I was looking at an LG 43' led 4k tv and it was around 400$ yesterday on amazon.. so not that crazy imo.

A very good event since I'm sure 99% of Sony's hope was not to incite panic. They want current owners of PS4 to be interested, but not angry or scared. I think they accomplished threading that needle without pissing everyone off.

Keep in mind there are many layers of fans in the PS fandom. Sony does not want to screw up a 'good thing' which is what they have with PS4, they are ahead and they are selling games and system. In fact I think Sony will sell a fair number of PS4 Slims this holiday where as XBox One Slim has a shadow over it. The argument for buying a Slim PS4 instead of a Pro seems more plausible than a XBox One Slim over the Scorpio.

Overall Sony messaging for this presentation was was easily digestible for fans watching, but more importantly no journalist left confused or getting the wrong impression. The write up fork this will be clear as we can see with Jeff's story right here. It was a simple presentation , so perhaps a small let-down for those that wanted fanfare, air-punching and shouting. However, it appears Sony wanted clarity, so letting Mark Cerny talk in a that slow calm voice did just that.

The bottom line:

- Pro is coming out soon, certainly beating Scopio and NX by a country mile.
- Pro will add some interesting but not crucial upgrades that are more highlighted if you have the proper 4K/HDR tv
- Pro will appear at a good price that is affordable for this Holiday.

You have to admit that while the three layers are a bit comical it is 'so appropriate' in term of look.

You know one when you see one because of the three layers, right? Yet fits in with the look/feel/ecosystem of PS4.

People can say, "That's a launch system, that's a slim, and that a Pro" because of the shapes. The whole concept is elegant from a branding perspective of shape.

Keep in mind that a lot of cheap 4K's out there either don't support HDR or have really bad input lag even if they have a gaming mode or not. Color accuracy is also an issue out there including the LG you just mentioned.

People out there shopping for cheap 4k's have to double check the details

I can never get rid of my old PS4. That's where PT lives.

Wake me when the 8k Ultra-HDR TVs and the PS4 Super Pro get here.

I was expecting a larger upgrade from pro to regular ps4 but now I see it more like an iphone s model upgrade.

Games that support the PS4 Pro will run better and/or have better graphics at 1080p than their normal PS4 counterparts.

@paulunga:

Those TV's do not have HDR. Which is one of the newest tehcnologies that the newest 4k tv's have that Jeff was talking about. Sure if you want to have 4k tv to use with the pro you can spend 600-700$. But seeing HDR in person your missing out.

And those tv's are expensive.

Did anyone else feel that Sony didn't care much for this product? Or that all the negative backlash when rumors hit, could have also had push back from developers, and consumers?

Felt like since this thing was in production for a long time, they had to come out with it, but it feels like they are not putting all their cards in on this like they were with PSVR this past E3.

I wonder since they openly talked about not using this as a transitioning console or blurring the lines between HD and 4K, but as just an option. They say they are not getting rid of generational consoles, so I WONDER if this is just something they are putting out there and seeing who bites?

You wonder if the next generation Playstation has some kind of UHD bluray player with zen cpu, vega gpu with HBM2?

Feels like they heard from developers and console owners, that maybe this is not the way forward? Hence why it felt like just an optional console, and not the new way forward.

I think I'll just use the money I would have spent on buying the PS4 Pro and a new to TV on upgrading my PC.

I'm not going to be affording a 4K TV this decade.

I'll just play Persona 5 next year. Same as I played Persona 3 & 4 the last time everything got too expensive. It'll all still be there to come back to.

This hobby

I'm not gonna lie, it doesn't seem worth the price tag at all in the UK. I'm lucky enough to have gotten a 4K monitor for cheap from work but I'd much rather use it with a new GPU that can stand the test of time for longer. I do own a console but purely for sports games and exclusives.

@monkeyking1969: Dang. They SO should've named it the "PS4 with Cheese".

A missed opportunity exacerbated by going with the most overused suffix in tech history.

@colourful_hippie: Yeah, there's a lot of IPS based TVs now, and those have TERRIBLE contrast next to VA TVs...and pretty much just Sony and Samsung use VA at all, and even then a lot of them are IPS.

And from reviews I've read, the only two companies that seem to care at all about input lag are, again, Sony and Samsung.

I've *LITERALLY* seen Sony TV reviews where the non-game mode input lag is LOWER than the game-mode input lag on other brands. Buy a Sony or a Samsung and your input lag is probably going to be fine in game mode. Buy anything else and HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM....

@regular_kirk said:

Well, maybe...we don't really know for sure yet how this is going to go. It may well be that you'll get a benefit from the Pro at 1080p...I guess it just depends on the way it's used. My understanding is the Pro can't possibly do real 4K anyway.

If you're buying a new PS4 now, then obviously get the Pro. If you're not, and you have a 1080p set, nothing wrong with just waiting and seeing, and I'm sure Sony has no problem either!

Glad I'm not the only one! It's weird to me that Pro is kind of a "real" upgrade while S is basically the "Slim", and yet the S has 4K Blu Ray and the Pro doesn't.

Well, that's always been the idea.

It's still like more than 2x the GPU, which is hardly a small upgrade though. Will be totally worth it IF it gets used.

@kosayn: Well the good thing is that supposedly the PS4 will fully run games through this generation. Guess we'll have to see how this pans out, but the PS4 is an AMAZING piece of hardware IMO even when it's superseded, whether by Pro or a PS5.

I guess you'll just have to put up with amazing games that look amazing, instead of even more amazing ;)

What world do you live in where physical media is "dead right now?"

People keep talking about physical media dying, but that future is very, very, very far away. Subscription services can't afford all the movies that are out there. Netflix's streaming library is far from comprehensive, and they lose licenses all the time. Publishers and distributors need physical sales.

I'll always prefer watching it from the disc or from a perfect MKV copy of it. Netflix has so many drawbacks. Tastelessly minimizing the credits, lengthy buffering before it's HD, spoilers in the pictures and descriptions, thick yellow subtitles and lack of subtitle options (I tried watching Cinema Paradiso a while ago, but it only had subs for the deaf and hard of hearing. It was so distracting, I gave up.), a disorganized library, a distracting UI that takes seconds to disappear, lack of extras (Not a biggie, but occasionally I'll watch or listen to them.) and compressed video and audio.

I bought the Early-Access model...

As an owner of both (I wouldn't recommend anyone own both - I got a free VIVE from a distributor), be careful with the Oculus until they release the damn motion controllers, and there is confirmation that they work well. They're, honestly, essential to the VR experience, 90% of the time.

Plus there is a giant list of technical issues with the Oculus, such as poor compatibility with most USB 3.0 ports, some HDMI ports, etc (make SURE you run the VR compatibility tool on your PC, even if you know the specs and think you meet them - you likely don't... but can get around most of them with USB add-in cards, disabling incompatible USB ports, and ignoring their incorrect processor detection methods). And, to top it all off, the required Oculus Home/Store is STILL in beta, and is very feature poor and buggy.

VR is pretty awesome and exciting, even with the lack of games that aren't tech-demos, but Oculus is very disappointing to me so far. Once the motion controllers are out, and if they're well receieved, and they fix the software, only THEN would I ever recommend Oculus. VIVE isn't perfect either, but it's where it's at currently with better Steam support and motion controls, and it just works better period, for now, at least.

I think for some groups it definitely is but you are right on. Some of the reaction to this is very indicative of the echo chambers that go on today, even over the internet.

"My friends all stream so no one ever uses physical media!"

I also don't think some get how much data 4K streaming requires and possible ramifications for many. Or, again, a "my internet is capable so everyone else's is and no one has data caps".

I have a PS4 and I love it, but I can't see myself buying one of these. Only because there is some much other console stuff coming out that I would rather buy instead. It makes much more sense to diversify - buy a PS VR, or the NX (whatever that is), or even the Scorpio. If I'm going to by another console, it just makes more sense to invest that money in something that is going to diversify my experience, not just improve resolution/frame rate on games I can already play.

I would probably feel different if I didn't already have a PS4. In that case, this would be a good way to get on board with what I consider the best console out there.

If it is professional, doesn't that make it a WorkStation?

@colourful_hippie: Samsung has a great $600 4K TV with HDR10 support. Input lag is lower than most 4K TVs in the budget/mid-range bracket (19ms, I believe) and it's a VA panel with great contrast. Biggest issue on it is the strength of the grays and the faux interpolation (which I would turn off anyway). There's compromise on TVs sub-$1000, but that's not to say they're bad. You just have to shop around.

4K TVs are getting cheaper. If you want the higher end OLEDs or the TVs with sub 10ms input lag, it'll cost you $2-3000 easily. But if you're more budget conscious and are looking to spend less, there's plenty of good TVs available from $500-1000.

Edit: Added link.

Personally, I like the idea of a PS4Pro for those who want better performance out of their console or want better support for their 4K TV. I'm looking to get a 4K TV come December, so this is quite timely for me. Highly considering trading in my 500GB PS4 and my Xbox Elite to get the PS4Pro. The lack of 4K BluRay support doesn't bother me greatly since I don't buy BluRays anymore.

The Horizon: Zero Dawn trailer in 4K sure looks stunning, but I wonder how different it actually looks comparatively between the two PS4's since it's 4K upscaled, rather than native.

PS4 pro seems like a half-measure. Same as their PSnow PC streaming PS3 games.

They are the top dog of the gaming industry right now, and because of that, they don't want to take any high risks that could put that position at risk. And this overly safe mentality is off putting to me. They are releasing 2 consoles out within a 4 month period of one another. Way to much for consumers to handle and wasting money by doing this. Who are they targeting? Not people who casually buy consoles, why would they buy another PS4 if their TVs can't handle the resolution. Or why would they buy another PS4 if theirs works perfectly fine? Better graphics? Are slight graphical increases worth 400 dollars to that many people?

Baffling marketing.

Stealing a good link from @slag about PS4 Pro framerate differences since there have been a lot of questions about it. The Mass Effect team and the Infamous Second Son devs saying they are going to have zero frame rate differences between the PS4 and Pro version. So yeah, people expecting that should definitely wait and see. This seems more and more questionable.

@artisanbreads: Considering Second Son has an unlocked frame-rate and we've seen the marginal Xbox One S performance boost has had a an effect both versions won't be the same.

Does anyone feel like Sony is bad at press conferences? They just feel so stiff and lifeless. Like these events are supposed to be these big fan fares of selling me Sony products and how awesome PS4 slim and PS4 Pro and PSVR and 4K TV's are going to be. And the event, the fanfare, is just so damn drab. Like I think back to E3, and kinda walked away with the same impression. Sony's E3 conference was so buttoned up, so stiff, and so corporate it just didn't make me excited about the things they are showing, which by themselves outside of the conference are really freaking exciting! I think of the Ubisoft and Microsoft conference, and hey look, they are big corporate ads as all these things are, but those press conferences were lively! Ubisoft and Microsoft were having fun on stage, their was excitement in their voices, it was a celebration of their products. I just get the excitement I get from a funeral procession during the Sony conference, to be dramatic. I also have no allegiance to the consoles, so the fanboy veil doesn't really exist with me.

They didn't say it at this press conference, but the earlier leaked memos to develoers were very clear that performance above and beyond up-red 4K, HDR were off the table - they should/could not be offered. This is something Sony might relax in 18 months when it won't matter as much, but for now the games are not supposed to have a frame rate or feature difference between Slim and Pro.

So, I would not even wait and see, because that is off the table for a long while if Sony is going on the game plan outlined in the leaks.

I think that's just Playstations MO. If you look at the system menus, and build of all their boxes since PS2 they go for a "Cool Elegance" vibe. I personally like it over a lazer show, where they pull the camera out to show you that the people in the area are watching what you're watching making it hard to see the footage, I don't care about them I want to see the games. I enjoyed this past E3 because it was simple. Big screen, big stage, live orchestra, games, games, games, the games should speak for themselves.

Granted it does come off dull when they're talking hardware.

They already called that a theoretical advantage and seemed fine with it. And I'm betting games on Pro will have less frame dips since feature parity and wholly integrated playerbase is forced as well. Games like Battle Field 1 and Titanfall 2, assuming devs don't waste that CPU power, should see less frame drops than what they've recently shown in their betas.

@artisanbreads said:

For me I don't really have a problem streaming, fast internet and no caps. But even with all that you can't get around that Netflix et al typically stream in less than a 10th the bitrate of even old Blu-rays (40Mbps) and the new UHD more than doubles that to 100Mbps.

I also typically enjoy the extras and 3D versions of some movies. I'm a lot more selective in what movies I get these days, but when I buy them I want them to be really high quality.

For me I find that Oculus Home works a lot better than SteamVR. SteamVR constantly messes up with the audio and either doesn't switch to the headset or doesn't switch back afterwards. Every time I have to go into the SteamVR settings and update it because it's constantly being reset. (Perhaps because I also have both headsets and switch between them.)

That said I fully agree with your assessment that the best thing to do now is to wait until Oculus releases their Touch controllers. (Oculus Connect is in beginning of October so we should get info then at latest.) The best thing is really to find a friend with access to the headsets and go over and play. Unless you are a developer you likely won't spend all days "jacked in".

And I mean that's completely understandable. Even new console launches typically take a year or two before you get any really good stuff. And that's when the new platform is essentially a spec bump of the last generation. VR is a completely new thing and honestly no-one really knows what to do with it yet. If you don't want to pay a lot for the "privilege" of being part of the ride then it's better to wait until it becomes a more known quantity.

@monkeyking1969: how does that jive with the Tomb Raider devs showing off an increased framerate setting and a graphics priority setting with their game though?

It squares because it is the same code running on Slim and Pro. Moreover, you don't get both it is an OR not and AND : you choose only 1080p (no 4K for you)at get 60 fps OR you choose the up-res 4K and 30fps. But, here is the kicker Crystal Dynamics confirmed that the game comes with three modes, each with a different resolution setting and frame-rate target.

It is likely on Slim the High Frame-rate mode is what can be applied, which targets 60 frames-per-second at 1080p resolution....but the 60 fps is not guaranteed... it more like 45 fps in some spot according to Crystal. If you think about it WHY would Pro have High Frame-rate mode which was specified as 1080p at 60fps that drops at times when they already said 1080p @ 60fps was its own mode on Pro? The High Frame-rate mode is a Slim option thus making things even.

@monkeyking1969: Theirs nothing stopping a developer having a game PS4/30fps with the Pro/60fps. The only kicker is frame-rate must be the same for MP on both but that wouldn't prevent the single player portion being 60fps if the developer wished.

Q: What benefits does PS4 Pro provide when played on a non-4K HDTV?

PS4 Pro offers benefits even if you play on a HDTV that isn’t 4K. Depending on how the developer chooses to use the increased processing power, games with PS4 Pro support are able to render higher or more consistent framerates, increased environmental and character model detail, improved overall visual quality, and other related visual enhancements.

Crystal Dynamics did say 1080/60 mode on the Pro wasn't locked

Rise of the Tomb Raider gives you graphics/frame-rate options on PS4 Pro

The first of these is 4K Resolution mode, which targets 30 frames-per-second and runs at a 4K resolution, though it’s unclear if it’s going to be native 4K or not, however unlikely.

Then there’s Enriched Visuals mode, which also caps the frame-rate at 30 frames-per-second, but pairs it with a 1080p resolution. Finally, there’s High Frame-rate mode, which targets 60 frames-per-second at the same 1080p resolution.

Crystal Dynamics said that the High Frame-rate mode may not always reach the target 60fps, but frame-rate should be north of 45 frames-per-second.

@monkeyking1969: Yeah I'm with @thepanzini. They said it was for the Pro. The slim doesn't have enough power to do a high frame rate option. I don't see how any of that jives.

I think Sony just doesn't want to be held accountable for people buying this expecting every dev to do this and devs are already showing they won't do it. I think this whole thing is more disappointing the more information gets out about it.

I was skeptical until I actually watched the 4k video's they uploaded to PlayStation YouTube. My monitor goes up 1440p and Mass Effect and Horizon Dawn look incredible. That hasn't pushed me to upgrade my PS4 though, its made me want to finally build that PC I've always dreamed of doing.

Meh, I'm not so into this whole iteration thing but I guess it's too early to see how it will be as a long term way of doing things in the console world.

It just wiffs of 32x...

I don't see any reason to buy the slim version