Quote from: Iamtylerdurden1 on January 31, 2021, 18:48:24
I find it funny how virtually every comment either calls the devs lazy or implicitly defends Series S with mentions of Cyberpunk, The Medium, and secret sauce.

I don't find it funny, because that is the truth. There was a quantitative leap forward that goes well beyond Teraflop count. The One X has more TFs than the XSS, but when you are given pretty clear examples (i.e., the most demanding games) showing why that does not matter you simply dismiss it with "I find it funny."

There is less memory and part of it is slower, however Microsoft also introduced different text streaming for the next-gen that lifts both of those requirements. Yet, you also seem to dismiss that.

You are working under the assumption that next-gen is just like all past-generation but with more powerful hardware. It is not. There are massive efficiency improvements that you need to understand before you can begin to see why it's not magic that next-gen games work so well on the XSS (only real problem is that there are so few of those and plenty of the old that rely on the really inefficient streaming).

I find it funny how virtually every comment either calls the devs lazy or implicitly defends Series S with mentions of Cyberpunk, The Medium, and secret sauce.

The first comment was a kid complaining that Microsoft misled him with XSS because they marketed it as the same exact experience as SX but with lower resolution and it's just not the case. U ppl either berate him or ignore him. XSS is indeed dramatically inferior and it's more than just GPU. The memory is significantly slower and there is far less of it. That ofc impacts texture quality/streaming and will certainly limit games built for next gen from the ground up.

Console development is not the same as PC development. Games built exclusively for console can better optimize because they are designing around a specific spec. Hence why they are able to squeeze more out of the limited hardware. Forcing devs to optimize for numerous different specs takes some of the advantage console has away. The more specs there are to optimize for the worse the optimization becomes. That's part of the reason Sony devs can squeeze so much from PlayStation exclusives.

Once devs stop supporting PS4 and XB1 and we see true next gen games XSS will absolutely be a bottleneck. I can't imagine devs in 2025 designing games for a 4 teraflop system with 10gb of slow memory. It will surely limit the possibilities. Most PC games will have higher system requirements than what XSS offers by then as well.

This is the beginning and already devs are complaining about limited hardware on console and we have XSS to thank. Remember how quickly PS4 and XB1 became antiquated? Now imagine Xbox had released another SKU in 2013 with .4 teraflops and 4gb of slower ram? Imagine how quickly that would become outdated and imagine how it would limit next gen? If devs are already saying XSS is limited imagine what they say in a few years?

Remember this comes from a developer that said they couldn't give you a free update for next gen consoles if you already owned the game. Even though this is PC game, where you can run it in 5 year old hardware.

XSS uses DirectX 12 ultimate, there's no real argument here to be made just a lazy developer and poorly written article.

They've been scaling  games for Nintendo Switch for years now with much success and no complaints. Switch even has it's own overwatch game and an exclusive new full MH game on the way. So... what's all this about xss?

Quote from: Face76 on January 31, 2021, 14:27:38
I found it funny people keep saying that this isn't true and memory problems will go away with optimization.  But the thing is first Control is a last gen game.  No matter what they do to get the game running on the ps5/XSX is still not as good as having the game being made for the ps5/XSX. The problem is once games start to get big areas, more details, and whatever they will start to utilize the ps5/XSX specs.

And yet the most demanding game to this date (Cyberpunk) runs just fine on XSS. I know it's a last-gen/cross-gen game. For a truly next-gen game built from the ground up you have "The Medium", also quite demanding due to its dual port view of both worlds, still it runs just fine on XSS.

The fearmongering only works until people get to see the games working just fine. A surprise to none, given all the hardware accelerated compression is there, so next-gen games can only get better since those are the ones that will take full advantage of the new compression techniques.

An no, the One X cannot run either game anywhere nearly as good as the XSS. Textures are only one side of the equation, XSS is just fine for its performance targets.

Claiming that XSS is behind because of lazy developers is funny argument, If the only problem was optimization, then why lunch new consoles, lets better optimize games...

I found it funny people keep saying that this isn't true and memory problems will go away with optimization.  But the thing is first Control is a last gen game.  No matter what they do to get the game running on the ps5/XSX is still not as good as having the game being made for the ps5/XSX.   The problem is once games start to get big areas, more details, and whatever they will start to utilize the ps5/XSX specs.  The XSS will fall behind.  It has already.  Yes optimization will help somewhat.   Later down the line, say within a year, the XSS will be slowly fazed out.  The production on the XSS has already slowed down.  As Spencer said that the only thing going against it would be if Sony went with 2 skus.  Many were against the XSS in MS but Spencer pushed for it.  But it's a 1.5 X1X.   It's why the X1X was discontinued so fast.  Devs have said it's already lagging behind.  The XSS isn't worth the money.  Period.  The specs and ssd space make it obsolete already.  Ps5 digital is $100 more and you get a true next gen console.   Because between the XSS and the ssd expansion you are paying more then the price of the XSX or ps5

This article is full of none sense. Lazy developers using Outdated tools don't want to work hard to earn their money and are blaming hardware. Freaking PC Games have been developed and optimised for thousands of GPUs and Configurations for decades why can't they do that now on Consoles when Microsoft has pretty unified the architectures. They to stop blaming hardware for their poor work. CDPR has has had a good share of this bulshit and now they are paying a high price.

The Series S has enough memory. The thing is, devs are not using the features the consoles provide right now, as they still develop with the old generation in mind. Xbox Series consoles and DX12U GPUs have Sampler Feedback Streaming which dramatically increases effective VRAM as textures can load more efficiently, but it requires some dev work to be implemented. It's logical to believe the Series S will only show its true potential once all of its innovative hardware features are being used, which is not the case right now

This is an old argument which was disproven. The memory problems goes away with optimisation.

This is not a fair complaint. Yes more sku is annoying (i am a graphic engineer and already shipped a ps5/xb4/ps4/xb3/pc title).

1440p to 2160p is a huge leap for your render target and texture sizes. Is it 6GB, less or more, it is a complicated question when you involve streaming, especially with fast ssd !

And gameplay should never be the top contender by far on memory occupancy, or they have to go back to the drawing board !

This is a dumb complaint. These devs have to make this game work on PC systems as well and simply optimising for the lower settings will do the trick. If you expected the same performance with lower specs and cost, you were being delusional.

Quote from: Gamerguy7130 on January 30, 2021, 09:59:13
As an Xbox Series S owner, I am very annoyed about not receiving all the next-gen enhancements. Microsoft's message was: "You'll have the same great next-gen experience." Hence, games would look similar for both Series S and X, but they would display in different resolutions. I am not having the same great experience when one version of the game supports ray tracing and the other does not! We're only at the beginning of this generation and Series S owners are dealing with these types of issues already.

Then maybe you should have bought a next-gen console. The series s is weaker than the last gen Xbox one x. One glance at the specs should have told you which console you should have bought and yet you went with the weak one and are now complaining that it's too weak. I also don't know how this is Microsoft's fault they straight up released the specs and told everybody that the series s is not as powerful as the series x. They said for a truly next gen experience you need the series x. If there's anyone to blame it's you for being too cheap to buy the real Xbox. Instead of releasing both a series s and x they should have released a series x with and without a disk drive. That would have made this console generation much simpler.

And yet, contrary to the narrative put forward by NBC, the Series S runs Cyberpunk just fine (the most demanding game so far) and the few truly next-gen games (not coss-gen with PS4 and Xbox One) such as The Medium also run just fine on the Series S.

I mean, it's very obvious the Series S is not as capable as the Series X (as intended), but so far there have been zero issues delivering a next-gen experience out of that budget and very compact Xbox.

Difference in resolution is fine. It could be just a Full HD console. But RAM difference is a mistake, gives developers a headache!