Is the Xbox Series S a "potato" console holding next gen game dev back?

[Strafe]

21 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Yeah whatever, developers are held back by any hardware than isn’t the latest Nvidia GTX 4090, using your own argument.

I didn’t say that, either.

[Stanley]

1 minute ago, Strafe said:

I didn’t say that, either.

There isn’t one single example of a game held back by Series S, further to that some of the greatest games this generation, and of all time, run on hardware considerably less powerful than that. 

[Strafe]

Isn’t there? I don’t know and neither do you and you’re talking about stuff that’s been released for both systems already.  So unless you have access to every developers design documents of games developed for the series X/S I can’t see how you could be so sure. I don’t see it as unlikely that they’d need to accommodate it in some way.

 

I’m not saying any of these things are game breaking but when you have game developers talking about having to work for limitations, it speaks for itself.

 

For what it’s worth I think the S is probably a good thing, just not for me. A higher player base means (hopefully) bigger budget games.

[Broker]

7 hours ago, bear said:

Do open world games need to get bigger? 

 

I played through Horizon Zero Dawn earlier this year and the world felt plenty big enough. If anything it felt a bit too big as so much of it was practically empty. 

 

I don't think the worlds need to get bigger but I'd like to see what's there get more interesting or react to what you're doing. Stuff like the Nemesis system or BotWs physicsy doddaddery. 

Games don’t necessarily need to get bigger, but up until the PS360 generation it felt like we were always getting a new biggest game ever and the amount of world games could have was always increasing. Whereas now most of the biggest games ever made are 15 years old. 

 

7 hours ago, JPL said:

I wasn't being entirely serious, but that's a bit of an eye-opener if true. Maybe it's the density of things to do in Elden Ring that make it feel endless.

Oh yeah, ER has a lot of stuff squeezed into it’s map. 

[TehStu]

Thanks Strafe, I read those. Sounds like it doesn't necessarily nukes the concept but speaks to optimization on the dev tools.

 

I acknowledge that Microsoft may have fluffed the concept and inadvertently introduced bottlenecks. Again, they'll reveal themselves on the PS5 eventually.

 

What we clearly don't have is "designing for the actual XB1 potato and anything the better machines do is a bonus" situation.

[Stanley]

3 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Isn’t there? I don’t know and neither do you and you’re talking about stuff that’s been released for both systems already.  So unless you have access to every developers design documents of games developed for the series X/S I can’t see how you could be so sure. I don’t see it as unlikely that they’d need to accommodate it in some way.

 

I’m not saying any of these things are game breaking but when you have game developers talking about having to work for limitations, it speaks for itself.

 

For what it’s worth I think the S is probably a good thing, just not for me. A higher player base means (hopefully) bigger budget games.

Then we can only base our judgement on what is available. There will always be limitations. You could be given 4090 as your base level and there will still be developers who overshoot. And as a flip side to that there will always be developers who confound expectations and push hardware beyond what we expect, there are plenty of examples there also. 

[Strafe]

12 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Then we can only base our judgement on what is available. There will always be limitations. You could be given 4090 as your base level and there will still be developers who overshoot. And as a flip side to that there will always be developers who confound expectations and push hardware beyond what we expect, there are plenty of examples there also. 

I’m basing my opinion on the developers who have been quoted. It’s not the end of the world though.

[Stanley]

5 minutes ago, Strafe said:

I’m basing my opinion on the developers who have been quoted. It’s not the end of the world though.

Id software? Their games look amazing on Series S. Unreal Engine 4 had similar issues last gen as I recall, but it’s middleware, and it will be adapted as necessary, and that Matrix thing ran on it. Until we have actual evidence of games that struggle on Series S or, more to the point, aren’t possible, then I remain sceptical. 

[Qazimod]

8 hours ago, bear said:

Do open world games need to get bigger? 

 

I played through Horizon Zero Dawn earlier this year and the world felt plenty big enough. If anything it felt a bit too big as so much of it was practically empty. 

 

I don't think the worlds need to get bigger but I'd like to see what's there get more interesting or react to what you're doing. Stuff like the Nemesis system or BotWs physicsy doddaddery.

 

I'd take a smaller "open world" with more going on inside it. Something like Deus Ex is more like "urban hubs connected by loading screens", but the sense of "freedom" comes from the amount of options available to you - and from how many interactive, reactive things are in the world. The old Yakuza city maps feel more modest than something like GTA but they get away with it because of the range of minigames and sidequests and opportunities for stat building.

[Strafe]

14 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Id software? Their games look amazing on Series S. Unreal Engine 4 had similar issues last gen as I recall, but it’s middleware, and it will be adapted as necessary, and that Matrix thing ran on it. Until we have actual evidence of games that struggle on Series S or, more to the point, aren’t possible, then I remain sceptical. 

No one is saying their games don’t look amazing on series S.

 

I‘n just taking the words of people who actually make the games rather than subjective optimism.

[Stanley]

1 minute ago, Strafe said:

No one is saying their games don’t look amazing on series S.

 

I‘n just taking the words of people who actually make the games rather than subjective optimism.

Tenuous though isn’t it? It’s not optimism that means all games released so far run perfectly well on Series S. The system has been designed to run the same games as Series X but at a lower resolution, and that’s what it does. PS5 doesn’t have the same ‘bottleneck’ so what games are there for that system that wouldn’t run on Series S? None that I can think of. 
 

As I said earlier there are only two games I can think of that push the hardware to the extent they wouldn’t work on last gen consoles, Returnal, and Flight Sim, and Flight Sim works fine. Maybe Ratchet & Clank too. 

[TehStu]

Betteridge's law of thread titles.

[JPL]

13 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Tenuous though isn’t it? It’s not optimism that means all games released so far run perfectly well on Series S. The system has been designed to run the same games as Series X but at a lower resolution, and that’s what it does. PS5 doesn’t have the same ‘bottleneck’ so what games are there for that system that wouldn’t run on Series S? None that I can think of. 
 

As I said earlier there are only two games I can think of that push the hardware to the extent they wouldn’t work on last gen consoles, Returnal, and Flight Sim, and Flight Sim works fine. Maybe Ratchet & Clank too. 

I haven’t got a PS5 yet so haven’t played it, but what is it about Returnal that couldn’t have been done on last gen systems?

[Strafe]

9 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Tenuous though isn’t it? It’s not optimism that means all games released so far run perfectly well on Series S. The system has been designed to run the same games as Series X but at a lower resolution, and that’s what it does. PS5 doesn’t have the same ‘bottleneck’ so what games are there for that system that wouldn’t run on Series S? None that I can think of. 
 

As I said earlier there are only two games I can think of that push the hardware to the extent they wouldn’t work on last gen consoles, Returnal, and Flight Sim, and Flight Sim works fine. Maybe Ratchet & Clank too. 

Someone asked in the thread title, someone else posted actual developer comments that said “well a bit, yeah” and you were all  “if you can dream it you can do it”.

 

I don’t think it’s a massive issue, I just agree that it creates some limitations. Using examples of games that have already been released as evidence that it isn’t the case is bonkers if you think about it because something looking amazing doesn’t prevent the opportunity for something looking even more amazing.

 

But like I said, I think the S is on balance a net good thing for gamers.

 

 

 

 

[Stanley]

Just now, JPL said:

I haven’t got a PS5 yet so haven’t played it, but what is it about Returnal that couldn’t have been done on last gen systems?

60FPS is essential for this type of game (shoot em up) and just the sheer amount of shit and effects moving about in a 3D space, and none of it feels superfluous. It’s worth owning a PS5 for, or a PC of its on that now, I’m not sure. 

[Strafe]

1 minute ago, JPL said:

I haven’t got a PS5 yet so haven’t played it, but what is it about Returnal that couldn’t have been done on last gen systems?

Mega shiny 60fps graphics!

[Stanley]

2 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Someone asked in the thread title, someone else posted actual developer comments that said “well a bit, yeah” and you were all  “if you can dream it you can do it”.

 

I don’t think it’s a massive issue, I just agree that it creates some limitations. Using examples of games that have already been released as evidence that it isn’t the case is bonkers if you think about it because something looking amazing doesn’t prevent the opportunity for something looking even more amazing.

 

But like I said, I think the S is on balance a net good thing for gamers.

 

 

 

 

Other than games released what evidence is there of these limitations, and surely they apply to Series X as well, or the very least PS5? 

[JPL]

7 minutes ago, Stanley said:

60FPS is essential for this type of game (shoot em up) and just the sheer amount of shit and effects moving about in a 3D space, and none of it feels superfluous. It’s worth owning a PS5 for, or a PC of its on that now, I’m not sure. 

 

7 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Mega shiny 60fps graphics!

Nice! It’s definitely on my list for when I finally pick one up.

[Stanley]

1 minute ago, JPL said:

 

Nice! It’s definitely on my list for when I finally pick one up.

It doesn’t get enough praise, and it’s had a lot praise! It’s phenomenal. Imagine the game of your dreams if you grew up during the coin-op era. This is that game. 

[Strafe]

7 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Other than games released what evidence is there of these limitations, and surely they apply to Series X as well, or the very least PS5? 

The people who make the games saying that there are limitations. It’s a page back and has been quoted a few times.

 

Limitations obviously apply to any and all hardware but we’re talking about the S as the series S and X are slightly more unique in that it’s the first time you have two different specs of machine when it launched rather than a pro model down the road.

[Thor]

I think Starfield will be the biggest test of this scenario. 

 

Returnal is a good should, Series S won't that at 60fps, even at 1080p. Not a chance. And that's my issue with the Series S. Pre-launch it was marketed as a console that would run games the same as the Series X, only at a lower resolution. Not. The. Fuck. Ing. Case. Nine times out of ten the game also runs at 30fp 

 

I believe @Stanley is right, in that so far there's nothing to show the Series S has held back a game for the Series X. But as time goes on and games get more advanced, MS's mandate that all games should run on both consoles will become an issue. 

 

[Stanley]

16 minutes ago, Strafe said:

The people who make the games saying that there are limitations. It’s a page back and has been quoted a few times.

 

Limitations obviously apply to any and all hardware but we’re talking about the S as the series S and X are slightly more unique in that it’s the first time you have two different specs of machine when it launched rather than a pro model down the road.

Look at Flight Sim for evidence. No game pushes PC harder and yet it runs on Series S. I can’t think of any forthcoming games that I’m concerned would struggle, and there are loads on the horizon (excuse the pun).

 

Id themselves got Doom Eternal running acceptably on Switch, and that’s still a cutting edge PC game. They are also a PC developer at heart and I can imagine them always trying to push the envelope when it comes to development, which is no doubt where their comments come from, but they’ll find a way because they are wizards, 

[JPL]

4 minutes ago, Thor said:

I think Starfield will be the biggest test of this scenario. 

 

Returnal is a good should, Series S won't that at 60fps, even at 1080p. Not a chance. And that's my issue with the Series S. Pre-launch it was marketed as a console that would run games the same as the Series X, only at a lower resolution. Not. The. Fuck. Ing. Case. Nine times out of ten the game also runs at 30fp 

 

I believe @Stanley is right, in that so far there's nothing to show the Series S has held back a game for the Series X. But as time goes on and games get more advanced, MS's mandate that all games should run on both consoles will become an issue. 

 

I thought it was if the X ran a game at 4K/60, the S should be able to do it at 1080/60 at least, 1440/60 at best. Is that not the case? I have an X myself, but whenever I see my boys playing on their S, it looks great to me.

 

I get your point about weaker hardware causing them problems though. Look what happened with Halo Infinite, undoubtedly because it had to run on the One. I really hope they’re in a better position this time and have t hamstrung themselves.

[Thor]

4 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Id themselves got Doom Eternal running acceptably on Switch, and that’s still a cutting edge PC game.

Nope. It looks great, don't get me wrong, but cutting edge? Nowhere near. 

[TehStu]

16 minutes ago, Thor said:

But as time goes on and games get more advanced, MS's mandate that all games should run on both consoles will become an issue. 

These are odd, layman's assertions. Look at what the devs actually said, it's fairly loose language. From that we extrapolate that when the X/PS5 hit their stride at 4k (and frequently at 30 FPS, you'll note), you can't do that same thing at 1080p on the S. That's what we're outright saying, that they didn't scale the hardware well enough.

 

I'm mostly playing Cyberpunk on an XB1, because I can't play in front of my kids.

 

Edit - thinking more about this, "Series" has failed if games can't eventually scale to the S (or we get weird scaled back ports, like that FH on the 360). Hope not, need the whole thing to work to keep everyone competing honestly.

[Hodge]

Unless series X and PS5 are targeting there games at 1080p 30fps down the line (let's face it's, it's game over for them at this point) then there ain't gonna be a problem with Series S.

 

Plagues tale requiem is case and point on this subject. Very stunning game, which is extremely demanding on resources when it comes to pc and console. scales down beautifully on series s and have to drop my 6700xt down to 1080p medium to maintain steady 60fps (which is comparative to series X/PS5 performance) 

 

If people think there is gonna be some magical headroom in the future for these consoles, they are dreaming. They are being maxed out already, and series S goes hand in hand with keeping up but at lower res and maybe tweaked graphical settings.

 

 

[Strafe]

8 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Look at Flight Sim for evidence. No game pushes PC harder and yet it runs on Series S. I can’t think of any forthcoming games that I’m concerned would struggle, and there are loads on the horizon (excuse the pun).

 

Id themselves got Doom Eternal running acceptably on Switch, and that’s still a cutting edge PC game. They are also a PC developer at heart and I can imagine them always trying to push the envelope when it comes to development, which is no doubt where their comments come from, but they’ll find a way because they are wizards, 

No, Panic Button got Doom running on Switch. ID don’t dirty their hands with that sort of thing.

 

Arghhhh. Again, and I’m really trying here, it’s still isn’t the stuff you know about that’s in question. It’s the games - or more likely features within them - that may end up compromised due to having to work to a lower end spec.

The thread title is asking if it’s holding development back. And the answer to that is, “potentially, yes”. We probably won’t be aware of it because no developer is going to release a game and say “we actually had this extra feature but had to drop it because whilst we had it on Series X we couldn’t get it working well on the S and Microsoft won’t allow it”.

 

No one is saying that the S can’t run perfectly serviceable versions of games already released. Well, maybe Digital Foundry when they get pernickety but you get my drift.

 

 

[Thor]

28 minutes ago, TehStu said:

These are odd, layman's assertions. Look at what the devs actually said, it's fairly loose language. From that we extrapolate that when the X/PS5 hit their stride at 4k (and frequently at 30 FPS, you'll note), you can't do that same thing at 1080p on the S. That's what we're outright saying, that they didn't scale the hardware well enough.

But my odd, layman's assertions point to the same conclusion you arrived at. 

 

13 minutes ago, Hodge said:

If people think there is gonna be some magical headroom in the future for these consoles, they are dreaming. They are being maxed out already

Lol. We get this every generation. Early in the consoles life cycles people think the devs have maxed them out, then something comes out that those same people thought not possible. GTA V was an Xbox 360 game, The Last of Us Part II was a PS4 game, a lot of people forget this, and just look at those games, then look at the hardware they originally run on.

 

We're not anywhere near seeing what these consoles are capable of. 

[SMD]

Is rllmuk discussion a "potato" board holding next gen game dev discussion back?

[AlexM]

It's got the CPU and Storage, those are the two important areas - graphics can be scaled back. I can't imagine a game being created for a PS5/XSX and it not being possible to scale back the graphical effects to make it work, that doesn't mean developers want to do that, it's more work!

 

I have an RX580 in my PC at the moment (hand me down) and it's definitely a potato, but I can still get the latest games running at 3440x1440 60fps - some look like shit (Back 4 Blood is very smudgy with FSR 1.0) but scaling technology is always improving AND the Series S is only targeting 1080p. Good developers will make it work, given time and resources (ha!).