If you don't have a 4K TV then Pro is not worth it. Now if devs gave the option for 1080p users (even 4K users who prefer a higher frame rate and better graphics effects) to run the game at 1080p 60 FPS instead of 4K 30 FPS then it may be worth it. Sadly they don't seem to want to do that, they seem fixated on that 4K number, either native or upscaled. Some games even look worse on the Pro by taking out effects such as particles etc just to get that magical 4k number, totally not wo...
More likely is they went for parity with the xbone version to please MS who they have a good partnership with. Since they both run at 1080p but the PS4 has a better GPU they should have been able to outpace the xbone version but chose not to.
And if you don't have a 4K TV (like most) then 60 FPS would be much better.
I would even say that many WITH 4K TVs would prefer the 1080p and 60 FPS option (possibly with better shadows, foliage etc as well).
The xbone GPU is too weak. It stutters now more than the standard PS4. You will need Scorpio to get some big improvement.
@thekhurg
"Graphical fidelity" is only for those with 4K TVs and the game looking the same but just 4k being better graphical fidelity is debatable. Even those WITH 4K TVs the resolution difference will be a minor compared to other things they could have used the extra power for. Then there are many with 1080p TVs. Some have very high quality 1080p TVs still and for most viewing distances and sizes look pretty good. 4K will look a bit crisper but it won't ...
Yeah the PS4 slim is pointless. Why buy that now when you can get a much better PS4 version soon? I can see the Xbox slim selling better than PS4 slim because it has a reason to buy with the UHD blu ray player and the Scorpio is a year off.
It will probably run worse because they will focus on running as close to 4K resolution as they can so all 8 users can play it in 4K. They will focus on the magic 4k number rather than improving frame rate or draw distance etc. That seems to be the trend with the Pro unfortunately.
Good first party games. Simple really.
The Nintendo Transformer, more than meets the eye...
Anyway who cares about a name and it is not THAT bad, the "Wii-U" on the other hand... Ugh.
But does "high end" players matter much these days for these discs? They are digital and output digital signals to the TV. The only way they would be bad is if they skipped or froze all of the time or something. It is not like the old days where quality analog devices like turn tables made a big difference.
And streaming sucks. The quality is shit and you can't own anything. Streaming is an ok option but should not be the only thing.
There are some of us who just like owning their favorite movies too. I am just not into renting everything. It is ok for some movies that I don't really care that much about, but I want a physical option. I have decent equipment but not top of the line but still prefer blu-ray. I would like to have UHD as it is still better than streaming and why buy old non UHD blu rays if the better ones are available?
It is dumb for Sony not including it based on the estimated...
That also helps insure the game releases buggy and incomplete. If a publisher finds loads of bugs or isn't finished they ship it for the original release date anyway. If they delay it whiny gamers throw a hissy fit and cancel pre-orders. So you get broken garbage day one and need to rely on a fast internet connection to install a "day one patch". The problem there is when those patches are taken down eventually you will not have a way to fix the junk you have on the disc, a ...
Yeah, just like the sun is a little warm...
And if it did the visuals would be so downgraded just to get slightly crisper edges, totally not worth it.
Give me 1080p with consistent frame rate and better effects and draw distance.
If you don't have a 4K TV then the PS4 Pro version is rather pointless.
Better effect/frame rate would be better than pseudo 4K.
Would be nice to have an option menu to let us select downsampled 4K, or native 1080p with better effects/frame rate. I would choose the better effects/frame rate, that would be much more noticeable than the blurry edges you get from downsampling (some think it is a "feature" like simulated AA, to me it just makes things look soft, not a fan) .
I don't know why developers are so averse to letting us choose like they do on PC. It is like they assume all cons...
Too low res and blurry. VR may be a thing in the future but as it is it needs work.
Now all it is good for is giving you a headache or to make you launch your lunch.
Yes, better effects and frame rate at 1080p are MUCH more noticeable than crisper edges at 4K, especially at the common TV screen size/viewing distance. 4K and this pseudo 4K aren't worth the downgraded visuals/effects you get. Look at Tomb Raider with all of the missing particles etc, not worth it.
If you don't have a 4K TV you REALLY don't need it.