Project Scorpio VS PS4 Pro

Scorpio or PS4 Pro?


  • Total voters
    4

ZaXo Ken'Ichi

Disciple of Vivi
Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
530
Location
Behind you...
Gil
1
The point of this thread is to discuss feelings related to these two iterative boxes of hardware, and which one we think is a more effective approach... if either will be effective at all.

Personally, I think the PS4 Pro is a much smarter step. I've seen a lot of people around the internet treating the Scorpio's lead in power as a definitive reason as to why it'll succeed and Pro will fail. I don't think it's that simple though.

First thing's first, though this doesn't exactly mean much, the less powered consoles traditionally wins console wars. The NES was underpowered compared to the competition, and while Sega shot themselves in the foot with the add-ons, the Genesis was ahead for a short while. The PS1 was weaker than the N64, the PS2 was the least powerful console between it, the Xbox, and the Gamecube, and the 360 -while more powerful on the surface- won despite the PS3 having much more flexible hardware... with the Wii stomping them both. The PS4 is one of the only times a more powerful console is unequivocally winning.

The more important part of that really comes down to the reasons WHY these consoles won. The NES had smarter marketing, and a more robust library. The SNES was simple and cheap compared to a Genesis with a Sega CD and 32X. Gameboy beat the GameGear because of the price and library. PS1 also won because of the depth of the library, and because it chose the right time to pick up optical discs. 360 had a year with no competition (which among other things tempted those without patience to buy it, and also tempted those who wanted to play games online with said impatient friends), and the Wii tapped into the casual market. The list goes on. The point is, choosing which battles to fight and which ones not to is much more important than just power 9 times out of 10.

The way Microsoft is doing things is actually really risky, and will likely lead to little improvement in their average sales numbers unless they have some secret under their belt. There are a few reasons for this, mostly related to the cost, the release timing, and development.

1. First of all, cost is a large factor. Whether people want to believe it or not, cheaper consoles generally sell better. It's less of an investment, and therefore less of a risk. Most people who play on console would rather go for a cheaper alternative, even if it doesn't check all of the exact same boxes as the more expensive alternative. With all that the Scorpio is offering, it's no doubt going to be more expensive unless Microsoft decides to take huge losses for a while. Meanwhile, PS4 Pro is masked as a good deal, by simply releasing it around a time that they were likely going to give the normal model a price cut anyway, and simultaneously releasing it at the original launch price.

2. PS4 Pro is releasing earlier. It may seem like a small advantage, but that really helped the 360, the PS1, the PS2, and even the PS4. This is a huge lead, likely being around a year, meaning if the 4K and HDR stuff blows up in that time, PS4 Pro will be the only option for console owners during that year.

3. Development. This one requires reflecting on console generation transitions. Developing for multiple hardware configurations is complex, particularly the more drastic the difference between the configurations is. If you look at generation transitions, you always see one of two things. Either devs make a game for the previous generation (because of the large playerbase usually), and then port it up. That usually means the game is only marginally better on the more powerful console(s), because it can't take full advantage of the hardware. The alternative is creating the game for the stronger console, and porting down. But that often leaves the previous gen version lacking, barren, or at worst, broken.

With the way the PS4 Pro is designed, developers really only have to make one version of the game, for the base PS4, and do minor porting work to get it to play nicely with the Pro. The consoles aren't different enough for it to impact development much. As an example, the Pro upscales using the same assets the base model PS4 uses, meaning there's no need to work with higher resolution textures, or tell the game how to stream them and when to swap them out, etc. This lack of enormous hardware disparity ensures that the regular PS4 is much more likely to get consistent support, while Pro offers the guise of a near-full upgrade to a new generation of hardware (in terms of visual fidelity), without incurring the monetary or development costs of such hardware improvements.

Scorpio meanwhile will face the same problems that are always dealt with during console transitions. The two console versions are different enough in design and goals, that they'll really require a lot more work to get both to take full advantage of each hardware configuration. One then has to ask how things like competitive online performance will be handled for example. If a game can only hit 30fps at 4k on Scorpio, but is at 900p and 60fps on the Xbox One, those on the normal model have a distinct advantage. This is of course a problem the Pro and the PS4 will have as well, but it's much easier to deal with there, again, because the power of the two systems is much closer.

The only way I can see for it to work well for Scorpio, is if Microsoft really pushes development teams extremely hard to make sure both versions of games on the Xbox One and Scorpio take full advantage of their hardware. Otherwise, owners of one console or the other are going to get shafted in the process. They could get around this if development teams offered graphics options on console more often. That would require essentially just treating it like they would a PC port (it would still take lots of additional work though). But since they don't, the two different versions of the game will have to be offered on the same disc, but isolated from each other. There's also the issue with HDD and BluRay space, since Scorpio will supposedly use full 4K assets while the normal Xbox One will use lower resolution assets... and I don't think Microsoft is going to give it like a 4tb+ HDD. But that's beyond the scope of my point.

4. Finally, true 4K just isn't that big of a boost when compared to upscaling. With 4K you're really entering diminishing returns territory, not to mention a lot of people don't sit close enough to their televisions (when compared to computer monitors) to tell the difference. So again, a lot of Scorpio's advantage is likely going to be wasted simply because people won't think it looks markedly better than the PS4 Pro. You also have questions about whether developers will even WANT to take advantage of Scorpio's power. A lot of developers would rather have parity between consoles so as to get consistent sales across the board.

There are possible advantages to Scorpio's power, like better performance at 1080p or 1440p, higher graphical presets. But that's assuming Microsoft doesn't lose themselves in the search for native 4K. If they do, the compromises will be huge, making the whole thing more complicated for them. Regardless of what I think though, I look forward to your thoughts. It's quite possible I'm missing something :)
 
I'm still scratching my head as to why they couldn't be bothered to give the PS4 Plus 4K Blu-ray support when even the Xbox One S has the feature. It's especially bizarre when the whole keynote was touting the PS4 Plus as like this 4K machine albeit egregiously missing this one key feature. Heck, even in the darkest days of the PS3's early lifespan, it at least had the Blu-ray optical disc support with it, so even without many good games it could still be a Blu-ray player and a key living room entertainment hub.

Or maybe Sony thinks everyone will be streaming all their 4K content anyway from Amazon and Netflix? Or they're just not expecting a mass audience to purchase this console, especially if it was pitched as a machine for a more hardcore gamer group that just wants that extra visual fidelity? Who knows.

As to who will win? I still think the PS4 will be in a comfortable position. As you said, it will heavily depend on whether the Scorpio will ever achieve anywhere near its potential on paper. A possible high price point may put off a vast chunk of their customer base who may just opt for the cheaper One S model to play games and be a Blu-ray player. There's also the question of games. The ability to play most of the Xbox One's offerings on PC does diminish the need to buy something like the Scorpio and the PS4 still commands the (marginally) stronger library.

At this point I'm not very interested in the PS4 Plus. I'm the sort of person who would rather sacrifice visual fidelity for a game that runs tangibly better, with a STABLE 30fps at the very, very least. The keynote instead elected to focus entirely on visuals so I tuned out. I'm going to wait and see what developers do from here out.
 
Couple of things!

1) While the Scorpio is offering more, apparently, it's also releasing a year later. When they start mass production on that thing, component prices will have dropped. I expect this thing to be expensive, but I also don't expect it to be hugely different to what we're seeing now with the PS Pro.

2) This is a weird point. Developers aren't creating assets at a console's output resolution. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you'll usually find is assets in console games have been down scaled in order to run on the limited hardware. If there's a need for higher quality assets than are already being used in PS4 and Xbox One games, it's just a matter of using a less compressed version of the original. I wouldn't argue that this would be a huge task. PC games already do this. "The alternative is creating the game for the stronger console, and porting down. But that often leaves the previous gen version lacking, barren, or at worst, broken" Welcome to almost every non-console exclusive game ever! Haha.

3) We don't how how the Scorpio has been designed. Could be that it's just a beefed up Xbox One in terms of architecture and porting Xbox One titles is relatively simple. A bit early to be making this claim, I think.

4) "If a game can only hit 30fps at 4k on Scorpio, but is at 900p and 60fps on the Xbox One, those on the normal model have a distinct advantage. This is of course a problem the Pro and the PS4 will have as well, but it's much easier to deal with there, again, because the power of the two systems is much closer."

As far as I'm aware, Microsoft has said that they don't care how developers use the extra power. 4K resolution isn't mandatory. I think we'll find that developers will aim for consistent performance across both platforms.

5) File sizes won't be any different to what we see on PC.

...

You're right in that not every developer will be using the full power of the Scorpio, but the same goes for the PS Pro. Honestly I'm not terribly interested in either of these consoles right now and I think it's a bit early to declare one better than the other xD. The exclusion of an UHD blu-ray player on the Pro is a little perplexing though.
 
I'm still scratching my head as to why they couldn't be bothered to give the PS4 Plus 4K Blu-ray support when even the Xbox One S has the feature. It's especially bizarre when the whole keynote was touting the PS4 Plus as like this 4K machine albeit egregiously missing this one key feature. Heck, even in the darkest days of the PS3's early lifespan, it at least had the Blu-ray optical disc support with it, so even without many good games it could still be a Blu-ray player and a key living room entertainment hub.

Or maybe Sony thinks everyone will be streaming all their 4K content anyway from Amazon and Netflix? Or they're just not expecting a mass audience to purchase this console, especially if it was pitched as a machine for a more hardcore gamer group that just wants that extra visual fidelity? Who knows.

I think yes, a large part of it is that streaming is much more lucrative and common than physical movies these days, so there's little incentive to make the machine capable of running 4k blurays. 4K BluRay has been doing rather poorly, so the only reason to include it is for storing games (since the games aren't being read off the discs anymore). But even then, since the normal Xbox One doesn't read 4kBRD's, they'll either have to package all Xbox One games with both discs, or store everything on normal BluRays. A lot of the people I hear complaining about the lack of a 4kBRD support just want it to have it, and don't actually plan on using it. If it was that big of a deal, 4kBD would be succeeding. At least, that's the way Sony probably sees it, is that the only logical use for it is to allow for a niche of people to use it for a failing format in a dying storage medium. They won't need it for games at all, because again, the games aren't being read off of the discs anymore, and because the Pro upscales.


Couple of things!

1) While the Scorpio is offering more, apparently, it's also releasing a year later. When they start mass production on that thing, component prices will have dropped. I expect this thing to be expensive, but I also don't expect it to be hugely different to what we're seeing now with the PS Pro.

Unfortunately, that entirely depends on Microsoft. I have a feeling they might be trying for exactly it. But they also have a nasty habit of overcharging for things, which has caused more than one of their products to fail both inside and outside of games.

2) This is a weird point. Developers aren't creating assets at a console's output resolution. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you'll usually find is assets in console games have been down scaled in order to run on the limited hardware. If there's a need for higher quality assets than are already being used in PS4 and Xbox One games, it's just a matter of using a less compressed version of the original. I wouldn't argue that this would be a huge task. PC games already do this. "The alternative is creating the game for the stronger console, and porting down. But that often leaves the previous gen version lacking, barren, or at worst, broken" Welcome to almost every non-console exclusive game ever! Haha.

Yes, generally assets during the creation of the game are larger than the final output. However, most of the time I believe the downscaled versions of them are the only ones released in the final game (so a game that's running at 1080p isn't going to include 1440p assets or 4k assets on the disc usually), mostly because downscaling them to the base resolution in real time would be a huge waste of computational resources. Such real time downscaling is done on PC, because the player has a much wider range of components and settings to use to tailor the experience. The structure of a console is so rigid, that the developer has to manually set it up to work on both configurations. To be completely fair, they could do it that way; just use the 4K assets for both, and have them downscaled in real time on Xbox One and One S. But that would mean worse performance on the Xbox One and One S version than it would otherwise have, since that real time downscaling will eat up some resources. Hence, those with the lesser console would be getting shafted. The point is that both the Xbox One and the Scorpio assets will most likely to be separately worked into the game for both consoles. If the framerate is fine streaming 1080p textures onto an area of a game on Xbox One, that doesn't mean it'll be fine streaming the 4K versions of those assets through Scorpio. All of that work needs to be retested, to make sure that the resolution of the textures (or other things like draw distance, alpha effects, etc.) are optimized for the same performance in any given area of the game, between the two consoles. Not to mention they have to fit the textures to the model and rig for the separate resolutions, meaning all that work has to be done twice.

Let me put it another, simpler way: The PS4 Pro is using post processing to upscale to 4k. That means the game is running the exact same on both it an the normal PS4, meaning very, very few changes need to be made to get it to work on the better hardware. Unless the post processing they're doing is exceedingly taxing, the better hardware should only cause the game to run better. Again, it's the same exact game either way.

With Scorpio, they're pushing for everything to be native 4k. This means it all has to manually be adjusted for that different resolution. Something as simple as the resolution of a few textures or screen space reflections far off in the distance could effect performance, as could close up textures, alpha effects, subsurface scattering, etc. If any of these things are changed (on either Scorpio or PS4 Pro), they have to do more work to optimize it. But Scorpio is pushing for these changes; PS4 Pro just wants to fake it without changing anything, making optimization astronomically easier.

3) We don't how how the Scorpio has been designed. Could be that it's just a beefed up Xbox One in terms of architecture and porting Xbox One titles is relatively simple. A bit early to be making this claim, I think.

Based on what they showed in the Scorpio reveal, we have a pretty good idea of what the console is offering: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-xbox-one-project-scorpio-spec-analysis

In a way, it definitely is just a beefed up Xbox One. But still, it really comes down to how the game is being constructed on both systems, even if the architecture is similar. Again, the optimization process is more finely detailed on console generally than it is on PC. PC is about broad optimizations across tons of different hardware configurations, but there's little nuance. The nuance is in the hands of the player, who is required to change settings, options, and maybe even hardware in order to further optimize. The player does half the work. On console, all of the optimization is up to the developer, because they're too dumb to offer graphics settings on consoles >:( And even then, technically they'll want to optimize in such a nuanced manner, since they're doing it for so few hardware configurations.

4) "If a game can only hit 30fps at 4k on Scorpio, but is at 900p and 60fps on the Xbox One, those on the normal model have a distinct advantage. This is of course a problem the Pro and the PS4 will have as well, but it's much easier to deal with there, again, because the power of the two systems is much closer."

As far as I'm aware, Microsoft has said that they don't care how developers use the extra power. 4K resolution isn't mandatory. I think we'll find that developers will aim for consistent performance across both platforms.

I haven't been able to find any statements from Microsoft about how they want developers to use Scorpio. Not saying there aren't any of course, I just haven't seen 'em. What we do know is that they're pushing native 4K hard in the public eye, which would imply that they're also wanting that to be a main goal for at least internal developers and major partners. Regardless, pushing for performance parity only means that they arguably won't be taking full advantage of the Scorpio hardware, meaning there's less of a point (in the eyes of your regular joe consumer) to purchase it.


5) File sizes won't be any different to what we see on PC.

Very true. But games are also generally way bigger on PC, mostly because they don't have to worry about storing them on physical media (and when they do, it's like 10 DVDs, lol, because a lot of people still don't have BluRay drives on their PCs). Scorpio likely won't be using 4K BluRays for their games, because that would mean it wouldn't play on a normal Xbox One. They could package it with both versions physically, but if they don't, they're restricted to storing the games on normal BluRays, which are too small for a game's worth of 4k assets. And even the normal 4k BluRay would often be too small, at only a 66gb capacity, meaning triple layer ones are the only real option outside of storing the game on multiple normal BluRays. It kind of illustrates just how complex all of this is. What the Scorpio does, is just raises a lot of questions and problems that need answered/solved. Not saying that the PS4 Pro is perfect by any means (I personally don't like the fact that either one exists, because it further dilutes the reasons for owning a console in the first place: cost, simplicity, and ease of use). But the Pro runs from the same assets to fake 4k, and is similar enough that the workload doesn't really change much for anyone involved.
 
It's hard to say what console is going to end up on top as of right now. There are still a lot of heavy hitter titles that have not come out yet period. Imo, the PS4 slim model is good for people on budget gaming that have not upgraded from the PS3 and/or trying to get into the PlayStation gaming scene some.

Rather or not Microsoft and Sony have been trying to troll/bait each either is something I don't know. While the Scorpio may very well be a very powerful console, Microsoft is very far behind this gen largely due to a horrible day 1 reveal. Perhaps the Scorpio will turn out to be a true next gen console, but only time will tell on that. I can't provide more thoughts on it, as it would really drive in speculation territory then.

The PS4 Pro is a good buy for people that have just been waiting on a decent amount of games to come out before making a purchase, especially those that own a 4K monitor and/or TV. Here is where things start to get tricky: Is the PS4 Pro going to a worthy purchase for people that do not own 4K products and already have the OG PS4? Well this really falls on the devs here, if there are no set rules. While multi-player online game functions are still going to operate at the same FPS level on both platforms (to prevent unfair advantages), the offline experience may not be the same. Personally if devs overall push for 1080 P with 45 - 60 FPS on their games that would run 30 FPS on OG PS4, then everybody will benefit from that. Upscaled 4K with 30 FPS would benefit those that own a 4K product a pretty good amount, but people that own only 1080 products aren't going to be able to tell that much of a difference. Imo, console gamers are starting to understand how important FPS is just in general, especially when there have been games that would take noticeable dips dropping under the 20's at times. Personally if the graphical fidelity route is taken and rules supreme, I won't have a reason to get the PS4 Pro.
 
I'm a bit late to this party, but here's my thoughts on the matter:

To be honest, I've been leaning away from my PS4 and to my PC for a while now. This console generation has been weird. We've had more new games come out that would run just fine on old consoles than games that really take advantage of the new hardware. And when high-end games do come out, they often struggle to perform satisfactorily. If Uncharted 4 were the rule and not the exception this wouldn't be a problem, but few games balance performance and visual quality so well, often resulting in both categories suffering. It's clear why Sony feels the pressure to release a higher-end system, but the way they've gone about it leaves me wondering what's the point of sticking to my PS4 as a primary gaming device.

I mean, here's the rub: three years ago I bought a system for $400. That system was a unified piece of hardware where everything should perform to expectation and be simpler and more reliable than PC gaming. It didn't live up to that. So in 2016, Sony wants me to spend $400 again to get the performance I expected three years ago. Except I won't. I'll either get similar performance at a higher resolution (which at this stage is a waste of processing power IMO) or a choice of compromise between performance and visual quality. Simpler and more reliable than PC? And let's not forget about Playstation Plus getting a price hike in the US. No, $10 more isn't much, but this is a service that's already struggling to deliver its value at $50 (opinions will vary here).

Basically, I've reached the conclusion that if I'm in the PS4 Pro crowd, I'd actually be better off on a PC. Instead of spending $400 on a PS4 Pro, I spent the same amount on an NVIDIA GTX 1070. My PC now plays everything currently out there at max settings. Many things run natively at 4K without breaking a sweat (4K Rocket League at 120 FPS, anybody?). I don't have to pay a yearly fee for online multiplayer. And with an Xbox One controller I can even get PS4-style benefits like a controller interface (Steam Big Picture) at the touch of a button and wireless headphone audio. If 'comfort' is a selling point of consoles, PC has recently made massive strides to compete. And from now on if I have the choice, I plan to play on PC for any title where graphics or performance are remotely a priority. Where's that FFXV PC port you keep teasing, Square Enix? :lew:

That being said, I find I'm actually more excited by the idea of the PS4 Slim and Xbox One S than PS4 Pro and Scorpio. If you're going to get either of those consoles you really might as well go all the way and get a proper gaming PC--especially on the Scorpio side, since it'll likely be more expensive than PS4 Pro. I've run some numbers, and if you bought a PS4 at launch, subscribe to PS+, buy a PS4 Pro now, and buy a 4K HDR TV to go with it, you'll end up at roughly $1700. But since PC users don't have to replace their entire system every three years or pay a yearly fee, the initial cost of building a new rig is quickly offset by savings over time. With that in mind, the cost of building a decent gaming rig in 2013 and upgrading it to be 4K-ready today would, by my estimation, come out to basically $1700. The same exact cost. And it'll perform better and do much more than gaming, too.

Which is where the PS4 Slim and Xbox One S come in. Both platforms have their handfuls of great exclusive titles that sadly will never come to a PC. In that case, having an option to experience those titles for cheap is great! Instead of buying a second, unnecessary 'premium' box, you can get a low-cost, no-frills experience to complement your PC with the games and media features PC doesn't have or isn't as good at. This, in my mind, offers the best all-around experience and ultimately is most cost-effective (since we are talking an enthusiast market, here).

So I'm sticking with my PC and my original PS4 and letting PS+ expire. Oddly enough, with the PS4 Pro Sony has convinced me that 75% of the time consoles just aren't for me.
 
I generally see what you're talking about AuronX. If Microsoft's idea of 'iterative consoles' with the console generations vanishing comes to fruition for consoles as a whole, I'll probably choose to do the same. Like I said earlier, consoles are supposed to be about ease of use, low cost, simplicity, etc. The understanding is that you're giving up device freedom and power for these things. Unfortunately, we've already lost some of that with the constant hassle to pay for online play, and to install updates all the time. The 'benefits' of iterative consoles are nothing but perversions of what the PC offers.

You get newer power every couple of years! ... But it's not as good as the PC can offer...

You get a cheaper box that can play all your favorite exclusives! ... But with so many boxes to buy, it's not really cheap... and you have no power over how the next box is upgraded. Not to mention, as stated earlier, these games will either be ported up, meaning the new box isn't being fully explored, or they're ported down, and don't run near as well on previous boxes.

You are 'ensured' compatibility with previous titles! ... Except titles will eventually be dropped...

With a console pretending to be a PC, you lose the nuance of upgrading your own way, you have all of your content curated by Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo/etc., you limit the max settings of your games still, you limit your setting options in game, and even your OS and what it can do is entirely dictated by the maker of your console. Overall, it's a phantom gain, with a net loss. I'm buying a Pro, because I don't yet have a current-gen console. If I had a PS4, I would not be upgrading.

Consoles and PC's are supposed to be in a symbiotic relationship. The console provides the limitations. Limitations breed amazing new tools that make the impossible possible. Then the PC pushes these things to their limits, and opens them up to exploration. Then that in turn pushes the consoles to try and keep up, starting the cycle all over again. Something like The Last of Us wasn't possible with the tools and knowledge being used at the beginning of the PS3/360 lifecycle. But because of this relationship between the anarchy of PC and the walled garden of consoles, it became possible. Turning consoles into PCs, or doing the opposite like with the Steam Boxes just doesn't work. You will always be sacrificing too much in the transition. They're both terrible ideas realistically, and I don't support them as a business practice... but that doesn't mean I don't want to take advantage of the chance to get a better version of a console I was gonna get anyway :D I'm a console guy at heart; it'd be a waste for me to not get a Pro (or Scorpio, but I'd rather have a Playstation for a multitude of personal reasons, down to exclusives, support for types of games I like, business practices, etc.).
 
I see this whole 4K-fixation developers have to be kind of pointless. As far as I know the amount of people with 4K TVs is even lower then people with 1080p TVs during the previous generation. Bringing out new hardware for what is a luxury at this point seems like waste of time.

I believe the PS4 PRO is primarily designed to improve the PSVR, while providing the absolute minimum specs for upscaled 4K. Considering it's release was so close to the PSVR, this is pretty likely.

Also in my opinion framerate is more important than resolution, and if I'm not willing to pay an extra 400 for extra frames, than I most certainly wont pony up that amount or 1000+ on a new TV for more Resolution.
 
Well, you can actually get decently sized 4k displays for rather cheap now. I've seen 40inch displays for like $500US. The caveat is that they're not designed with games in mind. So they often have huge amounts of control lag, even with tame mode on.

I do agree though, 4k is NOT worth it unless you have 4k textures and such to back it up; which neither upgrade console is capable of utilizing on modern titles. I'd rather see effects pushed further, like better lighting engines and such. That, and performance. I get super frustrated with performance below a rock solid 30fps. It's unacceptable, particularly with so many techniques out today like dynamic resolution scaling which can be used to hit that target. I'm playing a game, so control and therefore performance is important.
 
Back
Top