Sony Confirms PlayStation 4 Is Nearing the End of Its Life Cycle

[redhed17]

The more rumours about a PS5, the quicker sales will drop off for the PS4. They will have to get a bit creative with versions of the machine, cost cuts, or both. Or have some killer games, which is a bit unlikely this long into it lifespan imho. Cut the price too much and the successor looks overpriced. I had a PS1 pretty soon after release and got the PS2 and the PS3 the same, but the PS4 offered little for me until GT Sport. The lack of backwards compatibility again was also a disincentive to upgrade for me.

Once I had got the PS4, when GT Sport was released, the realisation that the 1TB hard drive will be wasted as the PS4 is not the media storage centre/viewer the PS3 was quite disappointing. My own fault for not doing enough research. Gaming is not a large a part of my life as it once was.

If more games require online saving as GT Sport does, then I may not even bother. Me messing my saves up is one thing, but a game developer losing my saved progress is another thing. And basically having no game when they switch off support for a game down the line, as may happen with GT Sport, is another reason to give a new system a miss if that is the route more developers go down.

 

[Robin]

I could see the standard PS4 being phased out very soon and the PS4 Pro becoming the only console they sell, especially if they want to push PSVR and want to compete better with the One X... but even then it's days are limited because like the One X they are both stop gaps to see this generation out.

It's no surprise that this generation of consoles didn't last long and its because they were massively under powered at launch. The jump from PS2 to PS3 was massive compared to the PS4. The PS3 even now is a very capable machine with graphics that by today's standards are still pretty good because it wasn't exactly a cheap thing to begin with.

I skipped this whole generation so far so might as well hold out to see what the PS5 is like. Given the One X has such excellent disk based backwards compatibility and a UHD player I would be very disappointed if the PS5 doesn't have those features.

 

[Zevious Z]

While the diminishing returns are a thing, I personally think part of the issue is a misguided emphasis on relatively minute details at the expense of the bigger picture, including things that can enhance or add to gameplay. One good example would be the supposed selling points of FM5 -- marbles, reflections in the windshield, orange peel in the paint...nothing wrong with that sort of detail itself, but I'm not going to buy a new console for that! For a "next gen" game I expected something more along the lines of PCARS.

Imagine what the PS4 or XBone could already do with object poly counts and texture sizes more like what you find on the Switch -- more objects, larger worlds, denser foliage or crowds, more stuff governed by physics, etc. I wouldn't care if the assets are individually unimpressive. A forest that is truly and legitimately as dense as the real thing, or a rainstorm that dynamically creates pools of water according to landscape drainage, backing up or draining somewhere else if the player interferes -- that would blow me away like the historical jumps you mentioned. That's the kind of jump I'm waiting for next.

this times eleventy-billion. The emphasis on silly eye-candy bling that has absolutely zero effect on gameplay and isn't really even noticeable 90% of the time is so frikking stupid on the part of devs it drives me nuts. Give me a more complex world full of stuff that operates and inter-relates in a convincing physical way over minute details I can't even see that impact nothing please...

 

[GT Sport]

And I still have the standard Ps4 I bought at December 2014..
So, what is going to "end"?
New titles will not make it to Ps4?
Hopefully PS Plus will stay alive

 

[05XR8]

I don't see the big deal. It's what always happens. A new console. It's not like some who spend $500+ on a new phone every year.

I just bought my PS4 two months ago. I bought my XB1 late as well. It is inevitable new consoles will come out when ever they come out. Been that way since Atari 2600.

 

[TVR27]

I am not going to buy the next Gran Turismo game if it is exclusive to the Playstation 4 Pro or if it's on the Playstation 5! I have the standard PS4 no point wasting my money on the pro if PS5 is coming soon. I think console gaming is basically dead at this point and I think the PS3 was the last great console with games I wanted to buy the PS4 is a good console but it doesn't have enough games and this problem will only get worse with the PS5. I can't afford to buy new consoles every few years like mobile phones. I think I should turn my PS2 back on!

 

[Rinku]

Sooner or later we'll see a new gen PlayStation. What makes me worry is a question of software backward compability and even more - hardware compatibility.

Just bought my G29

i hated sony, Logitech & polyphony for what they did with g27 user like me. mine was only under 4 years old. if that was not enough then windows messed up g27 driver thinking it was driving force gt wheel insted of g27. im still using my g27 with chronosmax plus. i dont want to buy g29 and thrustmasters suk with there bad quality and lifetime on there wheels plus they reset every new race in gt sport atleast
now im afraid if i buy g29 it may not support ps5.

 

[Robin]

I am not going to buy the next Gran Turismo game if it is exclusive to the Playstation 4 Pro or if it's on the Playstation 5! I have the standard PS4 no point wasting my money on the pro if PS5 is coming soon. I think console gaming is basically dead at this point and I think the PS3 was the last great console with games I wanted to buy the PS4 is a good console but it doesn't have enough games and this problem will only get worse with the PS5. I can't afford to buy new consoles every few years like mobile phones. I think I should turn my PS2 back on!

I've actually started buying PS2 games again They don't make them like they used to!

And I still have the standard Ps4 I bought at December 2014..

So, what is going to "end"?
New titles will not make it to Ps4?
Hopefully PS Plus will stay alive

Nothing will happen games wise. The standard PS4 will disappear and new games will continue to support it (because they have to) even if only the Pro is on sale. When the PS5 arrives there will be an overlap with the PS4 for a while with games releasing on both systems. As for PS Plus it should stay active for quite a long time. PS3's online services are still online.

 

[gtracedriver1]

I sold off my PS3 for my PS4 and I really regretted it, I miss it very much. I'm definitely hanging on to my PS4 when I get my PS5 no matter how good the trade in value is.

I am sure PS5 will be backward compatible for PS4 games. Otherwise it could be a dealbreaker. I think PS5 will release in 2020

The only reason for waiting until 2021 is because of that's when MS will release the next Xbox. Despite having the upper hand at the moment releasing a year earlier would hand MS a hardware advantage which would last the generation.

Hardware specs are just tool for developers for technical challenges but games is what will sell the console. I am sure PS5 will be capable 4K console and get VR support. So having even say 30% performance won't matter much IMHO. For example X inspite of having performance advantage of I think 50% is 100$ more expensive than Pro. On top of that they do not have games to compete. Therefore it is not selling good.

 

[JohnBM01]

Maybe my gaming habits have waned, but I felt if I did get a PS4 at this point, I probably would miss out and want to get into the PS5 cycle. Then too, let's look at the PS3. I think the PS3 came out in 2006, and I got mine in 2011. So I got my PS3 as it was basically nearing the end of its life cycle as the PS4 came along. As much as I like the PlayStation consoles and the Sony ecosystem, I somehow wasn't as reluctant to get a PS4 for some reason.

It would be weird to completely miss one console in a series and go right into the PlayStation 5 when it comes along. Maybe in my case, this is where things can go...

 

[Wolfe]

I think console gaming is basically dead at this point...

I could hardly disagree more. I thought last year was incredible and this year is carrying on that momentum. My watchlist of games on Switch has 22 titles currently and has been growing faster than I can check them off, and E3 is around the corner. My PS4 list has only seven, but multiplats go on the Switch list by default.

The Japanese corner of the industry has revitalized itself after its doldrums through the '00s and early '10s, and they're back on top, IMO. Meanwhile indies are dutifully filling the various holes that traditional publishers have long since left behind, if not charting new territory, and unlike on PC you can usually count on them to work and play properly on a console, at the very least with a better track record than western AAA games. I feel console gaming is very healthy.

 

[Jawehawk]

I could see the standard PS4 being phased out very soon and the PS4 Pro becoming the only console they sell, especially if they want to push PSVR and want to compete better with the One X... but even then it's days are limited because like the One X they are both stop gaps to see this generation out.

It's no surprise that this generation of consoles didn't last long and its because they were massively under powered at launch. The jump from PS2 to PS3 was massive compared to the PS4. The PS3 even now is a very capable machine with graphics that by today's standards are still pretty good because it wasn't exactly a cheap thing to begin with.

I skipped this whole generation so far so might as well hold out to see what the PS5 is like. Given the One X has such excellent disk based backwards compatibility and a UHD player I would be very disappointed if the PS5 doesn't have those features.

Nonsense. Once this generation ends, it will have lasted as long as the ones preceeding it. And the Pro is not a stop gap solution. That would imply a need for it, which there wasn't. Proof? Go play Horizon Zero Dawn or Uncharted 4 and tell me the base PS4 is underpowered. 4K resolution is primarily for people who don't know better and are easily impressed by large numbers. From a business standpoint, the Price was about money, not about fixing anything.

Graphical shortcomings today come down to lighting, animations and psychics. Not resolution.

The obvious graphical advances will of course diminish over time.

 

[shoemaker]

I hope they completely redesign the control pads, awful things and very poorly made too. Ps now was appalling when i had the free trial. Sony need to buck their ideas up, So glad i traded it all for a one x.

 

[Auditore]

The next consoles will ditch the Jaguar CPU for Ryzen's which is a pretty huge jump in power(Jaguar sucks)

We have 2 more years of PS4 based on the comments of the executives.

 

[lancia delta hf]

I hope they completely redesign the control pads, awful things and very poorly made too. Ps now was appalling when i had the free trial. Sony need to buck their ideas up, So glad i traded it all for a one x.

Why redesign them when people like the current design, why not offer 2 different designs?

 

[Robin]

And the Pro is not a stop gap solution. That would imply a need for it, which there wasn't.

Explain why it exists then.... If the standard PS4 is such a gleaming beacon of hardware prowess why bother? The PS4 costed about $400 per unit to make at launch (similar to it's retail price), the PS3 costed $800 to make in 2006 money! Tell me that's not an under powered system?

There was nothing wrong with it being a budget system. That's what made sense at the time and it sold well but it was always understood the lifespan wouldn't be as long. Also they knew later on that PSVR sucked on the standard PS4 which was another reason why it was a necessity to create the Pro.

The Pro and One X is somewhat of an admission of what the launch systems should have been, but at the time it was financially very dangerous because the world was still suffering from the recession.

Go play Horizon Zero Dawn or Uncharted 4 and tell me the base PS4 is underpowered.

It's under powered compared to what it could have been, are those games the graphical jump seen from PS2 to PS3? No. Frankly the improvements were marginal.

From a business standpoint, the Price was about money, not about fixing anything.

I presume you mean Pro instead of Price.

That is absolutely not true, both Microsoft and Sony came to the same conclusion that budget systems released in 2013 would not go the distance and needed boosted systems which we now have ended up with and which will likely totally replace the base systems. This will extend the lifespan to something comparable to the PS3/360 era but the standard PS4 if it disappears in the next year that 'generation' will have actually only survived 5 years.

 

[PocketZeven]

I am happy Sony went to a x86 cpu architecture. That will only mean future consoles will likely be backward compatible with PS4 games. Sony already has the biggest online userbase in the business even eclipsing steam! I am really hopping that in the era of PS5 they will encourage developers to patch older games for the extra horsepower it certainly is going to deliver!

 

[redhed17]

I am sure PS5 will be backward compatible for PS4 games. Otherwise it could be a dealbreaker.

I would not bet any money on that. Disk based backwards compatibility in a new console may be a thing of the past if they can easily be emulated online on their servers. Especially if you need a subscription to play the games you may have already have bought.

Why redesign them when people like the current design, why not offer 2 different designs?

Subtle redesigns are OK, but an alternative design would be an admission that they got the current design wrong. If there was a market for a radically different/better controller some third party manufacturer would be making a lot of money, and I don't see that, and haven't with any console.

Graphical shortcomings today come down to lighting, animations and psychics. Not resolution.

Psychics! Or did someone tell you I was going to post this?

 

[Jawehawk]

Explain why it exists then.... If the standard PS4 is such a gleaming beacon of hardware prowess why bother? The PS4 costed about $400 per unit to make at launch (similar to it's retail price), the PS3 costed $800 to make in 2006 money! Tell me that's not an under powered system?

There was nothing wrong with it being a budget system. That's what made sense at the time and it sold well but it was always understood the lifespan wouldn't be as long. Also they knew later on that PSVR sucked on the standard PS4 which was another reason why it was a necessity to create the Pro.

The Pro and One X is somewhat of an admission of what the launch systems should have been, but at the time it was financially very dangerous because the world was still suffering from the recession.



It's under powered compared to what it could have been, are those games the graphical jump seen from PS2 to PS3? No. Frankly the improvements were marginal.



I presume you mean Pro instead of Price.

That is absolutely not true, both Microsoft and Sony came to the same conclusion that budget systems released in 2013 would not go the distance and needed boosted systems which we now have ended up with and which will likely totally replace the base systems. This will extend the lifespan to something comparable to the PS3/360 era but the standard PS4 if it disappears in the next year that 'generation' will have actually only survived 5 years.

More nonsense. You're using the mentality of a PC gamer where it doesn't apply. Consoles have always achieved more with less, owing to games actually being optimized for them. Horizon Zero Dawn, when played on the base PS4, still looks better than the vast majority of other games out there. It's entirely nonsensical to say that a system is underpowered when it is capable of doing that.

Have you tried PS VR on the base PS4? I own and use it, and it works just fine. Graphically, VR has a long way to go, but that goes for all currently available systems (less so on PC, but it still applies). The affordable hardware for VR that looks anything like our standard games is still years off. If anything, the PS VR's admirable functionality on the base PS4 is a testament to how not underpowered the console is.

The Pro and X were easy sales because many people are easily impressed by big numbers, regardless of the actual benefits. It's about making more money without having to develop an entirely new consol. Simply good business.

Again. Diminishing returns are a thing.

What are you basing your claims of the base consoles being outright replaced by their slightly upgraded peers on? That Sony says the cycle is nearing the end, even though this would make this generation perfectly consistent with earlier ones in terms of a new generation coming out after 6-7 years.


And BTW. The PS3 pricing was largely a result of using a new and expensive disc format as well as the super advanced Cell Processor. In terms of actual capability, the PS3 hardly exceeded what the cheaper 360 was capable of.

 

[Tired Tyres]

More nonsense. You're using the mentality of a PC gamer where it doesn't apply. Consoles have always achieved more with less, owing to games actually being optimized for them. Horizon Zero Dawn, when played on the base PS4, still looks better than the vast majority of other games out there. It's entirely nonsensical to say that a system is underpowered when it is capable of doing that.

Have you tried PS VR on the base PS4? I own and use it, and it works just fine. Graphically, VR has a long way to go, but that goes for all currently available systems (less so on PC, but it still applies). The affordable hardware for VR that looks anything like our standard games is still years off. If anything, the PS VR's admirable functionality on the base PS4 is a testament to how not underpowered the console is.

The Pro and X were easy sales because many people are easily impressed by big numbers, regardless of the actual benefits. It's about making more money without having to develop an entirely new consol. Simply good business.

Again. Diminishing returns are a thing.

What are you basing your claims of the base consoles being outright replaced by their slightly upgraded peers on? That Sony says the cycle is nearing the end, even though this would make this generation perfectly consistent with earlier ones in terms of a new generation coming out after 6-7 years.


And BTW. The PS3 pricing was largely a result of using a new and expensive disc format as well as the super advanced Cell Processor. In terms of actual capability, the PS3 hardly exceeded what the cheaper 360 was capable of.

The PS4 and Xbox1 were low tech, low risk machines from manufacturers who didn't know if there was still a console market. Each previous console hits near top end game PC capabilities at launch. PS4 was nowhere near. YouTube videos popped up on this Gen release to see if you could build a games PC for the same money. You could very easily indead and there was a hell of a lot of upgrades possible after that.

 

[TJ13]

While they say 3 years off, I could see it only being 2 years.
As 2020 will be 7 years since release.

I only expect that if there is any last life in them is probably something to do with PSVR.
Maybe PSVR v3.

I always think that PC will always have the upper hand in gaming, but then you have those special games that only consoles will have and one must have it.

Will we see better tech in newer gaming?
Maybe?
But at what cost?
Since people remember the 599$ PS3 deal.

 

[Jawehawk]

The PS4 and Xbox1 were low tech, low risk machines from manufacturers who didn't know if there was still a console market. Each previous console hits near top end game PC capabilities at launch. PS4 was nowhere near. YouTube videos popped up on this Gen release to see if you could build a games PC for the same money. You could very easily indead and there was a hell of a lot of upgrades possible after that.

Except the fact that a PC build to console specs won't deliver you the same game performance. Feel free to show me a statement from Sony or Microsoft where they express doubts in the feasibility of consoles in 2012-2013.

Just like Robin, you fail to look at the software, and instead focus only on the hardware. Disregard the numbers for a second, and look at the actual capabilities of the PS4 through the formerly mentioned titles. Calling that underpowered is nonsensical.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Except the fact that a PC build to console specs won't deliver you the same game performance. Feel free to show me a statement from Sony or Microsoft where they express doubts in the feasibility of consoles in 2012-2013.

Just like Robin, you fail to look at the software, and instead focus only on the hardware. Disregard the numbers for a second, and look at the actual capabilities of the PS4 through the formerly mentioned titles. Calling that underpowered is nonsensical.

What coders do with software is what they do with, a supposed, non moving target. You can't optimise like that on PC for obvious reasons.

The only thing nonsensical here is your attitude buddy. You are expressing an OPINION. So am I.

 

[Jawehawk]

What coders do with software is what they do with, a supposed, non moving target. You can't optimise like that on PC for obvious reasons.

The only thing nonsensical here is your attitude buddy. You are expressing an OPINION. So am I.

That optimization is the exact reason why consoles don't need to be as powerful as pc's. That, and the pricing. The PC gamer attitude needs to stay in PC gaming. It's nothing but obnoxious appendix measuring while ignoring the actual results. And when certain games clearly show that the base PS4 is capable of powering some of the best looking games currently available, despite being nearly five years old, then the opinion is grounded in actual evidence. As opposed to only focusing on the hardware and being blind to anything else.

 

[ThaSyn]

It is frustrating sony plans to let us wait for so long. Some games almost make the ps pro sound like it is going to explode (eg. god of war). Won't get any better I'm afraid. We need more powerful hardware.

 

[BlacqueJacques]

Still not enough racing and flying games on PS4 for me to buy one. Sticking to pc (more games/sim choices) still.

 

[ImaRobot]

Hardware specs are just tool for developers for technical challenges but games is what will sell the console. I am sure PS5 will be capable 4K console and get VR support. So having even say 30% performance won't matter much IMHO. For example X inspite of having performance advantage of I think 50% is 100$ more expensive than Pro. On top of that they do not have games to compete. Therefore it is not selling good.

Don't forget that it also has a UHD player, which the pro doesn't have. That' and the power difference makes sense for the difference in price. They're definitely needing to up their exclusives, but I've been having a great time with my One X regardless.

 

[Whitestar]

That optimization is the exact reason why consoles don't need to be as powerful as pc's. That, and the pricing. The PC gamer attitude needs to stay in PC gaming. It's nothing but obnoxious appendix measuring while ignoring the actual results. And when certain games clearly show that the base PS4 is capable of powering some of the best looking games currently available, despite being nearly five years old, then the opinion is grounded in actual evidence. As opposed to only focusing on the hardware and being blind to anything else.

Those games you mention seem to be the exception rather than the rule. In a Digital Foundry video I saw recently (about Zero Dawn) they mentioned just how great it was that this game ran so stable at 30 fps, and that many other open world games had performance issues, running way under 30 fps.
"PC gamer attitude" or not, some of us simply prefer to play at 60+ fps with high graphics settings. I dare say that frame rate is a significant part of graphics, or visual fidelity if you will. And the current console generation doesn't score very well in that department.

 

[lancia delta hf]

Those games you mention seem to be the exception rather than the rule. In a Digital Foundry video I saw recently (about Zero Dawn) they mentioned just how great it was that this game ran so stable at 30 fps, and that many other open world games had performance issues, running way under 30 fps.
"PC gamer attitude" or not, some of us simply prefer to play at 60+ fps with high graphics settings. I dare say that frame rate is a significant part of graphics, or visual fidelity if you will. And the current console generation doesn't score very well in that department.

Sometimes when there are frame rate drops, the game looks like it's going backwards to me. Kinda like when a wheel spins it looks like its spinning in the opposite direction momentarily.

 

[Jawehawk]

Those games you mention seem to be the exception rather than the rule. In a Digital Foundry video I saw recently (about Zero Dawn) they mentioned just how great it was that this game ran so stable at 30 fps, and that many other open world games had performance issues, running way under 30 fps.
"PC gamer attitude" or not, some of us simply prefer to play at 60+ fps with high graphics settings. I dare say that frame rate is a significant part of graphics, or visual fidelity if you will. And the current console generation doesn't score very well in that department.

I certainly can't speak for every open world game out there, but from my experience, the PS4 is perfectly capable. In any case, Zero Dawn is still concrete evidence of what the base PS4 can do.

I realise that people will have wildly different experiences with PC gaming, so what I'm about to say will not necessarily have been your reality. That said, PC gaming hardly sets a good standard for well functioning games. Have a AMD GPU? There's a good chance the latest game outright won't work on your system. Bought a new GPU/CPU? There's a good chance your older games now require work to be able to play on your system, or won't work at all. This on a PC that is touted as being backwards compatible... And beware that you'll need to replace the GPU after two years if you want to continue maxing out the games, and that is assuming that the card you bought was a top of the line model, sometimes costing more than consoles do at release. I've done my fair share of PC gaming. I still do it a little because I happen to like RTS games and a few FPS games, the former of which is mostly nonexistent on console, and the latter arguably playing better with a mouse. But for anything else, I go for my console, because it saves me the annoyance of the game either requiring work to function correctly, or the game not working at all. Both of which are problems I have experienced a lot on PC, despite it being a rather expensive setup. Problems that, when combined with excessive DRM BS, game clients (Origin, UPlay) and mods shifting from free to being paid, have caused me to tire of the whole PC model.

PC gaming undeniably offers better performance, but most of it is theoretical rather than practical, and it comes at a higher price. That the base PS4 is capable of powering the best looking games (in terms of photo realism) currently out there is not an opinion. It's fact based on what has actually released on the system. That doesn't change the fact that you could achieve even more on a beefy PC, but what does this matter, when the lack of optimization due to the ridicules number of different setups prevents this from happening? As much as I like Crysis, to give an example, I hated not being able to play it on high settings for many years until after it originally released.

A lot of people like getting really into their hardware, and they have the money to spare. That's all well and good. That's what PC gaming, I think, is about at its core. Console gaming might not be that hardcore, but they work, as do the games. Neither should change to accommodate the other, as doing so would mean alinating either PC or console gamers.