Poll: *The Official PlayStation (PS5/PS5 Pro) Thread*

Will you be buying a PS5 Pro on release?

  • Yes

    Votes: 53 14.4%

  • No (not at £700 Lol)

    Votes: 211 57.3%

  • No (other)

    Votes: 85 23.1%

  • Pancake

    Votes: 19 5.2%
  • Total voters
    368
SDK^ said:
That's fine until NVIDIA release GPU's that support a HDMI 1.2 connection......but what about the PS5 which could have games at 4k@120.
The LG OLED's are some of the few TV's which currently support 4k @ 120. I'm surprised more manufacturers haven't released sensible sized TV's supporting next gen consoles. Even Sony haven't got a TV doing 4k@120, outside of their 8k model.
Click to expand...

The PS5 won’t be doing 4k120. It doesn’t have anywhere near the power required to drive modern games at that resolution and frame rate.
 
Kreeeee said:
The PS5 won’t be doing 4k120. It doesn’t have anywhere near the power required to drive modern games at that resolution and frame rate.
Click to expand...

Course it can. If you cheat with the 4K. You can checkerboard up from 1080p to 4K and get 120fps I bet. The output signal will still be seen as 4K120 and need the appropriate bandwidth. I've been begging Housemarque for a 4K120 version of Resogun for PS5. I still hope.

(Moon Studios is promising 120fps for the last Ori game on Xbox Series X. Even if the native resolution is 1440p, the console will still be outputting a 4K signal. So again, that 4K120 capability on your TV will be used.)
 
Last edited:
biron_w said:
But will be 4K/30FPS or ?/60FPS
Considering they're bragging about how powerful the new consoles are supposed I think that's pretty poor. It should be 4K/60FPS as standard.
Click to expand...

No idea, I'm guessing it will be one of the various methods for 'faking' 4k, I don't really read much into the how's and whats.
 
biron_w said:
Considering they're bragging about how powerful the new consoles are supposed I think that's pretty poor. It should be 4K/60FPS as standard.
Click to expand...

Why?

Say they enforced 4K60. This would limit developer choice, and would see (in many instances) worse looking games. They would look sharper and run smoother, but potentially at the cost of far more noticeable features and effects.

To throw out an extreme example, Minecraft at 4K60 vs Minecraft RTX at 1080p30. Which would you rather play? Or what if you could switch between the two using an in-game setting? It would be a massive shame to dump the RTX version because the game has to run at 4K60.

Only bit I'm not keen on is the marketing. 4K60 mode is going to be advertised heavily as a feature. But you just know that all footage and screenshots will be from the standard (better looking) version of the game :p
 
Mark1989 said:
Well for me it's two spider man and clank, does that make it better ha?

I'd like to say GT7 would be a launch title but they take years to release anything even once they announce it
Click to expand...

I remember that. Gran Turismo 5 Prologue. It came out what? 2006/7? Then GT5 came out 2009? I remember playing Prologue for so long.
 
McPhee said:
Why?

Say they enforced 4K60. This would limit developer choice, and would see (in many instances) worse looking games. They would look sharper and run smoother, but potentially at the cost of far more noticeable features and effects.

To throw out an extreme example, Minecraft at 4K60 vs Minecraft RTX at 1080p30. Which would you rather play? Or what if you could switch between the two using an in-game setting? It would be a massive shame to dump the RTX version because the game has to run at 4K60.

Only bit I'm not keen on is the marketing. 4K60 mode is going to be advertised heavily as a feature. But you just know that all footage and screenshots will be from the standard (better looking) version of the game :p
Click to expand...

On the other hand it could lead to better games because the developers take more time to actually learn the hardware at a deeper level out of necessity, 30fps is often just an exercise in laziness and publishers being able to rush games out with un-optimised code for a quick pay day.
 
Richdog said:
A £550 game? Yeah, perfectly justified. :p
Click to expand...

That's kind what I do tbh... I got a PS2 for San Andreas, I got a PS3 for GTAIV (then later brought the expansion packs, Red Dead & GTAV)

I'm not sure whether it is worth getting a PS4 or not now... am interested to play RDR2 but like with the PS5 coming out I'll maybe just buy that.

Or I guess if PS4 prices just bomb upon release of the PS5 then... maybe get a PS4 Pro purely for RDR2 and some of the remastered classics I've not played on PS3 yet.
 
dowie said:
That's kind what I do tbh... I got a PS2 for San Andreas, I got a PS3 for GTAIV (then later brought the expansion packs, Red Dead & GTAV)

I'm not sure whether it is worth getting a PS4 or not now... am interested to play RDR2 but like with the PS5 coming out I'll maybe just buy that.

Or I guess if PS4 prices just bomb upon release of the PS5 then... maybe get a PS4 Pro purely for RDR2 and some of the remastered classics I've not played on PS3 yet.
Click to expand...

Might as well just get the PS5 as it's backwards compatible with most PS4 games from what I gather.
 
9f3cGDm.jpg


Free upgrade for PS4/Xbone owners.
 
Nice, one of the few digital titles I have. I stopped playing because I played it on PC and then couldn't go back. I'm guessing a 60 fps mode is out the question? That's what stopped me finishing it on PS4.
 
Plainsong said:
For once I agree with you. Controls horribly. Gets so much praise but I can't get past the jankiness and bad control.
Click to expand...

That is what infuriates me with so many console games. Every developer puts in their own janky feel with the controls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom