Because money.
MS will bring the best VR experience, when the industry has spent all the money determining just what that is, for them. That's smart business, when you've already missed the first boat, like they have.
YES, it is a good idea. Why would Bungie/Activision go and bite the more lucrative of the two hands that feed it, by showing consumers that more is possible on the competition's hardware?
Bungie likes to make money folks, and if keeping the players happy, by knowing they're getting the best experience that Bungie has chosen to make available, makes them more money, due to the kinds of free marketing they get from Sony right now, for example, then so be it. They wil...
Wow. The PS4 Pro has been out for over a half-year, and this guy doesn't know what the competition is going to do with their version of the same?
Clickbait. The article is super short and not even worth reading, trust me.
(double post -- deleted)
I don't agree with price... the mid-high price console is not less expensive than the high priced console, because the high-end buyer doesn't care about price -- if they did, they'd just get a regular PS4 or Xbox One S. "You get what you pay for" is the mantra of many high-end consumers, and from a lot of perspectives, that's going to be true here as well.
I don't agree with number of games, because the BC library makes the number of quality g...
Anyone defending the PS4 Pro in these comments is of seriously questionable objectivity.
There is only one reason to get a PS4 Pro over a Xbox One -- You should consider it, if you prefer Sony exclusives over Xbox exclusives. That's it. If you care about any other contentious feature, the Xbox One X wins, hands down, which should make it a pretty hard sell for a serious consumer to buy a PS4 Pro over a Xbox One X.
Up to developers who haven't signed a parity contract. Seriously, get a business clue. The devs could tune those numbers in a heartbeat, and they've chosen not to. There is no other reason.
There are more factors at play here than console power, folks. You don't bite the hand that gives you most of your customer base.
@nX,
Sliders are easy. Marketing deals with the leading console marketshare holder are not so easy to change, if you get my drift.
You can't, plain and simple.
What's the point of 1440p at $400? (PS4 Pro)
You get what you pay for. If you want true 4K, you need to buy a $1000+ PC.
It's a competitive option for the gamer who wants to spend more on their hardware. I'll take one, since TBH, the different exclusives Sony offers don't tip the scales for me, in the face of better multiplat gaming, 4K Blu-Ray, and the better services I feel I get with XBL over PSN. I'll wager the same is true for a lot of people.
It's a good option. I'll take it. I suspect that this is a longer game than people expect -- the PS4 Pro accounted for...
...and Sony was all gung ho for it? You conveniently forgot that part.
Lol. Wrong.
Changing the output resolution of the framebuffer is one line of code, and it comes for free with the extra GPU muscle. They'll put the "effort" in, because there isn't any, and it makes their product look good and sell better.
Don't kid yourself -- your argument doesn't hold water. The two machines are practically the same, except that one is 40% more powerful. If you think it takes "effort" to put more variable ...
"Some say buy a PC instead, what PC will give me 4K gaming at that price?"
No such PC exists. You couldn't build one even remotely comparable for less than about $800, and then you still have to have developers use DX12 to get the most out of the PC CPU, and dodge the driver costs. Realisitically, you'd be lucky to be on even-footing with a $900-$1000 PC.
50% more horsepower, 3GB more GDDR5, vapor cooler, UHD Blu-Ray... kinda seems like an extra $100 to me?
You could argue that the PS4 Pro *should* have had a UHD Blu-Ray, and been clocked higher, so it could handle more than 1440p, or checkerboard 4K (justifying a vapor cooler, and shrinking the Pro, which is kinda big)... but then Sony would have had to charge $449 or more, wouldn't they?
Doesn't seem to need justification. It sucks that both co...
So, if I was a Sony drone, would I be arguing that no PS4 game should ever have cross-play, because I love it when I can't play with anyone who doesn't own, or prefer to play on, a PS4? ..because I would prefer that no one can compete with Sony's great monopoly, which I want to pay as much as possible for, after the competition is crushed? ..and that Rocket League cross-play, being made by an independent dev, somehow endangers my status as supreme console overlord?
<...
Umm. Crackdown looked good, and the original (I never played 2) was an AWESOME game.
There is almost no question that it will be a great exclusive. It's a great idea, plain and simple -- like the best open-world fun from games like Mercenaries and GTA, with extra explosions and some sci-fi thrown in.
So.. are they going to change the architecture away from the x86 architecture they are currently using, and that's why its "better"? Because that would be stupid.
If they call it "PS5", it'll just be a name. It will still be a souped-up PS4 Pro... or it better be. If they intentionally dump BC again, after charging a premium for the Pro just a few years beforehand, there's gonna be hell to pay.