Playstation 4 Catch-All

Interesting trade-offs vs Microsoft. Variable frequency vs fixed frequency. SSD is maybe twice the speed of Microsoft's solution, but Microsoft talked about accelerating I/O via dedicated hardware compression and transaction management. Unified memory vs two pools running at different speeds (a solution that seems to keep attracting Microsoft like a moth to a flame, with somewhat similar results). Fewer faster cores vs more slower cores.

Both groups are making a pretty big deal about their new audio capabilities (probably a relatively easy gain enabled by the new raytracing hardware), but Sony has gone into much more detail.

I think both designs are going to be pretty well balanced, as far as efficiently using their hardware resources. But, I had the sense from the presentation that Sony's choices were a bit more heavily influenced by cost considerations.

I think introducing this information in this format was a bit of a misstep. The presentation seemed too technical for a mass audience, but not nearly technical enough for front line coders. It seemed maybe more aimed at technical managers.

My takeaway is that we're firmly in the "dazzle them with bullsh*t" phase of a new console launch.

Sony always does well at this part. A good bullsh*t dazzle is built out of numbers, acronyms, and proprietary technology with aspirational names. Sony's the best of the platform holders at rattling those things off without coming up for air.

In this phase, Sony sounds like a boring but brilliant engineer. Microsoft sounds like a sleazy car salesman hyping horsepower and cup holders in equal measure. Nintendo skips this part because they haven't had hardware with impressive technical numbers in twenty years.

Backward compatibility sounded fairly weak (compared to what MS is saying). That is quite a shame.

Interested in how the PS5 looks. The Xbox design seems like the best console design in a while in terms of cooling efficiency (and maybe the worst in terms of fitting it into a shelf)
A console that doesn't sound like I got a miniature airport below my TV would be lovely.

Shadout wrote:

Backward compatibility sounded fairly weak (compared to what MS is saying). That is quite a shame.

Agreed. I was hoping they would allow players to just pop a PS2 (or PS1/3/4) disc in and let them play it at higher res. Probably too much to ask for (and not very realistic from a technical perspective).

At the moment, I'm not even contemplating buying a new console. If the PS4 is any indication, I will probably wait 1+ year before I get it, if ever. (Backwards compatibility is making me consider getting and Xbox One, weirdly enough.)

I'd settle for only PS4 games with added antialiasing, upscaled resolution and higher framerate.
I can understand why PS3 games wouldnt work. That console just seems like a technical mess in terms of emulating the games.

Shadout wrote:

I'd settle for only PS4 games with added antialiasing, upscaled resolution and higher framerate.
I can understand why PS3 games wouldnt work. That console just seems like a technical mess in terms of emulating the games.

So does the PS2 (although PCSX2 does a pretty good job overall).

Not that PS2 would do anything for me, I sold my entire collection a few months ago.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

In this phase, Sony sounds like a boring but brilliant engineer.

I found it incredibly entertaining. Maybe it's the frustrated engineer inside of me that never made it...

Apropos of nothing,
every time I'm reading a post by Clock and I see the profile picture with my peripheral vision, my brain turns
IMAGE(https://www.gamerswithjobs.com/files/pictures/picture-107344-1546471725.png)
into this
IMAGE(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/a1/46/a2/a146a2077166745700b45e82f5e348ba--snoopy-svg-snoopy-cake.jpg)

polq37 wrote:

I think introducing this information in this format was a bit of a misstep. The presentation seemed too technical for a mass audience, but not nearly technical enough for front line coders. It seemed maybe more aimed at technical managers.

I mean, the very beginning they up front said this was their planned GDC talk. It wasn't really for the consumer so much as it was to shop the PS5's current plan and vision to developers to give them a sense of what they were doing with the hardware. Think of it like a commercial for dev kits. The presentation would still have gone online, just on GDC's YouTube channel instead of Sony's.

Someone else mentioned that they think Sony is "behind Microsoft" in terms of marketing, but I disagree. Sony has been holding their cards close to their vest while Microsoft shows their hand. Looking at the recent Digital Foundry videos, it was all "numbers numbers and big numbers and Ray Tracing". Microsoft's latest demonstration of Quick Resume and loading times didn't make the splash I expected, in part because it indicated they're using the same interface (which has graduated from "just plain bad" to "passable") and even the Xbox Series X isn't safe from State of Decay 2 texture pop-in. Granted it's in Unreal Engine so there ya go, but still. Big numbers only do so much.

Microsoft's likely got a very long build-up to launch planned for marketing, but Sony's probably looking to have a much bigger show with more substantial stuff to say for consumers that will dominate the conversation, and with the mystery of what Series X is gone, it's going to be harder for Microsoft to regain control of the conversation from Sony. Plus, right now, all Microsoft has to offer when it comes to games is "GAME PASS! Play games for free!" but if Sony's first-party offerings simply look more fun to play, then it's a question of which you'd rather do: pay a subscription to play games that are mediocre or pay up front for a game that's good.

Right now, Series X only has Halo Infinity to offer around launch, and that plus other games are going to be playable on Xbox One as it is.

Oh, another factor: remember the trouble Nintendo ran into when consumers couldn't figure out the difference between Wii and WiiU?

I already had enough trouble making sure my family understood the difference between an Xbox One X and an Xbox One S. Now they've gone and named it Series X while the Xbox One X is still on the market. Aside from the fan-made acronym, that was just a dumb idea of them and is going to do them no favors. I guarantee you outside of the hardcore gaming enthusiast, you'll struggle to find people that see the reason to upgrade from what they have if they can just play Halo Infinity on their current or cheaper equipment.

In other words: Sony doesn't exactly need to try hard so if I were them I'd be holding my cards close as well, finalizing the details until the last possible minute and then showing everything as close to finished as possible.

Hobbes2099 wrote:

Apropos of nothing,
every time I'm reading a post by Clock and I see the profile picture with my peripheral vision, my brain turns
IMAGE(https://www.gamerswithjobs.com/files/pictures/picture-107344-1546471725.png)
into this
IMAGE(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/a1/46/a2/a146a2077166745700b45e82f5e348ba--snoopy-svg-snoopy-cake.jpg)

I see a frog looking at me like "WTF?"

Here's a somewhat sobering thought. If almost everyone designs for cross-platform capability, wouldn't that mean the vast majority of games would likely NOT be so carefully designed as to take advantage of the extra raw horsepower of the XsX? And similarly they would also NOT design to fully utilize PS4's faster I/O? I feel like teams would design for the slower hardware, and call it a day. Tweaking your game for each system's strengths might not be worth the effort... If this is true, only exclusives would max out each system's true power.

ccesarano wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:

Apropos of nothing,
every time I'm reading a post by Clock and I see the profile picture with my peripheral vision, my brain turns
IMAGE(https://www.gamerswithjobs.com/files/pictures/picture-107344-1546471725.png)
into this
IMAGE(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/a1/46/a2/a146a2077166745700b45e82f5e348ba--snoopy-svg-snoopy-cake.jpg)

I see a frog looking at me like "WTF?"

I saw a frog for the longest time. I was more than a little amazed when I realised that it isn’t a small, white frog at the end of a pipe but is, instead, foam on a partially consumed coffee.

My take away is that the two consoles are going to be pretty close performance wise. I suspected that, power wise, the Xbox would leave Playstation in the dust.

Someone in the comments for the latest Beyond! stream said that the next look at the PS5 needs to be more 'Play' and less 'Station.'

Higgledy wrote:

I saw a frog for the longest time. I was more than a little amazed when I realised that it isn’t a small, white frog at the end of a pipe but is, instead, foam on a partially consumed coffee.

I still always see the frog, even though I know it's not a frog.

Yeah. I still see a frog. A frog in a good mood. Probably because he feels safe at the far end of that pipe.

Most likely.

bobbywatson wrote:
Shadout wrote:

Backward compatibility sounded fairly weak (compared to what MS is saying). That is quite a shame.

Agreed. I was hoping they would allow players to just pop a PS2 (or PS1/3/4) disc in and let them play it at higher res. Probably too much to ask for (and not very realistic from a technical perspective).

At the moment, I'm not even contemplating buying a new console. If the PS4 is any indication, I will probably wait 1+ year before I get it, if ever. (Backwards compatibility is making me consider getting and Xbox One, weirdly enough.)

I still have all my favorite games all the way back to PS1, but my only real regret for backwards compatibility is that I won't be able to bring out my Ion drum set and rock my face off with PS3 Rockband and Guitar Hero games.

Higgledy wrote:

Yeah. I still see a frog. A frog in a good mood. Probably because he feels safe at the far end of that pipe.

IMAGE(http://tyrian.pantshead.com/images/hooray2.png)

While I realize that I wouldn't often be playing backwards compatible PS4 games, I do like the thought of being able to upgrade my ageing OG PS4 without losing my catalogue. Especially if VR remains 100% compatible and would maybe be in a slightly higher resolution.

I didn't know it wasn't a frog until just now.

Seems to me that PS5 is the presumptive leader in exclusives vs Xbox, and Xbox is the clear winner in power. In the X/PS4 generation, we did see multiplatform titles that had better framerates and resolution on one console or the other. There were tons of posts on r/gaming about how the PS4 version of a game had higher resolution.

I bought The Witcher 3 on PS4 because of the higher framerate. I bought Dark Souls 3 on PS4 for the higher framerate and higher expected user count (for multiplayer).

That makes me think about how great it would be for Elden Ring to have cross-play...

I am delighted by the discussion of my avatar. I love you all.

dejanzie wrote:

While I realize that I wouldn't often be playing backwards compatible PS4 games, I do like the thought of being able to upgrade my ageing OG PS4 without losing my catalogue. Especially if VR remains 100% compatible and would maybe be in a slightly higher resolution.

If they're focusing on making the top 100 PS4 games work with backward compatibility, I wouldn't count on any PS VR games making the cut.

Actually, Beat Saber stands a pretty good chance.

I'm wondering what extent this "100% backwards compatibility" requires, though, and if the system will simply tell you "Sorry, we can't run this game for you at all whatsoever" or if you'll still be able to play it, but it may see performance hitches that weren't present on the original hardware.

dewalist wrote:

Here's a somewhat sobering thought. If almost everyone designs for cross-platform capability, wouldn't that mean the vast majority of games would likely NOT be so carefully designed as to take advantage of the extra raw horsepower of the XsX? And similarly they would also NOT design to fully utilize PS4's faster I/O? I feel like teams would design for the slower hardware, and call it a day. Tweaking your game for each system's strengths might not be worth the effort... If this is true, only exclusives would max out each system's true power.

The only reason developers on the PC avoid making hardware demanding product is to make sure something can reach as broad an audience as possible, such as MMO games and games with "casual" appeal like The Sims. Otherwise, someone having weaker hardware has never stopped a game company from pushing the envelope.

I imagine they'll just tweak visual settings so players have consistent framerate across platforms and be done with it. You may not have the same visual flair between platforms, but you'll have the performance element that matters most.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

I am delighted by the discussion of my avatar. I love you all.

dejanzie wrote:

While I realize that I wouldn't often be playing backwards compatible PS4 games, I do like the thought of being able to upgrade my ageing OG PS4 without losing my catalogue. Especially if VR remains 100% compatible and would maybe be in a slightly higher resolution.

If they're focusing on making the top 100 PS4 games work with backward compatibility, I wouldn't count on any PS VR games making the cut.

It's worth noting that the top 100 was at launch. I would suppose that additional titles could be worked after launch.

IMAGE(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/T__e77I5vhY/maxresdefault.jpg)

This is probably my favourite free dynamic theme yet. Not so much for the visual design but for the rather unique musical score that has dug in a permanent nest inside my ear drums. I've had it on lock almost 24/7 since it came out. Taking a brief respite to enjoy the Doom Eternal theme.

Digital Foundry have their piece Digital Foundry - Sony's Next Gen Vision up that is a fascinating read. It breaks the main elements of Cerny's talk down brilliantly.

The Digital Foundry Direct video they have up is also superb, both Richard & John seem really impressed with the design philosophy of the PS5 with the SSD & 3D audio being standouts.

Lastly for a more broad but digestible approach to the the announced specs of PS5 the gameranx video is superb. It has much less technical jargon & is put across in a fun but informative way.

I personally can't wait for the 3D audio & having the equivalent of all the jaguar cores of the PS4 dedicated to audio in the PS5. Its so weak on the PS4. I went & bought a creative soundblaster card which plugs into a USB port on the PS4, then you plug your headphones into the card. The improvement is huge.

Be nice to plug my Sennheiser's straight into the PS5 & get an exceptional level of sound quality without needing add ons.

PlayStation Blog clarifies backwards compatibility somewhat:

A quick update on backward compatibility – With all of the amazing games in PS4’s catalog, we’ve devoted significant efforts to enable our fans to play their favorites on PS5. We believe that the overwhelming majority of the 4,000+ PS4 titles will be playable on PS5.

We’re expecting backward compatible titles will run at a boosted frequency on PS5 so that they can benefit from higher or more stable frame rates and potentially higher resolutions. We’re currently evaluating games on a title-by-title basis to spot any issues that need adjustment from the original software developers.

In his presentation, Mark Cerny provided a snapshot into the Top 100 most-played PS4 titles, demonstrating how well our backward compatibility efforts are going. We have already tested hundreds of titles and are preparing to test thousands more as we move toward launch. We will provide updates on backward compatibility, along with much more PS5 news, in the months ahead. Stay tuned!

Basically, it's the difference between something being playable on Xbox One and it being "Xbox One X Enhanced" kind of a deal. Some games are given extra code to be optimized for the platform, while most are just being checked to see if they run. That's what I'm getting out of this, at least.

I'll be happy if the PS4 games just run like they do on a PS4 --I don't need any enhancements. I mean, I'll take the upgrades, but if I think the game already looks great, I don't care if it's not improved.

Spikeout wrote:

I personally can't wait for the 3D audio & having the equivalent of all the jaguar cores of the PS4 dedicated to audio in the PS5...

The 3D audio on PSVR, which seems to be a precursor to what they're working on for the PS5, is already outstanding; it really helps give you sense of being in a particular place, enveloping you with sound the same way the VR display envelops you with imagery. Of course, that uses headphones, so it's the easiest use case, since they can control the sound to each ear independently. But I'm excited by the emphasis they're putting into sound, which can really sneak past your analytical faculties and make you feel like you're in a particular space.

Mario_Alba wrote:

I'll be happy if the PS4 games just run like they do on a PS4 --I don't need any enhancements. I mean, I'll take the upgrades, but if I think the game already looks great, I don't care if it's not improved.

Your thinking on this matter is very much like mine.

Evan E wrote:
Spikeout wrote:

I personally can't wait for the 3D audio & having the equivalent of all the jaguar cores of the PS4 dedicated to audio in the PS5...

The 3D audio on PSVR, which seems to be a precursor to what they're working on for the PS5, is already outstanding; it really helps give you sense of being in a particular place, enveloping you with sound the same way the VR display envelops you with imagery. Of course, that uses headphones, so it's the easiest use case, since they can control the sound to each ear independently. But I'm excited by the emphasis they're putting into sound, which can really sneak past your analytical faculties and make you feel like you're in a particular space.

I'd no idea the PSVR audio was that good. That bodes well for the PS5's 3D audio.

It should be pretty amazing for open world games that have distant chatter, rivers in the background, animals making noise, wind bellowing, raining hitting the ground etc

Spikeout wrote:
Evan E wrote:
Spikeout wrote:

I personally can't wait for the 3D audio & having the equivalent of all the jaguar cores of the PS4 dedicated to audio in the PS5...

The 3D audio on PSVR, which seems to be a precursor to what they're working on for the PS5, is already outstanding; it really helps give you sense of being in a particular place, enveloping you with sound the same way the VR display envelops you with imagery. Of course, that uses headphones, so it's the easiest use case, since they can control the sound to each ear independently. But I'm excited by the emphasis they're putting into sound, which can really sneak past your analytical faculties and make you feel like you're in a particular space.

I'd no idea the PSVR audio was that good. That bodes well for the PS5's 3D audio.

It should be pretty amazing for open world games that have distant chatter, rivers in the background, animals making noise, wind bellowing, raining hitting the ground etc

That's interesting as I've always used our 5.1 surround setup when playing VR, to keep some modicum of awareness when say the dog runs in front of me. I should try the headset.

dejanzie wrote:

That's interesting as I've always used our 5.1 surround setup when playing VR, to keep some modicum of awareness when say the dog runs in front of me. I should try the headset.

Not all PSVR games use 3D audio, though - Skyrim, in particular, really could benefit from it, but it doesn't, since that would have involved rewriting the audio engine for an existing game.

Regarding keeping a modicum of awareness of your meatspace surroundings - a lot of PSVR owners aren't aware that the PSVR audio settings has a passthrough feature - it's a slider for mixing in real-world ambient sound to the game's audio. It's under Settings > Devices > Audio Devices, IIRC.

I spent a ton of time trying to get a decent Vita Remote Play connection over the last couple years but had given up on that and really the PS4 entirely. Even with a wired PS4 to a Nighthawk X10 and all the network settings people have said fixes Remote Play I think the 2.4ghz space in my area is crazy packed plus the weakish WiFi chip of the Vita made it unusable. If I'm going to get any significant gaming time in my house with the kids and TV habits I'm going to have to be on a handheld and the Switch was doing a pretty good job.

But I did pick up FF7 Remake and am really enjoying it. I had a DS4 phone mount thing that I got with the intention of using with Steam Link but never did. Now that there is an official Android Remote Play app I tried it out and it works great! One session in had some hitches every few minutes but my second play session only had one hiccup in an hour. I'm using my S9 with the 5ghz WiFi band. I'd rather have a Vita/handheld like form factor but I feel like I got my PS4 back.