Topic: PS5 Rumour and Speculation Thread

I too would need get a new tv to experience hdr and 4k and would probs be after i get a next gen console. Currently the improvements that the X and Pro have aren't enough to entice me to buy one (a console and tv).

@BAMozzy @JohnnyShoulder @Th3solution @Gamer83 @Kidfried

I believe that once cheap 4k TVs have lower input lag they will easily outstrip full hd tvs then we are in business! My 4k tv is terrible really, it looks great in 4k hdr but my tv cant cope and starts skipping frames and stuff, its a strange one for sure. I often end up dropping back to 1080p without hdr. Its better in 4k no doubt but I would much rather the next gen of consoles has no pop in which is seemingly in every 3d game I own and does my head in!

Thats next gen for me - no pop in and limited aliasing all at 4k!

I think any new reasonably priced 4k tv should be ok these days. Personally i wouldn't go for anything in the budget range of models.The early ones were a bit problematic for gaming. Apparently HDMI 2.0 is the thing to look out for support 60 fps.

@Gamer83 You say games are hitting their stride where as I see games as being to big, too complex and even limited by the the current generation of consoles. Game development is being held back because the current consoles have such weak and lame CPU's. Games like AC:Unity flopped on console because the CPU was too weak to handle the density of the AI in the game and therefore had bottlenecking at the CPU which in turn affected the frame rate. Just Cause 3 struggled on console because of the physics based destruction and all those explosions were too much for the weak CPU to cope with and thus bottlenecked and resulted in poor frame rates.

We are also entering the 4th year of 4k now too and the momentum is gaining all the time. Games are built to 4k standards and have been for years yet we still don't have a PS console for the 4k era. Don't try and tell me the Pro is because that, at best, is a 1440p console - a half way step. All the games you can mention are having to be compromised to run on any Playstation - inc Exclusives. Naughty Dog wanted to bring Uncharted 4 out at 60fps - but couldn't. Even then it does have a few minor issues with pop-in and a bit of frame rate drops (particularly in the market shoot out scene). Infamous was also looking at 60fps (can't hit that consistently with a Pro either) but the bottlenecks in CPU prevented that. Look at how many games have to use Dynamic Scaling and unlocked frame rates just to run with a modicum of consistency. That is indicative of the consoles being under-powered for the current market.

If games were 'hitting' their stride as you say, then they would be running at the optimum standards the console offers without compromise. Just because we are seeing a lot of good games in development doesn't mean that the consoles themselves are just hitting their stride. Games are already to big, too complex etc to run on the limited hardware - hence we get games that can't hit Full HD consistently or locked frame rates. Devs have to use 'dynamic scaling, chequerboard rendering etc just to get their games working adequately. That's after scaling back on resolution, capping frame rates at 30fps, scaling back on visual settings etc from their original vision etc.

Even a PS5 I doubt would deliver all the games at the level to which developers are building the games. I bet some won't run at a 4k/60 with max settings but at least they won't need to scale them right down to 900p/30 with low-medium settings....

All the while, more and more people are upgrading to 4k TV's. I agree that the Xbox One X is also having to compromise on games before you bring that up but its not compromising as much as other consoles. Its better placed to deliver 4k than Sony are. Its not about the 'past' or how well they have done, its about bringing the present to their audience. Name 1 AAA developer that isn't building games to 4k standards? As much as I am looking forward to some of Sony's exclusives, I would much prefer to play them at 4k/60 than 1440/30 - the way the Devs probably built them to be before reducing them down to fit on the consoles.

Anyway, the point still stands the the current gen are holding back devs and limiting their design choices, having to compromise a lot and delivering 'inconsistent' (visual and frame rate) games. That is indicative of the need for a new generation - let alone the fact that 4k is growing much faster than HD did.

@Kidfried Sorry about the rushed post, i was coming to the end of my lunch break and had to quickl post something.

By the time the next gen machines come out you will most likely be able to get a decent 4k hdr tv for that price.

My current Sony tv was about £650 - £700 RRP, paid less than that as i got a good deal as a new model was being ushered in. My previous tv was an LG whic probs cost £350. Can't see me going back to that price range as the Sony is so much better in every way. Everyone comments on how good the picture is and its not even 4k.
@BAMozzy It does feel that Sony and MS cheaped out with some of the innards for the PS4 and XBO. But they both probs had a price point to aim. And with Sony that was really important for them to come out with a relatively low price point as they made that mistake with the PS3 with the Blu Ray drive.

@JohnnyShoulder You have to remember that in 2013 we were in a financial crisis. Analysts were predicting the death of consoles and the fact that in dark, economic times, the one thing that suffers most is 'leisure'. People who are struggling aren't going to spend £400 on a 'leisure' device when they have bills to pay, food to put on the table, unsure if they will have a job that can even pay for the basics let alone a 'console' for 'leisure'.

Both Sony and MS had to do something though as the PS3/XB360 wouldn't play all the games in development - games like Watchdogsm Batman Arkham Knight, Witcher 3, Division etc all due out in the next year or so.

They couldn't invest and build a console that may well have been £500+ (not including Kinect, Camera but a 'console' with controller) to deliver Full HD, 60fps but they also had to ensure that the console represented enough of an upgrade - at least visually - to even stand a chance of selling. As such, bith really scrimped on the CPU knowing that by at least going a bit bigger on the GPU, the visual difference from 720p to 900/1080p as well as the more impressive lighting, reflections etc, higher polygon counts, more particles etc would look 'flashy' compared to the games we were playing. By cutting right back on the CPU, essentially using a CPU for 'mobile' devices, they could at least make PS3/XB360 games look like 'next' gen visually - even if they had to scale back on frame rate performance.

Both Sony and MS knew they had to make a iterative hardware at some point - to keep up with the games. That also shows that they knew they had to make the PS4/XB360 with limitations and that they certainly weren't built to last the duration of the predecessors. Sony also knew the market was going to become more complicated with commercially viable 4k TV's releasing months later and VR likely to hit during this phase. MS maybe forgiven for not knowing 4k was that close or VR for that matter as they don't make either TV's or VR but Sony turned up at CES just a month or so after the PS4 launched with a range of 4k TV's that launched a few months later.

I know that maybe not many here have 4k TV's and are OK with the games not even delivering the full HD and solid performance. However for us with 4k TV's, and I have owned 1 for nearly 4yrs now, the PS4 (and XB1 especially) require so much upscaling to fit on a 4k screen. A 1080p game on a 4k screen requires the same upscaling as a 540p game would on a 1080p TV. That kind of visual performance makes it like playing a PS2 game on a full HD TV. The PS3, at around 600-720p is equivalent to a PS4 Pro on a 4k screen but with PS2 equivalent visual settings. The X is 'technically' better than the XB1 on a 4k screen because at least the games require less upscaling to 4k than the XB1 needs to hit 1080p.

I don't know anyone that would prefer to play say Last of Us 2 at PS2/PS3 visual standards by choice on their PS4 and if a PS5 was available that delivered not only full HD and 60fps, they would prefer to play on that. Chances are, when I come to play it on my Pro (if the PS5 isn't out), I will have to make do with sub 1440p resolution, lower quality visual settings than a 'true' 1440p game should have and make do with 30fps. That's the equivalent to a 4k TV owner, that's how much upscaling is needed to fit the screen properly. Those PS4 owners with 1080p may be alright with 900-1080p visuals - not much upscaling, textures and settings built and set for HD, maybe not overly happy with 30fps but its better than nothing. Happy to put up with declining visual standards in general (lower resolutions, lower visual settings with decreasing draw distances etc) because at least the games are still playable on the console - even if they are nowhere near as good as the devs made them to be. The mentality is like saying we don't need blurays and a bluray player because we have a DVD player and the films are still releasing on DVD.- don't need 5.1 because they have 'stereo' and that's 'good' enough.

Seriously, if you play in 4k HDR, then you want 'every' game in 4k SDR. If you play at 60fps, 30fps feels slow and cumbersome, less responsive and can take a while to acclimatise - then you play at 60fps and it feels so much better

Heres a thought. Bear with me here.

4k tv has 4×1080p screens -

You could literally buy a 60 inch tv and have a quadrant for each player for coop and you can play all online games this gen as couch coop.

Thats a selling point surely.

@themcnoisy but how powerful would the console have to be to run 4x instances of the same game at the same time? Or alternatively how well optimised must the game be? Even Mario Kart drops to 30fps with 3 or more players.

Not worth it considering coach co-op just isn't that popular, especially 3 or more payers.

@themcnoisy A game like Mantis Burn Racing - which is Native 4k and offers co-op, will split the game down into 4 x 1080p for local multi-player. You do have to sacrifice 60fps though if you play 3 or 4 player local MP.

Personally I have NO interest in couch co-op at all - pointless for me and I would rather all the 'power' going to make the full screen 4k image as awesome as possible at 60fps preferably - not have to make sacrifices as each 'screen' has its own viewpoint and calculations. A simple thing like a explosion would need to calculated from up to 4 different viewpoints, all the physics from each perspective etc. Its virtually running the game at up to 4x albeit with decreasing visual quality - not just resolution either - bit shadow quality, ambient occlusion, lighting, anti -aliasing etc. Its why a game like Mantis Burn Racing can't run 4x1080p screens at 60fps and has to drop down to 30fps to use the extra 16.6ms time for all the extra calculations its needing to do and can save time by lowering the quality a bit in some areas knowing the size is reduced too. On a 60" TV each screen is 30" and I bet most don't sit a lot closer to compensate.

Of course if its in the interest of the game, the PS5 could offer more 4x1080p couch co-op games and with a decent CPU, may not have to compromise on the frame rates either

@Kidfried I always thought Sony tellys were too expensive for me but it has certainly opened my eyes. Certainly the best TV I've owned

@BAMozzy Never been to keen on split screen myself either. Always preferred the full screen couch multiplayer games like sports, fighting games (Tekken, Mortal Kombat, etc). And Bomberman

@JohnnyShoulder @BAMozzy @kyleforrester87

Ok then how about this;

You can play all this gens games on 1 PS5 but it has 2 hdmi ports so you can set up 2x tvs next to each other!

Give me a job Sony you would all be gazillionaires with me in charge!

@themcnoisy but.. 1 PS5 is still doing all the work, same problem. Are you thinking?

Edit: although you did mention this gens games so more likely perhaps!

@themcnoisy You mean like the old skool lan multiplayer sessions that used to happen, but minus the multiple consoles?

Sorry to rain on your parade, but i don't see thay happening.

I think all that is fading away which is why you don't much split screen options in games anymore. Maybe on PC but i don't remember the last i heard of someone doing that.

Plus it doesn't sound that convenient having to lug another tv round to someone else's house. TV screens are big enough these days i don't really see the need to add another one into the mix.

@themcnoisy I could see the PS5 having 2 HDMI ports - but one of those being a audio out port for lossless Dolby Atmos. Some Amps don't support 4k HDR pass through and no TV (yet) has eARC so having a separate HDMI audio out - like the dedicated 4K bluray players do could be a thing. I don't expect a second HDMI TV output though.

Couch co-op may well be wanted by a small minority but it is a small minority. It seems pointless to build a console with the option to offer couch co-op on multiple screens for the few games that offer couch co-op. I am not saying couch co-op won't be supported in games but no doubt as prolifically as it has been this gen. I have two TV's so I would rather play online with both TV's connected to their own console. My Bedroom TV has a PS4 and XB1 set up with the Pro and X set up in the main room so it would be easy to have two people playing. Downside though, it may require 2 copies of the game - depending on how you buy...

@kyleforrester87 @JohnnyShoulder
One day I will have an idea which will blow everyone away. Mark my words. Lol.

@BAMozzy great idea. I once set up my gamecube into 2 audio outs and set them as a quasi surround sound. It was stereo plus an extra left and extra right speaker. I set the outside speakers to be better on high sounds and my normal stereo speakers to be more bassy. It was amazing. But the police came round when I was playing fzero gx as it was too loud. Good times.

This dolby atmos sounds great. Are the speakers wireless? If so thats a huge win. Even with the limited space in my front room I could put one behind the tv, one on the games storage to the left, one further left in the corner and one in the rear left over the door. Not true surround sound due to my living room but it would be better than the awful sound out of my phillips tv.

@themcnoisy Dolby Atmos can be Wireless - depends on the set-up you have. The most common set up seems to be the 5.1.2. The 5 being the centre, left and right front, left and right rear, the 1 being a base (the usual surround sound set up) but the 2 are either ceiling mounted or up-firing speakers that bounce the sound off the ceiling to give a more 'surrounded' and better 3D sound scape. Bullets for example sound like they are literally flying over your head. Cinemas for example that use Atmos, have speakers overhead but not every household are going to mount speakers in the ceiling so they have speakers that far the sound upwards to bounce off the ceiling. Its similar to soundbars that bounce sound off the walls to give a much wider and simulated surround sound from just a bar.

Samsung make a Dolby Vision Sound bar that fires the sound up from the bar as well as the providing the left, right and centre front sounds. It also comes with 2 wireless rear speakers and a sub too. The issue with wireless speakers though is that each usually requires its own power supply, so they do have 'some' wiring but its just the power.

My surround system isn't wireless but the wires were really easy to hide, I just ran them around the room under the skirting board/carpet. My Speakers are floor standing 'towers' so you don't have to trail wiring up the wall to where they are mounted - it keeps them tidy at least. My house has the plug sockets about 3' off the floor and under my TV, I have 10 sockets (yes I need all - 1 socket though is used to power the six block extension) that are not so easy to hide.

@JohnnyShoulder You must be quite happy with the numerous fighting games that seem to be releasing. Tekken though does prove my point about the 'need' for a next gen and I wouldn't be surprised if Soul Calibre 6 also gives a good reason to bring out a new gen too.

Again, I know resolution is just 'part' of the equation when we talk about 'Graphics' and again Graphics are part of the equation when it comes to making a 'great' game.

Tekken though runs at 1536x864 on a PS4 and 1920x1080p on the '4k' PS4 Pro. That's not the whole story either as the game uses 'dynamic' settings to keep a 60fps lock. Unlike some games that dynamically scale the resolution, Tekken scales the post processing pipeline - so things like texture filtering, anti aliasing etc can drop down in quality. I expect Soul Calibre to be very similar too.

Of course if you own a 1080p TV, the Pro at least is delivering a full HD and can have better texture filtering etc. In fairness, you aren't likely to be looking at the textures in the heat of the battle with all those effects on screen but for 4k TV owners and a console that is supposedly selling itself for the 4k market, its a far cry from the '1800p' that Sony were expecting Devs to hit at the minimum with chequerboard or other tools that minimise the GPU workload to give the impression of a 'higher' resolution. That was what Sony sent to the Devs - guidelines on what they expected - along with the frame rate order that could not be lower/worse than the base PS4. I am not criticising the Pro for only going so far, taking that 'half' step into UHD. Sony will want to sell its next gen and its much easier if there is a big step up in visuals as well as the other areas (4k HDR Bluray, Dolby Atmos, Game VRR, improved frame rates, maybe even Dolby Vision as their TV's will support that etc). The jump from 1440p (Pro) to 2160p (PS5) is the same jump up from 720p (PS3) to 1080p (PS4). I totally understand why the Pro is literally the same as the PS4 with a 2nd GPU bolted on - it was never meant to be a 'new' gen but to essentially just double the resolution - hence 2 PS4 GPU's bolted together. Slight boost to GPU and RAM speed but basically the same to ensure that the Pro works perfectly with all existing games - also ensuring that you won't get 'exclusive' PS4 Pro content. The difference also ensures that any game that can't run at 720/30 on a base PS4 won't run at 1080/30 on a Pro either so they can easily justify why certain games etc won't release on that generation.

On average, the Xbox One X is rendering over 2x the resolution of a PS4 Pro. That would be the equivalent of 720p vs 1080p for HD TV users to try and put some perspective on it. Again, I am NOT bashing PS4 or Pro but trying to show what the difference is and why Sony need to bring out its PS5 sooner. Its also showing that whilst games are still coming, still looking great etc, that the actual 'quality' of the 'Presentation' is dropping. By presentation, I am referring to 'sharpness' and quality of the visual settings - like draw distance, shadows, anti aliasing etc - not the actual quality of the games ambition. Its obviously worse for XB1S owners as Tekken runs at 720p and with a few settings lower than the PS4 can deliver - none of the consoles offer the 'high' settings either - not even the Pro. For 1080p TV owners, the drop from 1080p to 900p with great temporal anti aliasing may not be that obvious. Games like Star Wars Battlefront looked incredible at 900p on a PS4 but Battlefront 2 on a Pro, whilst it looks 'good', up against the X, its a much bigger gap than the XB1 to PS4. There is still a gap between the X and the PC as well though not as big a gap as the Pro to X. The point I am making is not about how much better the X is but more about how far Sony are behind in terms of delivering the 4k console and why I believe Sony need to bring out its 'next' gen sooner.

Of course Sony can sit on its hands for the next few years, let the exclusives sell the PS4 and the Sony fanboys will be happy with their games regardless of the visual quality and performance. Like I said though, I would MUCH prefer to play those at 4k/60 than 1440p (or Chequerboard 1800-2160), much prefer to play games with locked frame rates AND resolutions but if Sony don't bring out a PS5 sooner, then I will make do with the 'Pro's' performance. I would rather play the games than not.

To reiterate, its not that the PS4 is literally 'dead' or would be 'dead' the moment that Sony release the PS5. Sony have supported their older generation well into the next generation. The PS1 for example was discontinued months before the PS3 launched so it continued pretty much all the way through the PS2 era. The PS2 was discontinued months before the PS4 released and Fifa 14 was released on all 3 generations of Playstation - maybe not as in depth on PS2 but considering its age, that's still an impressive run. The PS3 was discontinued over a year ago (unless you count Japan which carried on until May 2017 but ended a month before the Pro launched in NA) so I can't see Sony suddenly drop the PS4 as soon as the PS5 comes out. I can see them discontinuing the Slim at some point and just making the Pro though. If people don't want full 4k, they could still buy and play PS4 versions but at least they would have the console for the 4k era. It would be great if the PS5 is fully backwards compatible and games like God of War, Spider-Man etc all ran on a PS5 rather than have to buy a PS5 'remaster' in 4k/60 with improved textures etc. A free 'PS5' update similar to what we see on the Pro/X. Its clear that a lot of the Xbox games are releasing with future BC in mind. Play those on the next box and the dynamic scaling, unlocked frame rates run at their max level - full 4k with no need to patch. They still could of course to improve the visual settings like Shadow quality etc.

Anyway, I think the point has been made that whilst games are looking 'spectacular' they are also beyond the current generation of consoles and having to be scaled down further and further to run at 'adequate' frame rates. The current offerings from Sony are not delivering the 'full 4k' experience either and Sony surely must want to be delivering that to its fanbase.

@BAMozzy Wow you got all that from me saying i prefer fighting games when playing couch multiplayer?! Credit to ya. 😉
Sorry i should have elaborated, i meant back in the day when there was no online. Yes there was a world before then.
I hardly play couch multiplayer these days, about once a month with my bro on PES.
Only played two fighting games this gen, the first injustice which i hated and mortal kombat xl which i really liked. And that was only the single player in those.

@JohnnyShoulder LOL - no but that just reminded me of examples I could use to explain why I think we need a next gen Sony sooner rather than later. If they leave it too long, then the cross-over phase will be much more short lived. Third Part Devs are pushing PC's let alone the consoles.

The last time I played any couch co-op was probably playing Black Ops Zombies in split screen online but that was before my Son got his own XB360 in his bedroom and after that, we played online together. I remember sitting around my 26" TV playing games like Mario kart with the family - by the time the N64 arrived, we had a 32" TV but was still happy to play Goldeneye etc. With the Wii, I had my 46" HD TV by then but I also found it more frustrating playing split screen. Playing Zombies or MP in CoD split-screen was awful despite the fact I had half the screen. If I played side by side, I found it too restrictive to see the enemies flanking, if I played top/bottom, I found that the view seemed to narrow - in both cases, it was a struggle to do well.

Fortunately now my Kids are older and have their own console. When my Son visits, I can at least still play full screen with the main room and bedroom both set up with consoles. I buy Physically but my son has a lot of Digital games as I often keep his credit topped up so he can buy what he wants. This means he can download the games to one of the consoles - or even we can share the games if I don't have it myself - at least on Xbox anyway as that is his preferred console.

I don't like fighting games myself. The last ones I actually bought myself were games like Yr Ar Kung Fu and Way of the Exploding Fist. I also had Barbarian but got bored of that quickly - too easy too chop heads off LOL. A lot of my friends loved Street Fighter in the Arcades but I couldn't stand it - much preferred to play Gauntlet - Showing my age now! LOL