Admit it, you just like that sexy Asmr.
Cerny's voice is like listening to Rainfall at Night or the sounds of the ocean crashing in the distance or Timdog crying about xbox,
Such sweet sounds.
PlayStation 6 Is Planned to Be the Most Powerful Console of Its Gen; Sony Only Considering AMD |UP| Will have handheld & AMD contracts signed.
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
Cerny's voice is like listening to Rainfall at Night or the sounds of the ocean crashing in the distance or Timdog crying about xbox,
Such sweet sounds.
If they can scale down production costs to where a cheap suitable headset can be included (say with a $BOM no more than $75 - $100), and sellable on its own for between $129 - $149...I think that adds incredible value proposition to a PS6 that can still provide very good performance upgrades and cut out a few things to target SKU pricings of $499 and $599 at launch, either without losing money upfront or recouping it through a single full-priced software purchase.
Realistically, a PS6 shouldn't be aiming for 100 TF or 64/128 GB of RAM or a huge 8 TB SSD anyway. Smart custom silicon for things like AI-driven LOD scaling management, some physics offloading calcs, fast contextual metadata processing, RT, image reconstruction/upscaling etc. means less need for brute "generic" compute and associated shaders.
Meaning a smaller chip, meaning you get more out of your wafers. Even better data I/O decompression tech means they can do even more with smaller pools of RAM, so maybe they only need 32 GB instead of something extreme like 64 GB, and they don't need an insanely fast (by future standards, like 40 GB/s or something like that.
It'd also mean things like needing a smaller upgrade on the CPU when it comes to core counts or thread support, or less cache in certain areas (though I think for things like I/O data processing and reducing power consumption across the bus, there would be an increase in localized cache pools).
And, smarter packaging of the APU would mean maybe they don't need the smallest node available at the time, to get the performance and TDP targets the console would require. And personally, the prospect of a PS6 with ingrained VR/AR support built in at the OS/UI level and being prolific enough that devs can comfortably take advantage of the tech in ways not possible before, is a lot more exciting than "just another" super powerful console box doing more of what already came before.
Hopefully technologies like Remote Play, PS.Link and Sony's own lenses, sensors etc. allow that type of scalability for a cheap enough entry-level VR headset (it doesn't have to be cutting-edge in features at all), with as much processing offloaded to the console as possible, to help make it happen. Which would allow for some cool innovations in the controller design as well. Plus, with the scalability they can still make premium-level VR headsets for those who want that ultimate performance, you'd just buy them separately (and they'd probably cost as much as the console itself for the highest end).
By 2028, yeah, I think (or at least hope) that can all be done for $499/$599 SKU packages. Easiest things to cut to make it happen would be the built-in disc drive (just make sure optional drives can be purchased separately), and storage capacity. Maybe the $499 model only needs 512 GB of SSD storage, and you give the $599 one 1 TB? Gimped storage capacity on the entry SKU didn't hurt the 360 at all back in the day (if anything, regular DVD support and not requiring manual installs to storage were bigger issues with that system).
I actually dont care that much about ray tracing, there are plenty of gorgeous games that dont use it.Nooo still 30fps but awesome ray tracing
I do get it that it makes it easier for devs to create better looking lighting but i'm not sure that the pacticity of it is worth the performance impact.
thats because most companies are still making games with the lowest common denominator (series S) in mind, it is literally holding back game development and what you could do with more powerfull hardware because you still need to make something that would run fine in something that obsolete.
Even with Sony games it's just more of the same? With faster loading and better graphics.
I dislike HZD but one thing I cant deny is how gorgeous the game looks so yeah, graphics. But its not just "better graphics", look at spiderman 2, crowd density, much further pop up, the speed at which can go and the game can even flow because of the hardware. Theres also a lot going on with how the hardware can affect how enemy and NPC AI in general works. I'm not super informed and even I can tell you that the better machines come with more than just "loading times and better looking graphics"
OP
OP
Definitely HZD also had a lush world and wasn't empty. I felt it had good density compared to the emptiness of BOTW and most games.
BOTW is actually impressive considering the switch is just a bit more powerfull than TI 84. But by god its empty as fuck, its a game that definitivelly gets the nintendo bump in its reviews.
Also, I meant Forbidden West, one of the best looking games of all time.
Switch (PS3 pro with anemic storage) and upcoming switch 2 (PS4) are the bottlenecks for modern games. Both consoles influence game development as they have and will sell more than 120M each.
I am sure game developers all had in mind potential switch 2 specs when designing multiplatform games.
Series S is not a significant bottleneck in game design. That's quite the narrative. It will play what ever the X or ps5 plays at lower resolution or framerrate.
I am sure game developers all had in mind potential switch 2 specs when designing multiplatform games.
Series S is not a significant bottleneck in game design. That's quite the narrative. It will play what ever the X or ps5 plays at lower resolution or framerrate.
you gotta be crazy to say something like "this machine that is half as powerful as the other machines is not a significant bottleneck in game design"
Just look at what happened with baldur's gate 3.
Devs dont even consider the switch a viable market because its so outdated, they port what they can but there is a reason everyone knows that nintendo is just doing its own thing.
Ao basically more of the same? Literally nothing here is huge upgrade over the PS4 gen except faster loading and Graphics was already top tier on PS4. Hardware being mixed by useless nonsense like Ray Tracing, crowd density is fine but that's not important for most games.
Going for just more power is a weak selling point going forward especially since diminishing returns has already stunted this generation.
There are some games that utilize the hardware on PS5 in unique ways don't get my wrong but I still don't feel like I have seen what the PS5 can truly do yet.
Will have to wait on Rockstar it seems
There are imo.
Apple is using an alternative.
In fact… in my opinion AMD today is the worst alternative
The way the AMD APUs is going PS6 will be even bigger and power hungry than PS5 at launch.
Fully agree, but I cant stress enough how much of an improvement the ps4 was over the ps5. Better graphics and performance is not a bad thing.
I used to hate when PC nerds complained that something wasnt 60 fps but now pretty much everything I play I rather have it running at 60 ergardless of the graphical downgrade, and if more power means we can have the best of both worlds, I'm all for it.
Also if games could have couch coop again because the hardware can handle it, that would be dope, pretty much all of the best experiences I had with gaming were playing with my wife or my friends, and there are plenty of games that could reaaaaaly use a splitscreen mode.
Most 3P AAA games are not designed with the Switch in mind, nor have they been. In fact 3P for Switch was very LTTP when it comes to AAA games.
Switch 2 might end up weaker than Series S (in raw compute), but it'll have DLSS and other features Series S lacks, making scalability for 3P much easier. 3P also have not traditionally needed to scope the design and scale of their games around Nintendo platforms, so whatever is the lowest baseline between Microsoft or Sony usually dictates such things.
Series S, being the weakest of the three (S, X, PS5), weighs down the scoping & design scaling of most 3P AAA titles, to provide good performance for the S and basically targeting the scope of their games to be within that scale. You can't replicate something like HFW: Burning Shore's final boss fight at the scale it is, with that fidelity, on hardware like the Series S.
What happened in baldies gate 3? The studio put more butts in seats and performance improved across all platforms. Hell, the game still feels like a beta act 3 and after.
Series S version is the only version that doesnt have split screen because the hardware cant handle it.