STARSBarry
Gold Member
Jesus are people fucking stupid... don't answer that because I already know the answer.
Some of the comment is a bit off, I think the Xbox naming scheme is confusing for consumers rather than the multi console issue, the increase in Xbox One sales after the Xbox Series announcement shows that. However when he states that having a less powerful machine is limiting for a generation he is 100% correct.
"Bu-bu-bu-bu-but the PC" I hear all you Xbox preorderes who don't own a PC cry. Yes but I think its pretty fucking well known that the PC despite having hardware on average several times that of a games console does not have graphics on average several generations ahead of the consoles... Perhaps there are negatives to developing games for multiple hardware configurations that result in engines and games being unable to achieve heights they could otherwise have because they have to make sure the minimum spec at least runs even if it looks like shit. This means scalability has to be baked into the game. Its no accident that consoles can pull off amazing technical feats that given there limited hardware would simply be impossible on PC due to its myriad of possible hardware configurations.
Final Fantasy XIV today for example you can still feel the effects everytime you go into a major city of the choice to release on PS3, everytime you hit one of those dotted lines dividing the citys in two, despite both PS4 soon PS5 and PC having access to much more RAM that decision to release on PS3 will always effect these older areas, its no accident the expansion that dropped PS3 has massive open areas compared to what came before. Having a weaker hardware variant at launch will negatively impact high end games, its as simple as that.
Like where are people getting this idea that it doesn't? It was a fucking selling point for generations that having a single machine with a set spec allows devs to invest time in getting that spec running as near perfect as possible.
Some of the comment is a bit off, I think the Xbox naming scheme is confusing for consumers rather than the multi console issue, the increase in Xbox One sales after the Xbox Series announcement shows that. However when he states that having a less powerful machine is limiting for a generation he is 100% correct.
"Bu-bu-bu-bu-but the PC" I hear all you Xbox preorderes who don't own a PC cry. Yes but I think its pretty fucking well known that the PC despite having hardware on average several times that of a games console does not have graphics on average several generations ahead of the consoles... Perhaps there are negatives to developing games for multiple hardware configurations that result in engines and games being unable to achieve heights they could otherwise have because they have to make sure the minimum spec at least runs even if it looks like shit. This means scalability has to be baked into the game. Its no accident that consoles can pull off amazing technical feats that given there limited hardware would simply be impossible on PC due to its myriad of possible hardware configurations.
Final Fantasy XIV today for example you can still feel the effects everytime you go into a major city of the choice to release on PS3, everytime you hit one of those dotted lines dividing the citys in two, despite both PS4 soon PS5 and PC having access to much more RAM that decision to release on PS3 will always effect these older areas, its no accident the expansion that dropped PS3 has massive open areas compared to what came before. Having a weaker hardware variant at launch will negatively impact high end games, its as simple as that.
Like where are people getting this idea that it doesn't? It was a fucking selling point for generations that having a single machine with a set spec allows devs to invest time in getting that spec running as near perfect as possible.
Last edited: