I don't want them to do it but would relucantly buy them if it turned out certain games ran on a PS4.5 and others didn't, while the rest of the games looked and ran better as well. However, being a lifetime console/Mac gamer (and my Macs are a 2008 iMac and 2011 Macbook) I am not invested in 1080p or 60 frames per second as a default and think everything on PS4 looks fucking incredible as is. I could play games that look and run like these do for several years; honestly, most of what I've enjoyed on PS4 has been the increase in access for games that used to be PC or XBox only like Rogue Legacy or Super Meat Boy.

WRT the Expansion Pak, I didn't see that as a failure because it was significantly less expensive than a new console (if I recall, not much more than a controller would cost) and Perfect Dark was a fantastic game. But if I had to pay the price of a full console for that little thing and then buy the game...? That would have been an awful consumer experience.

at some point, $400 for a ps4 and $400(?) for a ps4k you have a GTX 980ti.

This bullshit has turned me off to the console market. these goddamn multinational corporations...

If the PS4.5 has games and features that can't be used on a PS4, then I am HEAVILY against this. I just bought my PS4 only half a year ago, and the PS4 only came out about two years ago. If it's only for better graphics or some bullshit like that, then I don't care, they can release it all they want.

Nope, but I might get one anyways... later though. I'm not jumping at the bits to get another PS4, even if it is more powerful. Sharing the same software lineup wouldn't be so bad, since I could just keep using the old one until I've got 400 lying around to replace it. I've played PC games for most of my life on relatively low to medium-end PCs, so using a low-end PS4 shouldn't be too rough.

But man, the thought of a "low-end PS4" is a pretty big bummer. I decided to get more into console games to not worry about not having the latest and greatest graphics card and such.

I'm not sure Question 2 is a question, most games are coded to run at a target of 30fps, more powerful hardware isn't all you need to improve frame rate it's a part of development, and if 4k is required of the system then the target would remain at 30fps, i assume most publishers/developers would prefer to use the extra power to add more post processing instead of frame rate.

Personally, i haven't used my PS4 yet, so no i don't want a new PS4.

If you asked me pre-Steam Link, I probably would have shown some interest in it. But I really haven't been using my consoles much since I got a Steam Link. That said, waiting for additional details before making any kind of judgement on this seems like the proper course of action. As long as all software continues to work on both the PS4 and PS "4.5," I don't see any real issue with it. It could be a nice middle-ground option for those interested in a console with the power of a PC, but doesn't want to invest in a PC or get into what that involves.

Yes. These systems are basically versions of PC's that play PC Games, they are no longer like PS2-era and prior systems. They have to be on a faster update cycle, otherwise, as a developer, I'm completely hamstrung. I would buy a PS4 4k.

if the ps42 has more hard drive space ii will buy it.

I probably won't buy one, but I'm not sure I can really say that I "don't want Sony to make a PS4.5". If they see a market for it then go for it.

Ehh, dunno if I'd be down. At the moment I'm more interested in an NX if it plays WiiU games or simply a WiiU if it doesn't.

@will0827: That's a good way to look at it. They have found the sweet spot for pricing on a new console, and to keep sales up, will likely start doing what you say here. It allows people options, which is a good thing. When the new .5 comes out, people who haven't jumped on the bandwagon can pick up the previous version for cheaper, and the people who want to be up to date(and have more $$$) can get a system that will have faster load times, better FPS, etc. Sony in turn also gets more sales, so everybody wins. We just have to accept that a relatively non-upgradeable console is not going to be at an affordable price point AND be able to run games nicely for more than 2-3 years. The technology is evolving rapidly, and they have to do this to keep up. No one wants console cycles that are 6-7 years anymore.

If it will enable me to play games like Bloodborne with shorter load times and higher framerates, then absolutely.
4k is not a necessity, and I highly doubt should they put out a new box, that it will natively support 4k anyway.

I will buy an upgraded PS4. I hope it has a new GPU and CPU and 4K.

I'm very interested in a PS 4.5. I can understand why people reject it but I thought about something Vinny said on a recent podcast that was something to the effect of, "Are we going back to four year console cycles?". I kind of like that idea. At least in the way the rumor mill is putting it as a phone or Ipad like upgrade system. incremental hardware changes will allow consoles to develop over time and adapt to a shifting landscape while ensuring some degree of backward comparability over the long term as the base architecture will remain the same. It would allow the console to be a true hardware platform instead of just a static box that I plug into my TV fir the next 6 that will then be replaced by a completely different box which I will then use for several years and then move to storage as the cycle repeats itself. Allowing different standards and skews that all operate under a common platform may actually aid in preserving games. I think about when I want to play Red Dead Redemption these days. My sole option is dig my launch 360 out of storage and plug it into my TV which is already crowded with cables and boxes and play it until i'm done. At which time the game and system will go back into a box until I feel the itch to play something again. with the prospect of the PS 4.5 that problem may be solved if my optimistic views on the subject prove true. In 5 years I may have a new PlayStation variant but games like The Last of Us and Dying light would totally run on the new Hardware with no fuss. We would also reap the benefits of more power to run current games respectively and not have to worry about sacrificing comparability of old games. Maybe I'm overly hopeful but that's how I see it.

I went to a cousin's wedding over the weekend and talked to one of my other cousins and was surprised that he was super all for a PS4.5. He has a PS4 currently and is totally on board for an upgrade. I'm guessing it's because he doesn't have nor want a gaming pc. he's not a stranger to games but he's definitely not a 'gamer' either (games are just a thing he does, not THE thing he does). So I voted from his perspective.

Personally I'm kinda torn because on one hand "Oooo! SHINY!" but on the other hand, my current ps4 has darth vader on it and my new one would likely not.

I am an Xbox One owner...I have been thinking about getting a PS4 for a couple of months mostly because of some past and upcoming exclusives like Blood borne and Horizon Zero Dawn. I have been planning on getting one soon but the news of a Playstation 4.5 has stopped me in my tracks...I will most likely get one if they were to release it.

This feels like a mistake to me.
Things will get messy in the end.

So now we will need 2 review scores per game for 1 platform; the 4K version and the original. Some games probably will only be optimized for the original PS4 and run 30fps on that and 40-60fps on the PS4K (which makes it feel more stuttery then the original PS4 version). Maybe some games will aim for that 60fps on PS4K, but then have to make graphical concessions to reach that number ("PS4 original looks better").
Then there will be games that will be optimized for 30fps on PS4K and will be unplayable on PS4 (keep an eye on that sticker on the box - "PS4K recommended"). Or GTA6's online mode is only available for PS4K.

What to think of indie developers? They will have to make their game work on 2 extra platforms. And they won't get more sales out of it, it's just extra work.

I own a PS4 from launch, but I don't see myself buying the 'upgraded version' for full price again just to get some more frames per second or less pop in. I then rather spend some more bucks and buy a whole new platform (NX or a gaming PC).

Well, there was never really a a precedent for a four year cycle... Oh, it has happened once, but there have also been 5 year cycles, six year cycles and seven year cycles. There have also been system that has just gone away after two or three years....are those dead or non-cycles? If people are thinking of Xbox to Xbox 360 that was Microsoft getting out let in the PS2 era, and getting in early with Xbox 360 for teh next cycle. Not so much starting a new cycle as it was knowing they were f'd against PS2.

I think four year cycles are too short for developers, but also for publishers and buyers. We are in the third year of PS4/XBOne, and Uncharted and other big titles are just starting to arrive. Moreover, sales a great for consoles, they are ABOVE expectations. XBox One is lagging behind PS4, but it is selling. PS4 is breaking expectation for sales and people love it.

Now just in general:

Remember this isn't just a technical issues of 'could this be more powerful', this is a BUSINESS issue where profitability and install base matters a lot. Companies introduce the new thing only when the old thing is sagging in sales. Not in processing power, but in sales and profitability. That why last gen lasted so long, a long tail allowed companies to pull some profitability out of a slow starting generation. Yes, processing power was lacking for 360 and PS3, but that was not THE issue for either company. Squeezing every last dime out of what was out there was what mattered. It was a balance of power, cost, and profitability. Switching to a PS4.5 that is more power will fuck up software and hardware sales; i.e. everyone loses. Nobody wants that in teh industry.

So, what might PS4.5/PS4K exist. Well, some if not all of these reasons

- That is what you have R&D for to think up possibilities, even possibilities you don't need right away.

- Nobody knows what NX will REALLY be, so Sony has to plan just in case. Nintendo for the past three cycles has talked big, but they have never really put as much processing power as they boast early on. Sony has to plan for a NX that is twice, but I do notthink they expect that to happen at all.

- PlayStation VR was a consideration and R&D had to look at what PS4 could do and what a PS4.5 could do? That fact PSVR was announced means PS4 will run it, they would not have talked about it -in my opinion- unless it was ready to run on PS4 vanilla

- We are in year 3 and PS4 is ready for a semi-slim and/or a simplified model. They often simplify the manufacture by making a new PCB or reduce the amount of screws needed.

- To reduce heat or even just be more efficient Sony might be planning to use a 14nm SoC to replace the 22 nm chip. Smaller micro circuitry tracings means less electricity needed and lower heat. Less electricity means more efficient/lighter/or smaller PSU is needed. Moreover, less cooling needed and that chip might be the same price. Perhaps, the system MIGHT see a tiny increase in processing power, but that might not even be worth mentioning because it woudl be inconsistent from game to game.

- Sony itself might want PS4 to work better on it own 4K televisions. If Sony knows they need a different encoder or if they know a different connector might help, the PlayStation division would plan that in the slimmed/simplified model.

I keep banging this drum, but a PS4K/4.5 that is substantial more powerful HELPS nobody. It doesn't help Sony sell more system as a better profit than they have now. It doesn't help developers working on current games without putting them back MONTHS. It doesn't help publishers who will see software sales for current games and the games expected in teh next 18 months to slow. Nobody wins from a PS4K that is actually more powerful in CPU and GPU...nobody....hell, not even AMD who makes Sony's chips would likely profit unless Sony is willing to pay SUBSTANTIALLY more per chip. Guess what? Sony wouldn't be willing to do that, not even for VR.

I said this in the very first post of this thread.

Anyhow, regarding the PS4.5 rumors, doesn't anyone remember the N64 "Expansion Pak" or the Sega 32X?

If we're just talking about a PlayStation that can do 4K video, that wouldn't be too bad, but developers traditionally offer very little support for add-on technology, because it greatly limits their market. I'm even concerned about that fact hurting PSVR support, and that's considerably different than something that just improves graphics.

Ultimately, I think the phone analogies are just wrong. History has shown repeatedly that console gamers don't want moderate upgrades. New consoles also come with new controllers and new online features, something that wouldn't apply to a slightly improved PS4.

So do you think that the N64 "Expansion Pak" and Sega 32X are fair examples of why this is a bad idea, or are those not really fair examples at this point? If not, why not?

I was trying to spark some conversation, but I don't think ANYONE here bothered to answer my question.

Enter Kyle Bosman:

I really missed this man, and I'm very happy that he's back.

Looking at all console games that barely can hold 30 fps (Just Cause 3, Fallout 3, Final Fantasy XV, Dark Souls 3, Bloodborne) I certainly want a more powerful PS4. 4K i don't care one bit about, but a more powerful one would be great. You get the benefits of consoles, while still having games that run better.

Apple products are a better example nowadays. You're not just adding new stuff to the hardware, you're buying a whole new console. And the prices are not that far off of what Apple is asking for. So whatever.

I want them to move forward, and this is an interesting road to take. Whether it will work or not, we shall see.

I am done with consoles, period. I'm beefing up my PC, buying VR, and, with how things are going, I don't think I'll miss consoles.

In the case of Just Cause 3, I'd settle for developers who weren't idiots. Am I saying that they're stupid for not being able to make Just Cause 3 run at 60 fps on console? No. Am I saying they're stupid for putting so much emphasis on graphics at the expense of gameplay, frame rates, and even close to reasonable load times? Absolutely!

I just wanted a fun game, but they ruined that in the pursuit of some pretty pictures to show on the back of the box. I'm not normally one to go down the "lazy, stupid, inept developers" road of accusations, but that game should never have been released in it's original condition, and from what I've seen, now it's even worse.

This is fucking inexcusable!

Stupid developers! There. I said it.

Well you are totally right about Just Cause 3, and I even hesitated to put that in there. It even runs bad on PC. Which is a shame, because Avalanche other game Mad Max is a fucking masterpiece in performance, and runs in ultra settings in 1440p with my fairly modest PC. And is gorgeous.

I'm torn really, I wanted to pick up a PS4 at this point but of course right about now the whole rumor about 4.5 started. So first of all I'm obviously going to wait for 4.5 to come out but even then I think the practice itself is terrible and I don't want to support it. I did want to pick up a PS4 regardless though.

Even with my Playstation 4 dead at a repair shop, which it has been for six months probably not getting that back, even with it dead, I still don't want to buy a new one. I might get a current model off ebay, but that feels sketchy, but I don't want to pay full price, I just feel screwed over. I had something mess up with the HDMI port, then the repair shop told my wife they couldn't fix it, but would try anyway. I've been quietly holding an incredible Hulk kind of rage over it.

I'd rather just invest in a PC.That feels like the smart move, I liked a lot of things about the Playstation. It was nice getting games every month for forty bucks a year, but the games they were given me were kind of dumpy indie stuff the last few months. I keep getting all the plus games on my profile, in case I do get a playstation 4 again, but I'm not happy about it. I certainly don't want to pay more for a slight boost in power. The only reason I want to go for the PS4 version of games is convieiance, the thought was that I put a game in and it works. No PC settings fiddling, games just work. Since games aren't finished on release, that doesn't really matter anymore, so that leaves exclusives. While I really love Bloodborne, I doubt it was worth buying the Playstation 4 for one game.

TL;DR Do not want.

if consoles are going to go the route of making a series of half measures, then goodbye consoles, I don't need ya.

I would love to have one, maybe move my current version to another room.

I am not interested in a 4.5. But I haven't bought a console since ps2. So, what do I know! I am not the audience here. It is getting increasingly crazier to stay with the consoles, especially with these new reveals.

1. Don't care about 4K video, so wouldn't buy one for that.
2. I would buy a PlayStation 4.5 if it made games run better / smoother / made them prettier
3. I don't think it is a good idea to split the consoles like that, so no
4. I would overall like a PlayStation 4.5 if the promise of the second question is real.

I would have bought a PS4 already if it weren't for the NEO being leaked. With them acknowledging it publicly, I won't buy a Playstation until they clear up what is happening.

Part of me thinks that they got a look at the Scorpio and realized they were going to be outclassed immediately. If they go back and rethink this, I hope it is well planned and presented well.

Nope, I won't be buying it. I don't think there is anything special about this current generation of consoles, plus their upcoming updated versions. I suspect it'll a short-lived generation compared to the previous one between the 360 and PS3.

I would rather have a console that does 1080p with framerates easily at or above 60 fps and has a better WiFi radio than a console that is concerned with optimizing for TVs that hardly anyone have yet.

Skip the 4.5 and give is a proper ps5 instead, and give my pc some competition while you're at it.

I have a ps4, and I enjoy it for the exclusives. I prefer my xbone, but, I am 100% behind these consoles getting more powerful. It needs to happen. I hope Sony makes it 10 teraflops, or 100. I only play consoles, and these two consoles need more power. I'm not interested in pc gaming, even though it's better.

To be honest I really enjoyed the long length of the PS3/360 generation of consoles because it let me library built up so much. Like right now I only have around 35 games on the PS4 and there's already an upgrade coming. I just feel like I'm not getting the most value out of my PS4 now.

It's odd, I want Sony to make a 4.5, but I'm not likely to get one. If they do the 4.5 though I feel that would stretch out the life of my ps4. I don't have 4k tv so that's not a concern now. I would like to know more what the plan was going further and if it was going to stay the same. I'm likely to skip 4.5 and go straight to ps5 when available.

If I need to start thinking about upgrading my consoles on a time-frame any shorter than 5-6 years, then I'll probably just end up investing that money into keeping my PC up to date and forgo consoles entirely. I liked consoles for the fact that I could just buy one and know I was set. I'm not interested if I need to start coordinating my console purchases with release schedules, like with phones / gfx cards and shit.