Sources: The Upgraded PlayStation 4 is Codenamed NEO, Contains Upgraded CPU, GPU, RAM

the most important thing is that- 'publishers will be required to ship PS4 games with both a "base" mode for play on the regular PS4 console, and a "Neo" mode that can take advantage of hardware upgrades to increase graphical quality and boost frame rates'...plus players of both the original PS4 and PS4 Neo and will be able to play alongside each other on PlayStation Network...I was wondering how Sony was going to deal with newer games going forward

while the new PS4.5 sounds fine I'm content sticking with my regular PS4...I'm mostly a PC gamer and only play the PS4 for exclusives such as Bloodborne, Last of Us, Uncharted...for increased frame rates and improved graphics fidelity I play on my PC...I wonder if Sony will be offering trade-ins and how much they're going to offer...luckily Uncharted 4 is coming out before the PS4.5 so it'll be optimized for the base PS4
 
Last edited:
Don't fool yourself into believing the old PS4 will be left behind: The PS4 devs will still target the original console as the MAJORITY audience, and the PS4K versions will just have more bells and whistles and higher resolution.
 
I think the 4.5 power boost is related to the VR headset that is coming.
 
i mean, you could literally double performance and some titles still wouldn't make it to 1080p at 60 fps.

I guess it's just enough to get VR games working without looking like total shit.
 
socK said:
i mean, you could literally double performance and some titles still wouldn't make it to 1080p at 60 fps.

I guess it's just enough to get VR games working without looking like total shit.
Click to expand...

Its getting MORE than double. And besides, the PS4 never had issues running games at 1080P 30 FPS, and some games ran at 60FPS. So getting a huge 2.25X power boost on the graphics side is more than enough to push games to 60FPS while getting a decent bump in visual fidelity.
 
Oh they mean... upgrades like a PC? But you have to buy a whole new console! Ah of course, that's cost effective in peasant math..


KazeoHin said:
Its getting MORE than double. And besides, the PS4 never had issues running games at 1080P 30 FPS, and some games ran at 60FPS. So getting a huge 2.25X power boost on the graphics side is more than enough to push games to 60FPS while getting a decent bump in visual fidelity.
Click to expand...

It ran much more than the xbone but still couldn't run all games at 1080p 30fps that's for sure. Or 30fps with 15-5fps in heavy scenes..


I'd be willing to bet this ps4.I wish we'd made a computer5, will incorporate 14nm, maybe polaris based or similarly equipped APU.
1440p 60fps capable hardware is enough for a mediocre VR experience... ~290x performance basically.
 
I have no problem with this, I will be upgrading, if they are still requiring a base game for all OG ps4s, and no special perks or ps4.5 only titles, then whats the problem. I actually think this is a good way to support your base longer and those who want to get a bit more fidelity out of their consoles can upgrade. Its options for the consumer.
 
I hope that it has HDR capabilities also. If Sony wanted to be an innovator; FreeSync over HDMI to a Sony HDR FreeSync TV. Of course this isn't likely. But we can dream. We can dream...
 
Sony really seems to have their act together. I like the idea of upgrading a console without bringing a new, incompatible, one to market.

They're VR positioning also looks really good.
 
What I can't understand is why a developer would invest in making "neo" versions of their games. What is the ROI for the extra development time.
 
demingo said:
What I can't understand is why a developer would invest in making "neo" versions of their games. What is the ROI for the extra development time.
Click to expand...

Extra publicity & game promotion by Sony = more sales and (more importantly IMO) brand recognition for starters, that alone would cover extra development costs. There are lots of reasons why developers would want to support additional PlayStation features.

Sony can also provide incentives to upgrade their games, and/or require it with revised developer agreements long-term.
 
Yakk said:
Extra publicity & game promotion by Sony = more sales and (more importantly IMO) brand recognition for starters, that alone would cover extra development costs. There are lots of reasons why developers would want to support additional PlayStation features.

Sony can also provide incentives to upgrade their games, and/or require it with revised developer agreements long-term.
Click to expand...

The "more sales" line only works if you believe that there is a significant portion of the customer base who would ONLY buy a "neo" version of the game. I don't think that is true at all.
 
demingo said:
The "more sales" line only works if you believe that there is a significant portion of the customer base who would ONLY buy a "neo" version of the game. I don't think that is true at all.
Click to expand...

If you do not think additional free promotion would equal to more sales then there's nothing further to discuss.
 
Nothing good can come from this.

So you buy a PS4 and wait almost an entire year waiting for the "good" games to dribble in. Then a year later you start hearing this BS?

After Uncharted I wont really care about any "exclusives" anyway and just switch to PC master race.
Oh DAMN, forgot about hot shots golf.
 
I thought the good thing about consoles was you didn't have to worry about upgrades...sounds like consoles are becoming more like PC's now
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
All the consoles this gen were severely underpowered anyway, but I'm wondering why it's Sony making this move and not Microsoft.
 
polonyc2 said:
I thought the good thing about consoles was you didn't have to worry about upgrades...sounds like consoles are becoming more like PC's now
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is like both Microsoft and Sony are both Rage Quitting the console market and making them into incremental PC products.
 
I can see why it'll upset some console gamers, but I really like the incremental console idea... as long as things are fully backwards compatible and it's not more than once a year.

I don't see a big issue with devs having to target one additional graphics setting. The new hardware development kit will likely offer a simple switch to go back and forth between the two. It's still no where near as complex as what needed for PC games.
 
So, basically a whole new console with enforced backwards compatibility?

It may as well be, in all practical senses.
 
Well I look at my PC and I think what a waste Consoles are.
I mean, I bought a new video card. First one in several years. Now I am ready for 4K gaming, or 2K gaming and go ultrawide. My options are open.
Sure, I may spend a lot on hardware but the payback is so much more reliable than a console.

If consoles are going to be this way I might as well just keep my PS3s and use them for console fun times and PC everything else.
I simply don't need a ConsolePC. I already have a PC, and when I throw money at my PC it pays me back a rich harvest of dividends.

I have a PS4 and an extra controller. That is $450 just for the privilege of paying $50 a year more to play PS Plus.
These are not CONSOLES they are like CABLE TV boxes, where you have to feed them money to make them happy.
 
Personally, I don't see the big deal. We upgrade our phones in 1-2 year intervals, and those are much more expensive. And the new phones run the previous generation's applications, but with better performance.

I like this idea, increase performance, but have a minimum baseline for developers. Keep your platform AND ecosystem relevant.
 
zaxour said:
Personally, I don't see the big deal. We upgrade our phones in 1-2 year intervals, and those are much more expensive. And the new phones run the previous generation's applications, but with better performance.

I like this idea, increase performance, but have a minimum baseline for developers. Keep your platform AND ecosystem relevant.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of it. I prefer to buy one console and not worry about it for a few years. Otherwise you can get PCs. But last consoles I got was a PS2 and 3DS so it doesn't effect me. The problem is all games must run on a standard PS4 and "Neo", so they can't do much with the extra power. Up the res and maybe enable a few higher graphic settings but they can't change the fundamentals of the game. The game versions must be exactly the same and a game must run on both. This is just another hurdle for developers while not giving them more power to make the games better (more things on screen, larger scale, whatever). Not a huge deal and it probably won't be too hard to make two different graphic settings though. If anything devs can just up the res, maybe add some AA and let users get higher frame rates while otherwise not improving graphics at all.
 
zaxour said:
Personally, I don't see the big deal. We upgrade our phones in 1-2 year intervals, and those are much more expensive. And the new phones run the previous generation's applications, but with better performance.

I like this idea, increase performance, but have a minimum baseline for developers. Keep your platform AND ecosystem relevant.
Click to expand...

Phones aren't integrated into the home environment. They are pocket squatters.
 
While I'm not super excited for the PS4K (moreso pumped for PS VR), I do believe if they are going to upgrade their system, this is the way to do it. They're not kicking their installed userbase to the curb, and they're not creating multiple closed ecosystems.

This is definitely not a 32X or Sega CD-style upgrade path.
 
demingo said:
What I can't understand is why a developer would invest in making "neo" versions of their games. What is the ROI for the extra development time.
Click to expand...

They quite literally have no choice. As per the report games MUST ship with support for both modes. I doubt we'll see a lot of effort put into making games look all that much better, at least out of the gate, but games in Neo Mode will simply run better. Given how "well" a lot of current gen games run in general that could be a huge boon.
 
Derangel said:
They quite literally have no choice. As per the report games MUST ship with support for both modes. I doubt we'll see a lot of effort put into making games look all that much better, at least out of the gate, but games in Neo Mode will simply run better. Given how "well" a lot of current gen games run in general that could be a huge boon.
Click to expand...

Ahh the article I read only said base mode was mandatory. If both are then I get it.
 
KazeoHin said:
Don't fool yourself into believing the old PS4 will be left behind: The PS4 devs will still target the original console as the MAJORITY audience, and the PS4K versions will just have more bells and whistles and higher resolution.
Click to expand...

This is it. I've seen many people complain about this leak, but if you have a PS4, it doesn't hurt you. It's only if you want better graphics/frame rate, you can still play like always, and their won't be any PS4.5 exclusives. I fully expect the original hardware to be refreshed for manufacturing processes (same chipsets) as well so they can get it down to a $199 or so price point. Then people can make a decision to pay $199 for the 720p or $399 for the 1080p.


cageymaru said:
I think the 4.5 power boost is related to the VR headset that is coming.
Click to expand...

It's also telling that the PlayStation VR's codename was Morpheus and the PS4.5 codename is Neo.

This was an obvious decision in my opinion - you either launch a refresh that can handle VR to some degree or you launch a new console. The latter fragments your community, pisses developers off, and would have been a poor decision all around.

Refreshing hardware (unless some new tech comes out that requires a new architecture) is the way to go as developers want the largest audience possible.

We're not in a console loop with specialized architecture and ever-changing media delivery methods (DVD --> BluRay, etc). This can be pretty straight forward. Developers have to test against 2 hardware devkits and make config files.
 
I may also get the newer ps4, if they finally release a game worthy on it. Uncharted 4 is the only game I'm interested in and the current ps4 works 100% with it.
 
demingo said:
What I can't understand is why a developer would invest in making "neo" versions of their games. What is the ROI for the extra development time.
Click to expand...

This. The list of games with higher quality content for the New 3DS is vanishingly small. It's really just making NEW GAMES faster. I think the number of developers signing-on for this crazy train will be similarly small - really only the highest-profile games (and of course first-party titles).

The minimum cost to add that much power to the existing system will mean it can't sell for less than $450-500, especially since modern die shrinks add cost. This is where the weakness of an integrated APU comes to light - adding on a card is simply impossible.

Also, the ~6GB (to keep costs down from an astronomical $500-550) really prevents you from making much use of all that extra GPU power for 4k.
 
To all the people that don't like this: You're not losing out on anything that you were initially going to get. The devs are required to make a version for both. You still get access to every game that comes out, at the visual fidelity that you would have originally gotten for it. You lose absolutely nothing.

IF you're someone that wants a higher framerate or resolution, or maybe a few extra effects, you upgrade. If you're happy with the system you bought, there is absolutely no reason that you HAVE to have the upgrade.

So what's the problem with this? Nobody is required to get it to play any of the PS4 games. If you feel it tugging on your brain, and decide you have to have it, that's completely on you. You can't blame Sony for that. You can still play everything.
 
Just look at the New 3DS for how successful this idea is. I fully expect games to run worse on the original PS4 to coax owners to upgrade. The beginning of forced obsolesce is upon us.

Well, I can't keep up with multiple upgrade across multiple outlets. Something has to give and I rather focus my energy on PC gaming. So, it looks like this was the death nail for me. I'll probably still get a Nintendo NX since Nintendo is Nintendo and you can't really get their experiences anywhere else.
 
J3RK said:
So what's the problem with this?
Click to expand...
A few off the top of my head:

1. There's comfort in knowing that to stay up-to-date you only need to make a new purchase every 5 years or so.

2. It can also be a problem with wives/partners who don't like the "dirty habit" of gaming and already feel made a huge icky compromise with the "1 big toy every 5 year plan"

3. There's also that horrible feeling that you are playing a game on lower settings than available. PC gamers know this feeling when playing on lower graphics settings. It just SUCKS knowing you aren't experiencing the game at it's fullest, right? Maybe for you it's a 100 dollar upgrade, but for console gamers it'll be an ENTIRELY NEW console purchase.
 
HardUp4HardWare said:
Nothing good can come from this.

So you buy a PS4 and wait almost an entire year waiting for the "good" games to dribble in. Then a year later you start hearing this BS?

After Uncharted I wont really care about any "exclusives" anyway and just switch to PC master race.
Oh DAMN, forgot about hot shots golf.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I was the poor sucker that bought it at launch waiting for the games. I'm still waiting. Now, there's an update? You still haven't delivered content. I think this generation has a massive identity crisis. Luckily, I've shifted my focus to PC gaming at the beginning of this gen. So, my financial commitment is incredibly limited. However, I don't like the idea of establishing a three year life cycle for a console. If Sony were to do this as their PS5 style launch - 3-4 years from now - and just release a new console with a year bleed over, then switch to exclusive support, I would be fine. It would be the perfect B/C style console generational shift. As it is, it places this concept of "doubt" in the purchases. If I knew Sony was going to refresh 3 years after launching and still not have content...I would never have purchased the PS4. Ever.
 
twonunpackmule said:
Exactly. I was the poor sucker that bought it at launch waiting for the games. I'm still waiting. Now, there's an update? You still haven't delivered content. I think this generation has a massive identity crisis. Luckily, I've shifted my focus to PC gaming at the beginning of this gen. So, my financial commitment is incredibly limited. However, I don't like the idea of establishing a three year life cycle for a console. If Sony were to do this as their PS5 style launch - 3-4 years from now - and just release a new console with a year bleed over, then switch to exclusive support, I would be fine. It would be the perfect B/C style console generational shift. As it is, it places this concept of "doubt" in the purchases. If I knew Sony was going to refresh 3 years after launching and still not have content...I would never have purchased the PS4. Ever.
Click to expand...

Yes,
As soon as I heard that both XB and PS4 were going to be on the same x86 architecture I knew that things would get ugly. Well here we go. PS4.5 and XB1 "slim" are both in the rumor mill and sounding credible.
I too have shifted my focus back to the PC and I think a long term commitment to the PC is a better choice.
Now Nintendo will come out with the NX and on the heels of that these "upgraded" consoles will put it right back into its subordinate position. There will be blood....
 
Nintendo is Nintendo and they kind of have a financial reason to update their hardware. They sort of screwed the pooch and aren't doing so hot. I kinda excuse them for wanting to move ahead. However, they are still supporting the WiiU. My main concern is whether they'll finally move to a total User ID approach across consoles that'll allow me to access my content. If the NX allows me to play my WiiU purchases, then I will Day One that system. If it doesn't, I will probably wait a few months and get it when there's content.
 
Do you guys think that low frame rates will still be an issue with such a modest bump in CPU power? I've become an fps junkie since purchasing a 144hz monitor and find it impossible to play anything at 30fps, I'm a huge dark souls fan and would love to play bloodborne one day at 60fps, but i have a feeling devs are gona go crazy on the eye candy with all of this new graphic processor power and performance is gona take a backseat again.
 
So Sony announces PS4.5 goes on sale Q1 2017 promises NEO games by Christmas 2017 with lots of promises
XMAS 2017 comes and they get COD NEO version and the consumer sits there scratching his ass asking himself why he even bothers.

Meanwhile PSVR hits the market and is immediately obsolete with crappy games and lots of promises. Q3 2017, Sony announces PSVR2 with lots of promises

Meanwhile I am done, this is pointless. I am still waiting for UC4.
I used to enjoy keeping tabs on the gaming industry but it is sheer pandemonium now. I just can't see a path where the consumer ever really wins.
 
Youn said:
A few off the top of my head:

1. There's comfort in knowing that to stay up-to-date you only need to make a new purchase every 5 years or so.

2. It can also be a problem with wives/partners who don't like the "dirty habit" of gaming and already feel made a huge icky compromise with the "1 big toy every 5 year plan"

3. There's also that horrible feeling that you are playing a game on lower settings than available. PC gamers know this feeling when playing on lower graphics settings. It just SUCKS knowing you aren't experiencing the game at it's fullest, right? Maybe for you it's a 100 dollar upgrade, but for console gamers it'll be an ENTIRELY NEW console purchase.
Click to expand...

1. You bought a console that supports XXX and looks XXX-good. You can still play ALL future titles for the platform with XXX and looking XXX-good. You don't HAVE to upgrade, and will still have the same experience that you paid for.

2. Unless you CHOOSE to upgrade, you still have your toy, and your wife/partner has nothing more to say.

3. I know what you're saying, and I suffer from this disorder too which is why I play on the PC for the most part, but this is a psychological phenomena, and has nothing to do with you not getting your money's worth from the console that you bought. The NEO is extra, and entirely not necessary to get what you originally paid for.

Now, if they didn't force parity between the two, and require that games support both platforms, then there is an issue, and one that you see with the New 3DS. (however, I bought that new shiny toy, and have a couple of games that support it, and feel just fine about it. My wife was even on board. :D )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top