That's interesting and all, but I still don't see a reason to upgrade my PS5 to a Pro, and frankly it wouldn't even be that interesting for the price as a new player either.

Are there like any games that will really make use of the new hardware? Other than perhaps upgraded framerates and better 4K support. The average console player probably isn't going to care that much, not for the giant price increase over minimal gains.

I feel like all games on this generation will still be limited to the base PS5 anyway, can't imagine hardware matters much until the next generation consoles.

[–] essteeyou 29 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

There will be even fewer games that require a Pro than there are games that require the PS5 in the first place.

Potentially I'm just aging out of gaming a little bit, but I can't name 10 exclusives for the PS5, and it's been around for years.

Spider-Man 2 was fun, but not like $700 of fun.

[–] PunchingWood 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

People who don't have a gaming PC but still want to game would be the next target audience in line, since they wouldn't have another machine to play third-party games on anyway, so the exclusive would just be a bonus on top.

But I don't think they're even interested in paying so much extra for features they don't even care about. Perhaps a smooth high framerate in casual shooters would be something they'd care for, but that can easily be achieved on base PS5 with at least 60+ FPS. I don't think they're the ones that care about true 4K, 120Hz/FPS or slightly better textures.

The only thing I can think of that people are hyped up for is GTA6. I fear that Rockstar might sell out to Sony and deliver a shitty 30FPS locked, low resolution and texture version of the game on older PS5 models on purpose, just to "push the hardware" of the newest model. But then again, they also couldn't even be arsed to unlock framerate for RDR2 on PS5, not even after so many years.

[–] Lost_My_Mind 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm already decided. I'm not buying GTA 6. And GTA 6 was the whole reason I bought the PS5 to begin with.

Over the past year I've seen how rockstar are making moves to make GTA 6 even more of a pay to win multiplayer experience, and less focused on the $60 single player experience. All of this at a $60 or more price point to start with I'm sure.

If you want to be pay to win, you can't also be AAA pricepoint to buy the game. I personally don't play pay to win games, but when you charge for the base game it goes from being a sketchy game mechanic, to being an outright scam.

You know what I'm playing right now on PS5? Transportation Fever 2. Fuck off Rockstar. You lost me as a lifelong customer since the first GTA on PS1.

[–] PunchingWood 2 points 2 weeks ago

I haven't read much into GTA 6 so far, only seen the trailer basically.

I do hope the singleplayer will still be as good as previous games, although I definitely would expect them to try and cash in on online even more.

T2 and Rockstar definitely fucked up with GTA 5 too. Originally there were supposed to be singleplayer expansions. Which they of course dropped in favor of how popular online got. And then they even proceeded to ban mods that took multiplayer-only cars to singleplayer, fucking disgusting move.

I'll wait and see how the singleplayer is. I never bought GTA5 for its multiplayer, it only got less appealing the more they added to it too. The only part that interested me much later on were the RP servers, it genuinely looked fun on some of the moderated ones, so maybe Rockstar will try to get into that, but if online is just a carbon copy of GTA5 I won't even bother.

[–] Zahille7 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not gonna lie, they almost had me looking for a used PS5 so I could play Spider-Man 2. Then I just watched a playthrough on YouTube.

It's hard to get good open world Spider-Man games for some reason, and these last few have really scratched that itch imo.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It'll be on PC soon enough. Just like the last two games.

[–] Zahille7 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I know, but I was being impatient before. Ragnarok is already on PC and I kinda forgot about it. I'll look into it once a sale hits, but even then it'll be a debate with myself over the psn stuff.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

There are other ways of playing these games but the Jedi won’t tell you about them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

There are hundreds of games available that are just as fun. Don't stress yourself over a AAA game.

[–] Squizzy 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I just got it, cant say it is even 70 bucks worth of fun. Spend more time as Miles and Peter on a bike or watching cut scenes than I do as spidey.

[–] essteeyou 2 points 2 weeks ago

Don't you want to crouch-walk around as MJ for half an hour?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Looks like it's mainly just a $700 AI upscaling machine.

[–] donuts 5 points 2 weeks ago

I think you can expect about the same as with the PS4 Pro. Maybe finally this time it will be a smooth actual 4k (ok actually, UHD) gaming experience. But that's kinda what we said last time too, so I don't know.

Developers would still have to optimize their games to get the most out of the hardware, unless we're talking about a game that was already performing suboptimal and throwing raw power at it will hide the surface level problems so it looks smoother.

I would love to see all this horsepower being used to actually make the games better by design, like pathfinding and NPC behaviour. The last big breakthrough we had was raytracing, which proved that it wasn't photorealism that makes it look better, but accurate lighting and shadows. For the consoles it was using an SSD for almost instant loading times.

But I digress. I'm not upgrading my PS5 either, but I can see the value for power users that play competitively or something.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 weeks ago

There will be a single digit number of games for it and all of them will require subscriptions to play and half of them will be canceled +/- 2 months from launch and then impossible to play because the servers are shut down.

How many PS5 Pros will be sold at retail, taken out of the package, hooked up to a TV, and never play a game that you could play on a normal PS5 or even a PS4?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Unless they're suddenly shoving a UHD drive in there, I'm not interested.

It seems a weird oversight - gamers that care about 4K surely also care about films in 4K? The notion of it being an external add-on is laughable.

Then again, this whole thing is a solution looking for a problem.

[–] Lost_My_Mind 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

If the thing is going to be an add-on, what's stopping people from buying the drive, and connecting it to their regular PS5?

[–] BroBot9000 3 points 2 weeks ago

Sony and their software.

[–] Squizzy 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The drive is an add on, base ps5 has a uhd already.. i think.

Both versiins have their own drives.

[–] Lost_My_Mind 1 points 2 weeks ago

There is a PS5 version with no disc drive. You can even currently buy a disc drive for it, buy the disc version side plates, remove your discless sideplate, connect the disc drive, and then attatch the disc drive version of the side plates......and you have the disc version of ps5 that they would have sold you in stores.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I know Terraflops are real and what they measure

I still refuse to believe they're not a fake term used to fluff up tech announcements and make shit sound more powerful than it is because that's a fucking stupid name that nobody should use

[–] tekato 4 points 2 weeks ago

That’s like saying clock rate and core count are fake terms. Sure, by themselves they might not mean much, but they’re part of a system that directly benefits from them being high.

The issue with teraflops metric is that it is inversely proportional (almost linearly) to the bit-length of the data, meaning that teraflops@8-bit is about 2x(teraflops@16-bit). So giving teraflops without specifying the bit-length it comes from is almost useless. Although you could make the argument that 8-bit is too low for modern games and 64-bit is too high of a performance trade off for accuracy gain, so you can assume the teraflops from a gaming company are based on 16-bit/32-bit performance.

[–] ms_lane 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

'They are'

It's usually measured as the performance doing a floating point fused multiply-add (fma) - that's it.

But also, multiply then add is the cornerstone of 3D graphics...

[–] BroBot9000 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is staring to feel like Sony’s 32x

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

PS5 pro and Xbox series x are the dreamcast. Xbox series s and the PS4 pro are the 32x.

[–] edgemaster72 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So the PS2 is right around the corner again? Sweet!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Steam deck or switch 2. Depending on what you are going for.

[–] JusticeForPorygon 9 points 2 weeks ago

That's cool, still not buying a PS5

[–] HollowNaught 6 points 2 weeks ago

Ok but why tho

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

No longer a leak, embargo lifted couple of hours ago.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Rocks are still superior paper weights.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

Oh the 16gigs is for devs/games and the 2gb is exclusively for the system. Was wondering how they were able to get by with only 2 gigs of ram and 16gigs of vram originally lmao.

[–] Shadywack 3 points 2 weeks ago

Interesting in their choice of TFLOPS announcement. They could've simply claimed 33 and put an asterisk for FP16 performance on the precision and called it a day. They're listing AMD's FP32 spec, which is divergent from Ampere/Ada which has the same output regardless of precision.