PS4 worldwide shipments top 67.5 million

Well deserved.

Impressive.

Cross posting, I remember when GAF thread said this thing would top out 80 million.

I cant see this gen lasting any shorter than 2020 and I honestly feel like ps4 will hit 120/130 lifetime sales.

And all success has been deserved imo, incredible what this 350 box is able to output.

And now that the first party studio's are in full swing I expect things to only get better.

By Kidjr Go To PostI cant see this gen lasting any shorter than 2020

Stop it, you're going to give Smokey an aneurysm.

2019 PS5 hint, 2020 on sale.

Any later than that is trash.

I also see ps5 for 2020, I will also be fine if they take longer, it’s not like we will run out of games.

Hoping PS5 is 2019. This gen is trash

By s y Go To PostHoping PS5 is 2019. This gen is trash

PSY please, this gen has almost had something for everyone and is way better than last gen.

By s y Go To PostHoping PS5 is 2019. This gen is trash

this gen has Rocket League, the scientifically chosen best game of all time

I bought one of them.

You're welcome, Sony.

By s y Go To PostHoping PS5 is 2019. This gen is trash

Pfft pls.

PS5 is just waiting on a Ryzen and Vega APU with 16GB GDDR6, right?

Well, I do think 2020 is pushing it, but not if that's the only way you can get it to $400 or below. If they launch any higher than that price, it's not worth it.

Now, if they manage 2019 at $400, it'll be time to party like 2013 again.

Just speculation but: Sony is going to move a lot of PS4s off Costco pallets this Black Friday.

It's actually kind of interesting that it just might make or break just how good Sony's marketing team is at reading the Switch hype.

By Smoke Dogg Go To PostPS5 is just waiting on a Ryzen and Vega APU with 16GB GDDR6, right?

Well, I do think 2020 is pushing it, but not if that's the only way you can get it to $400 or below. If they launch any higher than that price, it's not worth it.

Now, if they manage 2019 at $400, it'll be time to party like 2013 again.

I dont want another console before 2020, low key hoping for a 10 year cycle tbh.

So much more juice left in these machine imo.

2020 makes sense to me tbh, TLOU 2 at the end of 2019 as a send off for the generation and then spend the next year building up for a new console.

I thought naughty dog were doing a space game, they'll need another two years after that so release early 2021 and drop ps5 end of same year. Boom.

By Kidjr Go To PostI thought naughty dog were doing a space game, they'll need another two years after that so release early 2021 and drop ps5 end of same year. Boom.

Nope. Thats just some fan speculation.

Druckmann has confirmed that after Lost Legacy shipped, the entire studio is on TLOU II.

Hopefully the PS5 drops Fall 2019. Spring 2020 at the latest.

I wouldn't be surprised if TLOU II(enhanced 60fps) is a launch title.

Naughty Dog has some amazing artists and tech wizardry staff. They could get pimp juice out of a Raspberry Pi if they wanted to.

The problem is the third parties like EA who don't know how to optimize for multi-platform development worth a lick.

Sony will probably be able to coup Bethesda if they put some Ryzen devkits in their hands.

First to Ryzen wins.

It makes no sense for Sony to drop the PS5 in 2019. PS4 sales are still pretty good, there is no way in hell that Microsoft are going to launch their next console in 2019 after spending tons of money on the X. Why would Sony rush to put a new console out there?
Any goodwill Microsoft gained from the 360 worldwide is gone and they are back to being a console mainly for the US and the UK, Nintendo are doing their own thing so Sony do not have to be the first to hit the market but the ones to offer the best deal.

Yeah, you're absolutely right, they first need to ensure they can launch at $400. Otherwise, there's no market---no mainstream market anyway.

There was no reason to drop the Pro either. Last gen was anomaly wasnt it? Gens usually last 5-6 years.

By Kidjr Go To PostI dont want another console before 2020, low key hoping for a 10 year cycle tbh.

So much more juice left in these machine imo.

You're free to stick with these garbage CPUs in these boxes if you'd like, while the rest of us are allowed a PS5 with backwards compatibility.

2020 it's happening. I feel good about it.

Isn't 6 years the commonly accepted historic sweet spot for Sony? At least, I think it was for the PSOne to PS2 transition. That one was so sweet.

By s y Go To PostThere was no reason to drop the Pro either. Last gen was anomaly wasnt it? Gens usually last 5-6 years.

I think the Pro is the reason it's going to last a similar length, their argument will be they need it for a generation to last longer than 5-6 years and it's in their interests for them to last as long possible.

By Smokey Go To Post2019 PS5 hint, 2020 on sale.

Any later than that is trash.

Since I didn't get a pro I would be OK with this lol. If I bought a pro ... ehhhhhh

I do think the release of the PS4 Pro does rule out a PS5 before 2020 at the very earliest, and I'd imagine Microsoft will probably be thinking no earlier than 2021 because of the Xbox One X's release. Subsequently, I can definitely see the PS4 rolling past the 100 million mark before then.

Based on the most recent Earnings call, Sony seems to be following Microsoft into the iterative console model.

Honestly I'm a fan of the rolling upgrades model.

By Ukumio Go To PostBased on the most recent Earnings call, Sony seems to be following Microsoft into the iterative console market.

Honestly I'm a fan of the rolling upgrades model.

Following? They kinda set the stage by being first to market with the Pro lol

By Ukumio Go To PostHonestly I'm a fan of the rolling upgrades model.

Me and my pocket book disagree

By reilo Go To PostFollowing? They kinda set the stage by being first to market with the Pro lol

Microsoft introduced the idea of a rolling console model before the PS4 Pro came out. Sony is just talking about switching to that model now.

Also I'm pretty sure Sony never saw the PS4 Pro anything more then a half step.

Again, if all your games work, it's fine. It's no different than a new GPU coming out on PC. If you're happy, then don't update systems.

By Smokey Go To PostYou're free to stick with these garbage CPUs in these boxes if you'd like, while the rest of us are allowed a PS5 with backwards compatibility.

2020 it's happening. I feel good about it.

Sure consoles are CPU constrained but if games like Last of Us II, Horizon and GTS are being pushed with such thats good enough for me.

No doubt you get much higher resolution and FPS but I barely see and diff in fidelity, all the above of comparable to the best I've seen on the PC.

2020 is cool but I think one of the reasons the ps4 is doing so well was due to how long we had to wait for this gen.

Would make sense for them to do it again.

The rolling iterative model only makes some modicum of sense now because Apple did it first--it remains to be seen if it definitively makes any sense in the console space though.

But anyway, Anthem might be a good first litmus test to see how third parties actually handle the interests of those left behind.

I doubt that any version of Anthem not running on Xbox One X won't basically just be a PS3 port of Bayonetta--an afterthought.

By Kidjr Go To PostSure consoles are CPU constrained but if games like Last of Us II, Horizon and GTS are being pushed with such thats good enough for me.

No doubt you get much higher resolution and FPS but I barely see and diff in fidelity, all the above of comparable to the best I've seen on the PC.

2020 is cool but I think one of the reasons the ps4 is doing so well was due to how long we had to wait for this gen.

Would make sense for them to do it again.

I wish I could explain to y'all HOW MUCH these Jaguar CPUs are holding back software.

By Smoke Dogg Go To PostThe rolling iterative model only makes some modicum of sense now because Apple did it first–it remains to be seen if it definitively makes any sense in the console space though.

But anyway, Anthem might be a good first litmus test to see how third parties actually handle the interests of those left behind.

I doubt that any version of Anthem not running on Xbox One X won't basically just be a PS3 port of Bayonetta–an afterthought.

Yes, putting the most effort on the version for 1% of the console market makes perfect commercial sense.

You lads thinking ps5 for 2020?

Jeez, that's ages.

The sales numbers are great though so I wouldn't be surprised.

By FootbalIFan Go To PostYou lads thinking ps5 for 2020?

Jeez, that's ages.

The sales numbers are great though so I wouldn't be surprised.

Won't be next year . Tease in 2019 with 2020 release makes sense

By s y Go To PostHoping PS5 is 2019. This gen is trash

TBF any gen without a ZoE game will always be trash to me

By Smokey Go To PostWon't be next year . Tease in 2019 with 2020 release makes sense

Tease at PSX 2018, PlayStation meeting in spring 2019, fall 2019 release, PS5 and PS5 S/+/Pro simultaneous launch.

I think eventually the traditional console cycle is gonna die. First two years of this gen were trash with cross platform garbage and tech demo exclusives. It’s only starting to get good now and then people want a new console already?

So hyped for new systems but Destiny 3 is gonna look just the same on PS4 as on PS5.

By s y Go To PostTease at PSX 2018, PlayStation meeting in spring 2019, fall 2019 release, PS5 and PS5 S/+/Pro simultaneous launch.

No way Sony is releasing a new console in 2019 with how ps4 is selling, there is no reason to kill your console if it’s still doing great.

Especially with how many exclusive titles they have announced for PS4, it's not like it's a Zelda situation where it's just one game.

No way it happens before 2020.

You guys saying that Sony shouldn't be in a rush are correct.

I still believe that strong international support (Japanese in particular) and sales from the PS2 (and from the Wii, for that matter) could've kept on blunting the early success of X360, and it would have allowed the PS3 to loom larger by giving Sony more time to develop and manufacture that damn thing. But honestly the PS3 may have been too far along anyway and they made all the wrong bets by underestimating how important ease of development really is.

Rushing to market almost always spells disaster though.

Nobody should really be launching a console until they have something like Gears of War to shock and awe, and to capture the wonder and amazement of real next gen software, which is what I think MS/EA are banking on with Anthem but they may have picked the wrong dev studio.

By Smokey Go To PostI wish I could explain to y'all HOW MUCH these Jaguar CPUs are holding back software.

Then try please.

Because as far as I was aware that is the whole point of GPGPU Computing was, to offset as many (relevant) tasks as possible to the pipelines that were idle. Then the fact that once those tasks are complete you didnt have waste time copying data from one memory pool to another due to the somewhat unified memory poo. So yeah Jaguar is weak but it's weakness have been somewhat compensated for. While I get that not all tasks should be offset to the GPU I think just saying lol "Jaguar is weak, holding us back" isnt really fair.

Isnt the real issue the time and resource it takes to get your code multi-threaded to the point where you using every idle pipeline?

Feel free to correct where I'm wrong as I'm no programmer but brute really is only one way to look at the problem imo.

Watch this if you can



You probably going to laugh but Assassin's Creed Unity is a perfect example. People say it was buggy and it was, but the engine was also too powerful for these consoles. The crowds and large interactions killed the console CPUs. You play that game over on PC and it's one of the best looking games out. Just Cause 3 too. These open world type games struggle hard at time when a lot is going on. Bungie said they couldn't give 60fps because of the CPUs. IDK about that, but it's what they said.

These CPUs are clocked at something like 1.6ghz. Theyre netbookish. It's bad. Up until this gen , you had pretty balanced consoles, although CELL was a different animal on it's own. That's part of the reason last gen was able to last as long as it did, the hardware at the launch of the consoles was pretty high end.

The 360 CPU was a proper madman, wasn't it?

By Smokey Go To PostWatch this if you can

https://youtu.be/LjjRdrVAHCQ

You probably going to laugh but Assassin's Creed Unity is a perfect example. People say it was buggy and it was, but the engine was also too powerful for these consoles. The crowds and large interactions killed the console CPUs. You play that game over on PC and it's one of the best looking games out. Just Cause 3 too. These open world type games struggle hard at time when a lot is going on. Bungie said they couldn't give 60fps because of the CPUs. IDK about that, but it's what they said.

These CPUs are clocked at something like 1.6ghz. Theyre netbookish. It's bad. Up until this gen , you had pretty balanced consoles, although CELL was a different animal on it's own. That's part of the reason last gen was able to last as long as it did, the hardware at the launch of the consoles was pretty high end.

I'm so glad you bought up unity because this is a prime example of what I'm talking about, the engine was not too "powerful" at all. AI algorithms inherently have a number of branches which I'm sure you know doesnt lend itself well to single core performance (where the Jaguar struggles). However the point I'm trying to make is that most games I believe lend themselves extremely well to mutli-threaded performance which is why there are still gains to be had in this area, physics, particle effects, (certain) lighting engines, geometry and more all lend its self well multi-threaded programming. So just because AI and weather simulations do not, you want to say f it? lol no, better single core performance really is only one way of looking at it. And I think the gains to be had multi-threading offset the going for higher single core performance right now, like we can live with it and I really dont think its holding anything back.

in my opinion it's time and money

By Kidjr Go To Postin my opinion it's time and money

Neither of which the majority of devs and publishers have proven themselves to be good with at all.

It's a miracle anything in the AAA space turns a profit at all these days.

Unity was pretty much expected.
A few from the footy community participate with that paid beta programme you guys might have heard about in the past, like when the dude got his xbox banned for leaking Gears screenshots.

Anyway, Ubi is using their services alot. Mainly for stress tests for the multiplayer, but also for feedback regarding the game.
Plenty of people told Ubisoft that the game needs to be delayed unless they pull off a miracle. There were so many problems that were listed during that Beta and they didn't give a fuck.
They were always behind schedule.

By Kidjr Go To PostI'm so glad you bought up unity because this is a prime example of what I'm talking about, the engine was not too "powerful" at all. AI algorithms inherently have a number of branches which I'm sure you know doesnt lend itself well to single core performance (where the Jaguar struggles). However the point I'm trying to make is that most games I believe lend themselves extremely well to mutli-threaded performance which is why there are still gains to be had in this area, physics, particle effects, (certain) lighting engines, geometry and more all lend its self well multi-threaded programming. So just because AI and weather simulations do not, you want to say f it? lol no, better single core performance really is only one way of looking at it. And I think the gains to be had multi-threading offset the going for higher single core performance right now, like we can live with it and I really dont think its holding anything back.

in my opinion it's time and money

Everything is going open world. That requires more CPU power. You have more of everything. Now we're moving towards 4k or fauxK which puts more of a burden on CPU and the GPU. These CPUs weren't good at launch and aren't good now. Just because you see the GRAPHICAL fidelity of some of these titles, doesn't negate the CPU aspect. Unity was too much for consoles. There's a reason Syndicate doesn't look as good not are the crowd sizes anywhere near what Unity was doing. The game had it's technical issues, but again, on PC it's one of the best looking out when it has decent CPUs to work with, and that was a launch game. They are mobile chips. The system(s) aren't balanced at all.

Also 60fps has become way more of a thing. That requires a good CPU. That's on top of maintaining the graphical fidelity people expect.

The AMD Jaguar CPU that lies at the heart of both PS4 and Xbox One may not be the gaming beast we had expected. … "In raw processing terms, these four Jaguar cores have slightly less than a quarter the grunt of a Core i5-3570K. Its the same story on a core-by-core basis. Less than one quarter of the performance."

FFS

Less than a quarter of a CPU that released in 2012

Don't let the graphical and technical wizardry of a studio like Naughty Dog fool you. These CPUs are definitely holding software back.