Support NeoGAF

[Codeblew]

So if a PS developer wants to make a feature or game that needs the extra compute power or memory in the PS5 Pro they literally couldn't because the PS5 would be incapable of running that feature? How is that not holding games back for Pro owners?

As far as I know, Playstation doesn't have a parity clause that says, for instance, that PS4 Pro can't have coop if base PS4 doesn't have it.

 

[Topher]

Same thing. Games were underdesigned to accomodate consoles.
I'm mostly pissed at the dumbing down of control schemes and UIs, more than graphics.
But it's the same thing.

The minimum PC requirements for BG3 is far less than what consoles have except for one specific area of one specific console: XSS RAM. Not the same thing.

 

[SkylineRKR]

and I think this deserves a lot of criticism. Everyone knows why the series s shipped with a 4 tflops GPU instead of a 6 tflops GPU like the x1x. They know why it had lower vram bandwidth AND ram amount. It's to cut costs so they could undercut sony. With no regards to the awful product they were selling to consumers.

At $399 they couldve released a 6 tflops GPU with 16GB of ram and it wouldve been more or less fine. Would run everything at half res so 1440p for 4k xsx games wouldve actually been possible. But they knew Sony was targeting $399 so they ended up gutting their console instead.

Phil said smoething along the lines of how he wont lose to Sony on either price or power. Im guessing he still has PTSD from when he had to announce $500 for the x1, but thats no reason to release a poorly designed console. Panello said they literally came up with the sandwich strategy back when they thought the PS5 was 8 tflops. This is why you dont design hardware in a fucking boardroom with suits who have no idea how games are designed and just want to win the console wars for their buddies on twitter and discord.

In this case it would be wise to just release a Digital XSX as the Digital PS5 was 399 as well.

But this would mean no undercut. In that case, the XSS should've been at least more powerful than X1X across the board, the current product is weaker in some respects. Which isn't a good outlook. It should've ran X1X profiles of legacy software at the very least. I can imagine gamers holding on to their X1X instead, even though the XSS is actually better once you play on it; it offers much higher framerates in general, on top of massively reduced load times etc). But on spec sheets it sounds weaker, and it has less RAM which is actually hurting it.

 

[MasterCornholio]

As far as I know, Playstation doesn't have a parity clause that says, for instance, that PS4 Pro can't have coop if base PS4 doesn't have it.

I think at this point we just need to stick to the evidence. The Series S and Series X currently exist in the market. The developer talks about a parity clause that exists between the two systems. That's the evidence.

At the moment Sony hasn't even confirmed the existence of the PS5 Pro. Nor have developers confirmed the existence of a parity clause between the PS5 and PS5 Pro. Once they do (if it happens) then we can accuse Sony of doing the same. At the moment the PS5 Pro is just a rumor and the existence of a parity clause is just speculation.

Hard facts.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Source:

Why Baldur’s Gate III is an accidental PS5 console exclusive

Larian is having trouble fitting Baldur’s Gate III on the Xbox Series S, the lower-priced and lower-powered console in Microsoft’s ninth-generation lineup. Microsoft requires games to run equally on the Xbox Series X and Series S. With Baldur’s Gate III, this parity rule means the game will be...

www.engadget.com

“Devonald said that multiplatform developers had to "optimize for the lowest performer," and, "we have a current-gen console that's not much better than a last gen one," referencing the Xbox Series S.”

…

Quick MS, more publishers to buy to silence… .

 

[Panajev2001a]

Baldur's Gate 3 Lead Says Xbox Series S Isn't Holding Back Current-Gen

Swen Vincke likened developing for the Xbox Series S to minimum spec PCs and the Nintendo Switch.

www.thegamer.com

"Larian Studios CEO and Baldur's Gate 3 creative lead Swen Vincke says that "the platform is perfectly fine".

"Do I think it holds [gaming] back?" Vincke said in an interview with Skill Up. "It just defines certain parameters within which you have to develop. There are ways of doing that - it just takes development effort [...] Despite us having grown, we don't have infinite resources. That means we can't do everything at the same time."

Looks like more a question of resources.

 

[March Climber]

Series X owners visiting Series S owners:

 

[KaiserBecks]

Forza Horizon is a cross-gen game.


Again, another bullshit comparison. A cross-gen game that does not have seamless drop in and drop out at any time or any point.

My original reply was deleted so let me rephrase it: You keep ignoring my argument. This isn’t about cross gen or anything related to that matter. All I can do is repeat myself and frankly I don’t see the point.

 

[GHG]

I'm not. I'm comparing the PS5 to a PS5 Pro. The idea is the same.

If this is really what the new "official" narrative is going to be then I think I may have given you guys a bit too much credit in the past.

 

[Mozzarella]

I dont think many of the Playstation market cares about Baldur's Gate 3, its mostly a PC game. A lot of people will probably jump on its bandwagon as a result of Starfield release though, i think its a neat move from Larian to delay 1 month back on PC so that they avoid direct competition on sales, but on the console it will fill a lot of void, the delay move was fantastic on their part.

 

[The artful mincer]

Phil said smoething along the lines of how he wont lose to Sony on either price or power.

But he will lose to them in sales!

 

[K2D]

I have never seen a platform holder finance a competitors exclusives..? Mindblown.gif

 

[8BiTw0LF]

The dude made a bunch of "Series S is better than PS5"-threads a couple years ago and now it's all damage control.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Baldur's Gate 3 Lead Says Xbox Series S Isn't Holding Back Current-Gen

Swen Vincke likened developing for the Xbox Series S to minimum spec PCs and the Nintendo Switch.

www.thegamer.com

"Larian Studios CEO and Baldur's Gate 3 creative lead Swen Vincke says that "the platform is perfectly fine".

"Do I think it holds [gaming] back?" Vincke said in an interview with Skill Up. "It just defines certain parameters within which you have to develop. There are ways of doing that - it just takes development effort [...] Despite us having grown, we don't have infinite resources. That means we can't do everything at the same time."

Looks like more a question of resources.

It is a lack of resources. You're right. It's called vram. Larian said so themselves. Good god you guys really are bent out of shape over this aren't you?

 

[cireza]

Baldur's Gate 3 Lead Says Xbox Series S Isn't Holding Back Current-Gen

Swen Vincke likened developing for the Xbox Series S to minimum spec PCs and the Nintendo Switch.

www.thegamer.com

"Larian Studios CEO and Baldur's Gate 3 creative lead Swen Vincke says that "the platform is perfectly fine".

"Do I think it holds [gaming] back?" Vincke said in an interview with Skill Up. "It just defines certain parameters within which you have to develop. There are ways of doing that - it just takes development effort [...] Despite us having grown, we don't have infinite resources. That means we can't do everything at the same time."

Looks like more a question of resources.

You did not provide the expected the receipts, please try again.

 

[alucard0712_rus]

8GB of RAM just ruined Series S, otherwise a very good 1080p next-gen console. On a brighter side we have a PC support.

 

[DeepEnigma]

My original reply was deleted so let me rephrase it: You keep ignoring my argument. This isn’t about cross gen or anything related to that matter. All I can do is repeat myself and frankly I don’t see the point.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Kakax11]

Bring back the one and only console exclusivity breaker

 

[rapid32.5]

The power of the cloud has no 2GB RAM available for the S.

 

[Clear]

It is a lack of resources. You're right. It's called vram. Larian said so themselves. Good god you guys really are bent out of shape over this aren't you?

Exactly this. Its not a problem because its utterly impossible to work around the limitations. Its a problem BECAUSE there are limitations to work around!

Who wants to be absolutely bound to making that extra effort in order to release on XBox because its mandated policy that they do both or neither?

 

[sendit]

In this case it would be wise to just release a Digital XSX as the Digital PS5 was 399 as well.

But this would mean no undercut. In that case, the XSS should've been at least more powerful than X1X across the board, the current product is weaker in some respects. Which isn't a good outlook. It should've ran X1X profiles of legacy software at the very least. I can imagine gamers holding on to their X1X instead, even though the XSS is actually better once you play on it; it offers much higher framerates in general, on top of massively reduced load times etc). But on spec sheets it sounds weaker, and it has less RAM which is actually hurting it.

This would have been the ideal situation. If they're in the position to buy out the competition, they could have ate the cost difference. Anyone defending the Series S needs to have a reality check.

 

[Fuz]

The minimum PC requirements for BG3 is far less than what consoles have except for one specific area of one specific console: XSS RAM. Not the same thing.

BG3 has nothing to do with what I was talking about, are you just mocking me?

 

[Elder Legend]

I get it, I was joking. The whole notion of the S being the base and the X launched at the same time as Pro system is crazy to me.

Ahh I gotcha. And yes, it's kind of.dumb.

 

[Freeman76]

MS are a bit ridiculous here. Or Larian, one or the other.

Just release it without co-op and add it in later, at least the 99% of people who wont even play co-op can still play the fucking game that way, and they get the sales. Stupid decision as far as I'm concerned, and its not like other games dont do it. Halo Infinite springs to mind

 

[Topher]

BG3 has nothing to do with what I was talking about, are you just mocking me?

The thread is about BG3 my man. No, I'm not mocking you. Let's drop it. Clearly we are not on the same page.

 

[SenkiDala]

I don't mind a lower specced model to keep these devs in check. If Rockstar was able to pull off RDR2 on an Xbone, then the Gotham Knight devs have no excuse for their complete failure on current-gen only systems.

Exactly. I mean you have games like Dead Space Remake, the RE Remakes, the Assassin's Creed series, Control, Cyberpunk, and so many more games with awesome graphics, getting a release on XSS, but the dude behind Surgeon Simulator is unhappy ? Let's be serious.

Oh and about Gotham Knight, well it could (should!) have been 60fps on XSX and 30 on XSS, like most of other games that I mentioned before are, and that would have been great.

Again I don't say that adapting a game for the XSS is not hard, it is obviously extra work and that need to be mentioned. But let's not exaggerate, the Baldur's Gate 3 case is exceptional as it needs to run the game twice in the same instance, but all the other devs complaining...

Phil is right to remain dedicated to release all the games on XSS, this is just respect for the millions of people who got an XSS.

 

[SlimySnake]

MS are a bit ridiculous here. Or Larian, one or the other.

Just release it without co-op and add it in later, at least the 99% of people who wont even play co-op can still play the fucking game that way, and they get the sales. Stupid decision as far as I'm concerned, and its not like other games dont do it. Halo Infinite springs to mind

Larian literally came out and said they wanted to release it without splitscreen coop but MS wouldnt allow it.

 

[Freeman76]

Larian literally came out and said they wanted to release it without splitscreen coop but MS wouldnt allow it.

Oh I didnt know that. MS need their fucking heads read

 

[kazuyamishima]

At the end, it seems that Cerny made the right choice with the whole digital/disc versions.

Two generations ago, it was the PS3 having developers complaining about it, now is the turn of the Xbox side.

 

[GHG]

Oh I didnt know that. MS need their fucking heads read

Well the simplest way for them to solve this is by allowing them to release the game with co-op on the X and without it on the S. But they don't seem to want to do that (I actually think they would potentially open the door for legal trouble if they did), so it is what it is.

 

[FunkMiller]

It was always the logical and sensible position that if you have a console with weaker specs that you insist everything runs on, it’s bound to have a detrimental effect on the stronger console. The fact this was even an argument shows how weird and warped console warring is.

XSS was a mistake. Clearly. And the more time that goes by, the more it’s deficiencies will hamper the Series X.

….mind you, MS seem quite happy to hamper the Series X with every single fucking thing they say or do, so another screw up on the pile probably doesn’t matter that much.

 

[gow3isben]

Who else is ready for the absolute shitshow that is going to be the Starfield release on Series S?

I'm thinking last gen versions of Cyberpunk on steroids

 

[MisterXDTV]

The funny thing is that probably Series S is the best selling console they have...

They can't tell people NOW that it's really NOT a next-gen console and drop the mandatory support...

It would be a PR disaster much worse than this one...

 

[DeepEnigma]

It was always the logical and sensible position that if you have a console with weaker specs that you insist everything runs on, it’s bound to have a detrimental effect on the stronger console. The fact this was even an argument shows how weird and warped console warring is.

XSS was a mistake. Clearly. And the more time that goes by, the more it’s deficiencies will hamper the Series X.

….mind you, MS seem quite happy to hamper the Series X with every single fucking thing they say or do, so another screw up on the pile probably doesn’t matter that much.

Buy up all the big third parties and IPs and really force them to be anchored by that low and slow RAM box.

 

[avin]

surely they can afford $6 per GB of vram. Sony, MS, and Sega all used to take $100 losses on these consoles. Sony took $250 losses with the PS3 for the first two years. Why cant a company that can afford to pay $70 billion for activiision while making $40 billion in profits last year spend an extra $36 to ensure ram parity?

Great post, that for once avoided unnecessary drama. You should make more of those.

avin

 

[MisterXDTV]

Or a digital Series X.

They couldn't...

That huge 52 CUs chip was too expensive to reach that price point...

But all they cared about was to win the Teraflops race....

A very important victory indeed...

LOL

 

[Katatonic]

At the end, it seems that Cerny made the right choice with the whole digital/disc versions.

Two generations ago, it was the PS3 having developers complaining about it, now is the turn of the Xbox side.

I agree with your general point, but it must be said that even though some 3rd parties struggled w the PS3 at first, Sony's 1st party was putting out stuff that sometimes looked a generation ahead of the competition. After some time, many of those same 3rd parties starting using PS3 as the lead platform.

The situation MS has been in for at least 2 gens in a row is nothing like PS3.

 

[clintar]

Lazy devs should have just adjusted resolution slider down.

 

[StereoVsn]

People should be writing entire thesis on this bizarre, boneheaded, selfish and anti-consumer move but as the article says, games media like Digital Foundry downplayed concerns before devs finally came out and called this console a potato.

Everyone wants to be friends with CEOs in this industry. There is zero accountability. I have not seen anyone pick up the phone and ask Phil or Jason Ronald to comment on literally dozens of games that have shipped without ray tracing or 60 fps modes on the series s despite MS claiming parity of features in marketing this console. The gaming journalists are too busy focusing on developer crunch or diversity issues. Great, now can we also focus a little bit on the consumer?

Here is what I would love the journalists to cover:

- Why was this thing greenlit after devs trashed it for being too underpowered? DF had several sources before its reveal saying devs were vehemently against it.
- Were the devs concerns addressed and specs upgraded? If not, why did Phil and co. ship this thing knowing devs had massive concerns about supporting it.
- At what resolution does MS step in and say it is unacceptable for a console they advertised as a 1440p console. DF said Matrix demo dropped significantly below 533p. Metro was at 512p. What are their standards for games to pass certification? 480p? 360p?
- Why should XSX owners who paid $250 extra for their console be punished with a delay because of a console they did not buy.
- What is the sales split between the two consoles? How many xss users are going to be affected by this? Why keep the sales split a secret?
- What exactly are the devs concerns? RAM, GPU, both? Go off the record if you have to, but its very surprising how few articles have been written about this. Even this one sources twitter instead of reaching out to devs themselves.
- If the pricepoint was a key target then why not take the loss like console manufacturers did in the past instead of passing down the cost to unsuspecting buyers who may not know about RAM and tflops bottlenecks. As a trillion dollar company, surely they can afford $6 per GB of vram. Sony, MS, and Sega all used to take $100 losses on these consoles. Sony took $250 losses with the PS3 for the first two years. Why cant a company that can afford to pay $70 billion for activiision while making $40 billion in profits last year spend an extra $36 to ensure ram parity?

We live in a world where Microsoft locked vital security AUDIT logs for their bread and butter Office 365 and Azure (that's what made them a trillion $ company) behind overpriced paywall of E5 licenses.

This was happening in Federal and Financial customer space. At the same time a known vulnerability reported to them in March that could only be detected via above is STILL unpatched. This shit drew real "call your senator" response, and got several Federal Agencies hacked.

And you think they care about some gamers unhappy at parity features, Xbox as a whole or whatever?

Hell, they fired bunch of security and support folks while making some of their biggest profits ever.

Basically Microsoft doesn't care.

 

[poppabk]

Well the simplest way for them to solve this is by allowing them to release the game with co-op on the X and without it on the S. But they don't seem to want to do that (I actually think they would potentially open the door for legal trouble if they did), so it is what it is.

But why not just cut it from both versions and then when they can patch it for both versions at the same time?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Lazy devs should have just adjusted resolution slider down.

 

[Konnor]

Baldur's Gate 3 Lead Says Xbox Series S Isn't Holding Back Current-Gen

Swen Vincke likened developing for the Xbox Series S to minimum spec PCs and the Nintendo Switch.

www.thegamer.com

"Larian Studios CEO and Baldur's Gate 3 creative lead Swen Vincke says that "the platform is perfectly fine".

"Do I think it holds [gaming] back?" Vincke said in an interview with Skill Up. "It just defines certain parameters within which you have to develop. There are ways of doing that - it just takes development effort [...] Despite us having grown, we don't have infinite resources. That means we can't do everything at the same time."

Looks like more a question of resources.

There's a reason devs don't port their games on PS3, PS2 , even PS1. They could definitely do it it with major compromises of course but the real reason is that it's a question of resources.

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

It was always the logical and sensible position that if you have a console with weaker specs that you insist everything runs on, it’s bound to have a detrimental effect on the stronger console. The fact this was even an argument shows how weird and warped console warring is.

XSS was a mistake. Clearly. And the more time that goes by, the more it’s deficiencies will hamper the Series X.

….mind you, MS seem quite happy to hamper the Series X with every single fucking thing they say or do, so another screw up on the pile probably doesn’t matter that much.

Xbox is in the business of making money first. So the series s wasn’t a mistake because it’s probably the only reason they sold consoles this Gen.

They didn’t feel like they could compete with the PS5 by matching the price so they needed a lower priced sku like the Series S at $299 to compete.

If you look at the threads before the Xbox Series s/x launch everyone pretty much said this is exactly what would happened by having a lower spec sku but some people love to drink the kool of lies Xbox puts out and really thought resolution would be the only trade off on the series s.

 

[Raonak]

Series S was a complete waste.

It sounded like a big brain move when they first announced it, but I don't think it was worth making at all.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

But why not just cut it from both versions and then when they can patch it for both versions at the same time?

Well back in the day they used to also have feature pairity with the PS4, where either the game had to launch at the same time as the PS4 version or include additional content... Maybe they brought that back too lol

 

[StereoVsn]

Well back in the day they used to also have feature pairity with the PS4, where either the game had to launch at the same time as the PS4 version or include additional content... Maybe they brought that back too lol

Yep, there is a parity clause MS has between Xbox to PS5 (and vice versa I think from Sony).

Edit: they would need to cut it from PS5 as well basically and then patch it back in when XSS solution is ready. Between that and Starfield it probably wasn't worth the effort or the outcry.

 

[Kilau]

The funny thing is that probably Series S is the best selling console they have...

They can't tell people NOW that it's really NOT a next-gen console and drop the mandatory support...

It would be a PR disaster much worse than this one...

They can adjust the advertising from SIMPLY NEXT-GEN to...

 

[Laieon]

They can adjust the advertising from SIMPLY NEXT-GEN to...

In the end though, we ended up loving Simple Jack.

 

[SkylineRKR]

But why not just cut it from both versions and then when they can patch it for both versions at the same time?

I figure bad outlook vs PS5.

Same as not releasing split screen on XSS; bad outlook for S. Though barely anyone likely uses the feature.

They couldn't...

That huge 52 CUs chip was too expensive to reach that price point...

But all they cared about was to win the Teraflops race....

A very important victory indeed...

LOL

PS5 often comes out on top regardless. Its not surprising to me, PS5 architecture seemed to be slightly more efficient. It has some strengths where it matters. And they have some studios that generally deliver very good work.

 

[Katatonic]

Exactly this. Its not a problem because its utterly impossible to work around the limitations. Its a problem BECAUSE there are limitations to work around!

Who wants to be absolutely bound to making that extra effort in order to release on XBox because its mandated policy that they do both or neither?

And when games don't sell on there to boot.