I’m still waiting for a reason to get a PS5 at all, everything I’ve been interested still got released on PS4 too - except for one single game.
I really don’t care for better specs anymore, I probably couldn’t even tell PS4 and PS5 games apart without a side-by-side comparison. Not to mention, to see a difference at all I’d need a new TV on top of the console. Not gonna happen anytime soon.
One major improvement with the PS5 is the instant loading times. I don’t think this thing will be any faster in that regard but it’s a major improvement over the PS4. The other improvement over my original PS4 is that it doesn’t sound like a jet engine after 20 minutes of running.
Ray tracing is cool but what console games are even using it at this point? It’s like them advertising “8K capable” as if anyone gives a shit about that during a time that 4k is just barely becoming the standard for most.
Consoles are a dying breed, especially Xbox and Playstation. Almost every exclusive ends up on PC anyway now, even then I personally don't think there's any game worth spending this much on hardware to play. There's literally no point in buying an Xbox or Playstation unless you really really don't want to bother with a PC setup.
I bet the market will end up as just PC and mobile. I mean the PC market share has already overtaken consoles.
We will see when Playstation 6 releases, its unlikely to sell as much as PS5 did, let alone PS4. Microsoft already realised the decline and are jumping into games as a service for the Xbox brand, ideally they would want you to just stream their games, as shitty as that is. With Xbox gone, there's no competition and with Sony being Sony, they are going to abuse that to squeeze any extra money they can from people still willing.
PC became a lot more affordable and accessible in the last decade and it doesn't lock you into a closed ecosystem, you can upgrade when you want, you don't have to pay subscriptions to play online games.
Kids are more exposed to PC gaming than ever before, with all the popular 'content creators' primarily playing on PC, so they are naturally swayed to it more than consoles.
I hear so many stories of people switching to PC, friends asking me for advice for what to buy for themselves or their children.
Circana's May 2024 U.S. video game market highlights, the analytics company reported that video game hardware spending is down 40% compared to 2023. Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony have all shown "double-digit percentage declines," with the Nintendo Switch seeing the "most significant drop."
The writing is on the wall, it would take a big change to swing back the other way. There's a reason they are dying for GTA 6 to release.
Most of the replies about ps5 pro is complaining about the price. Your point is, PC is somehow a better choice while the video card alone cost this much or more.
So no, I don’t think consoles will disappear, more likely streaming will improve to the point of being a real alternative and that will take over the people buying consoles. In fact it could be an alternative to PC as well, for non-competitive gaming.
The sales decline is because console companies don’t provide good enough reason to upgrade, and the market is saturated, not because people moving to Pc. Here I am rocking my xbox one pro still with no desire to upgrade.
That's just not true. You can make an entire PC for the price of the PS5 Pro. You can get a GPU that is a bit more powerful than a PS5 Pro GPU for ~$300. People normally spend more on PCs though because of the longevity it provides and you can use it for a lot more than just games. Just looking at Steam data, there's a yearly increase of MAUs (their concurrent count just peaked 3 days ago at 37.6M) where Playstation has plateaued.
Time will tell, but I think consoles will fade away, either through lack of appeal or turning into stream boxes as you say. Thanks for the conversation!
If a PC GPU is only slightly better than a console counterpart, typically its games will run slightly worse - since it loses the benefit of devs spending time optimizing for that profile.
You can adjust settings on PC, so you can trade off some useless post processing and other settings to push the frame rates way higher than console games, which are generally 60fps (or 120fps in some cases, if you run "performance mode").
Except that a PC with modern specs costs over $2k to build. Comparing PCs to Consoles is a fools errand, yes of course it’s way better, because my gaming PC also cost five times as much to build.
The price increase is insane. That does not seem to scale in comparison with what you’ll get in return over a regular PS5, especially if you’re gonna be forced to buy the digital editions from the PS store, which are outside of the sales often the most expensively priced versions too, I’ve practically only bought second-hand discs for my PS5 because of that.
So either games will start running at higher framerates on real 4K, like 60FPS and up. Or developers will get lazy and stop bothering to optimise for the older generation of PS5, which will then be an excuse to upgrade to the more expensive edition to play at 4K and/or 60FPS.
I really hope the latter won’t be a thing for the sake of both players and game development, there’s been enough unoptimised shit lately and I hope we can move forward again.
Yeah I’m afraid that stuff like GTA6 might run like absolute dogshit on the old PS5, because they will see the opportunity to make use of the better hardware to sell the 4K and 60FPS. No doubt even Sony will try to push this, trying to sell more of these Pros.
I do hope we will move forward, but I think money and greed will play too much of a role in this. We don’t even really need a PS5 Pro right now, looking at the current line-up of games that run fine on the old PS5, even in 4K and 60FPS, as long as developers spend the time to optimise their games instead of throwing everything on to raytracing (which I find is still in a very experimental phase).
Frankly that’s just thinking with only PS5 exclusives in mind.
A lot of people, probably the vast majority, don’t get an Xbox or PlayStation for the exclusives. They just get one because they don’t own or want a gaming PC and look for the easier more accessible solution.
So to them the catalogue is just fine because they don’t get the console just for the exclusives.
Not sure what the point of downvoting me is, but I’d rather be interested to hear people’s counter-arguments instead. Because a lot of people seem to just assume that many console-owners have both a console and gaming PC.
I’m not saying that exclusives didn’t play a part entirely, but even when the PS5 was hard to get by it was still cheaper than the Xbox that were in stock (where I live).
Despite the low amount of exclusive games it would still be an easy pick to get a PS5 instead, if people decided to upgrade at some point. And since a lot of cross-platform/console games were still coming out on the old consoles for a while there was little reason to get an Xbox instead of a PS if they wanted a new console right then right there.
I dunno I haven’t really been excited for any of the games released over the last couple years. It seems like nothing but legacy games like COD/Battlefield/Destiny and a few gems like Elden Ring. Most of these big studios seem to be laying off employees or shutting down instead of releasing new games. Part of this is just me being burnt out on gaming, but with so many studios struggling, it seems like it’s more than just me feeling like this.
Thing is that isn’t true for everyone, I am done with games like CoD and FIFA, but a huge majority of players is not. Hence why these games keep selling just fine.
Myself, I count the catalog of PS+ as an “exclusive feature”, plus it’s nice to play some of the PS4 games that struggled on a better machine. I loaded my God of War save and went from 30 to 60fps, which was great (sad that it was one of few games to offer PS5 enhancements in the PS4 version)
soooo…all 13 games they showed in the release trailer. Coincidentally, also about 90% of all “next gen” exclusive titles. I guess it’s not surprising that games compatible with the PS4 are not getting PS5 Pro upgrades, but it also kind of highlights how Sony has barely taken advantage of the base PS5 as-is.
The game is rendered at a lower resolution, this saves a lot of resources. This isn’t a linear thing, lowering the resolution reduces the performance needed by a lot more than you would think. Not just in processing power but also bandwidth and memory requirements. Then dedicated AI cores or even special AI scaler chips get used to upscale the image back to the requested resolution. This is a fixed cost and can be done with little power since the components are designed to do this task.
My TV for example has an AI scaler chip which is pretty nice (especially after tuning) for showing old content on a large high res screen. For games applying AI up scaling to old textures also does wonders.
Now even though this gets the AI label slapped on, this is nothing like the LMMs such as chat GPT. These are expert systems trained and designed to do exactly one thing. This is the good kind of AI that’s actually useful instead of the BS AI like LLMs. Now these systems have their limitations, but for games the trade off between details and framerate can be worth it. Especially if our bad eyes and mediocre screens wouldn’t really show the difference anyways.
The game is rendered at a lower resolution, this saves a lot of resources.
Then dedicated AI cores or even special AI scaler chips get used to upscale the image back to the requested resolution.
I get that much. Or at least, I get that’s the intention.
This is a fixed cost and can be done with little power since the components are designed to do this task.
This us the part I struggle to believe/understand. I’m roughly aware of how resource intensive upscaling is on locally hosted models. The necessary tech/resources to do that to 4k+ in real time (120+ fps) seems at least equivalent, if not more expensive, to just rendering it that way in the first place. Are these “scaler chips” really that much more advanced/efficient?
Further questions aside, I appreciate the explanation. Thanks!
Rendering a 3D scene is much more intensive and complicated than a simple scaler. The scaler isn’t advanced at all, it’s actually very simple. And it can’t be compared with running a large model locally. These are expert systems, not large models. They are very good at one thing and can do only that thing.
Like I said the cost is fixed, so if the scaler can handle 1080p at 120fps to upscale to 2K, then it can always handle that. It doesn’t matter how complex or simple the image is, it will always use the same amount of power. It reads the image, does the calculation and outputs the resulting image.
Rendering a 3D scene is much much more complex and power intensive. The amount of power highly depends on the complexity of the scene and there is a lot more involved. It needs the gpu, cpu, memory and even sometimes storage, plus all the bandwidth and latency in between.
Upscaling isn’t like that, it’s a lot more simple. So if the hardware is there, like the AI cores on a gpu or the dedicated upscaler chip, it will always work. And since that hardware will normally not be heavily used, the rest of the components are still available for the game. A dedicated scaler is the most efficient, but the cores on the gpu aren’t bad either. That’s why something like DLSS doesn’t just work on any hardware, it needs specialized components. And different generations and parts have different limitations.
Say your system can render a game at 1080p at a good solid 120fps. But you have a 2K monitor, so you want the game to run at 2K. This requires a lot more from the system, so the computer struggles to run the game at 60 fps and has annoying dips in demanding parts. With upscaling you run the game at 1080p at 120fps and the upscaler takes that image stream and converts it into 2K at a smooth 120fps. Now the scaler may not get all the details right, like running native 2K and it may make some small mistakes. But our eyes are pretty bad and if we’re playing games our brains aren’t looking for those details, but are instead focused on gameplay. So the output is probably pretty good and unless you were to compare it with 2K native side by side, probably you won’t even notice the difference. So it’s a way of having that excellent performance, without shelling out a 1000 bucks for better hardware.
There are limitations of course. Not all games conform to what the scaler is good at. It usually does well with realistic scenes, but can struggle with more abstract stuff. It can get annoying halos and weird artifacts. There are also limitations to what bandwidth it can push, so for example not all gpus can do 4K at a high framerate. If the game uses the AI cores as well for other stuff, that can become an issue. If the difference in resolution is too much, that becomes very noticeable and unplayable. Often there’s also the option to use previous frames to generate intermediate frames, to boost the framerate with little cost. In my experience this doesn’t work well and just makes the game feel like it’s ghosting and smearing.
But when used properly, it can give a nice boost basically for free. I have even seen it used where the game could be run at a lower quality at the native resolution and high framerate, but looked better at a lower resolution with a higher quality setting and then upscaled. The extra effects outweighed the small loss of fidelity.
It started as good tech to make GPUs last longer, but now is a crutch that even top notch hardware like a 4090 needs to actually achieve playable performance with ray tracing at high resolutions. And that hardware is already way overpriced, imagine the price of something that could do it natively.
So far I’ve traded in all my Playstations for the latest versions. But this price-hike and no disc-drive are a dealbreaker. Guess I’m going for a new gaming PC and a Steam Deck now. Too bad Sony, you messed up.
Not really on topic, but AI upscaling is no joke. It’s actually very useful and saves alot processing power. Same with the extra fps, making a 30fps into a 60fps with ease.
FSR doesn’t use AI hardware. The original comment is overselling it a bit, but something AI-driven like DLSS does offer substantial (if slightly blurry) framerate gains.
No game should be running down at 60fps these days, especially with any sort of upscaling. Native performance should be the only measured metric, no need for shortcuts when hardware is as good as it is.
This generation is already pretty weak, and it was hard to justify the original PS5 which, after a whopping four years, still has too few exclusive titles to justify the increased price point. Now they are asking for $700 (and they increased the controller’s price, too), but there’s still too few next gen titles, and it doesn’t even come with basic features like a disc tray and a vertical mount. Not even a better form factor, it’s the same old ugly case, but somehow bigger.
The only premium thing about this thing is the price tag. $700 dollars but €800, because apparently they are dominating the European market so much that they don’t even have to try to sell it at an honest price point. With all those money you can just buy a PC. I honestly don’t think that many people who are interested in the console market (which, historically, has always been a “low budget” entry into modern gaming) would be willing to spend so much money on one.
I guess we circled back to the PS3 era, when Sony got drunk with overconfidence. Only, this time they’ll get away with it because their main competitor is somehow even more incompetent than them. I wonder if the handheld PC market will pose a threat to their dominance in the future - at the moment, it’s a very small niche.
It’s just so sad. I remember back when the PS4 Pro came out and you could trade in your old PS4 for a little on top to get a Pro at GameStop. It was a night and day difference going from a base PS4 to a Pro - and merely for the price of the console, 3 random games off a list of curated games, two controllers, iirc, and 100€. It was straight gas for me.
Paying 300€ on top - realistically even more because you’re not gonna sell a used PS5 for 500€ nowadays - plus the money for a disc drive and a vertical stand would set you back like 900-1000€. Completely out of their minds
The PS5 is already a very powerful piece of hardware that most devs aren’t making full use of. I honestly can’t see any justification in a hardware upgrade other than some Sony execs thinking it’ll be the end of the world if they don’t put out something new to make some profit line continue to go up.
theverge.com
Najnowsze