Well whenever it's out it'll be mint.
PlayStation4
- Thread starter giggs-beckham
- Start date
If you have a big enough TV it's fine. It's just my example of how multiplayer should be done better. I love my PS3 for casual multiplayer game play in the same room. Not for its single player stuff, is there a single non-racing game that is better on the console than the PC?
In almost every game you should be able to invite your mates over and blast some shit up/run some shit over/etc. If the best thing about a game is its online play (battlefield, cod), then you should be able to do that split screen (credit to cod there).
Also you should be able to change profile from in the game.
I have a 42 inch TV. Probably I'm used to having that full 42 inch.
The if the technology behind the playtation TV takes off, then we may see more offline co-op games.
It's slightly more complicated than that isn't it? In split screen you have to render the world 2 or 4 times from completely different perspectives. It complicates matters. Online is different, as you have separate machines rendering separate parts of the same world, so there is no performance hit apart from keeping the whole thing in synch. Something has to give! If one machine is running at optimum displaying one player, something has to be lost to be able to do that for more than one and retain the same frame rate. There is no ifs and buts about it, something has to be cut back, be it graphical fidelity or whatever.
I hope this and the Xbox are years away to be honest. Really dont want to have to fork out loads of cash for new consoles
Even still, using that little trick with the 3D of the TV, each frame is still only around half the resolution it would be in normal non-3D, so again, something has to give. You can't push a machine to run at 30fps full screen one player and then expect it to push twice as much out for two players.
Uncharted 3 for example is 1280x720 with some form of MLAA in 2D, yet 896x504 in 3D mode with no AA. If it could render 1280x720 for each eye at 30fps in 3D, then it would be able to do 60fps 1280x720 in normal 2D mode, but it can't.
I'm not sure how it works, but if you are running split screen. Wouldn't the resolution be halfed for each split screen, thus easing the strain on the hardware?
I only just got my xbox 360 (very very very cheaply), I have 6 years to catch up on.
Weaste. What was your reaction like to the OP?
You're certainly right, and I was trying to use that as an example but for a console the ps3 was a bit of a let down over split-screen. Take cod zombies great game, a favourite to chill to but can't do 4 way split screen
Yes, of course. But then it's not blown up to double the size to fill the whole screen is it? It would start getting a bit blocky. Of course, a decent modern PC should be able to render 1280x720 twice with no problem, these current consoles can't.
One of the best examples is Super Stardust HD. It always ran at 1280x1080 60fps, but when they attempted to shove in the 3D for 1280x720 and get 30fps, the optimisation allowed them to go 1920x1080 60fps for normal mode. In that way, trying to push 3D was a good thing, because it made the 2D mode perform much better also.
Doesn't Halo Reach do 4 player split?
weaste when they release this beast of a machine will you buy me one?
Fact of the matter is Weaste, the timing of the release of the PS4 will have as much to do with the release dates of the Wii-U and the nextox. Sony have said so themselves this week iirc and I'm sure preparations are already well underway in terms of the timing of the software. The Wii-U looks like a 2012 launch console, whilst the rumours about the nextbox have been absolutely rife, you just need to browse places like neogaf for that. I could see Microsoft striking whilst the iron's still hot, by releasing the nextbox not too long after the Wii-U. The fear for both companies would be that the Wii-U gets a proper footing in the next-next gen console war, with what is most likely to be a superior console to both the 360 and the PS3, given how many of the more 'core' gamers are crying out for an upgrade of this gen graphics (again browse Neogaf to get some idea of the scale). So I can't see Sony waiting too long after the release of the Wii-U. For those that say that the Kinect has given the 360 new life, I agree but I think that Microsoft with want to capitalise on the new found momentum and bring out a new console, with kinect built in.
As for the speculation about just how powerful the PS4 will be, I can't see Sony making it significantly more powerful than the Wii-U and the nextbox, as I'm sure there'd have learnt from what happened with multiplatform games this gen, with lazy devs just developing for the 360 and porting over. The same is guranteed to happen if the nextbox and Wii-U are on par power and graphics wise.
You know that will involve a dress and 4 kg of ky don't you?
If Sony has any sense it will ignore the next Xbox (if rumours are true, I think it's not, it's a revision), and the Wii U. They don't need to get into a war with anything, it's an odd thing to do. What matters to Sony right now is profitability, not going nuts just because you have a competitor or two. They don't need to. IMO what they will do is keep cost reducing the PS3 until it's around the 129.99 mark, and then release the PS4.
If others have released earlier, so be it, they will have a machine that is much more powerful, and if they get it right, all games should run on both PS3 and PS4 or be PS4 only. This is no different to minimum specification requirements for PC software, with higher end hardware being able to up the game. There is no new TV standard anywhere near close to release for the mass market, 1080p is it. For the majority of people, graphics are good enough as they are.
Next generation for me should be less about audio/visuals and more about ai, physics, destructible worlds, less scripting, etc. If you simply placed a GTX 580 class GPU into a PS4 with a slightly revised Cell, more bandwidth on the buses, an 4-8GB of RAM, it would be enough. As you know however, on the current processes, there is no chance of sticking a 580 in a console now for many reasons. Two to three years down the line however, and it becomes a different kettle of fish. That's it, the last Playstation, it will not need another major revision (maybe RAM). It's a case of diminishing returns, so for the last major generational upgrade, you might as well go the full hog, but you have to wait.
Sony have come out and said that they will release soon after Nintendo and Microsoft make their move. Most gamers won't wait for Sony's next installment, if Microsoft and Nintendo offer an alternative earlier than them. If they do go for the alternative, they then won't invest further on the PS4. There is no way Sony would release later than a year after the other two imo. They'd be playing catch up from the very start.
Dunno, don't have an x-box. I imagine it would. Most COD games do 4 way split screen, or 2 way with bot's/zombies.
I really don't care about graphics is my view, the PS1 had more games where you could just sit down with 3 mates and play around.
PR speak is PR speak, and catchup to what? As I've said, it's a matter of diminishing returns now, and WiiU isn't going to be that much more powerful than a PS3, especially not in terms of CPU. Anything that runs on WiiU will be able to run on the PS3, there's no need to rush. You are not getting the masses running out buying 400 quid consoles just for the sake of it in this economic climate. You aren't going to see the next XBox next year either, just a revision. Sony let Xb360 have over a year start last time and worldwide saqles of XB360 and PS3 are almost equal. It's not a game here about waving your cock around saying how many consoles you can sell, it's about profitability on the best hardware you can put together. Your argument is a false one, just because Opel release a new Astra doesn't mean that Ford have to release a new Focus at the same time. Purchasing decisions are not made like that outside of enthusiasts, and it's not enthusiasts in the main that bought the PS2 or Wii in vast numbers. As long as Sony can keep a steady stream of software releases for the PS3, and keep getting the price of it down, then there is no need to release a PS4, at all! They should have let the PS3 stew for another year or two and simply kept selling PS2 at a profit, but other factors got in the way of that. 3DTVs are on the market, it doesn't mean every TV sold has to be a 3DTV, it's not necessary.
I agree 100% with this. You only have to look at how the PS2 still performed after the release of the 360 and the PS3. If Microsoft suddenly released a new generation XBOX, the PS3 wouldn't really feel much heat competition wise to it and by delaying it they would then have the same "Advantage" the XBOX has by releasing a next Generation console a couple of years down the line.
The fact is, the technology arc that has been around since the early days of Video Games is levelling out. The technology jump from this generation to the next will be a lot less noticeable to the end user than the jump from PS1 to PS2 and PS2/XBOX to PS3/XBOX360 and with this in mind, there is much less pressure to bring out new hardware.
The interesting problem will be for the developers when it comes to cross platform games. Will they choose to drop the PS3 for some games because it doesn't have the capability to run the games they develop or will they choose to hold back the potential of the new XBOX in order to accomodate the PS3 technology? Microsoft will have to make whatever platform they bring out incredibly developer friendly because they may even decide it is more effort than it is worth.
Playstation 3 owes me an addicting, world beating Grand Theft Auto before I can even think about PS4.
I guess we'll just agree to disagree. What sort of specs doing you think the Wii-U is going to have?
Jim Ryan did not actually mention Nintendo or Microsoft by name. All he said was that it would not be desirable to release the PS4 significantly after the competition but that the PS3 had plenty of life left in the console.
Sony won't see the Wii U as competition for the PS4. The Wii U is not going to stop people going out to buy the next Sony or Microsoft consoles.
All the Wii U is, is an attempt at trying to attract the hardcore gamers back to Nintendo with next gen high def graphics, a proper online network and also a new "innovative" control. It's a catch up console and by the time PS4 and the new Xbox is out, those will be significantly more powerful and innovative.
Don't even think the Wii U will be any huge step on power than the PS3 and Xbox, after all most of the games shown on the Wii U showcase were taken from PS3 and Xbox footage.
Personally i think Wii U will be the end of Nintendo. They were already circling the drain after what you may call disappointing sales figures of the GameCube and 64. They were struggling to compete with Sony and later Microsoft. The Wii saved them for a bit, but the flop that is the 3DS has led to over a $1 billion loss.
I don't think the Wii U, with the rumoured lack of Blu Ray and 3D support and with a expensive designed controller that i don't think will attract hardcore gamers, nor the casual/family gamers the Wii did, will have a market. Especially when there is no real innovation or huge power advantages behind it. I don't think anyone saw the showcase for the Wii U and thought "holy shit". The investors in Nintendo thought the same, considering shares plummeted to an all time low when it was announced.
Also, i don't think, with the financies of the world currently as it is. I don't think many people will be rushing out to buy a £200 console, when they already have £200 consoles at home.
Well, look at it like this. Do developers drop the XB360 and PS3 because they can't do things that a modern PC can do? Well, no! Some moan that the PC is being held back, but what really more is there to do? People said that Crysis 1 could never run on a console, well it did, just with less fidelity and performance.
The Wii was different, most games are GPU heavy today, and the Wii didn't have what you could call a modern GPU, whole games would have to be rewritten to even work on it, and when developers tried the Wii public didn't buy the Wii version, so Wii got dropped. PS3 can run PC games today, as I said with a lower fidelity. If it can do that, it will be able to run games from the next generation of consoles also. Publishers are not going to ignore a userbase of probably 70+ million just because a new XBox appears that will only ever sell around 8 million max in its first year. Same with the XB360, it will not go away for quite some time, especially in this economic climate. What does say the likes of Activision do? Say, OK, we can sell maybe 4 million MW4 on XB720, or 20 million on XB360 and PS3? Oh hum!
Of course, the balance in timing has to be correct, as the danger is PS3 owners will start to buy XB720s, but Sony will see that coming in terms of how much software they are selling and what the competitor is selling in terms of hardware and software. 3DS I think showed us that software is the key, and launching early can be seriously damaging.
Will the WiiU have better graphical capabilities than the 360 and PS3?
A little.
i want a bit of this gravy train...
30p...that said, I've got loads of spare cardboard, glue and chicken wire.
How's that then?
Let's see how much of a PC we can stick inside a box the size of a Wii without it blowing up or melting.
Do you think the size thing will always be an issue? Personally I couldn't care less if a system was twice the size of an Average ATX case if it was value for money and packed a serious punch.
could we not just get some duct tape and stick a whole load of consoles together? oh wait sorry but thats already been done, right biccie?
He's on suicide watch or something, thesedays, isn't he?
The 3DS' main reason for disappointing sales was its lack of games. Nintendo are rectifying that and the sales are on the up. The Wii and DS absolutely printed money for Nintendo. If Sony don't see the Wii-U as a competitor based on its rumoured power (or lack there of), they're absolute mugs. Nintendo have quite a good fan base and now can draw in more of the core gamer market, because they'll have the heavy weight devs taking the console seriously. EA have come out and said that the controller design is extremely exciting from a developers point of view.
The Doom mongering related to Nintendo products have been proven to be nothing but that in recent times. Even if the Wii-U is a flop (I think at worst, it'll have 'good' sales figures), Nintendo made more than enough from the last gen to take a hit on the bottom line figure.
Regarding the Wii-U's specs, at first I also believed that it'd be nothing more than a slight upgrade on the PS3 specs but I wouldn't be surprised if it boasted significantly better specs because I'm sure as Nintendo learnt from this gen, if they put it on par with the PS3, they'll need to come out with a new console within the next 5 years because the PS3 graphics are begining to look quite outdated already.
Everyone said that the Wii would be a flop, that no one would buy it, we all know how that turned out. I wouldn't be so quick to write off the Wii-U. A console that offers Nintendo exclusives + the other major multiplatform titles, just won't fail.
Oh it does, it's an Intel QM57 chipset. Try again.
I wasnt trying to contradict you, I was just curious and tried to find the best commercially available answer.