dont think its worth it, but if sony or ms were to do it, I would rather have a gpu+raytracing chimp, than gpu+gpu. the reasson is its never 1 to 1, at best you get maybe 80% of the second gpu.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Next gen PS5 and next Xbox launch speculation - Secret sauces spicing 2019
- Thread starter Phoenix Splash
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, though 80% could well be enough when 2 smaller chips are cheaper to make than one larger chip due to better yields.
Also, I now want a ray-tracing chimp.
Wow, what people want from these consoles is getting more and more unrealistic.
Feels weird with next gen roughly a year away. Games like RE2, RDR2, and devil May cry 5 are making this gen feel brand new to me, these games look that good.
I predict Sony will have a ray-tracing chimp, but MS will opt for the pricier ray-tracing orangutan.
I dont expect raytracing, nor do I expect sli. I have gotten disliked for thinking the ps5 will be around 8 tfps.
Superb post and very illuminating. Thanks for the insight and I definitely agree.
Remember 2 things:
- Those are 3 of the absolute best-looking games of the generation, whereas next-gen, games will probably look like that at the absolute bare minimum, but with better resolutions and framerates.
- The biggest jump next-gen will be in the CPU and how the games actually play. Those titles do have some impressive gameplay tech, but next-gen will go far, far beyond them.
Those are the main reasons why I'd be happy to see next-gen this holiday.
doubt it, go look at how a lot of companies are missing revanue targets, I cant see every game being as detailed as RDR2, maybe in model and texures, though I have my doubts, but certainly not in scope.
Yeah, there's a big difference between having the technical ability to add scope and detail and having the financial resources to spend on adding that. A lot of new animated films look like decade-old Pixar films, even though other studios have the ability to produce more detailed visuals — they just don't have the budget.
I think a next-gen version of, say, Tales of isn't going to look hugely different from the Switch/PS4 version.
I hope so. On both ends of the cable. I don't want any gross 1998 full-size USB ports on my fancy new next-decade console. Yeeuuchh.
I think a next-gen version of, say, Tales of isn't going to look hugely different from the Switch/PS4 version.
I hope so. On both ends of the cable. I don't want any gross 1998 full-size USB ports on my fancy new next-decade console. Yeeuuchh.
Graphical fidelity =/= scope. I think you're conflating to two.
Look at Naughty Dog, they're nowhere near the size of Rockstar and they can produce games as incredible looking as they do without $200m dev budgets.
RDR achieves what it achieves mostly through tech and good art. Reduce the scope of the game and you can produce similar result with a much more reasonably sized dev team.
Yep i expected TLOU 2 to look just as good as RDR2 maybe better in certain aspects .
But it going to be no where in size and scope so it won't be as expensive ( even if it going cost a fair amount)
Still over time it will be cheaper to make games that bigger in scope thanks to tech .
Yes, the reason why R*'s games look so good is because a lot of assets are hand placed and hand crafted.
Take watch dogs 2 for example, while it may have a better lighting model, better textures and a higher polycount, GTA5 still looks better 80% of the time because more time is spent crafting it, roads will have cracks in it and patchwork where the roads have been repaired where as in WD2 the world is more prestine and less realistic.
So nextgen while lighting, polycount and textures will be better no amount of tech will substitute the effect of manually creating environments with the finer details.
It's like a great artist can make a better picture in 1 month then the same artist drawing the same thing in 1 hour.
Last edited:
The post I was replying to was talking about "how good" those games look, and yes, I do think next-gen games will all look as good or better graphically (aside from the REALLY low-budget stuff that will probably be cross-gen anyway) with some variation due to taste and graphical styles. Agreed that not every game will match RDR2 in scope though, partly because of budget/time and partly because many games just aren't aiming for massive scope. I can see how my second point may have looked like I was saying that, though.
This.
CPU is the most exciting upgrade for me... All I want is the possibility to play open world SP games at 60fps, this opens the door to it..
May happen with cross gen.
But next gen open world will use the resources for NPC's, cars, creatures etc
Agreed. I very much hope more devs at least offer 60fps modes. This is why I disagree with the idea that a weak GPU is fine because devs can just use reconstruction techniques - I want those used for optional performance modes.
They will, but the impression I've gotten is that the CPU jump will be so big that they could apply a noticeable increase in all those things and also have 60fps as well, if they wanted.
I honestly couldn't care less for graphics and performance options in console games.
Outside of remasters and games launching on mid-gen refresh consoles, I think it would disincentivise devs to properly optimise their games for the hardware available.
I play consoles for a consistent and polished gaming experience. I don't wanna have to futz around with settings just to get it to run properly.
Options like that make sense for remasters and games played on mid-gen upgrade consoles. Not for base consoles.
Outside of remasters and games launching on mid-gen refresh consoles, I think it would disincentivise devs to properly optimise their games for the hardware available.
I play consoles for a consistent and polished gaming experience. I don't wanna have to futz around with settings just to get it to run properly.
Options like that make sense for remasters and games played on mid-gen upgrade consoles. Not for base consoles.
That would be cool, but I bet devs will utilise the whole CPU fairly quickly.
60fps + double the npc/vehicle/creature complexity would be very cool though.
We need a dev to tell us the score on what is possible with a 8 core Zen2 @ 2.5 - 3ghz.
One thing I want next gen is realistic facial expressions and mannerisms from NPC's.
The amount of progression that can be made in this space is super vast.
Sure, but only if they limit the scope of their games to same genres, styles and gameplay mechanics we've seen this gen.
If devs wanna go all out and create gameplay around innovative new simulation systems that require far more CPU performance than was available in previous gens, they will focus their computational budget on that, 60fps be damned.
It's not really realistic to expect every or even most games to be available at 60fps next-gen, even with Ryzen CPUs. At the end of the day, not every game benefits all that much from 60fps and so devs will prioritise their performance budget based on the vision for the game they wanna make.
Sorry, but I disagree. People's personal tastes with this stuff vary, and it's nice to have options. Plus, I'm only really talking about switching between two modes, not a full suite of PC-style settings you have to navigate. I feel that next gen is the best time to do it, what with the huge CPU jump and the fact that resolutions have become so tremendous now.
Agreed, this discussion is tough without more hard data on just how much of a boost the new CPUs will add.
Oh certainly, but then we get the question of what's more important - going all-out with those systems to the point that 60fps is impossible, or just doing better than this gen. I feel like, if all developers actually did commit to 60fps being an option in all their games, the leftover CPU power would still be enough to create incredibly complex and stunning games far beyond what we're playing now.
We'll have to see what happens - it's been pointed out that, actually, a LOT of games are being made at 60fps these days. Lately almost all big FPS games, multiplayer titles, character action games, sports games, remasters, etc are 60fps. It frequently feels like practically all genres are transitioning to at least having performance modes, except for Sony's big titles (and some of those have performance modes on Pro), and, of course, open-world games. That's the situation with shitty CPUs, so I'll be interested to see what happens with much better CPUs. There's also the matter of 60fps being the bare minimum needed for VR, which may well have knock-on effects.
Yeah if devs target 30fps 4K (or checkerboard) and provide an unlocked performance option with lower res and a few lower settings that would be good for most bases I think. Locked 30, and then unlocked you can hopefully leverage VRR to help smooth things out if you're hitting 45fps
considering yesterday's findings then i think PSVR2's likelyhood of releasing on launch increased, now that supposedly the PS5 has a port specifically for PSVR2.
i dont expect any from soft game at launch but if i were to guess, i think from are making with SIEJ a spiritual successor to bloodborne rather than a direct sequel.
I devs target 30fps that will be the beginning of the end of consoles.
Many devs are starting to target 60fps on mid-gen consoles now using laptop CPUs. With Zen 2 and VRR, next gen we'll all talk about 60-120fps console gaming.
Yeah. My bet is that we're not getting Bloodborne 2, in the same way that we didn't get Demons' Souls 2 - instead we'll get something new that's hopefully even better.
100% agree with this, though i understand why others prefer options.
30FPS didn't end console in the PS3 era, it didn't end consoles in the PS4 era and it won't end them in the PS5 era. Only enthusiasts care about that number. Casual gamers barely know that this difference exists or they just don't care.
I prefer 60 but I leave it to the devs. But I agree, more and more devs are shooting for 60 even on our current toaster CPUs, so next gen should have many more 60 FPS games (at least from Japanese devs).
That is a dream .
Open world games going to need all the power they can get .
Something like HZD 2 or Spidey 2 i much rather have better AI , more NPCs , physics than 60 fps .
You are not getting 120fps on consoles unless you talking VR .
I can see other games going for 60fps so it will improve but we still have awhile to go for full 60fps gaming on consoles .
Lol 30fps won't be the end of consoles.
30fps has been a thing on consoles for the last 25yrs.
not really.
most TV's dont even support over 60.
and even then 30FPS is still good for most people. 30FPS didnt kill consoles in any generation so it wont kill them now. we may have more 60FPS games next gen, but there will always be 30FPS games and likely they will still be more common than 60FPS games.
Do they really ? Have you looked at the list of the most played games on consoles currently ? For instance on XB (more shooters on XB, but still), those are the 5 most played games currently on XB:
Fortnite, COD, NBA, APEX, Siege.
Casual gamers may not know the difference between 30fps or 60fps, but in the end, they certainly prefer playing 60fps games.
We have fighting , sports , fps and some more going for 60fps .
Still open world \ huge area games will always keep the average down and i don't see that changing any time soon .
When fornite was getting huge it was not even 60 fps on consoles .
Also some of the best selling games this gen are 30fps which show casual gamers not to bother either way .
they are not that big because they are 60fps.
they are that big because they are fun multiplayer/sport games. they would have been huge at 30fps anyways (in fact fortnite was not originally running at 60fps on consoles and was still a huge game.)
speaking of 60fps next gen, apparently after people on era found out that the new days gone trailer was running at 4k 60fps they reuploaded at a 4k30 version, could it be they legit uploaded footage from the dev kit? because that would be one huge mistake lol.
here is the proof, IGN still has the 60fps version and it feels much much better while graphically looking the same:
Last edited:
You could be right, but a massive jump in CPU power and increases in resolution being less important than they used to be is exactly what could lead to real change.
If casual gamers don't care either way, I'd say that's a good argument for a 60fps standard. I don't see anybody quitting console gaming because of it, but there probably would be at least some PC gamers who would get back in (I know that when I get or got a game on PC, the number one reason why was because it was the only way to play it at 60fps).
Thing is GFX still sell games .
Look at how amazing RDR2 look and think about what they would have to give up for 60fps .
For open world games i think 60fps not worth it for some devs .
Would i love to play spidey 2 at 60fps yes but question is what would they have to give up even with better specs we getting.
Next-gen will have spectacular graphics regardless of the framerate chosen, though - we'll be able to have open-world games that look as good or better than RDR2 at 2160p60 (the assets, admittedly, may not be quite so handcrafted but that's not really relevant to framerate). Not to mention that 60fps is much easier to market nowadays.
Vapour chamber maybe but liquid cooling is to complicated and expensive.
Could well be.
It looks like genuine 60fps not some sped up 30fps footage.
So it could be PS5 dev kit footage.
just to clarify, the code name is very likely the AMD side code name for the APU, not the one that developers use.
if this video really is running on a PS5 version dev kit then this is one hilarious situation.
in the gameinformer rapid fire video they said 30fps only.
but the video from last week look 4k 60fps, so i am pretty sure its a dev kit.
Yeah I think I agree.
If days gone is 4k60fps on PS5, I hope its a BC patch, its not worth buying another version for.
Making 4K 60fps promo videos of Days Gone with no known way to play in that quality would be a really shitty move. It must either be a mistake or maybe, just maybe, they intend to announce the PS5 with BC before the games release in April, making it "ok" to show PS5 footage as a sign of things to come?
Nope. Cerny said that 8TF was the mininum for 4K years ago. Doubt they target something that low 4 years later.
Last edited:
And before people say that the X does native 4K with 6TF - the X does native 4K on SOME games with 6TF AND a huge RAM improvement. And while the PS5 would also get a massive RAM and CPU boost, Cerny openly stating 8TF as what he thought they needed just for native 4K PS4 games tells me that he would've demanded a higher number for PS5 (unless Navi has some huge architectural improvements that make 8 Navi TF much better than 8 Polaris TF.
All I want is backward compatibility for VR and PS3/PS4.
I need
- skate 3 (or a remaster)
- subnautica in 60fps
- my MP VR games compatible (because my buddy will finally drop into VR next Gen)
I need
- skate 3 (or a remaster)
- subnautica in 60fps
- my MP VR games compatible (because my buddy will finally drop into VR next Gen)
- Status