PlayStation 4 to Focus on New Gameplay, Not Hardware

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

kinggraves

Distinguished
May 14, 2010
445
0
18,940
I think by "fully networked" they mean "always on", there will be no offline content. Consoles don't use network bands as selling points.

All Sony has to do GPU wise is get 1080p. Next gen console games will be in 1080p. Any extra GPU processing will go to likely trying to claim 4k resolutions to go with their 4k TVs. I believe they've set up their own closed service for 4k streams, so maybe rather than selling it as a CD (PS1), DVD (PS2), or BluRay (PS3) player they will sell it as a 4k streaming box. I don't know why this is even surprising, Playstation has always been a media first box used to sell Sony's other techs and products.
 

tomfreak

Distinguished
May 18, 2011
176
0
18,630
do u have enough RAM, or too many background process running?

as u should have know that 30fps in PC does not mean it is going to be completely smooth. Battlefield 3 are JUST barely enough to run on those rig with everything tune down to low setting. U can google youtube video with battlefield 3 running @ those spec, is all over the internet.
 

cewhidx

Distinguished
Apr 27, 2008
21
0
18,560
[citation][nom]elcentral[/nom]its not like it will change 1% off the play station. the ps3 got lunched on the same idea. and little changed from the hole gaming experience. but i don`t see the point of getting an expensive equipment on the simple idea of not letting you use a mouse for gaming, cuss at the heart of today's consoles it is the only real difference. today's pc are simple to use, i dear to say simpler then consoles cuss if you get an error in a console you are so often fucked, But pc thx to google youll get a good idea of the problem and a solution. And seeing how pc got steam and programs like steam we are getting less problems and consoles in general more over time red ring of death for one but ps3 had some stuff i hated back in the day i owned one.The cost for a gaming pc today is also low, and in Sweden pc games are quite allot cheaper for the same game from console to pc you get of around 10-20 dollars worth.okey one more. i asked a kinda friend why he liked gaming on consoles over pc. and he told me that he could relax in the sofa only needing a controller. and if you don`t think you can do so with a pc you need to do some research cuss i take a pc powered home entertainment/gaming system 100% over a console.[/citation]
This was so painful to read, that I'm pretty sure your point went entirely over my head...
 

madjimms

Distinguished
Mar 7, 2011
90
0
18,580
[citation][nom]kyzarvs[/nom]huh???As neither has any codec support worth a damn, I use PS3 media server on my Debian box to serve and transcode films to my PS3 and 360. As the PS3 has gigabit LAN and the 360 only has 10/100, the 360 is crap at streaming full-quality transcoded 1080p data. The PS3 handles everything very well and with the Blu-Ray remote, is a doddle.Of course, if EITHER devices had decent codec support, transcoding into MPEG2 wouldn't be a requirement...[/citation]
You know that using the PS3 as a media SERVER is a VERY niche place right? 99.9% of PS3 owners don't install Linux on consoles, you have to face that fact.
 

guardianangel42

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2010
169
0
18,630
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]*sorry if this dub posts, upload seamed to fail first timeno... as they get more and more powerful, i would be mad if they didnt become media hubs, able to stream my collection to where ever i set it up, or stream internet and such... the problem is they are saying its not about power, but game play evolution... which is a MASSIVE mistake.[/citation]

You're serious aren't you?

I'd laugh but for some strange reason I don't find this particularly funny.

Focusing game development on gameplay and the experience as a whole is MASSIVE mistake? So what you're implying is that the only thing new hardware is good for is more realistic graphics? Not better and more complex enemy and NPC AI, not increased NPC count that adds to immersion, not destructible environments.

The only thing that matters is graphics because, since all of the above increase the gameplay experience, they don't matter.

You also imply that current gameplay styles, including rudimentary shooter experiences, is fine because what really matters is how realistic the explosions look.

Now, if you didn't mean any of this, then I'm sorry to say but you suck at communicating because claiming developers focusing on gameplay is a MASSIVE mistake implies you believe all of the above.
 

Jarmo

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2009
36
0
18,580
My PS3 has mostly been a media hub for a couple of years now, with plenty of DVD/Bluray/Netflix/other services use. So this is a natural evolution as far as I'm concerned.

The only thing bothering me is, with rumored 8-core AMD chip and a decent GPU, PS4 won't have low power requirements. Meaning it won't run cool or quiet, which is a bad thing for a media hub.
 

bemused_fred

Honorable
Feb 18, 2012
19
0
10,560
As weird as this might be to say on a hardware site, I approve of this move. Don't get me wrong: I love nerding over new hardware and shiny new graphics, but at the end of the day, I prefer good games. You can have the most sleek, beautiful, awesomely powerful PC rig in the world, but without the games, it's just so much expensive silicone.
 

CrArC

Distinguished
Jun 5, 2006
40
0
18,590
[citation][nom]gilgamex[/nom]Thing is you have to expand beyond just specs, even ATI and Nvidia new this over time. Everything must expand, that's why Nvidia and ATI focused on adding functionality, multiple monitors, 3d, computing and expanding the GPU role in as many fronts as possible besides just raw horsepower. Yes the PS4 should have at least a 7870's worth of a GPU inside to be fair, it will most likely be not, which is a bummer but a large issue you have to realize is that consoles are evolving and must expand and I applaud that.They are trying new things, if the DS has showed us anything is that Innovation is a huge driving force for the imagination of developers and the enjoyment of gamers even if the PSP was the more graphically powerful hardware. You have to give whatever comes up a shot, give it a good look over, try to imagine the vision and don't just trash it because it doesn't YOUR preconceived ideas of what it should be. Try to see where things could go, what territory could we reach, especially with the popularity of streaming these days on Twitch.tv I'm excited about this possible "Share" button. Take a break from the specs a second and hopefully we may see something great! Here's Hoping![/citation]Nvidia and ATi in part expanded their GPUs because they were terrified at the way the market was going. Games consoles were going to strangle development of bigger, better and more power-hungry games (and they have) and they knew they would need to expand because crappy future games would no longer drive their sales.

I'm all for innovation, but as a potential customer I don't want stupid buggy motion controllers which remind me I'm standing/sitting in the living room flailing my arms about like a twat. I don't want stupid social gaming features, 'share buttons', or Facebook integration, etc. I don't want their library of crappy software for browsing YouTube or Hulu or Netflix, for which I have proper dedicated equipment.

I want a refresher to consoles that should have died years ago so our games can experience real, fundamental technical innovation without all this stupid frilly crap. Don't you remember the extremely innovating and promising tech demos over the years with awesome crap like fully descructible environments, procedural texturing, etc etc? Most of those innovative technologies, relegated to gimmicky half-arsed tacked-on-the-side features because it wasn't worth the time developing properly with the limitations of the consoles and NVIDIA's/ATI/AMD's bickering over GPGPU technologies.

Games stopped evolving a few years ago. Here's hoping developers can finally stretch their legs again without getting distracted by stupid "new styles of play".
 

virtualban

Distinguished
Feb 16, 2007
625
0
18,930
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]Really always consoles need to do have the oculus rift as a primary source support it from day one[/citation]
Agreed!
Virtual Reality is the next generation. That will sell. Everything else will stagnate.
 

jcboyett

Honorable
Feb 6, 2013
1
0
10,510
Fully network would need to implement the new AC wireless technology, and not just the 5 GHz band on N.

[citation][nom]kyzarvs[/nom]As neither has any codec support worth a damn, I use PS3 media server on my Debian box to serve and transcode films to my PS3 and 360. As the PS3 has gigabit LAN and the 360 only has 10/100, the 360 is crap at streaming full-quality transcoded 1080p data. The PS3 handles everything very well and with the Blu-Ray remote, is a doddle.Of course, if EITHER devices had decent codec support, transcoding into MPEG2 wouldn't be a requirement...[/citation]
The main reason a lot of people are not using the PS3 as much to stream movies over their home network is the Cinavia support from Sony. It cuts the audio out of nearly any "downloaded" movie.
 

elcentral

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2010
202
0
18,830
[citation][nom]cewhidx[/nom]This was so painful to read, that I'm pretty sure your point went entirely over my head...[/citation]

sorry you felt like that. i'll try to be shorter the next time.
 

zybch

Distinguished
Mar 17, 2010
217
0
18,830
This is just Sony giving up on a true next-gen console right? Nintendo pulled the same thing (and successfully) by repackaging the GameCube with a silly Wiimote and calling it the Wii.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
640
0
18,930
[citation][nom]Jarmo[/nom]The only thing bothering me is, with rumored 8-core AMD chip and a decent GPU, PS4 won't have low power requirements. Meaning it won't run cool or quiet, which is a bad thing for a media hub.[/citation]Err, based on the rumored specs it will very likely be cooler, quieter, and more power efficient than the early fat PS3s. From there, it will only get better. It's a semi-custom design of some variety, similar to a mobile part in terms of power/heat.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
640
0
18,930
[citation][nom]kyzarvs[/nom]huh???As neither has any codec support worth a damn, I use PS3 media server on my Debian box to serve and transcode films to my PS3 and 360. As the PS3 has gigabit LAN and the 360 only has 10/100, the 360 is crap at streaming full-quality transcoded 1080p data. The PS3 handles everything very well and with the Blu-Ray remote, is a doddle.Of course, if EITHER devices had decent codec support, transcoding into MPEG2 wouldn't be a requirement...[/citation]If you think that 100 mbits is holding you back, you're wrong. 100 mbits is far more than your video stream will need, even with overhead. Also, why are you using MPEG-2? You should be using VC-1 (up to 15 mbits/sec Level 3) or H.264 (up to 10 mbits/sec High Profile 4.1).

Your transcoding/media server box has to have the horsepower and the right software to do this, of course. I've done this successfully with TVersity ages ago. I don't use the 360 as a media box anymore, since I've got a dedicated media box on the TV downstairs now. But HD streaming to the 360 worked fine for me in the past.
 

alidan

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
1,681
0
19,730
[citation][nom]guardianangel42[/nom]You're serious aren't you? I'd laugh but for some strange reason I don't find this particularly funny.Focusing game development on gameplay and the experience as a whole is MASSIVE mistake? So what you're implying is that the only thing new hardware is good for is more realistic graphics? Not better and more complex enemy and NPC AI, not increased NPC count that adds to immersion, not destructible environments.The only thing that matters is graphics because, since all of the above increase the gameplay experience, they don't matter.You also imply that current gameplay styles, including rudimentary shooter experiences, is fine because what really matters is how realistic the explosions look.Now, if you didn't mean any of this, then I'm sorry to say but you suck at communicating because claiming developers focusing on gameplay is a MASSIVE mistake implies you believe all of the above.[/citation]

ok, lets look at the direction they too with their alternative gameplay, and what microsoft did, and what nintendo did.

the move, while good, faild to be good over a long period of time, only produced gimick games, and even when one came along that tried to do more it beat you over the head with "you are playing a move game ZOMG LOOK MOVE AND IT MOVES"

microsoft shoved steel battalion into the kinect... seriously, google that. GOOGLE IT NOW
a game that was a mech sim, that required a 4 button controller 3 peddles and 2 joysticks.

their idea of alternate gaming is to make it move, kinect, or a waggle fest... if they had ANY idea that showed promise, i would be behind it... the wiiu has potential but so far its been crapped away,

you see i dont give a damn about what the graphics look like over all, im ok with ps1 quality so long as the resolution is high enough i don't see jaggies. but when they say media hub and not focusing on graphics, i hear waggle fests possibly no controller and needing to buy a new system for it too... see what scares me the most is if the next system takes off, or if sony somehow kills the ability to support the ps3 if the 4th is a failure, and force people to buy a new system, for ps3 quality games with a worse controller.

hell im also afraid that microsoft is going to do it too. hell they increased the price of xbox live JUST so they could put espn on it...

look, this is what 8 year old hardware that they are potentially JUST putting something powerful enough to run a ps3 game at full 720p or 1080p or hell could just be a ps3 quality that can upscale to 4k.

the only part i give a damn about in games is the texture quality, its the only part of a video game i refuse to compromise on, but look at this nvidia tech demo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQQpCd_vvGU&feature=youtu.be&t=3m58s

that is what a well done tessellation map can do. realistically you could put whatever you want on the console and the pc would just get farther draw distances, thats what i want, but the console needs to be powerfully enough to handle the 30-50% overhead this adds.

that and higher textue detail are really all i want for the pc

and lets go with your example... explosions looking better, to be honest thats all many games have going for them is how pretty they can look, so yea, i want better hardware, not just ps3 with 20% faster hardware (a rumor of what the 360 is is that they are shooting for 20% faster than the wii)

[citation][nom]virtualban[/nom]Agreed!Virtual Reality is the next generation. That will sell. Everything else will stagnate.[/citation]

i want the console to have occulas rift from day one mostly because there is a VERY good chance the average consumer doesn't support it because "3d sucks" arguments, or "i don't want to ware glasses" that i have also heard, if the consoles support it from day one, at the minimum they will sell 500k of them (the kinect sold at least 5 million and it barely works) and 500k would be enough that publishers push support, and that support would make more people but the rift...

my only fear about the rift is if its a pc only thing it may get next to no support... sure there is id, and from what i hear, the rift makes doom 3 scary, valve, which makes how many games a year, and to a lesser extent sony (i think they are trying to make a competitor apposed to pushing support in games) but will that really be enough?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.