Support NeoGAF

[OmegaSupreme]

 

[hououinkyouma00]

No thank you. As I said, I don't care for those kinds of threads in general.

It's generally better to always stay out, but it spills out sometimes. Unfortunately, people care way too much about what other people choose to use/play on.

 

[twilo99]

Lol what? As somebody else said as well try bringing up Mac and you'll see the same amount of people that shit on other consoles shit on Macs (and iPhones/iPad as well) and it's the same when PCMR constantly shits on consoles like their existence killed their dog and how everybody that makes a decision that doesn't match theirs is a fucking retard. This happens with every single topic, it's not just a PS/XB thing.

Also look at how many people deepthroat Nvidia and shit on AMD. They willingly get fucked in the ass and keep going back for more.

Ok see this is how it works..

PCMR have very similar feelings towards consoles to those of PS5 owners towards the XSS .. both groups think that the cheaper options shouldn't exist and they are holding back gaming and that the cheaper option is for "peasants".

The only saving grace for the PS community is a few decent "first party" games..

 

[onnextflix5]

The Xbox fans are not getting it, there is nothing wrong with a weaker system, in fact I think series s is good idea but ms have fucked up the execution, where it’s ram starved and and way under powered, ms engineers have messed up big time, let’s hope they get some better engineers next time.

 

[hououinkyouma00]

The Xbox fans are not getting it, there is nothing wrong with a weaker system, in fact I think series s is good idea but ms have fucked the execution, where it’s ram starved and and way under powered, ms engineers have messed up big time, let’s hope they get some better engineers next time.

Xbox One X had 6TF right? I would have bought and kept a Series S if it would have had a little more power behind it and didn't have the memory issues you pointed out. I wonder what price they could have had if it had more RAM and a 6TF GPU versus 4.

Unfortunately, my Series S was a Xbox 360 machine until I finally got rid of it.

 

[nosoynadie22]

I was hoping it will curb the hatred around here a bit lol

Of course, lipstick on a pig is a likely comment here

If there is a lot of hate around here towards the S Series

I have nothing against Series S, but I do agree with some comments I've seen...mainly the ones raising concerns that in 2027-9 developers will still have to get their games to run on Series S.

a console with the specifications of the Series S would have done very well in 2018 as a cross-gen console (based on RDNA1) at 400 dollars with full support from Microsoft until 2023 when a new console took over, possibly still receiving most of the game

Although Series S seemed like a great move from Microsoft, the numbers show that gamers are willing to pay a little more to get the best... if you add total PS5 sales to estimated Series X sales you see that Premium consoles sold 5 times more than the S series

 

[Crayon]

Bumping the series s specs would not have been that easy. Remember we learned that the sx costs way too much to make. Idk if they divulged the ss bom.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Ok see this is how it works..

PCMR have very similar feelings towards consoles to those of PS5 owners towards the XSS .. both groups think that the cheaper options shouldn't exist and they are holding back gaming and that the cheaper option is for "peasants".

The only saving grace for the PS community is a few decent "first party" games..

PCMR sides with MS/Xbox by proxy more often than not in the great brand wars. Especially when Sony puts out graphical powerhouses that a console supposedly has no business doing (at least last gen on that measly Jaguar and 1.8TF). They've been jaded since a Crysis investment is no longer a thing for the PC platform, just brute forcing console design.

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

i understand what MS was going for... a cheaper 1080p or so version of the series x.
same exact games, just a simple resolution drop for a cheaper price, right?

just didnt pan out that way.

 

[Crayon]

i understand what MS was going for... a cheaper 1080p or so version of the series x.
same exact games, just a simple resolution drop for a cheaper price, right?

just didnt pan out that way.

I think they were counting on being able to dictate the baseline but they don't have that kind of leverage right now. They managed to keep most game sizes stuck at a dvd's worth in the 360 era becasue they had a serious install base.

 

[twilo99]

If there is a lot of hate around here towards the S Series

I have nothing against Series S, but I do agree with some comments I've seen...mainly the ones raising concerns that in 2027-9 developers will still have to get their games to run on Series S.

a console with the specifications of the Series S would have done very well in 2018 as a cross-gen console (based on RDNA1) at 400 dollars with full support from Microsoft until 2023 when a new console took over, possibly still receiving most of the game

Although Series S seemed like a great move from Microsoft, the numbers show that gamers are willing to pay a little more to get the best... if you add total PS5 sales to estimated Series X sales you see that Premium consoles sold 5 times more than the S series

The PS5 selling 10x more than xbox or whatever the number is has nothing to do with specs, it has more to do with the games and Sony's mindshare in the console space.

I agree that it will be hard to keep the xss in the loop in 5 years from now, but there is no way to have a sub $300 machine without making the compromises MS had to make.. its unfortunate, but that's reality.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Xbox One X had 6TF right? I would have bought and kept a Series S if it would have had a little more power behind it and didn't have the memory issues you pointed out. I wonder what price they could have had if it had more RAM and a 6TF GPU versus 4.

Unfortunately, my Series S was a Xbox 360 machine until I finally got rid of it.

I think the TF isn't even the problem. The Series S can do some great things. For example compare Psychonauts 2 on both X1X and XSS. X1X is 4k yes, but at 30fps and horrible load times. XSS meanwhile runs at 1680p 60fps and even offers an 120hz option. Its a far better experience on XSS.

But its undercooked with RAM, which means if nothing is done legacy games default to One S. Once patched though, like Doom Eternal, I beat it on both XSS and PS5 in 120hz and also the XSS blows the X1X version out of the water. But they need to go the extra mile to buff the XSS version otherwise you're stuck with a One S game.

The XSS holds no benefit over XSX except for price. But you even lose a disc drive. Its not like consoles will stay expensive forever, when XSX hits a 299 price one day I can't see much reason for MS to keep the XSS around. Because I doubt its worthwhile to sell it for 99 bucks.

 

[Panajev2001a]

The PS5 selling 10x more than xbox or whatever the number is has nothing to do with specs, it has more to do with the games and Sony's mindshare in the console space.

I agree that it will be hard to keep the xss in the loop in 5 years from now, but there is no way to have a sub $300 machine without making the compromises MS had to make.. its unfortunate, but that's reality.

This kind of assumes MS had to make a $299 console vs a $349-399 Digital XSX with half the storage space for example…

 

[twinspectre]

Xbox isn't telling you to go fuck yourself if you're poor, they are working double time for you. They set up their model to become last/crossgen game land, and now they are bending rules to try and squeeze a real next gen game from PS5 onto Series S.

Maybe MS thought they would be SO successful, the whole industry would need to accept having games dragged down for a whole gen just to have titles on Xbox.

Games on Series S aren't going to get any worse. We should be happy games on other consoles will be allowed to be better without being affected by it.

To be fair MS did kinda tell you to go f yourself at the start of the gen when they blatantly lied about what the S could do. But we shouldn't have an entire long gen defined by S just for that. It was a mass produced affordable COVID crossgen box masquerading as a next gen system.

"MS lied to me and now all gamers with more money than me need to have complete parity with my experience for the whole gen" sorry no.

The difference between S/X and Switch portable/dock modes is that Nintendo never pretended anything, it's not a different sku, and X has to compete with a home console of the same price so it has the same perceived value. But that value isn't there when only one has pure next gen exclusives because the other one has to also target little brother mode.

They should have gone for a single sku for a healthier ecosystem and let people play Xbox One until they can afford it. It's what Sony did and why they are successful.

The problem with today developers is that they push the limit with PC and then they face the issue with consoles (being weaker). Welcome to the modern era of game dev, where agenda and movies comes first and then when they have time they will spend on twitter calling people -ism, instead of making the game great on all platforms.

 

[Crayon]

The problem with today developers is that they push the limit with PC and then they face the issue with consoles (being weaker). Welcome to the modern era of game dev, where agenda and movies comes first and then when they have time they will spend on twitter calling people -ism.

I don't think they are targeting too high a pc baseline. A lot of the bad-ports bad-devs talk over the last year has been in regards to rough pc versions that hitch even on high end hardware.

They are either targeting laptops or ps5. In the case of the recent imortals of whatever game for example, they likely thought they were going to get it running on a higher fsr setting but bumped it down as a quick fix when they were running out of time. The difference between the steps of fsr are small enough that they could have been falling short of that 6 by 5-10 fps and one more setting down would just cover it. Or when they were working on the game they thought that fsr would be more like dlss (better) at low resolutions. You are only going to mistake fsr for dlss at the ultra quality or maybe quality modes. Lower than that, it works well enough, but you are going to see that it's no miracle.

 

[twilo99]

This kind of assumes MS had to make a $299 console vs a $349-399 Digital XSX with half the storage space for example…

I have no idea what the supply chain and R&D looks like for those things, but you would think that if they could make a $350 XSX without a disk drive they would have? I just don't think that was possible at the time.

$299 is a great price for a console... that's exactly how much the PS1 was at launch.

 

[Crayon]

Out of the aquisition hearings we heard that they lose like $200 on xsx... which is nuts as sony sells ps5 (disk, presumably) at over their cost. How they ended up in that situation is anyone's guess.

Anyway it would be rough to push that rrp down by $100-$150. MS could tank it of course but the cost would be getting rediculous if it's not already.

 

[nosoynadie22]

I have no idea what the supply chain and R&D looks like for those things, but you would think that if they could make a $350 XSX without a disk drive they would have? I just don't think that was possible at the time.

$299 is a great price for a console... that's exactly how much the PS1 was at launch.

A quick search on the internet tells me the following:

$300 in 1995 adjusted for inflation is equal to $601.36 in 2023

 

[BlackTron]

The problem with today developers is that they push the limit with PC and then they face the issue with consoles (being weaker). Welcome to the modern era of game dev, where agenda and movies comes first and then when they have time they will spend on twitter calling people -ism, instead of making the game great on all platforms.

I think the opposite is true, console has been holding PC back for a long time

 

[BlackTron]

Out of the aquisition hearings we heard that they lose like $200 on xsx... which is nuts as sony sells ps5 (disk, presumably) at over their cost. How they ended up in that situation is anyone's guess.

Anyway it would be rough to push that rrp down by $100-$150. MS could tank it of course but the cost would be getting rediculous if it's not already.

MS sucks at this and Sony doesn't. Not warring here lets just be real already. Saying this as someone with an X and S but no PS5

 

[SkylineRKR]

A quick search on the internet tells me the following:

$300 in 1995 adjusted for inflation is equal to $601.36 in 2023

True PS1 was very expensive for me. It was the cheapest of the 2 new 32-bit systems, but I think it was about triple the price of a SNES and Genesis right then. I couldn't afford one at launch.

 

[nosoynadie22]

Out of the aquisition hearings we heard that they lose like $200 on xsx... which is nuts as sony sells ps5 (disk, presumably) at over their cost. How they ended up in that situation is anyone's guess.

Anyway it would be rough to push that rrp down by $100-$150. MS could tank it of course but the cost would be getting rediculous if it's not already.

Isn't it a widely accepted consensus that the PS5 feels a bit "cheap"?
Microsoft paid extra to make series x look premium.
the series x also has a vapour chamber which is quite expensive right?

 

[Crayon]

MS sucks at this and Sony doesn't. Not warring here lets just be real already. Saying this as someone with an X and S but no PS5

No lies detected. Sony engineered circles around them and it's one of The unsung disasters of this generation. It's like they were so concerned with having the highest teraflops number that they sailed right past the sweet spot and ended up with nothing to show for it.

 

[Crayon]

Isn't it a widely accepted consensus that the PS5 feels a bit "cheap"?
Microsoft paid extra to make series x look premium.
the series x also has a vapour chamber which is quite expensive right?

Idk if that's a popular opinion but regardless, there's no way it's $200 more for nicer plastics or packaging or whatever. Can't say how much more of vapor chamber would cost than Sony's 2 lb aluminum brick of a heat sink but I'd wager 5 to $20.

It's most likely that the bulk of that cost went into the soc, which is significantly larger than the ps5s.

 

[Slicker than your average]

Isn't it a widely accepted consensus that the PS5 feels a bit "cheap"?
Microsoft paid extra to make series x look premium.
the series x also has a vapour chamber which is quite expensive right?

Where is this widely accepted facts that the PS5 is abit 'cheap'? Ah yes the Xbox that releases Oreo and pizza versions.. not cheap at all.

Or is this more endless Astroturfering/shilling? 23 posts and all Xbox is the best. Sony bad.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I have no idea what the supply chain and R&D looks like for those things, but you would think that if they could make a $350 XSX without a disk drive they would have? I just don't think that was possible at the time.

$299 is a great price for a console... that's exactly how much the PS1 was at launch.

Even $399, but then again if the XSX being their early Pro console and the XSS meant to do a pincher manoeuvre against a perceived single model $500+ PS5 or not… well again no the doctors’ orders for MS either.

Even if it were not a full full digital only XSX, a $349-399 box would have likely lessed a LOT of the issues XSS brought. Say it would have had a slightly bigger GPU and 16 GB of RAM at a closer to XSX bandwidth… now we are talking about something much better and less likely to hold the XSX back…

 

[Panajev2001a]

No lies detected. Sony engineered circles around them and it's one of The unsung disasters of this generation. It's like they were so concerned with having the highest teraflops number that they sailed right past the sweet spot and ended up with nothing to show for it.

They probably bet that the narrative of having the highest TFLOPS count and a vocal fanbase was going to carry them over. Perhaps… the power narrative has always held them / defined them: as much as I find it puzzling the circling of the wagons on the XSS, we need to remember it took years for Xbox One super fans to accept that PS4 surpassed it and was the devs darling…

 

[Bonfires Down]

i understand what MS was going for... a cheaper 1080p or so version of the series x.
same exact games, just a simple resolution drop for a cheaper price, right?

just didnt pan out that way.

It should work in theory. Quarter resolution textures would take up around a third of the space and memory wouldn’t need to be as fast either. I don’t know why it doesn’t work in practice but seems like the hardware is just badly engineered for its purposes.

 

[nosoynadie22]

Where is this widely accepted facts that the PS5 is abit 'cheap'? Ah yes the Xbox that releases Oreo and pizza versions.. not cheap at all.

Or is this more endless Astroturfering/shilling? 23 posts and all Xbox is the best. Sony bad.

I wouldn't consider myself an Xbox advocate.. among my posts, did you find any where I acted as an Xbox advocate? I don't like Microsoft and among its fans I have seen really unpleasant characters (I am from Latin America and among YouTubers and Spanish-speaking influencers there are disastrous characters like Saselandia)

and I guess I was wrong to say that the ps5 looks cheap, I don't actually have the console, I just went by the comments I usually hear on youtube or twitter... a mistake because these are full of microsoft defenders.

I'm interested in buying when the PS5 slim comes out

 

[Crayon]

They probably bet that the narrative of having the highest TFLOPS count and a vocal fanbase was going to carry them over. Perhaps… the power narrative has always held them / defined them: as much as I find it puzzling the circling of the wagons on the XSS, we need to remember it took years for Xbox One super fans to accept that PS4 surpassed it and was the devs darling…

That's almost even more ironic. We saw from Xbox One that the fans and friendly outlets will just say it doesn't matter anyway. Crazy to let this kind of thinking influence hardware engineering so much.

 

[Majima Everywhere System]

Anything that hinders using UE5 is a good for the industry. I don't need a 30fps or buy a pro situation. Games look fine and are decades from the next leap.

 

[twinspectre]

I don't think they are targeting too high a pc baseline. A lot of the bad-ports bad-devs talk over the last year has been in regards to rough pc versions that hitch even on high end hardware.

They are either targeting laptops or ps5. In the case of the recent imortals of whatever game for example, they likely thought they were going to get it running on a higher fsr setting but bumped it down as a quick fix when they were running out of time. The difference between the steps of fsr are small enough that they could have been falling short of that 6 by 5-10 fps and one more setting down would just cover it. Or when they were working on the game they thought that fsr would be more like dlss (better) at low resolutions. You are only going to mistake fsr for dlss at the ultra quality or maybe quality modes. Lower than that, it works well enough, but you are going to see that it's no miracle.

I'm sure if they target the crappiest hardware and then push what the more beefy can offer to its limit guarantee them to have great version on every platform.
I will start developing for the lowest common denominator (Series S) then I will "upgrade" for the more powerful hardware till I reach PC which I can do whatever I want with the graphics and other stuff, but I'm sure somehow they will always screw things up for PC as always, because instead of investing their time and resources into making the best experience possible on all platforms, they would rather talk about -ism with their pink hair.

 

[Crayon]

I'm sure if they target the crappiest hardware and then push what the more beefy can offer to its limit guarantee them to have great version on every platform.
I will start developing for the lowest common denominator (Series S) then I will "upgrade" for the more powerful hardware till I reach PC which I can do whatever I want with the graphics and other stuff, but I'm sure somehow they will always screw things up for PC as always, because instead of investing their time and resources into making the best experience possible on all platforms, they would rather talk about -ism with their pink hair.

And some will do that. They are free to choose whether they want to target laptops, serious ass, or ps5. Maybe you think the series s, or maybe the laptops I can't tell, should be the target baseline for everyone's game but that's just your opinion. A lot of people have been begging for cross-gen to end, or for someone to target a really high-end PC spec. Some people want to put higher-end hardware to use other than just cranking up the resolution. That goes for both users and developers.

 

[twinspectre]

And some will do that. They are free to choose whether they want to target laptops, serious ass, or ps5. Maybe you think the series s, or maybe the laptops I can't tell, should be the target baseline for everyone's game but that's just your opinion. A lot of people have been begging for cross-gen to end, or for someone to target a really high-end PC spec. Some people want to put higher-end hardware to use other than just cranking up the resolution. That goes for both users and developers.

You know your way and modern development is illogic, because in order to have the best version on all platform they should do just that.
Starting from the PC (more powerful) means having issue with consoles, it simple as that, or keep games exclusives so they don't have to optimize games on every platforms, but since we are living in the "modern era" and exclusives are "BAD" it is impossible because "everybody deserve to play these games".

 

[Crayon]

You know your way and modern development is illogic, because in order to have the best version on all platform they should do just that.
Starting from the PC (more powerful) means having issue with consoles, it simple as that, or keep games exclusives so they don't have to optimize games on every platforms, but since we are living in the "modern era" and exclusives are "BAD" it is impossible because "everybody deserve to play these games".

I don't have a way. I just said it's up to the developer and people have different opinions on it.

 

[twinspectre]

I don't have a way. I just said it's up to the developer and people have different opinions on it.

Developers starts with the more powerful hardware, and then they face issue of frame rate, the same goes if they do vice versa, because modern developers have 0 clue on what they are doing.

 

[Panajev2001a]

That's almost even more ironic. We saw from Xbox One that the fans and friendly outlets will just say it doesn't matter anyway. Crazy to let this kind of thinking influence hardware engineering so much.

True, but for a while they were saying it actually was better / more balanced / stronger.

 

[DenchDeckard]

It sounds like Microsoft had everything right apart from the memory configuration. Just like the ps3 before it.

Hopefully its a lesson learnt and if they do a project like this in the future they don't skimp out on memory.

Now they gotta support devs and put the work in themselves to assist imo. All games will work but will take extra development and MS should front that expense.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I have no idea what the supply chain and R&D looks like for those things, but you would think that if they could make a $350 XSX without a disk drive they would have? I just don't think that was possible at the time.

Sorry for the second reply to this. The point for me still stand, $349-399 price points could have either allowed for a reduced storage (so some money would come from the overpriced memory cards they sell) digital only XSX or a better specced XSS that would be closer to the XSS (MS not being able to differentiate them enough to do a pincher manoeuvre against the PS5 they were prepared against us a bit like well their problem ). In both cases it would have helped the full XSX which may even been the SKU they manufactured in higher volumes to limit how much they would subsidise the other model… the fact that their own XSX design and cloud choices made it impossible is again not the customers’ fault .

I would also feel less bad if they did not go around and spend $80 Billion and counting to buy third party publishers and make their catalogue exclusive .

$299 is a great price for a console... that's exactly how much the PS1 was at launch.

I understand, but it was almost 30 years ago… inflation does matter…

 

[MasterCornholio]

It sounds like Microsoft had everything right apart from the memory configuration. Just like the ps3 before it.

Hopefully its a lesson learnt and if they do a project like this in the future they don't skimp out on memory.

Now they gotta support devs and put the work in themselves to assist imo. All games will work but will take extra development and MS should front that expense.

The issue they will always have is cost. You can't produce a cheap console without compromise. The lower the price point the more compromised the system will be. If they repeat this next gen a 300$ system will be heavily compromised compared to a 500$ one. That's the issue with having multiple systems at very different price point. The problem is even worse if they launch them at the same time.

To make this easier to u understand. If you fixed the XSS memory problems what would you sacrifice to hit a 299$ price point? Maybe a hit to the GPU or CPU. Maybe reduce on board storage or even reduce its speed.

 

[Sorcerer]

I'm guessing that Microsoft bet so heavily on the cloud at the beginning of the gen that they thought the difference between consoles was not going to matter. Within a few years everybody would be subscribed to Gamepass, streaming through tv's and phones.
Also, I seem to remember at one point, Phil Spencer actually downplayed the X and touted the S as the console to get. (That might have been because it was easy for a consumer to get at the time).
Of course, the cloud thing hasn't worked out and probably will not for a decade or two, and now they find that the hardware really does matter and are in a bit of a bind. They have to remain in the console space.

 

[Lysandros]

As I alluded to in my prior mockup, they should have knocked a teraflop off the XSX with a smaller, cheaper die but with a faster clock and subsequent faster front end. Then add a teraflop or so on to the XSS. It'd have been cheaper and easier to get an extra teraflop on the XSS rather than the XSX. Then just bump the memory and bandwidth a little on the XSS. This way the gulf is smaller and the overall cost across both systems probably would have been cheaper.

I don't think that adding 1TF would change that much. Just bumping RAM to 12 GB with at least 288 GB/s of (unified) bandwidth would put the system in a much better state with moderate cost implications. But the original idea is faulty/hurtful for the console industry to begin with.

 

[Bernoulli]

Used market is flooded with these

Did his 2 posts disappear?

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

If there is a lot of hate around here towards the S Series

I have nothing against Series S, but I do agree with some comments I've seen...mainly the ones raising concerns that in 2027-9 developers will still have to get their games to run on Series S.

a console with the specifications of the Series S would have done very well in 2018 as a cross-gen console (based on RDNA1) at 400 dollars with full support from Microsoft until 2023 when a new console took over, possibly still receiving most of the game

Although Series S seemed like a great move from Microsoft, the numbers show that gamers are willing to pay a little more to get the best... if you add total PS5 sales to estimated Series X sales you see that Premium consoles sold 5 times more than the S series

They could/should switch 2026 onwards games to the cloud for xss.

Sales?
I'm pretty sure xss sold half if not more than half of the Series sales.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

I don't think that adding 1TF would change that much. Just bumping RAM to 12 GB with at least 288 GB/s of (unified) bandwidth would put the system in a much better state with moderate cost implications. But the original idea is faulty/hurtful for the console industry to begin with.

12 gigs of ram but more importantly 6TF's instead of the paltry 4.

 

[twilo99]

Used market is flooded with these

Did his 2 posts disappear?

That's how I got mine for under $200 on fb marketplace..

Yes, posts deleted..I walk a fine line lol

 

[bender]

Sales?
I'm pretty sure xss sold half if not more than half of the Series sales.

Do we have any data to back your feeling sup? Do we know if either SKU is profitable or which loses less per sale? The split data would be fascinating. Maybe the market has spoken and we'll see a new strategy for Xbox next generation.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Do we have any data to back your feeling sup? Do we know if either SKU is profitable or which loses less per sale? The split data would be fascinating. Maybe the market has spoken and we'll see a new strategy for Xbox next generation.

Not googling it right now.
I'm pretty sure it was at one point and anyone reading can confirm or correct my memory with data

 

[Bernoulli]

Do we have any data to back your feeling sup? Do we know if either SKU is profitable or which loses less per sale? The split data would be fascinating. Maybe the market has spoken and we'll see a new strategy for Xbox next generation.

you can check yourself all sales data says series s is more than 50% of sales
In some countries outside the US it's 70% of S

 

[bender]

Not googling it right now.
I'm pretty sure it was at one point and anyone reading can confirm or correct my memory with data

For the record, I'm not doubting you.