PlayStation 4 General DiscussionPS4

[Saidur_Ali]

This is depressing as all get out to read. I sincerely hope companies don't let graphical prowess dictate how often they have to flip consoles. There's a time and place for realism, and that will always be a challenge to fit within a console's specs, but plenty of games have proven successful, and tons of fun to play, without having an alphabet soup of graphics-related features, or the same turd-brown palette and "gritty realism" the usual first-person-shooter suspects employ. A lot of the best games for both 360 and PS3 have shown up in the second-half of their lifecycles. While this generation's time length has been a bit longer than the two previous, I know I for one would probably just stop buying them if they started pushing them out every 2 or 3 years. A lot of people buy consoles for gaming exactly to avoid that annoying constant-upgrade approach to PC gaming.

It should be one of the main reasons to make new console especially when gap is big enough to justify and gaming experiences are being sort of ruined by the hardware for long enough time. Next consoles should finally take us back to the more fun era of gaming I would say as long as console makers like Sony don't skimp out heavily on hardware. My reason for this is, developers will finally be able to release games with high graphics quality and gameplay without having to try to water down features or lower resolution to get it to run at an acceptable frame rate or close to it. Less time will be spent optimising or thinking of ideas to get it to run with such low performance hardware, more time working on actual gameplay and freedom of a console having potentially more than 10 times increase in graphics performance than current generation and a lot more memory. CPU wise it should be easier to program for, not sure on performance of them yet, might not be much of a improvement on that side but enough to enhance gameplay for majority of developers.

About PC gaming, you don't really have to upgrade to play games as well as consoles and PC gaming if you don't go crazy on parts, then it is cheaper than console gaming. Like my current PC bought at similar time as PS3, has cost me to date about £100 less than my 60GB original PS3. It has better resale value (I have only upgraded a few times at a very small cost to me), and it is is much more powerful. Graphics card is at least 6 times more powerful, can play games at 1080p and 60FPS at high details but also takes less power than my original PS3. Games are also cheaper on PC. Main attraction for me regarding consoles is more the larger gaming community, way licenses work, sense of progression, fairness and plug and play approach of it.

Screen resolution for most people for next-generation consoles will be 1080p so gaming PCs will be less relevant I feel due to not really bringing much enhancements. There will probably be less pressure release a new console next time round, unless there is a major breakthrough regarding hardware in the world. Sony can think of other things to also prolong the next-generation like being able to scale performance up using second console if need be, for example higher resolutions. It all depends on really how strong the GPU will be from Sony and Microsoft to be able to better determine how long generation will last, whether short or long.

 

[Luminis]

Personally I want them to keep the sixaxis and just tweak and improve it slightly and I would love to have a console that lasts me another 10 years. If they decide to base the console on PC arcitecture then I dont really care if after 2 months its out of date compared to PC's themselves as long as Dev's keep pushing it as much as they can and spend more time improving gameplay and game size ect rather then worrying about how they are going to get AA working alongside HDR ect and what that will do to AI overheads.

You make it sound as if better graphics were the only benefit of improved hardware. 32 cars in Gran Turismo? Forget about that. 64 players on a map in Battlefield? Well, no.

Also, nobody cares about gameplay anymore. Some small indy companies do, yeah, and some enthusiasts like some of us. The market doesn't. Call of Duty being the best selling thing since slice bread is evidence of that.

 

[Wardez]

You mean gameplay innovation?

Call of Duty has solid gameplay and people latched on to it for that, they kept the core gameplay and multiplayer structure from MW and just milked it. People absolutely do care about gameplay. If the next CoD was third-person, or just somehow had terrible core FPS gameplay, then people *gasps* wouldn't buy it.

But on the innovation side of things, yeah that's gotten stale, but only because we're on our seventh generation where the basic form factor's stayed relatively the same. Same basic gamepad layout as well. That's why it seems like we're in a state of constant rehashing, because it's almost like we've heard all the same old songs already and the only thing new music producers have to do is go by what they know works. Something very different always comes around though, and when you'd least expect it. I'm hoping for a little more change for sure, in order to stimulate developers to delve into new territories more. Whether that's biometrics, some new immersion hardware things (like the Oculusvr), and much more fleshed out and fully utilized online infrastructure. Also, less restrictions put on developers trying to patch their games and making it cheaper for indie developers to release their own (Sony has a lot of room for improvement there).

 

[sems4arsenal]

You make it sound as if better graphics were the only benefit of improved hardware. 32 cars in Gran Turismo? Forget about that. 64 players on a map in Battlefield? Well, no.

Also, nobody cares about gameplay anymore. Some small indy companies do, yeah, and some enthusiasts like some of us. The market doesn't. Call of Duty being the best selling thing since slice bread is evidence of that.

COD has innovative gameplay that inspired alot of FPS this generation making it a highly addictive game.

I think you meant gameplay to be the actual story telling and the way games aren't finished and key features missing and favoring DLC rather than the gameplay mechanics which are actually one of the strong features of gaming in this generation imo

 

[Luminis]

COD has innovative gameplay that inspired alot of FPS this generation making it a highly addictive game.

CoD innovative? And what would you call games like Journey, then?

 

[sems4arsenal]

CoD innovative? And what would you call games like Journey, then?

Not getting my point ,the mechanics COD offer (certainly the older COD games)have changed the FPS genre ,games like MOH and BF followed suit .The gameplay Mechanics and graphical leap from previous generation made the FPS genre popular.Yes the mechanics haven't changed (neither did the average story telling)in recent years but they are still very fun games,lots of different games this generation have great gameplay ,you got your Halos ,infamous,assasinscreeds,Skyrim,Fallout,LBP ,Heavy Rain etc and of course games like Journey .

The point I'm making is the gameplay mechanics of this generation are very enjoyable and I really don't see any problem or have any complaints about this area.

The problem for me is the big desire for great graphics and terrible story telling as well as releasing unfinished games in the hope that updates and DLC's will fix that.

 

[Luminis]

Not getting my point ,the mechanics COD offer (certainly the older COD games)have changed the FPS genre ,games like MOH and BF followed suit .The gameplay Mechanics and graphical leap from previous generation made the FPS genre popular.Yes the mechanics haven't changed (neither did the average story telling)in recent years but they are still very fun games,lots of different games this generation have great gameplay ,you got your Halos ,infamous,assasinscreeds,Skyrim,Fallout,LBP ,Heavy Rain etc and of course games like Journey .

The point I'm making is the gameplay mechanics of this generation are very enjoyable and I really don't see any problem or have any complaints about this area.

The problem for me is the big desire for great graphics and terrible story telling as well as releasing unfinished games in the hope that updates and DLC's will fix that.

Yeah, CoD was a great game when the franchise just started out. The original CoD was great and it was (kinda) innovative. But ever since, the series entirely stagnated. Instead of improved gameplay, it got (slightly) better graphics with each new title. That's precisely what I dislike about the current development of mainstream games. And on consoles, they haven't even been looking very impressive...

The industry, at least as far as big budget titles go, is stupidly stale at the moment. But, then again, that's not suprising if the best selling games are Call of Duty 8 and Assassin's Creed 4, or whatever. People are seemingly content with that, so why should a developer bother with something aside from eye candy?

 

[Musolini187]

Lumines, you made me hate the next gen console even more than i did. its gonna be the most useless upgrade to a console yet. the jump from ps1 to ps2 was huge, from ps2 tp ps3 was the same. ps4 and 720 seem so underwhelming im surprised they want to bring it out.

and im even more surprised that gamers are waiting for these consoles. the improvement is barely gonna be noticable, so why even bring it out, no more importantly, why even buy it as a consumer. so far i dont see any reason to buy a next gen console, maybe ill wait for the gen after this one or go pc gaming wise.

besides next gen being crap, imo cod is basically a cs clone. as far as gameplay is concerned. both are arcade style fps.

 

[Wardez]

Yeah, CoD was a great game when the franchise just started out. The original CoD was great and it was (kinda) innovative. But ever since, the series entirely stagnated. Instead of improved gameplay, it got (slightly) better graphics with each new title. That's precisely what I dislike about the current development of mainstream games. And on consoles, they haven't even been looking very impressive...

The industry, at least as far as big budget titles go, is stupidly stale at the moment. But, then again, that's not suprising if the best selling games are Call of Duty 8 and Assassin's Creed 4, or whatever. People are seemingly content with that, so why should a developer bother with something aside from eye candy?

You realize that people were talking just like this even back when the Atari had already hit its peak right? They would all say, " it's all dwindling down, another asteroids clone, I don't want another Missile Command"

Then BAM, Nintendo.

I'm not saying the next revolution in gaming is gonna happen this year, or any time too soon. Just that we can't see what's around the corner so what's the point in being frustrated with how stale games are these days in terms of change? Just enjoy what you like, and something that will blow your mind will happen.

I'm optimistic about this next generation because there's a lot of big companies and franchises which came late to the game this last gen. And they have the motivation to fully realize what they've always wanted to do and will go for it fully. Some will utterly fail and those other few will bring something, while not totally new at all, so refined, polished, and rich, we'll become very spoiled and look back at this generation as total failure itself.

I think any innovation this time around will be mostly in how streamlined things will become. Get rid of region lock, HDCP, developers having to pay for patches, allow us to choose to download all games, have our own servers, allow me to access Xbox Live Marketplace or the PSN store without exiting a game! streamline everything even more on the software side of things.

The only thing I'm not looking forward to is even shorter campaigns. Because if the graphics are much better but there aren't enough new tools or methods that can streamline the artists' work then they'll have double the work load (along with double the memory hogging) and it'll force the retail game to be shorter... but have much more DLC.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Lumines, you made me hate the next gen console even more than i did. its gonna be the most useless upgrade to a console yet. the jump from ps1 to ps2 was huge, from ps2 tp ps3 was the same. ps4 and 720 seem so underwhelming im surprised they want to bring it out.

and im even more surprised that gamers are waiting for these consoles. the improvement is barely gonna be noticable, so why even bring it out, no more importantly, why even buy it as a consumer. so far i dont see any reason to buy a next gen console, maybe ill wait for the gen after this one or go pc gaming wise.

besides next gen being crap, imo cod is basically a cs clone. as far as gameplay is concerned. both are arcade style fps.

 

[sems4arsenal]

You realize that people were talking just like this even back when the Atari had already hit its peak right? They would all say, " it's all dwindling down, another asteroids clone, I don't want another Missile Command"

Then BAM, Nintendo.

I'm not saying the next revolution in gaming is gonna happen this year, or any time too soon. Just that we can't see what's around the corner so what's the point in being frustrated with how stale games are these days in terms of change? Just enjoy what you like, and something that will blow your mind will happen.

I'm optimistic about this next generation because there's a lot of big companies and franchises which came late to the game this last gen. And they have the motivation to fully realize what they've always wanted to do and will go for it fully. Some will utterly fail and those other few will bring something, while not totally new at all, so refined, polished, and rich, we'll become very spoiled and look back at this generation as total failure itself.

I think any innovation this time around will be mostly in how streamlined things will become. Get rid of region lock, HDCP, developers having to pay for patches, allow us to choose to download all games, have our own servers, allow me to access Xbox Live Marketplace or the PSN store without exiting a game! streamline everything even more on the software side of things.

The only thing I'm not looking forward to is even shorter campaigns. Because if the graphics are much better but there aren't enough new tools or methods that can streamline the artists' work then they'll have double the work load (along with double the memory hogging) and it'll force the retail game to be shorter... but have much more DLC.

Hit the nail right on the head ,I do fear this as well with a rise in cost of developing games ,feel alot of developers will rather play it safe rather than take a gamble .

This though I guess won't be a problem during the early days of consoles .

 

[Luminis]

You realize that people were talking just like this even back when the Atari had already hit its peak right? They would all say, " it's all dwindling down, another asteroids clone, I don't want another Missile Command"

Then BAM, Nintendo.

Even Nintendo has been incredibly stale throughout recent years. Unless you fall into the Wii demographic, I suppose. Really, the most promising and unique games I've seen this generation were pretty much indy games. Most of the AAA-Titles seem to be sequels or prequels, really. They'r enot even clones.

I'm not saying the next revolution in gaming is gonna happen this year, or any time too soon. Just that we can't see what's around the corner so what's the point in being frustrated with how stale games are these days in terms of change? Just enjoy what you like, and something that will blow your mind will happen.

It's just an observation, really. The last generation blew me away with some fantastic new releases and new IPs. Compared to that, the current generation seemed... Lackluster.

I'm optimistic about this next generation because there's a lot of big companies and franchises which came late to the game this last gen. And they have the motivation to fully realize what they've always wanted to do and will go for it fully. Some will utterly fail and those other few will bring something, while not totally new at all, so refined, polished, and rich, we'll become very spoiled and look back at this generation as total failure itself.

Eh, they'll still have to deal with all sorts of hardware limitations. Anyways, I kinda lost that positive outlook to an extent.

I think any innovation this time around will be mostly in how streamlined things will become. Get rid of region lock, HDCP, developers having to pay for patches, allow us to choose to download all games, have our own servers, allow me to access Xbox Live Marketplace or the PSN store without exiting a game! streamline everything even more on the software side of things.

I can't help it, I gotta be sarcastic here... You basically want them to catch up to what Steam has been doing for years. No offense, but if that's what you're hoping for with the next generation of games, then yes, I can absolutely understand your very positive attitude.

To me, this wouldn't be innovation. It would be catching up to standards set elsewhere years ago. Call me spoiled or whatever, but to me, that wouldn't be cutting it. At all. I think we're just entering the next generation with extremely different expectations and maybe a different background. After experiencing what, say, Steam does, or battle.net, it's hard to look at PSN and XBL and think of any improvements as innovative.

Lumines, you made me hate the next gen console even more than i did. its gonna be the most useless upgrade to a console yet. the jump from ps1 to ps2 was huge, from ps2 tp ps3 was the same. ps4 and 720 seem so underwhelming im surprised they want to bring it out.

and im even more surprised that gamers are waiting for these consoles. the improvement is barely gonna be noticable, so why even bring it out, no more importantly, why even buy it as a consumer. so far i dont see any reason to buy a next gen console, maybe ill wait for the gen after this one or go pc gaming wise.

Well, as I said, you've got to take FLOPS benchmarks and such with a huge grain of salt. They're just the only measurement available across all boards. Now, for me, it's not the difference between the last gen and the upcomming one that makes me feel a bit bummed. It's just that, compared to what else is available on the market, it seems to be lagging behind.

What's bothering me is the following: Today, a € 170 GPU puts out 1.8 TFLOPS. The PS4 is rumoured to out out 1.8 TFLOPS. Back then, the Xbox360 put out 355 GFLOPS. A GeForce 6800 Ultra, which would, in the day, have been considered a high-end card (and would've cost more around € 350) put out 75 GFLOPS. And that, for me, puts the whole thing into perspective, for me. Again, this is based on a rumour and we've got no way of knowing whether these FLOPS measurements are any where near accurate. Just saying that, going by what little we have, the consoles seem so much weaker in comparison to the rrest of the market than the least time a new generation was released...

 

[avens]

CoD innovative? And what would you call games like Journey, then?

CoD4 shaped the current industry's fps games market. Simple as that, pure innovation.

Before that it was CoD1 (and CoD:UO), nowadays everything is a modern warfare 2 copy and black ops 2 is on a level of its own on that particular genre (the pseudo realistic shooter). Improvement and innovation is not just making a game of a not mass market genre.

I think the "next gen" is promising because it will finally deliver the hardware needed for devs to do what they have always envisioned. Picture bioshock but with more companies than a handful doing AAA titles, plus all the current franchises improving vastly. A good example of the latter is GT6, if the ps4 delivers what the ps3 didn't.

 

[LaBounti]

Well, as I said, you've got to take FLOPS benchmarks and such with a huge grain of salt. They're just the only measurement available across all boards. Now, for me, it's not the difference between the last gen and the upcomming one that makes me feel a bit bummed. It's just that, compared to what else is available on the market, it seems to be lagging behind.

What's bothering me is the following: Today, a € 170 GPU puts out 1.8 TFLOPS. The PS4 is rumoured to out out 1.8 TFLOPS. Back then, the Xbox360 put out 355 GFLOPS. A GeForce 6800 Ultra, which would, in the day, have been considered a high-end card (and would've cost more around € 350) put out 75 GFLOPS. And that, for me, puts the whole thing into perspective, for me. Again, this is based on a rumour and we've got no way of knowing whether these FLOPS measurements are any where near accurate. Just saying that, going by what little we have, the consoles seem so much weaker in comparison to the rrest of the market than the least time a new generation was released...

My laptop runs circles around the PS3's specs but can't run games that look as good on it... and it costs more than PS3 does. Do not forget why consoles exist. 8th gen will crush the 7th in performance, that's all that matters in regards to specs.

There is a graphics threshold that will be achieved next generation(Sorry WiiU). The differences in super high end PC/console(Actual games running not specs) will be resolution and frame rate, not overall look with the gap being smaller. They are all rumors anyway, to get worked up over this is non sense.

I think the "next gen" is promising because it will finally deliver the hardware needed for devs to do what they have always envisioned. Picture bioshock but with more companies than a handful doing AAA titles, plus all the current franchises improving vastly. A good example of the latter is GT6, if the ps4 delivers what the ps3 didn't.

I strongly agree, KIllzone 2 is a great looking game, one can only imagine what it would look like with 3.5GB of ram and much more powerful GPU @ 1080p60.

 

[avens]

I strongly agree, KIllzone 2 is a great looking game, one can only imagine what it would look like with 3.5GB of ram and much more powerful GPU @ 1080p60.

Not talking about the looks but about the games themselves. 20 years ago it was simply impossible to release a first person shooter or anything that was in a first person perspective, which is something that was envisioned by everyone at the time. Concretely, bioshock was impossible to do 10 years before its release.

As for graphics, you can do better right now with a pc. It's been like that for about a decade and a half.

 

[wicken]

Kotaku has been a legit source in the past?
http://kotaku.com/5977849/the-playstation-4-has-a-new-controller-fancy-user-accounts-and-impressive-specs-so-far

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Kotaku has been a legit source in the past?
http://kotaku.com/5977849/the-playstation-4-has-a-new-controller-fancy-user-accounts-and-impressive-specs-so-far

Kotaku is a blog; but typically a reliable news source

As for graphics, you can do better right now with a pc. It's been like that for about a decade and a half.

That's not true; last(current) gen release surpassed average PC fidelity... PC obviously quickly caught up and blew past that though.

Next gen releases should be some of the best looking games we have ever seen; regardless of platform.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Kotaku has been a legit source in the past?
http://kotaku.com/5977849/the-playstation-4-has-a-new-controller-fancy-user-accounts-and-impressive-specs-so-far

The specs seem realistic for a Dev Kit. I expect for final release though all parts to be upgraded to latest generation AMD have that can be made especially regarding CPU.

 

[Earth]

I think next generation console should be able to run the Agni's Philosophy tech demo with some small downgrades and at 30 fps. The tech demo ran on a GTX 680 at 60fps. Now this same GTX 680 can run BF3 on 'ultra'/1080 at 77 fps. The PS4's rumored 7850 can run BF3 on 'ultra'/1080 at 30 fps. Thats a gap of 17 frames.

Hopefully optimization of console hardware will eat into that gap a bit, and maybe some small downgrades in graphics will get PS4 visuals to somewhat match the $450 GTX 680 card's rendering ability of Agni's Philosophy, but at 30fps.

Final Fantasy XIII runs at 720p/30fps and routinely drops below 20fps, for comparison.

Here is the Agnis Philosophy tech demo, and there is a real possibility PS4 will be able to match these visuals very closely at 25-30fps. Im happy with that attainable performance.

[YOutUBE]nv4Boq4HLKU[/media]

8th gen will crush the 7th in performance, that's all that matters in regards to specs.

Good point. We're not looking at a Wii U upgrade with the PS4. It might not be as large as from PS2-PS3, but did it need to be? Developers struggled mightily with the advanced graphics from last gen. As a result we only got one Gran Turismo, one Final Fantasy, one Metal Gear Solid, etc etc, when we use to get 2-3 of those per gen.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

I would expect they would try and get hardware to do run that tech demo at 1080p 60fps. Best thing is the cost of hardware as fast as that has reduced quite a lot and will reduce a lot more in 2014 and is already affordable in 2013.

 

[avens]

Kotaku is a blog; but typically a reliable news source

That's not true; last(current) gen release surpassed average PC fidelity... PC obviously quickly caught up and blew past that though.

Next gen releases should be some of the best looking games we have ever seen; regardless of platform.

I bought a top notch pc at the time and it blew the 360 and ps3 away, and still beats those including that devs got better at making games for those consoles.

Same was the case for the previous gen and it will be for the next one. If I or anyone else buys a top notch pc at the exact same time the ps4 is released that pc will run games better than the ps4.

Actually you can see that right now, months or years before the ps4's release. "The best looking games we have ever seen" can be played today, with better peripherals, screens, etc. etc. than what $500 can get you in some time.

 

[Ddrizle]

Not talking about the looks but about the games themselves. 20 years ago it was simply impossible to release a first person shooter or anything that was in a first person perspective, which is something that was envisioned by everyone at the time. Concretely, bioshock was impossible to do 10 years before its release.

Wolfenstein 3D was 20 years ago & Doom followed shortly after. Not sure why these two influential fps games were neglected, but it is what it is. Bioshock & other FPS(or most, if not all other types/genres of games), with the help of technical/hardware progress simply evolved the genre.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I bought a top notch pc at the time and it blew the 360 and ps3 away, and still beats those including that devs got better at making games for those consoles.

Same was the case for the previous gen and it will be for the next one. If I or anyone else buys a top notch pc at the exact same time the ps4 is released that pc will run games better than the ps4.

Actually you can see that right now, months or years before the ps4's release. "The best looking games we have ever seen" can be played today, with better peripherals, screens, etc. etc. than what $500 can get you in some time.

So your opinion is your PC "blew the 360 and ps3 away..." based on what exactly? at what time? what game(s)?

"The best looking games we have ever seen" can be played today.... obviously.... because after all... they are the best looking games we have ever seen... we aren't time travelers now are we... we can't see the best looking games we have never seen... Pong was the best looking game we have ever seen at one point.

 

[Tornado]

Same was the case for the previous gen and it will be for the next one.

You could build a computer that could outperform the Dreamcast back when one of the best GPUs on the market still needed a separate card for 2D hardware support? Our first computer had an Athlon 600 and a Voodoo3 3000 (after the original card it came with broke) and I don't recall being able to play anything that looked as good as the Dreamcast launch titles on it. And while maybe I'm just overestimating how good those components were in 1999, I also remember the PC version of Red Faction on a Pentium 4 2.4 Northwood with a Geforce3 being pretty much identical to the PS2 version, except the PC one had a lot shorter load times and the color of the bullet readout on the assault rifle was yellow instead of red.

 

[Samus]

The specs seem realistic for a Dev Kit. I expect for final release though all parts to be upgraded to latest generation AMD have that can be made especially regarding CPU.

I would expect they would try and get hardware to do run that tech demo at 1080p 60fps. Best thing is the cost of hardware as fast as that has reduced quite a lot and will reduce a lot more in 2014 and is already affordable in 2013.

You talk as if they can just slap in brand new, untested parts at the last minute. They can't, they need to be finalised a long time before the console is released, hence why console tech is always going to be outdated upon release.

 

[thelvynau]

You talk as if they can just slap in brand new, untested parts at the last minute. They can't, they need to be finalised a long time before the console is released, hence why console tech is always going to be outdated upon release.

Would that be due to possible incompatibility? I always thought that the parts will work together regardless.

 

[Tornado]

The parts may work together, but they may not work together efficiently as some other combination. Worse than that, you may not have a proper grasp on what is needed for adequate cooling if you slap in the absolute newest thing you can get.

 

[Luminis]

And since MS/Sony/Nintendo have to cover the whole consoe with their warranty, they can't just go and slap something into the console because it's up to AMD's standards. AMD probably never tested the 7850 for usage in a console when it was first created, so all of that has to be taken care of before release.

 

[Samus]

Would that be due to possible incompatibility? I always thought that the parts will work together regardless.

The parts may work together, but they may not work together efficiently as some other combination. Worse than that, you may not have a proper grasp on what is needed for adequate cooling if you slap in the absolute newest thing you can get.

And since MS/Sony/Nintendo have to cover the whole consoe with their warranty, they can't just go and slap something into the console because it's up to AMD's standards. AMD probably never tested the 7850 for usage in a console when it was first created, so all of that has to be taken care of before release.

What they said. Plus if you drastically update the hardware at the last minute a lot of the work on the dev-kits to date would be useless, you would have a completely new ballpark to work to.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

You talk as if they can just slap in brand new, untested parts at the last minute. They can't, they need to be finalised a long time before the console is released, hence why console tech is always going to be outdated upon release.

I am talking in the way it is usually done. They have a target to try and achieve, they know what is realistic closer and closer to when they need to finalise specifications. They can give dev kits with target performance using higher power consuming parts. I think they will be wanting better performance per watt especially regarding CPU and AMD are already working on that for a few years with new architecture designs. Console tech is not always outdated upon release, just look at the 360 with the GPU that it got, first with unified shaders and Cell CPU in PS3 which was quite a beast when it came out. Given that history, you might see latest architectures from AMD, the mid-range form first in the consoles before it hits desktops. Sure, there will be PCs out there more powerful at launch but comparing at similar thermals from same company, I think consoles will be ahead for a short while.