@TheFrenchiestFry it really isn't the same as the series X. The GPU is significantly weaker. It's an interesting product, but it'll not just do lower resolutions, but less geometry and other effects too. It'll be interesting to see how well it fits into the development pipeline, or not as the case may be. The best thing for me is at least the the CPU is the same, so it might not be so bad.
@SirAngry It’s basically just an mid-range PC for a cheaper price. It’s a good deal if you aren’t wanting to pay the money to play games at their ‘ultra’ settings or equivalent.
@nessisonett to an extent yes, but having to produce assets twice at different mesh counts, different resolutions, maps, fewer effects etc. etc. etc. might be a tad annoying in the development pipeline. That's two optimisation tracks... actually it's a bit of a ball ache and I know people who are still annoyed about it. It's also going to impact LoD and distance draw in games, but thankfully they finally went with parity on the CPU, because that could've been a disaster.
@SirAngry PC games already do that and every Xbox exclusive is also coming to PC through the Universal Windows thingy. It’s more work with optimisation but many of these devs would have that mindset anyway due to the mid-gen consoles being released and splitting optimisation tracks. It’s definitely a bit of a minefield though, especially if Microsoft insist on two versions before they’ll allow the game to release.
@nessisonett I work with many of these Devs and if you think PC games are optimised they most certainly aren't. lol. Trust me, it's a ball ache for most studios. Those who shift their pipelines over to middleware like CryEngine or UE5 might have a smoother time of it, but the XSS is not a welcome addition to the pipeline for many. Plus you really have to polish console games to get something that's acceptable to most gamers. PC gamers although vocal and grumpy, are actually far more forgiving and willing to get their hands dirty to make sure that games run well.
I also think the most requested thing that Cerny would have had on his tours of studios was no mid-gen upgrades. lol. Microsoft have gone for a two-tier environment from the off. It's an interesting strategy that's for sure.
@Kefka2589 I actually think it depends on money as always. If an install base is big enough people will still develop for it. However, I think maybe convincing teams to develop timed exclusives this generation might be cheaper. I'd bet your 6 and 12 month timed exclusives might be on the increase, give the team time to optimise for the other systems they've developed for. It's not too bad, but it might throw some teams some curve balls.
@SirAngry Alright man I totally understand. I don't want to put pressure on you by any means. Though I would appreciate it if you could only "imply" if there is a substantial performance difference between PS5 and XSX? In terms of GPU performance I mean.
@Kefka2589 there's no money for big developers in game pass. Maybe for sweating money out of products that's two or three years old, but for Microsoft it'll continue to lose money for the foreseeable future. if they get more subs then developers will ask for more money, it's as simple as that. I think going forward Game Pass will morph into a charge for free to play GaaS type products, and some smaller indie games that'll use it for a month or so as a kind of extended demo.
@Kefka2589 agreed, the interesting aspect to me is that Microsoft seem keen to do away with console generations entirely and move to constant iteration like phones. Maybe locking people into constant iteration via monthly payments. Might be enticing for some people. Maybe the industry is ready for it, maybe not, I guess we're about to find out. Sony's we believe in generations statement was a statement of intent.
@nessisonett also I realised I didn't answer this, but yes, Microsoft require you to provide XSS and XSX "version" as it were to get through certification. I can't just release my game on X or S. This was something most studios and publishers wanted to avoid, so, yeah I think Microsoft have ground a few gears. However, it'll rapidly become the new normal.
Always planned on getting the PS5 (optical version) and up until yesterday had no interest in getting a new Xbox of any variety but this digital edition has changed my mind. I have a few years of Game Pass stacked up so I'll definitely pick this one up, hopefully on day one to replace my OG XBO.
I really don't think this is out there to compete with PS5 Digital but I'm sure there are plenty of people like me who use Game Pass on an old XBO that will now upgrade to this version and I expect a lot of curious would be gamers will be interested in it too. Great move by Microsoft and a great price too.
@Kidfried - Well the OG XBO is showing its age a bit now with some newer games. I have a 4K HDR TV and the base XBO doesn't support HDR which I'm a big fan of. I don't use it enough to warrant buying a 1X or Series X but I do use it enough that for that price point I can justify the upgrade.
While I have no interest in the Series S, it is a play. It's a great machine for the fortnite generation. Add in game pass for 3 months and for under £300 you have a next gen console with over 100 games and its Fortnite ready.
Saying PS5 digital and Series S are a different class of console is taking a lot for granted, The PS5 is only able to keep those boost clocks going for a couple of seconds. It is a 9 TFLOP console 99% of the time. Rumor has been the Series S is 4 TFLOPs but the design seems optimized to cool around 7 TFLOPs.
If this is true it could put the Series S closer to the PS5 in performance than the PS5 is to the Series X.
My real point is don't write off anything until we have the full details and 3rd party testing will give us the performance details not manufactures stat sheets
@TooBarFoo sorry, I will take you to task and stop this now. The PS5 is capable of running boost clocks for way more than a couple of seconds. It is designed to maintain the "boost" clocks as standard. It drops when load isn't so high to help with longevity of components. The PS5 is not a 9 TFLOP machine, and this is the one piece of BS about the next-gen systems I wish would stop. That and the Xbox Series X/S SSD being terrible, it's not, and it won't massively impact the sorts of games that can be produced, it's nonsense and there are techniques around any bandwidth deficits the Xbox Series X/S may have. I could go into the math of the two systems, but I quite frankly think there's no point. Suffice to say both Microsoft and Sony targeted very similar end results that gamers will see on screen. But both took very, very different engineering routes to get there. It will be just as interesting for me to see how it all plays out, but in simple terms Sony sought to have a very fast system that can keep it's algorithm units (CPU and GPU) supplied with tasks to get closer to peak usage as average. Microsoft went the massively parallel route and brute force, but keeping 52 compute units fully tasked isn't easy, but there is a pay off if you manage it. The PS5 will run at or close to it's theoretical peak performance most of the time I'd assume, in fact with the cache scrubbers and memory management the majority of the computational power will by directed at what is on screen. The Xbox Series consoles have chosen to stick with the current paradigm (which for many is very, very welcome) and help with current rendering pipelines... but that means keeping the CPU and GPU at peaks is going to be very hard. However, in those moments where things get heavy in terms of load the Xbox should have head room and cope theoretically with excess demand. Sony hope with their priority levels and scrubbers that they can avoid excess demand and run near peak. Just drives me slightly mad how the two philosophies are misrepresented by people who generally haven't got a clue.
Forums
Topic: PS5 Digital vs. XSS
Posts 21 to 40 of 104
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.