Support NeoGAF

[STARSBarry]

Honestly this is the studios fault, if you keep hiring people who can't remember stuff of course your going to run into trouble.

Like the first question when hiring should be "Do you suffer from any memory issues?"

 

[Neo_Geo]

Series S shouldn't even be. It's literally holding back all of next gen due to its fucking existence.

 

[elliot5]

Series S shouldn't even be. It's literally holding back all of next gen due to its fucking existence.

How many games do you expect to be sooooo dependent on ram capacity and bandwidth that its existence is holding back "next gen"

 

[Hoddi]

Man ive played Matrix on my PS5 and then on my 3080 at native 4k and while native 4k clearly looks better, the PS5 version looks perfectly fine on my LG CX. I will try playing it on my LCD and see if it looks bad.

Returnal looks fine too.

What tv do you have? I have heard that the Sony x900h has a blurry 4k 120 hz implementation so maybe thats what making those games look blurry?

I have quite few a different displays. My main console TV is an old 1080p Panny plasma but then I also have a 4k OLED in the living room and two 1440p165 and 4k144 displays on my PC. The reason I've stuck with the plasma is simply because so many games run at sub-native resolutions on the consoles.

I also have a CRT fetish and too many of those, apparently. But what do girlfriends know.

 

[onQ123]

Why in the world would the devs need to adjust for the Series X?



No it won't. It's got the key CPU and SSD improvements that mark next gen. GPU and memory difference means you get a lower resolution, possibly reduced effects and lower texture quality…but you'll still get a competent looking next gen game that won't hamper the limits being pushed on the Series X.




And yet there's zero indication that anything on the flagship consoles was held back because of the Series S.
I wonder what the argument will be when the minimum spec becomes the next gen Switch?




I don't imagine any Series S owner will end up being 'left behind' since the hardware will last all gen. Plus the 'capabilities' you cite are pretty much the CPU and SSD. Which the Series S pretty much matches the flagship console.




This is an illogical point, since theres probably going to be enough space for 3-4 SSD optimized game on the console…and that's probably fine for many people.

Of all the cutbacks to complain about, storage has to be least. Because I can't imagine justifying more than 500GB on a low cost console. Cutbacks on GPU power and VRAM are way more constraining.




They aren't selling these at any significant profit, so not sure how you can call this a 'cash grab'

It seems to be a savvy decision to introduce a low price console that could boost subs and cater to a market that's price sensitive.

And yeah, it WILL affect all xbox owners. Most likely by increasing the userbase for xbox series and making the platform more attractive for third party development.

Read that again I said Series S

 

[onQ123]

Series S shouldn't even be. It's literally holding back all of next gen due to its fucking existence.

Without Series S , Xbox Series sells wouldn't be high enough to support exclusive games . Series S is the smartest thing Xbox has done since Kinect . No matter how much the hardcore hate this stuff it's good for the bottom line.

 

[Silent Viper]

Most modern engine support scaling and with AMD fSR2.0 this will not be problem.

Series S will have 720p games using FSR 2.0 in future.

Devs with shitty engines for example Dying light 2 devs are the ones who complain most as their engine sucks at scaling and all.

 

[Silent Viper]

They'll find a way like most of the time . But it probably take more time to optimize on series S .

You guys remember how Skyrim's dawnguard dlc on PS3 got delay because it dont have enough ram ?

Creation engine sucked at scaling and all. Plus consoles were not supporting features like FSR and all.

And finally PS3 cell architecture was pain to develop games for.

 

[Ozriel]

Read that again I said Series S

You said the 'devs have to adjust for the Series consoles'. That Includes the Series X, last I checked.

Read what you posted again.

 

[killatopak]

How many games do you expect to be sooooo dependent on ram capacity and bandwidth that its existence is holding back "next gen"

Any game with RT are bandwidth and capacity hogs.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Creation engine sucked at scaling and all. Plus consoles were not supporting features like FSR and all.

And finally PS3 cell architecture was pain to develop games for.

So was the PS2. I think that sold well

 

[ToTTenTranz]

The Series S' GPU may be fine for a while as long as devs make versions without RT (which doesn't scale down with resolution as much as rasterization) and keep the resolution low. However the 8GB GPU memory + memory contention issues is a problem that won't disappear and it might give the devs a lot of headaches.

Valve pushed really hard to put all of 16GB in the $400 Steam Deck with a much slower GPU and CPU, even though they could have used just 8GB or even 12GB (Samsung makes 24Gb modules aFAIK).
They know the RAM limitations can become a major bottleneck on the long term.

 

[Dampf]

What lesson will that be? It continuing to outsell Xbox 360?

There will be no lesson learned because the system is serving its purpose. Also, Sampler Feedback Streaming exists and will immediately remedy that memory issue when utilized. And lower resolution and lower quality textures is a known solution for Series S's memory problems. The CPU is more than up to the task and there's much more still to draw out of the system.

I am having doubts SFS will be used in the near future. I often take time to look up if devs are utilizing these next gen features, but I've not come across a single dev on twitter who demonstrates it, nor articles about it in game articles. If developers are not using it right now, it's unlikely it will be used anytime soon. Plus, many studios are switching to UE5 which uses virtual texturing, making SFS basically obsolete.

DX12U has been available since March 2020 for devs, more than 2 years now and not. a. single. dev posts anything noteworthy about it. That's not a good sign for these features.

 

[DarkMage619]

The Series S' GPU may be fine for a while as long as devs make versions without RT (which doesn't scale down with resolution as much as rasterization) and keep the resolution low. However the 8GB GPU memory + memory contention issues is a problem that won't disappear and it might give the devs a lot of headaches.

Valve pushed really hard to put all of 16GB in the $400 Steam Deck with a much slower GPU and CPU, even though they could have used just 8GB or even 12GB (Samsung makes 24Gb modules aFAIK).
They know the RAM limitations can become a major bottleneck on the long term.

Can't the Steam Deck run Windows? Would you even want to run Windows with less than 16GB of RAM? How fast is that RAM? Having more slower RAM isnt an advantage especially if you are running an operating system. I am thinking this isn't an apt comparison at all.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Series S shouldn't even be. It's literally holding back all of next gen due to its fucking existence.

Prove how it's holding back next gen. Pro tip: you can't

 

[arvfab]

Can't the Steam Deck run Windows? Would you even want to run Windows with less than 16GB of RAM? I am thinking this isn't an apt comparison at all.

Minimum requirements for Win 11 is 4GB, isn't it?

And as far as I know, the main OS for the Steam Deck is not Windows.

And isn't the Xbox OS based on Windows and - based on what people are saying in this topic - runs on 2GB?

 

[Shmunter]

Prove how it's holding back next gen. Pro tip: you can't

Pro tip: that's not a pro tip

 

[dcmk7]

I am having doubts SFS will be used in the near future. I often take time to look up if devs are utilizing these next gen features, but I've not come across a single dev on twitter who demonstrates it, nor articles about it in game articles. If developers are not using it right now, it's unlikely it will be used anytime soon. Plus, many studios are switching to UE5 which uses virtual texturing, making SFS basically obsolete.

DX12U has been available since March 2020 for devs, more than 2 years now and not. a. single. dev posts anything noteworthy about it. That's not a good sign for these features.

Completely agree with this.

It doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar right now, maybe you're right and has been superseded already.

 

[PaintTinJr]

I think developer complaints on this issue - in this current protracted cross-gen where the Series S is inferior to One X and plays enhanced One games - is probably very fair against the "Series" mantra that then keeps the original Xbox One forever in the cross-gen picture.

Unlike distinctive generations with one base console target, the series strategy implies that the consumer is expected to just buy a newer device in the series - if they don't like the visuals/performance of games on their current device - but the problem for developers is that it just increases the number of unique nuanced xbox hardware's they have to support for longer, and for efficiency they probably want to share as much of the CPU, IO solution between S and X, but the RAM CPU split of the X - they then use on the S - means they have just half the available VRAM of the X, - for use with the S - when the difference between targeting next-gen visuals in HD on the S and 4K on the X will use more than 6GB for the base assets.

Then they look at the One X, realise that they can better share the VRAM footprint with the series X, and then probably get frustrated that the Series S isn't superior to the One X in every single way, and then realise that they've had to refactor things for the S graphics, and then realise they can then dial those specific changes down further to work on the Xbox One and are then supporting 4 different unique nuanced xbox hardwares for an audience that wants to pay for games on a sub, and doesn't represent the biggest chunk of the AAA game paying market. Their natural grievance then being more work for less reward, and the additional work at the expense of making the PC, X and PS5 versions better - which helps market their game.

 

[yamaci17]

I am having doubts SFS will be used in the near future. I often take time to look up if devs are utilizing these next gen features, but I've not come across a single dev on twitter who demonstrates it, nor articles about it in game articles. If developers are not using it right now, it's unlikely it will be used anytime soon. Plus, many studios are switching to UE5 which uses virtual texturing, making SFS basically obsolete.

DX12U has been available since March 2020 for devs, more than 2 years now and not. a. single. dev posts anything noteworthy about it. That's not a good sign for these features.

even then, its a specific demo to specifically demonstrate its "peak" potential. it wont magically act as a magical 2.5x memory multiplier in every case.

 

[Toots]

Goddam twink in a wife beater talking shit about others, who would have thought ?

 

[jroc74]

I remember the handful of threads this spawned when the specs were revealed.

And how some claimed scaling is easy, despite what some of us said, while brining up PC and just out right dismissing minimum requirements for PC games can change from game to game.

Amazing a few years later and some of the same arguments are coming up. It is what it is, MS made this decision. And they have to deal with the consequences.

 

[elliot5]

Any game with RT are bandwidth and capacity hogs.

Sure but the two experiences that are fully RT dependent (Matrix and Metro) run on it. Metro at 60 fps even. Until something skips Xbox because the studio wants full RT lighting only, no rasterization, and the XSS simply couldn't hang, will it prove an issue. And in those scenarios it's likely to be a PC only game.

 

[DarkMage619]

Minimum requirements for Win 11 is 4GB, isn't it?

And as far as I know, the main OS for the Steam Deck is not Windows.

And isn't the Xbox OS based on Windows and - based on what people are saying in this topic - runs on 2GB?

And the RAM speed and type? You think the Steam Deck will get better performance because it has more slower RAM? Let not pretend this is a legitimate comparison.

 

[Haggard]

Scaling software down is always a pain in the butt, nothing new here.
Kinda surprised that a friggin software company like MS which should really know better willingly put developers through that nonsense.
The Series S reeks of marketing guys > tech guys.

 

[yamaci17]

Sure but the two experiences that are fully RT dependent (Matrix and Metro) run on it. Metro at 60 fps even. Until something skips Xbox because the studio wants full RT lighting only, no rasterization, and the XSS simply couldn't hang, will it prove an issue. And in those scenarios it's likely to be a PC only game.

topic is not about capability

topic is about being it a pain

sure, you can squueze out something and make it run with a decent look (in the case of metro exodus ee, the game has serious LOD and pop-in issues and a typical render resolution of 500p with very low samples of ray counts to a point where almost all surfaces are brim with noise)

i

 

[Bernd Lauert]

And how some claimed scaling is easy

It should be easy, just takes some additional work.

 

[Elbereth]

Ah, so this is why Starfield was delayed… /s

Honestly, I hope not.

 

[DarkMage619]

It should be easy, just takes some additional work.

I always thought the Xbox Series had a unified XDK that allowed multiple versions of games to be created simultaneously. Additionally it may be time to contact MS developer support for some assistance in utilizing the features of their systems that aid in RAM management. No one claimed game development is easy but there are resources available.

 

[KungFucius]

PC is a fixed platform that the developers can't choose the minimum specs for ?

No, but yes. The devs cannot choose the specs they target, the publishers will choose that based on their understanding of the market.

 

[SlimySnake]

It is what it is, MS made this decision. And they have to deal with the consequences.

Do they? It seems to me that series s owners have to deal with the consequences. MS on the other hand is posting record sales thanks largely to the series s being in stock. last year, the split was 50:50 with sales tilting towards more series s sales. it is probably 60:40 or even 70:30 now.

I think developer complaints on this issue - in this current protracted cross-gen where the Series S is inferior to One X and plays enhanced One games - is probably very fair against the "Series" mantra that then keeps the original Xbox One forever in the cross-gen picture.

Unlike distinctive generations with one base console target, the series strategy implies that the consumer is expected to just buy a newer device in the series - if they don't like the visuals/performance of games on their current device - but the problem for developers is that it just increases the number of unique nuanced xbox hardware's they have to support for longer, and for efficiency they probably want to share as much of the CPU, IO solution between S and X, but the RAM CPU split of the X - they then use on the S - means they have just half the available VRAM of the X, - for use with the S - when the difference between targeting next-gen visuals in HD on the S and 4K on the X will use more than 6GB for the base assets.

Then they look at the One X, realise that they can better share the VRAM footprint with the series X, and then probably get frustrated that the Series S isn't superior to the One X in every single way, and then realise that they've had to refactor things for the S graphics, and then realise they can then dial those specific changes down further to work on the Xbox One and are then supporting 4 different unique nuanced xbox hardwares for an audience that wants to pay for games on a sub, and doesn't represent the biggest chunk of the AAA game paying market. Their natural grievance then being more work for less reward, and the additional work at the expense of making the PC, X and PS5 versions better - which helps market their game.

I still think that an 8 tflops XSS with the same exact memory setup, cpu and ssd wouldve been a great buy at $399. This thing has way too many compromises not just for the dev but also the consumer. The whole idea behind the series s was that things would scale down, and its clear from every single game that things are not scaling down 1:1. That shouldve been their first clue and I remember DF bringing this up back at E3 2020 before the series S was announced. This was right around the time when insiders were saying the series S was cancelled after dev outrage. No idea why Phil revived this thing without giving it a bigger spec increase.

Even a 6 tflops RDNA 2.0 gpu with the X1 ram bandwidth wouldve been better than this. The 10.7 tflops 6600xt seems to be mostly fine with just 256 GBps of memory bandwidth as long as you stick with 1080p or 1440p resolutions, but it doesnt have to share that with the CPU like console GPUs do. I think MS made far too many compromises with the tflops number, the memory size and memory speeds, and the worst thing is the ssd size. To me that one is just unforgivable, this is a digital only console and only 380 GB is available for games? When cod alone takes up 200 GB? They knew that soccer moms would eventually have to run out and buy a $240 SSD which wouldve made this a more expensive console than the XSX.

I remember in 2000, I couldnt find the PS2 anywhere. My dad would stop over at shops on his way home from work every day for months until he was able to find one in May of 2021. Shortages were a thing back then too, but both Sony and MS went all out with the specs. Especially MS which included an HDD, a network adapter, and 64 MB of RAM in a console. My $1,500 PC had 64 MB of RAM back then. THat was not a $300 console. They took that loss because thats what you do. You dont pass the cost on the consumer. You are a trillion dollar company, you can afford to take a $100 loss to make sure the consumer gets a proper ssd size, and the devs get enough tflops and ram bandwidth to ensure your consumer does not get shafted. If MS really wanted that casual audience at $300, they shouldve taken the loss instead of passing it on the customer. If they were scared Sony would launch at $399 then they shouldve released an 8 tflops console at $399.

I mean these guys released the 360 in 2005. The best console of that generation. Better than any PC GPU available at the time. For $299. Same GPU, same CPU, same RAM. The only thing they saved money on was an optional HDD. Yes, it was expensive, but the key word is optional. They did not dare give 360 Arcade users an inferior experience.

 

[thebigmanjosh]

I always thought the Xbox Series had a unified XDK that allowed multiple versions of games to be created simultaneously. Additionally it may be time to contact MS developer support for some assistance in utilizing the features of their systems that aid in RAM management. No one claimed game development is easy but there are resources available.

Blaming developers ability when this has been raised as an issue since before the consoles launched is one of the most ignorant takes I've seen in this site in some time.

Sasan Sepehr, senior technical producer at Remedy Entertainment, has also chimed in, saying that while he's excited about the Xbox Series S from a consumer's perspective, as a technical perspective, he "sees trouble." Then there's David Mickner, multiplayer designer at Infinity Ward, who says that the Xbox Series S' lower specs "will serve as a bottleneck."

Billy Khan, lead engine programmer at id Software, says the Series S' RAM is "a major issue", and says that the "much lower amount of memory and the split memory banks with drastically slower speeds" will prove to be problematic. Similarly,

Alex Gneiting, principal engine programmer at id Software, agrees with that sentiment, and says that the RAM deficiency won't be easy to compensate, and will drag down the base specs that developers will have to consider noticeably for multiplatform games.

The RAM is not an issue for us (currently), but GPU performance presents challenges for future titles. Our current renderer is designed for high spatial and temporal resolution (read: 4K @ 60 fps). It is stochastic by nature. Dropping any of those would require us to do more expensive calculations dropping performance even further. We have a compromise solution right now, but I am not satisfied with it yet.

Xbox Series S RAM is a “Major Issue” – Several Devs Speak Out About Memory “Bottleneck”

www.google.com

Redirect Notice

 

[arvfab]

And the RAM speed and type? You think the Steam Deck will get better performance because it has more slower RAM? Let not pretend this is a legitimate comparison.

Did I say anything about better or worse performance? I just wanted to point out what you implied regarding the amount of RAM in the Steam Deck.

Additionally it may be time to contact MS developer support for some assistance in utilizing the features of their systems that aid in RAM management. No one claimed game development is easy but there are resources available.

Did you also ask the devs to call for Sony support during the PS3 era?

 

[Shmunter]

I always thought the Xbox Series had a unified XDK that allowed multiple versions of games to be created simultaneously. Additionally it may be time to contact MS developer support for some assistance in utilizing the features of their systems that aid in RAM management. No one claimed game development is easy but there are resources available.

Yeah, no optimisation needed or anything. Just press the button

 

[Belthazar]

I still think that an 8 tflops XSS with the same exact memory setup, cpu and ssd wouldve been a great buy at $399.

It would've been slaughtered by the PS5 digital as it costs that without having a single compromise beyond not being able to read discs.

 

[skit_data]

It would've been slaughtered by the PS5 digital as it costs that without having a single compromise beyond not being able to read discs.

Indeed, $349 would be more fitting. Or a version at $399 with a bigger SSD and disc reader.

Edit: Actually, I'd probably buy a $349 one with a disc reader and/or a decent SSD size with those specs over a Series X as a secondary console.

 

[SlimySnake]

It would've been slaughtered by the PS5 digital as it costs that without having a single compromise beyond not being able to read discs.

Maybe, but if engineered properly, you would seeing a 20% difference in pixels easily hidden by DRS.

Worse performing consoles selling at a similar price point dont always get slaughtered. Xbox one did worldwide, but in the U.S it won several months after it dropped to $399 including the all important november and december months and the delta between the two consoles was 41%. PS2 had worse specs and it continued to sell well. Better spec'd consoles dont always win generations.

And even if $399 wouldve been slaughtered like you said then MS needs to take that extra $100 loss and sell it for $299. Just like they did with the 360 and the OG Xbox which were far more expensive than their original $299 price tag.

 

[Banjo64]

I'll say what I've said all along; should have been £299/$349 and had 6tf and faster RAM.

Still £59/$49 cheaper than the PS5 DE but with less of a drop in performance.

 

[Belthazar]

Maybe, but if engineered properly, you would seeing a 20% difference in pixels easily hidden by DRS.

Worse performing consoles selling at a similar price point dont always get slaughtered. Xbox one did worldwide, but in the U.S it won several months after it dropped to $399 including the all important november and december months and the delta between the two consoles was 41%. PS2 had worse specs and it continued to sell well. Better spec'd consoles dont always win generations.

And even if $399 wouldve been slaughtered like you said then MS needs to take that extra $100 loss and sell it for $299. Just like they did with the 360 and the OG Xbox which were far more expensive than their original $299 price tag.

It's a different situation, as in this case there would be two tiers or consoles. One company offers the most powered console for $499 and an underpowered version for $399, while the other offers the high powered version for the same price then the underpowered version of the competition. And let's be frank, winning bakc market share is already an uphill battle for Microsoft this gen, yet another hurdle wouldn't do them any good.

 

[DarkMage619]

Blaming developers ability when this has been raised as an issue since before the consoles launched is one of the most ignorant takes I've seen in this site in some time.

People continue to post the same tweets from years ago to try and make a NEW claim about the XSS 'problems'. The fact remains that no dev at this point is using techniques the system offers to improve memory management. Also since we like to continue to bring up old commentary how about this:

“Xbox Series S Won’t Significantly Limit Game Development” – Warhammer 40K: Darktide Dev

gamingbolt.com

Some devs complain some devs say there is no significant issues. Perhaps the issues just come down to a particular dev and some here are choosing to focus on the ones complaining over ones that don't have a problem. To pretend this is a industry wide problem is disingenuous. Again there is assistance if a developer wants it. If MS isn't helping that is a different problem.

Did I say anything about better or worse performance? I just wanted to point out what you implied regarding the amount of RAM in the Steam Deck.

If the additional RAM isn't improving performance what is your point? Plenty in here are accusing the XSS of holding back the generation with zero evidence. The Steam Deck isn't offering a superior platform for game development.

Did you also ask the devs to call for Sony support during the PS3 era?

The PS3 received support the entire generation and Sony produced fantastic games for the platform. Are you also saying the XSS will get support all generation and get great games? If so I agree. Different devs get different results as the PS3 showed.

 

[onQ123]

You said the 'devs have to adjust for the Series consoles'. That Includes the Series X, last I checked.

Read what you posted again.

So you just going to skip the part when I said "because of Series S" just so you can try to start a BS argument? go away & find something better to do

 

[SlimySnake]

FSR 2.0 results on the 22 CU 5.2 tflops 5500xt are very impressive. Thats basically the same GPU thats in the Series S, just clocked higher to hit 5.2tflops.

20% in Quality. 50% in Performance.

Now 20% of 512p is still 560p. They really shouldve at least aimed for a 5.2 tflops RDNA 2.0 GPU. With the IPC gains from Polaris to RDNA, it wouldve been slightly better than the 6 tflops X1 and a dedicated 8GB vram pool wouldve helped negate any memory bandwidth issues.

Literally couldve used the same exact chip, just clocked it higher and the only extra cost wouldve been a better cooling solution which means adding just a couple of extra dollars to the BOM. An extra 2GB of vram to handle CPU only tasks wouldve freed up the 8GB for the GPU. Again, we are looking at a $10-20 BOM increase here. Cost they should have been willing to eat up.

 

[THE DUCK]

It's fine, you'd think they'd spend their time instead complaining about having to develop for minimum PC spec, much harder than S.

 

[Ozriel]

FSR 2.0 results on the 22 CU 5.2 tflops 5500xt are very impressive. Thats basically the same GPU thats in the Series S, just clocked higher to hit 5.2tflops.

20% in Quality. 50% in Performance.

Now 20% of 512p is still 560p. They really shouldve at least aimed for a 5.2 tflops RDNA 2.0 GPU. With the IPC gains from Polaris to RDNA, it wouldve been slightly better than the 6 tflops X1 and a dedicated 8GB vram pool wouldve helped negate any memory bandwidth issues.

Literally couldve used the same exact chip, just clocked it higher and the only extra cost wouldve been a better cooling solution which means adding just a couple of extra dollars to the BOM. An extra 2GB of vram to handle CPU only tasks wouldve freed up the 8GB for the GPU. Again, we are looking at a $10-20 BOM increase here. Cost they should have been willing to eat up.

Now this is something we can both agree on.

They should have swallowed an additional $30 on the BOM and increased clock speeds and VRAM . At best you increase bulk slightly with better cooling.

 

[yamaci17]

ps5 is about a 6600xt
sx is about a 6700xt
ss is about a 6500xt (but actually way worse)

wish the series s had a 6600 in it with a 350 price tag. then it would be a true, proper 1080p 60 fps machine indeed

 

[TheDreadLord]

So the devs are lazy and the problem is the XSS?

 

[ReBurn]

So the devs are lazy and the problem is the XSS?

The devs are always lazy. If they were good the could do anything.

 

[Kamina]

Old news is old
Its a nice console though.

 

[THE DUCK]

ps5 is about a 6600xt
sx is about a 6700xt
ss is about a 6500xt (but actually way worse)

wish the series s had a 6600 in it with a 350 price tag. then it would be a true, proper 1080p 60 fps machine indeed

Lol at ss being way worse than a 6500xt.

 

[BbMajor7th]

Devs be Lazy: A NeoGAF Armchair Developer Thread

I don't shit about coding, console hardware or programming, but I do know that if I'm moving house and I have a choice between a large or a medium-sized removal van, the hire company may tell me that technically everything will fit into the medium, but I sure as shit know I'd rather toss everything in the large van and have room to spare than spend six hours dismantling furniture and playing ultimate Tetris in the back of the medium one - I don't think I'm remotely alone in that.