• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Can I be honest here...I don’t think the Xbox Series S is going to last very long into the generation.

Md Ray

Member
It doesn't matter what a top level or s mid level pc is, it's the minimum spec that matters. It means the game has to be designed to run with 8gb of ram and weak video card, far weaker than what's in series S.

Take halo infinite:
  • Processor: AMD FX-8370 or Intel i5-4440.
  • Memory: 8 GB RAM.
  • Graphics: AMD RX 570 or Nvidia GTX 1050 Ti.
That's far, far weaker than series S with its faster RAM, io, ssd, and processor, plus ots a fixed platform.
First, Halo Infinite is a game made with the 2013 Xbox One HW in mind, so that's the minimum spec here, not PC.

Secondly, as you can see the minimum spec PC you posted already has 12-16GB of total memory: 8GB RAM + 4/8GB VRAM from 1050 Ti/570 depending on the model. So you see even these "far weaker" min spec PCs have more RAM than Series S. Nice try though, I'll choose to go with the actual devs opinion on this.
 
Last edited:

Mr Reasonable

Completely Unreasonable
First, Halo Infinite is a game made with the 2013 Xbox One HW in mind, so that's the minimum spec here, not PC.

Secondly, as you can see the minimum spec PC you posted already has 12-16GB of total memory: 8GB RAM + 4/8GB VRAM from 1050 Ti/570 depending on the model. So you see even these "far weaker" min spec PCs have more RAM than Series S. Nice try though, I'll choose to go with the actual devs opinion on this.

Well, let's take a look at the actual Dev's game.

1080p 120hz on Series S.

Seems like it worked out OK?
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
First, Halo Infinite is a game made with the 2013 Xbox One HW in mind, so that's the minimum spec here, not PC.

Secondly, as you can see the minimum spec PC you posted already has 12-16GB of total memory: 8GB RAM + 4/8GB VRAM from 1050 Ti/570 depending on the model. So you see even these "far weaker" systems have more RAM than Series S. Nice try though, I'll choose to go with the actual devs opinion on this.

The min spec I posted is 8gb of slow ram and 4gb of video ram. The entire 8gb available memory is literally twice the speed of the 1050ti's slower ddr5 ram, and that's without factoring hardware decompresssion. The cpu is much faster, and the ssd and i/o speeds matter too. It's not even close, the min pc spec listed is less than half the actual power of series S.
It's clear you don't understand the hardware.
 
Last edited:

Armorian

Banned
Nope and nope, makes zero difference as they were making every game for pc anyhow.

It doesn't matter what a top level or s mid level pc is, it's the minimum spec that matters. It means the game has to be designed to run with 8gb of ram and weak video card, far weaker than what's in series S.

Take halo infinite:
  • Processor: AMD FX-8370 or Intel i5-4440.
  • Memory: 8 GB RAM.
  • Graphics: AMD RX 570 or Nvidia GTX 1050 Ti.
That's far, far weaker than series S with its faster RAM, io, ssd, and processor, plus its a fixed platform.

Series S had literally zero impact on halo infinite's development. Same goes for forza 5. These are the two biggest games coming out for xbox this year.


WCAk6Jt.png


Devs:

Also "it always scaled on PC" is nonsense. Every AAA game in the past decade or so has their assets made once so they run on min spec. Increasing sample counts a bit here and there for high settings isn't what you could truly have done with more power. Min spec matters.

— Axel Gneiting (@axelgneiting) September 10, 2020

Consoles set minimum specs, not PC. Before 2013 no game on PC needed more than 2GB of VRAM, it all changed when consoles launched. Same for multicore CPUs, devs don't give a fuck that majority of PC gamers have 1060 GTX, they make games to work on Series S shit RAM setup first and foremost, than scale up.

Weakest console is always the lowest common denominator for entire gen. If you check my post history you will see that I always defended "lockhart" saying that with the same cpu devs can always scale gfx/resolution. But when they revealed RAM setup... Holy shit :messenger_tears_of_joy:

PS5 exclusives will be the only games not limited by Series S and showing full potential of this generation.
 
Last edited:

Md Ray

Member
The min spec I posted is 8gb of slow ram and 4gb of video ram. The entire 8gb available memory is literally twice the speed of the 1050ti's slower ddr5 ram, and that's without factoring hardware decompresssion. The cpu is much faster, and the ssd and i/o speeds matter too. It's not even close, the min pc spec listed is less than half the actual power of series S.
It's clear you don't understand the hardware.
The topic at hand is the amount of RAM. And that is far less on Series S, even compared to the min required PC spec for Halo Infinite. That's what devs are saying is the limiting factor, learn to read.
 
Last edited:

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
The topic at hand is the amount of RAM. And that is far less on Series S, even compared to the min required PC spec for Halo Infinite. That's what devs are saying is the limiting factor, learn to read.

I can read just fine, it's your comprehension of the whole picture that's in question. Are you saying the speed of the ram, the i/o, and the processor have zero impact on how much ram is actually needed? That's seriously flawed boxed in thinking.
 
Last edited:

Haggard

Banned
Nope and nope, makes zero difference as they were making every game for pc anyhow
the pc has never ever played a role in the spec target of a console game (which is pretty much 99% of the retail market).
The S is the lowest common denominator for the general game design. Any graphical scaling downwards or upwards happens after that is done.
 
Last edited:

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots

WCAk6Jt.png


Devs:



Consoles set minimum specs, not PC. Before 2013 no game on PC needed more than 2GB of VRAM, it all changed when consoles launched. Same for multicore CPUs, devs don't give a fuck that majority of PC gamers have 1060 GTX, they make games to work on Series S shit RAM setup first and foremost, than scale up.

Weakest console is always the lowest common denominator for entire gen. If you check my post history you will see that I always defended "lockhart" saying that with the same cpu devs can always scale gfx/resolution. But when they revealed RAM setup... Holy shit :messenger_tears_of_joy:

PS5 exclusives will be the only games not limited by Series S and showing full potential of this generation.

You mean the 3 biggest games also being developed for the ps4? Ok.

Also your wrong on what developers will set up for, Series s, one fixed platform with decent power is the least of thier overall concern when they are making games for 3 other platforms and a million PC combinations.
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
the pc has never ever played a role in the spec target of a console game (which is pretty much 99% of the retail market).
The S is the lowest common denominator for the general game design. Any graphical scaling downwards or upwards happens afterwards.

Just the ones that are making a pc version, or xbox one or ps4, which is like 99% of the games so far this gen. And don't forget the switch......
It certainly matter this generation.
 
Last edited:

Haggard

Banned
Just the ones that are making a pc version, or xbox one or ps4, which is like 99% of the games so far this gen. And don't forget the switch......
It certainly matter this generation.

The moment cross gen is done with the min-hardware target for game design will be the S as the lowest standardized current gen machine and that will be the case for the rest of the gen. The PC will continue to get its beautified ports and the switch will get the few games that actually can be done on it for money reasons.

Nothing`s changed. That´s how it`s been since pre HD times.
 
Last edited:

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
The moment cross gen is done with the min-hardware target for game design will be the S and that will be the case for the rest of the gen as it has always been.

Errr, pc is not "extra", on some cases it's even the lead platform (flight simulator anyone?)
Series S had zero impact in its design.
 

Armorian

Banned
You mean the 3 biggest games also being developed for the ps4? Ok.

Also your wrong on what developers will set up for, Series s, one fixed platform with decent power is the least of thier overall concern when they are making games for 3 other platforms and a million PC combinations.

These devs will make future games after cross gen period is done and XSS will be target platform, everything will scale up from this point and they won't be able to take game design out of 7 or 8GB of RAM available ghetto. 16GB of memory on XSX is a waste (just like 12GB on X1X).

This feels like it might be worth quoting.

:lollipop_sunglasses:
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
These devs will make future games after cross gen period is done and XSS will be target platform, everything will scale up from this point and they won't be able to take game design out of 7 or 8GB of RAM available ghetto. 16GB of memory on XSX is a waste (just like 12GB on X1X).



:lollipop_sunglasses:

Someday someone can explain to me how, by magic, a developer who supposedly is targeting a 1080p device magically transforms these same assets to 4k even though they are supposedly working from bottom up instead of top down. It's a "scale up" miracle!
 

Haggard

Banned
Errr, pc is not "extra", on some cases it's even the lead platform (flight simulator anyone?)
Series S had zero impact in its design.
duh...that game came out before the consoles were even released and MS Flight-Sim has been a PC IP for 20+ years.
Yes there are some real PC titles with a noteworthy budget, but those are few and far in between, and even less of those ever make it to console.

It`s a sad reality, that games will always be designed for the most profitable market and that has always been consoles. There aren`t many developers who really put effort in their PC versions to make them shine, which is also a budget question to be fair.

Someday someone can explain to me how, by magic, a developer who supposedly is targeting a 1080p device magically transforms these same assets to 4k even though they are supposedly working from bottom up instead of top down. It's a "scale up" miracle!
Not sure if you`re trolling right now or if your understanding of asset creation and management is really that bad....Let me guess, you`ve never used Maya, Blender, 3DS-Max, the UE Editor or anything similar in your life?
 
Last edited:

Md Ray

Member
I can read just fine, it's your comprehension of the whole picture that's in question. Are you saying the speed of the ram, the i/o, and the processor have zero impact on how much ram is actually needed? That's seriously flawed boxed in thinking.
This is one of the stupidest arguments I've ever read here. To overcome the amount of RAM needed all you need is more RAM bandwidth, i/o, and processor(?)... I've read it all.
No need for more memory, I guess?

Here's a real-world e.g. of what happens if you just increase the bandwidth without increasing the amount of the memory.

3060 (w/ 360 GB/s, 12GB) is beating both 3070 & 3060 Ti (w/ 448 GB/s, 8GB) here when limited by the amount of VRAM.
CCEno8H.png


Anyway, Series S is RAM-limited as devs pointed out. Period.
 
Last edited:

Soosa

Banned
My argument is that the Series S is selling. Some people around here are saying that Series S is gathering dust on retailer shelves because nobody wants it.

The reality is that it's consistently one of the top ten selling products in the Video Game section on Amazon. People refuse to accept that because it's not sold out, for some reason.
Well it all boils into this:

USA vs. rest of the world.

Using USA as only data point is biased, because that is the home town for xbox -> xbox always sells there well, and is equal competitor of playstation.

Using rest of the world as only data point is biased, because xbox is not really that popular outside of USA -> xbox almost always sells worse than playstation, isnt seen as strong or popular brand, xbox is basically seen as "spare option" for kids & fifa players, because playstation is just so much stronger.


2 completely different perspectives, and if people from either one wont acknowedge or know the whole picture, the view from other side sounds like bullshit.

from USA view it seems to be really difficult to see, that xbox isnt real competitor or equal thing
from outside of USA view it seems to be difficult to see that xbox would be anything but smaller spare option instead of serious competitor.


And if we use an average, it still does sound wrong because one side says "xbox is sold out!, this cant be true!" and one side says "but xbox is gathering dust, that cant be true!".

So, maybe only option is to talk USA market and global market separately?

Xbox is part of American culture like mac&cheese, while outside of USA I havent ever heard anyone eating that stuff, yet on online conversations USA folks seems to think that mac&cheese is some kind of universally popular thing :D

Playstation is part of european culture really strongly, but their competitor (xbox) really isnt a cultural thing to us.

Here in my country series S have been available basically from day one on stores, never seen them sold out. Series x have been available from time to time, and now it have had maybe 1-2 weeks of order time in few store chains in my country. And situation is similar around EU from what I have heard.


So is it series S a failure, because it does gather dust on Eu stores? Or is it a success because it is sold out in USA?

I think it is success and failure in the same time, it is success at USA where it fits the culture better, and failure on EU, because from the start it werent seen as part of the gaming culture, to have a chance.


Because:

if it is seen as a failure -> easy to see it as low specced machine which also makes devs to do extra work, even when people didnt want the system.

if it is seen as a success -> easy to see that this slow specced machine adds more to gaming than takes away by the extra work.


As long as USA vs. rest of the world continues without both sides really trying to understand the whole picture, conversation doesnt go anywhere.


But I think that series S will last the gen, because MS started with it, so it is difficult to remove it. And it will be wildly popular on USA, but not so much out of it. Kind of like xbox one digital edition (SAD), shops had to discount it to 99€ here and still it didnt sell that well.
 

Hezekiah

Banned
Casual gamers tend to stick to franchises they like. They are the least likely to have hundreds of games stored on their devices. You seem to be projecting your own personal thoughts on casuals and that would explain why you aren't making any sense. The storage on the XSS is a non issue and there are inexpensive ways to get more space outside of the Seagate drive surprised you did not know that.

The two SOC decision is the reason MS has product to sell in Europe and elsewhere. Just because you want a high end device doesn't mean everyone does. The main market MS should be focusing on is their home territory. In the US the XSS sells quite well. The US market is also bigger than the any market in Europe so I'd say MS has the correct priorities. As they aquire more of the XSX SOC there is nothing stopping them from sending extra units to Europe. Might as well grow your base in markets that give your product support. They learned the folly of pursuing the Japanese market as well. Interestingly enough the XSS is doing better there than other Xboxes historically. Glad they didn't follow your advice.

Damn right I'm not talking about the XSS hardware, because the XSS isn't being sold based on hardware specs. It's being sold as an affordable current generation gaming device. That includes Game pass and all the other features it has others don't. It provides far more value for your dollar than the same budget on the PS5. Don't get mad at me or MS because Sony isn't doing the same thing. Perhaps instead of being upset about a console you don't own why not focus your ire on the system that costs more yet lacks features the value box has? It makes no sense. The 'gimped' machine has more features and is a better value.

I'm not sensitive about anything but people failing to understand what the XSS is and who it is for. It was never sold as a high end gaming device, it was never marketed around its specs. People imposing false expectations on the system come across as disingenuous. It has the same feature set as the XSX for $200 less. That alone makes it worth the cost. There is no evidence whatsoever that it won't receive support this entire generation especially when the X1, a much weaker device, still get games 8 years later. You have the same thing in common as the people predicting MS' exit from console gaming. You were both wrong.
No idea why you're talking about hundreds of games. Just a few games is enough to fill up the Series S and leave people having to constantly be moving stuff around - and as I mentioned Series games in several cases are a fair bit bigger than their PS5 equivalents.

Europe as a whole is a bigger market than the US. I have no idea why keep zeroing in on me, I'm talking about the wider markets. I haven't carried out any surveys, but clearly plenty of people in Europe, Middle East, Asia (Asia is more than Japan by the way, but I'm glad you're happy that Xbox is doing so much better there lol) etc don't want it and realise that it doesn't offer by 'far the most value' as you claim. Again what you struggle to grasp is that cheaper doesn't necessarily equal better value. And once again you're bringing up features that most people don't care about. Just listing stuff to point score. Sony producing a Digital Edition PS5 for just £100 more was a far better decision - for them and for gamers. How many people have you seen online asking for another PS5 that's only £100 cheaper, but isn't actually a 4K machine and is far less powerful?? What a bizarre statement to make about Sony not doing one.

I'm dealing in facts while you're getting in your feelings. Microsoft's exiting the console industry is irrelevant, a pointless issue to raise. The fact is that a few months after launch the Series S was easily obtainable at retailers in the biggest market (and in others) because demand is far lower than it is for the other next-gen consoles. No amount of grandstanding is going to change that.
 

Armorian

Banned
Someday someone can explain to me how, by magic, a developer who supposedly is targeting a 1080p device magically transforms these same assets to 4k even though they are supposedly working from bottom up instead of top down. It's a "scale up" miracle!

Textures and models are usually made above what is used in games, full polycount models are reduced by different LODs etc.

Developers will have to make their games with aniamtions, textures, shadows, models, ai etc. work in this 7/8GB RAM buffer of Xbox Series S, this is true foe every first party MS game and all third party games. Games have to be feature complete.

Now, they can utilize PS5 and XSX additional power scaling up in game resolution, shadow resolution, using higher resolution textures, better models, Ray Tracing etc. They have ~13GB of memory to play way more than they have on XSS. The point I make is:

What they have on Series S i barely more than what they had on X1 and PS4 in terms of available memory. They have miles better CPU and IO but games have to fit in this tiny memory amount. All gameplay features had to be designed with this limit in mind. That's how games will be limited by XSS for the entire gen.
 

Mr Reasonable

Completely Unreasonable
Well it all boils into this:

USA vs. rest of the world.
I'm posting from the UK and using amazon UK as data source.

However, my point is that people saying it's not selling are wrong if the only measure they are using is if something is sold out or not selling.

Here in the UK, the series S is not sold out, but it is consistently one of the best selling items in Amazon's chart.

Conclusion: it may not be sold out but it is still selling well, something which people don't seem to be able to handle.
 
Last edited:

cireza

Banned
Textures and models are usually made above what is used in games, full polycount models are reduced by different LODs etc.

Developers will have to make their games with aniamtions, textures, shadows, models, ai etc. work in this 7/8GB RAM buffer of Xbox Series S, this is true foe every first party MS game and all third party games. Games have to be feature complete.

Now, they can utilize PS5 and XSX additional power scaling up in game resolution, shadow resolution, using higher resolution textures, better models, Ray Tracing etc. They have ~13GB of memory to play way more than they have on XSS. The point I make is:

What they have on Series S i barely more than what they had on X1 and PS4 in terms of available memory. They have miles better CPU and IO but games have to fit in this tiny memory amount. All gameplay features had to be designed with this limit in mind. That's how games will be limited by XSS for the entire gen.
Developers haven't even started releasing true next-gen games that use the capabilities of Series S.
 

elliot5

Member
This is one of the stupidest arguments I've ever read here. To overcome the amount of RAM needed all you need is more RAM bandwidth, i/o, and processor(?)... I've read it all.
No need for more memory, I guess?

Here's a real-world e.g. of what happens if you just increase the bandwidth without increasing the amount of the memory.

3060 (w/ 360 GB/s, 12GB) is beating both 3070 & 3060 Ti (w/ 448 GB/s, 8GB) here when limited by the amount of VRAM.
CCEno8H.png


Anyway, Series S is RAM-limited as devs pointed out. Period.
Your example is using 4K resolution as the highlighted box, something the Series S won't be pushing for anyway. Notice how at FHD or WQHD the 3070 beats the 3060.
 

Md Ray

Member
Your example is using 4K resolution as the highlighted box, something the Series S won't be pushing for anyway. Notice how at FHD or WQHD the 3070 beats the 3060.
That was not the point...
EgMEmakUwAE0OlO.jpg


Mr. dvdvideo here claims that RAM speed (higher bandwidth), I/O, and somehow even processor had some kind of impact on how much RAM is needed.

I simply showed him that wasn't true. Having higher BW doesn't compensate for a lower amount of memory like he ignorantly insinuated. You still need more RAM when it's required.
 
Last edited:

dcmk7

Banned
To see games released with less features than the XSX, especially from first party, indicates there are technical limitations there. I'm not sure why XSS having Quick Resume or VRR deflects from the many games released with differences between the two consoles.

It's fundamentally about the games after all. And they shouldn't have differences besides resolution according to Jason Ronald.

I think it should last the rest of the generation but I guess a lot depends on the sales and it seems be doing well in US
 

dcmk7

Banned
You posted these screenshots a (literal) dozen times. You still haven't pointed out which features are supposedly missing from the Series S. All the features are there, Jason Ronald didn't lie.

So why ask?

And why move the goal posts? How's that arguing in good faith exactly?

All the next gen features that are on XSX titles and not (but should be) on XSS is the problem I have with it.

I didn't expect first party studios to start doing this but they have, like with Doom Eternal.

But regardless of it struggles I'm sure it will see out this generation. If it keeps selling in key markets.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
My thoughts on this topic have been evolving. Looking at the data from the past few games, it's clear that Series S will have games that are downported from Series X. That means a lot of cuts at times to LODs, resolution, framerate and even key features like ray tracing. So clearly its not holding back anything. Yet.

The UE5 demo also runs at 1440p 30 fps on XSX and PS5. The Epic lighting setting actually runs at 1080p 30 fps. If devs were targeting the 4 tflops Series S as the 1080p 30 fps machine then the PS5 and XSX wouldve been at 4k 30 fps. We are not seeing that. Epic and devs are pushing visual fidelity over resolution and framerate, and dont seem to care much about the lower end GPUs.

So my fears before the start of the gen were unwarranted. Flight Sim is another great example. The XSX version looks far better than the XSS version. It was by no means compromised.
 
Moving goal posts? How's the arguing in good faith exactly?
That's rich. You purposely misinterpreted what Jason Ronald said so you can call him a liar.
All the next gen features that are on XSX titles and not (but should be) on XSS is the problem I have with it.
That's not what Jason Ronald promised. Take it up with the game devs.
I didn't expect first party studios to start doing this but they have, like with Doom Eternal.
It's a matter of priorities. The devs likely didn't want to sacrifice 60 fps or resolution in order to deliver raytracing on XSS. I don't see how this makes Jason Ronald a liar.
 

Schmick

Member
My thoughts on this topic have been evolving. Looking at the data from the past few games, it's clear that Series S will have games that are downported from Series X. That means a lot of cuts at times to LODs, resolution, framerate and even key features like ray tracing. So clearly its not holding back anything. Yet.

The UE5 demo also runs at 1440p 30 fps on XSX and PS5. The Epic lighting setting actually runs at 1080p 30 fps. If devs were targeting the 4 tflops Series S as the 1080p 30 fps machine then the PS5 and XSX wouldve been at 4k 30 fps. We are not seeing that. Epic and devs are pushing visual fidelity over resolution and framerate, and dont seem to care much about the lower end GPUs.

So my fears before the start of the gen were unwarranted. Flight Sim is another great example. The XSX version looks far better than the XSS version. It was by no means compromised.
I wish others would see it like you do.

When you look at it like this.... then we shouldn't be seeing "Series S should never have existed" posts.
 

dcmk7

Banned
That's rich. You purposely misinterpreted what Jason Ronald said so you can call him a liar.

That's not what Jason Ronald promised. Take it up with the game devs.

It's a matter of priorities. The devs likely didn't want to sacrifice 60 fps or resolution in order to deliver raytracing on XSS. I don't see how this makes Jason Ronald a liar.

I'm saying it was misleading and l shouldn't have been said at all.

It's looking more and more like it has technical limitations which hinders its ability to offer the same experience otherwise games, especially first party, would be the same experience. No doubt about it.

I'm sure MS would want their games being the same just at a lower resolution. So to see one released with such a big next gen feature missing isn't a good look. Let's be honest here.
 
Last edited:

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
These devs will make future games after cross gen period is done and XSS will be target platform, everything will scale up from this point and they won't be able to take game design out of 7 or 8GB of RAM available ghetto. 16GB of memory on XSX is a waste (just like 12GB on X1X).



:lollipop_sunglasses:
I don't agree with this, 12GB on the X1X was waste because the CPU have no chance of getting that much in the buffer, not the mention the HDD. With Zen 2 and SDD, I think the RAM could have been larger (the fast part, anyway)...
 

Armorian

Banned
I don't agree with this, 12GB on the X1X was waste because the CPU have no chance of getting that much in the buffer, not the mention the HDD. With Zen 2 and SDD, I think the RAM could have been larger (the fast part, anyway)...

Yeah, I think overall consoles should have more than 16GB. But all this memory that XSX has over XSS can't be used to anything gameplay related.

XSS is a fucking anchor this gen.
 

Helghan

Member
I don't see a problem with the Series S at all. Currently games are still being developed for last gen, the Series S is more powerful than all of them. Even when this changes in 2023-2024, we are only going to be using next-gen features which will make it easier to develop for the Series S. The console will easily be a viable solution for 1080p gaming in the next 5 years.
 
I'm saying it was misleading and l shouldn't have been said at all.
It's only misleading if you assume that Jason Ronald has a say in how game devs will choose to prioritize optimization in their games. He obviously doesn't have a say in that, so it's not misleading.
It's looking more and more like it has technical limitations which hinders its ability to offer the same experience otherwise games, especially first party, would be the same experience. No doubt about it.
Again, it will depend on what devs want. Some games have feature parity, others don't. Offering different modes helps (Doom could easily have RT on Series S, for example).
I'm sure MS would want their games being the same just at a lower resolution. So to see one released with such a big next gen feature missing isn't a good look. Let's be honest here.
Ideally yes, but it's more important to them to have a cheap way to get people into Gamepass. I don't think they're losing sleep over the Series S not having a raytracing mode in Doom Eternal.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
I don't see a problem with the Series S at all. Currently games are still being developed for last gen, the Series S is more powerful than all of them. Even when this changes in 2023-2024, we are only going to be using next-gen features which will make it easier to develop for the Series S. The console will easily be a viable solution for 1080p gaming in the next 5 years.
2023-24 we could have Pro models which would complicate things even more.
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
duh...that game came out before the consoles were even released and MS Flight-Sim has been a PC IP for 20+ years.
Yes there are some real PC titles with a noteworthy budget, but those are few and far in between, and even less of those ever make it to console.

It`s a sad reality, that games will always be designed for the most profitable market and that has always been consoles. There aren`t many developers who really put effort in their PC versions to make them shine, which is also a budget question to be fair.


Not sure if you`re trolling right now or if your understanding of asset creation and management is really that bad....Let me guess, you`ve never used Maya, Blender, 3DS-Max, the UE Editor or anything similar in your life?

You said all games, which is obviously wrong right from the hop. Tons of PC games make it to consoles (every Bethesda game ever made? Every xbox home studio game pretty much?)
My point on the asset creation is still valid, they aren't creating assets for low res games and then trying to use them at higher resolutions, they are creating assets for high res games and then using downscaled versions for the less powerful machines. This has always been the case, they are creating for the more powerful platform in mind, it just has to be done that way.
 

Hezekiah

Banned
New thread from people that never had any intention of buying it. Even me as a Xbox fan, this console is not for me, but I do not worry about the low specs. Do PC gamers worry about the low specs of the future Steam Deck?
The thread is from April.

And that's such a weird comparison.
 
Top Bottom