4K just may be the next gen standard, Sony shows Gran Turismo 4K tech demo

#261Omega_BlackPosted 10/6/2012 7:08:45 AM
I'm fine with my 1080p HDTV at the moment.
I don't want to spend a reported ten grand on something my old eyes may not even appreciate.
---
Go where the games are...
Brawl FC: 2062 8812 4168
#262SolisPosted 10/6/2012 7:29:29 AM
darkjedilink posted...
So, you think selling 150+million in eleven years is better than selling 100+million in 6?

Considering that a majority of the PS2's sales were in the first 5 years of its lifespan, yes. It reached 100 million a year before the PS3 was even released. The Wii sold FEWER consoles in a LONGER amount of time...yet somehow that's better?!

Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, the Wii didn't have anywhere NEAR the market control that the PS2. Whereas the PS2 more than outsold every other console from that generation combined twice over, the Wii wasn't even able to account for a majority of sales this generation. More total consoles have been sold this generation than last generation, and yet the Wii accounted for LESS sales than the previous market leader. See the difference?

By your logic, the PSP sold better than the Gameboy, because the Gameboy only sold 119 units in 14 years while the PSP hit 71 million units in only half that amount of time!
---
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review
#2631shadetail1Posted 10/6/2012 7:31:24 AM
DarkZV2Beta posted...
omniryu posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
At the time the Wii came out, HDTVs were underused. PS3 and 360 changed that, though, which is something Nintendo should have seen coming. It's not like PS2 was so heavily advertized as EDTV ready, or even PS1. Same with Xbox, even. But, they assumed it would be the same thing, that people just wouldn't care, similarly to EDTVs.(which were a much bigger upgrade off SD than HD was off them.)


I think it wasn't an oversight. Rather they chose to ignore it.


I don't see how they could benefit from ignoring it.

Nintendo obviously couldn't benefit...*now*. HDTVs are the current standard. They're in over 50% of U.S. homes now, and if you talk about just gamers rather than the general population, the percentage would probably be much higher. A generation 8 console without HD graphics would be a joke.

But that's now. We're talking about back when HDTVs were very rare. Less than one in fives homes had them back when the Wii launched. And the fact is, game consoles do not push technology, they follow it. Nintendo chose not to make the Wii to what was then a nonexistent standard, and focus on features instead. It obviously paid off, because they were number 1 this generation. They sold the most units even if you talk about consoles alone, and particularly if you add in handhelds. Unlike the gaming divisions of Sony and MS, Nintendo is solidly in the black.

Spending money getting a game console to support a future standard that isn't here yet is a waste of time and resources. Nintendo proved that with the Wii. And Sony, in particular, proved that trying to future-proof a console in that manner can backfire pretty badly. They wasted billions banking on the bluray movie playback in the PS3, only to see discs start to decline and be replaced by streaming before bluray ever got a foothold. For all we know, a similar fate awaits any company that bets on 4k this early, because we don't know yet that it will ever be the standard.
---
Religion is like spaghetti: either stiff and fragile, or wet and limp.
#264DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/6/2012 7:52:07 AM
And had the system been able to output a proper HD signal, it probably could have done even better. They even admitted it was a mistake to not include HD support at one point, and rationalized why; it wasn't their priority at the time.
---
Also, lolz@SATA drives. You see, they make these things called "heat," which kills consoles.
-darkjedilink
#265SolisPosted 10/6/2012 8:36:56 AM
1shadetail1 posted...
But that's now. We're talking about back when HDTVs were very rare. Less than one in fives homes had them back when the Wii launched. And the fact is, game consoles do not push technology, they follow it. Nintendo chose not to make the Wii to what was then a nonexistent standard, and focus on features instead. It obviously paid off, because they were number 1 this generation. They sold the most units even if you talk about consoles alone, and particularly if you add in handhelds. Unlike the gaming divisions of Sony and MS, Nintendo is solidly in the black.

Spending money getting a game console to support a future standard that isn't here yet is a waste of time and resources. Nintendo proved that with the Wii. And Sony, in particular, proved that trying to future-proof a console in that manner can backfire pretty badly. They wasted billions banking on the bluray movie playback in the PS3, only to see discs start to decline and be replaced by streaming before bluray ever got a foothold. For all we know, a similar fate awaits any company that bets on 4k this early, because we don't know yet that it will ever be the standard.

I've always found it to be a very poor argument to design a console based on what's already popular when the console itself is going to be on the market for 5+ years. HD was most CERTAINLY a standard when the Wii launched, and it was very clear that it would only gain in popularity as the generation went on, so there's really no excuse to create something that's already behind the times at launch. Even then, I'm pretty sure that wireless routers weren't in a majority of householes around the time the Wii released, yet they decided to build wifi into the console and not even include an ethernet port. Seems like a double standard really.

I think you're also very incorrect about consoles not pushing technology. Do you really think the Xbox 360 and PS3 didn't contribute to HDTV sales? In fact:

http://dizzy33.blogspot.com/2008/04/ps3-and-xbox-360-are-driving-hdtv-sales.html

Meanwhile, the Playstation 3's problem wasn't that it was "futureproofed", it's that it wasn't very efficiently designed and even used outdated components that were more expensive and less capable than more recent technology (especially its GPU).
---
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review
#266FoppePosted 10/6/2012 8:49:33 AM
Nintendo will release their next console before even 10% of the NA families will get a 4KTV, so why even whine about it?
---
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
#267JackalPosted 10/6/2012 9:05:34 AM
Foppe posted...
Nintendo will release their next console before even 10% of the NA families will get a 4KTV, so why even whine about it?


They know this. But it gives them a reason to complain about Sony.
---
PSN: Jackal-5, XBox: Jackal 55 (No, I don't have a 360)
EVE Online: Jonak
#268Shinobi120Posted 10/6/2012 4:21:00 PM(edited)
Solis posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
But that's now. We're talking about back when HDTVs were very rare. Less than one in fives homes had them back when the Wii launched. And the fact is, game consoles do not push technology, they follow it. Nintendo chose not to make the Wii to what was then a nonexistent standard, and focus on features instead. It obviously paid off, because they were number 1 this generation. They sold the most units even if you talk about consoles alone, and particularly if you add in handhelds. Unlike the gaming divisions of Sony and MS, Nintendo is solidly in the black.

Spending money getting a game console to support a future standard that isn't here yet is a waste of time and resources. Nintendo proved that with the Wii. And Sony, in particular, proved that trying to future-proof a console in that manner can backfire pretty badly. They wasted billions banking on the bluray movie playback in the PS3, only to see discs start to decline and be replaced by streaming before bluray ever got a foothold. For all we know, a similar fate awaits any company that bets on 4k this early, because we don't know yet that it will ever be the standard.


I've always found it to be a very poor argument to design a console based on what's already popular when the console itself is going to be on the market for 5+ years. HD was most CERTAINLY a standard when the Wii launched, and it was very clear that it would only gain in popularity as the generation went on, so there's really no excuse to create something that's already behind the times at launch. Even then, I'm pretty sure that wireless routers weren't in a majority of householes around the time the Wii released, yet they decided to build wifi into the console and not even include an ethernet port. Seems like a double standard really.

I think you're also very incorrect about consoles not pushing technology. Do you really think the Xbox 360 and PS3 didn't contribute to HDTV sales? In fact:

http://dizzy33.blogspot.com/2008/04/ps3-and-xbox-360-are-driving-hdtv-sales.html

Meanwhile, the Playstation 3's problem wasn't that it was "futureproofed", it's that it wasn't very efficiently designed and even used outdated components that were more expensive and less capable than more recent technology (especially its GPU).


I think that you're failing to understand his point. When this generation first started back in 2005, HD wasn't even standard into the homes of average consumers. SDTV's were still king back then. People were waiting until HDTV's have gotten more cheaper before buying them. A lot of people weren't going to buy HDTV's just for gaming. As a matter of fact, HDTV didn't start becoming the standard until about mid 2010.
#269SolisPosted 10/6/2012 5:43:05 PM
Shinobi120 posted...
I think that you're failing to understand his point. When this generation first started back in 2005, HD wasn't even standard into the homes of average consumers. SDTV's were still king back then. People were waiting until HDTV's have gotten more cheaper before buying them. A lot of people weren't going to buy HDTV's just for gaming. As a matter of fact, HDTV didn't start becoming the standard until about mid 2010.

No, that's exactly the point: they built a console based on what was popular at the START of the generation, even though they expected the console would be on the market for over half a decade. Again, why wouldn't the console be built to take into account the fact that HDTVs would only increase in popularity to the point of being standard within the time that the console is on the market? It's just plain short sighted to pretend that nothing matters except what's common at the launch of a system. That's like buying groceries once a week and only buying enough food to last you a day.

And again, I question why they chose not to support HDTVs because it wasn't standard in the homes of the average consumers, when they DID choose to support (and even require) Wifi networks which weren't standard in the homes of the average consumer when the console launched.
---
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review
#270PaukenPosted 10/6/2012 6:22:46 PM
Topic was tl;dr, but I have one important point to make:

What the #$#$ is sony thinking? 4k isn't even standard yet on PC!!! That's like making a PC game that requires a supercomputer to even run at 15 frames per second, let alone 120 fps.

Hell, my PC runs so fast it could make the PS3 and 360 look like they came from 1989, but even it can't run 4k res. This isn't helped much by my monitor being capped at 1080p. Sony's insane for thinking the PS3 could handle a resolution that would make my PC's video card and monitor cry for mommy on anything higher end than Morrowind. 100% confirmed Sony's commited seppuku. Glad I never jumped on the Vitanic.
---
"congratulations you successfully mined a death knight!
its completely normal as the class is EVERYWHERE" - Little Zardar