SupremeHoodie
Member
Well borderlands is a cell shaded game right? We’ll see more of a difference between performance on more detailed games.
Scaling compromises game design and artistic vision. Take for example the recent Cyberpunk trailer and compare it to what we saw 2 years ago. NPC count was considerable scaled and the world just looked empty.
I don't know man. Did we ever see better ai, more enemies on screen on Xbox One X or a pc in ultra settings? If there are graphical upgrades they'll likely be only superficial as the core game experience is designed with parity in mind. I'm sure it will be looker, though, with amazing art style. However, I'm also sure the pc version will require very modest hardware to be visually on par with the Series x version (minus the 120fps and 4k, of course) and that the Xbox version isn't going to look all that much different.
That'll be the big difference between the AAA ps5 exclusives. I mean if Horizon Zero West would get a pc version, the minimum requirements would probably be something like a RTX2070 Super or higher and a NVME SSD.
This just isn't true. Horizon Zero West is running in 4K. A significantly less powerful GPU would be required to run it at 1080P, assuming the CPU and SSD were the same. You know, like we're seeing with Lockhart.
Again, MS have already said that Inifinite uses the Series X as the base platform of development. Series S and especially One X are downports. Downport != parity, inherently. If gameplay features had to be scaled back or cut out to run on the other platforms, then so be it. That's the cost of going with the cheaper alternatives that clearly are not aiming for the same level of performance as Series X.
Well borderlands is a cell shaded game right? We’ll see more of a difference between performance on more detailed games.
The price isn't being undercut it's a different product. People have to both find value and find money. They also have to find enough value to justify over other things in life. Which is why many companies offer cheaper alternatives to their flagship so it's not basically an all or nothing decision. The consumer decides if there's enough value for the given price that they can afford. 400-500 isn't a sweet spot if it's a lot more money than a person is willing to spend on a machine dedicated to playing video games.What I’m saying is that there is a sweet price spot for every market.. That’s why consoles can’t go higher than 400/500... if they go higher they will take a huge risk and probably they will fail.. but with this said there is no need also to undercut the price.. consumers are willing to pay the price if they find good value in the proposition.. and as I said before I think the gamers that will jump first buying new gen consoles are willing to pay that bit more to have the bast versions.. the sex or PlayStation.. of course there will always be outliers that will be perfectly find with Lockhart and that is fine but they will not be the main profile population that buy consoles at launch..
Besides your premise is that the Lockhart buyer ( presumably for a relevant cheaper price) will have access to all the benefits of next gen and the only constrain will be lower resolution.. and that for me sounds like what MS want people to believe.. the narrative is out there and some are going with it.. I personally don’t believe that for many reasons I post before..
Anyhow that is what I think.. I’m really curious to see if MS with this tactic of trying to appeal to everybody from the get go will pay off.. I think it will only generate more noise and PR sound bits with no real world gains..
A few people here trying to make up any negative idea they can. Too bad its not working or close to reality
This is literally your own opinion as most people who've actually played the latest build say the world is pretty populated and dense with activity, a few repeating character model types (mostly children) notwithstanding.
Scaling can only compromise something negatively if it is poorly implemented. It in and of itself is not inherently bad, we owe much of what gaming we enjoy today due to scalability. Most developers I notice, are pretty smart when it comes to designing their engines and gameplay systems to accommodate for scaling.
Keep in mind that routinely many of the best games ever made have been 3rd-party titles, developed for a multitude of consoles (and arcade systems), and/or PC configurations. So no, scaling doesn't compromise artistic vision or game design whatsoever as long as it's implemented even halfway well into the design spec.
Again, MS have already said that Inifinite uses the Series X as the base platform of development. Series S and especially One X are downports. Downport != parity, inherently. If gameplay features had to be scaled back or cut out to run on the other platforms, then so be it. That's the cost of going with the cheaper alternatives that clearly are not aiming for the same level of performance as Series X.
Also just remembered, you're the guy saying the Series S is their true next-gen platform and the baseline, right? What actual, clear evidence do you have to state a claim like that? Even as a random idea or opinion, there is virtually nothing to support it.
The may event was not first party and mostly indie. Its not the same as a first party event.The prove is in the pudding. The May event was shit as people who watched it were wondering 2 things; 1. Where is the gameplay? and 2. Where are the next gen graphics?
July might very well the most important event in the history of the Xbox brand and they really have to show something might impressive after Sony's event. I just think that's gonna be extremely hard. Not just because of Lockhart, but also because all their exclusives have to run on a ancient jaguar cpu and low-end gaming pc's too. MS has already told us that they don't really care which Xbox you buy, as long as you subscribe to GP. In any case, we'll see soon enough.
If Halo Infinite has entire features missing on the Xone and will turn out looking like a different game, you're right. But if it's going to be in 120fps and 4k on Series X, like what's rumored, it's obviously not designed with Series X as the base platform.This is literally your own opinion as most people who've actually played the latest build say the world is pretty populated and dense with activity, a few repeating character model types (mostly children) notwithstanding.
Scaling can only compromise something negatively if it is poorly implemented. It in and of itself is not inherently bad, we owe much of what gaming we enjoy today due to scalability. Most developers I notice, are pretty smart when it comes to designing their engines and gameplay systems to accommodate for scaling.
Keep in mind that routinely many of the best games ever made have been 3rd-party titles, developed for a multitude of consoles (and arcade systems), and/or PC configurations. So no, scaling doesn't compromise artistic vision or game design whatsoever as long as it's implemented even halfway well into the design spec.
Again, MS have already said that Inifinite uses the Series X as the base platform of development. Series S and especially One X are downports. Downport != parity, inherently. If gameplay features had to be scaled back or cut out to run on the other platforms, then so be it. That's the cost of going with the cheaper alternatives that clearly are not aiming for the same level of performance as Series X.
Also just remembered, you're the guy saying the Series S is their true next-gen platform and the baseline, right? What actual, clear evidence do you have to state a claim like that? Even as a random idea or opinion, there is virtually nothing to support it.
It really is a ridiculous assertion. Why would Sony lock out the 90% + of PC gamers who don't go with the high-tier graphics cards? Even assuming 2070 Super increase in sales, at most they'd only be covering about 15% of the PC gaming market if they went 2070S as minimum spec.
At that point, it defeats their entire purpose of doing PC ports (which, yeah, they're going to be more frequent and with smaller time intervals between PS5 and PC release dates. I'd actually venture 1-year staggered dates between most of the big PS5 exclusives and PC ports happening within the next 2-3 years).
The price isn't being undercut it's a different product. People have to both find value and find money. They also have to find enough value to justify over other things in life. Which is why many companies offer cheaper alternatives to their flagship so it's not basically an all or nothing decision. The consumer decides if there's enough value for the given price that they can afford. 400-500 isn't a sweet spot if it's a lot more money than a person is willing to spend on a machine dedicated to playing video games.
Those gamers you speak of can pay more. I strongly disagree that most people buying consoles at launch are going to be mostly the hardcore type of gamers you are describing. Especially if there's going to be a cheaper alternative for them. If Sony or Microsoft thought that were the case they wouldn't even bother with the marketing campaigns as it'd be throwing money at showing off consoles that people aren't going to buy because the gamers you describe are the ones that don't need information pushed on them.
Even of the hardcore, not everybody is going to want to get the better console because again, price. To you there's so much more value to getting something more expensive. But to some people they only have so much money and paying $200-300 gives them enough value and keeps their wallet happy.
Kids are always wanting things, parents are always wanting to give things, and these launches happen around Christmas for a reason. It's so that they can align all their launch marketing with their holiday marketing and convince a bunch people to want and buy their new product. I don't believe that the "less-informed" casuals are going to stay from consoles in the first year or so.
I don't know what points you made previously, but from a high level view there's nothing stopping the lockhart from doing what the anaconda can do. In the same way nothing is stopping a pc with a 2070 from doing what a pc with 2080 can do. The one just does it better.
Regarding Cyberpunk. We have literally quite a few different views of the build that press got to play recently. It looks drab and empty (In comparison to the 2018 footage). Unless you have a source that states otherwise. However, I acknowledge it is still work in progress.
I used TPU 23 game benchmark suite to see what GPU you'd need to match 2080(XSX) 4K frame rate at, but at 1080p. RX 580(XSS) had a 75fps average @ 1080p, and 2080(XSX) had a 67fps average @ 4K. PS5 is ~15% weaker than XSX, so that would land it around, let's say, 60fps average across all benchmarks. Excluding any possible RT features, the GTX 1060 6GB and RX 470/480 8GB are easily powerful enough to run a PS5 game at 1080p without RT. That's at equivalent settings. With some adjustments to avoid VRAM bottlenecks, even something like a RX 470 4GB would be just fine as it's well above the compute/performance threshold for the job.This just isn't true. Horizon Zero West is running in 4K. A significantly less powerful GPU would be required to run it at 1080P, assuming the CPU and SSD were the same. You know, like we're seeing with Lockhart.
PS5 is between 2070 and 2070 Super, around or slightly below GTX 1080ti stock in the overall GPU hierarchy excluding RT...
2070 @ 4K = 43fps avg | 1080ti @ 4K = 51.4fps avg
1060 3GB @ 1080p = 54.5fps avg
Rise of Tomb Raider, 1080p/Very High, GTX 1060 3GB, 8GB RAM:
There are of course frame drops just as there would be at 4K for the aforementioned 2070/1080ti, but notice it doesn't suffer from overt VRAM bottleneck stuttering, despite only having half the apparent VRAM capacity that the above chart shows for 1080p on Titan X. This is using a i5-4460 4-core/4-thread CPU and 8GB RAM, not even something like 6c/12t Ryzen 1600 let alone 8c/16t Zen 2!
I'm still expecting/hoping for Lockhart to have 12GB RAM as mentioned in the original January 2019 leak, but even with 10GB it should be fine in light of it's more modern RDNA 2/DX12U feature set, NvME, and 8c/16t Zen 2 CPU.
The may event was not first party and mostly indie. Its not the same as a first party event.
it's not as hard as you think. Code running on different types of CPU's is achieved with thousands of games on PC. Making things scalable is not a problem that has never been solved. Also, just because sony isn't doing it, doesn't mean it's inherently difficult or a problem. MS said they don't care what system you play their games on, as long as you play their games (...and it's not specific to gamepass). It wasn't specifically a hardware statement. They discontinued Xbox one S and X and stopped manufacturing them both last year, so if they didn't care what hardware you play on, they have a funny way of showing it when releasing new devices.
That's a meme promoted by haters and that just spreads ignorantly across games forums. If you look at the skillup video he says he was in the starting area first shown in the 48 minute video of CDRP and the population density was 90% of what we saw in the demo. Yes, that's less, but depopulated? Hardly.
6:57
Personally I'm not willing to buy Series S but it's a very good idea in upcoming recession. Many parents will want to buy something cheap for their kids, and with gamepass on top of that I'm sure Series S will be a huge success for MS. This console will run next gen games with good results because all RDNA2 architecture features and CPU and SSD will be there, and many people just dont care about resolution as long it doesn't look as 480p.
Everyone keeps saying this and it makes zero sense.
People that are struggling financially isn't thinking about buying a new Xbox.
If price was the end all to everything then both sony and MS could just cut the price of the pro ps4 and X1X and push that to the low end consumers and parents would eat these consoles up in the holiday season if they were priced at $200-$250.
As for next gen, price is not a good enough reason for MS to release the lockhart day one because most of the people buying these consoles day one are not excited about playing a low end next gen console.
In the video below Michael Pachter even talks about the type of consumer that buys consoles day one and its not parents or price concise consumers....
Why do people keep saying that? Name me one pc game where toggling graphics settings turns a multiplatform game into completely different experience? Gears 5 is probably the best example of scalable graphics, but whether you play it on a 13 Tflops RTX2080 Ti or a 1 Tflops Xbox, you're still getting the exact same game with the same levels, geometry, ai, physics and core game design.
That's your opinion, but MS is the only company releasing two consoles that plays the same games and targets two drastically different price points. MS is making money off the xbox install base. Of course they care about it. if they didn't we wouldn't see new consoles from them.Personally I don't think MS cares about keeping their Xbox install base. They are just taking a much more cross platform approach where pc gamers are obviously their main focus. It's just that not many pc gamers have anything near the kind of specs that's in Series X. That is why they will probably be targeting specs like a GTX1060 for a long time, until RTX like cards become mainstream on pc.
I see you are trying to add a qualifier to that statement by adding "completely different experience". I'm going to ignore that, unless you can show me a game on the market where a "completely different experience" is applicable. I don't see how that statement makes sense within the context of a single game.
That's your opinion, but MS is the only company releasing two consoles that plays the same games and targets two drastically different price points. MS is making money off the xbox install base. Of course they care about it. if they didn't we wouldn't see new consoles from them.
I don't care what anyone says... if the reports are true the lockhart will be a big mistake for MS
Why would anyone with sense buy a 1080p console with 4 TF in 2020 .... if money is an issue just buy a X1X where you can still play cyberpunk and Halo infinite or save to get the Series X
Its not like the series X will get big exclusives out the gate because MS already said they will support the Xbox one for another 2 years and the install base will be very low out the gate for both PS5 and Series X versus the current gen.
“There is nothing the Lockhart can't do that the Anaconda can.”
So whats the point of Anaconda if thats the case? How can you Hype up Anaconda while at the same time not talk shit about lockhart? And if all above is true. Basically saying flops dont matter. Wouldnt that make the PS5 the sweet spot.
This doesn’t make any sense. Why buy a last gen console that won’t last you more than a year too when you can get an Series S and be good for the next 6-7 years?I don't care what anyone says... if the reports are true the lockhart will be a big mistake for MS
Why would anyone with sense buy a 1080p console with 4 TF in 2020 .... if money is an issue just buy a X1X where you can still play cyberpunk and Halo infinite or save to get the Series X
Its not like the series X will get big exclusives out the gate because MS already said they will support the Xbox one for another 2 years and the install base will be very low out the gate for both PS5 and Series X versus the current gen.
The developers is basically saying a 3 times more powerful gpu can't do anything noteworthy besides bumping resolution and framerates...Saying that “There is nothing the Lockhart can't do that the Anaconda can" doesn't mean that there isn't things that the Anaconda/Lockhart can do that the PS5 can't.
Agreed. I've been a product manager for a few years now, and our development cycle is constantly in flux. Feature set is dictated by both value to the user, as well as available developer resources. Some ambitious features gets shelved or rejected, simply because the cost/benefit analysis doesn't make it viable. This can come even late in the development cycle, as new ideas come up all the time.Your friend makes perfect sense. I don't work on development projects nearly as complicated as games on multiple custom consoles, but any project manager in IT or development can tell you it almost always comes down to how many resources a company is willing to throw at building a solution / app / whatever.
Agreed. I've been a product manager for a few years now, and our development cycle is constantly in flux. Feature set is dictated by both value to the user, as well as available developer resources. Some ambitious features gets shelved or rejected, simply because the cost/benefit analysis doesn't make it viable. This can come even late in the development cycle, as new ideas come up all the time.
I just don't know how much information about any particular project would be known even to individuals working on the project. Our devs don't fully understand how our products work, outside of the features they work on. Myself, my CEO, and my QA are the only people who have an understanding of how the pieces fit together. I wouldn't expect people outside of management, and dev kit developers to be able to piece together what's happening with either console, on the hardware side. Benchmarks probably get announced at team meetings, but those shouldn't be provided too far ahead of public release anyway. You'd have to be working at a fairly high-level on a particular project to have proper insight into what's going on. That's just my opinion having worked on both large-scale microprocessor teams, as well as medium-scale software applications.
I had root access to the entire microprocessor database as an intern tasked with managing the internal project team website, and even that was really hard to wrap my head around. It's just too much data to digest. Each team managed their own section of the portal, but understanding how it all worked together would have taken significant distillation from each component team, before piecing it together. And those component teams only reported to a few people.
No offense but what does working as a product manager have anything to do with game development? I'm no expert on the exact process either but from what I know game development typically goes as follows.Agreed. I've been a product manager for a few years now, and our development cycle is constantly in flux. Feature set is dictated by both value to the user, as well as available developer resources. Some ambitious features gets shelved or rejected, simply because the cost/benefit analysis doesn't make it viable. This can come even late in the development cycle, as new ideas come up all the time.
I just don't know how much information about any particular project would be known even to individuals working on the project. Our devs don't fully understand how our products work, outside of the features they work on. Myself, my CEO, and my QA are the only people who have an understanding of how the pieces fit together. I wouldn't expect people outside of management, and dev kit developers to be able to piece together what's happening with either console, on the hardware side. Benchmarks probably get announced at team meetings, but those shouldn't be provided too far ahead of public release anyway. You'd have to be working at a fairly high-level on a particular project to have proper insight into what's going on. That's just my opinion having worked on both large-scale microprocessor teams, as well as medium-scale software applications.
I had root access to the entire microprocessor database as an intern tasked with managing the internal project team website, and even that was really hard to wrap my head around. It's just too much data to digest. Each team managed their own section of the portal, but understanding how it all worked together would have taken significant distillation from each component team, before piecing it together. And those component teams only reported to a few people.
My post was only in response to BadBurger's post. Not any other conversations that were happening.No offense but what does working as a product manager have anything to do with game development? I'm no expert on the exact process either but from what I know game development typically goes as follows.
1. They pick a platform, which automatically determines the ambitions of the game
2. Games typically start with a gameplay mechanic and thinking about how to fit it in a game
3. Then they'll start with the whole creative process like level design, story board, the tone and setting etc
4. They try to get everything in the game while hitting a performance target
5. At the very end they'll optimize and resolution is typically the last things that is determined.
I never heard of any developer that would say we're doing a 60fps and native 4k game, and then determine what kind of game their making and what they want to put in it. It would ruin the whole creative process lol.
I don't get the part about Series X devkit mimicking Lockhart specs and driving so much difficulties vs an actual Lockhart devkit, I mean, at the end of the day you end up with two machines with the exact same specs, running the exact same engines, right?
man if this is true ... what a mess
The price isn't being undercut it's a different product. People have to both find value and find money. They also have to find enough value to justify over other things in life. Which is why many companies offer cheaper alternatives to their flagship so it's not basically an all or nothing decision. The consumer decides if there's enough value for the given price that they can afford. 400-500 isn't a sweet spot if it's a lot more money than a person is willing to spend on a machine dedicated to playing video games.
Those gamers you speak of can pay more. I strongly disagree that most people buying consoles at launch are going to be mostly the hardcore type of gamers you are describing. Especially if there's going to be a cheaper alternative for them. If Sony or Microsoft thought that were the case they wouldn't even bother with the marketing campaigns as it'd be throwing money at showing off consoles that people aren't going to buy because the gamers you describe are the ones that don't need information pushed on them.
Even of the hardcore, not everybody is going to want to get the better console because again, price. To you there's so much more value to getting something more expensive. But to some people they only have so much money and paying $200-300 gives them enough value and keeps their wallet happy.
Kids are always wanting things, parents are always wanting to give things, and these launches happen around Christmas for a reason. It's so that they can align all their launch marketing with their holiday marketing and convince a bunch people to want and buy their new product. I don't believe that the "less-informed" casuals are going to stay from consoles in the first year or so.
I don't know what points you made previously, but from a high level view there's nothing stopping the lockhart from doing what the anaconda can do. In the same way nothing is stopping a pc with a 2070 from doing what a pc with 2080 can do. The one just does it better.
True, I'd prefer to know what someone working on a next gen only game thinks about it.Context is key and we must understand all this information (if true) is centered around porting a current-gen game to next-gen. So comments of Lockhart can do anything Anaconda can is housed within that parameter.
I’d wait for more info.
My post was only in response to BadBurger's post. Not any other conversations that were happening.
Your description of the design process workflow seems like it makes sense, but I can't verify its accuracy. I kinda disagree with your assessment of performance targets not being viable to the design process. If you're making a fighting game, or an FPS that's intended to be a competitive game that features in tournaments, then you'd definitely want to keep 60fps as your minimum framerate. That means your time budget for processing a frame would have to fit within 1/60 of a second, and you run cost/benefit on any graphical or computational features that you want to include. If you can't get a specific effect to process in that time frame, you'd shelve it for a later patch, or just jettison it altogether.
Similarly, if you have a target resolution of 4k, then you either allow compromises like framerate, or you take the axe to non-critical effects. Again, on a cost/benefit basis. As these are graphical products, I think you have to include graphics baselines in your original design plans. There are some games that have fewer restrictions on creative, because they're not expected to have certain framerates or resolutions. However, there are some games that have certain graphical specifications, and those will certainly have to be factored into design. Creative things like storyboard, and graphical effects don't necessarily steer the game development process. The game designer starts off with a vision, and then compromises must always be made to make it fit into the engine that's being designed. Otherwise, you run the risk of project bloat, as you don't budget your resources based on efficiency when you try to make everything you want fit into a finished product.
So that's actually an aspect of my job (and sounds like BadBurger's too) that carries over to both hardware and software. Project management is a balancing act between ambition and resources. You try to fit in all the extra stuff you can as efficiently as possible, while ensuring that the cornerstone features are not compromised. It wasn't actually my intention to reference any other conversations though.
That could definitely happen but the PS5 will have some advantages as well so for some people it might be tricky for them to make that decision.
We'll have to wait for those head to heads
The only real advantage the PS5 has is the SSD, and although the speed of the SSD is what sets them apart, the true difference between last gen and this gen is the IOPS, that's what most developers are super excited about and both Xbox Series X and PS5 have SSD that will smoke HDD in this regard.
It is the biggest difference between the two. I guess we have to wait and see what the actual difference will be.
Indeed, if the rubber hits the road as well as projected, the difference maybe less than many expect.
Why would we? AI limitations are not because of hardware. We just don't have any good, efficient way to create great AI in videogames. The traditional behavioral trees can get you only so far. Nobody has come up with anything better for several console generations despite significant hardware improvements.So we’re not getting a generational leap in AI... how exciting.
I recently read that it might even be bigger than what we initially thought. I guess we have to wait and see what happens.
as i know hardware (cpu) indeed one of reason for lacking in AI and other cpu related field..current gen we only has jaguar cpu as main processor..that thing is just mobile cpu, intel atom level of cpu..for next gen..we get different beast..Ryzen cpu to handle the taskWhy would we? AI limitations are not because of hardware. We just don't have any good, efficient way to create great AI in videogames. The traditional behavioral trees can get you only so far. Nobody has come up with anything better for several console generations despite significant hardware improvements.
There are some amazing things being done with machine learning when it comes to AI but video game industry isn't the place which attracts the talent.