New PS4 model

[Sennex 1,903]

https://www.pcmag.com/news/362488/sony-quietly-rolls-out-new-ps4-model

 

 

If you go out and buy a PS4$381.95 at Amazon today, chances are the model number written on it will be some variation of CUH-2100. But in the coming weeks and months, that will change as Sony just rolled out a CUH-2200 model.

 

PlayStation model number changes are made for different reasons, and the digit that changes signals the importance of the change. Major hardware revisions result in the first digit changing, which is why when the PS4 SlimBest Price at Amazon was rolled out Sony moved from model CUH-1XXX to CUH-2XXX. The last two digits vary based on which region of the world a console is intended for.

 

As DualShockers reports, when the second digit in the model number changes it signals minor hardware tweaks, which is what this looks to be. CUH-2200 models have appeared listed on the Japanese online store with a 1TB Jet Black and 500GB Jet Black version both carrying the new model number. Eventually all markets will offer the CUH-2200 as Sony ships out new stock and stops making the CUH-2100 (this may have already happened).

 

These new consoles are unchanged in terms of power use, weight, and dimensions, which suggests that Sony has tweaked the hardware inside for some reason. Typically this is done when they figure out a way to save money and reduce manufacturing costs. Any saving, however small, can make a huge difference when you're producing tens of millions of consoles every year.

 

Don't expect Sony to mention the move to model CUH-2200 as there's no reason for it to be talked about publicly. It's also not worth waiting for the new model to be widespread before opting to purchase a PS4. The bigger question to ask is if you should be spending a bit more for a PS4 Pro

[phil bottle 9,822]

Or maybe just hold out for the next generation of consoles, which are just around the corner. Possibly.

 

If I needed a PS4 though, I'd definitely go for the Pro.

 

 

 

 

[J4MES OX4D 10,057]

The 2200 is probably Sony's final mass production shot of the PS4 - with no aesthetic or hardware changes, it's probably their last roll-out before the PS5. Basically means if you're going out and buying a new console from major retailers,  you'll get a 2018 produced console rather than perhaps a unit that was made in 2017 although there being no distinguishable difference. 

 

Microsoft usually do things differently - the 360 slim alone had Core, Pro and Elite plus the Slim and Super Slim which all had some differences even with the hardware. Only thing Sony is really missing is a PS4 Pro Slim but it's probably not viable now with the next gen closing in.  

[The3rdWalker 1,274]

Sony has been pretty clockwork when it comes to a release schedule. 

1. (PS1) December 3, 1994
2. (PS2) March 4, 2000
3. (PS3) November 11, 2006
4. (PS4) November 15, 2013
   1. (PS PRO) November 10, 2016

So even with the PS Pro you could view that as a halfway point of the console's life cycle. It would be a safe bet that in 2019 you will see a new system announced at least. I would doubt we see an actual release next year but who knows. 

[J4MES OX4D 10,057]

31 minutes ago, The3rdWalker said:

Sony has been pretty clockwork when it comes to a release schedule. 

1. (PS1) December 3, 1994
2. (PS2) March 4, 2000
3. (PS3) November 11, 2006
4. (PS4) November 15, 2013
   1. (PS PRO) November 10, 2016

So even with the PS Pro you could view that as a halfway point of the console's life cycle. It would be a safe bet that in 2019 you will see a new system announced at least. I would doubt we see an actual release next year but who knows. 

2020 is the expected launch of the new Xbox generation and that's coming from industry developers and even hinted by Microsoft themselves at E3. I'd expect Sony to be releasing their next gen then too. Sony not releasing the Pro Slim variant would suggest they financing exclusively for the upcoming gen too. 

 

Xbox One X owners must be pissed off that the already-convoluted gen where they've spent £450 on a new console will be replaced barely a couple of years later. The tech may not be obsolete but that's a pretty big kick in the teeth unless they brand the new console Xbox One X Two!

[The3rdWalker 1,274]

34 minutes ago, J4MES OX4D said:

Xbox One X owners must be pissed off that the already-convoluted gen where they've spent £450 on a new console will be replaced barely a couple of years later. The tech may not be obsolete but that's a pretty big kick in the teeth unless they brand the new console Xbox One X Two!

It has always been a dumb move. I don't understand the Apple iPhone life-cycle for consoles. At this point you're spending 1,000 monies you might as well buy a PC and enjoy all of the benefits over console ownership. There are some people that keep older consoles and I believe that's the smart route, but the highest end console at the end of the cycle and enjoy all of the games you may have held off on in the past. It makes zero sense to buy these consoles every 3 to 4 years. 

[Sennex 1,903]

The more I watch these new consoles and the shitty life cycles, the more I am going to start treating them the same way I treat games now.

 

Wait for it to be at the end of the life cycle, buy a greatest hits machine and call it a win. The last 3 Nintendo consoles have really burnt me out, not to mention how many shit games have I paid $60+ for, only to absolutely ignore after a week.

 

I just don't have the time or energy anymore to spend top dollar on these things.

 

I figure next year I will be able to pick up an Xbone for cheap, and then stock up on the titles I missed out on for the last few years.

 

/patientgaming FTW

[The3rdWalker 1,274]

1 hour ago, Sennex said:

/patientgaming FTW

You hit the nail on the head with consoles. Just like the folks who don't have a PS4 as of yet. Wait until it's no longer current- buy the pro and enjoy Horizon Zero Dawn, God of War, etc. 

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

[Sennex 1,903]

Best subreddit there is.

 

I post there a lot, i always felt I was on the fringe though as I would have current systems, whereas those guys are just now picking up Ps1's

[J4MES OX4D 10,057]

2 hours ago, Sennex said:

The more I watch these new consoles and the shitty life cycles, the more I am going to start treating them the same way I treat games now.

The first gen systems of new generations are always horseshit versions of hardware too.  The original Xbox One was visually and technically horrendous compared to the more compact and slightly more powerful Xbox One S released a couple of years later.  I spent a hefty sum on a PS4 back in 2013 and all I got in the first few years was trash like Killzone Shadowfall, Knack and Watch Dogs. I could've waited a bit and then bought a Pro for a similar pricepoint when all the real quality games starting flowing like Horizon, Nier, God of War and Detroit. 

 

Xbox One X owners have already blown £450-odd on their soon to be replaced systems and will probably waste another £500 on the first gen iterations of the next generation in 18 or so months. My PC is the priority because of cheap games and raw power but if I do tap into the next gen I will certainly wait a couple of years and look to get a second iteration system which has improvements over the original console. 

 

I can see a lot of people grabbing Pro's and XB1s consoles later this year though because they'll likely be around the £200 mark and in terms of games; there will be plenty available from the last few years to choose from. Games are the same too - no point in spending £50 on a game that'll be £30 a month later. 

[Sennex 1,903]

I liked knack and watchdogs. Killzone was crap

 

I agree otherwise

[GazzaGarratt 11,066]

10 hours ago, phil bottle said:

Or maybe just hold out for the next generation of consoles, which are just around the corner. Possibly.

 

If I needed a PS4 though, I'd definitely go for the Pro.

 

 

 

 

This for me however it is the first time that I feel like the next gen console isn't a given for me.

8 hours ago, The3rdWalker said:

Sony has been pretty clockwork when it comes to a release schedule. 

1. (PS1) December 3, 1994
2. (PS2) March 4, 2000
3. (PS3) November 11, 2006
4. (PS4) November 15, 2013
   1. (PS PRO) November 10, 2016

So even with the PS Pro you could view that as a halfway point of the console's life cycle. It would be a safe bet that in 2019 you will see a new system announced at least. I would doubt we see an actual release next year but who knows. 

This makes total sense. Although I do think the next jump in consoles will be the smallest in terms of actual differences to overall gameplay, etc.

[J4MES OX4D 10,057]

11 hours ago, GazzaGarratt said:

This for me however it is the first time that I feel like the next gen console isn't a given for me.

This makes total sense. Although I do think the next jump in consoles will be the smallest in terms of actual differences to overall gameplay, etc.

Next console generation focus should be on getting games running at 1080p/60fps bare minimum and I think that will be achievable. PS4 has done well to produce so many ambitious titles with hardware from 2012 but with the majority of games running around the 30fps mark and not even full 1080, it's definitely showing its age even if the games are current. 

 

I certainly wouldn't expect a huge jump in quality of games or scope especially from the AAA industry but hopefully from a performance perspective, games will be running to a higher and more consistent standard straight away. 

[phil bottle 9,822]

12 hours ago, GazzaGarratt said:

This for me however it is the first time that I feel like the next gen console isn't a given for me.

 

Yeah, that's quite a statement from you there Lee

 

[GazzaGarratt 11,066]

Yeah, that's quite a statement from you there Lee [emoji4]
 

I know! Feels kind of weird saying it but whilst I have to accept the changing world of consoles, I'll also admit I really miss the original concept of a console having games that you can put in and play. They're just becoming glorified PCs.

[The3rdWalker 1,274]

1 hour ago, GazzaGarratt said:

They're just becoming glorified PCs.

 

The PC gaming community will always welcome people with open arms when this is realized. No, but in all serious as I've said before. It's bullshit. 

[J4MES OX4D 10,057]

1 hour ago, GazzaGarratt said:

5 hours ago, phil bottle said:

Yeah, that's quite a statement from you there Lee
 

I know! Feels kind of weird saying it but whilst I have to accept the changing world of consoles, I'll also admit I really miss the original concept of a console having games that you can put in and play. They're just becoming glorified PCs.

I don't like how console games are so reliant on online connectivity these days.  Some games only contain partial data so a download is mandatory, day one patches are rife and the more and more single player games that require an internet connection is growing worryingly. Also the amount of games that are being designed around an online service in the AAA industry is just horrible now. 

 

A game like God of War champions how gaming was and should be then you have others like Far Cry 5 which just capture everything wrong with the industry these days. 

[Sennex 1,903]

I don't mind Far Cry 5, as other than the arcade mini-game, you can play the whole thing offline without an issue. (Its how I play it)

 

Watchdogs 2 was the one that gave me issue when it came to offline play though. They eventually fixed a lot of it, but still, it wasn't as enjoyable as it should have been.

 

Skyrim and Fallout 4 have their issues as well with always on connectivity because of the modding and creation lab crap.

 

GoW, and HZD were both amazing though. Also Witcher 3 was just perfect.