Am I the only one who thinks the PS4 Pro & Scorpio are a great idea?

Avatar image for donpixel
#1 Edited by DonPixel (2833 posts) -

I've heard and read so many negative takes on the PS4 - Scorpio

Personally speaking I think it will revitalize the console space, the casual market have the slim versions while the enthusiast can jump into a newer version

Short cycles have work wonders with tablets and phones (I know not the same), but in the other hand there is always something new to get, something better. IMO the previous 10 year cycle stagnated for to loooong, it really made the console space to felt archaic

Now that I'm growing old, I have little to no time to play, even less time to build and maintain a full fledge gaming computer. I just need something with decent performance I can plug into my tv and enjoy some vidyagames for a couple of hours a day. The pro really seems like a great option for that, I also think Sony nailed the pricing, it would cost me a lot more to get a PC with performance equiparable to the pro.

At the end I think shorter console cycles bring more options, ... I would rather upgrade my console every 2-3 years than upgrade a video card.

What do you guys think?

Avatar image for bartok
#3 Posted by bartok (3074 posts) -

I don't know I'll have to wait and see. Did the PS4 and XBOX1 market need revitalizing? Everyone was all doom and gloom before these consoles launched talking about the death of the home console and all that jazz. Then these two come out and exceed expectations sales wise. Personally I don't like the idea of a half step console because they can't alienate the existing customer base who bought the previous console but have to have enough incentive to get people to consider the upgrade so they really don't end up pleasing anyone.

Avatar image for frostyryan
#4 Posted by FrostyRyan (1989 posts) -

Well, you're grouping the two together. The PS4 pro can't play 4K discs and the scorpio can. Thus I think one is a good idea and the other one isn't.

Avatar image for shivoa
#5 Posted by Shivoa (1528 posts) -

The price means the PS4 Pro is a great idea (imagine if last gen we got such an upgrade at the 3-4 year mark to lest up that generation - it's not like the 360 aggressively cut the hardware prices over that very long generation). Scorpio: waiting to see how expensive MS go with that.

I love being able to get a game off my shelf and play it on my machine. This could be the new start of another period of actual backwards compatibility for consoles that actually works a lot more like 3D PC games - each generation of hardware then those games can look better. Hell, at this point my PC is my PS2 machine because it's the best way to play those games. I look forward to machines getting more powerful with time and games with long tails continuing to surf the generations.

They really need to be more aggressive in lowering the costs of the non-Pro PS4 to provide the largest install base for ensuring games sell well. Hopefully that's coming in the next year as the Pro pushes down used prices of the base console and retail has to work to keep unit sales up.

Avatar image for wjb
#6 Posted by wjb (1905 posts) -

The Pro/Scorpio finally lit a fire under my ass and I built my first ever PC after avoiding the idea for 20 years, so there's that.

Avatar image for whitegreyblack
#7 Posted by whitegreyblack (1510 posts) -

I will really like the idea if the next set of console iterations (after the PSPro & Scorpio) continues the "this plays the entire library" idea.

If they keep the old games playable on things moving forward, I like the idea of skipping every second hardware release. Sadly, I suspect this attitude to sink the whole thing. These things sell many millions of units, but not the kind of numbers smartphone or tablet hardware does. If a lot of people decide to skip several half-steps it could mean real trouble for Microsoft and Sony's plans.

Avatar image for sammo21
#8 Posted by sammo21 (5290 posts) -

No, but as a person who does not own a 4K TV and already owns a PS4 and an Xbox One I am not excited as there is no reason for me to be excited.

Avatar image for an_ancient
#9 Posted by an_ancient (219 posts) -

I think options like these are good, I just don't think it's a sexy proposition. If choice is what you want, you could build a more modest computer and forgo paying for PSN and sweep up sales.

The problem to me is while the upgrade path could arguably be cheaper and the maintenance less, console games now come with a lot of day 1 patches and lot of them break. As they need a bigger library, certification seems to have become more relaxed.

I think it was a necessary and smart move, but the console magic has kind of rubbed off. No longer do people look and think "what can they do if they are closer to the hardware?". Now it's just a very stable platform that attracted lots of PC developers. The point is also becoming moot with new graphics APIs and drivers on PC. While consoles also have to provide frameworks for app development so you can watch your Netflix. So it's kind of converged, the same way Android and iOS have. There are subtle differences, but they kind of do the same thing.

Thought I use my pc for a lot of things a console will never do. So that's what decides it for me even with the upgrade headaches.

Avatar image for belowstupid
#10 Edited by BelowStupid (414 posts) -

I honestly don't see anything that the pro offers that interests me, maybe I'll pick one up after I get a 4k tv, or if people really like it. The Scorpio is better because it's not a 1/2 step like the pro I'd say its 3/4, but I really don't like that they're pulling a 360 and bailing on their hardware again. I'd rather wait till 2018 and get a backwards compatible PS5. I'm not even buying any new games this holiday, there is nothing that interests me until Horizon. I'm happy to play classic PSX/PSP games on my Raspberry Pi until then.

Avatar image for daveydave
#11 Posted by Daveydave (273 posts) -

This is a problem that I have personally but now I know the pro is coming out soon I feel like I should get it now I am playing my ps4 more than before. But its not a nice feeling if i'm honest.

Avatar image for superfriend
#12 Posted by Superfriend (1715 posts) -

They are a great idea. Especially the scorpio, since both consoles were underpowered when they were released. Now it's just pathetic how bad some of these ports are. First party stuff is mostly okay, but heck, even Trackmania has slowdown and tearing on xbone.. if these new things can do literally anything to improve this situation, then they are worth it. Yeah, I know PCs exist. But some people like their consoles to be more powerful than their phones.

Avatar image for ds9143
#13 Posted by ds9143 (250 posts) -

Depends on the price and software.

Also, I'm sure someone at Sony/Microsoft thinks it's a good idea.

Avatar image for monetarydread
#14 Posted by MonetaryDread (2765 posts) -

I like the ideas of a console refresh. I am primarily a PC gamer, so I haven't made the jump to any of the next-gen consoles yet. The current crop just seems underpowered, and I can usually wait until a game comes out on PC. I will eventually buy one, and a cheaper option is nice, but, when I go to the store, I will probably buy the most powerful version. I know this isn't a popular opinion on these forums, but I like better graphics if I have the option of it.

Avatar image for donpixel
#15 Posted by DonPixel (2833 posts) -

@wjb said:

The Pro/Scorpio finally lit a fire under my ass and I built my first ever PC after avoiding the idea for 20 years, so there's that.

Did exactly the oposite for me after 20 years of building PCs, seems like consoles are finally getting their upgrade cycles and backward compatibility right.

In retrospect not even sure why they took this long

Avatar image for monkeyking1969
#16 Posted by MonkeyKing1969 (6219 posts) -

Consoles get refreshed all the time, and that has been the case since the very first those SNES variants or when PSX became PSOne. But, it comes down to how much variation and how those variation - intend or not - split their own market.

We have pundits saying, "Well this is the way it will be form now on folks" without really having any proof that a) anything has changed and that PS4 Neo isn't just a variation of PS4 in how it really work upon the market and b) that Scorpio will even sell as well as it has to to make this something Microsoft can spring board off of. That will all be known AFTER PS4 becomes PS5 and after Scorpio becomes XB "Next One".

Are they good ideas? Anyone who think they have a definitive answer is lying until a few years worth of sales show up. All that can be said is Sony is being a bit more conservation or staying very much in-line with their past variation on each system; whereas Microsoft is "seemingly" trying to jump a full half generation. But neither has proven that will work and neither has proven that ANYTHING that will stick has been thrown on the wall. Even the news that XBox One S is outselling PS4 is a bit misleading. Its outselling PS4 buy a very small amount, and only in one region.

All this talk of a new console release paradigm must be looked at with a wait and see attitude because it all unproven that a new paradigm will actually happen or stick. It should be interesting, but we might not know until a PS5 and XB-Next One show up. ZI have high hopes that these changes might just spur more console use and more buying...but we can't known that either.

Avatar image for hippie_genocide
#17 Posted by Hippie_Genocide (1864 posts) -

I think it's too early to say if they're a great idea or a bad one. We need to see how the hardware pans out and if they are able to take advantage of the better specs while still being beholden to the old hardware. Videogame consoles are not like phones and tablets, though. I strongly disagree with that analogy. If you have an old phone, its fine because it'll still do all you need it to do. On the flip side, I don't think people are going to be ok with owning an obsolete console (that in some cases they may have just bought) while they are seeing a new model playing games that look and run noticeably better. I think it's a huge gamble, especially for Sony. Personally, it doesn't reinvigorate my interest in consoles. If anything it makes me want to give Sony and MS the one-finger salute and take any money I might have spent on these machines and reinvest in a new PC.

Avatar image for conmulligan
#18 Posted by conmulligan (1701 posts) -

Yeah, I'm into it. As much as I like playing games on PC there are certain titles I'll only ever enjoy on a console, so I'll gladly shell out a few hundred quid every couple of years on new systems if it means those games look and run better.

Avatar image for donpixel
#19 Edited by DonPixel (2833 posts) -

@monkeyking1969: Well, thanks for stating the obvious? Granted, no one knows for sure what's going to happen

Doesn't mean we can't express what we would like to happen

Besides when you say : "how much variation and how those variation"

Yes we know how much variation, there are technical specs.. hard numbers that make easy to quantify the variation... I mean is there in numbers

" - intend or not - split their own market"

If they keep their backward compatible promise in reasonable margins, does it really matter? People that care will upgrade, people who doesn't care will not... The same way some people are still happily playing their 360 - PS3 today, giving zero shits about next gen

Avatar image for jrm
#20 Posted by JRM (343 posts) -

@superfriend: Shitty ports are shitty ports man and a bit more horse power isn't going to fix the problem.

Avatar image for alexw00d
#21 Posted by AlexW00d (7478 posts) -

Consoles get refreshed all the time, and that has been the case since the very first those SNES variants or when PSX became PSOne. But, it comes down to how much variation and how those variation - intend or not - split their own market.

I'm sure you mean when the Playstation became the PSOne, cause the PSX was a Japan only PS2 variant with a DVR stuck on it.

Avatar image for yesiamaduck
#22 Posted by Yesiamaduck (2150 posts) -

@alexw00d said:
@monkeyking1969 said:

Consoles get refreshed all the time, and that has been the case since the very first those SNES variants or when PSX became PSOne. But, it comes down to how much variation and how those variation - intend or not - split their own market.

I'm sure you mean when the Playstation became the PSOne, cause the PSX was a Japan only PS2 variant with a DVR stuck on it.

PSX was deffo used as shorthand for Playstation in the UK

Avatar image for sikdude
#23 Posted by sikdude (92 posts) -

I'm looking forward to both. Spending the money? Not so much.

Avatar image for alexw00d
#24 Posted by AlexW00d (7478 posts) -

@alexw00d said:
@monkeyking1969 said:

Consoles get refreshed all the time, and that has been the case since the very first those SNES variants or when PSX became PSOne. But, it comes down to how much variation and how those variation - intend or not - split their own market.

I'm sure you mean when the Playstation became the PSOne, cause the PSX was a Japan only PS2 variant with a DVR stuck on it.

PSX was deffo used as shorthand for Playstation in the UK

I've legit never seen it used outside of this website, and I'm 100% sure it's never been used in marketing considering the PSX is a completely different piece of equipment.

Avatar image for ajamafalous
#25 Edited by ajamafalous (13397 posts) -

@alexw00d said:
@yesiamaduck said:
@alexw00d said:
@monkeyking1969 said:

Consoles get refreshed all the time, and that has been the case since the very first those SNES variants or when PSX became PSOne. But, it comes down to how much variation and how those variation - intend or not - split their own market.

I'm sure you mean when the Playstation became the PSOne, cause the PSX was a Japan only PS2 variant with a DVR stuck on it.

PSX was deffo used as shorthand for Playstation in the UK

I've legit never seen it used outside of this website, and I'm 100% sure it's never been used in marketing considering the PSX is a completely different piece of equipment.

I live in Texas and PSX was also the primary shorthand for the PS1 once the PS2 had come out, whether or not it was incorrect.

Hell, here's ebay. It's also on Wikipedia as well.

Avatar image for shivoa
#26 Edited by Shivoa (1528 posts) -

@jrm said:

@superfriend: Shitty ports are shitty ports man and a bit more horse power isn't going to fix the problem.

Good news that neither of the announced mid-cycle upgrades are just a small incremental performance jump.

PS4 Pro is a 2.3 x GPU bump from a PS4. That's over three XB1 GPUs. Enough to do (if it used a splitter on the 4K output to feed three monitors) a triple-monitor setup with the same image quality of the XB1 can muster on a single display.

Scorpio isn't finalised yet but the announced plan is 4.6 x the XB1's GPU performance. So higher per-pixel quality at 4K than the XB1 can manage at 1080p or a massive increase in the rendering detail on the same screen. The 360 to XB1 GPU floating point performance increase was only 5.4 x so this is the same ballpark as that generational shift.

So, maybe augments against the value of these new consoles shouldn't lean quite so heavily on a fantasy that these aren't significantly more powerful systems that the base units they're built on top of.

Avatar image for dudeglove
#27 Posted by dudeglove (12572 posts) -

At this rate I think I'm just going to sit this entire generation out. I don't even have a decent TV anyway. Unless the console anufacturers do something drastic and outright force games from never turning up on PC, I see no reason to not stick with what I've got. I'd much rather buy a new monitor first.

Avatar image for dagas
#28 Posted by dagas (3482 posts) -

I don't like it because it doesn't seem like you have any choice over how to use the extra power. If all it does is increase to 4k then it is useless for me with my 1080p TV. Instead I got a new video card and now I can play Witcher 3 on Ultra with Hairworks on at 1080p. Something that you can just dream about on console. My new video card is better than the PS4pro and my PC should be about as good as the Scorpio and I get to choose how I want to apply that power be it frame rate, better settings, higher resolution. 4K won't help when games on console run on medium settings when compared to the PC settings and even the Scorpio won't run at Ultra settings at 4K. Not even a GTX 1080 can get 60FPS in Witcher 3 on high without Hairworks at 4K. Forget about Ultra with Hairworks on.

I love console gaming and still love my PS3 but since this generation seems to be just low powered PCs I don't see much need to get a console. Persona 5 comes out on PS3 and most other cames comes out on Vita or PC. So far the only reason for me to get a PS4 is Yakuza 0 since they are not putting out the PS3 version outside of Japan and Yakuza 6 if and when that comes here. I'll get a PS4 at some point but probably a Slim and not the Pro. I didn't get a PS3 until I bought a Slim in 2012. I'm in no rush when so far there are no games I can't play on other platforms. And XBOX One is completely redundant now that games come to PC. I play Gears of War 4 on PC for example (got the game with my video card as a free bonus).

Avatar image for tyn0mite
#29 Posted by tyn0mite (137 posts) -

I still don't know how I feel. I think I'm getting closer to wanting to just build a PC. Considering my main console is Xbox One and their exclusives will be on PC anyways it wouldn't be the worst idea.

Avatar image for pompouspizza
#30 Posted by pompouspizza (1223 posts) -

I really can't decide if I should sell my PS4 and spend the £200 to upgrade? Especially considering I don't have a 4K TV and won't for a long time.

Avatar image for boozak
#31 Posted by BoOzak (1717 posts) -

It used to be a 5 year cycle it was just the 360-PS3 era that dragged on too long. A new console every 5 years was fine. Personally i'd rather wait until 2018 for a much bigger hardware leap than these incremental "Pro" versions. But much like phones they know people will pay for them because they fear they will have inferior or dated hardware. (yes, yes I know PC is the l337est hardware)

Avatar image for avantegardener
#32 Posted by avantegardener (1877 posts) -

Hey if you dig it, thats cool, but I personally I think spending 400 dollars every year to maintain a minor sense of improvement is probably a false economy. Now, obviously I picked those prices and time frames out of the air, but that is what we are talking about... buying a slightly better console...every couple of years, I don't think the consumer wins.

As an aside, I think that xbox app on the PC is actually the future for Microsoft. Get the store and interface right, kill the hardware market...profit??

Avatar image for kharnivore2099
#33 Posted by Kharnivore2099 (68 posts) -

I think the Scorpio and the Pro are alright ideas, it's the original PS4 and Xbox One that were the bad ideas. They came right out of the gate looking weak, it was a damn shame.

Avatar image for adamlcook
#34 Posted by adamlcook (32 posts) -

I would rather upgrade a video card if needed every few years. Buying new machines for very limited improvements, that in my opinion are more flash than substance, just doesn't sit well with me.

Avatar image for shivoa
#35 Posted by Shivoa (1528 posts) -

@boozak said:

It used to be a 5 year cycle it was just the 360-PS3 era that dragged on too long. A new console every 5 years was fine. Personally i'd rather wait until 2018 for a much bigger hardware leap than these incremental "Pro" versions. But much like phones they know people will pay for them because they fear they will have inferior or dated hardware. (yes, yes I know PC is the l337est hardware)

In 2 years then we might... might have 7nm working for large chips needed for the SoC designs in modern consoles. But the GCN architecture is getting one revision in Vega (which is basically ready for Pro so they took the pieces they wanted from it and is certainly already ready for Scorpio to adopt if it wants to) and a 2018 revision called Navi and... that's it in the AMD roadmap. It'll be Zen+ cores by then but Zen is already basically ready so same thing as Vega - the PS4 Pro could have moved to Zen if they really pushed it and the Scorpio definitely has that option open to it (but it's really not likely to move from small cores to big CPU cores - even if you only need 4 Zen cores to get to 8 hardware threads).

I'm just not seeing where this massive hardware leap in 2018 comes from if you don't think the Pro and Scoprio are leaps. The consoles jumped as soon as the new die shrink was ready. The Scorpio design is looking pretty big for a console chip. I don't see where people think anything other than a Pro+ or Scorpio 1.2 come if they're looking for a 2018 timescale for a next generation to get back to the shorter generations we want vs the 8 years (and shocking lack of price reduction) of the generation we just left.

Avatar image for boozak
#36 Edited by BoOzak (1717 posts) -

@shivoa: I was just saying if they stuck to the original 5 year cycle (XBO & PS4 came out in 2013) without these middle of the road consoles that dont really do a whole lot more then the upgrade would be more significant and could probably handle VR or 4k a lot better, if people still give a shit about that in 2018 and we havent moved on to REAL VR by then.

The main thing these new consoles do that is the antithesis of the console experience is complicate things. Not just for the consumers but for the developers too.

EDIT: I guess striking while the iron's hot is probably smart on Sony's part, if VR was revealed to be a fad they would have lost their chance and it would be pretty catastrophic if they decided to base their console around it and noone cared. At least this way they sell some headsets and TV's and can ditch it if something else comes along.

Avatar image for shivoa
#37 Edited by Shivoa (1528 posts) -

As a developer, I do wonder why that particular meme is so popular. I know some devs dislike the complexity of PC work and find that having to build and test to two performance profiles is not free, but to paint this minor change as the end of the world seems to be really weird for an industry (be that indie or AAA) that still relies on PC revenue for a very healthy percentage of the total sales of games which provides the width of customer base that enables us to keep on working. I am way more into having 40 million PS4 owners as a customer base plus however many more (as that Slim continues to sell) plus the Pro base growing for a new title and do this every few years with a rolling window of support than having to start from zero customers every 5-8 years and having to build onto completely different architectures with different APIs at each transition.

There's nothing stopping Sony from releasing a better 4K product today. Except that's a box the size of the original PS3 and it costs $600, just like the PS3 did. That plan was seen to not work so now we get consoles that cost less, are less cutting edge, and are designed to be iterated every 3-5 years without an 8 year generation. The only innovative thing is using the same API and platform design to allow PS4 Pro games to work on the PS4 via lower-quality settings and that just seems like great business sense in a world where Steam, GOG, and so on continue to sell older games for tails that extend beyond a single platform generation.

Avatar image for boozak
#38 Posted by BoOzak (1717 posts) -

@shivoa: I just think making consoles like PCs or phones where certain things arent compatible or run like shit isnt a good idea. But I guess that all depends on the developers, good luck with that :)

Avatar image for shivoa
#39 Edited by Shivoa (1528 posts) -

@boozak: Think of it this way: this Pro isn't something you need to engage with and in your wished generational approach it simply wouldn't exist - only the Slim would have arrived this year. This transition doesn't force you to buy the new console. The next transition may well require you to buy a new device (in fact, Sony are heavily implying they plan a PS5 after this with a major CPU jump that'll possibly not have the forwards compatibility of this transition so that all games can assume a CPU performance level higher than these Jaguar cores can provide).

So it's just like the old generations except rather than just getting a smaller Slim model mid-cycle, there is a beefy mid-cycle option too. That you can ignore. But which means that we can explore what higher performance offers without focusing on purely pushing on the PC platform. Sony said the Pro is a counter to the PC for a reason: that's why this exists.

There are no compatibility issues we know of yet. If they emerge then that's a cert issue, not an issue with this model. Cert issues leading to bad performance are not because of transitions but because of failed cert testing that didn't fail a title for being bad.

Also, this is nothing like the variety of phones (even Apple release two different systems every single year and Android is a mountain of configs similar to PCs) so this isn't making consoles like those. Absolutely no one has talked about making consoles with an annual cadence who is in any way connected to actual console hardware development. This is way, way simpler. Any dev who has not totally ruined themselves making a PC or phone game is on easy street here.

Avatar image for boozak
#40 Edited by BoOzak (1717 posts) -

@shivoa: Thats good to know, I hope Sony do make a PS5. I just think making everything try to run on a wide range of systems can be bad for certain versions of games. For example last gen's Shadow of Mordor had it's main gameplay componant cut out because the developers couldnt make it work. And Destiny is (or was) obviously held back by the last gen versions of the game.

I think it was Microsoft that were the people citing 'the end of console generations' which is probably why the Scorpio (according to rumours) seems much more impressive akin to a Xbox 4 than Sony's "PS4 Pro".

Avatar image for _zombie_
#42 Edited by _Zombie_ (1483 posts) -

I don't think it's a bad idea, just not one I'll probably bother with at all. I can take or leave 4K so it's not really worth dropping $300-$400 every year/every other year just to keep up unless the games quickly outpace the capability of the base console. As long as games stay playable on the base console, I'd rather just wait out the console generation.

Avatar image for extintor
#44 Posted by Extintor (978 posts) -

My primary platform moved to PC from console just two years into this cycle. If Sony/Microsoft/Whoever want to make a console that's relevant and worth purchasing, it needs to be cheaper than my equivalent PC upgrade path.

If they make such a console then I'll be on board, if they don't I wont.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.