I would say the GPU and the memory. Which are 2 of the most important things.
It was useful for people during lockdowns and with chip shortages but I think that need is gone now.
VFX Artist for Bossa Studios claims Many Devs have been desperately trying to get Series S dropped - it’s an albatross for next gen
- Thread starter Shmunter
- Start date
I would say the GPU and the memory. Which are 2 of the most important things.
It was useful for people during lockdowns and with chip shortages but I think that need is gone now.
I honestly don't see the point of this complain when 99.99% of the games are made to run on mobiles.
I think devs don't want to work with lower specs or at least have the choice to work only with the specs they wanted but they are being forced.
That is his point... BTW it is not his point it is the point from most devs even before this generation started.
After all minimum specs matter and hold back game development... so "next-gen" games are not truly next-gen at all because devs are forced to carry these mininum specs.
What I find particularly interesting is that maybe the strategy with Series S isn't working to the level MS envisioned. Having a $300 box Day 1 was supposed to create an explosion of new buyers and ramp up the install base much more quickly but...if recent numbers from Ampere and MS's own install base estimates for the platform holders are true, Series X & S combined are at 13.16 million, and at most would only be tracking ~ 930,000 ahead of 360 (and maybe XBO) time-aligned.
So this grand strategy's only netted at most 930K additional units sold-through time-aligned with 360. Technically, it IS still trending ahead of that system, and 360 eventually sold ~ 87 million lifetime but, quite a few of those were multiple units by the same people due to RROD. I'd say probably 10 million of those systems at least were re-buys due to RROD (some people like to say it's more but I doubt it as it seems RROD only mainly affected a couple of the earliest unit model SKUs). Also, 360 saw a huge explosion in sales thanks to Kinect, but what is the Kinect-like thing MS has for Xbox this gen? I doubt subscription gaming and cloud gaming are going to captivate the mainstream at any point over the next 5 years the way motion controls did back in their day.
So supposing Series keeps trending the way it does, and even if all the upcoming 1P hit as well as they can, I really do think without a dedicated streaming box (that Project Keystone), Xbox Series will probably land around 52 million - 62 million lifetime (keep in mind 360 was at 40 million worldwide prior to Kinect's launch), maybe 70 million due to any growth in the console market. But that's going to require as much of that upcoming 1P content to hit as good as possible, and stuff like Starfield already looks like it's not reaching the highs of the hype talk they were doing for it before the June Showcase. It's also going to require at least some of them to have a ton of mindshare in the zeitgeist.
Which I guess is why MS want their hands on IP like TES and COD, but as long as stuff like COD continue to release on PS5 this generation, it won't give the Xbox console the type of install base boost it maybe would've otherwise gotten. Anyway, just an aside WRT Series S's effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) in growing total Xbox install base I found interesting (though maybe it is having some help in countries like Japan, to offset any natural decrease in console sales and whatever decrease Series X on its own would've seen there without Series S).
So this grand strategy's only netted at most 930K additional units sold-through time-aligned with 360. Technically, it IS still trending ahead of that system, and 360 eventually sold ~ 87 million lifetime but, quite a few of those were multiple units by the same people due to RROD. I'd say probably 10 million of those systems at least were re-buys due to RROD (some people like to say it's more but I doubt it as it seems RROD only mainly affected a couple of the earliest unit model SKUs). Also, 360 saw a huge explosion in sales thanks to Kinect, but what is the Kinect-like thing MS has for Xbox this gen? I doubt subscription gaming and cloud gaming are going to captivate the mainstream at any point over the next 5 years the way motion controls did back in their day.
So supposing Series keeps trending the way it does, and even if all the upcoming 1P hit as well as they can, I really do think without a dedicated streaming box (that Project Keystone), Xbox Series will probably land around 52 million - 62 million lifetime (keep in mind 360 was at 40 million worldwide prior to Kinect's launch), maybe 70 million due to any growth in the console market. But that's going to require as much of that upcoming 1P content to hit as good as possible, and stuff like Starfield already looks like it's not reaching the highs of the hype talk they were doing for it before the June Showcase. It's also going to require at least some of them to have a ton of mindshare in the zeitgeist.
Which I guess is why MS want their hands on IP like TES and COD, but as long as stuff like COD continue to release on PS5 this generation, it won't give the Xbox console the type of install base boost it maybe would've otherwise gotten. Anyway, just an aside WRT Series S's effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) in growing total Xbox install base I found interesting (though maybe it is having some help in countries like Japan, to offset any natural decrease in console sales and whatever decrease Series X on its own would've seen there without Series S).
He is probably very "exited" to share how he will bring more games to more gamers.
Via XCloud
There is no nonsense.
S is crap and should not exist.
It's 100$ cheaper than ps5 digital. It makes no sense having so many drawbacks and being only a bit cheaper.
the 100$ is not worth market segregation and yet another verison for devs to prepare.
I wouldn't go as far to say that PC doesn't matter, because if more PS studios are taking PC as a target platform to bring their game to in shorter intervals (say 1-2 years, as Herman suggested as an idea in that interview), you don't think those studios are going to scope out the game with a minimum PC spec in mind?
I figure that won't be too big a problem as long as the PC minimum spec kept in mind matches the PS5's specifications more or less (accounting for headroom), but realistically how often will that be the case? There's the thing on my end where, if the PC min spec is lower in performance than PS5, could those studios just do what we've been worried can end up being the case with Series S, and scope the game out for the lowest spec and simply use the higher specs (including PS5, in this example) for framerate & resolution boosters? Or will they actually bite the bullet, take the effort and hardline PS5-level performance as the minimum spec and try scaling down for lower-spec'd PCs when the time nears for a potential PC port, however long that may take?
We still need to see in practice how that actually shapes out before saying this isn't necessarily an issue on Sony's end tho, I agree with you and everyone else saying that the min spec on PC can always be increased and rather liberally, so even if that acts as a bottleneck at some point, it doesn't have to remain the bottleneck for very long plus the min spec can change for the individual game. Those are massive pluses that won't be the case on the Xbox side because for the next 5+ years, your game HAS to run on a Series S at minimum in a way that isn't broken. That can end up being a lot tougher for devs on the Xbox side (including 3P devs) to deal with, and I wonder if it's even worth it considering Series S won't likely grow the Xbox install base significantly beyond the XBO's (like, I very strongly doubt they'll hit 360's LTD without the Project Keystone and that still has caveats).
BTW this is an old subject.
ID Tech guy already said lower specs indeed hold your game development years ago.
Like I said in the other thread I truly wanted to see how jaw dropping should be a game made specifically for RTX 4090 + Top Dog CPU without any lower hardware holding the developer design, vision and code.
If Sega were still making powerful PC-based arcade systems we'd of probably gotten that
Not gonna be possible to drop Series S when it probably accounts for at least 60% of all Xbox Series systems sold :/
Best case if indeed it turns out to be a real bottleneck, is for MS to get acceptance for streaming as high as possible. That way if devs are still demanding dropping Series S, Series S players can still play via xCloud steaming.
They're probably going to push Project Keystone very hard due to this; if it can increase adaption for game streaming, and considering Series S systems are already the majority of Xbox Series systems out there, just makes the switch easier.
That said though, I think this whole thing with Series S is just going to come down to the specific developer. You'll have some who feel it's a potato and too difficult to optimize for, too much of an anchor etc., and other devs who feel it suits what they're doing perfectly fine. I think most indie devs would fall into the latter, and the former will mostly be some 3P devs with some AAA games (not all, but some).
It is what it is.
Typical ms, dragging everyone down to their level.
Horrible machine whose hardware will look massively dated when this generation ends ~2028.
By that time it will be constraining developers big time.
Seriously sub 900p games in this day and age when TVs being sold are all 4k and 8k. Pathetic.
By that time it will be constraining developers big time.
Seriously sub 900p games in this day and age when TVs being sold are all 4k and 8k. Pathetic.
No, because Hermen said that their priority will continue focused on developing their games for PS5 only, and that PC will continue being secondary for them. That PC ports it's an extra on top that won't reduce their focus on PS5 or affect the quality of the PS versions.
Meaning, they will design and develop a game for PS5 as their top priority. And later to figure out the port. If the game requires too high PC specs then bad luck, PC user. They won't make the game worse to cover a bigger PC userbase.
They don't even plan to release all their games on PC, so can drop the whole PC port if needed.
We saw the recent SH2 remake announcement requiring minimum a GTX1080 even if it's a PS2 remake, may be something we'll continue seeing for UE5 next gen only games or next gen only engines for PS5. And this is a PS2 linear game with PS2 design etc.
In the future minimum specs will be higher for more really next gen type games, even if some of them with a more classic design and features will be able to be run with lower specs. And well, PS5 console exclusives won't need to run on Series S.
Maybe MS stops forcing devs to support with native games before this gen ends, which would mean that if you want to play newest games there you'd be forced to do it via cloud gaming at the 'consumer friendly' pricing of $180/year for renting it.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 13
Guest
Man, you seem very insecure here for some reason.
Don't consider the PC as the lower-end hardware here. Textures will always be created at really high resolution so that it can be downscaled for lower-end systems (including consoles). Shaders work on samples of some sort, so making that variable will also ensure all systems get a proper down port.There is no "later figure it out". You act like not a single developer will work on the PC in-house at the time they are making content for the PS5. Did any developer tell you that?
When has a game on the console required a top-end PC hardware in order to run equivalent to the console version? Again, you are talking as if the console is the more powerful hardware here.
Again, you sound very insecure here about a game being in development hell if they are trying to port the game to the PC platform.
I am not insecure at all. Yes, the PC is the lower-end hardware here.Man, you seem very insecure here for some reason.
Next gen engines will focus on streaming stuff very fast so I/O will be key, and current PCs and the ones to be available on a few years, even the top ones, will be below PS5.
And even right now, with games not designed to take full advantages of the new gen engines and I/O, games that are basically previous gen games with some minor bells & whistles (like Spider-Man or Uncharted 4), can't achieve the PS5 performance in most of the PCs that players have. In many of them can't even run.
So yes, in PS Studios games the PC port will be always the lowest end hardware because they will always target the majority of the PC userbase. And the majority of the PC userbase won't have harware powerful enough to achieve the same or better performance than in PS5, so they'll have to make the games scalable specially down and to run decently with worse specs.
Things like textures, LOD, shaders or resolution are pretty easy to scale down (even if some of these things take some time) and will be easier with next gen engines where a ton of related job will be automated and done by the engine on the fly.
To compile a new version of a console game requires a devkit and to test it needs a testkit. They can only be used in the office, even if some indies or during the pandemic they brought them home, or developed remote solutions like to compile remotely and test using cloud stuff like Parsec or Nvidia Now. And well, obviously an artist, musician etc didn't need frequently versions to test their stuff even if it would help.
The PCs of the gamers capable to run multiplatform games with better performance than high end consoles always have been a tiny portion of the PC userbase, often under 20% and even 10%.
Compared to the PCs that most PC players have yes, high end consoles are more powerful or get better performance in games. So console only games that get ported to PC have to be scaled down.
Maybe, but the backlash would be huge.
People would say that their Xbox hardware has been left behind by MS (yet again). Not to mention the number of people with crap internet/not near a data centre who would be screwed by regular cloud gaming.
Sadly I think we're saddled with this heap of shit for the rest of the generation.
Nah, there wouldn't be backlash: as usual Phil's PR team would find some way to twist it with some weird excuse and people would kiss his ass and would praise his 'consumer friendly' practices.
D
Deleted member 13
Guest
No it's really not. You can't even prove your claim with a single game made for all platforms.
This is nonsense man. It's already been proven that PCs can run streaming I/O pipelines for textures/geometry to run at least equal to next-gen consoles. Did that UE5 demo (2nd) run right past your view when it was released?
What does this have to do with anything? The PC has several configurations available with options to lower/raise samples, resolution, fps, etc.. According to your logic, those features should not exist since the games were designed to low-end PC hardware.
In other words, every single multiplatform game should have 0 options for higher performance or more detail in the visuals. Why is there an option for 16x anisotropic filtering (which is expensive to consoles) available for even the lowest-end GPU and NOT for the consoles? That is not a trivial graphics feature as it significantly changes the sharpness and clarity of textures and normal maps in a game.
According to your logic, the performance should be stuck at the lower-end GPU's capabilities. You are not making sense and refuting your own argument.
Show me ONE Sony 1st party exclusive game that has to be scaled down and released to the PC where the PS5 version is better looking?
You guys need to stop listening to these garbage VFX artists and absolutely unrelated people parading around like engineers and coders who know nothing, and are clearly lying for attention.
That's not how it works, and you know it, but nice try to move goal posts.
deck So you use that guy as fact but deny the principal programmer from ID Software as know nothing?You guys need to stop listening to these garbage VFX artists and absolutely unrelated people parading around like engineers and coders who know nothing, and are clearly lying for attention.
To run a game at 4k120 on Series S it should be made with minimum specs from 2 decades ago and the guy still grab about that
He won’t understand the issue if he created a game with PS2 graphics to run on Series S
that is exactly what next-gen programmers and VFX doesn’t want to be forced to do… they want to push next-gen games ahead… they want to push the industry ahead.
So you use that guy as fact but deny the principal programmer from ID Software as know nothing?
To run a game at 4k120 on Series S it should be made with minimum specs from 2 decades ago and the guy still grab about that
He won’t understand the issue if he created a game with PS2 graphics to run on Series S
Their games are clearly graphical powerhouses
Games – Nightdive Studios
www.nightdivestudios.com