Wikipedia says you're pretty much right. Looks like Perfect Dark would work without it, but with 'limited options'.

retroking1981 wrote:

I guess the only successful HW .5 was the Game Boy Color.

DS Lite and DSi but they weren't so much. 5 as. 1 and. 2
Although the DS Lite didn't have exclusive games and the DSi only handful of garbage ones.

Liveinadive wrote:

DS Lite and DSi but they weren't so much. 5 as. 1 and. 2

Pretty much the equivalent of the slimmer versions of home consoles we tend to get, which also include minor hardware tweaks (lower power consumption, bigger hard drive etc).  I wouldn't be surprised if these .5 editions are little more than the now traditional hardware revision, with maybe the ability to watch 4k movies. Sony might also opt to squeeze in the VR processing unit, to make it a more attractive proposition.  Unlikely, but a possibility.

Escape wrote:

I've always wondered if Perfect Dark's framerate was any better without the Pak, since it enabled high-res textures?

It was effectively unplayable without the pak.

From what I remember it was just the multiplayer with bots that was playable.

You are right though, some games frame rates were hit because of the bump in resolution. That's why developers started using it to improves frame rates instead. Some games even gave you the choice.

Raiziel wrote:

Wasn't Banjo-Tooie expansion pack only?

Doesn't even support it according to Andy's link.

They aren't going for the PC route. They're going for the tablet route which is fraught with dangerous pitfalls.

iOS in particular has had numerous revisions since the iPad/2/3/New/Mini and iPhone revisions and the old software often fails to work on the new hardware/firmware. Ostensibly a revision cycle model of console hardware is argued as being beneficial in order to build a critical mass of end users who happily empty their wallets for new software, season passes, in-game consumables gambling currency and subscriptions. That's the publisher mindset. The creative mindset is neither hampered nor hindered by whether there is new hardware or not, but their resources in being able to address compatibility issues are.

Then there is the historical fact that late-gen software seems to stagnate with few exceptions (though some of those exceptions are indeed exceptional). If you're going to go the revision model, just become a steam box sub licensee and put your own shopfront in there. Otherwise there is no reason for the customer to not go PC anyway.

i can't see the end result of this being anything other than increasing the cost for gamers.

while there's the potential for a utopian arrangement where the .5 console offers nice improvements to those just buying the console new without any detrimental effect on the games for existing owners of the 'base' version, i don't see it happening.

developers/publishers aren't going to want to put in the extra time and effort to fully optimise two different versions of the same game without increasing the costs.
MS and Sony will be too caught up in using the upgrades to make their machine 'best' to then force developers to prioritise the base version...especially as if the upgrade doesn't show enough difference over the original then there'll be a backlash over the costs of the newer console...they won't just want 'new' customers to buy the newer version, they'll want a reason for existing customers to upgrade too.
it's not just a case of going "well, we'll turn the cpu up by 20% and that will automatically make all those 720p games run at 1080p".
if they don't insist on parity for something like framerate between the different systems then you immediately open up a difference in gameplay quality, and then you have possible issues with online play between v1 and v1.5 owners...  

i know it's kind of just semantics/perspective, but for me they'd be better off just bringing out a full 'next gen' console (and make it fully backwards compatible), rather than a halfway house  that i think would just irritate and confuse people.

Monkey and Rambo sounds like a series I would watch.

Turns out all these upgrades are purely cosmetic.
Xbox One Horse armour and Recon Helmet coming holiday 2016

I've no idea what Ham is on about there to be fair.

It will irritate plenty of people (see this thread), but far fewer than a whole new console

Yeah, I could've worded that better. It would irritate virtually nobody that wouldn't be irritated more by a PS5, and it wouldn't confuse anybody that wouldn't be confused by a PS5, and the potential harm from any confusion would be smaller.

@Dants fair enough.

Working on the assumption that they're bringing something out this christmas, would you rather it was 4.5 or 5?

Diluted Dante wrote:

I'm fine with a PS5. I'm not fine with a PS4.5

But why? What's the difference that worries you? Timelines or compatibility?

IanHamlett wrote:

Working on the assumption that they're bringing something out this christmas, would you rather it was 4.5 or 5?

Neither. They are already bringing something out at Christmas, it's called PlayStation VR.

A PS5 will come along later, as Retroking articulates. A PS4.5 muddies the waters for no real benefit. The PS4 is fine as it is, and it's selling in fine enough numbers. They can bring out a slimline by all means. Don't try upgrading the actual console.