Sony promised the PS5 would be much easier to find in 2023, and it’s slowly becoming a reality. Sales are improving dramatically in the manufacturer’s native Japan, where for the longest time you’ve had to register your interest with retailers in order to partake in lotteries for the opportunity to purchase a system. That practice is now, finally, on the way out, as the platform holder is able to more easily meet demand.
Electronics outfit Nojima Online has announced that, starting 1st February, it’ll cease its lottery system for the PS5 and switch to regular sales. This means, effectively, you’ll be able to order a console directly when available, without restriction. This doesn’t mean the system won’t still sell out, of course, but it’s an indication that hardware will be more readily available moving forward, which is something the PlayStation maker itself has indicated.
The firm is currently in the process of relaunching its new-gen console, with a vast and sprawling marketing campaign that’s seen artefacts like Kratos’ Leviathan Axe from God of War Ragnarok installed in real-world locations. It seems confident it can finally meet demand for its new-gen console, so if you’re in the market for a PS5, there’s never been a better time to try and pick one up.
[source twitter.com]
Comments (18)
This is great news for playstation as it means stock is increasing, hopefully they can gain some momentum back in Japan and get some more bigger exclusive JRPG's.
Especially with xbox sales slowing down and xbox announcing today that they are increasing the cost of the series S/X in japan.
Forget the PS5, when is the Pro Console coming out?
Nice to see it finally properly stretching it's legs without the need of gobbling up multiple hundreds of 3rd party games for 77 billion
@neonpizza Not for a long time, if at all.
@get2sammyb
You would think Nov 2023, if History is anything to go buy, but 2024 seems more likely due to PS5 shortages.
I need an RTX 4090, which has the power of 10 PS5's. WIth that, I can run every new title I throw at it, at 120-144fps, + RT, maxed graphics and higher frame rates. Not even a PS5 Pro would be able to dethrone it. But that's expected, since a 4090 will run you at least $2299 CAD.
@neonpizza it was already alluded to that Sony will skip the pro and just carry on in to the next game cycle.
Are you promoting a graphics card on a PlayStation news forum?
@neonpizza I don't think a pro console is coming, dude.
@neonpizza i hear at the moment that card has a lot of driver issues. I’m sure that will get worked out over time. But it’s really expensive to have it not be compatible with most games. But yea a $4,000.00 dollar PC does out perform a PS5 or PS5 Pro.
@MacRider as much as I’d love a Pro, i think you’re right, it’s not coming this Gen. Which is fine, if it means we get the PS6 a year or two earlier. Either way is a win i suppose 😀
@NomNom
If that's the case. Yikes. I was hoping for a Pro so i could run nearly everything at 120fps instead of 60. Looks like the PS5 will just be my VR machine with the occasional exclusive. With Switch being a glorified retro machine with Nintendo Exclusives hehe.
@neonpizza The Pro primarily existed to accommodate the shift to 4K. PS5 is more than capable of running modern games at higher resolutions. With the world the way it is, Sony will be lucky to maintain consistent PS5 production through the rest of the generation and meet demand.
As always, if you need top-tier performance, you're going to want to main PC.
@neonpizza "I need an RTX 4090, which has the power of 10 PS5's... But that's expected, since a 4090 will run you at least $2299 CAD."
Plus a CPU, MB, RAM, SSD, PSU that can maximise that GPU, you can't scrimp here or you bottleneck. Plus Case, Coolers, Fans, K&M &/or Controller. You are looking at around $4000 - $5000+ CAD for a system that maximises the 4090. So about 10x the cost of a PS5. Wish you luck getting anywhere near 10x the performance. /s
@themightyant
I'm doomed.
Well, I'm gonna have to hold off i Guess. It's too bad
because i struggle to game at 60fps whenever it comes to anything in first person and sometimes 3rd person, even fighters(etc) simply because of the amount of mushy detail destroying motion blur constantly motion blur that constantly smothers my OLED TV(and every other OLED for that matter), and you're only getting 300p motion resolution which is actually below SD resolution with these sample & hold displays. It's a far cry from 1080, and especially 4k. So much for picture stability.
The only way to get higher motion res' and lower motion blur is to brute force higher frame rates like 120fps, which does wonders. There's also black frame insertion, but it has it's set of compromises. Too much brightness loss(On my LG C1) to make it even worth while, doubles input lag, causes noticeable flicker on whites and severe shadow detail crushing...
In return you jump from 300p to 650p(which is near HD)motion resolution and you cut down more than half the motion blur. It's comparable to 'average' plasma motion when all said and done. It makes a BIG difference. Without it, games like Resident Evil 8 running at 60fps are simply put unplayable.
I've tried, i really have. But the motion blur makes my eye balls want to vomit, i can't handle it. Every time the in-game camera turns from left to right, it's like gaming through the eyes of somebody who's drunk of his butt. It's unbearable, especially after Fake/forcing 120fps into Resident Evil Village(PS5) and seeing how much better it looks in motion. It's night and day. BFI looks solid...But again, the compromises are frustrating.
PC, as expensive as it is Should get every new title running at 120-144fps unless there's a frame rate cap. Oh well, at least RE8 is coming to PSVR2 in 21 days, hopefully running at, at least 90fps and in VR? Motion Blur is very minimal as it is.
@neonpizza For all the nice things about OLED tv's I didn't like how it handled motion, especially in lower frame rates. Ended up trading in my LG in for a top end QLED. There are a few small compromises - there are pros and cons to each - but ultimately i'm much happier with it. We like what we like regardless what everyone else says is 'right'.
Don't get me onto BFI, gives me a headache, I understand the theory but no, never... can't understand the statistical anomalies that actually like it. lol
Wish you luck with your 120-144fps PC endeavours.
@themightyant
Strange, I always assumed even QD-'LED''s suffered from more motion blur due to the lower motion response time. Plus local dimming has it's drawbacks(like even being disabled in game mode) and they can't achieve true blacks etc.
But like you said, both tech's have their pro's and cons. I'm looking into getting the new 2023 Samsung S95C QD-OLED this June, it's less than half an inch thick, which is great for wall mounting. It uses a one connect box which has all the HDMI inputs(etc) and it slips into your TV stand. the TV itself just has one cable. And it's 20% brighter than last years S95C, which means BFI and SDR Game mode will even brighter.
As for QD-LED possibly being better for motion...They do have a lot more gobs of brightness to spare, which could mean greater Black frame insertion compared to OLED, if done properly.
But ya, I can't stand motion blur, I wish i could get every PS5 game running at 120fps, and there's no doubt in my mind that a PS5 Pro could do the trick if it ever came to fruition. Isn't it crazy? I've been gaming since the late 80's, for almost 3 decades on CRT. motion blur didn't even exist...We've gone backwards. If you're selling me a 4K television, it should have zero motion blur with 4K motion resolution...
Once 240fps TV's become available, and consoles like the PS6 become powerful enough to run games at that frame right i'll be content. I mean, you're cutting blur in half from 120fps, motion resolution increases to 1200p and lag drops to 2.5ms.
Combined with Rolling Scan BFI, you're probably getting near CRT-like results as far blur reduction goes.
Also, even if a future TV could eliminate Motion Blur at 60fps for base motion, you're still left with a horribly low 300p motion resolution. Shifting from 1080p-4K when the screen is static and then dropping down to that once things gradually start moving is going to be jarring and gross to look at.
BFI & Higher frame rates are the only two solutions. According to BlurBusters Chart >
60fps - 300p Motion res - 16ms Persistence - 10ms lag
120fps - 600p Motion res - 8ms Persistence - 5ms lag
240fps - 1200p Motion res - 4ms Persistence - 2.5ms lag
240fps + Rolling Scan is going to be a CRT lover's dream.
@neonpizza It wasn't the motion blur that is the problem for me, it was the opposite. The almost instant response time on OLED made anything below 60 or 60+ fps look really stuttery to my eyes and 'felt' worse than my previous inferior TV which seemed to cover it with persistence blur. I prefer that to stutters.
Sure i'd love to always play at higher framerates, but as your post over on NL goes to show many great games like BOTW are sub 60, WE don't get to choose that all the time.
Personally I like SOME motion blur, if it's good per object motion blur when it's done well. I feel it should be like a sporting referee, you know it's done well when you don't notice it and it is just part of the games style.
But I don't like either end of that scale. I can't do with too much e.g. I noticed in Plague Tale: Requiem it was OTT at default settings, and I notice it's absence when it is turned off.
Different horses, different courses.
@themightyant
Stop playing games at 30fps, problem solved.
It's funny, Breath of the Wild is one of the few games that i can tolerate just fine at 3. Probably, because the in-game camera moves so slowly from left to right, that the Judder appears more to be more minimal including the motion blur which seems to only really effect mountains and other environmental objects out in the distance.
Other decent examples, are Resident Evil Remake & 0. Any first person title in 30 & even 60fps is where i draw the line, on sample and hold displays unless I'm gaming at 120fps or using quality black frame insertion.
I hate motion blur, because it destroys detail and makes me want to look away from the screen. it isn't natural unless you've plowed over a dozen beers. lol Some devs inherently add it to their games and there's no way of turning it off. I just don't get the appeal. To each their own i guess.
A PS5 Pro should be able to run any game that's thrown at it, at 120fps, even if it's 1080p without Ray Tracing. Resident Evil 4 Remake is 1080p + 60. Looks like I'm gonna have to use BFI and figure out a way to correct the shadow detail crushing it causes. ugh.
neonpizza wrote:
Except it is. Move your head side to side quickly and everything blurs just a little, or look at a fan blade spinning for persistence. It's simulating what our eyes do when me move, and to many people (not all, including you) it IS more natural when done responsibly.
In fact our eyes see far more motion blur then we 'see'/compute but our brain masks it out in a process known as Saccadic masking.
Of course VG motion blur is only an approximation and that is probably what your brain is picking up on, it's not quite right. Much like many don't like 3D films, myself included, as it gives us eye strain when our eyes try to put in focus the blurry bits, and we can't, which leads to headaches.
Tap here to load 18 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...