Support NeoGAF

[cormack12]

I disagree that it is the same exact approach. TLoU II is a title that had been many years in the making and while Sony is committed to support PS5/the new console’s launch with exclusive first party software in its launch window that are focused on the new console only, they are also known to support the existing console throughout its life cycle. It is their first party flexing to do both things: new PS4 focused titles and new PS5 focused titles (now with some titles coming with enhanced BC, not unlike the PS1 to PS2 transition for example). If MS had a mix in the first year of first party XSX exclusive content and cross generation or Xbox One titles I would have no problem with that stance.

Many of the examples you posted about ported games are examples of non parallel development by the same team developing on the main platforms and games being developed and optimised by other teams and all sold separately which is not the case for a new game that you buy once, comes out at the same time on all consoles, and has to target from Xbox One S to XSX.
Also, exceptions like SC aside, I do not tend to look at either mobile platforms nor PC’s as examples of games not being targeted for a minimum common denominator and then scaled up.

It might not be the same approach but it's the same issue. A flagship IP 'held back' by a piece of hardware that was released in 2013. They could have made the decision to launch the PS5 with their flagship IP but didn't. At some point, the decision was made to target that game at old hardware instead of targeting it at the incoming platform with higher specs. That's an active decision made by somebody instead of saying 'OK, this is a top tier franchise, the studio have already put out two uncharted titles, let's make this PS5 exclusive'. What do you think drove that decision? Developers wanting to be constrained and bound by 7 year old hardware, or more likely the return on investment projections? Also taking note of the cheap remastered for double dippers?

You'll have to go out on a limb here then, and give us examples of things that can't be scaled. Let's say Halo Infinite is built for The Xbox Series X exclusively and is then downported to the other Xbox systems. Aside from the SSD and loading which would be part of the design, what elements cannot be scaled back either by compile options, or linear sliders, creative direction? This is the part of the conversation that is missing in this topic - for me at least.

 

[Redlight]

Sure hope nobody reads the OP...

They've already spoken of playing Xbox games on phones etc via Xcloud and Gamepass on Samsung TV's. Those are the 'any devices' he's talking about. I think most reasonable people will understand that. Unfortunately your 'gotcha' isn't very compelling.

 

[GHG]

Oh my.

He's clearly talking about cross-generational support, on the same ecosystem (that's Xbox if you haven't noticed). It will probably even extend beyond that to things like Gamepass on Samsung TV's. At that point Samsung will also be part of the ecosystem. Maybe Sony will be one of the acquisitions? Then you get what you want!

"Cut off the gamers from other ecosystems". Sheesh.

The fact is if you really care about the most people possible having access to games and not "locking people away" then you would ensure those games are not locked in to a single ecosystem.

On the whole, third party developers have demonstrated this since the beginning of time and will natively release their games everywhere possible, even down to mobile in some cases. However, when you are a platform (or ecosystem) owner then you have a vested interest and it is no longer just about making sure everyone has access to the games you make. It's about making sure people have access to games on your terms. That's not absolute freedom of choice, that's not empowering the consumer. Yes, you now have multiple access points which is commendable, but he's attempting to talk this up into something it really isn't and it's clear as day. Take this snippet for example:

We want to enable you to play the games you want to play, with the friends you want to play with, on any device.

Any device huh? What he should be saying is any modern PC or Xbox since the Xbox One. And again with this "device" bullshit:

Gaming is about entertainment and community and diversion and learning new stories and new perspectives, and I find it completely counter to what gaming is about to say that part of that is to lock people away from being able to experience those games.

Sorry Phil, but last time I checked anyone who doesn't have a Windows PC or an Xbox is "locked away" from experiencing those games.

Can I play your games on my Linux laptop running Pop OS? No? Oh I have to buy one of your "devices" or have a device that runs your operating system do I? Funny that. What about PS4, Switch, Mac OS and Stadia users? No? No love for them either.

What they are doing directly contradicts the ideology he is trying to put forward. That ideology will be further contradicted when they suddenly stop releasing their first party games on the Xbox One without notice. He's full of shit.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

It might not be the same approach but it's the same issue. A flagship IP 'held back' by a piece of hardware that was released in 2013. They could have made the decision to launch the PS5 with their flagship IP but didn't. At some point, the decision was made to target that game at old hardware instead of targeting it at the incoming platform with higher specs. That's an active decision made by somebody instead of saying 'OK, this is a top tier franchise, the studio have already put out two uncharted titles, let's make this PS5 exclusive'. What do you think drove that decision? Developers wanting to be constrained and bound by 7 year old hardware, or more likely the return on investment projections? Also taking note of the cheap remastered for double dippers?

You'll have to go out on a limb here then, and give us examples of things that can't be scaled. Let's say Halo Infinite is built for The Xbox Series X exclusively and is then downported to the other Xbox systems. Aside from the SSD and loading which would be part of the design, what elements cannot be scaled back either by compile options, or linear sliders, creative direction? This is the part of the conversation that is missing in this topic - for me at least.

Both Sony and Microsoft are going to launch the games on the platform they promised to launch in. To not do so is very bad PR. This is why BotW ended up launching on WiiU. And why Sony decided to release The Last Guardian on PS4 instead of just canning it. What you are suggesting is for Sony to cancel a game's launch on PS4 after it was already announced, which no one does intentionally.

However, you might remember how there was an entire year when Sony didn't announce any new games; why did you think they did that? They even avoided Conventions. This is because they were making PS5 games. True PS5 games that was built from the ground up to run on PS5. And they didn't announce them early because PS5 wasn't announced. Sony planned this. Sony didn't just take some random PS4 project and make it PS5 exclusive. If you believe that then good on you, whatever makes you happy.

 

[geordiemp]

Well Capcom have already decided for RE8 to drop last gen



Next year I predict Phil will say new things that MS are now focussing on XSX and Lockart and listening to their customers. ............Whatever.

 

[GHG]

Well Capcom have already decided for RE8 to drop last gen



Next year I predict Phil will say new things that MS are now focussing on XSX and Lockart and listening to their customers. ............Whatever.

Capcom are being evil and anti-consumer.

I saw nothing in the RE8 trailer that couldn't be done on Xbox One and PS4. Nothing they showed required an SSD or a CPU faster than a Jaguar. In fact, I think it should also be a mobile phone game, all games can scale down after all.

This game should be available for everyone. I'll be sad when playing it on my brand new $500+ next generation hardware that little Timmy in a small village in India without Internet access can't also experience it at the same time that I am, I'll be thinking of him throughout my playthrough.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

You'll have to go out on a limb here then, and give us examples of things that can't be scaled. Let's say Halo Infinite is built for The Xbox Series X exclusively and is then downported to the other Xbox systems. Aside from the SSD and loading which would be part of the design, what elements cannot be scaled back either by compile options, or linear sliders, creative direction? This is the part of the conversation that is missing in this topic - for me at least.

This is your problem right here. Halo Infinite or any games built under MS policy will not be built for Series X exclusively. The XB1 version will be developed alongside it, anything that isn't possible on XB1's slow CPU and HDD will shackle development to last gen's tech. Scaling is a consideration from the start of development.

For a title like Horizon 2, the devs have no such consideration and can try to push the PS5's specs to their full potential. The onus should be on you to explain last gen cross development with next gen games has no impact on the title that is produced. It seems obvious to me it will, and not in a good way. The PS5's I/O is about 100 times faster than the PS4's, the PS5's SSD is about 100x times faster again and there is an absolute chasm technologically between current gen and next gen.

 

[cormack12]

Both Sony and Microsoft are going to launch the games on the platform they promised to launch in. To not do so is very bad PR. This is why BotW ended up launching on WiiU. And why Sony decided to release The Last Guardian on PS4 instead of just canning it. What you are suggesting is for Sony to cancel a game's launch on PS4 after it was already announced, which no one does intentionally.

Let's not redirect into another argument. Let's solve the first argument first. At which point I'll pick up the tangential points with you. The assertion is that Sony strongly support their new console and believe in offering the strongest experiences to make you switch platform or to justify it. Let's also not forget that TLOU I was released at the end of the PS3 lifecycle and we didn't see anything from the same AAA studio until three years later.

If you're making this point, then you need receipts. This isn't like the cell to x86 migration which meant you were hamstrung. Again, Sony have chosen to launch the PS5 without their main AAA studio's having a title in site. Guerilla is at least a year out, Naughty Dog and Sucker Punch are out the picture for a sizeable amount of time. SSM are not around, Polyphony based on that recent footage are at least a year out. If you're trying to sell the point that you want to reward early adopters then having all your well respected studio's out the picture at launch is not a good look. Sony/ND chose to announce TLOU Ii for the PS4 - they could have waited, worked on it and announced it for the PS5 - they chose not to. That's the fact whether you like it or not. Someone made a decision that they would sequel the IP (there was no pressure either as the desire for a sequel was not urgent) and target it at the PS4, despite knowing their dev cycles from 2016 would be at least three years and more than likely four which would coincide with the new console.

This is your problem right here. Halo Infinite or any games built under MS policy will not be built for Series X exclusively. The XB1 version will be developed alongside it, anything that isn't possible on XB1's slow CPU and HDD will shackle development to last gen's tech. Scaling is a consideration from the start of development.

To which I'm asking you to explain what can't be scaled back? I've already said SSD and game design will be hampered, but beyond that, I'm asking you not to state the specs but the game differences to the player. What will you see on screen if Infinite is designed for the XsX rather than also running on Xbox? What cannot be scaled? NPCs? Assets quality? Draw Distance? Shadows? Geometry? Effects? I'm asking for an example beyond the SSD and loading as an example. That's all. If you have one, then fair enough but so far everything I've seen can easily be scaled across platforms, even more so when they move to UE5

 

[Tulipanzo]

People are defending Spencer from Spencer’s own words...

 

[killatopak]

So Xbox is going third party?

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Let's not redirect into another argument. Let's solve the first argument first. At which point I'll pick up the tangential points with you. The assertion is that Sony strongly support their new console and believe in offering the strongest experiences to make you switch platform or to justify it. Let's also not forget that TLOU I was released at the end of the PS3 lifecycle and we didn't see anything from the same AAA studio until three years later.

If you're making this point, then you need receipts. This isn't like the cell to x86 migration which meant you were hamstrung. Again, Sony have chosen to launch the PS5 without their main AAA studio's having a title in site. Guerilla is at least a year out, Naughty Dog and Sucker Punch are out the picture for a sizeable amount of time. SSM are not around, Polyphony based on that recent footage are at least a year out. If you're trying to sell the point that you want to reward early adopters then having all your well respected studio's out the picture at launch is not a good look. Sony/ND chose to announce TLOU Ii for the PS4 - they could have waited, worked on it and announced it for the PS5 - they chose not to. That's the fact whether you like it or not. Someone made a decision that they would sequel the IP (there was no pressure either as the desire for a sequel was not urgent) and target it at the PS4, despite knowing their dev cycles from 2016 would be at least three years and more than likely four which would coincide with the new console.




To which I'm asking you to explain what can't be scaled back? I've already said SSD and game design will be hampered, but beyond that, I'm asking you not to state the specs but the game differences to the player. What will you see on screen if Infinite is designed for the XsX rather than also running on Xbox? What cannot be scaled? NPCs? Assets quality? Draw Distance? Shadows? Geometry? Effects? I'm asking for an example beyond the SSD and loading as an example. That's all. If you have one, then fair enough but so far everything I've seen can easily be scaled across platforms, even more so when they move to UE5

Naughty Dog has an average dev cycle and it's less time than this, they made TLOU and Uncharted 3 simultaneously and Uncharted 3 was made 2 years after Uncharted 2, TLOU took an additional 2 years while they had their teams split. TLOU II was first teased in 2016 shortly before Lost Legacy released, The last time Naughty Dog missed a year in between releasing games was 2010, form 2011 to 2017 they had at least one release per year, the delays for TLOU II weren't something that were expected to happen and they certainly weren't planning in 2016 for it to release so close to the next console generation approaching. In the developer's entire history 3 years between releases has only happened one other time between Rings of Power and Way of the Warrior when they were less of a powerhouse than they are now.

 

[Tulipanzo]

They've already spoken of playing Xbox games on phones etc via Xcloud and Gamepass on Samsung TV's. Those are the 'any devices' he's talking about. I think most reasonable people will understand that. Unfortunately your 'gotcha' isn't very compelling.

Well, my English isn't native, so when you say "any device" I just understand "any device" not "devices that we deem convenient to release games on, while criticizing others for doing the same".
Truly a fascinating language

 

[cormack12]

Naughty Dog has an average dev cycle and it's less time than this, they made TLOU and Uncharted 3 simultaneously and Uncharted 3 was made 2 years after Uncharted 2, TLOU took an additional 2 years while they had their teams split. TLOU II was first teased in 2016 shortly before Lost Legacy released, The last time Naughty Dog missed a year in between releasing games was 2010, form 2011 to 2017 they had at least one release per year, the delays for TLOU II weren't something that were expected to happen and they certainly weren't planning in 2016 for it to release so close to the next console generation approaching. In the developer's entire history 3 years between releases has only happened one other time between Rings of Power and Way of the Warrior when they were less of a powerhouse than they are now.

You can only go on the most recent data. What if they were quicker due to less complexity? Quicker because they didnt have the freedom to spend so much time writing rope logic? Its an unknown therefore you have to use the data available. And some of those releases were ports and remasters. Not the same thing. At all.

If anything your argument strengthens the point that this AAA studio should have something else to go for the launch of the PS5, if it's not TLOU II

 

[Explosive Zombie]

You can only go on the most recent data. What if they were quicker due to less complexity? Quicker because they didnt have the freedom to spend so much time writing rope logic? Its an unknown therefore you have to use the data available. And some of those releases were ports and remasters. Not the same thing. At all.

I didn't claim it was the same thing, I'm claiming it's an anomaly for them to not release a game every 1 to 2 years and that teasing us on TLOU II in 2016 should indicate they weren't planning to hold it for next gen.

 

[cormack12]

I didn't claim it was the same thing, I'm claiming it's an anomaly for them to not release a game every 1 to 2 years and that teasing us on TLOU II in 2016 should indicate they weren't planning to hold it for next gen.

Two anomalies become the norm.....

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Two anomalies become the norm.....

They began releasing games in 1985, in the 35 years since then there have been only two 3 year lulls between releases and one of them, again, was before they became big. This is not the norm and we know it wasn't meant to be because TLOU II was meant to release much sooner, this is factual, before any delays it would have released within their normal window of time.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

To which I'm asking you to explain what can't be scaled back? I've already said SSD and game design will be hampered, but beyond that, I'm asking you not to state the specs but the game differences to the player. What will you see on screen if Infinite is designed for the XsX rather than also running on Xbox? What cannot be scaled? NPCs? Assets quality? Draw Distance? Shadows? Geometry? Effects? I'm asking for an example beyond the SSD and loading as an example. That's all. If you have one, then fair enough but so far everything I've seen can easily be scaled across platforms, even more so when they move to UE5

Well look at previous generations, where the technological jump has actually been much smaller in certain aspects. Using an extreme example, Red Dead Redemption 2 on XB1. Not the best version of the game sure, but can you imagine trying to port this game to Xbox 360? No, and if it was, it would be a fundamentally different game. Ok, the question is why? Technically, you could probably scale to an extreme degree to get some basic version running on 360, but the experience would be so inferior that the publisher wouldn't do this. Either you sacrifice aspects of RDR2 on XB1 so that the 360 version isn't left massively behind, or you just create a different game altogether.

There isn't many aspects of next gen games that technically cannot be scaled I imagine, in answer to your question, but thequestion is what is feasible and realistic. Having said that, certain advanced AI, physics and any high quality texture loading could be impossible on current gen.

 

[cormack12]

They began releasing games in 1985, in the 35 years since then there have been only two 3 year lulls between releases and one of them, again, was before they became big. This is not the norm and we know it wasn't meant to be because TLOU II was meant to release much sooner, this is factual, before any delays it would have released within their normal window of time.

Uncharted 2 - TLOU I: 4 years
TLOU I - Uncharted 4: 3 years
Uncharted 4 - LL: 1 year
LL - TLOU II: 3 Years

Trying to claim ND are releasing games that other houses are porting is weak and disingenuous.

 

[cormack12]

Well look at previous generations, where the technological jump has actually been much smaller in certain aspects. Using an extreme example, Red Dead Redemption 2 on XB1. Not the best version of the game sure, but can you imagine trying to port this game to Xbox 360? No, and if it was, it would be a fundamentally different game. Ok, the question is why? Technically, you could probably scale to an extreme degree to get some basic version running on 360, but the experience would be so inferior that the publisher wouldn't do this. Either you sacrifice aspects of RDR2 on XB1 so that the 360 version isn't left massively behind, or you just create a different game altogether.

There isn't many aspects of next gen games that technically cannot be scaled I imagine, in answer to your question, but thequestion is what is feasible and realistic. Having said that, certain advanced AI, physics and any high quality texture loading could be impossible on current gen.

But it can be scaled. At a cost. There was a thread abour RDR2 running on a notebook or something. I'm not saying there aren't compromises, just asking for something that can't be turned down/scaled. No one has said they are expecting the same quality game on these devices or a top experience. It might be that the draw distance and LOD is awful on Xbox 1S but it will run.

 

[anothertech]

TBH Phil, just rename gamepass to Xbox and become the software service you desire to be.

You can then have a home on all platforms.

Doesn't make sense to keep making hardware if your giving up on hardware generations.

 

[asustitan]

You can't really scale physics and AI intelligence with a weak CPU though right., to me is where next generation should be going.

Them CPU's are such a vast difference between last gen and now.

 

[Panajev2001a]

It might not be the same approach but it's the same issue. A flagship IP 'held back' by a piece of hardware that was released in 2013. They could have made the decision to launch the PS5 with their flagship IP but didn't. At some point, the decision was made to target that game at old hardware instead of targeting it at the incoming platform with higher specs. That's an active decision made by somebody instead of saying 'OK, this is a top tier franchise, the studio have already put out two uncharted titles, let's make this PS5 exclusive'. What do you think drove that decision? Developers wanting to be constrained and bound by 7 year old hardware, or more likely the return on investment projections? Also taking note of the cheap remastered for double dippers?

You'll have to go out on a limb here then, and give us examples of things that can't be scaled. Let's say Halo Infinite is built for The Xbox Series X exclusively and is then downported to the other Xbox systems. Aside from the SSD and loading which would be part of the design, what elements cannot be scaled back either by compile options, or linear sliders, creative direction? This is the part of the conversation that is missing in this topic - for me at least.

Again, as I said I disagree it is the same approach and thus the same issue. I do not have a problem with a company offering both as a first party, especially one with lots of studios, but I do have a problem with a super large company doing either what Xbox or Nintendo generally used to do (massive drought of games while the new console is being readied for launch) or what Phil is talking about here (no exclusive XSX games for at least a year from XGS). If they were doing a mix of both exclusive titles and Xbox One titles (up scaled with enhanced BC it not) I would have less of a problem.

MS is trying to make consoles a closed box PC ecosystem like Apple has on mobiles too (for me the worst of both worlds: fixed not user mode able HW and minimum common denominator generationless approach). Not what consoles are about and I see no benefit to me as a consumer from this strategy.

The point is not just possibility and impossibility of porting down, but time, cost, and complexity and thus viability of this approach while truly targeting both ends of the spectrum in earnest. The examples generally given are titles on mobile or PC targeted at lower end HW and scaled up or ports developed at different times by different teams and sold as new products (in which case they do not qualify as a scalability example in this case IMHO).

 

[Panajev2001a]

But it can be scaled. At a cost. There was a thread abour RDR2 running on a notebook or something. I'm not saying there aren't compromises, just asking for something that can't be turned down/scaled. No one has said they are expecting the same quality game on these devices or a top experience. It might be that the draw distance and LOD is awful on Xbox 1S but it will run.

This is just token support for Xbox One though... “just make it run, like shit if you have to, but make it run”. How is this better than Sony’s approach of having some teams supporting a platform late in its generation cycle and some other teams making focused exclusive titles for the new generation? How is that more pro consumer?

In each scenario, PS4 late support or PS5 early support, you are getting a lot more resources actually invested in the game itself and give more polished results to gamers.

 

[Saaleh]

Where would Microsoft have money to pay third parties or make a profit if sony is taking 30% off the top. Gamespass only works if they are not paying anyone else a cut. Especially if it is all cloud based and paying server costs on top of it.

Phil is the best leader Microsoft has had since Peter moore. Phil inherited a division in ruins with zero budget. He has done one hell of a job so far rebuilding from what was burned to the ground. You might not like it but he got the CEO to give the division funding again to buy studios and start to make first party games again hands off letting inexile and obsidian entertainment do the games they want. He started consumer friendly practices like the awesome backwards compatibility program and brought the surface team in to help build the best looking console the one x and it is powerful quiet to boot. Now he just has to wait for the new studios to come out with games. He was also a driving force to make the series x a power house getting back to their roots. Hate him all you want he has made mistakes but done better than anyone could with what he inherited. Sure they won't beat Sony but they won't be a joke like in 2013.

I agree. But you are still expecting too much from him. Yes he reached a point where he is able to buystudios but that doesn't mean that we will get high budget games. If you really want big GAMES from ms you should make sure that phil knows that you are not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Once you play his new games and they match the quality of ps exclusives then we will start respecting him a bit by bit, but the fact that he is downplaying exclusives and next gen exclusives is a sign that he is not aiming to create big games. So why would i trust his leadership? Why would i wait eagerly for his next conference?

The Xbox One launch was just a complete mess, the clear messaging I was referring to is this upcoming generation, where they have been nothing but upfront and transparent with the direction they are trying to take Xbox in the next generation.

Also the highlighted part seems extremely childish and fanboyish, because as much shit as Xbox deserves PS is far from the perfect child and should do better in certain aspects there really aren't any enemies only rivals. As for GamePass on the PS your way to naive to believe Sony would actually allow such a thing, they barely allowed cross play and EA Access what makes you think they would allow a direct competitor into their own house.

I don't blame him because of his situation but he really don't have to over promise things or shed bad light on what Sony is doing. When he is ready to deliver BIG unique games, once we play them and get impressed by them than we will give him praise, but right now he is not there yet and he keeps insulting the best things about Sony just so that he can redefine another thing.

I get the feeling that Phil would be OK with this and that resistance comes from the other side.

I don't think Sony will have an issue with that once Xbox become third party service. It will be like playing Sonic on PS.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Uncharted 2 - TLOU I: 4 years
TLOU I - Uncharted 4: 3 years
Uncharted 4 - LL: 1 year
LL - TLOU II: 3 Years

Trying to claim ND are releasing games that other houses are porting is weak and disingenuous.

Wait wait wait... another house ported Uncharted 3? Because that's the only way you get 4 years between Uncharted 2 and TLOU 1. Also it's not weak and disingenuous, the point was that you expect something from Naughty Dog, regardless of if they farmed out a port, every 1-2 years, that's the pattern and if TLOU II had released on schedule the pattern would have stayed.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

But it can be scaled. At a cost. There was a thread abour RDR2 running on a notebook or something. I'm not saying there aren't compromises, just asking for something that can't be turned down/scaled. No one has said they are expecting the same quality game on these devices or a top experience. It might be that the draw distance and LOD is awful on Xbox 1S but it will run.

My point is there is a limit to scaling, not that it's not possible. You reach a point where the experience is so inferior on old hardware it's not worth doing. The UE5 demo 8k movie quality asset streaming as the player moves their FOV (instantaneous high quality asset streaming), or the flying through the crumbling city section at high velocity could be replicated on PS4, but it would be so different it's not the same experience.

Instead of trying to do this head first feet later development, devs on Xbox will get their feet wet first on what's feasible across all platforms. Tailoring their game exclusively to a baseline of 12tflops and comparatively super fast SSD is not a possibility.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I agree. But you are still expecting too much from him. Yes he reached a point where he is able to buystudios but that doesn't mean that we will get high budget games. If you really want big GAMES from ms you should make sure that phil knows that you are not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Once you play his new games and they match the quality of ps exclusives then we will start respecting him a bit by bit, but the fact that he is downplaying exclusives and next gen exclusives is a sign that he is not aiming to create big games. So why would i trust his leadership? Why would i wait eagerly for his next conference?


I don't blame him because of his situation but he really don't have to over promise things or shed bad light on what Sony is doing. When he is ready to deliver BIG unique games, once we play them and get impressed by them than we will give him praise, but right now he is not there yet and he keeps insulting the best things about Sony just so that he can redefine another thing.



I don't think Sony will have an issue with that once Xbox become third party service. It will be like playing Sonic on PS.

Yep... telling console gamers that new generation launching with exclusive games is not what console gaming is about is just disingenuous and a PR exec that keeps disagreeing with himself back and forth depending on how the situation suits him and the sympathetic narrative he wants to generate.

 

[Psykodad]

Well Capcom have already decided for RE8 to drop last gen



Next year I predict Phil will say new things that MS are now focussing on XSX and Lockart and listening to their customers. ............Whatever.

My crystal ball told me it's when they have an indication on when their first XSX exclusives will release.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Next year I predict Phil will say new things that MS are now focussing on XSX and Lockart and listening to their customers. ............Whatever.

geordiemp It is very transparent, they do not have titles ready yet and they plan to have a GaaS strategy anyways and would like for consoles to work like Android and Apple mobile phones in terms of Wales garden and iterative HW. It is doing that and pretending to do the opposite and doing for the gamers in a holier than thou tone while flip flopping every other year than I find most annoying.

 

[FranXico]

The whole DRM thing this gen was really traumatizing for Xbox management. They are never going to stop trying to manufacture an equivalent scandal to pin on Sony.

 

[cormack12]

Wait wait wait... another house ported Uncharted 3? Because that's the only way you get 4 years between Uncharted 2 and TLOU 1. Also it's not weak and disingenuous, the point was that you expect something from Naughty Dog, regardless of if they farmed out a port, every 1-2 years, that's the pattern and if TLOU II had released on schedule the pattern would have stayed.

On mobile so must have just scrolled too quickly and missed it. But the picture is radically different to the 'every year' point you were trying to stand up which has now changed to 1-2 years. You yourself alluded to the expansion so why would a studio with more capacity output less?

Again, as I said I disagree it is the same approach and thus the same issue. I do not have a problem with a company offering both as a first party, especially one with lots of studios, but I do have a problem with a super large company doing either what Xbox or Nintendo generally used to do (massive drought of games while the new console is being readied for launch) or what Phil is talking about here (no exclusive XSX games for at least a year from XGS). If they were doing a mix of both exclusive titles and Xbox One titles (up scaled with enhanced BC it not) I would have less of a problem.

But Sony had a drought for the launch of the PS4, and with all their AAA studios having nothing for the launch of PS5 it looks to be the same. Take TLOU II being built for the Pro and scaled back for the OG - they couldn't do this for the PS5?

My point is there is a limit to scaling, not that it's not possible. You reach a point where the experience is so inferior on old hardware it's not worth doing. The UE5 demo 8k movie quality asset streaming as the player moves their FOV (instantaneous high quality asset streaming), or the flying through the crumbling city section at high velocity could be replicated on PS4, but it would be so different it's not the same experience.

I agree, but the position is that every Microsoft game will always be targeted to run on the OG X1 which anyone with a brain knows isnt the case. They will do what third parties do. in 2 years they wont be looking to scale it across the OG X1 which is how people are choosing to interpret it. For points. If you look at the PS4 it still has a two year roadmap of releases.

This also discounts proprietary engine improvements across tools. Like anvilnext - look at the improvements between syndicate and odyssey for example.

Also the coming changes are MORE scalable because this is the closest we've had to continuity in the console space and the closest to PC.

CDPR did not even have access to the switch before scaling it down so rhe feet wet doesnt rung true with me.

It is very transparent, they do not have titles ready yet and they plan to have a GaaS strategy anyways and would like for consoles to work like Android and Apple mobile phones in terms of Wales garden and iterative HW. It is doing that and pretending to do the opposite and doing for the gamers in a holier than thou tone while flip flopping every other year than I find most annoying.

I think thats the main problem. Most of these arguments seem to be centred around the drama/phil hate. Its transparent that all of sonys flagship studios have nothing for PS5 for example. While saying they are giving me a compelling reason to upgrade. Newsflash, you havent. Neither have MS yet.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

On mobile so must have just scrolled too quickly and missed it. But the picture is radically different to the 'every year' point you were trying to stand up which has now changed to 1-2 years. You yourself alluded to the expansion so why would a studio with more capacity output less?

I always said 1-2 years...

I didn't claim it was the same thing, I'm claiming it's an anomaly for them to not release a game every 1 to 2 years and that teasing us on TLOU II in 2016 should indicate they weren't planning to hold it for next gen.

And yes... less output is weird was my point the entire time, that because TLOU II was their next game and prior to it they nearly always had output every 1-2 years it's weird to expect the game would take until next generation, especially when at the end of 2016 the arrival of next gen had no set date.

 

[geordiemp]

Capcom are being evil and anti-consumer.

I saw nothing in the RE8 trailer that couldn't be done on Xbox One and PS4. Nothing they showed required an SSD or a CPU faster than a Jaguar. In fact, I think it should also be a mobile phone game, all games can scale down after all.

This game should be available for everyone. I'll be sad when playing it on my brand new $500+ next generation hardware that little Timmy in a small village in India without Internet access can't also experience it at the same time that I am, I'll be thinking of him throughout my playthrough.

/S

You saw nothing but Capcom obviously did.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

I think thats the main problem. Most of these arguments seem to be centred around the drama/phil hate. Its transparent that all of sonys flagship studios have nothing for PS5 for example. While saying they are giving me a compelling reason to upgrade. Newsflash, you havent. Neither have MS yet.

Playstation WANT you to upgrade. While Xbox has declared that they don't care if you upgrade or not. So if you want Xbox to give you a reason to buy a Series X, you are going to wait forever.

I don't know the really reason Xbox is doing this, but that is the hill they decided to die on. And rest assured, if this crazy plan failed, they WILL die.

EDIT: technically they would revive and turn into a second SEGA. But that is still a death.

 

[Dory16]

The fact is if you really care about the most people possible having access to games and not "locking people away" then you would ensure those games are not locked in to a single ecosystem.

On the whole, third party developers have demonstrated this since the beginning of time and will natively release their games everywhere possible, even down to mobile in some cases. However, when you are a platform (or ecosystem) owner then you have a vested interest and it is no longer just about making sure everyone has access to the games you make. It's about making sure people have access to games on your terms. That's not absolute freedom of choice, that's not empowering the consumer. Yes, you now have multiple access points which is commendable, but he's attempting to talk this up into something it really isn't and it's clear as day. Take this snippet for example:



Any device huh? What he should be saying is any modern PC or Xbox since the Xbox One. And again with this "device" bullshit:



Sorry Phil, but last time I checked anyone who doesn't have a Windows PC or an Xbox is "locked away" from experiencing those games.

Can I play your games on my Linux laptop running Pop OS? No? Oh I have to buy one of your "devices" or have a device that runs your operating system do I? Funny that. What about PS4, Switch, Mac OS and Stadia users? No? No love for them either.

What they are doing directly contradicts the ideology he is trying to put forward. That ideology will be further contradicted when they suddenly stop releasing their first party games on the Xbox One without notice. He's full of shit.

News flash: Phil Spencer runs the gaming division of MICROSOFT. Not Linux or Playstation. He is speaking about avoiding the fragmentation of MICROSOFT's gaming customers by giving them access on all of their MICROSOFT devices and software platforms. You are just baiting people into bickering at this stage and i will leave you to your obvious agenda of proving at all costs that Phil Spencer is the problem with gaming because he allows people to play new games without buying the latest hardware.

 

[VAVA Mk2]

When did he change his mind?
Because when he was the general manager of Microsoft Studios his tune was very, very different.

His boss Satya Nadella told him there is more money to be made this way.

 

[BootsLoader]

Maybe Phil will use the "power of the cloud" that will make the xbox one a console with unlimited power because of the "power of the cloud" that never came to be.

 

[geordiemp]

News flash: Phil Spencer runs the gaming division of MICROSOFT. Not Linux or Playstation. He is speaking about avoiding the fragmentation of MICROSOFT's gaming customers by giving them access on all of their MICROSOFT devices and software platforms. You are just baiting people into bickering at this stage and i will leave you to your obvious agenda of proving at all costs that Phil Spencer is the problem with gaming because he allows people to play new games without buying the latest hardware.

Enjoy playing Resident evil 8 on last gen. The first casualty and we are still 3-4 months away from next gen.

it has already begun. Wont last long.

Next year this will all be forgotten and last gen will be dead, and phil can claim he was helping people transition in a virus torn world.

 

[Bernkastel]

Well that’s unfortunate Lady Burn . I mean excluding any would be drama, what are your genuine thoughts on Phil’s words or thinking? I think they’re definitely relevant enough to create a topic from but surely at least if anyone attacks anything it should be Phil’s words and/or thoughts and not he himself as a person.

Well my post was in response to the original thread title of Phil does not prefer PS5 style exclusives. The GI Biz interview did not mention PS5 and he was talking about exclusives coming to Xbox One for the first year. But the article OP linked gave their own spin to the interview and OP accompanied it with a disingenuous thread title. Now regarding exclusives releasing on Xbox One for the first year, some Xbox exclusives like Halo Infinite and Flight Simulator(began development in 2015) started development way before many PS5 exclusives and were originally intended to be Xbox One titles. Now if you go to the official page of Hellblade II you will see that just like the trailer it only mentions Xbox Series X. So while Halo Infinite, Flight Simulator, Bright Memory Infinite, The Ascent, Everwild, Call of the Sea and Second Extinction will release on Xbox One either because they were originally Xbox One projects or because they are not they are not that demanding, but after that Hellblade II, Scorn, Obsidian's RPG project and Playground Games RPG will stop releasing on Xbox One. The Medium is a launch title console exclusive to XSX because it can't run on Xbox One(although you better look up how old this project is). That's all my thoughts on scaling the initial XSX games for Xbox One.

 

[Qudrat Rabbi]

Erm Sony has done the exact thing Microsoft does. It’s funny how when Sony does something it’s seen as essential but Microsoft does it then it’s bad. I give you an example, Sony closing the wipeout studios in Liverpool vs Microsoft closing a studio. Microsoft bad vs Sony needed it to happen. It’s the same narrative all the time.

the studios Microsoft have bought are not brand new studios, they have been around and have produced games. It’s not like the studios were sitting there 12 months befor Microsoft bought them and were doing nothing. They were making games and the games will come out and possibly be better due to extra financial help.

it was the same with DLC or timed exclusives, when Microsoft had the timed DLC for call of duty it was seen as bad but now Sony has it people on here defend that Sony has more gamers so it’s right. Again timed releases, when Microsoft got tomb raider this gen a year ahead of Sonythis place was unreal slagging the company and Microsoft off, yet when Sony paid to have to tomb raider 2 exclusive to ps rather than be on other consoles that was great also.

p

Sure they both did the same thing, but somehow one side ended up with a shit ton more exclusives that kicks ass than the other. We always se Microsoft go all out early on (1st year Xbox exclusives were better- sunset overdrive, titanfall 2) but then it falls off a fucking cliff. So yea all these studio purchases still make me question things based on the past. Idk I guess I’m a bit skeptical but I’m ready for good games from the green side for sure.

 

[cormack12]

Playstation WANT you to upgrade. While Xbox has declared that they don't care if you upgrade or not. So if you want Xbox to give you a reason to buy a Series X, you are going to wait forever.

This is just a fanboy lie. They are simply saying if you can't upgrade immediately, you will still be able to experience the games until we go XsX exclusive in 2 years. But this whole debate is around the reason to upgrade. Why would I buy a PS5 when all flagship IP's are two years away (at least)? On the other hand MS have a flagship IP day one on the Xbox Series X in Halo Infinite. Let's take two situations here for Halo Infinite and TLOU II.

Naughty Dog's last main release was Uncharted 4 in 2016
Halo 5 was the last mainline entry in 2015

The next Halo was deliberately targeted at the Xbox Series X and it will scale down to run on X1X and X1S and has been in development for five years or so.
TLOU II was deliberately targeted at PS4 Pro and would scale down to run on the PS4 and has been in development for four years I guess.

Going into next generation and based on the latest dev cycles, we can assume ND will not have a PS5 exclusive title until 2/3 years into the PS5 lifecycle (which was also the timeline in which Uncharted 4 arrived on PS4). This doesn't even take into account any Pt II DLC or a remaster as well. So if we knew TLOU II was going to be on the PS5, do you think it would look and perform better on the PS5 than on the PS4 Pro? Undoubtedly, yes. However, they chose not to. That does not equal giving me a reason to upgrade. If anything, both these games releasing so late has given me more leeway to consider what Microsoft are bringing to the table. If GoT and TLOU II were day one exclusives on PS5 then you have the pull of continuing a beloved franchise and a brand new sexy IP. Right now, I've held off TLOU II because there is no way I want jet engine noise while playing a poignant story and bought GoT because it looks like a good 30-40 hour action platinum.

But they did this 'swansong' on the PS3 as well - why is this different? For two reasons, first migrating the ND engine from the cell broke a shitload of code so it wasn't an easy scale up job. Second, Cerny even said in his road to PS5 video that the time to triangle from PS4 to PS5 was around a month. In that amount of time in which millions of lines of code were generated for rope, and there were multiple rewrites requiring new animations there wasn't time to just port the game engines to have a flagship IP on the PS5 release? The reality is you're going to end up with a remaster with enhanced FPS and resolution like TLOU:R and be asked to buy again.

This has been a decision made a long time ago. And this ties into everyone saying about no XsX exclusives for two years. Well guess what - that's around the same timeline all the Sony AAA's are on as well. It's just that in the meantime, you can probably expect the flagship IPs from Microsoft to appear earlier and be playable on the X1X etc. before they go dedicated. If you're talking about these flagship IPs having new entries within six months of launch (Halo, FM8, Fable) but being backwards scalable while Sony are still making dedicated PS5 titles that are another 2/3 years away then yeah the next Sackboy and Ratchet and Clank aren't going to cut it I'm afraid.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

This is just a fanboy lie. They are simply saying if you can't upgrade immediately, you will still be able to experience the games until we go XsX exclusive in 2 years. But this whole debate is around the reason to upgrade. Why would I buy a PS5 when all flagship IP's are two years away (at least)? On the other hand MS have a flagship IP day one on the Xbox Series X in Halo Infinite. Let's take two situations here for Halo Infinite and TLOU II.

Naughty Dog's last main release was Uncharted 4 in 2016
Halo 5 was the last mainline entry in 2015

The next Halo was deliberately targeted at the Xbox Series X and it will scale down to run on X1X and X1S and has been in development for five years or so.
TLOU II was deliberately targeted at PS4 Pro and would scale down to run on the PS4 and has been in development for four years I guess.

Going into next generation and based on the latest dev cycles, we can assume ND will not have a PS5 exclusive title until 2/3 years into the PS5 lifecycle (which was also the timeline in which Uncharted 4 arrived on PS4). This doesn't even take into account any Pt II DLC or a remaster as well. So if we knew TLOU II was going to be on the PS5, do you think it would look and perform better on the PS5 than on the PS4 Pro? Undoubtedly, yes. However, they chose not to. That does not equal giving me a reason to upgrade. If anything, both these games releasing so late has given me more leeway to consider what Microsoft are bringing to the table. If GoT and TLOU II were day one exclusives on PS5 then you have the pull of continuing a beloved franchise and a brand new sexy IP. Right now, I've held off TLOU II because there is no way I want jet engine noise while playing a poignant story and bought GoT because it looks like a good 30-40 hour action platinum.

But they did this 'swansong' on the PS3 as well - why is this different? For two reasons, first migrating the ND engine from the cell broke a shitload of code so it wasn't an easy scale up job. Second, Cerny even said in his road to PS5 video that the time to triangle from PS4 to PS5 was around a month. In that amount of time in which millions of lines of code were generated for rope, and there were multiple rewrites requiring new animations there wasn't time to just port the game engines to have a flagship IP on the PS5 release? The reality is you're going to end up with a remaster with enhanced FPS and resolution like TLOU:R and be asked to buy again.

This has been a decision made a long time ago. And this ties into everyone saying about no XsX exclusives for two years. Well guess what - that's around the same timeline all the Sony AAA's are on as well. It's just that in the meantime, you can probably expect the flagship IPs from Microsoft to appear earlier and be playable on the X1X etc. before they go dedicated. If you're talking about these flagship IPs having new entries within six months of launch (Halo, FM8, Fable) but being backwards scalable while Sony are still making dedicated PS5 titles that are another 2/3 years away then yeah the next Sackboy and Ratchet and Clank aren't going to cut it I'm afraid.

Halo Infinite was made to run on Xbox One. It had to be, because Series X didn't exist 5 years ago. But I guess if you haven't accepted that reality, by now, you never will

And the "Sony is doing it too" argument does not fly on next gen exclusives. You WISH Sony is copying MS, the same way you wished they copied Xboxone's always online. Guess what? If you could only accept something by pretending the competition is also doing it, then you are admitting that it is a bad thing and needed to make up an excuse.

 

[nyr88nyg]

Easy to say when your exclusives are outclassed by your competitor.

 

[Qudrat Rabbi]

This is just a fanboy lie. They are simply saying if you can't upgrade immediately, you will still be able to experience the games until we go XsX exclusive in 2 years. But this whole debate is around the reason to upgrade. Why would I buy a PS5 when all flagship IP's are two years away (at least)? On the other hand MS have a flagship IP day one on the Xbox Series X in Halo Infinite. Let's take two situations here for Halo Infinite and TLOU II.

Naughty Dog's last main release was Uncharted 4 in 2016
Halo 5 was the last mainline entry in 2015

The next Halo was deliberately targeted at the Xbox Series X and it will scale down to run on X1X and X1S and has been in development for five years or so.
TLOU II was deliberately targeted at PS4 Pro and would scale down to run on the PS4 and has been in development for four years I guess.

Going into next generation and based on the latest dev cycles, we can assume ND will not have a PS5 exclusive title until 2/3 years into the PS5 lifecycle (which was also the timeline in which Uncharted 4 arrived on PS4). This doesn't even take into account any Pt II DLC or a remaster as well. So if we knew TLOU II was going to be on the PS5, do you think it would look and perform better on the PS5 than on the PS4 Pro? Undoubtedly, yes. However, they chose not to. That does not equal giving me a reason to upgrade. If anything, both these games releasing so late has given me more leeway to consider what Microsoft are bringing to the table. If GoT and TLOU II were day one exclusives on PS5 then you have the pull of continuing a beloved franchise and a brand new sexy IP. Right now, I've held off TLOU II because there is no way I want jet engine noise while playing a poignant story and bought GoT because it looks like a good 30-40 hour action platinum.

But they did this 'swansong' on the PS3 as well - why is this different? For two reasons, first migrating the ND engine from the cell broke a shitload of code so it wasn't an easy scale up job. Second, Cerny even said in his road to PS5 video that the time to triangle from PS4 to PS5 was around a month. In that amount of time in which millions of lines of code were generated for rope, and there were multiple rewrites requiring new animations there wasn't time to just port the game engines to have a flagship IP on the PS5 release? The reality is you're going to end up with a remaster with enhanced FPS and resolution like TLOU:R and be asked to buy again.

This has been a decision made a long time ago. And this ties into everyone saying about no XsX exclusives for two years. Well guess what - that's around the same timeline all the Sony AAA's are on as well. It's just that in the meantime, you can probably expect the flagship IPs from Microsoft to appear earlier and be playable on the X1X etc. before they go dedicated. If you're talking about these flagship IPs having new entries within six months of launch (Halo, FM8, Fable) but being backwards scalable while Sony are still making dedicated PS5 titles that are another 2/3 years away then yeah the next Sackboy and Ratchet and Clank aren't going to cut it I'm afraid.

Flagship as least 2 years away? Horizon drops next year. Spiderman ain’t flagship? Sold 13Mil copies lol MS won’t even reveal how much halo 5 sold. Naughty dogs last title was lost legacy in 2017. They have 2 teams, so the other one is already making something for 3 years. Tlou2 is definitely getting remastered with fractions next year. Do the math....

 

[Shmunter]

Phillys last book under his pseudonym Billy....

 

[Panajev2001a]

This is just a fanboy lie. They are simply saying if you can't upgrade immediately, you will still be able to experience the games until we go XsX exclusive in 2 years. But this whole debate is around the reason to upgrade. Why would I buy a PS5 when all flagship IP's are two years away (at least)? On the other hand MS have a flagship IP day one on the Xbox Series X in Halo Infinite. Let's take two situations here for Halo Infinite and TLOU II.

Naughty Dog's last main release was Uncharted 4 in 2016
Halo 5 was the last mainline entry in 2015

The next Halo was deliberately targeted at the Xbox Series X and it will scale down to run on X1X and X1S and has been in development for five years or so.
TLOU II was deliberately targeted at PS4 Pro and would scale down to run on the PS4 and has been in development for four years I guess.

Going into next generation and based on the latest dev cycles, we can assume ND will not have a PS5 exclusive title until 2/3 years into the PS5 lifecycle (which was also the timeline in which Uncharted 4 arrived on PS4). This doesn't even take into account any Pt II DLC or a remaster as well. So if we knew TLOU II was going to be on the PS5, do you think it would look and perform better on the PS5 than on the PS4 Pro? Undoubtedly, yes. However, they chose not to. That does not equal giving me a reason to upgrade. If anything, both these games releasing so late has given me more leeway to consider what Microsoft are bringing to the table. If GoT and TLOU II were day one exclusives on PS5 then you have the pull of continuing a beloved franchise and a brand new sexy IP. Right now, I've held off TLOU II because there is no way I want jet engine noise while playing a poignant story and bought GoT because it looks like a good 30-40 hour action platinum.

But they did this 'swansong' on the PS3 as well - why is this different? For two reasons, first migrating the ND engine from the cell broke a shitload of code so it wasn't an easy scale up job. Second, Cerny even said in his road to PS5 video that the time to triangle from PS4 to PS5 was around a month. In that amount of time in which millions of lines of code were generated for rope, and there were multiple rewrites requiring new animations there wasn't time to just port the game engines to have a flagship IP on the PS5 release? The reality is you're going to end up with a remaster with enhanced FPS and resolution like TLOU:R and be asked to buy again.

This has been a decision made a long time ago. And this ties into everyone saying about no XsX exclusives for two years. Well guess what - that's around the same timeline all the Sony AAA's are on as well. It's just that in the meantime, you can probably expect the flagship IPs from Microsoft to appear earlier and be playable on the X1X etc. before they go dedicated. If you're talking about these flagship IPs having new entries within six months of launch (Halo, FM8, Fable) but being backwards scalable while Sony are still making dedicated PS5 titles that are another 2/3 years away then yeah the next Sackboy and Ratchet and Clank aren't going to cut it I'm afraid.

So enhanced BC / Pro patch like scenario gives you again the best of both worlds? Great late generation support instead of a drought, enhanced BC, and some new exclusive titles showing off the console’s capabilities and complementing the third party offerings? Why not ?

Sony has honed a play book of generations support and generations transitions, not an unknown quantity, not something problematic in need of a revamp, and definitely not something I feel MS is presenting a better alternative to.

Creating/contributing to a software draught to ship Halo Infinite alongside the XSX instead of launching it earlier, focus on Xbox One and then optimise/enhance it via BC support/patch does not seem more pro consumer or preferable especially if the answer is just “token Xbox One support where it barely runs / runs very crappily”.

 

[skneogaf]

Playstation exclusive games only make up 2.7 percent (74) of the playstation 4 library and 0.8 percent (12) exclusive games are found on the xbox one.

Surely these figures explain that exclusive games as good as they are, especially on the ps4 aren't likely to have such a bad effect on the standard of xbox series x games as a whole.

Every other game by every other development team can skip the xbox one if they so wish to.

They likely won't as both the xbox one and the ps4 have millions of consoles in people's homes.

 

[cormack12]

Flagship as least 2 years away? Horizon drops next year. Spiderman ain’t flagship? Sold 13Mil copies lol MS won’t even reveal how much halo 5 sold. Naughty dogs last title was lost legacy in 2017. They have 2 teams, so the other one is already making something for 3 years. Tlou2 is definitely getting remastered with fractions next year. Do the math....

It's a fairly safe assumption it will be delayed. The statement made by the lead creative was aiming for late 2021 I think (from memory), we're still not out of COVID territory yet and given pretty much every other studio has delayed from ND to CDPR it's a fairly safe assumption that Spring 2022 is not beyond the realms of probability.

Spiderman isn't flagship lol. Its had one release. And it was a very solid entry that used the strength of its license and absence of IP for a long time (this isn't a remark on its quality btw). Great, so we get a remaster of a Gen 8 game instead of an actual reason to buy a PS5 with a brand new title. You're making a lot of asumptions instead of tying them to actual evidence. Remember the last quote from Neil - he doesn't want to speak about games that aren't close to release.

Halo Infinite was made to run on Xbox One. It had to be, because Series X didn't exist 5 years ago. But I guess if you haven't accepted that reality, by now, you never will

Yeah unlike most people in this thread, you are not worth discussing these things with. They're clearly beyond you. Improve your points and drop the childlike rants otherwise you'll be ignored. It might be best to actually understand I don't own any xboxes currently either.

Creating/contributing to a software draught to ship Halo Infinite alongside the XSX instead of launching it earlier, focus on Xbox One and then optimise/enhance it via BC support/patch does not seem more pro consumer or preferable especially if the answer is just “token Xbox One support where it barely runs / runs very crappily”.

But the PS5 has the same drought, if not bigger. The difference is that both companies could have put their flagship IP on the next generation and scaled it down. Microsoft did, Sony didn't. Support for the older platforms will decline quicker than games will run like lego on them. It seems to eb around two years. That looks like the roadmap for PS4 support, sounds about right for third party support, matches the dev cycles before we'll see flagship IPs on PS5 and the same amount of time Phil quoted before shifting focus to XsX completely. I'm not saying it's pro consumer or anti consumer, just saying that it seems to make sense that TLOU II/GoT would be available on PS5 like Halo Infinite if they want to push this narrative that they want people to move over quickly and without friction.

I've still not got an answer as to what isn't scalable or what the concerns are beyond the game design including an SSD. What can't be scaled? This is a genuine question because from what I've read it all is from geometry to shadows.

 

[ZywyPL]

Maybe Phil will use the "power of the cloud" that will make the xbox one a console with unlimited power because of the "power of the cloud" that never came to be.

Sort of - the base XB1/1X can still serve as an xCloud HUB once the games won't be able to run on them natively.

 

[Qudrat Rabbi]

It's a fairly safe assumption it will be delayed. The statement made by the lead creaive was aiming for late 2021 I think (from memory), we're still not out of COVID territory yet and given pretty much every other studio has delayed from ND to CDPR it's a fairly safe assumptionthat Spring 2022 is not beyond the realms fo possibility.also which company tends to delay games that end up getting cancelled?

Spiderman isn't flagship lol. Its had one release. And it was a very solid entry that used the strength of its license and absence of IP for a long time. Great, so we get a remaster of a Gen 8 game instead of an actual reason to buy a PS5 with a brand new title. You're making a lot of asumptions instead of tying them to actual evidence. Remember the last quote from Neil - he doesn't want to speak about games that arent close to release.




Yeah unlike most people in this thread, you are not worth discussing these things with. They're clearly beyond you. Improve your points and drop the childlike rants otherwise you'll be ignored. It might be best to actually understand I don't own any xboxes currently either.




But the PS5 has the same drought, if not bigger. The difference is that both companies could have put theri flagship IP on the enxt generation and scaled it down. Microsoft did, Sony didn't. Support for the older platforms will decline quicker than games will run like lego on them. It seems to eb around two years. That looks like the roadmap for PS4 support, sounds about right for third party support, matches the dev cycles before we'll see flagship IPs on PS5 and the same amount of time Phil quoted before shifting focus to XsX completely. I'm not saying it's pro consumer or anti consumer, just saying that it seems to make sense that TLOU II/GoT would be available on PS5 like Halo Infinite if they want to push this narrative that they want people to move over quickly and without friction.

I've still not got an answer as to what isn't scalable or what the concerns are beyond the game design including an SSD. What can't be scaled? This is a genuine question because from what I've read it all is from geometry to shadows.

Spiderman isn’t flagship but still sold more than halo 5 which is THE flagship for Xbox, what defines a flagship then?.COVID affects everyone not just Sony. So if you expect delays, expect it across the border. Doubtful MS goes NBA style bubble for their developers. Tlou2 is getting remastered because a) it didn’t release with MP and people love the fractions mode b) they did it with the first game and it sold like crazy.