Sony hate thread

no one is winning with outdated hardware valve still wants 1000 bucks for (especially not in this economy), an HMD that costs even more with questionable software support or getting zucc'd
while I disagree that VR is the killer app, with those options the VR2 is still the best normalfag solution (if they own a ps5 already).
I moreso meant people who bought the Index at launch or people who bought it for like 500 used, but sure. I brought up the BSB2 for optics since it means that no “enthusiast” would want to spend money on the VR2 when there’s more expensive and better looking shit to buy.

I still think the Quest 3 beats the VR2 for normies, something about not being tethered and just using the headset on its own, along with shit like media viewing is probably more attractive to them. Zuck be damned, they’re probably the easiest headsets to just jump into.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gog & Magog
Nothing 3D on any of those systems looked good. You are looking through nostalgia goggles if you say otherwise or counting prerendered FMV shit with no gameplay.
You're gonna pretend Pokemon Stadium 2, maybe the best looking N64 game, doesn't look good?

stadium2.webp
maxresdefault (1).webp
battlenow.webp
hq720.webp
dexzoom.webp

You must be an unfathomable graphics whore. This looks good.
 
Yeah, it's hard to believe but I'm glad they're doing it. PS6 for 2026, baby :story:
What was the quote, that the PS6 is at the "top of mind" for Sony? Yeah, they design these consoles years before they're released. Red herring. Probably 2027 at the earliest for a PS6.

The rumored handheld could be interesting, and I'd like to see them put a ton of RAM in a PS6 (i.e. more than 32 GB) for AI/LLMs running at the same time as graphics. Maybe 24-32 GB of GDDR7 and a relatively huge amount of system RAM (the PS5 has 512 MB DDR4 for SSD cache, and the PS5 Pro has 2 GB DDR5).
 
5th gen overall has kinda aged like milk, especially sandwiched between the absolute fine wine of 4th gen's genesis and snes, and 6th gen's perfect balance, before the true gwaffix whorery started, but I think the average ps1 game has aged far worse than the average n64 game, and the ones that buck this trend are usually pretty much just souped up snes games. Symphony of the Night is by far the best game on ps1, and the best game from the 5th generation overall, and it's basically a snes deluxe game. FF7, again, plays pretty similar to the snes FF4-6, just with a different art style and FMVs.
 
Symphony of the Night is by far the best game on ps1
4omo89equnf51.webp

and the best game from the 5th generation overall
memed-io-output.webp

Maybe 5th gen aged graphically but not gameplay-wise. Also, just on the PS1 alone there's a dozen better games that come to mind than SotN:

Ape Escape
Resident Evil 1-3
Mega Man Legends 1-2
Metal Gear Solid
Parasite Eve 1-2
Klonoa
Tenchu 2
Threads of Fate

I think the average ps1 game has aged far worse than the average n64 game
I think this might be true, but it could just be because there's so much on PS1.
 
something about not being tethered and just using the headset on its own
I've never seen a problem with the tether. It beats charging the thing every two hours or wearing a heavy arse battery on your swede.
 
You're gonna pretend Pokemon Stadium 2, maybe the best looking N64 game, doesn't look good?

View attachment 7505596
View attachment 7505598
View attachment 7505603
View attachment 7505602
View attachment 7505600

You must be an unfathomable graphics whore. This looks good.
The game did look good for its time, helped greatly that the majority of its combat took place in a simple room with no moving items, humans, etc, etc.

edit: Or at least I assume it did, as I have only actually played Stadium 1 (US.)
 
The game did look good for its time, helped greatly that the majority of its combat took place in a simple room with no moving items, humans, etc, etc.

edit: Or at least I assume it did, as I have only actually played Stadium 1 (US.)
The fact is it looks good. It certainly did help that the locations were largely static though.
 
Nothing 3D on any of those systems looked good. You are looking through nostalgia goggles if you say otherwise or counting prerendered FMV shit with no gameplay.
That's silly. Games that took hardware limitations into account like Megaman Legends (broad, cartoony art style that still reads well with low-res textures) still look great.


The Crash Bandicoot and Spyro games have a similar approach. I defy anyone to claim these are not visually-appealing levels.

1sxyd9xkpn491.webp
 
That's silly. Games that took hardware limitations into account like Megaman Legends (broad, cartoony art style that still reads well with low-res textures) still look great.


The Crash Bandicoot and Spyro games have a similar approach. I defy anyone to claim these are not visually-appealing levels.

View attachment 7506331
Dude... that Megaman game looks like ass. Look at 1:45 where Tronne has crossed her arms, fiving you a good look at the pair of cubes that she calls hands. And you're cheating on Spyro if you don't plaster Spyro's big doofy ass all over the screen like it actually looked like in gameplay.
 
Series S/X was a good idea at the core, even if Microsoft didn't realise it. With price increases of hardware, especially on the high end, being able to offer a 1080p machine for £299 would have swept up, with the option of customers to then mop up.

I've said this repeatedly. The Series S would've been an excellent idea as the "budget" launch system if they targeted 1080p only and didn't force 4k onto a system that clearly couldn't perform at that level. I'd argue that the Series X can't really do 4k very well either, but on some older games, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. This idea of hitting 4k 60 on both Microsoft and Sony's part is fucking stupid. Not only is it a waste of resources, but I don't know anyone in the space who plays higher than 1440p. The Series X should've hit 1440p and stayed there. Same with the PS5 "Pro".
 
I've said this repeatedly. The Series S would've been an excellent idea as the "budget" launch system if they targeted 1080p only and didn't force 4k onto a system that clearly couldn't perform at that level. I'd argue that the Series X can't really do 4k very well either, but on some older games, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. This idea of hitting 4k 60 on both Microsoft and Sony's part is fucking stupid. Not only is it a waste of resources, but I don't know anyone in the space who plays higher than 1440p. The Series X should've hit 1440p and stayed there. Same with the PS5 "Pro".
Exactly. their marketing/product/project department at both companies needs sacking and replacing with competent people (challenge level: impossible).
Switch - 720p@30fps
Switch 2 - 720p@60fps
Series S -1080p@30/60 fps
Series X/PS5 - 1440p@60/90fps high
PS5PRO - 1440p@90/120fps ultra
PC - Anything, but MS+Sony should have put their games on there and locked them to true 4k w/RT, 90/120+fos Ultra.

Let the PC market make the Sony/MS exclusive look incredibile, while offering a decent/high-end quality game on AFFORDABLE hardware. It's retarded that console try at keep up with PC, while failing, while killing their own market.

They're all fucking retards.
 
Dude... that Megaman game looks like ass. Look at 1:45 where Tronne has crossed her arms, fiving you a good look at the pair of cubes that she calls hands. And you're cheating on Spyro if you don't plaster Spyro's big doofy ass all over the screen like it actually looked like in gameplay.
Nitpicking about blockiness proves his point, it's fine overall. 5th gen graphics could look good enough. I never played Fear Effect, but the graphics almost look too good to be 5th gen, kinda looks like Dreamcast. It just isn't true no 3D games looked good.

Hana_Rain_opening.webp
rnu9hkdg3ioe1.gif

Maybe on average it's true they didn't look good. There were plenty of cases that looked like this:

guardian_crusade_profilelarge.webp
The-Granstream-Saga-Screenshot.webp

But then there were ones that looked like this:

parasite-eve-ii-screenshots-1.webp

Doesn't look bad, the generation was just a mixed bag.
 
I played both Fear Effects, they were stylish and very interesting, but they didn’t look like DC games, they looked like typical ps1 smoke and mirrors. Using cherry picked screenshots from games with pre-rendered backgrounds and two characters on screen is a bad example.

And not only ps1 had problems with graphics, but many of the ports were absolutely inferior. Need For Speed Porsche Unleashed, Crusaders of M&M, Rainbow Six, there are dozens of examples. They were basically different games on pc.
 
I played both Fear Effects, they were stylish and very interesting, but they didn’t look like DC games, they looked like typical ps1 smoke and mirrors. Using cherry picked screenshots from games with pre-rendered backgrounds and two characters on screen is a bad example.
How many characters do you want on screen exactly? If you can find a shot that clearly shows more than 2 up close then go for it.
 
How many characters do you want on screen exactly? If you can find a shot that clearly shows more than 2 up close then go for it.
Dude, obviously my point was that those games don’t really show how ps1 graphics looked and worked. Medal of Honour at least played it fair.

Do you remember In Cold Blood? I might as well say the game looked like a ps2 one.
 
Back