeable on 1080p TV's...

I think I would buy if the difference in games is great enough but I was hoping to buy my next console in the next cycle.I guess technology is evolving faster than I thought it was.

@Rapid
You don't have to buy though, that's the thing. It's just like when MS and Sony brought out slim models of their consoles with bigger harddrives last gen, and in the case of MS, a significant upgrade with the slim model offering wireless out of the box where the launch 360 didn't. This really isn't much different. Your PS4 games are going to run like they always have (no dev worth a damn is going to p*ss off 40 mil people by releasing a sh*tty version of a game for the vanilla PS4) but the option is there to upgrade if you want. I can't believe how much people are overreacting to this. If games were being made exclusive to PS4K, I'd understand people being p*ssed.

@Gamer83 I think your right and I'd be glad not to have to upgrade I truly hope this is like ps3 slim and you make a valid point.

@Rapid
Yeah, we'll have to see how it all pans out. I don't think it will be a huge deal, but at the same time, I never rule out insanity like all the sudden deciding to release PS4K exclusive games. I do think the competition has forced Sony's hand to a degree. Supposedly Nintendo is back in the tech race and who knows what MS will do, Sony can't just sit back, I don't care what anybody says.

@Gamer83 yes Nintendo's next console and What technological punch it can pack will be decisive in this. Understandably Nintendo would like to control the monopoly. I guess business is business and Sony won't make it easy and I feel we still have the best exclusive's available.

@get2sammyb Very crazy all three companies are set to blow the roof off E3 event this year will be one the best ever

@kyleforrester87 Don't believe anything you hear MS aren't just going to stand around at all and have huge things up their sleeves , all three companies are going to bring it to the table

@BAMozzy "$200 n the US"

Well if PS4K is going to be $200 more - $200/$250/$300 to $400/$450/$500 - they should name it "PS4K ULTRA" w/ 1TB and a UHD blu ray drive and truly market it at 4k tv owners for streaming and not even mention games. Though Sony tried that and failed miserably w/ PSX in Japan so I think you are off w/ that high price differential, Sony should have learned fr m it's mistake. (Interesting note - PSX had EIGHT retail configurations - just look at that chart!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSX_(video_game_console)

I really do like the 1080p blu ray upscaling to 4k, there are a bunch of blu ray players that advertise that now, I have no idea how good of a job they do. I think that's a better - ie cheaper - option than an actual 4k UHD drive, keeps the price down while offering blu ray disc owners a reason to buy a 4k tv. There must be a ton more blu ray discs in homes than UHD discs.

And if Sony did go for an expensive PS4K it could wind up looking like the Panasonic Q. blech

@rjejr £200 isn't that unrealistic. the PS4 costs £275 now, maybe drop to £250 (a bit more than an XB1) before Christmas and launch the PS4 at £400 - after Christmas drop the PS4 down to around £200 to sell consoles during that 'lull' period (or £225ish with a game)

We don't yet know any of the 'specs' surrounding its media capability - things like Bluray so they could still put in a UHD Bluray or at least an upscaling one. At the moment Sony haven't mentioned these so I guess its still finalising its complete hardware. Its had to let developers have access to the CPU, GPU and RAM and how these will be available in the final build (like available RAM as some is allocated to System Software) because they have to continue developing games - especially if their games are due out from October onwards. They cant 'guess' how their games may run, what level to set the 'Neo' mode at if they have no idea.

It really doesn't matter at the moment what HDD or Bluray player they decide to go with. HDD is going to be at least 500gb and that's 'ample' for a games developer. It doesn't matter if not a uHD bluray as the developers aren't going to be watching uHD movies on the dev-kit.

Sony could opt to put in a 1 or 2TB HDD and UHD Bluray in September and then release in October - it still doesn't matter to developers or us until its officially announced. It could be the fact that the final design, the final hardware (such as these 2 components) hasn't been decided yet and therefore we haven't got an official announcement!

@BAMozzy "hasn't been decided yet and therefore we haven't got an official announcement!"

Bingo! Speculation is fun and all, but I don't think its something people should get so upset about until we see the final product and price. Then they can loose it if they want