I'm down with this, because I've not bought a ps4 yet, and I had chance to borrow one for a friend for 6 months. I really liked core PS4, and if this means a solid price drop, I'm getting one.

As a crazy person that owns a PS4, Xbox One, and a pretty decent gaming PC, I can't say that I'm too concerned. It seems that my current PS4 will still be able to play all future games that are NEO compatible, albeit with lower graphics settings. For the majority of third party games this is irrelevant as I have my PC, and for PS4 exclusives I'm ok taking a hit on graphics.

Since Sony is saying that there will be no exclusive, not even any other features in certain games or whatever, I don't care at all.

I think this sort of thing was probably necessary on some level during this console generation, but I'm not at all certain that I'll be willing to drop another $400 to upgrade. I'm not particularly looking forward to having to decide between shelling out more money or being stuck with the "worse-looking, worse-performing version" of every PS4 game from now on.

So this is basically where I'm at too. I don't like the idea that the guy next to me, getting the same game as me ($90 after tax in Canada) is getting a better version.

More than that I'm ACTUALLY concerned that the quality of non Neo PS4 games will drop as time goes. If Sony somehow guarantees that Old PS4 games will run at a minimum 30fps for something I would be less worried but it's not hard to imagine a scenario where most dev time is dedicated to the Neo version and less effort in optimizing to the older version leads to a drop in game quality for the old model.

Looking at you Hyrule Warriors 3DS...

Yes, I am totally down with this. My regular computer is a MacBook Pro, and using that as a gaming rig is pretty nuts, and I have no desire for an entire separate computer just for gaming. Having a console suits my lifestyle perfectly. The only downside is less visual fidelity and framerate, and this helps with that.

If a company makes the proposition "pay $400 dollars every 3 years to get a dedicated no-hassle gaming device with lots of games that more or less keeps pace with technological development", then I will absolutely take that deal. It's perfect for me. I seriously think that when they thought of this, they specifically wondered "what would fit gkhan's lifestyle and purchase preferences the best?"

Then again, this was already the case, all of us console users were getting versions that were inferior compared to the PC versions (give or take the occasional inexplicable Batman release). All us knew this and we've made our peace with it, thinking "it's not worth getting a gaming PC because of price/hassle/whatever, even though it's a superior device for rendering games". If you're getting mad that someone else is having a better time than you, then I have some harsh truths for you: that's always the case, with everything.

The fact that PS4 Core quality might fall is a bigger concern, though. I agree with you, I really hope Sony keeps a tight leash on developers about things like that. Sony's messaging seems to indicate that they are very much aware of this concern, so I'm hopeful that they'll make sure Core stays a viable platform (also, developers have strong incentive there as well, with 35 million units shipped).

I think they handled this policy-wise about as best as they could. Basically a pro version of the system that will run games better (in theory) that can't lock out existing players. Sounds like the best way possible to approach this new business model.

Don't own a PS4 (yet) so I'm glad I held out for the upgraded version!

I'm fine with it existing because I don't have a PS4, and more options are good. However with a new Nintendo coming, my computer being 2 years old, and my never picking up a Xbox One, I have no idea what my next gaming hardware purchase will be. Not to mention all the VR stuff...

If they patch Bloodborne to run at a better framerate, the entire thing is justified.

I have a feeling that I'll care less about the PS4K as more details about it come out. I'm mainly on PC. I only want a PS4 to play stuff like Senran Kagura and Nights of Azure, so the OG PS4 should be good enough for that.

I'm cool with it existing but fear that the policies they've put around it will put a lot of strain on developers. Their policies sound great for consumers, but if they are going to put developer relations in the same kind of place they were with the PS3, I'd rather the NEO didn't exist. Sony is killing it right now, mostly due to their relationships with third-parties and indies, and it'd really be a bummer to sacrifice that for a few more frames or lighting effects in my console games. Hopefully being on x86 architecture will mean that developing for both PS4 models will be easy and everyone will be happy, but it seems like the potential for some disasters is high.

I'm strictly on PC now, so it doesn't affect me, but I talked to a PS4 owner about the Neo. He isn't too hot on the idea of it, and told me this morning that he is going to start saving up to build a PC. He said he will miss the exclusives, but he'd rather be on PC if console makers are going to start putting out new consoles every few years from here on out.

If Brad was correct and if I can move PT from one machine to a new machine, I'd probably get the new machine.

If I can't do that - I'm keeping my old machine that can play PT over this new non-PT machine.

For right now? Eh. I don't own a PS4 yet.

But what if, three years from now, a PS4 game is released and the basic version runs like Far Cry 3 did on last gen consoles? I remember seeing some people, even console-only players, posting that playing that game was an unpleasant experience. Remember, games on the Neo can't run at a lower FPS than the basic version, but there's no standard for the basic version to stay up to. I'm not OK with that.

I do want to buy a PS4 and play Bloodborne and Persona 5 and, if it ever comes over here, Dragon Quest XI, but now it looks like I'll have to either get a base PS4 and play those games and risk the above situation, or wait and get a Neo and play those games long after I wanted to (Bloodborne has already been out for a long time). Or just not get a PS4 at all, actually, because all I want to play on the system are those three games, FFVII, and Kingdom Hearts III.

I hate this, no one was asking for it.

Console makers seem to be completely out of touch with their audience and just trying to bleed their user base for money left right.

Incremental hardware improvements, paid online and microtransactions will make me not want to play video games on a console ever again

If they take the opportunity to make this a slim model, and I like the way it looks, I'd happily buy a new PS4 with a performance bump. I 'm not that interested if the box is the same.

@rafaelfc said:

Trends in the tech industry say you're making some pretty big assumptions there, some of which don't seem to be supported by other areas of the tech sector. I think you need to separate "this isn't for me" from "nobody was asking for it." I lead into saying all of this not trying to say "you have to think this way" btw. And let's not get into microtransactions, which are hardly a console-centric issue at this point.

Realistically, there is very little left technologically that receives no real hardware refresh over a five to eight year period of time the way consoles have. In addition, now that both consoles have moved to hardware architecture that is much closer to PC in design, there's no real reason they have to so intrinsically tie hardware and software into platform upgrades. If anything, it makes a lot of sense to adapt a three year hardware refresh model for a lot of reasons. After several years, you've about maximized hardware manufacturing cost savings associated with producing a technology, and in many cases you start actually moving backwards as fewer companies demand the components you're looking for. So if I can sell to you a significantly more powerful device at the same cost or for a small fraction more today as the earlier model, it makes sense to do so.

What Sony and Microsoft have to overcome to make this fiscally successful of course is the culture surrounding consoles and any potential "buyer's remorse" or blowback associated with "jealousy" towards those with more powerful devices. As discussed in the Bombcast, I think they have bout as good as can be asked for blueprint on how to approach developing for both variations of the console.This is of course as long as the original PS4 or XBox One buys you we'll say six years worth of all titles developed on the current incarnation of the Playstation or XBox platforms. I think that's the key right now. I don't think the console industry demands annual or necessarily bi-annual hardware refreshes like say the smart phone industry demands.

BTW: I have no particular dog in this fight as I'm mostly a PC gamer at this point. But also as someone who has an MBA, there is a very strong business case for why this is a worthwhile model to consider going forward for the console industry.

I'm mildly down with it. I'm in the market for a PS4, so I'm probably the person they're selling to. That said, it's really frustrating that there are still no official details on this. I was hoping to get a PS4 in time for No Man's Sky, but that seems exceedingly foolish right now. Guess I'll just sit on my hands until they speak.

The big problem for me is that if Sony is already willing to release a game in as poor a state as Fallout 4 was, we're going to get a whole lot more of that when devs start developing for the Neo. But now it won't just be Bethesda and a few other companies.

If Sony (and console makers in general) have had such poor quality control so far, it's only going to get worse. If they made a new company policy, similar to the vr policy, that all games had to only every reach a minimum of 30 fps, and that was strictly enforced, then I'd be far more okay with it. But that's not going to happen.

Yup, that is my fear as well... I can't imagine a world where the Neo does anything but make the issue worse.

Im warming up on it if games are universal between the two. If i can transfer all my downloaded games and play my couple disk games i may consider trading in my ps4 for an upgrade if it happens. If none of that is true itll probably be the end of my console life for a while.

Mildly pissed, although I'd say more "concerned" than "pissed". This isn't what I come to consoles for.

I misunderstood your use of the phrase "down with", because I'm old and unhip. I may end up getting one of these, but I'll resent Sony for it just the same.

Well, now that more light has been shed on it, I don't know. Suppose I feel neutral. I bought PS4 right as it got released, so at least I don't have the whole "bought a console one month before new model got revealed" issue to get pissed about. The specs also don't at least seem to yell that every game would be running at 1080p and 60fps on Neo, otherwise I could be a bit miffled.

"I'm down with this" as used to be positive about something is such a strange phrase to me. It makes no sense. I can't not think of "down with x" which wants the removal of something (akin to the knocking down of a monument).

Yes, but that's a good thing imo. Hardcore fans and newcomers can get the new model without alienating most everyone else. The key of course is that they don't let anything that runs real egregious on old hardware through.

I actually really love this - I have a PS4 already, but it's been a few years and the price point isn't ridiculous. That isn't the source of my interest, however - that would be the fact that I was an early 4K TV adopter, and am glad to have the opportunity to purchase a device that is affordable for me instead of investing in a more expensive gaming PC. Maybe by the time this comes out, the cost of a 4K gaming PC will have come down a bit, but probably not to the $399 price point.

I don't feel gouged, although I was confused as to why this generation of consoles was so underpowered and that Sony, a pioneer in 4K televisions, didn't launch with 4K support, but that may have to do with component pricing at the time. I wonder if the real push behind this is the demands that the Sony VR headset will have? It seemed weird that Sony was developing a VR headset when all the reports were about how good a PC people would need to run VR.

I do think that this has the potential to ruin one of the benefits of consoles - that standardization leads to less problems with how well games run (although the industry likes to surprise us anyway *cough cough Fallout 4 cough cough*). This, along with the fact that I need a laptop for work and that a good gaming laptop is very expensive (and therefore less likely to buy a gaming PC in addition to said laptop), is one of the main reasons I have never been a gaming PC guy.

My 2012 MacBook Pro ran Diablo III pretty OK when it was first released, and wasn't complete shit running modded Skyrim, but it chugs running anything from the last 2 years. : (

As someone who doesn't own a PS4 but does own an Xbox One and really wants to play the games coming out on the PS4 I'm moderately excited. The PS4 has a greater breadth of games than the Xbox One does right now, Firewatch, The witness, and No Man's Sky are some games and experiences that I want to check out (FYI I don't own a beefy PC, I just have a mac book air for school work). If your also telling me that I can have that access and get better graphics on a budget that a college student like me can handle then give me that option. And not like I would buy it day one, but if this means that PSVR is a better experience than I could seriously see myself buying this NEO option and probably a PSVR to boot in the future. That assumes PSVR, or VR in general, is a worthy entertainment investment, which I'm yet to be convinced of with a few exceptions. As it stands, if I had the means to buy one, I would get Job Simulator (Yes, I know I need the Eye and Move peripherals) but that may be it. And based on Austin's story that lays out the current requirements that devs have to live by, it seems that Sony is doing the correct things to do this, so far. I agree with Brad's sentiment that you need a clear upgrade path to get to NEO status. I also think that it needs to exist in perpetuity, to give base-level players that option to jump forward and maybe keep jumping forward if they desire, regardless of when purchase was. Knowing how Sony is changing there ways and how gun-shy they are about angering consumers, aka PS3, you can bet your bottom dollar that you will give that option. However, worse decisions, have been made by Corporations. As a business major I would know about dumb business.

I got my ps4 late last year and, despite what any document may say, you just know that this is going to lead to some horrid performance on a lot of "Base Modes". That being said, there's no way I'm upgrading, especially given how expensive everything is right now (CND is pretty much where USD was about 6 years ago, so my ps4 was still $500 at that point). I can't see the NEO debuting at anything less than $550 up here.

if it has a big hd then yay i will get one if not then nope i will not.

As somebody who has had life happen and hasn't gotten around to buying a ps4 this worked out for me. I was going to get one next month, but I'll just be waiting instead

My PS4 has been broken for a few months due to the HDMI port breaking down (which I later read online is due to a somewhat common defect) so now I have a nice little excuse to buy one of these new ones. Or at least the old ones on a discount if it turns out that the upgrade doesn't really do much of anything. Would be nice if Atlus suddenly changed completely and decided to release Persona 5 on PC, then I could just ignore the PS4 altogether.

As someone who paid for a used unit years ago, I'm happy this won't leave me behind. In many ways, this is like a form factor thing. Sure, there's quicker guts but the documentation and the need to keep parity across hardware specs probably mean developers are shooting for the base specs just as they were in 2013. Status quo.

"I don't care" is the closest to a middle ground, but not really my feelings. I have a PS4, but I'm not happy or angry, just very interested in all of this. Mostly because what the hell is this E3 going to be? It's like a half console reveal half normal-cycle E3. We have the Neo, possibly some similar Microsoft thing, and more than likely the NX reveal.

I hope this doesn't lead to crappy performance on the base model though.

One way or another I usually end up buying a new version of a system mid-generation so buying one with a bit more horsepower makes this a more intriguing upgrade.

Last generation I had every one of my consoles die at least once, Xbox 360 was replaced multiple times but they always send a refurbished version of the same model so eventually I wanted a model with better reliability and HDMI, which of course died and I had to replace within a month. 60GB PS3 with PS2 backwards compatibility was great until it die late in the generation and I replaced it with a slim. Wii graphics card thankfully die early enough that I was able to walk over to Nintendo and get them to swap it.

My PS4 has been solid, I have a weird problem with the ethernet connection that is guaranteed to disconnect 15 minutes into a session unless I run a network test beforehand, but it has been good so my main reason for upgrading would be for an expanded feature set. I do have Playstation VR preordered so if there are significant performance differences on those titles that could motivate me to upgrade sooner rather than later.

The funny thing is that the current PS4 pricing in Canada is higher than what I paid for a PS4 at launch thanks to a significant decline in the Canadian Dollar exchange rate. So if they are planning to sell the NEO at a premium relative to the current price, which is likely, then it might to harder to justify that cost.

I am looking forward to the new PS4. I will probably pick one up and play the games like The Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 that I have abandoned and had to buy on PC because the frame rate made them almost unplayable. Ideally I would like to use my PC for PC only games like Xcom2. I usually buy a new console halfway through the console cycle when they release the redesign like the slim anyway. This just seems to address the issues of performance problems that make some games unplayable. I must say I am tired of waiting for actual game play to come out to see if the frame rate is acceptable for me to not have to buy it on PC. No real rush as most of the games run just fine. Then there is Dark Souls 3. It runs well. I should probably load up a podcast and get back to that.

I don't really care that it exists too much, rather I come away as more confused as to why it exists in the first place. Especially given what we currently know of the restrictions they're placing on utilising the better hardware, it just seems like a sort of pointless disruption to the user base and runs somewhat counter to one of the main draws (to me) of owning a console, being the simplicity of hardware and all. Idk. Every day video games just get weirder.

I think people need to get used to this. The 5-year console lifespan is a hold-over from the 70's and 80's that we've never gotten rid of. Technology moves a lot faster now and it's unrealistic to expect these boxes with fixed specs to last that long. We don't expect that with computers, phones, or hell even tv's anymore. Why do we expect that with game consoles?

Mildly pissed.
I just hope that 'base PS4' games quality don't be affected by the PS4.5 (neo)

"I'm mildly down with it existing."

Even though I only got my PS4 ~5 months ago, I have noticed during my time with it that it's kinda not that exceptional a leap over the last gen. Hardware that'll allow for more glitz and faster bits so I can bop non-stop would *implodes*

@rlazoti: That's something that won't start to happen until the number of Neo units sold start getting closer to the Base units sold.

For the good of the industry and consumer, we should probably stop chasing these graphical pipe dreams.

I got my PS4 at the very end of September so I'm really not happy about this. That said, if they mess w/ the current 35-40 million PS4 owners, it's not us they're fucking, it's their business.

I'm into it. I just got a 4K TV and receiver so the idea of a PlayStation outputting at 4K, even if it only results in sharper UI text, is appealing. This kind of half-step makes much more sense for the Xbox, though. Not only could it do with a performance boost from a purely marketing perspective, but there would be a bunch of tertiary benefits like a snappier UI and improved 360 virtualisation that don't really apply to the PS4.

Where's the option for "I think it's fucking stupid?" Seriously, why not just wait until the next generation of consoles to do this shit? Are they trying to push 4K resolution so more of their TVs will sell? That's the only thing I can genuinely think of.

@jakob187: It feels like PS4's success may have jumped them back into the mindset they were in when they announced the PS3. That said, another reason I could see would be not needing an external box for VR on your console with the Neo.

We're what, approaching 3 years into the current gen? I'd be curious to see if they came out with another incremental upgrade a few years after the NEO, and took a more phone-like approach to consoles. Not every year of course, because fuck that, but maybe 3-4 years at around 400 bucks a pop for a jump in tech. Keep the games working within 2 generations, so whatever comes after the NEO wouldn't have games that work on current gen consoles, but would work on the NEO. Or maybe they just push the NEO in the interim while behind the scenes they're working on a PS5 that'll be a more substantial upgrade and warrant the name. Or maybe they never do this middle-upgrade thing again, I dunno. It's fuckin weird times for video game consoles.