Whats so "Next Gen" About the ps4?

[stuart1234]

Alrighty. well I really want the ps4. But then I thought to my self. Whats so Next Gen about the ps4? All it really is is just a slightly Upgraded ps3. Like. the ps3 was Next Gen because it just was. look at the ps2. it didn't have a interface. you couldn't look online with it. and the graphics for the ps3 are AWESOME compared to the ps2. But the ps4 just has slightly better graphics. AND theres no backwards compatibility! Why the hell not? My god damn PC can play games that are 12 years old and are on a disc. I don't want to pay for my games again to be able to play on the ps4. its almost 2014. there is really no excuse for having no backwards compatibility. Im not a Xbox person if you guys are wondering. I will never get anything to do with xbox. don't like them. I'll eventually need to get the ps4 since they wont make ps3 games.

What do you guys think on the subject?
and. is the ps vita worth it? :I

 

[jardantuan]

People need to stop thinking that 'next-gen' is a power thing.

It's not.

A generation is simply a measure of time. As in, each subsequent console is a generation ahead of the previous. It's a pretty flaky term at the best of times anyway, since there's no reason that one company couldn't release a consoles at a faster rate than the competition, meaning that there is no such thing as a unified generation. If, for example, Nintendo released a console every 3-4 years, they'd be generations ahead of Sony and Microsoft, but that doesn't mean that they would be more powerful.

As for comparing PS2 to PS3, of course the jump seems bigger. The PS3 was HD, and the PS2 wasn't. Factor in that games are looking so good these days, there's very little that can be done to create a massive leap like between the PS2 and PS3 (short of creating a console that costs upwards of £1000). Imagine we had a console that could make games that looked real. There's no way to make them look better, since they're as perfect as we could perceive. So, it makes sense that as we get closer to that theoretical perfection, it'll get harder and harder to provide any meaningful improvements.

At the end of the day, if you want the best graphics, get a gaming PC. If you want to play exclusives, get consoles. The PS4 is better than the PS3, even if it doesn't blow it out of the water graphically. But a new console will be inevitable every few years in order to both take advantage of technological advancements, and to take advantage of the fact that people will always buy a new console.

 

[Loui2]

Hardware wise, it's about 8x more powerful then the PS3. Your PC can run old PC games, it does not make sense for a PS4 with PC architecture to be able to run PS3 games that use the cell processor (It's the same reason PC's can't run PS3 games. Gaikai will be an alternative however).

Just remember, the hardware is definitely a HUGE leap, it's up to the developers to make something of it.

 

[Frantic]

Tack on the fact that the developers probably need alot of time to even figure out the best way to use these things. Its a learning process for them as well.

 

[ukasskickr]

People need to stop thinking that 'next-gen' is a power thing.

It's not.

A generation is simply a measure of time. As in, each subsequent console is a generation ahead of the previous. It's a pretty flaky term at the best of times anyway, since there's no reason that one company couldn't release a consoles at a faster rate than the competition, meaning that there is no such thing as a unified generation. If, for example, Nintendo released a console every 3-4 years, they'd be generations ahead of Sony and Microsoft, but that doesn't mean that they would be more powerful.

As for comparing PS2 to PS3, of course the jump seems bigger. The PS3 was HD, and the PS2 wasn't. Factor in that games are looking so good these days, there's very little that can be done to create a massive leap like between the PS2 and PS3 (short of creating a console that costs upwards of £1000). Imagine we had a console that could make games that looked real. There's no way to make them look better, since they're as perfect as we could perceive. So, it makes sense that as we get closer to that theoretical perfection, it'll get harder and harder to provide any meaningful improvements.

At the end of the day, if you want the best graphics, get a gaming PC. If you want to play exclusives, get consoles. The PS4 is better than the PS3, even if it doesn't blow it out of the water graphically. But a new console will be inevitable every few years in order to both take advantage of technological advancements, and to take advantage of the fact that people will always buy a new console.

most amazing answer on the net!!!

 

[SpaceTiger]

Exactly what jardantuan said. It's not about "PWR" or "GRAFIX", it's the wave/period a console appears in. The gaming and tech media took the "next generation" term and applied it to technological advancements in a console period and that resulted in later generations of gamers adapting that definition of "next gen".

 

[themarting]

AND theres no backwards compatibility! Why the hell not? My god damn PC can play games that are 12 years old and are on a disc. I don't want to pay for my games again to be able to play on the ps4. its almost 2014. there is really no excuse for having no backwards compatibility.

Well, noone sells PS3 games intended for a PS4 either. They sell PS3 games intended for a PS3. If you want PS4 games go buy a PS4, If you want to play your PS3 games im sure you either have a PS3 or are buying games for consoles you dont own.

The playstation 2 actually had a PS1 built in, so it wasnt emulating PS1 games, it was actually loading them into PS1 hardware. Same for PS3, it initially had a built in PS2, which in turn had PS1 hardware. the last PS3s sold at retail were not capable of backwards compatibility.

Emulating consoles is DIFFICULT and power intensive. Its said you need an exponential amount of power to properly and fully emulate a console. Check this out for example.
http://www.tested.com/tech/gaming/2712-why-perfect-hardware-snes-emulation-requires-a-3ghz-cpu/

Also, as others said, its next gen because:
1), its a totally new console. One could say the PS3 is the father of the PS4. Thats a generation, the next generation, next gen. You are your parents child, youre the next generation. Are you better? No, you might even be worse, but youre still next-gen
2) It actually IS VERY different than the PS3. the PS3 had 256mb of system ram (1/4 gb) and 256 mb of video ram. The PS4 has 8 gigs of GDDR5 ram which is not only 16 times as much as the PS3, its also a much faster type of RAM. On top of that, where the PS3 ran a single 3.2GHz processor, the PS4 runs DUAL QUAD core processors.


Everything about it is next gen.

 

[aperture7]

Emulating consoles is DIFFICULT and power intensive. Its said you need an exponential amount of power to properly and fully emulate a console.

I'm really glad someone finally mentioned this. Yes, I'm bummed out as much as the next person about backwards compatibility, but it hasn't exactly been an option for a few years now for two of the three main consoles. I don't know if it will ever be.

This annoyed me for a bit, but then after going over to friends' houses, I realized many of them have a PS3 (and now PS4), PS2, PS1, SNES, Nintendo 64, or some combination of all those things. Because they are super cheap at some gaming stores. People are adapting to a minor inconvenience.

 

[Stuck_X_Button]

AND theres no backwards compatibility! Why the hell not? My god damn PC can play games that are 12 years old and are on a disc. I don't want to pay for my games again to be able to play on the ps4. its almost 2014. there is really no excuse for having no backwards compatibility.

If you're backwards compatible you're really backwards.

 

[baracksyndel]

The backwards compatibility isn't that big of an issue. If you own the games on the PS3, my understanding is that you can download them for free on the PS4. At least that's what I've heard from other PS4 owners. What you will have to pay for is an upgrade for certain games to play them on the PS4, and it's about $10. If it's really that big of a deal, no one say's that you can't keep your old console. I still own and use my PS2 all the time.

 

[jbepp]

"Next-gen" is just a name.
The PS4, X1 and WiiU really aren't that mind blowing as some previous consoles. I mean, the jump from PS1 to PS2 was HUGE, and I think we'll ever something like that again.

 

[stuart1234]

The backwards compatibility isn't that big of an issue. If you own the games on the PS3, my understanding is that you can download them for free on the PS4. At least that's what I've heard from other PS4 owners. What you will have to pay for is an upgrade for certain games to play them on the PS4, and it's about $10. If it's really that big of a deal, no one say's that you can't keep your old console. I still own and use my PS2 all the time.

I still play my ps2 and ps1 games all the time. the reason why I want backwards compatibility is because I really dont want to keep switching cords. it may sound like a stupid reason. But I just dont see why they cant add it. I would pay a extra $100 if I could play my older games on it. Personally I think that there is really no excuse for not having backwards compatibility in 2014 (almost 2014)

 

[stuart1234]

"Next-gen" is just a name.
The PS4, X1 and WiiU really aren't that mind blowing as some previous consoles. I mean, the jump from PS1 to PS2 was HUGE, and I think we'll ever something like that again.

I completely agree with you. I think that the ps4 took 3 steps sideways rather than 3 steps forward. and we will never be as amazed as we were when we first saw those ps2 and then ps3 graphics

 

[stuart1234]

If you're backwards compatible you're really backwards.

? what do you mean?

 

[dragoonblade]

People get too caught up with the term next-gen when really the leap isn't really that big this cycle. It's not nearly as amazing as what we saw when we first laid eyes on the PS3, and Xbox 360. And it certainly didn't blow my mind when I saw the N64 or the PS2. I don't think we'll ever be that excited or amazed again until they invent the visor system.

 

[hellsing006]

There are definitely some cool tricks in what we can do hardware wise with the new systems but let's face it until we're playing games .hack//sign style I doubt anyone is ever really going to feel what we all felt when the PS2 and Xbox 360's came out. Those kind of leaps are a long way off. I mean remember when we saw the Day/Night cycle in Ocarina of Time or the 3D of Final Fantasy VII. My mind hasn't been blown like that in years.

 

[jardantuan]

? what do you mean?

Well, as has been mentioned in the thread already, it's difficult to emulate previous consoles, and usually very power-intensive. It's not as simple as putting a little bit of code into the OS that enables you to load older games - the hardware has to be designed in such a way that the games can actually run on it.

It's also down to architecture. I'm pretty bad when it comes to the hardware side of consoles, but I've learned enough to know what's happening here. With the PS3, early models were backwards compatible, but this was removed after a few months (don't know the exact timescale, but it was about a year IIRC). The reason Sony did this was to cut down on price, and make manufacturing easier. See, to make the PS3 backwards compatible, they essentially had two sets of hardware in place, one for new games and one for emulation purposes. The two consoles had very different architectures, so it was impossible to run PS2 games on the PS3 without having the extra hardware. This is the same reason that the Wii U can run Wii games - they both have very similar architectures.

That's kind of dumbed down, and I may be a little wrong on a few points, but I think that's the general idea behind it.

 

[SpaceTiger]

The "If you're backwards compatible then you're really backwards" comment was a reference to Don Mattrick when explaining that the Xbox One wouldn't be backwards compatible. The weakest point made was that a small portion of people actually play old games on their console...which makes sense, but only because they didn't make it possible for people to play older games on the console in the first place.

...plus Xbox's library wasn't an unchained beast like PS2's so pickings would've been pretty slim anyway.

 

[themarting]

Well, as has been mentioned in the thread already, it's difficult to emulate previous consoles, and usually very power-intensive. It's not as simple as putting a little bit of code into the OS that enables you to load older games - the hardware has to be designed in such a way that the games can actually run on it.

It's also down to architecture. I'm pretty bad when it comes to the hardware side of consoles, but I've learned enough to know what's happening here. With the PS3, early models were backwards compatible, but this was removed after a few months (don't know the exact timescale, but it was about a year IIRC). The reason Sony did this was to cut down on price, and make manufacturing easier. See, to make the PS3 backwards compatible, they essentially had two sets of hardware in place, one for new games and one for emulation purposes. The two consoles had very different architectures, so it was impossible to run PS2 games on the PS3 without having the extra hardware. This is the same reason that the Wii U can run Wii games - they both have very similar architectures.

That's kind of dumbed down, and I may be a little wrong on a few points, but I think that's the general idea behind it.

Youre pretty much spot on. The PS3 had a built in PS2, which had a built in PS1. THey took this out to save space and money and those without the PS2 hardware are not backwards compatible. Also, iirc the PS2 slims didnt have the PS1 hardware and are also not backwards compatible

 

[SpaceTiger]

Also, iirc the PS2 slims didnt have the PS1 hardware and are also not backwards compatible

You would be correct..and jardantuan is correct with the technical explanation. It knocks out the convenience of playing older games but allows for a better price since manufacturing costs were cut down. Some will be available on the shop, but if you want ones that are unlikely to make it to PSN it is best to keep your PS2 and PS3.

Now if the PS4 was Xbox One price or higher I would definitely expect backwards compatibility, maybe a hand cooling/warming controller, and something else.