What is w10?

Minnesänger wrote:

Diluted Dante wrote:

Would my original Bone work with these Series X games, or does it need to be at least an S?

OG Bone will work. It’ll run like shit.

Perfect, I can legitimately review bomb games then.

Minnesänger wrote:

Diluted Dante wrote:

Would my original Bone work with these Series X games, or does it need to be at least an S?

OG Bone will work. It’ll run like shit.

It says a lot that a company would sacrifice the end user experience just to say 'but at least you can run it on your 6 year old system!'

Remember when computer and video games used to review the amiga version of a game and give it 90+% and then there would be a little side box with the c64 score. It wasn't as high, mostly.

The critical question is this: could Titanfall or Rise of the Tomb Raider be as impressive as they were on Xbox One if Respawn and Crystal Dynamics had to factor in Xbox 360 in the initial design phase? Similarly, while Dead Rising 3 had its issues on Xbox One, it's clear that the developers had a vision that out-stripped the capabilities of Xbox 360. Meanwhile, Ryse: Son of Rome may have started out as an Xbox 360 Kinect title, but it evolved into something very different - a technically brilliant release that set the bar in several respects for the rendering technologies that would come to dominate the current generation. Would any of these titles have been anything like the same experience if the developers had one eye towards accommodating Xbox 360?

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-can-microsoft-deliver-next-gen-experiences-while-still-supporting-xbox-one Titanfall was released on the 360, so I'm not sure what they're on about there. Since most of it was developed with that platform in mind, Ryse could have been released on 360 too, but obviously a bit less shiny. Rise of the Tomb Raider wasn't a launch title, it came out in 2015, the Xbone was out in 2013, so it falls into the bracket where they're thinking about releasing exclusives. Dead Rising 3 seems to be the one where you can't get it done without doing shit like breaking the world into chunks with load screens between them, or significantly reducing the number of enemies you're capable of having on screen at the same time and how you interact with them. Changing those goes against everything the game is trying to do, so I understand that you can't compromise there. But then again, there's this which shows that DR4 is nerfed in some areas where the original is better: How is that stuff possible on previous gen hardware but not in a sequel released a decade later, three years into the next generation? I'd be interested to see how long it takes to develop a AAA game, how long the specs for the next gen consoles have been known, and how the two match up to give a release window. I'd not be surprised if it turns out to be one or two years after launch.

As Eric pointed out earlier, many of the 360 ports of Xbox One games where handled by external dev teams who could cut, tweak and optimise to get things working smoothly. John Linneman talks about it here @1:47. It's not going to be the same as it was back then, now it looks like it will be one disc and game version that is supposed to work across multiple devices and two generations.

There's only so much basic graphics and setting slider adjustments you can make before devs really need to get their hands dirty and make bigger adjustments to get things working right. A common thing seen in game ports to weaker hardware over the decades has been to add walls or corridors in parts of levels to make it so there was less stuff on screen at particular times, which makes it easier for weak hardware to keep up a good framerate. I don't know if that sort of thing could be done effectively and easily enough anymore if it's all on the one disc. The general architecture between next and current gen is quite similar though, so porting is far more straightforward.

I haven't really seen much of Ryse, but I think the problems with getting it running on the 360 would go beyond it being just 'a bit less shiny'. It looks like there's quite a bit going on in the background, tons of Romans and barbarians fighting away, definitely can't see it having anything like the same feel on 360 hardware.

In regards to the differences in details between Dead Rising 1 and later games; it's not that they couldn't do that stuff, they just didn't bother for whatever reason. I would speculate that larger game worlds with a greater level of graphical fidelity and detail make putting some of these neat details in too costly in terms of the development time needed, and other things get prioritised over nice animations and effects. It might also be the case that it's easier to have lots of cool details in a more constrained game world than in a larger one, there's a problem of scaling as things get bigger and more complex, less system resources for such frivolities. I would like to see the general attention to detail shown in GTA4, DR1, FC2 to come back again soon though.

And again I think it's important to remember that the leap in CPU performance this time around is much greater, back when the current gen machines released they were pretty weak compared to even a very modest gaming PC. Now though the hardware is very respectable indeed, the nextboxes will actually be ahead of many mid range PCs from the last few years I would wager.

I don't understand why this means people immediately get a ps5 over Xbox

Multiplatform games will most likely still look and perform better on Xbox series x, if we only go by stats.

For me, I'd rather wait for Sony to have 3/4 exclusive strong games so when I get one it's worth it

MattyJ wrote:

Multiplatform games will most likely still look and perform better on Xbox series x, if we only go by stats.

For me, I'd rather wait for Sony to have 3/4 exclusive strong games so when I get one it's worth it

But you’re guessing about whether they will look/play better on the X series though, nothings been confirmed yet.

Sony will probably follow MS' strategy.
I read somewhere (eurogamer?) they seem to have this fancy new amd navi/zen2 chiplet processor that can emulate PS4 cpu down to clockspeed level. That's the base and Pro PS4 models. Online stores and building your own library over generations (think: Steam) will be the new console thing. MS is exploring alternatives with gamepass and XStream too, they don't seem to want to put all their eggs into a 1x basket.

If you are a diy guy and love tinkering, anything is possible.

GurtTractor wrote:

No idea how they are going to handle that, or if there's a good solution.

FFXIV ended service on PS3 with the launch of 3.0. They could do the same and end PS4 support with a particular expansion or patch update.

Minnesänger wrote:

I agree with much of this but I think there's a couple of thing worth considering:

1. The last couple of gens have been LONG. 7 years now for these 2 gens. And this gen wasn't a huge leap - the consoles were mid-range on launch. The PS5 and Series X will be much bigger jumps.

2. Cross-gen is fine, and yes, most games will be ok BUT the issue isn't really whether games can cross gen with the best Xbox One hardware - i'm specifically worried about the Xbox One S. The X is a great bit of kit and has enough power for most new gen games, probably. But the S is the weakest, easily, of the 4 main home console SKUs out today. It reliably runs new releases at the lowest resolutions and the lowest framerates. It has hit its limits. Any Xbox first-party exclusives could be fine on the X...but the S is now an anchor around the neck of the entire endeavour for the next 2 years. There 100% will be compromises. 

3. Sony will come out strong - Santa Monica, Insomniac and Guerrilla will have games ready within the first two years, almost without doubt. First party games should be flagships. Sony, for all their faults, get that. The first 2 years of the PS5 will be stronger than the first 2 years of the PS4, and that might make a difference when consumers look to upgrade, especially as backwards compatibility, without trying to be fanboyish, will probably be a bigger sell for the PS5 (with the PS4 catalogue) than the Series X (with the One catalogue).

4. Between Xcloud / Play Anywhere and the piss poor naming conventions etc. they're not doing a great job of selling me the actual box. I'd love to buy an Xbox Series X - the One was the first one I skipped and I bought a Surface Pro and 2 (!!!!!) Windows Phones - i'll buy into MS hardware if I even half-believe in what they're peddling. But, right now, I really don't. I'm not convinced in their love of the box itself, I'm seriously worried about their strategy to support the S with first-party titles, and I think their first-party studio acquisitions have been...for lack of a better word, absolute dogshit.

1. We'll find out come release, but to me the jumps aren't getting bigger from generation to generation, they're more incremental. The jump from 16bit to full 3D with Mario 64 etc felt massive, the jump (step?) from PS360 to the current gen was distinctly underwhelming. I wasn't tempted by the upgrade to Pro and X, not enough there for me. I hope you're right and the next gen blows my socks off, a new TV/monitor should aid the wow factor, so fingers crossed.

2. I'm not worried about the OG Bone and I'm still using mine. It'll be an after thought, the games will technically work, got to tick that box, sure, but they'll be nerfed to shit as the main focus will be on the next generation console. The old hardware will be where the compromises are made, not at the sharp end.

3. What makes you think they'll hit the ground running this gen when they didn't in the last one? That's going to be tricky, especially if they're trying to make use of the extra grunt in never before seen ways. I've not seen anything of their games mind.

4. I don't even know what studios they've got, and I don't know much about the Sony ones either. Guerilla is Killzone and Insomniac are Spider-Man right?

I'll be keeping my eyes open and seeing what takes my fancy. Seems like a lot of people already have their minds made up before a ball has been kicked in anger, and this news is just another nail in the Xbone coffin. I'll be doing what I did at the start of this gen, keeping my powder dry at launch, seeing how things are going then making a shrewd judgement and just buying everything anyway.

Having said that, I did get a Switch at launch but that was driven by Zelda. If someone comes up with a game as far up my street as that one I'll probably drive in day one. Horizon Zero Dawn 2 maybe?

Moot_Geeza wrote:

A Rare game was shown recently I believe. Looked a bit BotW-ish, can't remember the name.

Can't have been too much like BotW as I can't remember seeing it.

Minnesänger wrote:

Eric wrote:

The Dead Rising debate also doesn't account for the different developers involved. I think only the first was developed in house by Capcom Japan the others were farmed out which could account for the different mechanics.

It doesn't work for another reason. People compare Dead Rising 1 to 3 or 4. But compare Dead Rising 1 to what came BEFORE and what do you see? A title within the first 12 months or so or the 360s life cycle that couldn't have existed on the OG Xbox.

Mechanics dropping throughout a series is definitely a thing, it's not just Dead Rising. Elder Scrolls and Far Cry have stuff that's been dropped through the sequels, there's a video much like the DR1/4 one where some impressive physics like fire etc from Far Cry 2 are nerfed in 5.

@Cinty that's true, but once we had Dead Rising doing it's thing on 360, why are we seeing the follow ups dropping features and mechanics even though they're on a next gen system? I don't get it.

RedDave2 wrote:

OK. I dont get this approach from MS. If they were in the strongest position (ie the Sony role) it would make sense as you have those 100 million machines out there and all that brand loyalty. I dont see this helping getting Xbox back to where it can really be called a competitior to the Playstation format.

Or maybe this is microsoft moving away from hardware in a way and really just focusing on the service. Whats the chance of a nintendo machine or even an apple or google machine playing an xbox gamepass app in the near future? 

I confused.

I'd not worry about how it benefits Microsoft, concentrate on how it works, or doesn't, for you. I think if I didn't skip the X I'd be less interested in the next gen version. But as it stands, the OG Bone is well due an upgrade.