joeyjoejoeshababadoo

• 11:30am EST - March 3rd, 2013
• 1

 I honestly don't think this generation is ready for that. It's going to take many years before 4k goes mainstream. Most american' internet can't handle 4k video, I know mine can't.

OsborneLV | Eric_Osborne

• 11:56am EST - March 3rd, 2013
• 2

Well the same could of been said about blu-ray format back when the PS3 introduced it, it wasn't for afew years until it became standardized as HDdvd and BLUray was battling it out, then after that it took another year or so before it was the norm. Personally I like that Sony is leading the way with new technologies. This system is planned for a 10 year lifespan, so ofcourse it will feature things we haven't seen yet and are quite frankly not ready for. Well I hope that Sony understand that 100GB movies and larger game files requires a huge harddrive. I would be very disappointed if I can't buy a PS4 with atleast 1TB of space - with movies that size, we would more than likelly require 5-10TB drives. I plan to buy the largest one they offer, and I hope they make it so it can be changed out as easily as the super slim's drive. PERSONALLY I prefer to DOWNLOAD ALL games/movies so I have a huge digital library and don't need to swap out games, worry about scratches or lost discs, but I understand that all digital isn't for everyone, it's just way better for me and my needs, my PSV is 100% digital - only complaint is that 32GB is too small, would love a 128GB card after the PS4 releases.

Gameoholic007 | Demented007

• 1:09pm EST - March 3rd, 2013
• 3

I think 4K should be introduced later on in the consoles cycle. Right now, 4K tv's are so expensive, that your average joe can't efford one, and won't be able for quite some time. I don't see a lot of people hitting up the downloads right away at that expense. When the PS3 came out in 06, HD wasn't even close to being that steep, and everyone seemed to climb on board at a more rapid pase to support HD within the first year of the PS3's release.

joeyjoejoeshababadoo

• 2:48pm EST - March 3rd, 2013
• 4

 @2 I don't know about that. When blu-ray was first introduced you could get a standalone unit for a few hundred bucks. 

Try getting a 4k TV for under $10k.. They even have some that are $40k+

pepsivscoke

• 3:22am EST - March 4th, 2013
• 5

I don't think the market is ready for the 4k just yet. Maybe down the road but there are many people that are still adapting to blu-ray. (besides, blu-ray is Awesome! as it is)

@4 if I remember correctly stand alone Blu-ray players were between $1000 to $2000 when the PS3 released. Many people waited til 1 to 2 years or more after the release of the PS3 to purchase. Most of the people I know were waiting to see which would win between HD-DVD and Blu-ray. I think that helped hurry the cost reduction of Blu-ray machines. (just my opinion?)

Alpha2

• 5:38am EST - March 4th, 2013
• 6

Hd was a government mandate (in the form of digital broadcast TV) for 2 years even before the PS3 came out so HD was inevitable and as such the race between HDDVD and Bluray was going to happen with or without the PS3. HDTVs were pricey at first but 1000 bucks or so for an impressive upgrade wasn't outside of your budget if you were money conscious and saved for it Plus with the switch to Digital TV most people didnt have much choice but to get a new flat screen or use one of those silly converter boxes.

4K though is not a necessity though. Experts say any screen below 30 inches is a waste if you're getting an HDTV because you can barely tell the difference at that size, With 4K the minimum size for a tellivision would be about 60 or 70 inches. How many people have the room, let alone the money in this economy to shell out close to 5 grand for a first generation 4K tv at their MINIMUM size. Especially when the only things that might reach that resolution anytime soon are Home movies, a few rare sporting events on cable and maybe a couple of imax movies. As for streaming; Even with Fios I occasinally have trouble streaming Youtube videos at 720p, I doubt 4K streaming will be a smooth experience for most people when we still dont have a nation wide broadband standard.

It's a niche product, like 3D. and even if there was a practical use built into the PS4 it's going to be 3 years before you get any really decent content for it especially since they've said games are not going to go 4K. So what's the point in even worrying about it. I paid over a grand for an HD tv 5 years ago, I dont have any need to buy another one anytime soon.

cheetor

• 10:32am EST - March 4th, 2013
• 7

 I have not witnessed a 4k tv in action but I cant imagine its as big a leap as was SD to HD. This seams like another service Sony wants to do just so they can say they were first. I think it will be a failure like 3D catching on. In some cases 3d looks good but it is still just kind of weird. Since many people feel like that, why go buy another newer hdtv for the added feature? I feel this will be the same mentality for 4k.

TheTenth666

• 11:03am EST - March 4th, 2013
• 8

Downloading a 4K movie? like 200+ Gb? on ADSL maybe 15 hours at best to watch a 2 hour movie? just plain stupid and unnecessary

Taken from wikipedia : "In measurements made between January and June 2011, the United States ranked 26th globally in terms of the speed of its broadband Internet connection with an average measured speed of 4.93 Mbit/s", honestly France may be around that as I'm lucky if I have 1Mb for 10 minutes straight. So with 5Mb we'd get a 200 Gb movie downloaded in 11 hours ... and only if the internet speed doesn't go down here and there ...

I'm amazed some tech guys don't even take into account the interent speed ... or Sony has some amazing tech in their sleeve

WayFastWhitey | pitofskulls

• 3:09pm EST - March 6th, 2013
• 9

 Why push for a 4K resolution if the games can't even get 1080p support across all games?? The first thing would be to provide 1080p support across ALL games first, worry about movies later..