• 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.

BusinessInsider.com: Microsoft's Xbox is beating the PlayStation 5 this holiday season for 3 key reasons

Status
Not open for further replies.

Topher

Gold Member
Exactly. Why would the Series S compromise XSX games? They're the same architecture. PS4 and PS5 are not. The PS4 doesn't even have an SSD!

What about PC then? Every Xbox game is being made for PC which doesn't always have SSD and is using multiple architectures. So every Xbox game will be compromised by PC?

So you're saying Jim Ryan was lying when he said he believes in generations then? Nah, I don't think he would lie like that.

I think you should review that "generations" quote and take it in context.

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features.

"We do believe in generations, and whether it's the DualSense controller, whether it's the 3D audio, whether it's the multiple ways that the SSD can be used... we are thinking that it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5."

 

Lognor

Member
What about PC then? Every Xbox game is being made for PC which doesn't always have SSD and is using multiple architectures. So every Xbox game will be compromised by PC?



I think you should review that "generations" quote and take it in context.

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features.

"We do believe in generations, and whether it's the DualSense controller, whether it's the 3D audio, whether it's the multiple ways that the SSD can be used... we are thinking that it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5."

Yeah, I don't know about PCs. Will PC gamers migrate to SSDs? Will future games require SSDs on PC? I don't know much about it. I think I've read that without an SSD a PC can brute force something that would require an SSD on a console via more RAM? I dunno. Could be way off base.

But if that is not the case and PCs will hold back Xbox games, won't the same be true for PS5 games as more and more of them get ported to PC? We've seen a handful thus far, but we know more and more will be coming. Sony seems to have found a lot of success with PC ports so why would they stop? Would Ratchet and Clank be possible on PC? Probably. But it's not possible on PS4. It would be possible on the Series S though. Series S has an SSD afterall.
 

adamsapple

Member
What about PC then? Every Xbox game is being made for PC which doesn't always have SSD and is using multiple architectures. So every Xbox game will be compromised by PC?

I would say this is not a valid comparison.

As of yet, only The Medium is a next-gen Xbox/PC exclusive game that isn't on last gen. And it's kind of a shitty game anyway.

STALKER 2 is coming in April, it's Series/PC exclusive and it requires an SSD in its minimum requirements as per Steam. That is a better indicator:




 
Last edited:

Lognor

Member
I would say this is not a valid comparison.

As of yet, only The Medium is a next-gen Xbox/PC exclusive game that isn't on last gen. And it's kind of a shitty game anyway.

STALKER 2 is coming in April, it's Series/PC exclusive and it requires an SSD in its minimum requirements as per Steam. That is a better indicator:




Oh shit! I did not realize any PC games were requiring an SSD. I wonder if that's legit or if it will still run without an SSD. I can't imagine a majority of PC gamers have an SSD.
 

adamsapple

Member
Oh shit! I did not realize any PC games were requiring an SSD. I wonder if that's legit or if it will still run without an SSD. I can't imagine a majority of PC gamers have an SSD.

I think it'll still *run* without the SSD, but you may be prone to more streaming pauses and very long load times, if the games asset streaming is being designed around an SSD.


I personally think a decent cpu and super fast SSD is the most next gen feature of these consoles. Having that as standard will be the key component to unlocking next gen gaming this gen.

Yeah, the Series S CPU is a massive generational improvement over the PS4.
Series S's GPU is a weaker version of the current generation GPU in PS5|Series X, but still a massive improvement over the GCN architecture of the PS4/Pro.
And the presence of a mandatory SSD has its own benefits as already stated.

There's really no comparison in how a PS4 and how a Series S will effect current gen gaming. They're literally not the same generation of hardware.
 

skit_data

Member
So you're saying Jim Ryan was lying when he said he believes in generations then? Nah, I don't think he would lie like that.

And just because a game has been in development for several years doesn't mean it couldn't be developed exclusively for the PS5. I mean, Returnal was in development for several years before the PS5 hardware was finalized. So was Ratchet and Clank. So was Demons Souls. Why wouldn't these games be on PS4 then? I think they changed course mid development because they knew they would not be able to sell enough consoles quickly enough due to supply shortages. A lower end console could have fixed that.
Of course he lied to some extent, I thought that was well established by this point.

Of course they could’ve shifted the development and entirely cut off the PS4 but personally I think both GoW Ragnarök and Horizon FW were expected to release way earlier than what they are set to release now. Returnal, Demon’s Souls and Ratchet & Clank were probably produced in a much shorter time frame than both those titles. Shifting Gran Turismo 7 to both PS4 and PS5 seems to have been more of an afterthought though, so I’ll give you that.

My main point is that both GoW Ragnarök and Horizon FW probably were so far into production that shifting it to a PS5 only release probably would have had a pretty small impact of how the game plays.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
I would say this is not a valid comparison.

As of yet, only The Medium is a next-gen Xbox/PC exclusive game that isn't on last gen. And it's kind of a shitty game anyway.

STALKER 2 is coming in April, it's Series/PC exclusive and it requires an SSD in its minimum requirements as per Steam. That is a better indicator:





You've still got multiple architectures there so I'd say that's completely valid. It is interesting that games are starting to require SSD. I think that is going to ramp up once RTX IO and DirectStorage become more widely adopted.
 

Rykan

Member
Looking at sales, the big majority of players buy AAA games for consoles, so they don't seem to care about playing them in 30fps. And in Steam most of them have low or mid level hardware. So considering there's a hardware constrain for the majority of players, devs must decide if to go for striking visuals at 30fps or less good visuals at 60fps.

Outisde a few genres like fighting games, players seem to prefer 30fps with better visuals in most AAA genres like action adventures, open worlds, etc. Same goes with resolution, most people still don't have 4K displays so prefer games looking better using a lower resolution than to have native 4K support.
Thats because the alternative is having to purchase a much more expensive platform to play at 60 fps. You claim that the majority of console players don't play care about 60 fps, yet a substantial amount of the most popular games run at 60. CoD runs at 60 fps. Fornite runs at 60 FPS. Minecraft runs at 60 fps. As does Fifa.

Same story for PC. The most popular games are all low specced games on which it is easy to achieve 60 fps on. League of Legends, Minecraft, Valorant, CS:GO, Rocket League. Games on consoles ran at 30 fps because these consoles were unusually CPU bound and attempts to run it at 60 would lead to drastic cuts. It's not a coincidence that nearly every single release on current gen consoles runs at 60 fps or has a 60 fps option.
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
PS4 is last gen, Series S is current gen. The poster *is* kinda right in their assertion.

Series S won't compromise games, not anywhere close to the extent a game designed as a cross-gen game would.
These people are beyond reasoning with. Imagine thinking that a low end netbook cpu from 2013 with a 1.8TF 8 year old gpu and a slow hdd is in any way comparable to a Zen2/RDNA2 cpu/gpu combo with an ssd and gddr6 lol. One is a very outdated previous generation machine, the other is a current gen machine.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
These people are beyond reasoning with. Imagine thinking that a low end netbook cpu from 2013 with a 1.8TF 8 year old gpu and a slow hdd is in any way comparable to a Zen2/RDNA2 cpu/gpu combo with an ssd and gddr6 lol. One is a very outdated previous generation machine, the other is a current gen machine.
Going by a lot of what people are saying it feels like they're making the case that console gaming is now superior to PC gaming in a lot of ways because of the guarantee of an SSD and fast RAM. I know it's not what they're trying to say, but the turns this conversation is taking definitely make me scratch my head.
 

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
Please tell me how the XSS held back developers especially for PC of which there are more gaming PCs with lower specs than said XSS. Can you name ANY games the XSS held back? Just one.
It's too early to say but I can Imagine devs will have a harder time optimizing for the XSS GPU and ram once last generation is dropped and that will probably cause some sacrifices in our 3rd party releases
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
Going by a lot of what people are saying it feels like they're making the case that console gaming is now superior to PC gaming in a lot of ways because of the guarantee of an SSD and fast RAM. I know it's not what they're trying to say, but the turns this conversation is taking definitely make me scratch my head.
Their argument and goalposts constantly shift to make their preferred console out to be the “winner” in every way, for all things.

I mean we’ve got people now saying the PS4 is the same as a Series S 😂. And yeh, lots of them have convinced themselves that their console of choice is better than a pc, and that their exclusive games are only possible on that specific console…..despite most of those games now coming to pc 😆
 

FrankWza

Member
What about PC then? Every Xbox game is being made for PC which doesn't always have SSD and is using multiple architectures. So every Xbox game will be compromised by PC?



I think you should review that "generations" quote and take it in context.

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features.

"We do believe in generations, and whether it's the DualSense controller, whether it's the 3D audio, whether it's the multiple ways that the SSD can be used... we are thinking that it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5."

Ryan says this and it gets cut to 4 words.
Jason Ronald says the series s will offer the same experience as the series x at lower resolutions and then stops. Easy right? No. Instead, people add paragraphs with disclaimers and interpretations of what this meant. Meanwhile the official site has the features listed backing up exactly what he said.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
It's too early to say but I can Imagine devs will have a harder time optimizing for the XSS GPU and ram once last generation is dropped and that will probably cause some sacrifices in our 3rd party releases
I tend to think of it like PC gaming and how that works. There are still a lot of PC gamers rocking 1060's but we're not fretting about those cards holding back PC gaming for 3080 gamers. PC gamers talk about it in terms of the beefier hardware making games better, not slimmer hardware making games worse.

Devs have been and will continue to dial back settings to make games work on the 4 TF GPU in XSS just like they allow settings to be dialed back so people can play games on the 4.4 TF 1060 GTX at 1080p-ish. The XSS CPU is respectable for the rest of the parts in the box it's in. The parallels are there between XSS and a lower-end gaming PC build and doing tuning for that lower spec, which is what we have seen for the past year. I really don't see a need to be concerned about XSS holding gaming back until there is an actual example to be concerned about.
 
Last edited:

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
I tend to think of it like PC gaming and how that works. There are still a lot of PC gamers rocking 1060's but we're not fretting about those cards holding back PC gaming for 3080 gamers. PC gamers talk about it in terms of the beefier hardware making games better, not slimmer hardware making games worse.

Devs have been and will continue to dial back settings to make games work on the 4 TF GPU in XSS just like they allow settings to be dialed back so people can play games on the 4.4 TF 1060 GTX at 1080p-ish. The XSS CPU is respectable for the rest of the parts in the box it's in. The parallels are there between XSS and a lower-end gaming PC build and doing tuning for that lower spec, which is what we have seen for the past year. I really don't see a need to be concerned about XSS holding gaming back until there is an actual example to be concerned about.
It's more likely that the XSS will be the baseline in a year or so. If you know you have lower spec hardware that your game has to run on then you don't push the stronger box as much as you would if you only had to design around the PS5 and XSX

Not everything scales linearly
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Member
When games running on PS5/SX can't give the same resolution metrics in so many cases, being stuck on the "but they said Series S will run the same as SX in 1440p" is a bizarre thing. As the above post states, things do not always scale linearly. Expecting them to do so and hanging on to the Jason quote from before the consoles even came out is a weird flex.

If we're gonna do that, we also need to read the entire Jim Ryan quote, not just the parts conveniently bolded and enlarged.

we are thinking that it is time to give the PlayStation community something new, something different, that can really only be enjoyed on PS5."

That's the context of people harping on Ryan's "Generation" quote, that shortly after he said it's time to make something new that can be enjoyed on the PS5, they announced that basically all of their major upcoming first party games will be cross-gen (Horizon, God of War, GT7).
 
Last edited:

Emedan

Member
Come on what is this garbage about the Series S holding back next gen. Games have always been looking their best on PC and that platform's scalability is almost endless. You really don't know what you're talking about unless you've played Oblivion with a view distance of 10 meters.
 

Topher

Gold Member
If we're gonna do that, we also need to read the entire Jim Ryan quote, not just the parts conveniently bolded and enlarged.



That's the context of people harping on Ryan's "Generation" quote, that shortly after he said it's time to make something new that can be enjoyed on the PS5, they announced that basically all of their major upcoming first party games will be cross-gen (Horizon, God of War, GT7).


How do you talk about that quote in context while cutting out everything but half a sentence? That is the reason why I provided the entire quote and not just the part that fit a narrative. The part I bolded is key because that part is so often "conveniently" ignored.
 
Last edited:

MrFunSocks

Banned
Come on what is this garbage about the Series S holding back next gen. Games have always been looking their best on PC and that platform's scalability is almost endless. You really don't know what you're talking about unless you've played Oblivion with a view distance of 10 meters.
It's FUD spread by people that hate that the xbox division isn't dead and buried. Fanboyism. Console wars. Nothing more. It's ridiculous that it's still allowed on this forum.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
We are a year in and still arguing the same shit. It’s a prime example of insanity.
we believe in generations….you will get the exact same experience at a lower resolution….

who gives a fuck lol…there’s so much good about all these consoles and pc, we should just enjoy it and stop arguing over the same shit constantly.
 

Soosa

Member
It's FUD spread by people that hate that the xbox division isn't dead and buried. Fanboyism. Console wars. Nothing more. It's ridiculous that it's still allowed on this forum.
Why people have to turn things into extremes? like it is either huge differences, or no differences at all?

Nope, it is just the reality, that the more you have platforms to develop & test, less resources you have for one invividual platform. Devs dont have infinite resources.

We also have to think it as potential differences, which means that it can affect things, but it is variable thing as in holding back doesnt probably mean big differences, but it could also mean it, or maybe there isnt any differences that we can notice.

Situation A:
You have one system to develop games for -> 100 % of resources are in your reach to use for this one version.

Situation B:
You have 2 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100

Even if they have same architechture, APIs and so on, you will probably dont have 100 % of resources to use for system 1, because some amount must be used to optimize&test for system 2 too.

Situation C:
You have 3 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100
system 3 = relative performance is 40-500/100 (all the pc platforms)

Now you have to spare some resources to the 2 console versions + PC version, which means less time + resources for one invividual system.

So, either you have less time, money and resources per system, or you have to have more money and devs vs just having one system.

Anybody whom claims that there is zero difference between making game for 1 platform vs multiple is just using extreme ends wrongly.

Then there is the situation where devs would make game for PS5 only, and port it for pc 2-4 years later -> in this situation, assuming the PS5 version were made only thinking about PS5, PC version wont affect the PS5 version.

The real point is, that how do we define "it is holding back"?

Does it mean that it takes more time, or game isnt as pretty, or it is not as optimized, or there is anything different?


Fact is, that having multiple systems includes the potential to have something less, vs having only one system. <-- and this doesnt mean that all games are "held back", dont read it like it. It means that there can be potentially situations like that.

Also, if devs choose to do games using "100%" of series x potential without caring limitations of series s, then it kind of means that series x is "holding front?" series s version, if even after downgrades it wont be a good experience on sxs.

If devs have budget to combat against added cost to dev for multiple systems, then we can get the same results, if they have limited budget then we can potentially get something held back because of these limitations.

I own PS5 + SXS, and I personally dislike that devs have to make games for slower systems (sxs + ps4 + slow pc setups), but I understand that it must be done financially.
 
Last edited:

MrFunSocks

Banned
Why people have to turn things into extremes? like it is either huge differences, or no differences at all?

Nope, it is just the reality, that the more you have platforms to develop & test, less resources you have for one invividual platform. Devs dont have infinite resources.

We also have to think it as potential differences, which means that it can affect things, but it is variable thing as in holding back doesnt probably mean big differences, but it could also mean it, or maybe there isnt any differences that we can notice.

Situation A:
You have one system to develop games for -> 100 % of resources are in your reach to use for this one version.

Situation B:
You have 2 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100

Even if they have same architechture, APIs and so on, you will probably dont have 100 % of resources to use for system 1, because some amount must be used to optimize&test for system 2 too.

Situation C:
You have 3 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100
system 3 = relative performance is 40-500/100 (all the pc platforms)

Now you have to spare some resources to the 2 console versions + PC version, which means less time + resources for one invividual system.

So, either you have less time, money and resources per system, or you have to have more money and devs vs just having one system.

Anybody whom claims that there is zero difference between making game for 1 platform vs multiple is just using extreme ends wrongly.

Then there is the situation where devs would make game for PS5 only, and port it for pc 2-4 years later -> in this situation, assuming the PS5 version were made only thinking about PS5, PC version wont affect the PS5 version.

The real point is, that how do we define "it is holding back"?

Does it mean that it takes more time, or game isnt as pretty, or it is not as optimized, or there is anything different?


Fact is, that having multiple systems includes the potential to have something less, vs having only one system. <-- and this doesnt mean that all games are "held back", dont read it like it. It means that there can be potentially situations like that.

Also, if devs choose to do games using "100%" of series x potential without caring limitations of series s, then it kind of means that series x is "holding front?" series s version, if even after downgrades it wont be a good experience on sxs.

If devs have budget to combat against added cost to dev for multiple systems, then we can get the same results, if they have limited budget then we can potentially get something held back because of these limitations.

I own PS5 + SXS, and I personally dislike that devs have to make games for slower systems (sxs + ps4 + slow pc setups), but I understand that it must be done financially.
PCs exist, high/mid/low end. Devs already know how to make games for various configurations. When they’re set hardware configurations it’s just straight up easy. The cpu and gpu are the same setup and generation.

It’s all fake concern.
 

reksveks

Member
Situation C:
You have 3 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100
system 3 = relative performance is 40-500/100 (all the pc platforms)
This is basically the situation but I would argue that system 1/2 are effectively subsets of system 3 and the only thing that's specifically interesting is the ability to QA those two more. If you were really concerned about the fact that the series s was holding back game devs, pc development would have been a huge issue (given their typically low min spec requirements). As soon as Microsoft decided to go to releasing on pc, they had to think with some level of scalability in mind.
 

MonarchJT

Banned
If it doesn't have the same graphical effects or running at the same framerate, it is not the same experience. Just like Halo isn't the same experience on a series console as on xbone.
really stop it.....this is becoming hilarious we are accepting unfulfilled promises from consoles that cost twice as much .... as soon as Sony releases VRR (which they promised at launch) we will be able to rant about why the XSs doesn't have raytracing (that they never promised) on all games
 

MonarchJT

Banned
Looking at recent sales rankings I see FIFA (and Madden in USA), CoD, Battlefield, GTA, Far Cry 6, Guardians of the Galaxy, Deathloop, Kena, TLOU2. If you mean a game published by Sony or big exclusives during holiday, in recent years they avoided to release games during Q4 and left it to 3rd parties, multis and indies.

They publish their big exclusives in the other quarters, filling other spots of the year with less 3rd party releases. This year in addition to Returnal, Ratchet, Destruction All Star, Death Stranding DC, Ghost of Tsushima DC, Deathloop, FFVIIR DLC, Kena or Guilty Gear Strive they also had planned Horizon 2, GT7 or GoW Ragnarok, but as happened with tons of other games from basically all publishers, were delayed to the next year due to covid.
seem that half of what youcwrote was old games that Sony find how to grab money again from you ahahh

(sorry your was basically a list war)
 
Last edited:

DarkMage619

Member
It's too early to say but I can Imagine devs will have a harder time optimizing for the XSS GPU and ram once last generation is dropped and that will probably cause some sacrifices in our 3rd party releases
Why would developers have a harder time optimizing for the XSS after using the hardware for years? I have never seen a developer get worse over time as they continue to use hardware. I'll wager as time goes on developers will get more experience, the XDK will gain additional features, and the full feature set of both Series consoles will get utilized. There is no precedent of a console's performance getting worse over time.

Ryan says this and it gets cut to 4 words.
Jason Ronald says the series s will offer the same experience as the series x at lower resolutions and then stops. Easy right? No. Instead, people add paragraphs with disclaimers and interpretations of what this meant. Meanwhile the official site has the features listed backing up exactly what he said.
Again Frank, experience relates to the hardware and the feature set that hardware provides. Jason Ronald never said all XSS would use all the features, all the time and you know that. He has no control over actual game content and you've never provided any examples of missing levels, characters, and gameplay elements on the XSS. His statement didn't require further elaboration. You say the site has features listed tell us all which ones the XSS does not have. It should be pretty easy to list them. Just the features the XSS is NOT capable of.

Their argument and goalposts constantly shift to make their preferred console out to be the “winner” in every way, for all things.

I mean we’ve got people now saying the PS4 is the same as a Series S 😂. And yeh, lots of them have convinced themselves that their console of choice is better than a pc, and that their exclusive games are only possible on that specific console…..despite most of those games now coming to pc 😆
There have been Switch comparisons too! It is amazing how the XSS bothers so many people. People like Frank here regularly argue about the XSS in bad faith. It is pretty odd because he doesn't even have one yet he is super 'concerned' for XSS owners. I suppose we should just be glad he is looking out for so many people. That number has gone up recently so he'll have to work overtime to get the word out.
 

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
Why would developers have a harder time optimizing for the XSS after using the hardware for years? I have never seen a developer get worse over time as they continue to use hardware. I'll wager as time goes on developers will get more experience, the XDK will gain additional features, and the full feature set of both Series consoles will get utilized. There is no precedent of a console's performance getting worse over time.


Again Frank, experience relates to the hardware and the feature set that hardware provides. Jason Ronald never said all XSS would use all the features, all the time and you know that. He has no control over actual game content and you've never provided any examples of missing levels, characters, and gameplay elements on the XSS. His statement didn't require further elaboration. You say the site has features listed tell us all which ones the XSS does not have. It should be pretty easy to list them. Just the features the XSS is NOT capable of.


There have been Switch comparisons too! It is amazing how the XSS bothers so many people. People like Frank here regularly argue about the XSS in bad faith. It is pretty odd because he doesn't even have one yet he is super 'concerned' for XSS owners. I suppose we should just be glad he is looking out for so many people. That number has gone up recently so he'll have to work overtime to get the word out.
Because games are going to get more demanding as the generation goes along
 

Emedan

Member
Why people have to turn things into extremes? like it is either huge differences, or no differences at all?

Nope, it is just the reality, that the more you have platforms to develop & test, less resources you have for one invividual platform. Devs dont have infinite resources.

We also have to think it as potential differences, which means that it can affect things, but it is variable thing as in holding back doesnt probably mean big differences, but it could also mean it, or maybe there isnt any differences that we can notice.

Situation A:
You have one system to develop games for -> 100 % of resources are in your reach to use for this one version.

Situation B:
You have 2 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100

Even if they have same architechture, APIs and so on, you will probably dont have 100 % of resources to use for system 1, because some amount must be used to optimize&test for system 2 too.

Situation C:
You have 3 systems to develop games for
system 1 = relative performance is 100/100
system 2 = relative performance is 50/100
system 3 = relative performance is 40-500/100 (all the pc platforms)

Now you have to spare some resources to the 2 console versions + PC version, which means less time + resources for one invividual system.

So, either you have less time, money and resources per system, or you have to have more money and devs vs just having one system.

Anybody whom claims that there is zero difference between making game for 1 platform vs multiple is just using extreme ends wrongly.

Then there is the situation where devs would make game for PS5 only, and port it for pc 2-4 years later -> in this situation, assuming the PS5 version were made only thinking about PS5, PC version wont affect the PS5 version.

The real point is, that how do we define "it is holding back"?

Does it mean that it takes more time, or game isnt as pretty, or it is not as optimized, or there is anything different?


Fact is, that having multiple systems includes the potential to have something less, vs having only one system. <-- and this doesnt mean that all games are "held back", dont read it like it. It means that there can be potentially situations like that.

Also, if devs choose to do games using "100%" of series x potential without caring limitations of series s, then it kind of means that series x is "holding front?" series s version, if even after downgrades it wont be a good experience on sxs.

If devs have budget to combat against added cost to dev for multiple systems, then we can get the same results, if they have limited budget then we can potentially get something held back because of these limitations.

I own PS5 + SXS, and I personally dislike that devs have to make games for slower systems (sxs + ps4 + slow pc setups), but I understand that it must be done financially.
Sorry but this way of thinking no longer have any merit. Sure when consoles was completely independent architectures from PCs, but that's just not the case anymore. Modern games made for these devices is on par with how you've developed games for PCs since the 80s.
 

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
Graphics are the easiest thing to scale as PC gaming has shown forever, also Series S is far from being the minimum spec looking at the minimum PC specs that have been quoted recently and they are usually exaggerated, like Halo Infinite where my PC CPU is well below the minimum but runs the game fine.
By the time Series S becomes the minimum spec in years from now you would expect the RDNA2 performance saving features to be in common use so it will punch above its weight for a long time, easily enough to see out this generation.
 
Last edited:

Great Hair

Banned
Come on what is this garbage about the Series S holding back next gen.

The Series S is not holding back this gen, because it is not the leading platform.
Series S
10GB ram
2GB for OS
2 to 3 GB for game.exe
5+ GB Vram

XSX/PS5
16GB ram
2GB for OS
2 to 3 GB for game.exe
11+ GB Vram

PC GPU
GTX1050ti 4GB vram
GTX1080ti 11GB vram

Creating games, assets, levels that need to fit inside a lower mem-budget and then porting it over to a stronger machine is what people are afraid of.

Ask every pc enthusiast with a GTX1080ti (11gb vram) or better having to accept the fact, they will never really see a game "made" at concept stage for their uber-pc with 5x the power, as every game also needs to run, fit inside a shitty GTX1050ti mediocre 4GB vram budget.
 

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
The Series S is not holding back this gen, because it is not the leading platform.
Series S
10GB ram
2GB for OS
2 to 3 GB for game.exe
5+ GB Vram

XSX/PS5
16GB ram
2GB for OS
2 to 3 GB for game.exe
11+ GB Vram

PC GPU
GTX1050ti 4GB vram
GTX1080ti 11GB vram

Creating games, assets, levels that need to fit inside a lower mem-budget and then porting it over to a stronger machine is what people are afraid of.

Ask every pc enthusiast with a GTX1080ti (11gb vram) or better having to accept the fact, they will never really see a game "made" at concept stage for their uber-pc with 5x the power, as every game also needs to run, fit inside a shitty GTX1050ti mediocre 4GB vram budget.
I Appreciate You Dj Khaled GIF
 

silentstorm

Member
Oh cool, Xbox beat PS5 according to the title...will this make more developers, particularly japanese ones but including indie ones, actually make games or ports to Xbox?

Because quite a few times the Xbox gets ignored, there is no reason why Shovel Knight:pocket Dungeon isn't on Xbox, even stuff like Arcade Archives completely ignores it, maybe now it will get more games and who the fuck am i kidding!?
 

MonarchJT

Banned
No, the PS5 will have enough ram and fast enough bandwidth
sure a 4k console that most of the time dont render 4k and probably will go down with the res (moving forward in gen) will have enough RAM and Power for everything ... but let's complain about a console that costs 269/99 oriented to casuals, gamers who doesn't cares about res and a raytracing enough to still play at 1080p. Oooooookay jan
 
Last edited:

MonarchJT

Banned
Oh cool, Xbox beat PS5 according to the title...will this make more developers, particularly japanese ones but including indie ones, actually make games or ports to Xbox?

Because quite a few times the Xbox gets ignored, there is no reason why Shovel Knight:pocket Dungeon isn't on Xbox, even stuff like Arcade Archives completely ignores it, maybe now it will get more games and who the fuck am i kidding!?
I get you could get a lover of japanese games but in all honesty a looking at sales and excluding Nintendo stuff those are mostly very VERY niche games
 

Rykan

Member
really stop it.....this is becoming hilarious we are accepting unfulfilled promises from consoles that cost twice as much .... as soon as Sony releases VRR (which they promised at launch) we will be able to rant about why the XSs doesn't have raytracing (that they never promised) on all games
Yeah because VRR, a niche feature that almost nobody has access to, is exactly the same as ray tracing. Also, twice as much? Lol, the ps5 de is just 100$ more.
 

RPSleon

Member
I just picked up a series X as a tertiary console...

I know the series S will sell year round it's essentially competing with the switch at that range. I just feel the almost constant "out of stock" for the big boys has had people just get a series S instead, can't blame them it's been over a year.
Yeah, my friend got a series s until he can get an x. Its not his first choice.
 

MonarchJT

Banned
Yeah because VRR, a niche feature that almost nobody has access to, is exactly the same as ray tracing. Also, twice as much? Lol, the ps5 de is just 100$ more.
who buy the xss doesn't care about VRR or raytracing in the same way..,....and pls not again this....you can get the XSs with all gamepass catalog with something like 400 games for 270/300 euro here in Italy .....at the same time you can get the PS5 digital for 399+81 euro for just 1 (ONE) PS5 first party exclusive ..if you get TWO games well we are around 550/560 euro....you don't buy consoles without games
 
Last edited:

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
sure a 4k console that most of the time dont render 4k and probably will go down with the res (moving forward in gen) will have enough RAM and Power for everything ... but let's complain about a console that costs 269/99 oriented to casuals, gamers who doesn't cares about res and a raytracing enough to still play at 1080p. Oooooookay jan
Resolution after 1440P starts to become a waste of resources IMO. Graphics are much more than resolution and I might sound selfish but I care more about the premium consoles getting pushed than some catering to casuals
 
Isn't it funny how there's tons of Playstation gamers complaining about XSS holding the gen back but at the same time mutligeneration games like Horizon, God of War and Gran turismo look like the best ever, according to them.

Also, PC games have been scaling for year across multiple CPUs, GPUs and Ram and storage speeds . At least the Xbox has some of them the same across the board.
 
Last edited:

STARSBarry

Gold Member
Isn't it funny how there's tons of Playstation gamers complaining about XSS holding the gen back but at the same time mutligeneration games like Horizon, God of War and Gran turismo look like the best ever, according to them.

Also, PC games have been scaling for year across multiple CPUs, GPUs and Ram and storage speeds . At least the Xbox has some of them the same across the board.

As a primarily PC player that also happens to own all of the consoles. The fact that PC has scaling and how that impacts on the games I play... actually helps proves the Sony players (and some xbox users too) point.

In that by making an engine scalable across multiple hardware specs results in a less specified engine and therefore weaker graphical fidelity at the higher end. It can also adversally shape how games are designed, for example FF XIV had to drop PS3 because otherwise zones would be heavily limited in the maximum size and Complexity due to the limited RAM amount. The fact is a game has to be designed for the weakest hardware target and scaled up, otherwise you run into problem and is a very real issue for "next gen games".

PC at least has a "minimum" spec that the creators can define, but Xbox right now will always have Xbox Series S as that minumum. Although to be fair right now the minimum spec is actually the Xbox One base console so that's even worse given its HDD.

PS5 is also going to suffer from that issue with most of the big names being forced to release on PS4 as well and therefore being restricted by especially the storage solution of the older hardware...
 
Last edited:
As a primarily PC player that also happens to own all of the consoles. The fact that PC has scaling and how that impacts on the games I play... actually helps proves the Sony players (and some xbox users too) point.

In that by making an engine scalable across multiple hardware specs results in a less specified engine and therefore weaker graphical fidelity at the higher end. It can also adversally shape how games are designed, for example FF XIV had to drop PS3 because otherwise zones would be heavily limited in the maximum size and Complexity due to the limited RAM amount. The fact is a game has to be designed for the weakest hardware target and scaled up, otherwise you run into problem and is a very real issue for "next gen games".

PC at least has a "minimum" spec that the creators can define, but Xbox right now will always have Xbox Series S as that minumum. Although to be fair right now the minimum spec is actually the Xbox One base console so that's even worse given its HDD.

PS5 is also going to suffer from that issue with most of the big names being forced to release on PS4 as well and therefore being restricted by especially the storage solution of the older hardware...
The issue is, its only the XSS that's gets slated on this forum for holding 'this generation back' when in reality, Sony are the ones creating games that are on both the PS4 and PS5. Yet these games, according to them, look the best they have ever seen. So some people are being disingenuous. Either games are truly being held back in which case, Sony games should look terrible.

Even more so, the PS4 (and xbox one) specs were old even at the time they arrived. They are ancient now, the CPU really having a limiting factor when designing games. Yet the XSS doesn't have that limit. It has the same CPU, and the same SSD.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom