PlayStation 5 - Now with FAQ in OP.

TitianGerm

Markitron wrote: »

Do they really promise this? They use the same buzzwords every time but I can't remember a console launched off the back of a 60 fps standard claim. Anyway, at least the option of a framerate mode is becoming more and more common, we know at least Demon's Soul's will have a framerate mode. This wasn't a thing at the start of the PS4 gen.

Those buzzwords can cause a problem though. You saw someone in here already thinking this gen is going to do 8K gaming v

Markitron

TitianGerm wrote: »

Those buzzwords can cause a problem though. You saw someone in here already thinking this gen is going to do 8K gaming v

Yea I noticed that all the way back when console was announced in that Wire article. They did casually mention that it was compatible with 8K displays and people went off on one complaining that they shouldn't be trying to push 8K when 4K hadn't been fully adopted yet.

Either way they have been mostly pushing the SSD and the changes it will bring, going by the Ratchet and Clank demo, I can see them delivering on this.

facehugger99

I only buy digital games - I don't care about trading in games - too much hassle.

I will probably get the disk version of the PS5 if it comes with a 4K player. I already have a 4k player but its a couple of years old and the PS3 was great little BluRay player, so I'll wait and see what the reviews are like for this aspect of the console.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Markitron wrote: »

Do they really promise this? They use the same buzzwords every time but I can't remember a console launched off the back of a 60 fps standard claim. Anyway, at least the option of a framerate mode is becoming more and more common, we know at least Demon's Soul's will have a framerate mode. This wasn't a thing at the start of the PS4 gen.

Microsoft have certainly said that they're aiming for 60fps as a baseline and up to 120 fps.

of course, this is their statement of intent, and likely what all their 1st party studios are doing, however AC Valhalla is running at 30, so it ultimately kick the responsibility / blame back to the 3rd part developers when its not met.

Homelander

It's not hard to see why many developers would stay with the 30FPS for most single player games. They know console players are used to 30fps. They know that by sticking to 30fps they can get maximum visual detail and really create a "next gen" visual experience.

By comparison, if AC: Valhalla was running at 60fps true 4K - which the CPU is more than capable of delivering this time around - it would mean graphical compromise, which on the balance of everything, they likely decided wouldn't be appreciated by most gamers.

I'd be hopeful that many games will integrate a 60fps v 30fps mode and allow the user to select the visual trade off if desired.

jester77

Digital seems to be what will be pushed going forward. You can see by the design that the console was designed without the drive and it was just tagged on later, maybe even due to the Xbox releasing with it.

Console games are the last medium hanging onto physical media, I would imagine this will be the last generation with it. There will probably be games released on digital only in this cycle, like what is happening on the Nintendo Switch. Kind of pointless having the disc any way when you have to download the whole thing for the inevitable release day patch.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Homelander wrote: »

It's not hard to see why many developers would stay with the 30FPS for most single player games. They know console players are used to 30fps. They know that by sticking to 30fps they can get maximum visual detail and really create a "next gen" visual experience.

By comparison, if AC: Valhalla was running at 60fps true 4K - which the CPU is more than capable of delivering this time around - it would mean graphical compromise, which on the balance of everything, they likely decided wouldn't be appreciated by most gamers.

I'd be hopeful that many games will integrate a 60fps v 30fps mode and allow the user to select the visual trade off if desired.

I dunno about that, this whole ps4 / xb1 generation has been lamenting the 30fps framerates.

Markitron

facehugger99 wrote: »

I will probably get the disk version of the PS5 if it comes with a 4K player. .

It is confirmed that it does, and them putting the media remote front and centre probably means they are taking it a bit more seriously than with PS4

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Microsoft have certainly said that they're aiming for 60fps as a baseline and up to 120 fps.

of course, this is their statement of intent, and likely what all their 1st party studios are doing, however AC Valhalla is running at 30, so it ultimately kick the responsibility / blame back to the 3rd part developers when its not met.

Yea they can promise what they want for their first party games, they may actually achieve it too cos they have said those games are gonna have to run on the og XB1 as well.

The Raging Bile Duct

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

I dunno about that, this whole ps4 / xb1 generation has been lamenting the 30fps framerates.

Have they? Can't say it's really anything that's kept me awake at night.

Markitron

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

Have they? Can't say it's really anything that's kept me awake at night.

Yea if anything the last gen had a massive improvement in your average framerate. Dipping below 30 fps was commonplace on PS3/360, but most games mostly stuck to their 30 fps targets last gen.

OSI

OSI wrote: »

Ah come now. The PS5 touts 5.5GB/s, you could achieve 5.0 on PCs for the last few years easily, the bottleneck was PCI-Express 3.0. With the move to PCI-Express 4.0 there's already systems pushing nearly 20GB/s.

Moving this kind of data around on PC is very resource intensive.

PS5 was designed from the ground up to take advantage of it's SSD. Moving data around quickly, decompressing it quickly, getting it directly where it needs to go with minimal latency and overhead. Cerny talked about it in some depth during the Road to PS5 conference. Tim Sweeney and others have expanded on it and/or simplified it.

By all accounts the PS5 is enormously more capable of taking advantage of fast storage versus a PC of similar spec. For example their hardware decompressor is operating on a level equivalent to 9x Zen2 cores.

shaveAbullock

Yes they really have made it clear that the SSD and hardware decompression was a big focus while in development.
Fantastic for PS5 exclusives but what will happen with games that are also developed for the xbox and pc?

Mr Crispy

shaveAbullock wrote: »

Yes they really have made it clear that the SSD and hardware decompression was a big focus while in development.
Fantastic for PS5 exclusives but what will happen with games that are also developed for the xbox and pc?

Yeah, I think most commentators are of the opinion that only first party games will really benefit.

J. Marston

€600 minimum, I reckon.

shaveAbullock

J. Marston wrote: »

€600 minimum, I reckon.

People are saying it won't sell at this price point but if the xbox is the same price then why wouldn't it?

Stone Deaf 4evr

shaveAbullock wrote: »

Yes they really have made it clear that the SSD and hardware decompression was a big focus while in development.
Fantastic for PS5 exclusives but what will happen with games that are also developed for the xbox and pc?

Good point, as is often the case, when you design something very nice, like the PlayStation touch pad, it's never used to the best of its potential outside of first party applications.

Vyse Remastered

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Good point, as is often the case, when you design something very nice, like the PlayStation touch pad, it's never used to the best of its potential outside of first party applications.

I can remember that touch pad ever serving a function. the only game I can recall using it is that PlayRoom game that came with the system. Good game mind.

Wing126

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Good point, as is often the case, when you design something very nice, like the PlayStation touch pad, it's never used to the best of its potential outside of first party applications.

Considering a lot of developers are praising the PS5, it could be well used. PS5 could be the lead development console for example.


Epic alone have made provisions for the PS5 in Unreal Engine 5, which is a great sign - https://www.theverge.com/21256299/epic-ceo-tim-sweeney-sony-ps5-ssd-impressive-pc-gaming-future-next-gen

Although, it's all smoke and mirrors until we actually get to play anything.

CastorTroy

A good move for Microsoft would be to include at least 1 month of Game Pass Ultimate. Then it gives people lots of games to play day 1.
Sony could give Now access but I think it would be less appealing

Mike3287

jonerkinsella wrote: »

3700x and an RDNA 2 5700XT, which is reported to be as much as 50% IPC gain W for W over RDNA 1.

But no way will the PS5 of the Xbox X be doing 120fps in AAA games.

Yeah its amazing for its price

€500 is a steal, comparable gpu on a pc will cost that

Its a bit mad really as the gpu is more advanced than anything AMD has out for any money on the pc right now, shows what they think of us pc users lol, we are being robbed blind

Like you said new gpu with RDNA2 tech with ray tracing and all other bits missing from AMD's most powerful Radeon VII and RX5700xt gpus is in the PS5

Devs seem to be putting it at around Nvidia rtx 2080 level and XSX gpu at rtx 2080ti level

A decent €300 3700x cpu along side both and ultra fast 1tb SSD, 4K blu ray drive

You couldn't build a PC for less than €1000 to rival it

XSX supposedly going to be €450 at launch with a gpu as strong as €1200 rtx 2080ti, now that's value for money

johnny_ultimate

The Xbox Series X sounds like a very capable machine, with clear tech advantages outside the SSD - I’m sure multi-platform games will be able to be adapted one way or the other with relatively minor adjustments or compromises. Game Pass is a clear advantage too, as Sony’s well behind in offering such an attractive and worthwhile service.

What’ll be really interesting to me is to see how Microsoft’s cross-gen support plays out. By their own account they’ll be ensuring all their exclusives play on XB1 for at least a good while longer. That’s a great, generous policy for many customers - there will be many who can’t afford an upgrade, or have only bought an XB1 recently. Sony seemingly taking a more traditional approach to ‘generations’, though, could potentially see their own exclusives offer more obviously ‘next-gen’ technology than the enhanced XBSX titles which also have to support the XB1.

This isn’t criticising Microsoft’s approach by any stretch - I’m really curious to see how their strategy plays out, and they’re definitely eyeing a likely future in which hardware isn’t just the usual six-seven year release cycle. It’ll just be interesting to see how the big exclusives compare across both consoles. But with multi-platform next-gen titles - which AFAIK don’t require XB1 support - I think both will be more than up to the task.

Zero-Cool

CastorTroy wrote: »

A good move for Microsoft would be to include at least 1 month of Game Pass Ultimate. Then it gives people lots of games to play day 1.
Sony could give Now access but I think it would be less appealing

Sony should bundle Now and Plus together as a single new service. Big catalogue of games, 'free' games each month and online play.

Wing126

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Sony should bundle Now and Plus together as a single new service. Big catalogue of games, 'free' games each month and online play.

Should take the Game Pass approach too and add first party exclusives to the service day and date. Beef up the availability of more recent titles too.

Zero-Cool

Wing126 wrote: »

Should take the Game Pass approach too and add first party exclusives to the service day and date. Beef up the availability of more recent titles too.

Man, I've never been tempted to switch to xbox until game pass ultimate, such a great service. Sony know they don't have to compete with it because they're doing better than xbox which isn't great for PlayStation owners.

So many games i hear coming out that i want to play and find out they are going straight to game pass on day 1.

Sony will never compete or catch up to it imo.

TitianGerm

CastorTroy wrote: »

A good move for Microsoft would be to include at least 1 month of Game Pass Ultimate. Then it gives people lots of games to play day 1.
Sony could give Now access but I think it would be less appealing

Microsoft give you a months game pass with every console. When you sign up your given the option of turning on recurring billing and if you do that you get an extra month for free. Just have to cancel the recurring payment then.

You can also buy two years Live for around €80 from CDKeys and convert to GamePass Ultimate for €1.

Wing126

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Man, I've never been tempted to switch to xbox until game pass ultimate, such a great service. Sony know they don't have to compete with it because they're doing better than xbox which isn't great for PlayStation owners.

So many games i hear coming out that i want to play and find out they are going straight to game pass on day 1.

Sony will never compete or catch up to it imo.

Yeah, I agree with you there. I hope the creation of a Digital Edition console is a step in that direction though. I'd gladly pay the price if Sony's service was as impressive as Game Pass. I think the ability to download the titles is strongly needed also. Not sure if PSNow offers that already, has been a while since I even looked at PSNow.

The Raging Bile Duct

Wing126 wrote: »

Yeah, I agree with you there. I hope the creation of a Digital Edition console is a step in that direction though. I'd gladly pay the price if Sony's service was as impressive as Game Pass. I think the ability to download the titles is strongly needed also. Not sure if PSNow offers that already, has been a while since I even looked at PSNow.

You can download PS2 and PS4 games, you can only stream PS3 games.

Markitron

J. Marston wrote: »

€600 minimum, I reckon.

The last time they priced a console that high it basically created the concept of a meme. They will never go that high again.

shaveAbullock

Markitron wrote: »

The last time they priced a console that high it basically created the concept of a meme. They will never go that high again.

But that was because of the price of the 360. The challenge is not to get well below a $600 price point but to be competitive to what Microsoft is offering.

Just to put it in perspective $600 in 2006 is the equivalent of close to $800 today when you allow for inflation. Sony won't go that crazy this time, the price will be well below $800!

billybonkers

Mike3287 wrote: »

XSX supposedly going to be €450 at launch with a gpu as strong as €1200 rtx 2080ti, now that's value for money

Do you really see it outperforming at €1200 GPU?