Support NeoGAF

[Jhn]

What's weird is that both their mid-gen boxes targeted higher resolutions rather than higher framerates by significantly upgrading the GPU while leaving the CPU more or less untouched.

Maybe I'm out of touch, but I've never heard actual consumers complaining that the consoles couldn't do native 4K. On the other hand, I hear complaints about poor framerates all the time.

Noone asked for 4K, yet that is what we got. These consoles feel like they were made for their investors rather than for their end users.

 

[cooldawn]

I think Sony realised that the PS4 is a little too weak.

For Microsoft, I don't think it's entirely technology related. Although XBOX ONE is not as powerful as PS4, and a world away from PS4 Pro (although I can't recommend any game to show the power advantage), I think it's to do with a new beginning. A reset for the brand as a whole. That couldn't be done with the original XBOX ONE and the XBOX ONE S is still too close for comfort.

THis is the opportunity for Phil to shape the brand from now on.

 

[ufo8mycat]

The big problem with the XBOne X is the lack of exclusives. If someone already owns a PS4, especially a Pro, what reason is there to get a X? Slightly better visuals & resolution on Multiplatform games for $500 does not seem worth it, over a Pro, especially when you don't have a great exclusive game library to go with it.

 

[Equanimity]

I think Sony realised that the PS4 is a little too weak.

For Microsoft, I don't think it's entirely technology related. Although XBOX ONE is not as powerful as PS4, and a world away from PS4 Pro (although I can't recommend any game to show the power advantage), I think it's to do with a new beginning. A reset for the brand as a whole. That couldn't be done with the original XBOX ONE and the XBOX ONE S is still too close for comfort.

THis is the opportunity for Phil to shape the brand from now on.

Battlefield 1.

The big problem with the XBOne X is the lack of exclusives. If someone already owns a PS4, especially a Pro, what reason is there to get a X? Slightly better visuals & resolution on Multiplatform games for $500 does not seem worth it, over a Pro, especially when you don't have a great exclusive game library to go with it.

Why do people keep on saying this?

They might not be as good as the competition when it comes to exclusives but that doesn't mean they lack in it.

 

[Nightengale]

The big problem with the XBOne X is the lack of exclusives. If someone already owns a PS4, especially a Pro, what reason is there to get a X? Slightly better visuals & resolution on Multiplatform games for $500 does not seem worth it, over a Pro, especially when you don't have a great exclusive game library to go with it.

The whole point of mid-gen consoles are that there are no exclusives for them.

 

[sirap]

The system doesnt benefit many games (be it resolution or performance) specifically for those without 4k tvs. The fact it runs many games with little to no benefit to the user, shows Sony jumped the gun.

Neither lanched with exclusive content although Sony does benefit from Japanese game exclusivity.

This again? A lot of games benefit from Pro's extra power, even those without Pro patches.

 

[spannicus]

The big problem with the XBOne X is the lack of exclusives. If someone already owns a PS4, especially a Pro, what reason is there to get a X? Slightly better visuals & resolution on Multiplatform games for $500 does not seem worth it, over a Pro, especially when you don't have a great exclusive game library to go with it.

The same reason some people upgrade their graphics cards. Better performance, more power. I get that xbox one doesn't have as much exclusives as PS4 its been said many times. If you dont own a Pc but can afford 500 dollars, its not a bad price for better performing multiplats, great ecosystem with lots of ways to play games (cheap). I would think the same reason PC gamers upgrade their rigs would be the same reason many console gamers make the jump to the more powerful console. Also think the pro released more to support sonys vr push imo.

 

[Jhn]

The big problem with the XBOne X is the lack of exclusives. If someone already owns a PS4, especially a Pro, what reason is there to get a X? Slightly better visuals & resolution on Multiplatform games for $500 does not seem worth it, over a Pro, especially when you don't have a great exclusive game library to go with it.

I assume that was what they tried to address with that weird exclusivity tourettes they had going on at their E3 presentation.

Since the pace was so fast, you had to really keep your wits about you to keep track of what kind of "exclusivity" you were dealing with, since most of the time the game wasn't exclusive at all. It's like they looked at the Tomb Raider fiasco and thought "Yeah, we really need to do more of that".

They're basically making up for a pretty poor set of true exclusives by using misdirection and subterfuge to make you think they have more to offer than they actually do. And that just sucks.

 

[oldergamer]

This again? A lot of games benefit from Pro's extra power, even those without Pro patches.

Which games? If it's not running in "pro mode" where are the benefits?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Not sure how we could know the answer to this outside of inside information, but I think both MS and Sony knew that this generation would go long into the next decade and they needed to have shinier options out there to maintain a degree of technological freshness to keep these platforms capable of impressing their core user well into the second half of their current platforms' active lifespans.

You will know next generation console when it comes. We will probably be talking about something on the order of 32-64GB of hbm3 stacked ram with >terabyte/sec bandwidth, a Navi-based GPU with at least 20TF and a multi-core Ryzen CPU.

Expect to see all this in a single APU chip using 10nm process.

This is what PS5 and Xbox Two will be.

This sounds too pricey for the 2020-ish timeframe of a $399-$499 console.

 

[RomeoDog]

Mid gen consoles don't get exclusive games, they get superior ports that will make the FullHD versions of games run so badly and ugly that people will be forced to upgrade only for the better gameplay that the graphics provide.

PS4 and Xbone games are going to go the way of Lost Cause 3 after the X and Pro have been out for a year or two.

MS is going to sell a lot of X's simply by letting the xbone versions of games be extremely optimized.

It's going to be really crappy for people holding out on PS5/XTwo.

 

[therealbigrich]

Almost every major third party game is checkerboarded on the Xbox One X. Microsoft is mainly focusing on exclusive games to reach native 4K. Third party devs are free to do what they want.

As far as I seen only 2 games are confirmed kind of with anthem and assassin's Creed but that could change.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Which games? If it's not running in "pro mode" where are the benefits?

If an unpatched game has frame rate problem then boost mode will help dramatically.

 

[Equanimity]

This sounds too pricey for the 2020-ish timeframe of a $399-$499 console.

He/she is joking.

 

[Scrawnton]

I think Sony realised that the PS4 is a little too weak.

For Microsoft, I don't think it's entirely technology related. Although XBOX ONE is not as powerful as PS4, and a world away from PS4 Pro (although I can't recommend any game to show the power advantage), I think it's to do with a new beginning. A reset for the brand as a whole. That couldn't be done with the original XBOX ONE and the XBOX ONE S is still too close for comfort.

THis is the opportunity for Phil to shape the brand from now on.

I really would love to see it like that, but a think a lot of people look at the name Xbox One X and DO NOT see it as a reset. They needed to get away from the Xbox One branding and they did not.

 

[family_guy]

I just wonder what MS's goal really is. They know they won't sell alot of these, but does the existence of Xbox One X mean they'll extend this console generation? PS4 and Xbox One launched at the same time. If PS5 is ready to go in 2019 will MS wait it out for a year and give Sony the headstart? That's something I don't think they can afford to do. Even if Scorpio had the same specs a year from now but was $100 cheaper, MS could have said they're moving on from Xbox One and this is their next gen console. Sure it would have been weaker than a PS5 but they get the headstart like they did with 360 and developers won't have to be held back by the Xbox One anymore.

 

[geordiemp]

One's a mid-gen refresh, and the other is a generation-less console.

Microsoft was reactive to PlayStation 4's power advantage and PlayStation was reactive to market trends.

So I'd say Sony did.

What a load of absolute PR crap.

Both are shit jaguar CPU, both will run AAA demanding games above 1080p at 30 FPS, Scorpio will hit 4k more often. Voth will have nice stability at 30 FPS. Both are mid gen refresh for 4K tv;s with weak CPU's that wont make much of a difference IMO.

Once Ryzen CPU hits console, it will run rings around scorpio and pro (approx 300 %). AIl the games that are 30 on Scorpio / Pro can finally be a smooth 60 FPS (developer enabling). Once Ryzen hits, I will drop my Po like a brick.

 

[spannicus]

Mid gen consoles don't get exclusive games, they get superior ports that will make the FullHD versions of games run so badly and ugly that people will be forced to upgrade only for the better gameplay that the graphics provide.

PS4 and Xbone games are going to go the way of Lost Cause 3 after the X and Pro have been out for a year or two.

MS is going to sell a lot of X's simply by letting the xbone versions of games be extremely optimized.

It's going to be really crappy for people holding out on PS5/XTwo.

I disagree. Some Pro and X games will be enhanced but that takes nothing away from the game being played on a regular 4 or 1. Some games will just take advantage of the hardware. I think you're reaching here.

 

[timberger]

XOX seems like the most reactionary piece of home hardware this industry has ever produced.

 

[Equanimity]

As far as I seen only 2 games are confirmed kind of with anthem and assassin's Creed but that could change.

I believe most devs will opt in to use CBR on the Xbox X. 4K CBR with additional graphical enhancements over the base system is more enticing, in opinion.

 

[Nightengale]

I really would love to see it like that, but a think a lot of people look at the name Xbox One X and DO NOT see it as a reset. They needed to get away from the Xbox One branding and they did not.

No, they did not because keeping the brand was the right thing to do.

They were smart to keep the Xbox One brand.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

I think after Ps4 and XboxOne launched both companies noticed that horsepower was a topic that interested people. At the same time they saw how healthy PC gaming was.

Microsoft definitely wasn't happy with having the weaker console, they were determined to change that as soon as possible.
Sony on the other hand saw 4k as a new standard and considered a mid gen upgrade as a smart way to keep early adopters of the new tech engaged with the Playstation brand.


Given that Ps4 Pro is already 100$ cheaper than XB1X and Sony could potentially already drop the further, and given that Microsofts 1st party can't really compete with Sony 1st party when it comes to visuals, and given that 4k checkerboard vs. 4k native isn't exactly a differences that easily communicated to consumers.
Given all that I think XB1X will have a hard time competing with Pro.


I think Sonys timing and pricing is better.

 

[ColdDeckEd]

XOX seems like the most reactionary piece of home hardware this industry has ever produced.

But there were rumors of it's existence before the pro?

 

[Equanimity]

What a load of absolute PR crap.

Both are shit jaguar CPU, both will run AAA demanding games above 1080p at 30 FPS, Scorpio will hit 4k more often. Voth will have nice stability at 30 FPS. Both are mid gen refresh for 4K tv;s with weak CPU's that wont make much of a difference IMO.

Once Ryzen CPU hits console, it will run rings around scorpio and pro (approx 300 %). AIl the games that are 30 on Scorpio / Pro can finally be a smooth 60 FPS (developer enabling). Once Ryzen hits, I will drop my Po like a brick.

Are you accusing me of Microsoft PR?

I'm only stating what they've said.

 

[Nightengale]

But there were rumors of it's existence before the pro?

Rumours of Pro predated X by months.

 

[oldergamer]

If an unpatched game has frame rate problem then boost mode will help dramatically.

That's not much of an improvement. That's exactly what I meant by little to no benefit for most users.

 

[oldergamer]

What a load of absolute PR crap.

Both are shit jaguar CPU, both will run AAA demanding games above 1080p at 30 FPS, Scorpio will hit 4k more often. Voth will have nice stability at 30 FPS. Both are mid gen refresh for 4K tv;s with weak CPU's that wont make much of a difference IMO.

Once Ryzen CPU hits console, it will run rings around scorpio and pro (approx 300 %). AIl the games that are 30 on Scorpio / Pro can finally be a smooth 60 FPS (developer enabling). Once Ryzen hits, I will drop my Po like a brick.

Unless Ryzen has a similar power consumption to the jaguar CPU's, don't expect such a huge improvement.

 

[sirap]

That's not much of an improvement. That's exactly what I meant by little to no benefit for most users.

Little to no benefit? You're crazy. How is better performance not an improvement?

 

[RomeoDog]

I disagree. Some Pro and X games will be enhanced but that takes nothing away from the game being played on a regular 4 or 1. Some games will just take advantage of the hardware. I think you're reaching here.

Games are already stuttering on PS4 and Xbone. It'll only get worse.

The last Guardian sucked on regular ps4 and was ok on pro for example.

 

[geordiemp]

Are you accusing me of Microsoft PR?

I'm only stating what they've said.

I said the PR was crap, it is. You just quoted it, unless it was you who made the statement and work for Microsoft PR.

Unless Ryzen has a similar power consumption to the jaguar CPU's, don't expect such a huge improvement.

Ryzen does 1.7 more instructions per clock than jaguar like for like. Yes a 3Ghz Ryzen will be almost 3 x faster, just like an I5 / I7. Jaguar is such a tiny part of the APU, Ryzen is so much bigger, the concern is about chip size of CPU + GPU with Ryzen (which will be fine at 7nm). The improvement and power is already known, Ryzen is out.

Why do you think high PC gamers can play games at stuff like 144 Hz, and us console gamers get excited when its a stable 30. Expect a huge improvement ?....., its kinda known already. Why do you think every new or future hardware thread for consoles has half the posts about CPU. Everybody knows.

 

[Maximus P]

What's weird is that both their mid-gen boxes targeted higher resolutions rather than higher framerates by significantly upgrading the GPU while leaving the CPU more or less untouched.

Maybe I'm out of touch, but I've never heard actual consumers complaining that the consoles couldn't do native 4K. On the other hand, I hear complaints about poor framerates all the time.

Noone asked for 4K, yet that is what we got. These consoles feel like they were made for their investors rather than for their end users.

Gamers are more informed now.

Digital foundry threads on this very forum were and are popular with enthusiasts, and the 1080p vs 900p/720p raw numbers played into alot of people's minds.

It was common sense that Microsoft and Sony would then move onto to getting the best resolutions over anything else looking at how social and gaming media reacted at the beggining of these consoles life cycles.

 

[Lupercal]

Hostile much?


I have a gaming PC and an entire room dedicated to Vive.


I still own a Pro and will get a 1X. There are plenty of reason to do so. You're stance also negates console exclusive. Many of which are fantastic.

Must be nice being rich brah.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Now that the Xbox One X has been fully revealed, it seems like it or the PS4 Pro are a direct response to the other.

Although they are marketed differently and there is a noticeable price and performance delta between them, they are the fucking same console given the one year gap.

In my eyes, they are so similar in design and purpose (too similar)I am very suspicious to take at face value, Sony's and Microsoft's explanation for this similarly.

If they are to be believed, similarities between Pro and X are mere coincidence as they were being developed for years (since 2013-ish, supposedly)in a vacuum and are absolutely, positively in no way reactive to each other as they were unaware of each other before hand.

Now with all that out of the way who is REALLY the initiator of this iterative console model?

Who blinked first.....Microsoft or Sony?

They are BOTH mid-gen refreshes.

The Jaguar CPU core is the common denominator and the anchor of this generation.

If X had a truly upgraded CPU then I would agree with you.

 

[Nipo]

Battlefield 1.



Why do people keep on saying this?

They might not be as good as the competition when it comes to exclusives but that doesn't mean they lack in it.

what exclusives does OX play that PC won't? I thought they were all multiplatform now?

 

[jelly]

What's weird is that both their mid-gen boxes targeted higher resolutions rather than higher framerates by significantly upgrading the GPU while leaving the CPU more or less untouched.

Maybe I'm out of touch, but I've never heard actual consumers complaining that the consoles couldn't do native 4K. On the other hand, I hear complaints about poor framerates all the time.

Noone asked for 4K, yet that is what we got. These consoles feel like they were made for their investors rather than for their end users.

It's pretty obvious. The mid gen boxes are current gen and will never become a next gen platform. It was GPU or nothing, they just want enthusiasts and new users to buy into these mid gen consoles and it keeps the hype of better looking games at the forefront instead of coasting to death like last gen. Also, there just isn't a decent CPU solution for the console space right now and even if there was, it would for a new generation and that was never happening with the success of the PS4. You'll get the CPU+GPU monster combo next gen on PS5 and Xbox 5. If you want 4K/ish, better graphics, performance or haven't jumped into this gen then Pro and X are for you if want to spend more than the S and PS4 Slim.

 

[eso76]

They are exactly the same.

I think Microsoft needed it to be competitive in third party games performances and to prove they are not the same company that made those huge design mistakes with the Xbox One.

Xbox one X does a lot of things right; the right philosophy, innovative solutions, efficient with a desirable form factor and system level enhancements for the existing library.
I think it's too late this gen to bring devs on their side with the current install bases, but hopefully this wins them back some credibility comes next gen.

So to answer the question, I think MS was the first to consider a mid gen update, because they were at a clear disadvantage.
Sony embraced the current trend and saw an opportunity with 4k panels spreading.


Also, this CPU = framerate and GPU = resolution needs to stop.
SOME games are CPU limited, others are GPU limited.
For 60fps across the entire ps4/xboxone libraries you would have to double both the CPU and the GPU.

 

[angelic]

You're stating the obvious.

I said the Xbox has console exclusives.

Whereas PS4/Pro has platform exclusives.



Almost every major third party game is checkerboarded on the Xbox One X. Microsoft is mainly focusing on exclusive games to reach native 4K. Third party devs are free to do what they want.

Thats good but the games still have to run on the original bone, so "free to do what they want" is basically shore up the frame rate and add a few shinies.

 

[EvB]

add a few shinies.

Which has essentially been the basis of console generations for the last 20 years.
I'm not sure why it is that suddenly people don't want it.

 

[The Bookerman]

Disagree completely. I personally don't care very much about all the resolution stuff necessarily, but the fact that it has the power to run games at native 4K, and apparently - judging by the trend thus far - support a lot of games that checkerboard up to a full 4K image, makes me very excited about the kind of power packed into this console. It seems to have plenty power to run games at some pretty high graphics settings while also being able to do so at an insanely high resolution. I worried that too high a resolution would prevent the system from being able to stretch its legs graphically, but it's looking like those fears may have been unfounded.

Not every game will be 4K, or even checkerboard to 4K, and some will even do dynamic scaling when necessary, but the picture that is forming about the potential performance of Xbox One X is pretty damn exciting.

Games are still being developed for the original Xbox one as the base line. Unless developers do the leg work to patch in something really specific for the X, you're gonna be disappointed.

 

[Trup1aya]

I really would love to see it like that, but a think a lot of people look at the name Xbox One X and DO NOT see it as a reset. They needed to get away from the Xbox One branding and they did not.

Because it's not a reset, and doesn't have the hardware required to justify a reset... not with a jaguar processor in 2017. Trying to separate from the Xbox One branding would have been a disaster.

It's for console gamers who want better graphics. It's targeting a niche within a niche.

 

[Yautja_Warrior]

Microsoft definitely wasn't happy with having the weaker console, they were determined to change that as soon as possible.
Sony on the other hand saw 4k as a new standard and considered a mid gen upgrade as a smart way to keep early adopters of the new tech engaged with the Playstation brand.

Given that Ps4 Pro is already 100$ cheaper than XB1X and Sony could potentially already drop the further, and given that Microsofts 1st party can't really compete with Sony 1st party when it comes to visuals, and given that 4k checkerboard vs. 4k native isn't exactly a differences that easily communicated to consumers.
Given all that I think XB1X will have a hard time competing with Pro.

I think Sonys timing and pricing is better.

Pretty much what I think too. For the time, Sony did a good job of making an updated PS4 at a decent price. MS might have improved on what Sony did with the Pro but it's a year later and at a higher cost, so really not sure how it's going to go for the X.

With most people buying the cheaper base PS4 / XB1, the Pro and X are always going to have a small audience but the X might have an even smaller audience than the Pro, thanks to the higher price tag.

It will be interesting to see how it sells at launch and in the following months after. I expect like the Pro, we might not hear too much about sales for the X.

 

[Trup1aya]

Rumours of Pro predated X by months.

Nah, the first rumors where that MS was looking to do a midgen refresh. Then rumors started that Sony was doing one, and would beat MS to the punch.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

If someone has a PS4 Pro and a good Win 10 PC, are there any games they can't play? What would someone game from owning a XoX if they already have those other two platforms?

 

[EvB]

If someone has a PS4 Pro and a good Win 10 PC, are there any games they can't play? What would someone game from owning a XoX if they already have those other two platforms?

Perhaps they don't have a group of friends that play the multiformat games on the other machines?

 

[Trup1aya]

If someone has a PS4 Pro and a good Win 10 PC, are there any games they can't play? What would someone game from owning a XoX if they already have those other two platforms?

If you have a good Win10 PC, I don't think MS is targeting you with XOX... they already got you to buy a Windows device. Now they want you to buy their games from the Win10 store.

The XOX is for console gamers who just have to have the most powerful console.

 

[Clear]

Pretty much what I think too. For the time, Sony did a good job of making an updated PS4 at a decent price. MS might have improved on what Sony did with the Pro but it's a year later and at a higher cost, so really not sure how it's going to go for the X.

With most people buying the cheaper base PS4 / XB1, the Pro and X are always going to have a small audience but the X might have an even smaller audience than the Pro, thanks to the higher price tag.

It will be interesting to see how it sells at launch and in the following months after. I expect like the Pro, we might not hear too much about sales for the X.

This.

Realistically by making the X1X such a considerable amount more expensive than X1S, MS have to sell the new model's strengths harder to justify it to the market. They have to really push it, which is a double-edged sword as it risks the base-models becoming overshadowed in the marketing.

Have to say that looking at it dispassionately as I can, as a pure business strategy I'd say I far prefer Sony's approach.

 

[SOR5]

If the statements of the executives are to be believed then,

They both had no idea that the other party was making an upgrade.

Scorpio work began in 2014, Pro began around the same timeframe

 

[Trup1aya]

This.

Realistically by making the X1X such a considerable amount more expensive than X1S, MS have to sell the new model's strengths harder to justify it to the market. They have to really push it, which is a double-edged sword as it risks the base-models becoming overshadowed in the marketing.

Have to say that looking at it dispassionately as I can, as a pure business strategy I'd say I far prefer Sony's approach.

I don't think they really have to push it. They know the xbox1s will be vastly more popular than the XOX. The XOX targets a very specific, small, niche market, and MS knows this. The people who will be interested in the XOX will know about it despite a lack of advertising...

 

[Kayant]

Regardless who blinked first or if no one blinked and they both came to the same conclusion, neither side were caught with their pants down.

Development of electronics hardware products take a bare minimum of 2 years. Even copycat products.

Anyone who thinks either side could rush to market a product based on "rumours & hear-say" of what the competition is doing and scale it down to a 12-months difference has never worked in or with a multinational electronics firm before.

Sony decided to release the best console they could make at $399 in 2016.
MS decided to release the best console they could make at $499 in 2017.

That's really all that needs to be said.

Yep we can confirm this by the fact MS could have released a mid-gen refresh also in 2016 but decided it was better waiting for their use case.

Nah, the first rumors where that MS was looking to do a midgen refresh. Then rumors started that Sony was doing one, and would beat MS to the punch.

Do you have a source for this?

 

[sleazefrenzy]

Neither reacted to each other, they were both reacting to 4K TV's becoming popular in the middle of a console cycle.

Sony went for clever upscaling, Microsoft went for more brute force, but both are simply addressing the same problem, that 1080p/720p games look ugly on 4K TV's.

This is also no indiction that we will necessarily see mid-cycle refreshes again in the future, this is all just about the awkward timing of 4K TV's becoming popular during this specific console cycle. It's really that simple.