MilkyJoe
Member
It will never work like that, unless the stronger hardware is emulating the weaker machine. In order for the game to run natively on both machines, it would have to be two versions of the same game.
I really dont think so.
It will never work like that, unless the stronger hardware is emulating the weaker machine. In order for the game to run natively on both machines, it would have to be two versions of the same game.
Ehm, not exactly. Sure, every hardware manufacturer would love to keep one version of their device as long s possible. Gen 7 was an exception (huge losses at start, recession, strong sales very late)- once again, under normal conditions I expect PS5 to arrive in 2018/2019.
For me the essential question is now - what are MS's expectations + intentions with this strategy:
A) Do they really expect this will knock Playstation of it's throne?
B) or are they going for a Nintendo mentality: 'We won't go for a head-to-head competition with Sony in the console space anymore'. Meaning: Main focus on W10 and services and future Xbox=cheap PC is a nice bonus to have and to get people into their services.
They don't need to de two separate versions. Pc version already uses higher fidelity assets, higher precision effects and higher resolution/framerates than consoles, that can all apply to the new xbone.
In theory they don't even have to fine tune. Ms has been adding assessing tools into directx ever since windows 8.1 so your code can test the machine performance and scale the graphics item per item given the hardware capabilities.
Keep in mind Ms goal is to have applications and games running from high end desktop all the way to low powered cell phones, compared to that supporting scaling on the same magnitude of power is a piece of cake.
I agree, I remember the whole 720P vs 1080P a wee bit overblown.
In the end the price has to be right and have the games that are fun. Worked in the past
I'm not quite sure I understand how you object to my point. In the name of clearness, I'm talking about a specific scenario where Ms launches a Xbone.5 and sony finds itself forced to do the same. In that case, even if sony can steal Ms thunder back Ms will have driven the market forward.
Having your digital ecosystem for said generation carry over to the next is a godsend! If MS cracked that code then consoles going digital makes more sense then ever. That to me is the big draw. Telling their userbase you'll never lose the games and the eco is ever evolving is HUGE!
I really dont think so.
That might be true for some people, but I'm willing to bet there's a subset of people who, after learning that they can now play all (or most, whatever) XB1 exclusives on PC, will switch over.Or you prefer the convenience of a console, without the fannying about that comes with a PC?
It's not that big of a deal, really. I would really like it, yes, but it's not gonna make MS sell heaps.
I'm not quite sure I understand how you object to my point. In the name of clearness, I'm talking about a specific scenario where Ms launches a Xbone.5 and sony finds itself forced to do the same. In that case, even if sony can steal Ms thunder back Ms will have driven the market forward.
I'm a dev - I AM TELLING YOU, that's the only way this works. Especially for closed-box software development.
It actually is. When Sony 5 comes out and all your digital games you bought are worthless. Shit will hit the fan. That's one of the selling points of steam.
I guess we'll see what happens. I find it unlikely that the next Sony console won't be BC since they won't need additional hardware or emulation to run old games, assuming they stick with the architecture they have (and I can't see them changing that). Time will tell, but acting like it's a foregone conclusion that the PS5 won't run PS4 games is silly.It actually is. When Sony 5 comes out and all your digital games you bought are worthless. Shit will hit the fan. That's one of the selling points of steam.
I guess the idea is, it's not closed-box dev. It's UWA dev. The various XBox flavours just being UWA devices. Like iOS development.
That's what I've been thinking. The problem is how Turok 2 ran if you didn't own one of those expansion paks. It was terrible. So did Conker. Im afraid that some devs may abuse this and make a game require a upgraded unit to play their game.Well, it wouldn't really be too versions of the same game. Rather one version that runs in two modes (similar to something likeTurok 2 on N64, or Marvel Super Heroes on Saturn). If the developer chose not to, the I guess the result would simply be that the game would look identical on both versions of the console, with the upgraded model simply seeing better performance (unless the game has a stable locked framerate, in which case there would be no difference at all).
I guess we'll see what happens. I find it unlikely that the next Sony console won't be BC since they won't need additional hardware or emulation to run old games, assuming they stick with the architecture they have (and I can't see them changing that). Time will tell, but acting like it's a foregone conclusion that the PS5 won't run PS4 games is silly.
It actually is. When Sony 5 comes out and all your digital games you bought are worthless. Shit will hit the fan. That's one of the selling points of steam.
This ain't the past. DF has pushed specs to front and center this gen. This gen more then ever specs matter.
That's what I've been thinking. The problem is how Turok 2 ran if you didn't own one of those expansion paks. It was terrible. So did Conker. Im afraid that some devs may abuse this and make a game require a upgraded unit to play their game.
Could you imagine if Gears 4 was a pack-in and if you didn't upgrade, you couldn't play? People would go apeshit.
I guess the idea is, it's not closed-box dev. It's UWA dev. The various XBox flavours just being UWA devices. Like iOS development.
Sony wouldn't do it. They have no need to. They never did it in the past. The original Xbox was far stronger than the PS2, and Sony didn't even blink as it continued to sell millions and millions of units while games ran worse on their machine compared to the OG Xbox.
The fact is, 'power' is not something the console market values anywhere near as much as the core audience and console warrior crowd. You think Sony would throw away all of its sales momentum it's enjoying on the PS4 just because they are no longer the strongest console on the block? That's insane logic in the world of sales.
Consoles & PC have been different in this regard since 2004, when Steam launched. The fact is, console users do not care about BC anywhere near to such a degree. If they did, the Wii U would have done better, as would have the PS3, and the 360 would have never taken off on account of them not having real BC at launch.
Console users don't care about losing their library, as long as they have had enough time to enjoy their games on that platform.
I think you are waaaayyy downplaying it. Two things:
More powerful hardware matters and it's a selling point. Games look and play better.
Having your digital ecosystem for said generation carry over to the next is a godsend! If MS cracked that code then consoles going digital makes more sense then ever. That to me is the big draw. Telling their userbase you'll never lose the games and the eco is ever evolving is HUGE!
Except games will NEVER be that flexible as applications. Most games require rigorous amounts of specialization to work properly on a closed box. If any of the APU is different on the XO+ versus the original XO, I'm now working off a different code base.
Most apps do not use a heck of a lot of hardware capabilities, hence why they are so flexible on the hardware they run on. Games use a ton more power and capabilities of hardware.
Except games will NEVER be that flexible as applications. Most games require rigorous amounts of specialization to work properly on a closed box. If any of the APU is different on the XO+ versus the original XO, I'm now working off a different code base.
Most apps do not use a heck of a lot of hardware capabilities, hence why they are so flexible on the hardware they run on. Games use a ton more power and capabilities of hardware.
Your statement was:
I'm saying you can already.
And you're downplaying brand-loyalty and -awarenes. Like someone mentioned below just look at Gamecube and Xbox1 vs. PS2. This gen Sony got the best of many worlds:
- Playstation is a much stronger brand ww
- lower price at start
- more power
- no fuck-ups
This is a pretty plausible recipy for succes.
What MS is able to offer with an upcoming Xbox upgrade RIGHT NOW is just 'more power'.
I haven't read anything that suggests developing ROTTR or QB on UWA made the ports easier/instantaneous.Aren't they doing it now with their exclusives?
I am a console user, I absolutely care, and it pisses me off I have to keep old consoles lying about to play my old gen games. So speak for yourself.
I haven't read anything that suggests developing ROTTR or QB on UWA made the ports easier/instantaneous.
Well, this too.
Asking thirdparty spend more resource to make 2 version of the game and not allow them to sold separately, let's see how that's pan out.
Okay, you do. There are many other users like you in this market base who do. But I'm telling you right now - you're, unfortunately, the minority in this sentiment. The majority of the market you are in doesn't care. Heck, if they did, the Xbox One would have enjoyed an immediate and sustained increase in sales the moment BC was announced. And yet, here we are, and the needle hasn't moved.
I am a console user, I absolutely care, and it pisses me off I have to keep old consoles lying about to play my old gen games. So speak for yourself.
So the baseline assumption should be that nothing has changed until we learn it has?So maybe it is? We don't know at this point.
Brand loyalty and awareness is always in flux. Esp in the US.
Oh for goodness sake.Why do you think that? I'd expect the same Xbox disc to work on multiple different hardware revisions if they go forward with this.
Okay, you do. There are many other users like you in this market base who do. But I'm telling you right now - you're, unfortunately, the minority in this sentiment. The majority of the market you are in doesn't care. Heck, if they did, the Xbox One would have enjoyed an immediate and sustained increase in sales the moment BC was announced. And yet, here we are, and the needle hasn't moved.
Do you consider yourself a fanboy?Lol can't wait to see how many fanboys will cry when Xbox becomes more powerful than ps4. And some idiots think MS is getting out of consoles?? Lol wtf smh. Xb1 keeps getting better and innovating ps4 is still boring.
I think you are waaaayyy downplaying it. Two things:
More powerful hardware matters and it's a selling point. Games look and play better.
!
I haven't read anything that suggests developing ROTTR or QB on UWA made the ports easier/instantaneous.
As a dev, I assure you, nothing in your post reflects the reality of coding a game to a closed box system, or of modern game development. I have gone at length in this thread as to why this would be a nightmare for devs, and most publishers wouldn't even support such a model- they would just support the box with the larger install base and call it a day.
I'm a dev - I AM TELLING YOU, that's the only way this works. Especially for closed-box software development.
Eh, it wouldn't really be a case of throwing away sales momentum though, and it's also not a similar situation to the OG Xbox. The PS2 was weaker than the OG Xbox and Gamecube, but those were both new systems that were starting out at zero in comparison to a PS2 that had an install base of millions and a large software library, accessories etc. A new upgraded Xbox model wouldn't be in the same boat as the OG Xbox was. It would have all the software that the current Xbox One has, and developers wouldn't have to create games to sell uniquely to the subset of customers that bought the new version. It's not a 32X style upgrade where if only 500k users have the device then that's your potential addressable market when you ship a game that runs on it. You'd simply ship an Xbox One game like you do now, but also (optionally) make some graphical adjustments to cater for those with the more powerful model. Maybe you just use the same graphics profile that you use for the PS4 version of the game.. maybe you enable some graphical features that would others on be in the PC release. There'd be extra work involved in this, sure... but it's not the same as creating a whole separate port for a new platform, and you could realistically simply choose not to change anything at all. I think it's safe to assume that if MS releases an upgraded model, then it'll be ensured to at the very least run existing software equally to the base model... so developers can continue to only target that base model if they choose to. It won't be XB1.5 vs PS4, it'd be XB1+XB1.5 vs PS4, in the same manner that all iterations of the 3DS would be compared against the Vita.
Do you consider yourself a fanboy?
Each to their own and all that, but I'd say the majority think the same way.