• johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, but at the same time it makes the PS4 games a much better experience. I dunno if that justifies the spend for a lot of people, but I don’t regret getting one.

  • Stefen Auris@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s like all we heard about the PS5 was that it was super hard to get when it came out and then it kind of disappeared from our collective consciousness

  • VanHalbgott@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I currently have my original PlayStation (PS1) which is more like a classic version of the brand.

    I still have a decent collection of games for it but I seldom use it out of sentiment for the PS5 being a failure from what I’ve been reading about it.

    So technically I have a PlayStation in this case.

  • Rageagainstbelief@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    If they would make them backwards compatible I would be more likely to upgrade it still bugs me that they stopped doing that. I miss my old PS3. That thing was awesome I even installed Linux on it and had emulators working… the good old days.

  • Powerbomb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve been holding out for an eventual PS5 Pro version since day 1. The base PS5 having less space than my stock PS4 Pro was the biggest dealbreaker for me.

  • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    PS3 lets me play online for free. Later consoles don’t.

    PS3 plays CDs and stores media files on its internal hard drive. Later consoles are limited to external storage solutions for media playback (and no, streaming doesn’t count).

    PS3 has a snazzy user interface. Later consoles have… a user interface, I guess.

    PS3 plays PS1 disks. Some models even play PS2 disks. None of the later consoles do that, having a strong reliance on digital downloads for PS1 and PS2 compatibility, meaning some games are straight up limited to the earlier consoles.

    PS3 even lets me transfer games and media to a PSP or PS Vita through a USB connection. Guess what, the later consoles straight up don’t do that.

    Don’t have an HDTV? PS3 works with composite, component, and even S-Video in addition to working with HDMI. It even downscales Blu-ray Disks to fit on your super small screen. Got an HDTV? PS3 upscales your DVDs to fit your super big screen. Later consoles only work with HDMI, and I’m not sure if the upscaling/downscaling thing with DVDs and Blu-ray even works or not.

    The choice is yours.

  • Moonrise2473@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The PS5 doesn’t even have a browser because they’re scared of exploits

    Why not just have some hardened Firefox with auto updates instead of licensing a browser from a company specialized in exploitable browsers for consoles? Nobody uses netfront, why Sony and Nintendo are so obsessed with it?

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    it has no games and was plagued by availability/price issues for a BIG while there.

    why should anyone buy it?

  • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    IMO improving graphics technology is a case of diminishing returns. Sure you can always make a better looking game by throwing more processing power at it, but that has (at best) a minor effect on things like gameplay and story. Like seriously, if Squenix had decided to make FF7: Rebirth in the PS3 era, other then some uglier graphics how much would the game have have been different?

    And (to actually tie this in to the thread) that’s the reason PS5 sales have been so sluggish. What do you really need those PS5 graphics for? I mean my PC is still running hardware from 5-10 years ago, because there isn’t anything I really need to upgrade for. Most of what I’ve been playing is indy titles and for the few graphic intensive games I want to play they’ll usually run if I lower some graphics settings.

    • Moonrise2473@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      And Nintendo proved this right by making successful games on underpowered systems. The switch it’s basically an Android tablet from last decade sold with crazy markup but talented game designers make compelling games

      Sure, in the store they have 3rd party do lazy shitty ports like this https://www.nintendo.com/us/store/products/jello-run-switch/ but I feel it has more interesting games than the photorealistic ones on PS5, except the masterpieces by insomniac studio, but those can also be played on PS4 or PC

    • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Exactly this. I’ll always maintain a game will be and will remain prettier is an artistic style than an ultra realistic style. It just takes up resources that could be used elsewhere for the sake of looking pretty for the next 3-5 years before the “Uhh muh Guuhhhhd, it looks so realistic” ages like milk. Games like Wind Waker and Okami still look gorgeous today.

  • AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I could have waited it out probably another 2-3 years if I wasn’t gifted one. Still have LOTS of PS4 titles I’ve been meaning to play. In fact, most of the games I play on my PS5 are PS4 games.

  • Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I play, like, fine games. In very irregular binges. Why the fuck would I shill out 500 Euros, to raise my binges’ fps?

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Most people don’t need the newest and expensive tech. From the last 30 days of active games on Playstation brand, here a split PS3/PS4/PS5 (I just show a ratio that is set in relation to the numbers of players for the game), meaning left side is older console:

    https://ps-timetracker.com/statistic/last-30-days

    • - / 42 / 14 Fortnite
    • - / 3 / 2 Roblox
    • 0 / 33 / 9 Minecraft**
    • - / 14 / 9 Cod:MW2
    • - / 38 / 12 GTA V
    • - / 23 / 8 Rainbow Siege
    • - / 26 / 8 Apex Legends
    • - / 17 / 7 Overwatch 2
    • - / 1 / 1 EA Sports FC 24

    (**ps3 players almost at 0 level for this game)

    As you can see, all games are available for PS4 and they run decent enough, are multiplayer games and the new consoles do not offer anything substantial for these kind of players.

  • CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    For me, it was:

    • You couldn’t get one for ages when it came out, so I missed the initial hype period.

    • When it did finally become available, it was prohibitively expensive.

    • There are no real killer exclusives or features so no particular reason to upgrade, aside from games looking nicer.

    • Sony is releasing all the good stuff on PC now, so if I want to play a nicer-looking version of a PS4 game I can just do that.

    • Steam Deck