Discussion in 'Sony Consoles' started by supasaiyan, Mar 29, 2012.
It really should be 1080P though.
Not much excuse for it not to be IMO.
See? A whole post later, common sense vanishes, and the Internet flames start.
There isn't any flaming there Elvis?
I think you're reaching for something to prove your point.
So rumoured to be two SKU's (not surprised) one at $429 and the other $529. US Prices...
So if those figures are correct, expect $500 and $600 I'd say minimum.
And unlikely to be this year in Europe/Australia. Which I'm expecting, I'd think March 2014.
Price, id say you are about right.
As for timing they would be stupid not to release it here and EU at the same time as US.
We'll see tomorrow, but if they released in Japan and the US, and have an inevitable shortage like every console, you can't expect them to cater for the (large) European audience. Im almost certain we'll get it in 2014.
If Sony really wanna but fuck us in the price department I wouldn't be shocked either, afterall $599 PS3 was $999 here, regardless of the dollar.
I could actually see it higher then the $600 figure.
Bit of a gamble if they do, as the 720 would probably be released well before then.
Hopefully dont have to wait, i want the new console gen!
USA is pro 360
Japan is equal Nintendo/Sony
Europe is Sony
They won't lose alot with a 360 launching earlier in Europe (let alone Japan).
Would like to think that they would be able to anticipate global launch sales and produce accordingly, but we shall see.
I think they can rely on brand loyalty in Europe, time it with a FIFA game and it'll sell well.
Oh well this time tomorrow we should know.
So when we are discussing resolution, are we discussing internal rendering resolution with the console doing scaling to the output resolution?
If so, then it matters not if people mostly have 720p (and 768p) since the console would just scale it down.
The choice on output resolution should be game dependent. I'd rather lower res with smoother gameplay vs. higher res at choppy framerate.
In any case, I prefer games with stylistic artwork rather than realism (unless of course realism is necessary for the experience).
When it comes to realism, more resolution doesn't necessarily enhance it.
He does that.
I don't really care too much about the difference between 720 and 1080, because without my glasses I can't bloody tell anyway, however I believe 1080 will be the default res for these consoles, no question. I just hope the games have actually improved dramatically, I want to see unreal engine 4 demo type quality, but I'm not sure it will be that amazing. The games we get at launch will be much closer to current gen graphics, but look at the difference between say Halo 3 and Halo 4, HUGE difference on same hardware.
Hell I just want a new console. This cycle has gone on too long.
Imagine waiting out for the next gen but dying before it arrived
Looking forward to the announcement.
Im not a diehard Xbox or PS fan (i have both consoles and like each of them for different reasons) but i have always had a softspot for my PS3
I don't really care either, though I prefer xbox just because of media center. I will likely get the PS4 again if it is released first.
Looks like the controller will be larger too, which is great as for me the dual shock is just too small, it's like it's made for little kids (little japanese kids?) :3
To think people only want 1080p for 'the shinyz' is ignorant.
I couldn't care less if the graphics stay the same, but I want an improvement of image quality. Having 720p (or even lower in some games) resolutions with no AA, muddy textures etc makes games look far worse than they actually are. I'd rather not look at blurry messes for another generation, thanks.
We're not expecting CG level image quality, but if it can at least match 8xAA and 16xAF while 1080p, that's a hell of a lot better than the current consoles.
I want this:
consistent framerates with 720P and 16xAF + 2-4xAA will give you good looking games and also reduce the fill by a bit compared to 1080P making the shiny more deliverable.
see, I would rather spend the extra pixels from a 1080 jump on a cleaner 720p image, 32X aa, smooth deferred lighting, 4 or 8bit alpha instead of 1bit for grass/leaves/opacity etc. same-res SSAO/SSDO instead of the half or quater res that we get a lot now. better (and more) post processing effects, better blooms, screen derived lens effects etc. and make it all run at 60
btw texture res is mostly memory, so its a non-issue with resolution.
I dont think 32xAA is realistic it might not even be supported by the cards, then again its probably a typo.
I would love to see some games at full 720P with 4xAA and 16xAF though, i suspect even some last gen games at that would look completely stunning.
No reaching required. You fell directly into the stereotype not one post after it was predicted.
The Internet clamours each and every console release for more resolution. And yet we still have lighting effects from the 1990's in games, not to mention a complete lack of ray tracing, global illumination, and other basics of 3D image creation that are still avoided as modern video cards aim to mindlessly push more pixels and not much more. Every now and then we see a tech demo, but weeks later it's proven to be not much more than a trivial simulation full of pre-baked visual information with very little real-time information in it.
I'd love to see a hardware vendor do something new. The polygon revolution happened 20 years ago. Since then all we've been doing is upping the poly count, and upping the pixels on our screens. But we're still nowhere near the power required to do basic things we saw on film 20 years ago realtime.
I would take 480p realtime raytracing over 4K res with current realtime 3D technology. I've been playing video games for a time since way before 480p was even a thing, and I'm far more interested in a higher quality of image at low resolution than I am a stupendous amount of pixels showing me 20+ year old 3D rendering concepts.
And the fact of the matter is that you can't have both. Not for some time yet. And for everyone who says "why can't we have both?", marketing people hear "hell, lets go nuts with the tech we already have that's cheap, rather than risking negative public opinion by dropping the res in favour of prettier pictures".
Stuff pixel count. Real time ray tracing and GI is far more exciting. It's a shame no-one has the balls to pursue it.