PlayStation 4 owners, PS4.5 releases, what do you do?

Shit like this happens all the time (to a lesser degree) when companies don't say shit about a price cut and/or slim versions of consoles. It's not a big deal.

If you're upset your ps4 runs games at lower settings, should have gone with a pc in the first place

Yeah it's not really a big deal if it doesn't happen, though the pros should outweigh the cons if it happens. And I am leaning towards it will happen.

Better performance is great, but at the same time the really rushed, rough and unoptimized games i'd just ignore anyway so i'd make out just fine with the OG console.

Keep my old ps4 and buy the new one. I was getting a slim version anyway so if this what the slim version essentially becomes them my mind was already made up.

I'll wait a few years to see if it gets more than one or two games like the current PS4 has. Then I'll go from there.

Won't be buying a Sony console at launch again. They seem to get worse each time.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I'm not buying another ps4, I'm more inclined to upgrade my pc. This console generation is f****in weird.

It completely depends. Can I get a good deal for trade in on my old system? What new features will it have? Games? VR? I don't know yet enough about it to reason.

People pay crazy money for new phones every 1/2 years and gain basically nothing in return, so you never know.

Personally I'm still kicking galaxy s3 lte, why would I swap out of it? Rather throw that money on PC and get something out of it

lol the sony haters/xbot worshipers in here trying to paint this as a negative thing are trying too hard, especially the faux PC gamers saying "OMG what about the early adapters, if Sony dose this it's going to be terrible"

lol tell me ass clown PC gamers, What do you say when new GPUs come out for PC like every 6 to 8 months after you've bought your latest graphics card? Do you say, "OMG, how could this happen, I'm going to abandon PC gaming now, the PC is dead to me!" haha.

This is EXACTLY the same situation that PC gamers have been dealing with since PC gaming began and I don't see them complaining. Please stop the faux concern about this because we know the guys who are always praising PC gaming and it's ever advancing power. And hasn't this same crowd been saying the console are too weak? Make up your minds you stupid fakeboys and stick to one argument.

You can't praise PC gaming and hate on this you look idiotic. As long as you're able to play all your PS4 games on both versions there is nothing lost here. It's just like with PC and higher powered GPUs being available than what you currently own...if you want the more powerful version you pay, simple.

Well cashangry at least with PC you know what you are getting yourself in to, this is not something console players are used to at all.

I'm allready sub'd to the 3k per month PC upgrades so I dont really care too much about this, if I deem the ps4.5 worthy I'll upgrade, doesn't mean its like that for everyone

If it's just an upgrade to HDMI 2.0 and video playback of 4k media I have no problems with it, I'll stick with my ps4 and happily keep gaming.

If it's an upgrade to the gpu/CPU and offers better visuals and framerates then I'm done console gaming. I'll stick to retro gaming and maybe dabble in pc.

Why? Someone could decide they don't like the whole upgrade thing and move on to something else instead. People expected that once you can a console, they were good to go for the gen.

But if MS does it too, they'd obviously solve that issue and match the competition would they not. The differences would be smaller, like last gen.

MS already said they wouldn't dare risk on peripherals again, so they have the whole budget to go on the main hardware like Sony.

That's why I thought this was a foolish move by Sony, because I think they'd have MS in a corner for the rest of the gen if they didn't 'open this door' so to speak. I don't think MS would be able to do it if someone else wasn't doing it too, because of how it might look to people.

Not sure why consolites panties are in a bunch here you get to upgrade be happy.

Yep, you sound like you are grasping for straws.

lol what is anyone loosing by Sony releasing a more powerful version of PS4? Do PS4 titles suddenly stop working? You hermits (undercover xbots) are really stating to show your stupidity with the 180 logic here.

and this comment:

if I deem the ps4.5 worthy I'll upgrade, doesn't mean its like that for everyone

LMAO...what the hell does that mean? Seriously WTF are you trying to say with that? As a supposed PC gamer that comment makes you sound dumb as shit. If ANYONE deems it worthy they will buy it cornball.

There is nothing different for anyone, if they don't care for it they will just settle for their lower powered PS4s like hermits settle for lower powered GPUs when more powerful ones come out.

Your whole post is laughable contradiction to all the crap PC gamers say they do as OPTIONS with PC gaming. PS4k is an OPTION not a requirement so your objection is null and hypocritical coming from a PC gamer, next...

So it totally flew over your head, no big surprise

The difference with phone upgrades, like Apple and Samsung is in The phone market consumers are normally ready upgrade every two years, because that's the length of a typical phone contract.

At the end of those two years the contract is up and you normally get your latest smart phone for free so consumers want a new model.

Even ipads and tablets come with 24 month data contracts so they work in a similar way.

Consoles are not like this

Your damage control? No, I got it. I just demonstraited how idiotic your flop flop logic is while trying to praise PC. Either you support the concept you've been praising for PC or you don't.

One last time, what happens to PS4 games if Sony releases a PS4k, do PS4 games stop working? This is critical here....lol, what's your response?

Maybe it's the success of "HD" or "Definitive Edition" remakes that has Sony convinced that a visual wash and wax is all people need to spend their hard-earned. The reality is that people that are buying these games are playing them for the first time because they didn't own a PS3 because it was late to the party, had inferior multiplatform versions of games for majority of it's life cycle, and was sluggish to release exclusives that didn't under achieve until too late in the console cycle.

In any case, it will not "advance" the platform. By releasing a platform revision with superior hardware, they'd be more or less devaluing their own currency. It would unfold as follows:

1. The PS4.0 becomes flawed because from a consumer standpoint, a PS4.5 would not be necessary in a world in which the PS4.0 was without defect.

2. The market is flooded with used PS4.0s that are substantially more cost-efficient than their "new" counterparts. These consoles are marketed cheaply with Sony earning $0 for every one sold.

3. The flooded base of non-warranty restricted PS4.0 owners sparks curiosity and gives rise to an expanded community intent on compromising the consoles hardware.

4. a) If gamers feel that the revision was not worth the purchase, their loyalty will waver. Their contempt will be expressed beyond necessity, as gamers are the most reactive consumer-base on the planet

b) If it does deliver, it raises gamers expectations to standards of which Sony is unable to attain, "a" will eventually become true.

5. When gamers look for a "next generation" console with no confidence that Sony can deliver, they will turn to any company that can.

The only reason Sony's Playstation is still a viable brand is because they ****ed up less than everyone else.

1. The Sega CD and 32X were overpriced failures. Everyone wanted a next gen platform. The Saturn was an overambitious disaster. The failures of Sega are all a result of the "if you build it, they will buy" mentality. Sega didn't build what people wanted to buy nor did they build what developers wanted to develop for. Their arrogance of thinking that the industry would conform to their standard made room for the Playstation standard.

2. Nintendo releases "Paks" for the N64. Two of these Paks only contributed to the awkward and unwieldy nature of the controller. The "Expansion Pak" was superfluous given Nintendo's hardware was already visual superior of the generation. The rumble pak was a feature built in to Sony's redesigned controller the "Dual Shock". It's hard to support an accessory that isn't standard issue without isolating a portion of the consumer base. These moves would only further isolate Nintendo from 3rd party developers. Nintendo's lack of compliance to the DVD standard, unconventional controller design, and overall lack of aesthetic appeal in the succeeding generation would force Nintendo to be almost completely reliant on 1st party titles for marketability.

3. The shittiest console launch roster of all time did nothing to sway the consumers trust in Sony's overhyped PS2. Sony capitalized on hype and lack of competition to establish an early base. Confidence began to waiver when the XBOX entered the scene, having superior hardware and all of the PS2's add-on's as standard issue. The PS2s online service failed and their HDD was completely unmarketable. In fact, the PS2 "slim" didn't even bother making room for an HDD because it had to be cost effective for those getting Disk Read Errors from their original model. It's fair to say that coming with a "slot" for hardware in lieu of actual components is a failed design. Sony went on to play the "hype" card yet again, yet was never really able to recover from a late release, pricey hardware, and inconsistent visuals. Sony would ultimately utter the phrase "red ring of death" for an entire generation to remind themselves that while another consoles failures could not undo their own, they can help you stay relevant.

4. The only reason the PS4 is even a contender at this point is because Microsoft failed and there was no other candidate. No Adam, I wont "just deal with it". I don't want to pay $100 more for a Kinect that I'll never use because I'm a 28 year old man who enjoys gaming. All of the rumors and controversy surrounding the "always online" DRM and Microsoft's failure to adequately address the situation basically back-handed their consumer-base. What gave the PS4 so much crossover appeal to lemmings was the fact that it didn't try so hard to not be an XBOX.

What am I damage controlling by saying that PC gamers are already used to upgrading their hardware, console gamers aren't? Why would I defend supposedly Xbox one when I don't even own one?

So you hate PC gaming then?

(that question goes for anyone who is trying to make a argument against this idea now)

Pretty simple, but I thought people loved PC gaming and the ability to upgrade for more power in here? lol I guess that was all just a bunch of lies and BS then. Time to abandon PC gaming then guys.

Why are you asking me questions when you have yet to answer mine? Answer the question bud! lol it's clear you've resorted to scrambling with desperate deflection now.

Also do you become angry and dissatisfied with PC gaming when more powerful GPUs are released? If not, tell me why?

What's your response?

Why do I need to answer such an obvious question? Ofc they arent going to stop working. Was that ever on the table here? No.

So you have no real argument then?

lol See how easy that was? You can stop the faux concern about this move from Sony then as it affects noone negatively and offers the option for people who might want an upgrade of the same games they already enjoy....just like PC.

K thx bye ;)

Yes, someone "Cell-phone" theory'd me last time the subject of console "revisions" came up. There is no relative marketing standard by which you can compare a phone to a gaming console. Contracts sell phones. Tablets are sold for hardware profit.

Consoles are sold at minimal profit (sometimes loss) to establish a consumer-base to which you can market $60 games to for profit. Licensing fees and what not, but that's the basic principle.

The reason why Sony wanted to extend the previous console generation was because they were selling PS3's at launch for less than the total cost of components combined.

Console manufacturers traditionally find ways to implement cost-effective components into their design as the generation progresses so that they can afford to lower the price of the console and expand the base of consumers.

I will buy it if it plays games at real 4k. I don't care of it shows 4k movies or not, I just care about what it's going to do with the games.

@casharmy: I'm a pc only gamer so no, the pc market is different because it's always been like that, and there are only serveral components to upgrade, not buying a whole new model.

Often times someone can just upgrade the gpu and nothing else and be set for a few more years. PC gaming has the flexibility to build a system to your needs, Consoles following the mobile phone incremental upgrade market is not same

The upgrades are likely minor, and you won't have much in terms of flexibility.

I was just saying I understand how console gamers would not like this.

I'm equally questioning the move from MS if it really is an performance upgrade. Like I said earlier I see no issue with ps4 slim with 4k videos.

Have you not read any of the n+1 topics about pc vs console, where one of the selling points of consoles is "not needing to upgrade" ? It affects nobody negatively? Wasn't it also important that because Consoles are one set hardware games get better optimization? How's that when there's xbox one and four quarters, ps 4.8? There are numerous "perks" which console gamers have listed as advantage over PC that are gone with the upgrade model of consoles, so again how doesn't this affect in a negative way?

And once again, I as a PC gamer am fine with upgrades and according to these very forums part of console gamers aren't.

I had a funny thought this could be the great comeback for the x1. We have fairly bashed the x1 for having multiplats that are subpar to the ps4. Now x1 has a chance to catch up or pass sony in power. There is one major cavet x1 has backward compatibility. With the added power you can get in theory better BC.

IMO this could be a real game changer and shift the balance of power in the x1's favor.

tbh even with a new more powerful xbox one they would not catch up with PS4

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, you seem to think that the PC market and console market are comparable in terms of upgrading and the procedures for that being done.

You obviously have no conscious idea of the clear separation there, one market being geared for decades for sub-generational upgrades and the other with absolutely no concept of that being a thing. You can't just flip the script in a cemented market like this and expect things to go good at all, 38 million people already spent their $300-$400 for the generation on hardware, that's the plan, that's the generation in hardware bought and paid for with no thought, need or want for anything else, just like it's always been... And now you're going to tell them you're releasing something better than what they just bought sub-generational?

What the **** did they just spend their money on? They'll view what they own as inferior, they're resent it, they'll wonder why they bought it or were even sold it when it was replaced in a only a few short years, and not even by a successor, just an upgraded version of what they already own. That's what you don't seem to get, the PlayStation 4 is Sony's console for generation 8, that is the plan these tens of millions of people had until generation 9, and now you want them to buy a generation 8 Sony console a second time?

Not going to happen, that doesn't happen in this market, no one expects that from this market, you change the status quo in a static and cemented market like this without incremental change, and you're going to get destroyed. The Xbox One reveal is a prime example of this, too much too fast with no preparedness for the market.

As far as upgrades go, I would always choose my PC over standardized platforms.

A CPU and RAM rarely bottlenecks performance in gaming. Many people don't understand this. Consoles don't even have separate processing units or dedicated VRAM.

The "script" is that unlike any other market, consoles rely on their consumer base and not the profit earned selling hardware. They make money on selling licensing fees and games. It's in their best interest to build the console at less cost, sell it for cheaper, and expand their base of gamers.

LMAO at your argument. Not buying this argument.

The MAIN component you need to have in your PC when upgrading is the GPU. Other components are important not to bottle-neck the system but without the GPU you're just tweaking. With that said, new GPUs ALONE retail anywhere for $600 to $1200...ALONE lol.

Please cut the BS, "...not buying a whole new model" in most cases when you've bought a new GPU by itself you've already paid the price that someone would pay for, "a whole new model" in the console market.

Lastly, "Consoles following the mobile phone incremental upgrade market is not the same, The upgrades are likely minor..."

So going from 900p - 1080p to 4k is "incremental" and "minor"? Most PC gamers aren't even pushing 4k at the current time but now that's minor?

lol Just stop talking, these counter arguments are getting worse and worse. A new wrinkle just appeared to me as to why PC gamers may be so against this idea of console upgrades.

If consoles adapt even the mid tier generation upgrade like PC has but most likely much more affordable than what a similar PC would cost they'd lose their constant power advantage argument that they try so hard to hype for console gamers to convert to PC. Being that all consoles can run games exactly the same it would mean 100% of people who own PS4k could play games in 4k vs the spacer amount of PC gamers who can do the same and that idea is apparently scaring hermits shitless

If I had a 4k TV then I might buy it, but I don't so.

Yes, he said "upgrade the GPU and nothing else". This is usually the case. A GTX970 can be had for $320.

Its beyond reason for a "revision" to include a graphical overhaul from 60FPS 1080p to 60FPS 4k.

4K output =/= 4k Graphics.

The PS4 has to solve its data throughput issue before anything else. There's no reason an SSD connected to the PS4's SATAIII port should have data access rates slower than the same drive on a SATA150 standard.

Well now you are starting to actually make a better argument at least. Your other points were honestly terrible but I can actually conceed some of the logic you've presented here.

The point about consoles not needing to upgrade is a good point. +1 for you :)

Here, unfortunately for you, is also where your argument is flawed. lol, consoles STILL don't need to be upgraded haha. Games like Crysis 3 were still made and highly playable on PS3 and xbox 360 when comparable PC hardware wouldn't be able to load the game.

The difference between this closed box stationary console upgrade and PC gaming is that PC gaming is SERVERY fragmented with a nearly endless combination of hardware and brand variation to consider. It's nothing alike considering all the devs would have to do for an upgraded PS4k is bump up the textures, resolution and effects...all on the same level (essentially it's like PS4 vs X1 same assets only better). Still anything can and will be scaled to the PS4 throughout the generation.

PC hardware becomes obsolete because there is no way to factor in all the different variations of configurations when newer more advanced games are release, that won't be true with consoles.

A good point, but you see it's not one that holds up with closed box stationary consoles. :)

and as far as consoles being on some sort of level playing field with PC's as far as hardware....

As I previously said, for a console to possess PC gaming power and remain affordable, it would have to be sold at a loss. What incentive would any manufacturer have to sell a piece of hardware at a loss?

Except they don't. Quality GPUs that match or outperform consoles cost as little as £120. The more expensive you go, the longer you can go without upgrades.

Also only a part of the console price can go to the GPU, because your paying for all the other hardware. So it's not going to be cheaper. It's still going to have to come out at £400. I doubt there would be any advantage. I can upgrade my PC for the price of a cheaper graphics card, half that of the console.

Why not??

If you can by a x1 elite for 400 that's more powerful and has BC it's a no brainer.

I wouldnt make the same mistake twice. Lol PS4K, gimmie a break.

No way can this so called ps4.5 play games at 4k, it will only be able to support 4k media, watch.

Well ps4 hasn't been winning just because it has slightly stronger hardware, xbone launch was a fiasco, ps4 has more exclusives, xbox is looking to be a low/mid end PC in the future while PS4 still offers something to those who own a med/high end PC

Unless it does something other than 4k gaming I don't care as I don't have a 4kTV.

If it does something better than the current model beyond resolution then I would be tempted to buy the add on for my current PS4. If it's not available as an add on then I'll buy PS4.5 whenever, if ever my current PS4 bricks.

PNY GeForce GTX 970 - $310

It would take 3 console revisions to catch that card.

You're not going to be playing any games at 4k with the PS4.5, certainly not the much vaunted AAA games, so you can forget about that. If you're lucky you'll be getting 1080p and 60fps with high settings, which will be an improvement over what it currently is. That does not make it a substantial upgrade. On top of that you need to replace the entire machine not just plug in an expansion cartridge or module. Remember we're talking about console gamers, the majority of which were happy to sit for 7 years with the same machines, not PC gamers, like me, who happily upgrade something in their PC on a fairly regular basis. The two demographics are very different when it comes to purchasing hardware.

I do believe that consoles should be upgradeable, but I think a full console replacement that's compatible with the last iteration is the wrong way to go about it, it should have been designed with this from the start and have been modular. From my point of view this looks more like, at best, an unplanned knee jerk reaction to the speed the consoles are falling behind (both MS and Sony's). At worst, a snide effort by Sony to push 4k TV's, similar to the way they used PS3 to push Blueray.

Even upgradable consoles are not going to match the power of high end PC's, you're just wishing for fairy magic.

Consoles don't need an upgrade. You actually seem to feel that they do, hence your agenda in the topic.

Nvidia vs. ATI

Intel vs. AMD

So many "brands to consider". The platform standard of the PC is DirectX. The hardware is designed to run DirectX, the games coded for the DirectX platform. Its much easier and cost effective for developers to develop PC games. They only develop console games because the console is a "closed system" and is therefor much less prone to piracy.

If it's only to make PS4 fill that tiny 3% gap to PC then I'd stick to regular PS4. I love graphics but not enough to buy a whole nother console just to get 3% better looking visuals.

@casharmy:

4K Gaming on a PS4......

You still have to acknowledge the fact that the PS4's file system restricts the throughput of the system's storage drive. There is no work-around with the end result being a system that runs any PS4 software that currently exists. With this bottleneck in place, future "revisions" would inherit this issue. Load times would increase with texture resolution.

Graphics that can only be perceived by those with 4K displays do nothing for most people with 1080p televisions.

These are major factors to consider. There's the plausibility, and if it were possible, would it even be marketable? At what price? What would you consider a reasonable price?

If Ps4.5 only is for 4k resolution i will dont care about it, i only have 1080p tv and have no plants buy new TV anytime soon. But if it make 30fps games 60fps then MAYBE i think about it.

The bold, I actually completely agree with that part.

As I have said in the past, I fully expected MS to come into this generation using this concept for their console having a PC background and I thought it was going to be a killer move over Sony.

The thing I disagree with you about is why Sony is doing this. lol it's not a knee jerk reaction to consoles falling behind anything, Sony could care less about that PS4 is stopping the competition. There is only one reason why Sony is considering this move and it's to adapt to their new platform, the PSVR, to make it more compatible for future compatibility without need external or additional hardware.

With that said, the PS4k WOULD indeed need to match up with higher end spec PC to be able to pull it off. People aren't being very logical when talking about the situation.

What's cheaper and more practical building an entirely new and separate hardware add on to increase the power needed to adapt to new peripheral or simply throwing in a new GPU in the stand alone system for a simple and affordable package? That is what we are looking at here. lol your post goes into left field when you start talking about consoles falling behind, that's not what's happening...at least not with Sony.

If it greatly enhances the games I'll completely ditch the sony name.