Nik wrote:
Next-gen games are unlikely to be smaller.
Well, they might, a bit. HDD seek times are so slow that developers put multiple copies of common objects on it to avoid jumping around the disk. Sony have repeatedly mentioned that Spider-Man's data blob has 30-40 copies of the mailbox object, for example. There's also been significant advances in compression formats and the PS5 has a decompression co-processor that essentially makes it free to use compressed textures. That'll significantly reduce asset size (I think Sony's GDC talk was speculating on 2x-3x compression compared to the formats used in the PS4.) Balance that against the ever-greater push for higher graphics fidelity, naturally.
Quote:
But I guess price is a big factor.
I'm sure that's the main motivator, yes. 
Good point - hadn't thought of that.
Satsuma wrote:
Still no look at the machine but here’s the controller which must means we’re getting a 70’s looking white/black combo thang.
https://blog.us.playstation.com/2020/04 ... station-5/
https://blog.us.playstation.com/2020/04 ... station-5/
Light grey icons on white buttons?
Black PS button on a black base?
Fuck the visually impaired then, I guess.
GazChap wrote:
Fuck the visually impaired then, I guess.
How often do you look at your controller buttons? 
I look at the Switch Pro controller buttons quite often as I can never remember which way round are the plus/minus buttons compared to the home/screen shot buttons.
But that's black on black so I'm not sure what my point is here? Maybe I should just learn where the buttons are?
But that's black on black so I'm not sure what my point is here? Maybe I should just learn where the buttons are?
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
GazChap wrote:
Fuck the visually impaired then, I guess.
How often do you look at your controller buttons?Me, almost never.
Other people, especially those nowhere near as familiar with games consoles and controllers? Couldn't say, but probably quite often, based on watching members of my family trying to navigate existing controllers.
TheVision wrote:
I look at the Switch Pro controller buttons quite often as I can never remember which way round are the plus/minus buttons compared to the home/screen shot buttons.
But that's black on black so I'm not sure what my point is here? Maybe I should just learn where the buttons are?
But that's black on black so I'm not sure what my point is here? Maybe I should just learn where the buttons are?
Black on Black?
Our Switch Pro controllers (and the default joycons) have the A/B/X/Y buttons as white on black, and the other buttons (d-pad, and others) have shapes "embossed" (or bevelled, or whatever) into the buttons so you can feel the differences.
Xbox controllers have super colourful face buttons.
PS4 and below have highly contrasting face buttons, and different colours for each symbol, too.
You are right, the main buttons are white on black. The menu buttons have the shapes embossed but I can't tell the difference between those. I'd be rubbish at reading braille.
Just noticed that the light bar is gone too. Doesn’t that screw up a couple of PSVR games, assuming they’re backwards compat? Probably only a couple of games though.
Satsuma wrote:
Just noticed that the light bar is gone too. Doesn’t that screw up a couple of PSVR games, assuming they’re backwards compat? Probably only a couple of games though.
OMFG WTF RTFA ETC
Quote:
Additionally, we changed the position of the light bar that will give it an extra pop. On DualShock 4, it sat on the top of the controller; now it sits at each side of the touch pad, giving it a slightly larger look and feel.
Not reading one article, I see.
How’s the camera going to pick it up on the sides of the touchpad?
Satsuma wrote:
How’s the camera going to pick it up on the sides of the touchpad?
"Hey baby, the way you're glowing, my exposure is going off the charts."
Satsuma wrote:
How’s the camera going to pick it up on the sides of the touchpad?
You have to hold it weird.
Maybe we've all been holding it wrong all this time, and this is the exasperated designer now forcing us to hold it properly. The top is actually the front!
https://twitter.com/Andrewsccll/status/ ... 7186675712
Well, that's that ruined forever.
#PlaystationV (V for vest). pic.twitter.com/E2D2EhGOtd
— Andrew (@Andrewsccll) April 8, 2020
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
GazChap wrote:
Fuck the visually impaired then, I guess.
How often do you look at your controller buttons?Quite a bit, when moving between Xbox and Switch, the same-buttons-in-a-different-layouted gits!
TheVision wrote:
https://twitter.com/Andrewsccll/status/1247933867186675712
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Oh no, all the PlayStation you’ve played in the last ten years ruined forever
Mr Chonks wrote:
TheVision wrote:
https://twitter.com/Andrewsccll/status/1247933867186675712
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Oh no, all the PlayStation you’ve played in the last ten years ruined forever
I've played a fair bit of PlayStation actually. I'm currently playing through Ace Combat 2.. It's ace.
Haven't touched a PS4 though....
TheVision wrote:
https://twitter.com/Andrewsccll/status/1247933867186675712
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Well, that's that ruined forever.
Ruined? It makes it better!
Frantic L3 and R3 action
The PS5 event which was due for Thursday has been postponed
https://twitter.com/PlayStation/status/ ... 5825900549
https://twitter.com/PlayStation/status/ ... 5825900549
— PlayStation (@PlayStation) June 1, 2020
That seems fair.
They don't need to announce or present fuck all. Open preorders today and sell 10 million
DavPaz wrote:
They don't need to announce or present fuck all. Open preorders today and sell 10 million
I mean, it would probably help if they'd announce the actual price.
Bamba wrote:
DavPaz wrote:
They don't need to announce or present fuck all. Open preorders today and sell 10 million
I mean, it would probably help if they'd announce the actual price.
Under £450 and I become a console pleb once more
Mr Chonks wrote:
Under £450 and I become a console pleb once more
Sony have said “...the best way that we can address this is by providing the best possible value proposition that we can... I don’t necessarily mean lowest price." It's also said it "will be appealing to gamers in light of its advanced feature set." Consider also that the PS4 launched at $399 in 2013, which is now the equivalent of $439 due to inflation.
I would guess at $450-500, with a direct 1:1 mapping to £450-500. I'd be very surprised if it was lower, and somewhat surprised if it was higher.
£399, I reckon.
I just pulled that figure out because it’s pretty much exactly what I need to spend to upgrade my PC to modern standards.
I reckon £650.
Reckon between £59 and £20K
49,500 bells
Three hundred thousand, thirty four, nine hundred and seventy four thousand pounds. *
* Source - P. Patel.
* Source - P. Patel.
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
Mr Chonks wrote:
Under £450 and I become a console pleb once more
Sony have said “...the best way that we can address this is by providing the best possible value proposition that we can... I don’t necessarily mean lowest price." It's also said it "will be appealing to gamers in light of its advanced feature set." Consider also that the PS4 launched at $399 in 2013, which is now the equivalent of $439 due to inflation.
I would guess at $450-500, with a direct 1:1 mapping to £450-500. I'd be very surprised if it was lower, and somewhat surprised if it was higher.
Wasn't the original PS3 stupidly expensive at launch?
£425, says google
DavPaz wrote:
£425, says google
So yes.
DBSnappa wrote:
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
Mr Chonks wrote:
Under £450 and I become a console pleb once more
Sony have said “...the best way that we can address this is by providing the best possible value proposition that we can... I don’t necessarily mean lowest price." It's also said it "will be appealing to gamers in light of its advanced feature set." Consider also that the PS4 launched at $399 in 2013, which is now the equivalent of $439 due to inflation.
I would guess at $450-500, with a direct 1:1 mapping to £450-500. I'd be very surprised if it was lower, and somewhat surprised if it was higher.
Wasn't the original PS3 stupidly expensive at launch?
That was partly due to having what amounted to a PS2 inside it though which was later dropped so they could bring the price down, plus the Blu-ray drive would've been at a bit of a premium at that point. Granted, the SSD in the PS5 will bump costs up but not as much I'd have thought, and certainly they're not having to add a load of PS4 hardware inside it as well.
DavPaz wrote:
£425, says google
or 600 dollars / euros
while at the same time the Xbox360 cost £280 (pro) / £210 (standard)
Its the 600 dollars price that's often mentioned when people talk about the high launch price of the PS3 - in contrast the PS4 launched for $400 (so 2/3s of the price)
DBSnappa wrote:
Wasn't the original PS3 stupidly expensive at launch?
Yes.DavPaz wrote:
£425, says google
Technically correct and incorrect at the same time, because the Euro launch was five months later.Nov 2006 was the JP & US launch, at $499 (20 GB) / $599 (60 GB) (that's $618 / $742 in today's money, so it's a lot more than we are discussing for the PS5.) This was regarded as scandalously expensive at the time, not helped by Sony's arrogant comments in the press.
The UK launch was Mar 2007, at £425, for the 60 GB model. Around the same time the 20 GB model was discontinued in the US, and the 60 GB model was cut to $499 in Jul 2007.
So the $600 price point never existed in the UK, and was only around for a few months in the US, and was widely regarded as a mistake.
Technically correct, you say?
DavPaz wrote:
Technically correct, you say?
In so far as you answered a narrow interpretation of the question in the least helpful way possible whilst ignoring the wider, much more meaningful interpretation: yes.
That feels less technically correct than it does just actually correct. Even by your longer explanation, it launched in the UK at £425. Surrounding it with extra international data doesn't change that.
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
[...]yes.
Sweet
Was it the PS2 that used the PS1 as a sound card, and got around emulation that way?
Aw, it looks like that isn't entirely accurate - it just included the PS1 sound kit. Dull.
Aw, it looks like that isn't entirely accurate - it just included the PS1 sound kit. Dull.
Oh wait, I was sort-of right - they use different bits for different things.
Quote:
I'll try to make this simple.
FAT PS2 has the PS1 CPU as an I/O controller, which acts as the CPU when playing PS1 games. It includes PS1's 2MB RAM. Meanwhile, PS1 games' GPU duties are performed by the PS2's graphics synthesizer in hardware (since it is a hardware successor - it is essentially eight PS1 GPUs glued together).
Here's where things get tricky. The slim PS2, like the fat PS2, has many different motherboard revisions - even under the same serial number. Slim PS2's I/O MIPS chip can still comprise the entirety of PS1's R3000A, sometimes with and without PS1's RAM, and IDE traces (30-second soldering can install an IDE HDD!).
But, even if the R3000A chip is included in a slim PS2, it is unused for PS1 games. It's only for I/O processing peripherals.
To run PS1 games, slim PS2 performs PS1's CPU, GTE (Geometry Transfer Engine), MDEC (Motion Decoder) and SPU through emulation on the PS2's CPU (Emotion Engine) instead. Hence PS1 games' generally higher frame-rates, incompatibility with PS1 and PS2 games which used the R3000A for I/O sound processing (or in Jak X's case, network data on PS1's RAM), and missing music and reverb due to the lack of PS1 SPU in slim PS2s.
Slim's CPU was overclocked from to 294MHz to 299MHz for this. Sony designed this for easier PS1/PS2 emulation in PS3
FAT PS2 has the PS1 CPU as an I/O controller, which acts as the CPU when playing PS1 games. It includes PS1's 2MB RAM. Meanwhile, PS1 games' GPU duties are performed by the PS2's graphics synthesizer in hardware (since it is a hardware successor - it is essentially eight PS1 GPUs glued together).
Here's where things get tricky. The slim PS2, like the fat PS2, has many different motherboard revisions - even under the same serial number. Slim PS2's I/O MIPS chip can still comprise the entirety of PS1's R3000A, sometimes with and without PS1's RAM, and IDE traces (30-second soldering can install an IDE HDD!).
But, even if the R3000A chip is included in a slim PS2, it is unused for PS1 games. It's only for I/O processing peripherals.
To run PS1 games, slim PS2 performs PS1's CPU, GTE (Geometry Transfer Engine), MDEC (Motion Decoder) and SPU through emulation on the PS2's CPU (Emotion Engine) instead. Hence PS1 games' generally higher frame-rates, incompatibility with PS1 and PS2 games which used the R3000A for I/O sound processing (or in Jak X's case, network data on PS1's RAM), and missing music and reverb due to the lack of PS1 SPU in slim PS2s.
Slim's CPU was overclocked from to 294MHz to 299MHz for this. Sony designed this for easier PS1/PS2 emulation in PS3
Mr Chonks wrote:
Bamba wrote:
DavPaz wrote:
They don't need to announce or present fuck all. Open preorders today and sell 10 million
I mean, it would probably help if they'd announce the actual price.
Under £450 and I become a console pleb once more
I expect that’s right on target.
Looks like the PS5 announcement stuff has been rescheduled for Thursday this week
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 55936.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 55936.html
zaphod79 wrote:
Looks like the PS5 announcement stuff has been rescheduled for Thursday this week
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 55936.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 55936.html
That must mean racism will be over by then, great!