Xbox just price hiked Series X by $100 and nobody is talking about it?

[mibu no ookami]

At the end of the day this comes down to conditioning.

They're prepping people for a more expensive "Xbox" when the time comes. However, it will largely be a PC box.

It'll have at least 2tb, but when it is 700-800 dollars, they'll point to this model to say, well this is more advanced.

I expect we'll see this launch in 2026, but possibly 2025 in time for GTA.

 

[Polyh3dron]

The Wii. It sold gangbusters.

I'll say it again: Did I miss where Nintendo released a next generation console that was a massive downgrade from their previous generation one? Are you implying that the Wii was a downgrade from the GameCube? Hell, you could play GameCube games on the launch model.

1080p@120fps with RT and every game at ultra settings. There is a difference between 1080p and 4k, a noticeable difference. Not as noticeable as half price hardware though.

I'll say it again: crippling the performance of a next-generation console will not make game development cheaper or make the games get done quicker.

 

[Sircaw]

Yeah R+C looks and plays incredible. Horizon, while stunning, is more impressive on PS4 because of how old that machine is, if that makes sense.
Three years in and only one game has shown what the PS5 can do? It ain't enough, chief. Not for £450. Call me tight but

Demon souls is really nice?

 

[Danja]

The first generation where early buyers weren't screwed over.

 

[xollowsob]

I'll say it again: Did I miss where Nintendo released a next generation console that was a massive downgrade from their previous generation one? Are you implying that the Wii was a downgrade from the GameCube? Hell, you could play GameCube games on the launch model.

The Wii wasn't an upgrade from a GameCube. If a console keeps the same level of power across a generation, it's a downgrade.

I'll say it again: crippling the performance of a next-generation console will not make game development cheaper or make the games get done quicker.

How will it not? One of the big complaints of why games take longer is because of high-res 4k textures. It's not crippling performance. You're presuming that 4k is must requirement for gaming, it isn't, at all. If it was, indie games, switch games, any pixel art games wouldn't have sold any.

 

[Kokoloko]

That Series S at 350 with the PS5 digital currently at 400 (and currently a year of premium Netflix)
Then dropping a 2TB Series X at 600 with some random pollock paint with the upcoming Pro??

Lol this is literally it

 

[Polyh3dron]

A bigger problem, why buy a PS5pro? What game requires that extra power?

Final Fantasy VII Rebirth could use it. The performance mode as it is looks insanely blurry and seems like some really shitty FSR-like thing is being used. Final Fantasy XVI because its performance mode can't hold 60 FPS.

 

[Dick Jones]

Can anyone explain the Series X Sku to me?

We will now have a discless version that is 449 with one TB of space.

We have a disc version that is 599 with two TB of space.

Logically, shouldn't the disc version be a TB and the 2TB be the discless version?

Am I overthinking this?

 

[Polyh3dron]

The Wii wasn't an upgrade from a GameCube. If a console keeps the same level of power across a generation, it's a downgrade.

How will it not? One of the big complaints of why games take longer is because of high-res 4k textures. It's not crippling performance. You're presuming that 4k is must requirement for gaming, it isn't, at all. If it was, indie games, switch games, any pixel art games wouldn't have sold any.

You are advocating for a theoretical PlayStation 6 to have significantly weaker specs than the PS5. And I will rephrase since you've decided to turn this into a semantics war.

Has a game console manufacturer ever made a new generation of a home console to replace an older generation that is less powerful? What would be the incentive for the installed user base to downgrade to this next generation?

By mentioning "high-res 4k textures" you seem to have a misunderstanding of the relationship between texture assets in a game and the display resolution of said game. You can use a 120x120 texture or a 2000x2000 one in a game running at 480p, 1080p, 1440p, and 4K equally. Game development is a radically different thing now than it used to be. Artists are more accustomed to working with far more user friendly development tools. No one is writing any assembly code anymore. The budget is not going to magically get smaller, and the dev time won't get shorter by running a game at a lower resolution and frame rate. There is a general expectation from game consumers of the fidelity of the games they will spend their time on, and cutting corners to make games cheaper to make and generally worse, is not going to be a recipe for success.

 

[Polyh3dron]

Can anyone explain the Series X Sku to me?

We will now have a discless version that is 449 with one TB of space.

We have a disc version that is 599 with two TB of space.

Logically, shouldn't the disc version be a TB and the 2TB be the discless version?

Am I overthinking this?

I think you're assuming the disc-based version would not require the use of the internal storage while playing disc-based games. Under this assumption, the internal storage would not need to be utilized as heavily.

In reality, physical copies of PlayStation and Xbox games are fully installed on to local storage these days. After that process and while the game remains installed on the console's local storage, the only use for the disc is to act as a cumbersome DRM key.

Either way, this is a bad value proposition IMO. You can buy a disc-based PS5 for cheaper and then decide for yourself how much additional storage you want, and then buy a non-proprietary M.2 NVME SSD.

 

[Dick Jones]

I think you're assuming the disc-based version would not require the use of the internal storage while playing disc-based games. Under this assumption, the internal storage would not need to be utilized as heavily.

In reality, physical copies of PlayStation and Xbox games are fully installed on to local storage these days. After that process and while the game remains installed on the console's local storage, the only use for the disc is to act as a cumbersome DRM key.

Either way, this is a bad value proposition IMO. You can buy a disc-based PS5 for cheaper and then decide for yourself how much additional storage you want, and then buy a non-proprietary M.2 NVME SSD.

I know the game loads onto the console but wouldn't it be quicker to install via Disc than downloading time wise?

 

[Polyh3dron]

I know the game loads onto the console but wouldn't it be quicker to install via Disc than downloading time wise?

Most modern ISP speeds are faster than a 6x Blu-ray disc read speed which is 216 Megabits.

 

[FatKaz]

Can anyone explain the Series X Sku to me?

We will now have a discless version that is 449 with one TB of space.

We have a disc version that is 599 with two TB of space.

Logically, shouldn't the disc version be a TB and the 2TB be the discless version?

Am I overthinking this?

Yeah would make sense the digital version to have more storage.

They are probably taking a bath on the cost of the digital, and couldn't stomach more loss with additional storage.

 

[xollowsob]

You are advocating for a theoretical PlayStation 6 to have significantly weaker specs than the PS5. And I will rephrase since you've decided to turn this into a semantics war.

Has the console industry been in this position before? I've given you examples of comparatively weaker specs or at worst on par. If that's not enough then agree to disagree.

By mentioning "high-res 4k textures" you seem to have a misunderstanding of the relationship between texture assets in a game and the display resolution of said game. You can use a 120x120 texture or a 2000x2000 one in a game running at 480p, 1080p, 1440p, and 4K equally. Game development is a radically different thing now than it used to be. Artists are more accustomed to working with far more user friendly development tools. No one is writing any assembly code anymore. The budget is not going to magically get smaller, and the dev time won't get shorter by running a game at a lower resolution and frame rate.

Then how were games made quicker last gen and the gen before that, if not using lower Res or whatever, assets? Going forwards isn't always progress. Sometimes stopping or going backwards Is the best foot forwards.

There is a general expectation from game consumers of the fidelity of the games they will spend their time on, and cutting corners to make games cheaper to make and generally worse, is not going to be a recipe for success.

This is bullshit and you know it. Based on this gen, those consumers have whole heartedly rejected games of higher graphical fidelity, leading to some huge bombs. Most games that succeed aren't those of super high graphics. The switch has sold 140+ million consoles and 1-1.5 billion pieces of software.
Where as Xbox, with the most powerful console in the world (their words) has sold like shit and their games have been complete flops.
Hellblade 2, arguably the best looking game this gen, flopped. Horizon and GoW, while great games, sold more on PS4, a lower powered machine than PS5.
Black ops 6 is cross gen.
Xbox and playstation owners aren't adopting the next gen at the rate one would expect.

The industry is struggling and suffering to try and appease this phantom market who want super realistic graphics, when the vast majority of those games fail, big time.
Meanwhile, indie games, low Res/low graphics games and the switch are cleaning house and making billions.
Mobile games make more than the pc and console industry combined. Yet they're shite graphically.

If you work in the industry mate, your head is being filled full of boardroom lies and bean counters fantasies.

 

[Polyh3dron]

Then how were games made quicker last gen and the gen before that, if not using lower Res or whatever, assets? Going forwards isn't always progress. Sometimes stopping or going backwards Is the best foot forwards.

Crunch culture was a big part of it. It still happens now, but is nowhere near as bad as it used to be. COVID also threw a monkey wrench into literally everything and the effects are still being felt from that.

Nintendo can keep their budgets lower because they have fostered a general expectation of smaller scope of their games for the most part which is accepted by their user base, and they hardly pay their developers anything at all compared to what they get paid in North America.

Inflation is a real thing, and the cost of living is insanely high where most game development studios are based.

 

[xollowsob]

Crunch culture was a big part of it. It still happens now, but is nowhere near as bad as it used to be. COVID also threw a monkey wrench into literally everything and the effects are still being felt from that.

Bring back crunch. The industry is largely bloated with lazy, inefficient and untalented people. Just like every other industry.
COVID is more like copevid at this point. There's no reason at all why that should still be effecting the industry. Let alone all of the copium that was hugged about WFH being more effective than working In the office, while every game received a year's delay.

Nintendo can keep their budgets lower because they have fostered a general expectation of smaller scope of their games for the most part which is accepted by their user base, and they hardly pay their developers anything at all compared to what they get paid in North America.

If Nintendo can manage expectations, there's no reason Sony and Microsoft can't.

Inflation is a real thing, and the cost of living is insanely high where most game development studios are based.

Not to be rude, but how is that the gamers concern? Move studios to cheaper to live areas, be more efficient in work, cut bloated, unnecessary positions from the company, reduced outsourcing because it isn't cheaper in the long run.
There's loads the industry can do but refuses to. Their problems shouldn't be solved by gamers paying more for less.
The real irony is that if work from home works so well, why do Devs only hire in places where the cost of living is so high?

 

[Nhomnhom]

Crunch culture was a big part of it. It still happens now, but is nowhere near as bad as it used to be. COVID also threw a monkey wrench into literally everything and the effects are still being felt from that.

Nintendo can keep their budgets lower because they have fostered a general expectation of smaller scope of their games for the most part which is accepted by their user base, and they hardly pay their developers anything at all compared to what they get paid in North America.

Inflation is a real thing, and the cost of living is insanely high where most game development studios are based.

Crunch culture produced more and better games, feels like the DEI con artist types had a lot less room to work with back then, people needed to get shit done and had no time to waste.

 

[2spooky5me]

Tom Warren will be the first to get all 3!
He’s gotta make “Daddy Phil” happy.