I said MORE affordable. You can get a 4K with HDR for around £400 with the word Panasonic on it now. I paid approximately that for 1080P two or three years ago.Affordable? The cheapest 8K TV is over $8000; I don't think they'll suddenly drop to $1000 in the next year. My dad bought a 4K TV for the living room quite recently, and I got one for the playroom 3 days ago. 3 days! And we can't even use the 4K resolution because the standard PS4 can't use it, and digital TV has JUST started using 4K, and that's only for selected shows at the moment. The idea of jumping up to 8K after using our older TV's for 10 and 7 years respectively sounds ludicrous. 8K will not become the norm for AT LEAST another decade, so there is no point developing a console to handle it! Technology for the sake of it mate, that's all it is.
That's not so much joining the dots as throwing another dot out there. What's the connection?
My pro with an SSD, mid game sharing is extremely fast. 1-2 seconds tops.The menu is easily my biggest complaint with the current PS. The delays, especially when heading to the TV section or hitting the Share button mid-game, are incredibly frustrating, especially when it's on the Pro!
Eh, it's inconclusive at best. It's focusing on PS4 because that's the most recent generation, and it's the one without BC. I imagine PS1 and PS2 emulation are easy enough to just do from a software side, unless Sony wants to keep them on PS Now to encourage signups of that service.
I really like how MS deals with BC right now on XB1. If you have a compatible XB or X360 disc, you just pop it in and it triggers a download. Plus, a good chunk of titles even have One X updates, meaning you can play them at a level of detail closer to current-gen. That's a great move, and part of the reason I've been expanding my previous-gen multi-platform library on the One X instead of the PS4 Pro.
That said, I'm really excited about the PS5. It sounds like Sony is addressing the handful of weaknesses it has currently without sacrificing its strengths. The next gen console lineup from both it and MS should be a truly exceptional one.
Now that is something I agree with. But it will take a while for 8K to become commonplace.I said MORE affordable. You can get a 4K with HDR for around £400 with the word Panasonic on it now. I paid approximately that for 1080P two or three years ago.
The second gen of 8K will be cheaper. It will be more affordable. Does that mean most people will be able to? No. I won't buy one until I can justify it.
Didn't you even see my point there? Like I said, the PS5 is a next-generation console. So there's a possibility that there will also be a jack up for the price of its games, just like what happened before with Nintendo's DS and its successor, the 3DS. And aside from that 2010 you're saying, what you're talking about was a long time ago, where games are much cheaper because it's a generation where they don't come in HD yet. It's only either 2D or 3D.@GTV0819 why would you think that? The cost of games hasn't increased significantly since at least the mid-'90s, I remember my Mum buying me Atomic Runner on the Mega Drive back in 1993 or 94 (I would've been 7) for £40. I also remember her buying me Zone of the Enders for my 14th birthday in 2001, also for £40.
Since 2010 though I can probably count the number of times I've spent £40 or more on a game on my fingers, admittedly I don't buy many AAA games and rarely buy things on day one unless I really want them badly. Games are quite unusual in their resistance to inflation, if Atomic Runner was £40 in 1994 then games should be £78.90 or so now and yet very few games have breached the £50 mark for a non-special edition.
Well, that's a good thing to know. I've never owned a PS4 yet until now so that's why I only assumed about this stuff. Getting more games for lesser the price is nice.With pre-orders, special editions, and huge season passes becoming ever more necessary for a complete experience, most AAA games don't really cost $60 anymore. $60 gets you in, but that's when the monetization starts.
I remember when people said that about 4K and 4K screens. That's not exactly a feat of memory, because it was four years ago - and slightly further back people were literally dismissing the possibility of the PS4 ever running 4K back in 2013.Until 8K TVs become widely available and affordable (below $2000) I see absolutely no point in 8K gaming for consoles.
PS5 games will not run nativity at 4k.
In fact, selling the consoles is the key to selling the screens. Who'd buy an 8K screen if there wasn't an 8K source to exploit it? As the early adopters scramble for both, the prices of the panels comes down, just like it did with "HD Ready" screens, then "Full HD" screens, then 4K screens. 3D seems to have died a death though, thankfully.
PS5 games will not run nativity at 4k.
and slightly further back people were literally dismissing the possibility of the PS4 ever running 4K back in 2013.
It's been common exactly because the hardware hasn't been able to do better, thats it.
Unless 'cinematic' = eye-irritating these days.
I don't see the point of 8K, but honestly I don't understand why some would complain about it. If you aim for 8K, you need to have a buttload of power, well beyond what you'd need for 60fps at 1080p.
It's like giving a car more power. You can make it have a higher top speed, higher acceleration, or a bit of both.
Unless your eyes are irritated by the vast majority of video out there, and pretty much all movies, no, cinematic means cinematic.
I don't see why not. The XB1 will run games at a native 4K resolution — even at a steady 60fps in the case of FM7. The PS5 will be significantly more powerful.
Just like this generation, I'm sure we'll see a variety of resolutions based on developer needs and desires, and 30fps will still be pretty common thanks to its more cinematic feel. But given the sheer power of the next generation, I imagine sub-4K resolutions will be few and far between.