PS4 Pro Speculation (PS4K NEO Kaio-Ken-Kutaragi-Kaz Neo-san)

[Arwin]

I don't know honestly. Given the position Microsoft is in versus Sony here, they might try something radical out of desperation. I'd say it's a little less unlikely than for PS4, but I still would be surprised to see it actually happen. The existing userbase would be ... surprised.

 

[east of eastside]

Um, no. Sony mentioned about a more advanced PS4 back in October (or earlier) of last year.

Um, so it was just an idea in Phil's head just before he recently announced it...

This isn't true all. Microsoft is supporting the VR community in many ways... just not in the form of a XB1 VR ready solution (yet). Once they have the proper hardware (XB1.2) in place, I can guarantee you, they'll have an XBVR ready solution thereafter (Oculus or In-house).

LOL, did you forget about HoloLens? Nobody cares about VR this year in its current form. EA is not supporting it and Gamestop just said it was 'cautious' about VR this year in its earning release. VR is a risk, its potential and long term, mass consumer adoption could be ways off. Why would they endorse the competitor's strategy when they have other major initiatives of their own to launch first? Nope.

That the PS4K isn’t a replacement for the current model, but an "addition" to the PlayStation family. By offering those diehard gamers who crave higher image fidelity and performance. Price it slightly steep as well ($500-600). That this is truly for those gamers wanting the best (at a premium cost).

It's very easy to dismiss that as a fantasy market that only exists on a video game message board. PS4 is one of the most successful console launches ever with millions sold last holiday, are you going to burn goodwill and fan trust with all those consumers? I thought Sony was supposed to be the 'cool and friendly' guy? What is the point of resetting the console battle at a newer spec, Xbox could very well gain the advantage this time. There is no need, it would not make any strategic business sense, there is no evidence from AMD or any of the publishers that all new spec 'premium' console is launching... it just makes no sense at all.

Sony is going to launch a $500 VR and $500 premium PS4 at the same time this holiday... I see, is Ken back running the company? LOL.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[function]

I don't necessarily disagree with your method... however, the locking away of additional resources "regardless" of time and length, seems counterintuitive towards those buying into the newer revisions. I believe the best method is just being straightforward on their messaging.

I agree that messaging is key. If Sony market the PS4K as being a PS4, but with 4K output and optimised VR - and make no specific reference to power - they might be able to focus on the features and less on the politics.

But another way might be, as you say (and as I think MS will approach a new system), "it's a PS4 but better".

That the PS4K isn’t a replacement for the current model, but an "addition" to the PlayStation family. By offering those diehard gamers who crave higher image fidelity and performance. Price it slightly steep as well ($500-600). That this is truly for those gamers wanting the best (at a premium cost).

I think the PS4[K] is a replacement. There may be some overlap of a year or two, but I think a transition will be the goal. The PS4K might not actually cost any more to make, in which case they can enjoy some phat margins for a while and then get back to business as usual.

 

[Shortbread]

Um, so it was just an idea in Phil's head just before he recently announced it...

Sony and Microsoft more than likely had plans for revisions/upgrades since the original PS4/XB1 designs. Sony just happened to mention the possibility of this happening since last year. Not this weird tinfoil hat theory that its in response to Phil's blurb about an updated XB1.

LOL, did you forget about HoloLens? Nobody cares about VR this year in its current form.

Do you have any data to support this "Nobody cares about VR"? Other than your obvious personal feelings towards VR.

EA is not supporting it and Gamestop just said it was 'cautious' about VR this year in its earning release. VR is a risk, its potential and long term, mass consumer adoption could be ways off. Why would they endorse the competitor's strategy when they have other major initiatives of their own to launch first? Nope.

Everything in BUSINESS is a risk! You don't go into business thinking every product you offer/sell/service is going to succeed. Sony PSVR / Facebook Oculus / Steam/HTC Vibe see something that's positive in the market pointing towards the readiness for VR. And many others who support this movement as well.

It's very easy to dismiss that as a fantasy market that only exists on a video game message board. PS4 is one of the most successful console launches ever with millions sold last holiday, are you going to burn goodwill and fan trust with all those consumers? I thought Sony was supposed to be the 'cool and friendly' guy? What is the point of resetting the console battle at a newer spec, Xbox could very well gain the advantage this time. There is no need, it would not make any strategic business sense, there is no evidence from AMD or any of the publishers that all new spec 'premium' console is launching... it just makes no sense at all.

Sony is going to launch a $500 VR and $500 premium PS4 at the same time this holiday... I see, is Ken back running the company? LOL.

Who said anything about resetting? Sony/MS are just offering an additional device within the same family for those wanting a more robust experience. Its called capturing additional sales and growing the userbase even further.

 

[Rangers]

PS4K could very well be a response to Xbox 1.2 that Phil Spencer already gave strong suggestion of an upgrade.

Except these are years in the making. If Sony was recently briefing devs they started down this path 1-2 years ago (ditto MS and Phil's comments)

 

[eastmen]

I don't mind the idea of new consoles already. I would peg it for 2017 as the ideal year , 4 years is good.

However it would be odd for sony to do anything to split their base. The ps4 is selling extremely well for them and a new ps4 with better graphics or 4k could cause them problems. Either by killing the ps4 adoption rate or alienating people who just purchased a ps4. You'd also risk ending up with the weaker system this time around if MS does indeed upgrade the one.

So my question to you guys is this. Do you think a die shrink of the ps4 apu clocked higher could reduce the need for the ps4 breakout box hardware ? So for example this ps4 4k would remove the need for the chip in that box and would reduce the wiring and extra power supply needed. Thus reducing the cost of psvr for adopters while also reducing the cost of the ps4 with the die drop ?

 

[MrFox]

This makes no sense, if ps4 launching a mid gen upgrade kills adoption rate and alienates their fans.... so does an xb1 upgrade.

 

[bgroovy]

I think the idea of removing the breakout box is a nonstarter. They'd have to sell an additional SKU of PSVR which is already confusing enough and there's little to no advantage to not having a breakout box compared to complicating your PS4K's board design.

 

[Grall]

compared to complicating your PS4K's board design.

Why would it complicate anything? A theoretical, more powerful "PS4k" would do what the breakout box does in software.

Well, except for the additional HDMI connector, which hardly counts as "complicating" anything, really.

 

[eastmen]

This makes no sense, if ps4 launching a mid gen upgrade kills adoption rate and alienates their fans.... so does an xb1 upgrade.

Do you know what the PS4 has that the Xbox One doesn't have ? Momentum.

Do you know what has gotten reset every single generation except for the ps1-ps2 generation ? Momentum.

So right now Sony has what a 12m unit lead or more ? If they both do a half step but its Sony that has the weaker system or is missing a key feature or has internet backlash Sony could loose all the momentum and good will they bought with the ps4.

MS has a lot less to loose since they are falling further behind. A console that hits all the right notes and is the most powerful on the block could give them the momentum and allow them to be in the driver seat.

You know how when the xbox wasn't selling 4 years into the console cycle they launched the xbox 360 which allowed them to go from 20m consoles to around 80m consoles while sony went from a 150m ps2s to 80m ps3s.

 

[turkey]

For clear messaging the current console performance trajectory should remain after any revisions, xbox one will not want to be pushed sub hd, Sony will want ps4 at 1080 as long as possible, so they can have their revision squarely marketed for 4k and leave the ps4 as its always been sold and continue un altered. This is a nice clear message and recent adopters who may be upset will be a smaller subset with 4k tvs.
For vr improvements could "simply" try and add 30fps, so 60 hits 90 and 90 hits 120, smooth it out and make it more comfortable, also an easier sell PR wise.

Xbox is already the lower delta, people know it going in so would a more powerful one be such a surprise or upset? it never was top dog so you are not taking any crown or status away.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Do you know what the PS4 has that the Xbox One doesn't have ? Momentum.MS has a lot less to loose since they are falling further behind. A console that hits all the right notes and is the most powerful on the block could give them the momentum and allow them to be in the driver seat.

A new Xbox One+ may give Microsoft momentum but who says that whatever Sony does won't improve their momentum? Both companies can gain momentum (i.e increasing adoption of their respective ecosystem). I'd posit that enhanced versions of existing consoles are less likely to result in a significant change in momentum relative to each other.

A brand new console generally means your game library generally gets reset to zero so it's as good a time as any to switch. If the new consoles are enhanced versions of current consoles, I'd say platform switching will reduce because you'll be asking users to make a decisive decision to abandon their game library. People wanting the best performing console may switch (assuming there aren't overriding factors like being able to pay with your friends which would make it a collective group decision) but I don't think the "console master race" is a big market.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Do you know what the PS4 has that the Xbox One doesn't have ? Momentum.

Do you know what has gotten reset every single generation except for the ps1-ps2 generation ? Momentum.

Except this isn't a new generation. Why does everyone talk about it like it is? With full BC, it's not a reset. It's Something New. There's no real comparison save handhelds, where Nintendo's releases of improved hardware has never adveresly affected platform momentum.

 

[orangpelupa]

with BC and FC, it will be more like phone and PC. Even Nintendo did not have FW despite they have great BC.

 

[Nesh]

It's not a matter of need, but a matter of greed. If there's a market for a PS4 that plays PS4's library but better quality, selling to that market Makes Money, and also expands the user base. Let's say for illustration that there are presently 5 million PS4 owners who'd like a PS4+. By not offering a PS4+, Sony are no better off. By offering a PS4+, Sony make profit on 5 million units sold and expands the PS4 userbase another 5 million as the old PS4's are sold/passed on.

Only if the market for a PS4+ is tiddly does it not make sense. Otherwise it's a way to further monetise the existing fanbase.

If you consider that the console is still very far from reaching its sales saturation, it still doesnt make sense to me. Companies may always be greedy, but risking the current successful business without strong indications that they will be better off doing it is silly. We dont know how many million PS4's extra will be sold with a beffier PS4. And also even if we assume 5 million PS4's will be sold to newly created consumers, is it really worth it next to the tenths of millions you have already sold to and the other tenths that would have bought it anyways?
Is it really worth it making things complicated in other areas such as development, marketing etc etc?
This is exactly why I believe why the more powerful PS4 makes more sense for media function, upscaling to 4k and VR

 

[Shifty Geezer]

...but risking the current successful business without strong indications that they will be better off doing it is silly.

I'm not seeing any risks. If no-one wants it, the business won't be affected and PS4 carries on as normal. If people do want it, business will grow. The 'risk' seems to be every PS4 owner getting disgruntled and ditching their PS4 and getting an XB1 instead because it doesn't play the games as well but at least everyone playing XB1 games won't be worse off than other people playing XB1 games, and there's nothing more important to console gamers than feeling like they're all the same and no-one's better off. I had no idea console gaming was so Communist!

 

[Nesh]

Judging by the comments/poll here and GAF, the answer seems to be yes.

That is an extremely small sample to even consider using it for any statistical conclusion.

Many believe this to be a nonissue. That this chaos thinking/opinions are stemming from those cheap bastards (their emotions) of not wanting others with an advanced version.

"Many" doesnt say anything by itself. We know for a fact that some of the differentiating points that made consoles successful to this day was the standardized specs, that you knew what you bought will always play and that developers didnt have to worry about multiple specs.
The question in the poll is also a mess. Shorter console cycles means the next gen version of the current console (not an upgraded console) will be released sooner and developers enjoy that they dont have the technical limitations of the previous console in mind sooner. Forward compatibility makes sense if the upgraded console will provide differences that are the equivalent of running games at higher visual settings only. The PS4K wont mean a shorter development cycle. It is an upgraded PS4 which comes very soon. Much sooner than when the market would demand a PS5. Sales and interest on the PS4 have barely saturated

 

[Grall]

Sony could loose all the momentum and good will they bought with the ps4.

The thing about momentum is that it typically doesn't matter if you're the weaker system, AND missing 'key features'. PS2 was weaker than Xbox, and missed loads of features, but which console had the greater momentum by far?

The public generally has little concept or care about key features, and tend to care even less about which console is weaker or stronger than another. Price and software plays a much larger part in success. Sony probably realizes this after getting burned with PS3; they certainly had a strong price/software focus for PS4, which makes me think they would do the same for any theoretical "PS4k"; it would be unlikely to expect them to have unlearned so quickly a lesson so recently re-learned.

 

[Nesh]

I'm not seeing any risks. If no-one wants it, the business won't be affected and PS4 carries on as normal.

I am not sure you have a clear idea about how the new PS4 will be sold and hence you are confusing scenarios. Is it going to be a niche premium console sold at premium price? Only then someone can think that the market will want or not want it. Otherwise if it is going to replace completely the old PS4's and be sold at the same price then you cant really know if the market will want it or not. Someone who did not buy a PS4 but wanted one will buy a PS4 regardless if it is upgraded or not. There is no gain in that.

If people do want it, business will grow. The 'risk' seems to be every PS4 owner getting disgruntled and ditching their PS4 and getting an XB1 instead because it doesn't play the games as well but at least everyone playing XB1 games won't be worse off than other people playing XB1 games, and there's nothing more important to console gamers than feeling like they're all the same and no-one's better off. I had no idea console gaming was so Communist!

The risk seems to be on the fact that you are introducing a new variable into your game development, people will be selling PS4's cheaply in order to upgrade which means potential loss of full price sales, a portion of the market may start giving up on the brand/consoles overall or when your next gen console is released many of the first adopters will be reluctant to purchase early, and there will be a problem on how you communicate your new games to consumers. Are you going to be showing them off at their fullest graphical settings which may look or play noticeably worse (i.e framerate) to your existing market?Or are you going to show the low settings and not demonstrate what the new PS4 can do? It will be introducing a form of uncertainty that was always absent from consoles and was one of the reasons it was attracting many consumers

 

[Deleted member 11852]

If you consider that the console is still very far from reaching its sales saturation, it still doesnt make sense to me.

Both manufacturers have built consoles on the same AMD technology and the perceived wisdom was that commercially, with the goal of each console being a good balance of performance and affordability, AMD was the only choice. It wasn't a coincidence that for first time in decades two competing consoles had more in common than what differentiated them.

Now wind on a few years and AMD develop what could be a 'no brainer' package that could work as the basis for upgrades to both consoles. If you're Microsoft you may look at this and consider this the answer to closer the technical gap, or leaping ahead. If you're Sony you may look as this as something you kind of have to do because Microsoft might.

When you're in a competitive market you need to appear to be competitive (even if you're not). It's rarely consumers asking for an extra core or more Ghz. The danger here is in not dong it when the other guy does. And as Shifty said, there isn't a massive risk to trying this. AMD have pushed on with their architecture and manufacturing advancements and although you are designing a new piece of hardware, this isn't the undertaking it used to be and it's not like you're designing a complete new experience and ecosystem - that's already in place.