• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion Drama Clickbait [TechRadar] Xbox Series S is now a real threat to PS5

lostinblue

Member
Dec 22, 2008
3,005
169
1,045
Having the same Cpu doesnt mean you can just have same amount of enemies or characters ler scene as another hardware, weve already seen games with fewer pedestrians on series s than the other 2 consoles.
We've also seen the opposite. With cyberpunk 2077 XSS had more NPC's than PS5. And I'm not claiming this to be due to optimization.

Look, if the CPU is the same, then it's down to Level of Detail (LOD) and things like updating at half rate that can always be scaled back, it's been done for years and most people haven't ever noticed. You don't have to halve the count. That's a testament to bad optimization in itself.
Your Graphics fidelity answer is so ridiculous its laughable developers have always yearned for graphics fidelity in consoles in all triple a games its why you have games like uncharted and god of war and its always the same thing developers will simply make native ps5 and series x games as a base and then port back a rubbish port to series s they wont let a weaker hardware designed because of greed and bad decisions hold back their game design the same way with ps5s ssd what will happen is theyll design games with ps5's ssd in mind and then scale back for series consoles to avoid crashes and popin weve already seen this in mortal shell wherer series consoles have popin theyll just clean that up in mextgen games.
Sure.

But Uncharted and God of War are exclusive in-house games - if Sony platforms were underpowered they would achieve their vision regardless as they couldn't exactly make the game for Xbox. Are you telling me Microsoft themselves will have a problem supporting their smaller box because it's not able to showcase their "vision"?

As for mortal shell, if you judge a fish by it's ability to climb a tree you'll just conclude it's stupid. But why does Mortal Shell, a game that is not AAA and exists on last gen consoles have to be optimized with PS5 SSD in mind? Vision, again? Or lack of thereof?

Xbox Series S/X have an SSD as well, PC's too. It's just not the same SSD as PS5, but a massive improvement from last gen consoles nonetheless.
This has always been the norm developers always create games with the best console in mind and then make itterations for the badly engineered console we saw how they ditched the wii with triple a games even though the wii outsold both ps3 and 360, they also made the x360 their base dev comsole because it was powerful had similar ram with ps3 but was easier to code for and then port the games to ps3 and u always had a rubbish port on ps3 early on that gen until sony fixed the tools and devs matured with the hardware.
Wii was ditched because it was too shitty for cross platform. Sure devs had a special hatred for it, but the money wasn't theirs and thus, the decision wasn't theirs as well. You have to take into account that the jump from PS2/GC/Xbox was absolutelly HUGE. It was bigger than the jump from PS4 to PS5 is.

If it's architecture was more modern and it had feature parity with the rest of it's generation you would have seen way more software making the jump, despite the fact devs would still bitch and moan about it being underpowered. Also, another thing to have in mind but third parties had problems selling their software on the Wii most often than not, this was a hard market for them to guess demand.

Lead platform should be the platform most people own and play the game on, not the platform devs like the most or PS4 Pro and Xbox One X would have been lead platforms right after they launched. and of course it just might be harder to reach a certain level of performance on a lower performance spec/platform but if you treat it as an afterthought, well, you either take your time (and hire help, perhaps) or you're screwed. Might as well go the other way around.

For the first time in decades, Nintendo has third party support. It's not that they stopped making underpowered crap, it's that at some point even something underpowered and with a RAM deficit, can pull feature parity, some nice graphics and run some scaled back modern titles. It's suddenly "good enough" for a lot of these.

Now I'm not saying the Switch is good enough, but XSS probably is (for the people who'll buy it, that don't care for 60 fps or rendering above 1080p), if used properly.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DarkMage619

abel empire

Member
Feb 8, 2021
428
1,213
370
We've also seen the opposite. With cyberpunk 2077 XSS had more NPC's than PS5. And I'm not claiming this to be due to optimization.

Look, if the CPU is the same, then it's down to Level of Detail (LOD) and things like updating at half rate that can always be scaled back, it's been done for years and most people haven't ever noticed. You don't have to halve the count. That's a testament to bad optimization in itself.

Sure.

But Uncharted and God of War are exclusive in-house games - if Sony platforms were underpowered they would achieve their vision regardless as they couldn't exactly make the game for Xbox. Are you telling me Microsoft themselves will have a problem supporting their smaller box because it's not able to showcase their "vision"?

As for mortal shell, if you judge a fish by it's ability to climb a tree you'll just conclude it's stupid. But why does Mortal Shell, a game that is not AAA and exists on last gen consoles have to be optimized with PS5 SSD in mind? Vision, again? Or lack of thereof?

Xbox Series S/X have an SSD as well, PC's too. It's just not the same SSD as PS5, but a massive improvement from last gen consoles nonetheless.

Wii was ditched because it was too shitty for cross platform. Sure devs had a special hatred for it, but the money wasn't theirs and thus, the decision wasn't theirs as well. You have to take into account that the jump from PS2/GC/Xbox was absolutelly HUGE. It was bigger than the jump from PS4 to PS5 is.

If it's architecture was more modern and it had feature parity with the rest of it's generation you would have seen way more software making the jump, despite the fact devs would still bitch and moan about it being underpowered. Also, another thing to have in mind but third parties had problems selling their software on the Wii most often than not, this was a hard market for them to guess demand.

Lead platform should be the platform most people own and play the game on, not the platform devs like the most or PS4 Pro and Xbox One X would have been lead platforms right after they launched. and of course it just might be harder to reach a certain level of performance on a lower performance spec/platform but if you treat it as an afterthought, well, you either take your time (and hire help, perhaps) or you're screwed. Might as well go the other way around.

For the first time in decades, Nintendo has third party support. It's not that they stopped making underpowered crap, it's that at some point even something underpowered and with a RAM deficit, can pull feature parity, some nice graphics and run some scaled back modern titles. It's suddenly "good enough" for a lot of these.

Now I'm not saying the Switch is good enough, but XSS probably is (for the people who'll buy it, that don't care for 60 fps or rendering above 1080p), if used properly.
Your just writting long useless posts, just because you have the same cpu doent mean you can render similar amounts of objects on screen than series x and putting the ps5 in the conversation on a game like cyberpunk is totally pointless.

Developers have said for months ive even posted you the recent remedy dev "porting on series s is not as easy as just scaling resolutions and textures down" weal consoles have always existed and they always end up scrapped by developers nobody had the time to waste on a weak hardware that will hive him a headache. Theyll just focus on series x ps5 and pc thats the bottom line you can keep posting your gymnastics but they wont solve the issue ram is always the biggest bottleneck its the reason we have game generations the biggest improvement is always memory because it allows you to have more detail and mechanics that you couldnt do on previous gens, ps3/x360 had very good cpus and average gpus but the 512mb of ram they had made it impossible to support them after ps4 and xbone came out there was one year crossgen period and that was it, its the same again the series s will simply have horseshit ports and performance in nextgengames developers wont allow it to ruin their goals this was a huge mistake from microsoft they seem to get things completely wrong everytime lastgen it was tv tv tv xbones hardware suffered because of their decisions and now its series s for the life of me i never understood their management. Why not just make a digital series x like the ps5 to give developers an easy time cause this is a clusterfuck.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: DarkMage619

lostinblue

Member
Dec 22, 2008
3,005
169
1,045
putting the ps5 in the conversation on a game like cyberpunk is totally pointless.
So is citing Hitman 3, Uncharted, God of War, Mortal Shell...

I know what you said and I responded to it. We don't agree, that's it. But I prefer to explain why I don't agree rather than simply pointing out that I think a lot of things you've said are speculative and, well... "pointless", "ridiculous and laughable", etc. Your words, not mine.

We are too early into this generation to draw a lot of the conclusions you're trying to pull out of games that run better on PS5 (or PS4 Pro, for that matter).


I'll skip the rest of your post or I'll have to reply to it.

(NOTE: PS3/X360 had horrible CPU's as well, it's the opposite of what you're saying, their GPU's were really good for the time. The CPU's weren't)
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DarkMage619

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
3,627
4,939
505
It vould be a bad port but yes ps4 pro does have better settings and resolutions than series s and some games just perform similar the only big difference is series s cpu which let it hit higher frame rates but its basically a lastgen console thise rdna 2 features are fancy but its the ram and shaders thats a big bottleneck but lets wait and see

It does not. You must be comparing the 30fps mode on PS4 Pro that XSS does not support. The Pro runs performance mode (60fps) at base PS4 settings that are lower (draw distances, shadows, etc.) than the settings used in the 60fps mode (only mode available) on the series S. Both run the 60fps mode at 1080p. If a half framerate mode was introduced on the S, they could bump the settings there too. LOL

Also, the XSS is capable of an iq that the PS4 Pro simply isn't due to having more ram available and the SSD for faster streaming of assets. If you think these are equivalent systems I feel bad for you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DarkMage619
Jul 24, 2016
617
196
475
This is another variant of the argument that as the 'real" bigger and mid sized games first-party and third(console exclusive) come out Xbox Series S or X, will move.

This is of course obvious as for both the Series consoles and the PS5 the new gen has been very slow and early "major releases" have been uh, underwhelming.
 

thismeinteil

Member
Jan 6, 2020
376
996
300
It's almost like the X1 TV TV TV thing didn't happen and MS didn't spend years reversing bad policies.
They've been down the fuck up route, but definitely not the humble one. They constantly brag and make big claims about shows/reveals and games, instead of keeping expectations in check. Each year is going to be their biggest, yet it almost always seems smaller. They also can't help but take swipes at PS when they can, while Sony mainly ignores them. They even tried to use the "this is how to share games on PS4" thing from 7 years ago like 3 times, recently. It's obvious that still burns them.

I'll put it this way, a humbled Xbox wouldn't have revealed Halo Infinite in the state it was in, claiming it was great because it was 4K and 60 fps.
 

crozier

Member
Apr 18, 2013
2,163
322
630
I have a PS5 and plan to buy both a Switch and Series S. I’ll be gaming at 1080p this entire generation, performance mode on the PS5. I am most definitely not a casual gamer either. I just don’t see the need to game at 4K. I’ll take the extra frames thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Duchess

Radical_3d

Member
Apr 6, 2020
1,074
2,445
385
Morgan Freeman Good Luck GIF
 
  • Like
Reactions: OmegaSupreme
Mar 27, 2020
11,351
31,584
720
Uncharted bunghole
You clearly don't know much about PC gaming. 399$ pc will not be enough for games for AAA graphically demanding games. You forgetting that console is sold at loss. SS manufacturing cost high, its 299 coz MS selling it loss, same goes for X and PS5.

399 Gaming PCs are good for Minecraft and Fortnite but not other AAA games.

Plus low end pc hardware wont get same level optimisation from devs.

I actually built my own PC so I do understand the costs. I'm just saying it isn't expensive to build a PC that matches the XSS. It's not like it's going to cost you 2000$ to build a PC that matches it.
 

RevenantX

Member
Mar 15, 2018
2,080
2,781
685
I actually built my own PC so I do understand the costs. I'm just saying it isn't expensive to build a PC that matches the XSS. It's not like it's going to cost you 2000$ to build a PC that matches it.
You cant build good gaming pc at 399. Only a fool will build pc to match console price. Smart PC gamer always aim for higher spec machines than consoles
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Jun 1, 2013
8,542
2,736
770
They've been down the fuck up route, but definitely not the humble one. They constantly brag and make big claims about shows/reveals and games, instead of keeping expectations in check. Each year is going to be their biggest, yet it almost always seems smaller. They also can't help but take swipes at PS when they can, while Sony mainly ignores them. They even tried to use the "this is how to share games on PS4" thing from 7 years ago like 3 times, recently. It's obvious that still burns them.

I'll put it this way, a humbled Xbox wouldn't have revealed Halo Infinite in the state it was in, claiming it was great because it was 4K and 60 fps.
Exactly.

The continued fails at trying to get back at Sony for the shared used games just looks sad now. The first one with the Dicaprio pic was hilarious tho.

You would think that seeing how Sony was so quiet during the lead up into the PS5 would tell MS to just chill, do what they do and chill with the pr stuff. If everything works out for them, it'll take care of itself.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: thismeinteil

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
2,482
3,733
1,590
They've been down the fuck up route, but definitely not the humble one. They constantly brag and make big claims about shows/reveals and games, instead of keeping expectations in check. Each year is going to be their biggest, yet it almost always seems smaller. They also can't help but take swipes at PS when they can, while Sony mainly ignores them. They even tried to use the "this is how to share games on PS4" thing from 7 years ago like 3 times, recently. It's obvious that still burns them.

I'll put it this way, a humbled Xbox wouldn't have revealed Halo Infinite in the state it was in, claiming it was great because it was 4K and 60 fps.
A humble MS wouldn't come out with a game console with a TV and Kinect focus. They spent the whole generation reversing policies and trying to recover some of the good will they had during the 360 era. If they weren't humbled they would have doubled down on their original X1 focus. They lost tons of money and support because of their previous errors.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: thismeinteil

Neo_game

Member
Mar 19, 2020
651
665
315
Yes, I don't think the true test is this price point. Microsofts end game for the s is to sell it at 249 or 199. At those prices, it will sell no matter what.

By that time I would think slim version will be out on PS5 and SX. If I have to guess I would say PS5 DE slim will be the most sold console this gen.

If devs would stop removing the settings menu when porting to console it would actually be no different from buying a lowend graphics card for your PC.

But the problem comes when devs are guessing what the user want to prioritize. On console it’s always an optimization lottery. You never know what you’ll get. And with lowend consoles it becomes a big problem. Switch is obviously the worst but Xbox One S has been terrible too and I suspect Xbox Series S to be awful too. You just never know how the devs will scale down the game, could be resolution, graphics, framerate, anything. We have no idea and no control. So the best bet is to always have the most powerful box.

I agree with you. It is better to invest on expensive console on long run since you also get more storage. I do not think SS customers will spend some 200$ for adding more storage, that would be pretty dumb thing to do. SS I guess is good for BC games and monitor, 1080P users
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
Sep 15, 2005
2,010
1,907
1,680
Your just writting long useless posts, just because you have the same cpu doent mean you can render similar amounts of objects on screen than series x and putting the ps5 in the conversation on a game like cyberpunk is totally pointless.

Developers have said for months ive even posted you the recent remedy dev "porting on series s is not as easy as just scaling resolutions and textures down" weal consoles have always existed and they always end up scrapped by developers nobody had the time to waste on a weak hardware that will hive him a headache. Theyll just focus on series x ps5 and pc thats the bottom line you can keep posting your gymnastics but they wont solve the issue ram is always the biggest bottleneck its the reason we have game generations the biggest improvement is always memory because it allows you to have more detail and mechanics that you couldnt do on previous gens, ps3/x360 had very good cpus and average gpus but the 512mb of ram they had made it impossible to support them after ps4 and xbone came out there was one year crossgen period and that was it, its the same again the series s will simply have horseshit ports and performance in nextgengames developers wont allow it to ruin their goals this was a huge mistake from microsoft they seem to get things completely wrong everytime lastgen it was tv tv tv xbones hardware suffered because of their decisions and now its series s for the life of me i never understood their management. Why not just make a digital series x like the ps5 to give developers an easy time cause this is a clusterfuck.

Wake up and smell the coffee, the s has plenty of ram, cpu horsepower, ssd speed and gpu for a 1080p machine that the huddled masses can enjoy. Bla bla bla too weak, bla bla bla.........Joe casual gamer could give two craps if his 1080p game is 30fps or 60fps, or if the resolution sometimes drops to 900p.

If you still don't understand why they didn't make a digital X, you don't understand basic math - they cost more to build. The end goal here is a $249-$199 sustainable price, not in 5 years, but late this year or sometime next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarkMage619

lostinblue

Member
Dec 22, 2008
3,005
169
1,045
What a silly comparison. XSS and XSX are running One X code. PS5 is running PS4 code.
XSS doesn't run Xbox One X code. Not enough RAM:

-> https://www.videogameschronicle.com...le-to-run-xbox-one-x-content-its-claimed/amp/

It either runs code written specifically for it, or does fallback on Xbox One code and assets with some LOD changes.

I wasn't claiming it is a good comparison though, cyberpunk is a clusterfuck and I don't even know if in it's current state, if still applies.

My point is that it's too soon to compare apples to apples and come to any meaningful conclusion. IMO other examples are equality bad/potentially misleading.
 
Last edited:

Negotiator101

Member
Jan 24, 2021
792
905
300
It's not too difficult for Sony to quickly launch their own subscription service. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Sony had one being readied in the background right now. Put all released titles on there and put new titles on after 6 months etc
You have no idea what logistics are required with publishers and developers to create a service like this. Microsoft have been running this for years now and have around 20 million subscribers, that's a huge pull for a publisher to get their game on the service. To say Sony could just ready a service like this and with this level of quality titles from day 1 is absurd.

"Its not too difficult", you mind sharing with all of us how easy it is, since that's a pretty bold statement?
 

bender

Bending Rodríguez (22, 1,729)
Apr 12, 2010
9,300
13,679
1,420
XSS doesn't run Xbox One X code. Not enough RAM:

-> https://www.videogameschronicle.com...le-to-run-xbox-one-x-content-its-claimed/amp/

It either runs code written specifically for it, or does fallback on Xbox One code and assets with some LOD changes.

I wasn't claiming it is a good comparison though, cyberpunk is a clusterfuck and I don't even know if in it's current state, if still applies.

My point is that it's too soon to compare apples to apples and come to any meaningful conclusion. IMO other examples are equality bad/potentially misleading.

Then it runs Xbox One code. It's still a silly comparison to showcase what any of the new consoles are capable of.
 
Mar 27, 2020
11,351
31,584
720
Uncharted bunghole
You cant build good gaming pc at 399. Only a fool will build pc to match console price. Smart PC gamer always aim for higher spec machines than consoles

Not really unless your gaming on a budget and you want to go with the advantages that PC offers. But we are talking about matching the XSS not the XSX here so it really isn't that expensive.
 

skneogaf

Member
Aug 31, 2017
1,271
1,725
455
A lot of people on here seem to believe that the majority of gamers have gaming pc's. In my opinion/experience that is false.

I speak to around 15 people on a regular basis about video games and I think 4 maybe 5 have a pc good enough to play games and do so.

Looking at my steam friend list compared to ps or xbox friends list is a way bigger margin.

So in my opinion playstation 5 and either series S or X for the majority of my friends if xbox can utilise their studio's to have unmissable console exclusives.

The price of the xbox series x and the ps5 together is still way cheaper than a gaming pc from scratch that will keep up with either console.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iced Arcade

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Jun 1, 2013
8,542
2,736
770
Yes, I don't think the true test is this price point. Microsofts end game for the s is to sell it at 249 or 199. At those prices, it will sell no matter what.
Oh, so now $299 is not low enough? Funny because all we heard before the new consoles launched is that MS had Sony in a tough spot because of the $299 price. Maybe some are starting see reality with this too.....

It should sell no matter what right now...isnt the regular Switch the exact same price?

Also...now that MS is marketing it as a 1080p console, we just gonna forget what the initial pr was....cool.
 
Last edited:

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
2,482
3,733
1,590
Not really unless your gaming on a budget and you want to go with the advantages that PC offers. But we are talking about matching the XSS not the XSX here so it really isn't that expensive.
Just curious. Care to price out the PC that matches XSS specs? Needs a Zen2 CPU, an SSD, a GPU capable of raytracing, an OS, and a controller. Your budget is $299.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: dcmk7

Warnen

Can he swing from a thread? Take a look overhead / Hey, there, there goes the Spider-Man
Sep 24, 2005
5,352
4,922
1,850
42
Sea lab
With so many ps5 ports having a hard time with 4k maybe the Sereis S has more in common with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcmk7

dcmk7

Member
Mar 25, 2020
501
1,487
350
You have no idea what logistics are required with publishers and developers to create a service like this. Microsoft have been running this for years now and have around 20 million subscribers, that's a huge pull for a publisher to get their game on the service. To say Sony could just ready a service like this and with this level of quality titles from day 1 is absurd.

"Its not too difficult", you mind sharing with all of us how easy it is, since that's a pretty bold statement?
PS Plus has roughly 50 million subscribers, which they could use to their advantage and potentially tie it into that for a short introductory period of time, I could imagine would be attractive for publishers. And a way to gain good traction.

It's all theoretical obviously and it sure would be a lot of work, but it almost certainly would have thought about over at Sony. If they haven't then that would be beyond complacent.
 

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,364
4,170
350
PS Plus has roughly 50 million subscribers, which they could use to their advantage and potentially tie it into that for a short introductory period of time, I could imagine would be attractive for publishers. And a way to gain good traction.

It's all theoretical obviously and it sure would be a lot of work, but it almost certainly would have thought about over at Sony. If they haven't then that would be beyond complacent.
Exactly. PS Now is not the Gamepass competitor (it can't be), and I think Sony has realized this as well.

However, PS Plus can be that competitor, and it already has a lead. The quality of free monthly games is already through the roof. In the last 6 months, they have released 5 new games on the service day and date.

Imagine if Sony takes a few more steps this year to make it even more tempting (e.g., get EA Play free with PS+, combine PS Now downloadable library, double the size of PS+ collection, etc.). PS+ can become a very good competitor of GamePass, and if it does it will already have a solid lead of roughly 30 million subscribers.

Having said that, GP growth pace is phenomenal. Plus, the higher price point will have its competitive advantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZywyPL

dvdvideo

Member
Sep 15, 2005
2,010
1,907
1,680
Oh, so now $299 is not low enough? Funny because all we heard before the new consoles launched is that MS had Sony in a tough spot because of the $299 price. Maybe some are starting see reality with this too.....

It should sell no matter what right now...isnt the regular Switch the exact same price?

Also...now that MS is marketing it as a 1080p console, we just gonna forget what the initial pr was....cool.

It may have been an initial target, but we all know consoles drop over time. Keeping the parts cost low gives then additional flexibility at the start if a console cycle. As to the switch price, there is a reason why the switch lite exists, did you forget about that one?

As to the 1440p vs 1080p marketing, everyone complaining about that is a bunch of crap.
All consoles, including ps5 and series X make claims above thier true punching weight.
The ps5/series x don't do true 4k at 60fps all the time, nor do they do they advertised 8k.
Hold all consoles to the same bs standard if your going to do this.
 

dcmk7

Member
Mar 25, 2020
501
1,487
350
It may have been an initial target, but we all know consoles drop over time. Keeping the parts cost low gives then additional flexibility at the start if a console cycle. As to the switch price, there is a reason why the switch lite exists, did you forget about that one?

As to the 1440p vs 1080p marketing, everyone complaining about that is a bunch of crap.
All consoles, including ps5 and series X make claims above thier true punching weight.
The ps5/series x don't do true 4k at 60fps all the time, nor do they do they advertised 8k.
Hold all consoles to the same bs standard if your going to do this.
Suspect the 8k to be more about streaming TV shows.

Haven't personally seen 8k being displayed in any marketing for the two respective consoles.

The XSS however...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: thismeinteil

Clear

Deer/Dur
Feb 2, 2009
12,495
7,391
1,365
The problem with series S is the size of the drive, and expanding storage basically doubling the cost of the system.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: dcmk7

RevenantX

Member
Mar 15, 2018
2,080
2,781
685
Not really unless your gaming on a budget and you want to go with the advantages that PC offers. But we are talking about matching the XSS not the XSX here so it really isn't that expensive.
Bro. My friend runs PC hardware shop. I know what im talking about. When u build SX like PC at same price which can run stuff better or same as these consoles, let me know
 

dcmk7

Member
Mar 25, 2020
501
1,487
350
The problem with series S is the size of the drive, and expanding storage basically doubling the cost of the system.
Absolutely.

Was very stingey of Microsoft. Especially when factor in that with each generation that's passed the game install footprints get bigger and bigger.
 

lostinblue

Member
Dec 22, 2008
3,005
169
1,045
The problem with series S is the size of the drive, and expanding storage basically doubling the cost of the system.
I can't imagine M$ not bumping it to 1TB within 1-2 years. And possibly doing it with a faster SSD and/or faster data bus.

Specially as optimized PS5 games have been showing an edge in those areas, and NAND prices have been dropping lately and it oversupply was forecast.
Absolutely.

Was very stingey of Microsoft. Especially when factor in that with each generation that's passed the game install footprints get bigger and bigger.
I understand why it happened, they were penny counting and assumed games could actually get smaller this gen, seeing SSD's allow to nulify the advantages of file repetition for seek times. The capability for selective installs was probably also conceived thinking it could be used to avoid games of Xbox Series S to take as much space as Xbox Series X.

I don't know if at this point there's any discrepancy on native games between these two consoles, but I'm curious.

Regardless, yes, 512GB is certainly too small and their expansion method has the potential to be horrible if prices don't drop.

They should offer inexpensive NVME adapters, fast. (or pray that someone does)
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
Sep 15, 2005
2,010
1,907
1,680
Suspect the 8k to be more about streaming TV shows.

Haven't personally seen 8k being displayed in any marketing for the two respective consoles.

The XSS however...

You can't tell what it's for from the box......and its right on front for ps5.
And that doesn't address the 4k / 60 arguement at all.

Also of note, even if it doesn't do 8k games, it actually doesn't even do 8k media to date......

 

dcmk7

Member
Mar 25, 2020
501
1,487
350
You can't tell what it's for from the box......and its right on front for ps5.
And that doesn't address the 4k / 60 arguement at all.

Also of note, even if it doesn't do 8k games, it actually doesn't even do 8k media to date......


They are both capable of 8k output just not enabled.

No media content or any games support the format just yet.
 

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
2,482
3,733
1,590
The problem with series S is the size of the drive, and expanding storage basically doubling the cost of the system.
No matter how many time people bring this up it does not change that the XSS can put any game in to cold storage on an inexpensive external drive and move it back when time to play. Saving the trouble of re-downloading the game. This basic feature is missing from more expensive consoles. The cost is NOT doubled.

It may have been an initial target, but we all know consoles drop over time. Keeping the parts cost low gives then additional flexibility at the start if a console cycle. As to the switch price, there is a reason why the switch lite exists, did you forget about that one?

As to the 1440p vs 1080p marketing, everyone complaining about that is a bunch of crap.
All consoles, including ps5 and series X make claims above thier true punching weight.
The ps5/series x don't do true 4k at 60fps all the time, nor do they do they advertised 8k.
Hold all consoles to the same bs standard if your going to do this.
Excellent point. The XSS will ALWAYS be cheaper than the other more powerful consoles and it will drop in price like all non Nintendo consoles do. Also no matter how many people point out it's in stock in Luxembourg its out of stock in the largest market in the world. When there is a glut of stock in America we can talk about how much a failure it is sales wise.

The other interesting thing is does the PS5 do 1440p? I thought I read it only does 1080p and 4k natively.


Yeah I didn't imagine it. Perhaps before we point out how the XSS doesn't do 1440p we should ensure more expensive consoles can.
 
  • Like
  • LOL
Reactions: DavidGzz and dcmk7

DavidGzz

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2018
2,346
2,739
615
Next gen games will have to be compromised if SS is the lead platform. SX and PS5 will be treated as mid gen upgrade
🤦‍♂️

Tbh, I'd be good with this. Instead of devs pushing the XSX and PS5 just to have to go back to 30fps shit, we have 30fps shit on XSS and 60 on the XSX and PS5. I'll drop down to 1080p for that.
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
Sep 15, 2005
2,010
1,907
1,680
An added log to the "casual" gamer arguement.

The switch from atari to 8 bit - large jump
The switch from 8 bit to 16 bit - large jump
The switch from 16 bit to 32 bit/3d - large jump
And so on with ps1 to ps4 / Xbox to Xbox one

But I would content, of all the generations, this one offers perhaps the smallest visible jump for the casual gamer of any in recent memory.
 

Neo_game

Member
Mar 19, 2020
651
665
315
Tbh, I'd be good with this. Instead of devs pushing the XSX and PS5 just to have to go back to 30fps shit, we have 30fps shit on XSS and 60 on the XSX and PS5. I'll drop down to 1080p for that.

We have to wait and see but I will not be surprised if GTA6 or RDR3 also come with a option of 60fps performance mode. If that is not possible I guess it is time for midgen upgrade or new consoles ?