• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

When will the first 'next gen' console be revealed?

  • First half of 2019

    Votes: 593 15.6%
  • Second half of 2019(let's say post E3)

    Votes: 1,361 35.9%
  • First half of 2020

    Votes: 1,675 44.2%
  • 2021 :^)

    Votes: 161 4.2%

  • Total voters
    3,790
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

discotrigger

Member
Oct 25, 2017
561
I thought the backwards compatibility for both PS4 and PS3 were based on specific software patents. Of course, PS4 backwards compatibility can be inferred just from the PS5 sharing quite a bit in common in terms of architecture (not just X86, but unified memory and other aspects as well). Not having backwards compatibility with PS4 would represent a major weakness compared to the next Xbox and PC platforms.

This is especially important given how well these games are going to hold up for various reasons. After all, everything photorealistic will still use PBR as the theoretical lighting model, unlocking the framerate can give PS4 games new life and give them some advantage over certain PS5 titles in that aspect, and a full 2160p will provide a better experience when compared with checkerboarding on the PS4 Pro. The jump between PS4 games with a high framerate and good image quality compared to PS5 games targeting 60 FPS isn't likely to be very pronounced during the early years of PS5, so if the next Xbox allows you to enjoy the same third party games with those kinds of improvements and PS5 doesn't, it's gonna' be rough going unless the next generation of games come out at a record pace.

Of course, given the architectural similarities and the availability of higher quality assets and rendering techniques from PC, it will be all the easier for third parties to quickly rerelease their games for PS5 with targeted enhancements. This will probably be more common than it was with the PS4 since Steam wasn't quite as big when the PS4 launched, but now it's fairly uncommon to see console exclusives that aren't artificially exclusive through some kind of partnership. So maybe backwards compatibility really won't be as necessary as it feels right now, even if it feels like a certainty at this point.
 
Last edited:

bcatwilly

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,483
Here is Digital Foundry last year on the Slipspace engine demo, definitely next gen stuff that I expect to see and learn more about at this E3.

 

STech

Member
Sep 24, 2018
1,735
SSD should be an option. It's an easy way to save costs and you could replace it easily like in PS3/4.
 

Deleted member 30005

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 2, 2017
305
This is the advertising feature you can opt out of in the system settings.

Everyone threw a fit when their automatically downloaded destiny years ago then everyone disabled it and it hasn't been used since

It didn't download the entire game. Featured content places an ad on the homescreen inviting you to purchase/download it.

An unwelcome feature, still.
 

christocolus

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,932
Here is Digital Foundry last year on the Slipspace engine demo, definitely next gen stuff that I expect to see and learn more about at this E3.

I loved the short demo they did last year...if the engine is really that good then may be PG games could use it for their open world rpg project too, either way it will be really nice to learn more about slipspace and Halo at E3 2k19.
 

MrKlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,038
That's what I always think. Something devs can take advantage of

Devs can take advantage of the guaranteed access/transfer speed of an SSD, especially for open world games.

The only reason I do want *only* an SSD is because it makes it expensive for uses to do an external drive if that also therefore has to be SSD speed. A smaller SSD cache combined with a mechanical HDD for game storage would be better IMO - allows the user to expand with a regular external HDD while still offering the increased speed for devs to leverage on all games.
 

Screen Looker

Member
Nov 17, 2018
1,963
No. That is pretty much impossible. You can't have every physical game require a mandatory download to et the complete game. Splitting the game though is possible but not worth the headache of having every dev have to do that. And what happens when you have single player games that take up around 100GB?

I feel like they could easily make all campaign files on discs and multiplayer sections downloadable.
 

BreakAtmo

Member
Nov 12, 2017
12,830
Australia
Yes. Nand flash + replaceable HDD is the best option.

They can put 240GB of embedded nand flash in the consoles for less than or around $10 for them (You can buy a 2.5" 240GB sata SSD for around $25 right now at retail). And still be able t put in a 2TB HDD in there too and manage all this at under $40 per console. As opposed to spending $40 - $50 on a 1TB HDD and either make it non replaceable or make every consumer know they can'\t throw in a normal (higher capacity) HDD in there.

And you want devs to know that every console has this much bandwidth to work with s they can better build their games around that r not the devs will just assume every consle is using HDD.

I thought so. Only thing I worry about us how long it could potentially take to transfer the game's data to the cache when you start playing it - what are the best ways to go about this?

Edit: I came up with another option, though I'm not sure how feasible it is.
- Include 1TB of embedded flash on the motherboard, along with an empty 2.5" drive bay (relatively cheap, I hope).
- Upon purchase the 1TB of flash would act as the game's normal storage.
- If you put a storage drive into the drive bay, the 1TB of flash becomes a huge flash cache, with games stored on the HDD being moved to it (either entirely or partially as needed) when you start playing them, and moved back either manually or when the flash is close to getting full.
- If the drive you put in is an SSD that matches or exceeds the read/write speeds of the internal one, the system lets you play games directly off of it.
This might be too complex, but I feel like enough of it could be automated for it to work.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
I thought so. Only thing I worry about us how long it could potentially take to transfer the game's data to the cache when you start playing it - what are the best ways to go about this?
Sony have a patent for starting to pre-load game assets when you move across the item in the menu before you even click to start playing.
Not sure if there was any more to it than that - but they're considering that problem.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,151
United Kingdom
Here is Digital Foundry last year on the Slipspace engine demo, definitely next gen stuff that I expect to see and learn more about at this E3.



It's just a hype/speculation video. Doesn't really offer much on the technologies being employed by the engine.

His basic premise is that its a big step up from previous Halo games, which it is, but Halo games haven't set visual benchmarks for graphics in a very long time.

Importantly, at the beginning of the video he highlights that it's an engine demo. Engine demos don't have to run on target hardware nor even in realtime. So the flawed presentation to me suggests they are targeting a level of visual fidelity that's close to what the current gen consoles can achieve, especially since there's very little there that says "next-gen".

The Embark software video posted earlier is much more inline with what i'd expect from an engine demo, i.e. something not limited by current generation hardware, that cranks all the VFX settings in the engine to max to show off the top end of what is possible.

The Slipspace demo doesn't do that. It looks very clean and very nice, but doesn't remotely seem beyond the ability of current gen consoles.
 

MrKlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,038
Here is Digital Foundry last year on the Slipspace engine demo, definitely next gen stuff that I expect to see and learn more about at this E3.




I didn't like that trailer when I first saw it, and still don't. Something looks odd - especially that section with the warthog driving along from a distance.

Also while I love DF stuff, Richard at the start of that video just reminded me of

 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
4,930
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
Yeah Halo 4 was never a looker.....
It is less graphically modern than Halo Reach by far, but generally has stable 30 fps performance and nice high poly art for the era. Also, has one of the better particle systems from last gen (much like Reach).
RDR 2 and HZD are on par with this. It doesn't look next-gen at all to me. They should do better with this.

You are probably going to be very disappointed in Next Gen graphics then honestly with that attitude. Halo infinite is going to target 60 fps unlike the unstable 30 that those games target. You may want to watch the trailer again and pay attention to high poly the enironments are, somthing that current gen games tend to not have at all (they spend all the poly budget on the characters and hero objects) and take a closer look at the ground and environmental rocks in games like HZD or RDR2, they most definitely do not have high poly meshes and craggy sillhouettes like this:
rockst6kft.png
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
We all talk about graphics all day long but when it comes to immersion audio is as much important if not more in certain situations. Just found that report about Dolby Atmos on Xbox One. I assume this will the case for Playstation next gen too.

Dolby Atmos Upmixing for all Games and Movies Comes to Xbox One!!

Source: https://wccftech.com/dolby-atmos-upmixing-comes-xbox-one/

You are probably going to be very disappointed in Next Gen graphics then honestly with that attitude.
I have to agree. Besides for the usually upgrade in resolution for those with a base console I expect finally an AI worth the name in games, better frame rates and better textures but it won't be that much of a difference like between gens before. As a Xbox One X owner I count on the last three as for resolution I already playing most of the time in 1800p to 2160p.
 
Last edited:

TheRaidenPT

Editor-in-Chief, Hyped Pixels
Verified
Jun 11, 2018
5,945
Lisbon, Portugal
We all talk about graphics all day long but when it comes to immersion audio is as much important if not more in certain situations. Just found that report about Dolby Atmos on Xbox One. I assume this will the case for Playstation next gen too.

Dolby Atmos Upmixing for all Games and Movies Comes to Xbox One!!

Source: https://wccftech.com/dolby-atmos-upmixing-comes-xbox-one/

Most likely yeah, not sure if Sony is gonna keep pushing the 3D Audio
 
Jan 17, 2019
964
You are probably going to be very disappointed in Next Gen graphics then honestly with that attitude. Halo infinite is going to target 60 fps unlike the unstable 30 that those games target. You may want to watch the trailer again and pay attention to high poly the enironments are, somthing that current gen games tend to not have at all (they spend all the poly budget on the characters and hero objects) and take a closer look at the ground and environmental rocks in games like HZD or RDR2, they most definitely do not have high poly meshes and craggy sillhouettes like this:
rockst6kft.png

HZD is very, very stable 30.But i'm not talking about frame-rates. Also, those high poly meshes and craggy sillhouettes doesn't give suddenly to game a next-gen look. There's a bunch other stuff. Especially scene with Warthog. That doesn't look next-gen to me at all. Trees especially. HZD and RDR 2 are still on par with that trailer graphically speaking and next-gen should do better than that. Well, what the hell i know.
 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
4,930
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
HZD is very, very stable 30.But i'm not talking about frame-rates.
That is key to the perspective though - if Halo infinite has half the time to render a game world in it is necessarily going to affect the complexity of its graphics. If next gen is just 2x or 2,5x more GPU than X1X, and half of that is being eaten by a 60 fps target and 4K resolution, it is easy to imagine why it looks the way it does.
Also, those high poly meshes and craggy sillhouettes doesn't give suddenly to game a next-gen look. There's a bunch other stuff. Especially scene with Warthog. That doesn't look next-gen to me at all. Trees especially. HZD and RDR 2 are still on par with that trailer graphically speaking and next-gen should do better than that. Well, what the hell i know.
You are going to be very disappointed next gen on PS5 or Xbox 2 with that current dismissive attitude regarding something like that - really keep your expectations in check. The way the rocks and ground are rendered there is much higher poly than current gen games. It may seem slight to you, but the cost and level of complexity is there. Just coming off Metro Exodus which cut out tessellation on consoles, this is indeed beyond current gen.
I have to agree. Besides for the usually upgrade in resolution for those with a base console I expect finally an AI worth the name in games, better frame rates and better textures but it won't be that much of a difference like between gens before. As a Xbox One X owner I count on the last three as for resolution I already playing most of the time in 1800p to 2160p.

PS4pro and x1x are going to make next gen seem very underwhelming if people do not keep their expectations in check. We have a great understanding of power envelope and price requirements for next gen, yet people are still going to expect miracle offline CG rendering.
 

gundamkyoukai

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,105
HZD 2 and Rockstar next game will likely look better because they going to target 30fps .
So there games looking better would not be surprising .
 

El-Pistolero

Banned
Jan 4, 2018
1,308
The opening scenes of that Halo trailer are clearly beyond what current generation consoles can produce. Some bits look rough, but I would attribute that to how early the project was, when the trailer came out...
 

Pheonix

Banned
Dec 14, 2018
5,990
St Kitts
I thought so. Only thing I worry about us how long it could potentially take to transfer the game's data to the cache when you start playing it - what are the best ways to go about this?

Edit: I came up with another option, though I'm not sure how feasible it is.
- Include 1TB of embedded flash on the motherboard, along with an empty 2.5" drive bay (relatively cheap, I hope).
- Upon purchase the 1TB of flash would act as the game's normal storage.
- If you put a storage drive into the drive bay, the 1TB of flash becomes a huge flash cache, with games stored on the HDD being moved to it (either entirely or partially as needed) when you start playing them, and moved back either manually or when the flash is close to getting full.
- If the drive you put in is an SSD that matches or exceeds the read/write speeds of the internal one, the system lets you play games directly off of it.
This might be too complex, but I feel like enough of it could be automated for it to work.

Say around the end of this year a 1TB SSD cost around $80 at retail; OEM pricing for sony and MS will usually always be around half or even less than what the retail price is. So that will put it at around $40 for them to put in a 1TB SSD. And if they are going the embedded route that means its going to cost them even less. So say around $30/TB. Now this may seem great but there is another reason why using a smaller SSD makes more sense.

If using a smaller embedded 240GB nand flash they could also invest in an NVMe controller. All falling within about a $20. And still be able t put in a 1TB HDD in there. A set up like this gives the best of both worlds, and not the entire game needs to be copied over to the nand flash (that would just be a waste of resources). This way you can maximize SATA bandwidth with regards to copying game segments from HDD to embedded cache and have a pool of over 1GB/s of bandwidth for the embedded SSD so OS functions and tasks doesn't impact available bandwidth for game applications.

A set up like this will also mean that you can pretty much transfer data from HDD to SSD at the maximum speed the SATA 3 interface will allow.

But they could just simplify all this and just do what you said but not even put the option of an empty SATA 3 interface. Cause truth be told is they dont need to.

They can just have 1TB of embedded SSD and call it a day. If you want to expand your storage you can just plug in an external drive via those snazzy USB 3.2 ports they have included The switch gets away with having almost no internal storage so yh.... it won't be the end of the world.
 

VX1

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,000
Europe
PS4pro and x1x are going to make next gen seem very underwhelming if people do not keep their expectations in check.

This.I am so glad i didn't buy mid gen upgrade,next gen for people like me will be very nice jump,from base PS4 to PS5.
Colbert it seems to me that people who bought 1X will be the most disappointed when next gen arrives ;)
 

Deleted member 34385

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 26, 2017
459
This.I am so glad i didn't buy mid gen upgrade,next gen for people like me will be very nice jump,from base PS4 to PS5.
Colbert it seems to me that people who bought 1X will be the most disappointed when next gen arrives ;)
not at all, i will buy the mid gen upgrade of next gen, so while you constantly get the launch models, i get the mid gen models, same thing, different time :)
 

Taffy Lewis

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,527
Adding a port if it is not included in the motherboard design is a pita. Doubtful that Sony cared enough. Probably we will just get plain old USB 3, not USB 3.1.
Um... the PS4 Pro has USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports

That poster is using the old nomenclature, it has been changed for marketing reasons: That's USB 3.0. USB 3.0 has been renamed to USB 3.1 Gen1 and now USB 3.2 Gen1.
The same happened with USB 3.1, it became USB 3.1 Gen2 and now USB 3.2 Gen2.
And USB 3.2? It's USB 3.2 Gen2x2

nbw7wgO.jpg
 

BreakAtmo

Member
Nov 12, 2017
12,830
Australia
Say around the end of this year a 1TB SSD cost around $80 at retail; OEM pricing for sony and MS will usually always be around half or even less than what the retail price is. So that will put it at around $40 for them to put in a 1TB SSD. And if they are going the embedded route that means its going to cost them even less. So say around $30/TB. Now this may seem great but there is another reason why using a smaller SSD makes more sense.

If using a smaller embedded 240GB nand flash they could also invest in an NVMe controller. All falling within about a $20. And still be able t put in a 1TB HDD in there. A set up like this gives the best of both worlds, and not the entire game needs to be copied over to the nand flash (that would just be a waste of resources). This way you can maximize SATA bandwidth with regards to copying game segments from HDD to embedded cache and have a pool of over 1GB/s of bandwidth for the embedded SSD so OS functions and tasks doesn't impact available bandwidth for game applications.

A set up like this will also mean that you can pretty much transfer data from HDD to SSD at the maximum speed the SATA 3 interface will allow.

But they could just simplify all this and just do what you said but not even put the option of an empty SATA 3 interface. Cause truth be told is they dont need to.

They can just have 1TB of embedded SSD and call it a day. If you want to expand your storage you can just plug in an external drive via those snazzy USB 3.2 ports they have included The switch gets away with having almost no internal storage so yh.... it won't be the end of the world.

They could do that, but I'd find it pretty annoying if external drives were essentially mandatory. I have one now for my Pro, and it's ok, but I don't like constantly having to repair it when it suddenly decides to not work, and I don't like having one of my USB ports taken up. I literally don't have enough ports for everything I have (external drive, PSVR, Platinum Headset and arcade stick). I'd be cool with that approach only if the console had, like... 6 USB ports, or if you could buy an external drive that somehow replaced the port it was taking up. I would prefer to be able to buy my own 4TB internal HDD rather than have the console come with a 1TB HDD that I had to pay for, too.

Also, the Switch may lack internal storage, but you can at least use SD cards that are nicer than external drives.
 

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
This.I am so glad i didn't buy mid gen upgrade,next gen for people like me will be very nice jump,from base PS4 to PS5.
Colbert it seems to me that people who bought 1X will be the most disappointed when next gen arrives ;)
Ha ha, I don't think I will be disappointed even owning a One X. I know what to expect ... just like Dictator (a fellow german) said ;)
 

Thorrgal

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,302
PS4pro and x1x are going to make next gen seem very underwhelming if people do not keep their expectations in check. We have a great understanding of power envelope and price requirements for next gen, yet people are still going to expect miracle offline CG rendering.

Do you dare to guess some possible specs tied to price?

Like what could we realistically get for $399/$499?
 

Taffy Lewis

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,527
They could do that, but I'd find it pretty annoying if external drives were essentially mandatory. I have one now for my Pro, and it's ok, but I don't like constantly having to repair it when it suddenly decides to not work, and I don't like having one of my USB ports taken up. I literally don't have enough ports for everything I have (external drive, PSVR, Platinum Headset and arcade stick). I'd be cool with that approach only if the console had, like... 6 USB ports, or if you could buy an external drive that somehow replaced the port it was taking up. I would prefer to be able to buy my own 4TB internal HDD rather than have the console come with a 1TB HDD that I had to pay for, too.

Also, the Switch may lack internal storage, but you can at least use SD cards that are nicer than external drives.

While a SATA port or an m.2 NVMe slot may be nice and would be something I'd prefer, I don't think you can realistically expect anything more than a USB 3.2 Gen2x2 port for an external SSD. External drives are reliable, if yours isn't you should consider getting another enclosure.

Also, I think hard drives in general are pretty much "out" for next gen, considering loading times are a huge problem even in this generation.
 

MrKlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,038
While a SATA port or an m.2 NVMe slot may be nice and would be something I'd prefer, I don't think you can realistically expect anything more than a USB 3.2 Gen2x2 port for an external SSD. External drives are reliable, if yours isn't you should consider getting another enclosure.

Also, I think hard drives in general are pretty much "out" for next gen, considering loading times are a huge problem even in this generation.

I don't want to be limited to 1TB internal storage and if I want to expand that I have to buy a USB 3 external 1+TB SSD - those costs will still be pretty high if you want more than 1TB.

Mechanical storage support isn't just to help keep cost of goods under control for the console, its also to help with user extensibility options
 

Fastidioso

Banned
Nov 3, 2017
3,101
"Generation ahead" is obviously hyperbole (cuz I thought that's the way we were supposed to communicate on the internet), but the Slipspace demo is nothing special at all. Out side of the clean IQ and high-rez textures on thw rocks everything else looks pretty unremarkable. There really wasn't a single standout graphical feature, some of the lighting looked flat and the rhino animation and smoke effects in partcular dragged down the whole presentation.

Compared with the lighting in FH4, volumetric lighting effects, animation and density and consistency of detail in RDR2, it's really night and day.
I'm not want to sound rude but UE4 typical should use a more advanced lighting than RDR2 (which it seems extremely low buffer on the X at least) and I doubt even a car racer can have a more advanced graphic details of UE4 considered it has to prioritise the fps.
 

Bowl0l

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,608
That poster is using the old nomenclature, it has been changed for marketing reasons: That's USB 3.0. USB 3.0 has been renamed to USB 3.1 Gen1 and now USB 3.2 Gen1.
The same happened with USB 3.1, it became USB 3.1 Gen2 and now USB 3.2 Gen2.
And USB 3.2? It's USB 3.2 Gen2x2

nbw7wgO.jpg
They have really gone nuts with the naming. Might as well wait for USB 4
 

Sprat

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,684
England
They could do that, but I'd find it pretty annoying if external drives were essentially mandatory. I have one now for my Pro, and it's ok, but I don't like constantly having to repair it when it suddenly decides to not work, and I don't like having one of my USB ports taken up. I literally don't have enough ports for everything I have (external drive, PSVR, Platinum Headset and arcade stick). I'd be cool with that approach only if the console had, like... 6 USB ports, or if you could buy an external drive that somehow replaced the port it was taking up. I would prefer to be able to buy my own 4TB internal HDD rather than have the console come with a 1TB HDD that I had to pay for, too.

Also, the Switch may lack internal storage, but you can at least use SD cards that are nicer than external drives.

You can get external drives with USB hubs on
 

cooldawn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,445
That is key to the perspective though - if Halo infinite has half the time to render a game world in it is necessarily going to affect the complexity of its graphics. If next gen is just 2x or 2,5x more GPU than X1X, and half of that is being eaten by a 60 fps target and 4K resolution, it is easy to imagine why it looks the way it does.

You are going to be very disappointed next gen on PS5 or Xbox 2 with that current dismissive attitude regarding something like that - really keep your expectations in check. The way the rocks and ground are rendered there is much higher poly than current gen games. It may seem slight to you, but the cost and level of complexity is there. Just coming off Metro Exodus which cut out tessellation on consoles, this is indeed beyond current gen.


PS4pro and x1x are going to make next gen seem very underwhelming if people do not keep their expectations in check. We have a great understanding of power envelope and price requirements for next gen, yet people are still going to expect miracle offline CG rendering.
For me this type of assumption/assertion begs the question....What's the point?

I keep seeing low quality assets in videogames within a high resolution frame and I can't understand why everything doesn't develop at the same rate. The explosive resolution increases made in recent years are visibly far ahead of the technology/techniques to provide a rich scene that even warrants 4K detail. More often than not rocky cliff edges are sharp lines and low resolution textures. Expansive open-world environments usually have bad grass/sand/dirt textures. I mean there's no point in 4K if the quality of the assets are poor in the first place.

Would it not be more compelling to have a game run at a reasonable resolution but show a rich, full and detailed world? Just seems the push for 4K is at odds with everything else.
 

chris 1515

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,074
Barcelona Spain
I think people will be disappointed by the next generation if they are disappointed by the 4k 60 fps trailer of Halo Infinite. We had some mid-generation console and no new rendering method. This will be an evolution and like said Albert Penello don't expect generational leap as big as before.
 

Carn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,911
The Netherlands
For me this type of assumption/assertion begs the question....What's the point?

I keep seeing low quality assets in videogames within a high resolution frame and I can't understand why everything doesn't develop at the same rate. The explosive resolution increases made in recent years are visibly far ahead of the technology/techniques to provide a rich scene that even warrants 4K detail. More often than not rocky cliff edges are sharp lines and low resolution textures. Expansive open-world environments usually have bad grass/sand/dirt textures. I mean there's no point in 4K if the quality of the assets are poor in the first place.

Would it not be more compelling to have a game run at a reasonable resolution but show a rich, full and detailed world? Just seems the push for 4K is at odds with everything else.

Yeah, the resolution race kinda sucks. It has very limited application in gaming: Big TV screens, and VR. For the rest, I'd rather have a high quality image; I'm fine with 1080p and/or the use of clever upscaling / rendering methods to reach a higher res.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.