Shawn is right. Of course there are differences and constantly improving graphics, but we really have reached a point of extreme diminishing returns. Having just watched the Digital Foundry analysis of Ratchet and Clank on the PS5 Pro, it's almost laughable how hard you have to pay attention to really tell most of the screens apart. After a few minutes, your brain adjusts and incremental improvements are barely noticeable. Granted, they can still be noticed for those looking, but we&#...
TM1 and 2 are time period classics. They were a bit rough, ugly, and grungy, but they felt right during the time period they were released and they scratched that early console “death match” itch before FPS games would completely swallow that market.
Many great memories with friends playing couch co-op and 1v1. Short, and quick-and-dirty gameplay that we returned to over and over. I’d buy a remake or proper remastering of the first two games day one.
Because gamers are irrationally emotional about their games. And there’s also some jealousy attached to the hate.
Right. With the same performance issues/ loading stutters when entering new areas.
I won't presume that the game is bad, but after playing through 80% of Link's Awakening, this has the fingerprint of something that I won't enjoy. The magic of the Zelda formula has been lost with me for a long time. The mechanics and puzzles aren't surprising to me anymore, and the overly long quests and backtracking get monotonous. That being said, I'm not surprised that the gaming press will emblazon this with 9s and 10s.
Reusing a game engine, wit...
It's been mentioned before of a "Boost Mode" that accelerates all titles if selected. Digital Foundry mentioned it, but I don't believe anything has yet been officially tested. This would be similar to the PS4 Pro's Boost Mode.
A niche product doesn't have the economies of scale to aggressively sell at a loss. You can make the argument with the base PS5, even with 20% inflation factored in over the last few years, but there'd be minimal incentive to invest in low-margin hardware if the price was at or below cost.
The Base and Pro are two separate business models and exist for different purposes.
PS6 might be 5 or 6 years away. The point is obvious... to be able to play current gen games at 60 fps with "Graphics Mode/Quality Mode"-like resolution.
Yes, I know. However, it’s interesting to compare and contrast.
They are and they will. The base PS5 is the core system and will be the main performance target for games into the next gen. The Pro is a way for enthusiasts to play these same games but with a bump in image quality to take better advantage of 4k screens.
Fair enough - and totally agree about the different industry. At the same time, if almost 30 million consoles aren't enough to sustain the MS business model, I would love to know what their business plan looks like.
Jury is still out, but the belief is that PSSR isn't "free" - believe Digital Foundry mentioned that it costs 2ms of processing time, depending on the level of upscaling. Remember, the Pro GPU is only giving you an extra 45% of performance increase, which isn't a huge amount in and of itself. That's essentially saying that if a game was running at 30 fps maxed out, the Pro could, through brute force, get you to 43-44 fps.
Which is why PSSR is a rev...
I'm not inferring that Xbox is doing great with these numbers. What I'm trying to compare to is the sales of consoles of the past. Turbografx-16 is rumored to have sold less than 750k US consoles in its lifetime, and something around 10 million lifetime in Japan. The fact that 6 million sold in a year for XBox is considered a failure is fascinating from a historical context.
Just simple musings from a tired gamer who's seen a lot over time.
Agreed that these are comparatively abysmal sales numbers over the last year, but is anyone else kind of surprised that even still, about 6 million consoles were still sold? Going back in history (I'm thinking the 16 bit gen), 6 million consoles is still a hefty number.
So very simply, to double performance, you maintain pixel resolution from the Quality mode. If you go from 30 fps at 864p to 60fps at 864p, you’ve doubled performance - mission accomplished.
Were people expecting more than a double upgrade in performance from PS5 Pro? I’m confused.
I think people are misunderstanding what is being explained here.
The Pro is only 45% faster in raw rendering terms. That, by itself, is NOT enough to double game performance (you would need 100% faster performance for that to happen). PSSR AI upscaling is the other piece of the puzzle that gets you to that notional double speed up.
So to go from 30 fps in a game’s Quality Mode to 60 fps, you need some combination of the two technologies to double perf...
I sometimes feel like this industry is disconnected from reality. You can tell from the NINE MINUTE unveiling that the Pro is not meant as a main stream product. This is an enthusiast machine enthusiast gamers with comfortable pockets. End of narrative.
PS4 Pro didn’t light the world on fire but still had a lot of support. Boost mood, a resolution bump, better dynamic scaling, and smoother/more consistent frame rates are exactly what this system is made for. These aren’t terribly difficult to implement, and some are free/automatic.
The people that are pissed about the price are clearly not the target audience for it.
Believe I read that there is a "Boost Mode" of sorts that will apply general speed improvements to the games, just like the PS4 Pro did.
I played, completed, and enjoyed Mario Odyssey, but I tend to agree that I don't think it's the best 3D Mario. There was sense of sameness that prevailed after the first couple of worlds... not in the levels, environments, or aesthetics, but in the routine of each world. It just felt like each new environment was just the beginning of another checklist of moons to acquire, and the sheer number of them took away the sense of accomplishment I got from the stars in Mario 64 and the lik...