Are you disappointed with next-gen consoles for 2020? [XBSX, PS5]

[Pixel]

Aren't devs saying it might be the biggest générational jump ever with these new consoles ?

It isn't anywhere close to as large a jump going from SNES to N64, or PS1 to PS2, or N64 to Gamecube. Sounds either like rose tinted glasses focusing on the move to Zen2 after going through such a small cpu leap going from 7th to 8th gen or hyperbole to create excitement for next gen.

Only way it makes any sense from any perspective is the move to SSD, and that is just one element of a system.

 

[Karamazov]

i don't know, devs may have another '"more technical" point of view. We tend to only measure the visual impact of games.
The change to 3D was big, but 2D games were not massively Superior than SNES or say Neo Geo for example.
Just like VR is a graphical regression but a big jump in immersion.

Sure thing is whatever the specs of next gen, we'll see amazing games/experiences.

new SSD tech loading for assets and RT could be game changers.

 

[techuse]

Assuming the Xbox X 12 TFLOP leak is legit, im super excited. The fastest consumer GPU you can buy is only 30% faster than that.

 

[Entropy]

Assuming the Xbox X 12 TFLOP leak is legit, im super excited. The fastest consumer GPU you can buy is only 30% faster than that.

I’m sorry, but this is too easy.
Do you honstly believe that the fastest consumer GPU, when the consoles are released to consumers, will only be 30% faster?
And as you say, that’s assuming the number is legit. The deeper question is if console consumers really want their consoles to follow PC-GPUs in their escalation of power draws. One thing is sure, the rest of consumer electronics, (and governmental regulatory bodies) is moving in the opposite direction. We have an anomaly here driven by limited advancement in HP lithography, while graphics providers need to supply ever increasing levels of performance (increasing all the more due to diminishing graphical returns/FLOP).

Personally, I feel this is a dead end direction to follow. There is no way it can increase the total market appeal of these consoles.

 

[techuse]

I’m sorry, but this is too easy.
Do you honstly believe that the fastest consumer GPU, when the consoles are released to consumers, will only be 30% faster?
And as you say, that’s assuming the number is legit. The deeper question is if console consumers really want their consoles to follow PC-GPUs in their escalation of power draws. One thing is sure, the rest of consumer electronics, (and governmental regulatory bodies) is moving in the opposite direction. We have an anomaly here driven by limited advancement in HP lithography, while graphics providers need to supply ever increasing levels of performance (increasing all the more due to diminishing graphical returns/FLOP).

Personally, I feel this is a dead end direction to follow. There is no way it can increase the total market appeal of these consoles.

There will likely be a GPU more than 30% faster come console launch window but this is a big improvement over last gen. Consoles will be much closer to the top end GPUs of the day. Im not sure how you realistically expect better given your acknowledgment of the slowing progress of lithography.

 

[Entropy]

There will likely be a GPU more than 30% faster come console launch window but this is a big improvement over last gen. Consoles will be much closer to the top end GPUs of the day. Im not sure how you realistically expect better given your acknowledgment of the slowing progress of lithography.

I don’t.
I would have much preferred if the manufacturers had adapted to process realities and leveraged the nice advances at the LP end, producing cheaper consoles with a power draw of 20W, allowing petite form factors and freedom from cooling and noise concerns. There is no way that this "more-of-the-same" approach will increase total market appeal. Its justification lies elsewhere.

 

[RobertR1]

When you buy off the shelf mid range hardware, what do you expect?

 

[techuse]

I don’t.
I would have much preferred if the manufacturers had adapted to process realities and leveraged the nice advances at the LP end, producing consoles with a power draw of 20W, allowing petite form factors and freedom from cooling and noise concerns.

Ok i see. Personally that doesnt interest me at all. Theres already a switch for that market.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I would have much preferred if the manufacturers had adapted to process realities and leveraged the nice advances at the LP end, producing consoles with a power draw of 20W, allowing petite form factors and freedom from cooling and noise concerns.

That'd just be shrinking this generation then.

 

[ultragpu]

Perfectly content with XsX for its 12 TF RDNA, the rest is just icing on the cake. Can't say the same for PS5 tho, the casual first mentality has resulted a 9.2 TF weaksauce piece of hardware that would hinder a whole generation of first party exclusives. If that really is the PS5 hardware in the end, it would be my single biggest disappointment. Seriously it would be a total shame and waste to treat those amazing AAA franchises like God of War, Spiderman, Uncharted, Tlou, Horizon etc with a meager 9.2 TF casual box. Sure the games would still look great just like how a 1.84 TF PS4 been doing it this gen but the point is the competition, the rest of the industry are pulling ahead now, you need enough power to compete, to set the standard, to wow us again.
Also gimmicks like RT is just a total waste of silicon and cost, next gen is not ready for it, why can't they just wait for the gen after? It's not like rasterizer can't render insane visuals like Hellblade 2, The Rebirth demo or The heretic demo. So yeah I guess the RT inclusion is my second biggest disappointment. I might be the minority on this matter but heck I think arrogant Sony is back.

 

[PSman1700]

the casual first mentality has resulted a 9.2 TF weaksauce piece of hardware

I understand you but those casuals are the biggest market, there is where sony is going to make the most money. The hardcore high spec market is rather small. Consoles are just toys, 99% just buy them whatever the specs are, and a reasonable price of 399 is going to result in a faster adoption of the new machine. MS can also do it cause they are going to launch two consoles, most will buy the lockhart sub 9TF console.
Many have been afraid of a 8/9TF ps5 console since last spring, but it is going to offer a generational leap with the ssd and cpu and 9TF ain't that bad either in special compared to about 2TF PS4. Japanese companies are more to follow a smaller design then the american MS xbox.
Besides, it's useless to try to keep up with a console, next year and 2021 we will see double the xsx performance from nv and possibly AMD if the rumors are correct.

heck I think arrogant Sony is back.

Sony was arrogant with the overly expensive PS3, they aren't going to do that again. Yes XSX is going to have an advantage with more power, higher res or higher settings etc. And with MS now focus on AAA titles, perhaps like hellblade, we might see some more advanced gfx from them, if utilising that whole 12+ TF it is.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Perfectly content with XsX for its 12 TF RDNA, the rest is just icing on the cake. Can't say the same for PS5 tho, the casual first mentality has resulted a 9.2 TF weaksauce piece of hardware that would hinder a whole generation of first party exclusives. If that really is the PS5 hardware in the end, it would be my single biggest disappointment. Seriously it would be a total shame and waste to treat those amazing AAA franchises like God of War, Spiderman, Uncharted, Tlou, Horizon etc with a meager 9.2 TF casual box. Sure the games would still look great just like how a 1.84 TF PS4 been doing it this gen but the point is the competition, the rest of the industry are pulling ahead now, you need enough power to compete, to set the standard, to wow us again.
Also gimmicks like RT is just a total waste of silicon and cost, next gen is not ready for it, why can't they just wait for the gen after? It's not like rasterizer can't render insane visuals like Hellblade 2, The Rebirth demo or The heretic demo. So yeah I guess the RT inclusion is my second biggest disappointment. I might be the minority on this matter but heck I think arrogant Sony is back.

I wouldn't necessarily say that, without knowing the costs associated with each console or the actual specs (but we'll go with the agreed upon narrative right now), we can't say whether Sony are being realistic or conservative. Likewise we can't say whether MS are being overambitious.

On the face of it, MS are betting big on attempting to win back some of the consumers they lost this generation. It's entirely possible that they're eating a relatively large loss on each console sold in the hopes of winning back more market share. If so, that could bite them in the butt if not enough consumers come back and/or they can't cost reduce as aggressively as they hope to be able to.

If I were to rate each maker on the specs that many seem to believe is real (I'm still not convinced we have the right numbers for both consoles) then I see...

• Sony having the more realistic approach to building their console, with an eye towards balancing the most powerful console they can make WRT how much money they expect to make during this next generation. Basically they are working within their established budget (expectations being that they'll retain all or most of their users from this generation).
• Microsoft are over-achieving with their console. They have large cash reserves and the board has OK'd dipping into it heavily in order to win back consumers lost during the last generation. The plan is to grow and establish a large software ecosystem (PC, Console, and streaming with Netflix like game subscriptions alongside software purchases) with consumer confidence that whatever they buy, they'll be able to run it forever on whatever hardware they get. This could be seen as a stepping stone towards that, so they may be willing to take a loss, break even, or just have a small profit for this generation.

There's also many other narratives that we could come up with. Lockhart if it is released changes the dynamics of having a very expensive console (Anaconda). PS5 could be more powerful than people are currently saying it is. Perhaps there's some breakthrough in technology (whether fab related or other tech related) coming along that we don't know about that will change the cost calculations of the consoles this generation.

Basically...WE DON'T KNOW. And I see far too many people just buying into the narrative that these are the specs for this generation of consoles (and then either patting themselves on the back, panicking or whatever) rather than these just being data points that might or might not be valid when the consoles release to retail.

Regards,
SB

 

[Pixel]

i don't know, devs may have another '"more technical" point of view. We tend to only measure the visual impact of games.
The change to 3D was big, but 2D games were not massively Superior than SNES or say Neo Geo for example.
Just like VR is a graphical regression but a big jump in immersion.

Sure thing is whatever the specs of next gen, we'll see amazing games/experiences.

new SSD tech loading for assets and RT could be game changers.

No doubt its going to be great, but I get tired of people taking every statement every developers say as factual gospel.
There are hundreds of thousands of devs out there making cumulatively millions of statements, you don't think there will ever be a use of hyperbole? And every statement will always have the aim of being absolutely accurate? The use hyperbole is fine, but there is no need to hang on every word they say as 100% accurate.
You've never seen developers argue with each other over statements they've made on Twitter?

eg last month in a GameInformer interview a Shuhei Yoshida and a Naughty Dog developer sat down for an interview and the developer said PS3's Cell CPU is more powerful than the fastest Intel desktop CPU you can buy.

Van Der Leeuw:"Even desktop chips nowadays, the fastest Intel stuff you can buy is not by far as powerful as the Cell CPU, but it’s very difficult to get power out of the Cell. I think it was ahead of its age, because it was a little bit more like how GPUs work nowadays, but it was maybe not balanced nicely and it was too hard to use. It overshot a little bit in power and undershot in usability, but it was definitely visionary."

I mean come on, Ignoring the workstation oriented 18 core 7980XE, Intel now has 8 core desktop cpus like the 9900K and in 99% of workloads its going to beat the PS3's Cell processor.

 

[Globalisateur]

Jonathan Blow (Braid, The Witness).

Am I excited about the next consoles generation ? I am excited about Sony console in the next generation. Not all of them. PS5 is pretty good.

 

[ultragpu]

I understand you but those casuals are the biggest market, there is where sony is going to make the most money. The hardcore high spec market is rather small. Consoles are just toys, 99% just buy them whatever the specs are, and a reasonable price of 399 is going to result in a faster adoption of the new machine. MS can also do it cause they are going to launch two consoles, most will buy the lockhart sub 9TF console.
Many have been afraid of a 8/9TF ps5 console since last spring, but it is going to offer a generational leap with the ssd and cpu and 9TF ain't that bad either in special compared to about 2TF PS4. Japanese companies are more to follow a smaller design then the american MS xbox.
Besides, it's useless to try to keep up with a console, next year and 2021 we will see double the xsx performance from nv and possibly AMD if the rumors are correct.



Sony was arrogant with the overly expensive PS3, they aren't going to do that again. Yes XSX is going to have an advantage with more power, higher res or higher settings etc. And with MS now focus on AAA titles, perhaps like hellblade, we might see some more advanced gfx from them, if utilising that whole 12+ TF it is.

A generation leap it actually might not be depending on if they wanna go full native 4k with those specs. The multiplier in gpu power (counting in RDNA efficiency) is lower than PS3-PS4 yet the increase in res multiplier is higher. Sure the SSD and CPU would help greatly but not to the same extent a more powerful GPU could. I can see a 12 TF RDNA console to provide just enough juice for a generational leap, if native 4k is the standard. In the end don't expect many native 4K PS5 games with native next gen engine or graphics. While doing Dynamic res or temporal projection sure can mitigate it but if the competitions also go that route then the difference would still remain unchanged. Now I don't care about how fast or slow PC cards advance, I don't game on PC these days so it's a moot point to me.
What I meant by arrogant Sony is not about setting a sky high price, it's more to do with how they're feeling too comfortable with their immense install base thus not pushing the boundaries in tech while relying only on fan's loyalty and the exclusives to sell bucket loads. They got away with $399 this gen I think mostly because the competition is 40% weaker yet $100 more expensive, now what if the competition is 25% stronger but only $50 more this time with improved exclusive offerings?

I wouldn't necessarily say that, without knowing the costs associated with each console or the actual specs (but we'll go with the agreed upon narrative right now), we can't say whether Sony are being realistic or conservative. Likewise we can't say whether MS are being overambitious.

On the face of it, MS are betting big on attempting to win back some of the consumers they lost this generation. It's entirely possible that they're eating a relatively large loss on each console sold in the hopes of winning back more market share. If so, that could bite them in the butt if not enough consumers come back and/or they can't cost reduce as aggressively as they hope to be able to.

If I were to rate each maker on the specs that many seem to believe is real (I'm still not convinced we have the right numbers for both consoles) then I see...

• Sony having the more realistic approach to building their console, with an eye towards balancing the most powerful console they can make WRT how much money they expect to make during this next generation. Basically they are working within their established budget (expectations being that they'll retain all or most of their users from this generation).
• Microsoft are over-achieving with their console. They have large cash reserves and the board has OK'd dipping into it heavily in order to win back consumers lost during the last generation. The plan is to grow and establish a large software ecosystem (PC, Console, and streaming with Netflix like game subscriptions alongside software purchases) with consumer confidence that whatever they buy, they'll be able to run it forever on whatever hardware they get. This could be seen as a stepping stone towards that, so they may be willing to take a loss, break even, or just have a small profit for this generation.

There's also many other narratives that we could come up with. Lockhart if it is released changes the dynamics of having a very expensive console (Anaconda). PS5 could be more powerful than people are currently saying it is. Perhaps there's some breakthrough in technology (whether fab related or other tech related) coming along that we don't know about that will change the cost calculations of the consoles this generation.

Basically...WE DON'T KNOW. And I see far too many people just buying into the narrative that these are the specs for this generation of consoles (and then either patting themselves on the back, panicking or whatever) rather than these just being data points that might or might not be valid when the consoles release to retail.

Regards,
SB

A fair say indeed. Coming off this gen as the underdog, MS are sure making great effort to impress us all, they went the extra mile to deliver a high end SKU if only for the sake of satisfying us hardcore with the option to pay more and get more. Yes, the price factor is important but what's stopping Sony to launch a Pro version too along with the Base?
Anyway like you said we should wait for more concrete info on the specs, maybe new year will bring new hope of 12 TF console base.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This thread is only about disappointment in the rumours 9 and 12 TF consoles. Discussion on whether those are or are not what will actually be released should be held elsewhere.

 

[Karamazov]

Well asking for something like 10x jump from current gen is hyperbole too. Ultrabole even !

 

[McHuj]

If the PS5 is really 9.2 TF, then yes, I’ll be a little disappointed. Now this is only a total mental thing in my head, but 10.0 TF would be so much better...

I’m pretty happy with the XSX’s potential 12 TF, that’s better than I had thought possible.

 

[Globalisateur]

If the PS5 is really 9.2 TF, then yes, I’ll be a little disappointed. Now this is only a total mental thing in my head, but 10.0 TF would be so much better...

I’m pretty happy with the XSX’s potential 12 TF, that’s better than I had thought possible.

Hey Cerny did it with PS4 once (1.84 instead of 2). I am sure he would do it again with PS5. I am sure he could even do 9.9 tf without batting an eyelid.

He has others priorities than most of us.

 

[ultragpu]

9.2 TF spells incoming PR disaster. Beaten by the one year old Stadia, beaten by your arch rival Xbox Series X, beaten by the launch year mid end or even low end PC hardware, beaten by Nvida's laptop, if Sony ever wants to shit the bed in style this is one way to spectacularly do it.
At the end of the day, I hope the 2.5% of casuals who craved the BC should feel proud and honor Sony by engaging obscenely amount of hours on PS4 games on their PS5. The immense sacrifice Sony made for them by butchering the console's design potential shall never leave the back of their heads.