While I wouldn't find such an upgrade worthwhile in of itself, it is possible it would bring similar improvements that comes from running non pro-optimized games on the pro consoles. Of course, that is if the scenario laid out is accurate. I imagine they would be pushing for some sort of Helix optimizations, but that is just an assumption I'm making.
Same build does not mean same profile. Series S and Series X can run the same builds, but run different profiles optimized for each configuration. Just like a single PC build with different settings. So the incentive to upgrade would still be there. Or do you mean why anyone would bother to upgrade if all games can run on last gen forever? MS could still artificially prevent games from running on older gen hardware by locking the game to a profile (let's say "Helix" profile) and restricting purchase on the store to just Helix hardware.
It's just as valid to assume that that Rockstar will develop for the Xbox console as they do now. The GDK isn't going to force them to release a PC version if they do not want to. Their goal is to make building a PC release or Xbox release easier, not mandatory. I assume that's why they are doing the hard sell to devs to make their games "play anywhere", because it's optional.
Saving this post to see how well it ages. Thanks!
Yes there is
Xbox Series consoles?
I thought of bookmarking it, but that I accepted the fact that there would be no way I would remember to go back and check when RDR3 releases in 2032.
Not if it can natively run Series S/X games while normal PCs can't.
All Xbox console games require emulation as they don't work natively on PC. Helix is using a mix of hardware and software emulation to get them working.
To some degree it's a matter of semantics...Xbox Series games already run inside a virtual machine on a console version of WindowsSo you just called it official emulation....
That really wasn't my point, which is on me for not being clear. In saying that, I actually am inclined to believe that we will see XSX, XSS, and PS5 versions of games for a very very long time. My GUESS would be that is more likely than not that a 2030-2032 RDR3 release would have a version playable on Gen 9 consoles. The march of technological progress has slowed, and with the rise and proliferation of these relatively low spec gaming devices, I think we are headed towards a new age of optimization and squeezing as much out of hardware as possible. I imagine you are probably thinking I'm full of it, and maybe that's true.
They've already talked about the chip they've built to handle this, but on your point, translation does equal emulation.
There isn't an Xbox Helix Console, the only console part is BC emulation. Everything else is PC, no different to a Xbox ROG Ally.
Rumblings from GDC suggest there is a path for devs to make Helix exclusive games that allow devs to optimize and build specifically for the specification and feature set. The goal seems to allow for devs to easily take that work, and use it create what would be considered your standard PC port that works on all capable PC's. The ROG Ally does not contain what will be the Helix's standardized configuration, so I do not agree.
Don't think so. Emulation is exactly what it states, emulation of hardware processes through software. Translation converts instructions into a format so that the native hardware can execute.
That is literally the only reason why I sort of have my head wrapped around this.
Note: Source is MLID, who says a lot of things.
I don't believe that to be the case, and I responded in full as to why to bitybitdeath, if you want to scroll up a little and read.
Correct, That's why I hedge my statements. In saying that, my argument in its entirety does not hinge on what MLID says, but relies on what Ronald McDonald said at the GDC talk, as well as other communication from Xbox.
The below image is from GDC and specifically mentions building for PC = building for next-gen.
I was waiting for you to point to that picture. Does being able to build for PC and Project Helix equate to not being able to target the Helix platform specifically? Does this simplified snippet of generalized info supersede any other information shared, like the GDC talk? When Ronald says that they are developing a "family of silicon" with specific hardware capabilities that a developer can target, does that necessitate the developer also target every other hardware configuration across all Windows PC's? I don't think this definitively answers those questions.The below image is from GDC and specifically mentions building for PC = building for next-gen.
The below image is from GDC and specifically mentions building for PC = building for next-gen.
What does native mean in this context?
So it's just running under Hyper-V.... like any workload on a PC?
It mentions it's unified, so 1 = all.
I'm not arguing their wording, just building for one means the end result plays on everything under the PC banner.It says "and next gen consoles" in the first tab tho.
Im imagining something where you can link your steam account and access your games but in a sandbox without going through the store - kinda like playnite but more locked down so you aren't able to access the actual file system.
I'll restate; we are working with incomplete information, and I'm not convinced that allowing a developer to target "all, means they must target "all" ("all" meaning devices outside of the Helix Platform). In light of that, I realize that whether or not the GDK compiles a build that works on all PC's and Helix devices is not the crux of our disagreement.
No.
In the sense that it runs Series S/X games without additional layers of abstraction compared to consoles
