PlayStation 5 Launches Nov 12 $399/$499 Nov 19 £359/£449

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yeah, I would expect it at the same time. I’m ok with that. . I would imagine with the bundles and the success of Moss (it’s been in the charts for two months since it’s debut) not to mention the price cut, Sony may have shifted quite a few units over the last 5 months. If we have another solid year game wise Sony may well have made a billion on software alone come the end of 2018. It was at half a billion several months ago. We are also starting to see improved graphics and AAA Upgrades like Wipeout will help.

I don't think Sony will launch PS5 and PSVR 2.0 at the same time. I think they will stagger the launches.

[dyne]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

I don't think Sony will launch PS5 and PSVR 2.0 at the same time. I think they will stagger the launches.

Agreed and not only from a who would pony up the money to buy both argument but also the logistical supply chain. A console is enough strain by itself to launch.

[Steedeel]

Not if the meat of the VR is baked into the console itself lads.

[dyne]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Not if the meat of the VR is baked into the console itself lads.

Please explain this. You still need a headset which cannot be "baked in" and is all of the cost. Whatever you claim (asdding processors and whatnot to the system) will only add to the initial system cost which will probably already be $400+. At that point you're also asking people that don't want VR to foot the bill to subsidize it. I don't want an extra $50-100 added to my system for something I'll never use.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by dyne

Please explain this. You still need a headset which cannot be "baked in" and is all of the cost. Whatever you claim (asdding processors and whatnot to the system) will only add to the initial system cost which will probably already be $400+. At that point you're also asking people that don't want VR to foot the bill to subsidize it. I don't want an extra $50-100 added to my system for something I'll never use.

Would be the same mistake MS made with the camera

[dyne]

Originally Posted by R3P0

Would be the same mistake MS made with the camera

Exactly. If I'm spending more money on a system I want it to be because the hardware is better for it. Not for some additional chips that will help power an accessory I'll never use. Also on the same point there were always system resources reserved on the One solely for the Kinect even if the damned thing wasn't attached. It was implemented at the OS level. Requirements were eventually lessened but never fully stripped.

[Mavrick]

Originally Posted by dyne

Please explain this. You still need a headset which cannot be "baked in" and is all of the cost. Whatever you claim (asdding processors and whatnot to the system) will only add to the initial system cost which will probably already be $400+. At that point you're also asking people that don't want VR to foot the bill to subsidize it. I don't want an extra $50-100 added to my system for something I'll never use.

A few "insiders" have said that it will be PSVR ready out of the box, basically just eliminating the breakout box so all you need to do is plug in the headset. The breakout box after all has no extra processing power it just handles the directional audio and splits the HDMI signals.

[dyne]

Originally Posted by Mavrick

A few "insiders" have said that it will be PSVR ready out of the box, basically just eliminating the breakout box so all you need to do is plug in the headset. The breakout box after all has no extra processing power it just handles the directional audio and splits the HDMI signals.

Which will not significantly lessen the price on a new headset or help much logistically with two simultaneous product launches.

[Steedeel]

For me, it’s crucial that I have full support for VR. Just because it doesn’t matter for you, doesn’t mean others don’t want it. It differentiates the consoles also, with the switch and Xbox not being VR.

Also, there is a big difference between the camera and VR as accessories. The major one being that according to reports VR software is making money for Sony after 18 months on the market. Half a billion at last count and several months have passed since then. For me, it’s the reason I will still buy PS in the future. Flat games are just so dull once you have experienced VR long term.

[dyne]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

For me, it’s crucial that I have full support for VR. Just because it doesn’t matter for you, doesn’t mean others don’t want it. It differentiates the consoles also, with the switch and Xbox not being VR.

Also, there is a big difference between the camera and VR as accessories. The major one being that according to reports VR software is making money for Sony after 18 months on the market. Half a billion at last count and several months have passed since then. For me, it’s the reason I will still buy PS in the future. Flat games are just so dull once you have experienced VR long term.

You still haven't answered anything though. You keep saying "support" as if there will be PS5's that can't use a headset. There's are no PS4's that cannot use VR so why would PS5 be any different? I'm just saying to put all the cost of VR into the headset itself so the people that don't want VR aren't paying an extra cost for whatever you feel they need to "bake into" the system for VR. I'm not saying to abandon VR.

[Mavrick]

What if it is cheaper for Sony to have it in the console itself. I think they would be more inclined to go the route that is cheapest for them from a manufacturing standpoint. The goal would be to make the headset lighter and more comfortable, I don't think adding in the breakout box to the headset would be the way to go.

If the PS5 is built for PSVR from day one then the directional audio and HDMI signal splitting would be built in to the chip set that is being used for the whole system so they shouldn't be adding any cost that would be noticeable to the consumer. I can't see it being more than 400 anyway. Leaving out the VR functions isn't likely to save us any money at retail adding it in isn't likely to cost us any more, so it's all good.

[partridge]

Agreed. Building the processor box into the 5 will cut down on cabling, all your need to do is hook up a camera and the headset and away you go. Right now it's a mess of cables and an extra power supply.

Not everyone has a camera for the 4 but it still supports it, not everyone makes use of HDR but it supports that too. I can't see why Sony wouldn't add this bit of the VR kit into the next console.

[Mavrick]

Digital Foundry: PlayStation 5 - When can Sony truly deliver a generational leap in power?

PlayStation 5: When Can Sony Deliver A True Generational Leap? - YouTube

Q4 2019 is our first viable target for a proper generational leap in console power, but the price of that leap in technology looks daunting. Even in the here and now, the price bubbles in the PC component market are making the high cost of Xbox One X look a lot more attractive. But a relatively large 7nm processor with an Xbox One X-level cooling solution paired with a big upgrade in RAM and some kind of solid-state storage solution? That's a whole new level of expense - and financial viability more than any other factor may well push the arrival of a next-gen PlayStation or Xbox back to 2020.

[TheWildWhelk]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but Mark Cerny has already said that at least 9 teraflops of GPU power would be the minimum required to do true 2160p gaming, rather than the 1X's 6. That's fairly straightforward, with the PS4 Vanilla able to handle 2.25 gigs of date with it's 5 gig graphics memory pool. A graphics card that can handle that amount of data isn't going to be cheap!

[Mavrick]

That's the beauty of console manufacturers of being able to take a loss on hardware upfront. Plus they get pretty decent discounts for ordering millions of components which helps a bit. They should be able $399/£350 I'd be surprised if they launched at One X or PS3 price points but you never know.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by Mavrick

That's the beauty of console manufacturers of being able to take a loss on hardware upfront. Plus they get pretty decent discounts for ordering millions of components which helps a bit. They should be able $399/£350 I'd be surprised if they launched at One X or PS3 price points but you never know.

Maverick, based on the fact that the hardware for the PS4 was finalised inhouse a full year before launch for the PS4, what do you anticipate is likely to be the spec of the PS5? Realistically? Just the GPU and the shared memory/speed. Tech bods here at the university have suggested at least 32 gig DDR5, 3.5ghz dual quadcore, but as for the GPU, the are stumped...

[recS-12]

Can someone direct me to where I can read about if the PS5 will play 4K UHD discs, and if so what to expect as far as features, HDR, DOLBY VISION, audio decoding ATMOS DTS X etc? Or if somebody just wants to answer w/a yes/no is fine too. Thread is too large to start at page 1

[MAUL xx]

My prediction is the PS5 is announced & released next year so I voted 2019.
I think it's a safe bet to say that it will have a 4k UHD player & play all PS4 games.

[Blu Lemmy]

Originally Posted by recS-12

Can someone direct me to where I can read about if the PS5 will play 4K UHD discs, and if so what to expect as far as features, HDR, DOLBY VISION, audio decoding ATMOS DTS X etc? Or if somebody just wants to answer w/a yes/no is fine too. Thread is too large to start at page 1

All speculation, nothing confirmed yet

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by MAUL xx

My prediction is the PS5 is announced & released next year so I voted 2019.
I think it's a safe bet to say that it will have a 4k UHD player & play all PS4 games.

I went with 2020. I’m utterly convinced.