• 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.

Opinion Analysis Hardware Without any details, I Feel 'Lockhart' Will (In Some Way) Hold Back The More Ambitious Next-Generation Games...

Oct 26, 2018
13,147
17,371
695
I don't think that is a fair representation and I'll point out why....

I think Xbox had the better launch games in general but Xbox marketing made it all about TV and wanted to target a bigger audience than us silly gamers.... cause our audience wasn't important or big enough for them.

In November 2017 the One X was revealed and didn't change a damn thing... because (although 2014 was ok) in 2015 the big games started dropping on PlayStation and still have not stopped....
We are gaming and enjoying the games while.... well I have no idea what you'd be doing on Xbox TBH.

BC... I frankly have too much stuff to play as it is, there's no reason to look at PS1, 2 or 3 games.

PS games already look phenomenal, I honestly don't know how they do it and the SSD will just let me enjoy the games more of my free time.

I genuinely hope MS deliver some great games for you guys because the hatred Xbox fans seem to have for us is crazy.... I'm in a PlayStation group on Facebook and they came in posting FF7 spoilers and it's my first playthrough of the game. It only builds animosity between us all..... and none of this is aimed to piss you off, it's all just based on my perspective as a biased PS fan...
If Xbox One had better launch games it goes to show they did care about gamers. Problem is many people didn't want a more media focused piece of hardware that does everything..... like PS3 which had BR.

And for 2013, people cared more for 1080p gaming.... which came from having a more powerful system. This coming gen it swings to the other foot.

X probably didn't do much, and neither did Pro. Gamers seemed to still prefer buying base systems at $100-200 cheaper than buy a bumped up system. Go figure.

I have too much to play too. MS first party games have much more variety than SP narratives, GT and Sony's 25th baseball game (closer to 30 if you count old ESPN Sony Imagesoft games) . And upgrading to Gamepass Ultimate for 3 years for $1 + tax gives me probably 100+ additional games including first party launches and recent third party games.

As for hatred for PS gamers, says who? I had a PS1 and PS2 myself. As an Xbox fan myself now, I just contribute to put more balance and perspective in forums instead of 20 year console warring of list wars, sales wars and other junk gamers like you bring up for decades.

As for spoiler bombing, that's trolls and fan wars for ya. Similar to 10 years ago when Sony fans started user score bombing 360 game scores on Metacritic to make it look like the game is a 3/10. Then Xbox fans retaliated. See? Goes both ways.
 
Last edited:

Bryank75

Banned
Jan 12, 2018
7,973
16,614
825
Ireland
If Xbox One had better launch games it goes to show they did care about gamers. Problem is many people didn't want a more media focused piece of hardware that does everything..... like PS3 which had BR.

And for 2013, people cared more for 1080p gaming.... which came from having a more powerful system. This coming gen it swings to the other foot.

X probably didn't do much, and neither did Pro. Gamers seemed to still prefer buying base systems at $100-200 cheaper than buy a bumped up system. Go figure.

I have too much to play too. MS first party games have much more variety than SP narratives, GT and Sony's 25th baseball game (closer to 30 if you count old ESPN Sony Imagesoft games) . And upgrading to Gamepass Ultimate for 3 years for $1 + tax gives me probably 100+ additional games including first party launches and recent third party games.

As for hatred for PS gamers, says who? I had a PS1 and PS2 myself. As an Xbox fan myself now, I just contribute to put more balance and perspective in forums instead of 20 year console warring of list wars, sales wars and other junk gamers like you bring up for decades.

As for spoiler bombing, that's trolls and fan wars for ya. Similar to 10 years ago when Sony fans started user score bombing 360 game scores on Metacritic to make it look like the game is a 3/10. Then Xbox fans retaliated. See? Goes both ways.
I was on 360 too...

I don't know which narrative will prevail this time, MS marketing has been on point but I still think people have a trust issue with them.... the lack of delivery on games towards the end of the 360 and now again on Xbox One is something people tend to remember, particularly the core gamers.

I know PlayStation has a reputation for single player narrative games but if you look, it is very diverse... FF7 remake is JRPG, Nioh 2 is souls-like with coop elements, Dreams is a creative game, Persona 5 royale is a turn based JRPG, Predator is Asymmetrical multiplayer and Street Fighter V Champion Edition is competitive multiplayer..... without going into the far side of the year.....

For me, that lineup is pretty incredible, even if I'm luke-warm on how Predator looks.
 

FireFly

Member
Aug 5, 2007
1,057
669
1,270
What a disaster..... the whole purpose of a new generation is to not have to think about old or less powerful hardware and focus on making a game that was previously not possible in some capacity.

That's why PlayStations strategy is better, it gets everyone in on the same floor and the devs making exclusives don't have to water down their ideas.... much more room for their imagination to go wild. As they've expressed numerous times about PS5.....

So, why would you pay for an extra flop and a half to play games that are outdated but look a tiny bit sharper???

Better spend that money on something that actually allows gameplay and design innovation. Leave Xbox in the past.
Exactly why Lockhart will have the same SSD and CPU. Because people care about innovation, not pixels, right?
 

Bryank75

Banned
Jan 12, 2018
7,973
16,614
825
Ireland
Exactly why Lockhart will have the same SSD and CPU. Because people care about innovation, not pixels, right?
I guess we will have to see.... I mean Series S is still the same kinda power at One X and they are releasing all games on One S.... so it's tied to 1.3 tflops at the minimum. It's not very exciting to me.
 

FireFly

Member
Aug 5, 2007
1,057
669
1,270
I guess we will have to see.... I mean Series S is still the same kinda power at One X and they are releasing all games on One S.... so it's tied to 1.3 tflops at the minimum. It's not very exciting to me.
Right but only for the first 1-2 years of the generation.
 
Last edited:

FireFly

Member
Aug 5, 2007
1,057
669
1,270
Refresh is probably year 3...
I don't see why that makes a difference, since games will still be designed for the base consoles (now without the One S). In fact the idea of a refresh only makes sense if it has a clear additive value proposition, like all your games at 60/120 FPS, or all your games at 8K.
 

Bryank75

Banned
Jan 12, 2018
7,973
16,614
825
Ireland
I don't see why that makes a difference, since games will still be designed for the base consoles (now without the One S). In fact the idea of a refresh only makes sense if it has a clear additive value proposition, like all your games at 60/120 FPS, or all your games at 8K.
It always will.... more or improved or next generation ray tracing or even faster SSD speeds, more compact, heat efficient designs with higher clocks etc.
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Sep 26, 2019
1,451
1,673
375
PS4 and XBox 1 tech will hold back Xbox series X and PS5. Simple fact, in a coule years they will have to be left because of the lack of power.

Just like ps2 and og xbox would of held 360 and ps3 back and so on.

If you dont think so, go play this gen games on ps3 and x360...... I can probably tell why you would want to disagree.....
 

quickwhips

Member
Jan 26, 2009
7,494
2,534
1,205
39
Yea no clue is what I expected of you. Lower CPU and SSD speeds = held back games. Git gud. Or do you think resolution is all there is to graphics? :messenger_tears_of_joy:
I think you have xbox derangement syndrome. You forgot to mention something about 3d audio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
2,090
8,660
450
As long as the SSD and CPU remain the same, the GPU and the RAM can be adjusted to 1080p targets.
 

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,389
4,687
460
I think you have xbox derangement syndrome. You forgot to mention something about 3d audio.
So THAT's what this is about. Someone bashing Xbox series S got your fanboy panties in a bunch. Aww. The concern is about series S holding back multiplatform gaming as a whole, so you can rest easy warrior.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: quickwhips

Mista

Dragonslayer
Nov 21, 2014
19,730
33,707
1,360
So THAT's what this is about. Someone bashing Xbox series S got your fanboy panties in a bunch. Aww. The concern is about series S holding back multiplatform gaming as a whole, so you can rest easy warrior.
The thing is it doesn’t make any sense. Did the vanilla PS4 hold back the Pro? Did the vanilla X1 and S hold back the X1X? The answer is no that’s why it is stupid to think that on next-gen when we have a proof already
 

BigLee74

Member
Mar 14, 2014
488
983
510
Scotland
How is it toxic when I and many others are concerned about this prospect?

Here you are insulting me and trying to say that it will be toxic when in reality, YOU are the one who’s being toxic right now, this is very weird. I don’t know where to start with some of you weird fanboys.
Just pointing out that I see right through you . Your last sentence there is a real doozy too, cheers for the laugh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,389
4,687
460
The thing is it doesn’t make any sense. Did the vanilla PS4 hold back the Pro? Did the vanilla X1 and S hold back the X1X? The answer is no that’s why it is stupid to think that on next-gen when we have a proof already
The mid gen refreshes were made specifically to play base ps4/xbone games at a higher resolution and framerate. The games were still designed so that they HAD to run on base processor.

If Xbox series S has a weaker processor and SSD, and it becomes a hit, then next gen games won't be able to make full use of PS5/Series X processors and SSDs because most gameplay features resulting from those components can't be scaled to lower hardware.. They need to target the lowest common denominator.

On the other hand, if it were just a GPU TF difference, then you would be right as graphics can be scaled to lower systems just like with PC gaming.
 

Mista

Dragonslayer
Nov 21, 2014
19,730
33,707
1,360
The mid gen refreshes were made specifically to play base ps4/xbone games at a higher resolution and framerate. The games were still designed so that they HAD to run on base processor.

If Xbox series S has a weaker processor and SSD, and it becomes a hit, then next gen games won't be able to make full use of PS5/Series X processors and SSDs because most gameplay features resulting from those components can't be scaled to lower hardware.. They need to target the lowest common denominator.

On the other hand, if it were just a GPU TF difference, then you would be right as graphics can be scaled to lower systems just like with PC gaming.
They did that though. They made games with vanilla consoles in mind but they still looked great on Pro and X1X. So what does that mean? We’re just creating a discussion out of nothing when we already have a livIng proof. I would understand the concern if we don’t have something to proof otherwise but as I said, we already have that for both consoles. People are just stressing about unnecessary things
 

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,389
4,687
460
They did that though. They made games with vanilla consoles in mind but they still looked great on Pro and X1X. So what does that mean? We’re just creating a discussion out of nothing when we already have a livIng proof. I would understand the concern if we don’t have something to proof otherwise but as I said, we already have that for both consoles. People are just stressing about unnecessary things
They only did that from a graphical standpoint. If we are talking pure graphics, then yes it can be scaled between different levels.
But I'm talking about gameplay/graphics features that could have been exclusive to high end hardware that will now have to be compromised to run at lower end hardware. For instance If the series S has a 1 GBps SSD (hypothetical) then games on series X will be limited to 1 Gbps streaming as opposed to 2.5 Gbps streaming since its something you can't scale between systems.
A lower end CPU will make things even worse.
 

RespawnX

Member
Oct 25, 2018
116
152
230
They only did that from a graphical standpoint. If we are talking pure graphics, then yes it can be scaled between different levels.
But I'm talking about gameplay/graphics features that could have been exclusive to high end hardware that will now have to be compromised to run at lower end hardware. For instance If the series S has a 1 GBps SSD (hypothetical) then games on series X will be limited to 1 Gbps streaming as opposed to 2.5 Gbps streaming since its something you can't scale between systems.
A lower end CPU will make things even worse.
I think Series S and Series X are going to share the same SSD layout, otherwise it's going to cause a chaos for the expansion cards. On the other side, Series S should be fine with 12 GB GDDR6 as the target resolution is much lower. Most of the cost savings will be from the die, which is going to be much smaller than the huge Series X chip. Wouldn't be supprised, if Series S launches with 500 or 750 internal SSD so match the 300/349 price point.

And even if MS ist going to start an SSD expansion chaos with different speeds on the consoles, it shouldn't affect the games that much, as the quality target for the weaker console is going to be much lower. A lower end CPU is also fine, as long developers can hit their 60 fps target. It's possible with Xbox One X, shouldn't be a problem with Xbox Series S. 120fps won't be the target for a 300$ console.

Modern engines can scale quality and density of assets and shaders easily, a PC 150$ GPU won't hold back a 1000$ GPU.
Basically all Xbox games are developed around multiple system compatibility and PCs, you don't sacrifice anything if you know your shit.

OP should grab a calculator, we know that Series S won't be weaker than 4 TF RDNA2, that's a 1/3 of 12 TF. 1/3 of 1800p is still around 1080p and not 720p. Also ray tracing "scales" with render resolution.
@OP linked video: Another guy which can't complete a sentence without a cut ... :messenger_astonished:
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,389
4,687
460
I think Series S and Series X are going to share the same SSD layout, otherwise it's going to cause a chaos for the expansion cards. On the other side, Series S should be fine with 12 GB GDDR6 as the target resolution is much lower. Most of the cost savings will be from the die, which is going to be much smaller than the huge Series X chip. Wouldn't be supprised, if Series S launches with 500 or 750 internal SSD so match the 300/349 price point.

And even if MS ist going to start an SSD expansion chaos with different speeds on the consoles, it shouldn't affect the games that much, as the quality target for the weaker console is going to be much lower. A lower end CPU is also fine, as long developers can hit their 60 fps target. It's possible with Xbox One X, shouldn't be a problem with Xbox Series S. 120fps won't be the target for a 300$ console.

Modern engines can scale quality and density of assets and shaders easily, a PC 150$ GPU won't hold back a 1000$ GPU.
Basically all Xbox games are developed around multiple system compatibility and PCs, you don't sacrifice anything if you know your shit.

OP should grab a calculator, we know that Series S won't be weaker than 4 TF RDNA2, that's a 1/3 of 12 TF. 1/3 of 1800p is still around 1080p and not 720p. Also ray tracing "scales" with render resolution.
@OP linked video: Another guy which can't complete a sentence without a cut ... :messenger_astonished:
Again you are only talking about the graphical features which I already said are scalable. I'm talking about gameplay design that's only possible on higher end hardware. You can't scale that back to run on lower end. A CPU does more than just help with FPS. Read prev post ^.
 

Sycomunkee

Member
Jan 21, 2019
3,055
3,525
435
Again you are only talking about the graphical features which I already said are scalable. I'm talking about gameplay design that's only possible on higher end hardware. You can't scale that back to run on lower end. A CPU does more than just help with FPS. Read prev post ^.
Gameplay is not typically handled by the GPU.
 

ManaByte

Member
Jun 10, 2004
28,238
27,637
2,445
42
Southern California
manabyte.com
Again you are only talking about the graphical features which I already said are scalable. I'm talking about gameplay design that's only possible on higher end hardware. You can't scale that back to run on lower end. A CPU does more than just help with FPS. Read prev post ^.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: hyperbertha

RespawnX

Member
Oct 25, 2018
116
152
230
Again you are only talking about the graphical features which I already said are scalable. I'm talking about gameplay design that's only possible on higher end hardware. You can't scale that back to run on lower end. A CPU does more than just help with FPS. Read prev post ^.
Of course it makes more than help width fps but it still can scale down and shouldn't be a problem to scale when Microsoft uses a waker 2,8-3 Ghz CPU with the Series S. Could be a real problem if they stick with the Jaguar cores.

The jump from HDD to SSD is much bigger than the jump from slower to faster NVMe. You can take a look at Star Citizen to get a feeling for a game with really huge scope. Mainstream game development won't reach this scope for the next years. You need a lot of procedural technology to deliver this tremendous scope and this kind of technology is damn complexe and expensive. That's why most of the games only use partial and simple implementation of procedural techniches.

There is no point of moving with 2000 mph (which could be easily done width a SATA SSD at AAA video quality) if the world is empty or over after 5 seconds. On the density and detail the GPU will limit the output much earlier than the SSD, even if you only use 1-2 Gbps NVMe. You could free up resources when you render native at 1080p and scale up with AI. There is where the things are going to be interesting but don't expect extensive use and scale before mid generation. I expect Sony to show possiblities a bit earlier, as they live in their own, closed eco system.

As I mentioned, if you want to get a feeling for "future" technologies, take a look at Star Citizen. They are far ahead of industry standards.



Diversity of procedural environments is nice in No Man's Sky 👍, but the scope is limited to the PS4 era.
 
Last edited:

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,389
4,687
460
That kind of downgrade kinda removes the series S's reason for existing in the first place don't you think? You expect games to have removed gameplay features on the Xbox series S to be common? Sadly, in most cases devs are going to just develop for the lowest common denominator.

Also what about more advanced features like complex AI routines only possible on a stronger CPU? When you take away something like that its no longer the same game.

If indeed the Series S is gimped in CPU and SSD then your example is the best case scenario where games can have gimped gameplay features on lower systems but its going to be an extremely rare case.
 

Marlenus

Member
Jul 29, 2013
1,596
456
565
UK
It depends entirely on how it is specced and their target price.

If the spec was
8c 16t Zen2 @ series X clock speeds
18 CU gpu @ 1.6Ghz
12GB GDDR6 ram on a 192bit bus. (Or 8GB on a 128bit or maybe a 256 bit bus if they use slower chips)
512GB SSD

Then the games could be the same on both consoles with the X rendering at 4k and the S at 1080p.

A spec like that would probably mean the soc is about half the size vs the series X and the power requirements would be much lower so a cheaper cooling solution can be used. Less ram is also less cost and obviously the SSD would be half the cost as it is half the size so all in I expect it could be $100 to $150 cheaper than the series X so $350-$400 region at a guess.

Enough cheaper to be a viable option but offering a worse perf/$ proposition to the X making the step up to the X seem that bit easier.
 

Gavon West

Member
Jan 12, 2018
2,053
2,210
375
you can always play MS games on laggy xcloud on your phone since all xbox games will have to run on that stuff as well.

Third parties devs must be loving all the different platforms they have to support now.
You realize devs won't have to do any work to bring their games to Xcloud, right? RIGHT????
 

Tamy

Banned
Apr 9, 2020
161
503
280
you can always play MS games on laggy xcloud on your phone since all xbox games will have to run on that stuff as well.

Third parties devs must be loving all the different platforms they have to support now.
wtf are you talking about?
 

vkbest

Member
Jan 23, 2017
864
707
400
Then the games could be the same on both consoles with the X rendering at 4k and the S at 1080p.
You forget later in gen resolution is dropped because developers want better graphics on the same machine. PS4 until 2 years ago, almost all games was 1080p, now AAA games are below 1080p or dynamic resolution.
 

Silver Wattle

Member
May 21, 2018
378
450
320
If it has the same CPU and same speed SSD, then no, it's aimed at 1080p and can dial down graphics if needed, won't hold back anything.
 

Boswollocks

Gold Member
Apr 19, 2019
7,651
12,158
780
Mars
Gamers have to pick:

The same style of games now with more fancy and more shiny graphics

Or

Retooled, next-gen only games.
 

martino

Member
Apr 25, 2013
4,671
2,258
640
France
Again you are only talking about the graphical features which I already said are scalable. I'm talking about gameplay design that's only possible on higher end hardware. You can't scale that back to run on lower end. A CPU does more than just help with FPS. Read prev post ^.
we know it's all about that fantasy game design only possible with 9gb/s sdd.
wake me up for it's here....

preview from future:
 

KAL2006

Member
Feb 6, 2009
11,373
681
1,195
UK
Series S is a genius idea. It won't hold back the generation much as it's targeting 1080p, heck if it struggles they can even do checkerboard 1080p. There are a ton of people that don't give 2 shits about resolution and just want to play the latest game with the latest features. I know plenty of people who bought a regular PS4 or Xbox One S for their 4K TVs and they don't care. Also there are plenty of people who also have small TVs and sit far that can't even tell the difference.

People will eat crow I expect Series S will outsell Series X when the generation is over. There are plenty of people who don't mind saving an extra $150 and take a hit on resolution.

As for devs having to optimise for this system, they are already doing this with One X and One S and different PC configurations, they will adjust and in fact they will benefit as more people will be able to play their games due to having affordable next gen system.

This is coming from a PlayStation fan and I am likely going to buy a PS5, but competition is great for everyone, if Series S sells great due to cheap price it can potentially cause Sony to drip the price of PS5 sooner.
 
Last edited:

Hendrick's

Member
Jan 7, 2014
7,137
9,381
745
Gamers have to pick:

The same style of games now with more fancy and more shiny graphics

Or

Retooled, next-gen only games.
Gamers can pick all they want, but the developers and publishers are the ones who make the games. We are going to be getting shinier versions of the same style games we have now.

If we are lucky, we will see some evolution in design 2-3 years into the gen for a handful of titles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boswollocks

Flintty

Member
Apr 24, 2014
4,186
2,601
840
UK
I’d be interested to see some meat put on this argument. What features do you think will be held back? Is there an example of game changing tech that has had a sizeable impact on next gen gaming previously?

If we’re talking Ray Tracing, faster loading times, pretty effects etc. these things can be scaled back/handled on lesser hardware. Show me something on PC that has a requirement that older GPUs can’t deliver on.

Ive said it before, the only thing that might be held back is some crazy innovative shit that none of us internet commentators have even thought of. Show me an example of that and I’ll believe you.
Otherwise, the world keeps turning and we keep getting newer prettier games and people with older tech get inferior versions.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
16,590
7,058
2,055
did the 360 or ps3 hold back the one or ps4? I think not
Agree to disagree, we were lucky third party developers moved away from 7-8 years old HW pretty quickly if not it would have dragged down adoption and experiences more (and we had some first parties pushing really hard on that too).
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
16,590
7,058
2,055
I’d be interested to see some meat put on this argument. What features do you think will be held back? Is there an example of game changing tech that has had a sizeable impact on next gen gaming previously?

If we’re talking Ray Tracing, faster loading times, pretty effects etc. these things can be scaled back/handled on lesser hardware. Show me something on PC that has a requirement that older GPUs can’t deliver on.

Ive said it before, the only thing that might be held back is some crazy innovative shit that none of us internet commentators have even thought of. Show me an example of that and I’ll believe you.
Otherwise, the world keeps turning and we keep getting newer prettier games and people with older tech get inferior versions.
Even without having to go in anything particularly detailed, more HW to support, more performance profiles to optimise for and test against, the less time you spend iterating on the gameplay, game core tech, etc... that is on top of discussing what you can do with 3x the performance and possibly more RAM.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
2,815
2,103
535
Agree to disagree, we were lucky third party developers moved away from 7-8 years old HW pretty quickly if not it would have dragged down adoption and experiences more (and we had some first parties pushing really hard on that too).
Same will happen this gen, they will release their games on new hardware asap. Old hardware will be abandoned very quickly it always happens
 

Flintty

Member
Apr 24, 2014
4,186
2,601
840
UK
Even without having to go in anything particularly detailed, more HW to support, more performance profiles to optimise for and test against, the less time you spend iterating on the gameplay, game core tech, etc... that is on top of discussing what you can do with 3x the performance and possibly more RAM.
Agreed, it’s an additional resource drain. But the concept of the game, including innovative ideas, would likely be firmed up by that point?
If we hear the devs have a great idea at the conception stage for something new and special but they can’t do it because of old hardware, then yes OP is correct.
Don’t get me wrong, I know nothing of game development. But a statement like the OP needs evidence to support it and despite (or because of?) my arrogance on the subject, I can’t see any.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
16,590
7,058
2,055
Same will happen this gen, they will release their games on new hardware asap. Old hardware will be abandoned very quickly it always happens
Lockhart would not be old HW... for the bit that concerns third party devs (first party ones have a different stance for the first two years).
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
2,815
2,103
535
Lockhart would not be old HW... for the bit that concerns third party devs (first party ones have a different stance for the first two years).
well the thing is when they develop games its not like they hold back, look at Crysis when that launched, lower spec PC didn't hold it back. it was playable on lower hardware. its nothing to worry about if there are 2 series xboxs
 
  • LOL
Reactions: hyperbertha

Marlenus

Member
Jul 29, 2013
1,596
456
565
UK
You forget later in gen resolution is dropped because developers want better graphics on the same machine. PS4 until 2 years ago, almost all games was 1080p, now AAA games are below 1080p or dynamic resolution.
And?

If in 3/4 years time the latest and greatest are running sub 1080p on the S and sub 4k on the X it does not really matter. Especially with a DLSS equivalent.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
16,590
7,058
2,055
well the thing is when they develop games its not like they hold back, look at Crysis when that launched, lower spec PC didn't hold it back. it was playable on lower hardware. its nothing to worry about if there are 2 series xboxs
You are going in circles here... but believe what you want phil_t98 phil_t98 .

The console model trades the great benefit of open and user replaceable HW and modding for consistent, curated, documented, and supported Dev Tools and API’s and fixed HW specs that all developers on that platform have available. HW is often customised to allow dedicated developers to take advantage of HW and tools that would be difficult to bring to a platform so focused on backward and forward compatibility like PC and modern smartphones are.
Conversely on PC’s game tend to be based on much higher levels of abstractions (you get less and less of an exact view on how the HW below you operates) to cope with the complexity of supporting so much HW diversity (and in some cases they mostly offload some of the optimisation to users in the form of deep configurability in their graphics and settings menu).
Supporting more and more HW leaves either a lot on the table unused (lack of critical mass) or generally waste R&D resources in extra development and testing... time that is take away from making the games better or more sustainable.

Having consoles becoming iPhone like regularly HW refreshes is the worst of both worlds: you cannot mod the software, you cannot replace or mod the HW, models tend to get replaced instead of falling down in price, and few to no developers optimise for any given model.
 
Last edited:

Bumblebeetuna

Member
Jun 23, 2008
6,420
1,457
1,210
Gamers can pick all they want, but the developers and publishers are the ones who make the games. We are going to be getting shinier versions of the same style games we have now.

If we are lucky, we will see some evolution in design 2-3 years into the gen for a handful of titles.
This. We’re at the end of this gen, what brand new experiences have we seen? It’s basically bigger more detailed versions of last gen titles. I don’t recall anything in terms of wild innovation.

The most original titles have essentially been smaller indie/AA titles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phil_t98