• 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.

(*)Let's Clear Up Some Misconceptions On PS5 & XSX Specs Shall We.....

Which system do YOU think holds the overall performance advantage?


  • Total voters
    275
  • Poll closed .

JackMcGunns

Member
You mean what happened to this?
VwGQ7tS.png


Exactly my point, we knew this for the PS3/360 era and even before that since Saturn vs PS1 where the Saturn was just a difficult machine, yet that didn't stop the fans from saying "We should only compare exclusives". Today what exclusives are we comparing? no, we're going straight to the conclusion based on mulitplatform game performance to say the PS5 is just as powerful. What happened to "I don't care if the average multiplatform game performs better on 360 when I know exclusives will have more potential on PS3". Should we be looking forward to what The Coalition and Unreal Engine 5 games can achieve with Series X over PS5? what's with the hypocrisy?
 
I don't even believe a streaming stick is necessary. All they would need is an APP and then people can just buy a Bluetooth controller and just play games with it.

Playing games natively is much better than streaming though which is why I believe the XSS exists.

Although I do agree there's some issues with that platform which several devs have mentioned (Larian and Epic for example).

The only issue with an app-only approach is that the app performance is beholden to the hardware in, say, the smart TV, which may not be great in terms of the processor, RAM, internal storage (helpful for cached data), wifi module etc.

So the streaming experience can be significantly different from device to device if it's app-based only. A streaming stick or module at least evens the field a bit more regardless what endpoint a person is using, IMO.

What’s funny is that shills wanted us to believe that the Series S would outperform the PS5.

Mesh shaders, VRS, Velocity architecture and all those buzzwords didn’t do a damn good thing.

Hope I never brought into the "Series S outperforms PS5" drivel. It's such a farcifical claim that it'd be hard to believe it on any level.

I remember seeing your turn in real-time. I was like, "this guy is really starting to figure it out". Not many people do that.

Also willing to admit when I made a bad call. Can remember some of my 'criticism' towards TLOU2 back in 2020 which were just wrong, like trying to compare it to similar movies to downplay the story/narrative Films and games being very different mediums always make those type of comparisons flawed.

Exactly my point, we knew this for the PS3/360 era and even before that since Saturn vs PS1 where the Saturn was just a difficult machine, yet that didn't stop the fans from saying "We should only compare exclusives". Today what exclusives are we comparing? no, we're going straight to the conclusion based on mulitplatform game performance to say the PS5 is just as powerful. What happened to "I don't care if the average multiplatform game performs better on 360 when I know exclusives will have more potential on PS3". Should we be looking forward to what The Coalition and Unreal Engine 5 games can achieve with Series X over PS5? what's with the hypocrisy?

We can compare the exclusives...and even there I'd say PS5 has shown a stronger hand in terms of technical performance. Many of Sony's 1P games give 60 FPS options with RT, 120 FPS options, RT period etc., whereas we're seeing with many of MS's 1P games on Xbox lacking RT altogether, and not offering 60 FPS options (RedFall, Starfield, FH5, Flight Sim etc. all lacking RT on console, for example).

I would say there isn't a single MS 1P game with the visual complexity and density of Horizon Forbidden West: Burning Shores, or HFW for that matter. This is even more so when taking artistic elements into account alongside technical features and effects. Seeing the scaling back of games like Avowed doesn't instill confidence we'll see a 1P game from MS anytime soon to provide the technical & artistic flair of games like HFW, GOW Ragnarok, Rift Apart, or Demon's Souls Remake as some examples.

In the immediate short-to-mid term the only game that come to mind that could potentially do that are Fable (whose recent demo was a lot of smoke-and-mirrors) and Hellblade 2 (which so far doesn't seem expanded at all in scope vs. the first game). I'd like to be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening anytime soon if ever this gen. And I'm genuinely of the thought that Series S (plus Sony's own teams constantly improving themselves) might be a culprit as to why.

Like, yes, the Series S is quite more capable than PS4 tech-wise and we saw Sony 1P work magic with PS4. But that's also because we saw them work magic with the PS3. I just think Sony's 1P gained so many skills during the PS3 era in terms of pushing visuals because they were forced to in order to simply survive that gen. That's for Sony as a whole, too. Microsoft are not in that situation and have never been, same with their 1P teams, so I don't think they've ever been in a "do-or-die" situation where they were forced to push themselves to such a new level. And as long as Xbox always has Microsoft money around to bail them out, I don't know if they'll ever be pushed to do that.

At least, IMO.
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
Exactly my point, we knew this for the PS3/360 era and even before that since Saturn vs PS1 where the Saturn was just a difficult machine, yet that didn't stop the fans from saying "We should only compare exclusives".
Some fans might have said 'let's compare exclusives' but let's be honest here - almost noone really did. Multiplatforms were always the short hand to compare 'power' dating all the way back to early 80s on 8bit micro computers, over a decade before PS1 was even conceived.
And nothing really changed since - the main reason outlets like Digital Foundry exist in the first place were the multiplatform comparisons - and that all hit a fewer pitch precisely in the PS3 era. So no - history revisionism aside - narratives are still the same today as they were back then. The more powerful machine on paper is getting criticised more for failing to show it.

The only difference this gen is that - even if you take all the Microsoft PR literally and at face value - we're still looking at the smallest difference between two competing consoles in 40 years of industry history. The fact that said PR didn't materialize just makes the already diminishing difference that much less relevant.
 

JackMcGunns

Member
Some fans might have said 'let's compare exclusives' but let's be honest here - almost noone really did. Multiplatforms were always the short hand to compare 'power' dating all the way back to early 80s on 8bit micro computers, over a decade before PS1 was even conceived.
And nothing really changed since - the main reason outlets like Digital Foundry exist in the first place were the multiplatform comparisons - and that all hit a fewer pitch precisely in the PS3 era. So no - history revisionism aside - narratives are still the same today as they were back then. The more powerful machine on paper is getting criticised more for failing to show it.

The only difference this gen is that - even if you take all the Microsoft PR literally and at face value - we're still looking at the smallest difference between two competing consoles in 40 years of industry history. The fact that said PR didn't materialize just makes the already diminishing difference that much less relevant.


Don't get me wrong, I agree with everything you said, I've just been around these debates long enough to watch the goal posts move around. The way I see it, MS engineering team did good this time around, compared to Xbox One disaster, the Xbox One X and Series X gave Sony some serious competittion in the hardware department where people thought Sony would demolish MS, but that clearly wasn't the case and even the box design gets the win imo, something I never thought I would be saying.
 

JackMcGunns

Member
The only issue with an app-only approach is that the app performance is beholden to the hardware in, say, the smart TV, which may not be great in terms of the processor, RAM, internal storage (helpful for cached data), wifi module etc.

So the streaming experience can be significantly different from device to device if it's app-based only. A streaming stick or module at least evens the field a bit more regardless what endpoint a person is using, IMO.



Hope I never brought into the "Series S outperforms PS5" drivel. It's such a farcifical claim that it'd be hard to believe it on any level.



Also willing to admit when I made a bad call. Can remember some of my 'criticism' towards TLOU2 back in 2020 which were just wrong, like trying to compare it to similar movies to downplay the story/narrative Films and games being very different mediums always make those type of comparisons flawed.



We can compare the exclusives...and even there I'd say PS5 has shown a stronger hand in terms of technical performance. Many of Sony's 1P games give 60 FPS options with RT, 120 FPS options, RT period etc., whereas we're seeing with many of MS's 1P games on Xbox lacking RT altogether, and not offering 60 FPS options (RedFall, Starfield, FH5, Flight Sim etc. all lacking RT on console, for example).

I would say there isn't a single MS 1P game with the visual complexity and density of Horizon Forbidden West: Burning Shores, or HFW for that matter. This is even more so when taking artistic elements into account alongside technical features and effects. Seeing the scaling back of games like Avowed doesn't instill confidence we'll see a 1P game from MS anytime soon to provide the technical & artistic flair of games like HFW, GOW Ragnarok, Rift Apart, or Demon's Souls Remake as some examples.

In the immediate short-to-mid term the only game that come to mind that could potentially do that are Fable (whose recent demo was a lot of smoke-and-mirrors) and Hellblade 2 (which so far doesn't seem expanded at all in scope vs. the first game). I'd like to be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening anytime soon if ever this gen. And I'm genuinely of the thought that Series S (plus Sony's own teams constantly improving themselves) might be a culprit as to why.

Like, yes, the Series S is quite more capable than PS4 tech-wise and we saw Sony 1P work magic with PS4. But that's also because we saw them work magic with the PS3. I just think Sony's 1P gained so many skills during the PS3 era in terms of pushing visuals because they were forced to in order to simply survive that gen. That's for Sony as a whole, too. Microsoft are not in that situation and have never been, same with their 1P teams, so I don't think they've ever been in a "do-or-die" situation where they were forced to push themselves to such a new level. And as long as Xbox always has Microsoft money around to bail them out, I don't know if they'll ever be pushed to do that.

At least, IMO.


I think we're in agreement on every point! As for the highlighted, we can't compare actually, the pedigree of Sony exclusve studios are just on another level. I was just highlighting the hypocrisy of a select few, not that Xbox has a chance to compete, well maybe to some degree when Hellblade II releases and maybe whatever The Coalition is working on since they've been working closely with UE5 for consoles.
 

Kataploom

Gold Member
I'd rather have the system that provides the best experience from a technical perspective.

SX has by far the clearer advantage. It'll be interesting to see if games are at 4k60fps on it and 4k30fps on PS5.
It makes sense to me now people get so emotional against XSX these days. A 18% more GPU raw power on same architecture won't give you double the frame rate LMAO.

It will give you the edge on most GPU bound scenarios though, so a little better RT performance, a little higher resolution, an almost locked 60 fps while PS5 have some dips into 50s, etc. And even then there are CPU/IO bound scenarios (like HFR modes) where PS5 has the edge.

This is "Switch is gonna sell worse than Wii U" level of absurdity :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:

zeldaring

Banned
It makes sense to me now people get so emotional against XSX these days. A 18% more GPU raw power on same architecture won't give you double the frame rate LMAO.

It will give you the edge on most GPU bound scenarios though, so a little better RT performance, a little higher resolution, an almost locked 60 fps while PS5 have some dips into 50s, etc. And even then there are CPU/IO bound scenarios (like HFR modes) where PS5 has the edge.

This is "Switch isn't gonna sell worse than Wii U" level of absurdity :messenger_tears_of_joy:
He was clueless it seems.
 

bitbydeath

Member
Xbox this gen was just looking like it had no real plan and the console was second-fiddle to Microsoft's gaming goals. And then those gaming goals turning out to be buying up big 3P publishers, push FUD using astroturfers and shills, mislead regulators, engage in hypocritical actions & project that onto Sony & Nintendo (mainly Sony), albatross the Series X with the mistake of the Series S, use slimy political PR tactics to pressure approval for a 3P M&A deal that gave Kotick a reprieve ono his company's workplace problems, and on and on and on.
I also don’t agree with the narrative that it was Don Mattrick who tanked Xbox One, when it was actually Phil Spencer.

Don was in charge when Kinect came about but it didn’t slow down non-kinect games, they had almost as many studios as Sony when he was in charge and partnered often with a number of third parties. XOne’s best games were because of Don.

It wasn’t until Phil (doesn’t believe in games) Spencer took over and took an axe to everything that wasn’t Gears, Halo and Forza. Some say poor Microsoft couldn’t afford them anymore but that’s obviously BS, especially now seeing the acquisitions they’ve since made.

Phil never saved Xbox, he damned it.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom