By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ruler said:
Captain_Yuri said:

From a hardware perspective, I think MS had the right moves and the better execution. If I want to get a console for 4k, I want it to be a 4k experience. A lot of games on x1x are running native 4k or at the very least, higher than ps4 pro and it comes with a 4k Bluray player. It also has Super Sampling and AF for every game instead of leaving it up to the developers at 1080p. That is the kind of a console that I want if I wanted a "4k" experience at least for this generation. Yea it costs more money but if I can't afford it, may as well get the cheaper one.

The problem with the x1x is the same problem with the x1... The games... Sony has more exclusive games than Xbox does while having most if not all third party games the xbox one does.

So you have one console that gives you plenty of games and some exclusives vs another console that gives you mostly the same games plus a lot more exclusives. And that's not even getting into the whole "most xbox games are playable on PC."

I think at the end of the day, they made the right call overall with the x1x. If they made the hardware close to the ps4 pro, then there wouldn't be much of a reason to get an x1x but having a hardware that is much more powerful than the ps4 pro while having a 4k bluray player... There is at least something there to give buyers a reason.

But these features the X has over the Pro arent something you cant fundamentally fix. Downsampling is something they can update for the Pro, 4K blue ray playback they can update or release it with a PS4 Pro revision in the future. The Pro was never supposed to be a 4K machine, otherwise they would have called it the PS4K.

You also forget that the Pro came out one year earlier, so its not only about money. I dont think it was the better execution to let customers wait another year of better PS4 and PS4 Pro multiplats for something the X wouldnt accomplish in the first place. The Xbox One was always 500$, it would have been stronger than the Pro even a year earlier, and Sony wouldnt have made the Pro to be 500$ hardware.

Too bad the developers are lazy... Yea the devs can patch it in themselves except they don't. Just cause they can doesn't mean they will which is proven by the year lead the Ps4 Pro has. The devs had an entire year to patch their games with it yet they didn't. Only a few games on the pro really have Down Sampling when it comes to 1080p where as every game that has a higher resolution than 1080 on the X1X has Down Sampling and AF. And if it's not supposed to be a 4k machine, then maybe they shouldn't advertise it as that... Yet they do...

If it meant to the pro would have what the x1x has now, then I would consider it to be worth the wait. The Ps4 Pro leaves it all to the developers which is its problem. Some games you have all the features like a Down Sampling at 1080p with increased visual affects while having an option of performance mode or 4k mode while in many others, it's just basic 1440p checkerboard to 4k and that's that. With the x1x, there is more of a guarantee of what the buyers will get cause every game that has a 4k mode will also have down sampling and AF at 1080p. Yea it costs $500 but oh well... If I am gonna spend money on a mid-cycle refresh, I would want the best experience there is. If I can't afford it, well there's always the base console. The only reason I don't own a x1x is cause of the games but if the games were the same and weren't available on PC, I'd choose it over the pro any day of the week even if it costs more.



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850