By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Puggsly said:
DonFerrari said: 

Sure there were demand, I bought Pro. Just didn't bought the better HW that X1X is because I mostly am interested in Sony exclusives and the few 3rd party I play wouldn't justify the extra cost. Unfortunatelly I'm not much into FPS or shotters in general where GoW and Halo would certainly be reason enough to buy it.

Of course the GPUs weren't impressive, but the CPU was even lower tier (but balanced for what they wanted on the gen, console games are much more GPU heavy), but needing to keep CPU the same for X1X and Pro (just small improvement to keep the processing for the improved pixel count) made most if not all games very limited.

Games are going to improve graphically, that is a marketing tool. So if the HW don't improve they will have to cut in other areas to keep the graphics improving.

Well the mid gen upgrades came when it was too soon to start a new gen but people wanted better graphics. I'm happy they came and my X1X will likely be a great way to play Halo Infinite.

I disagree, the CPU and GPU are fairly balanced in base hardware. Frankly, much of the bottle neck has been on the GPU which is why resolutions have varied and dynamic resolutions became common. People keep saying the 8th gen CPUs are too limited, but I don't think developers are even pushing its limits. I mean Just Cause 4 shouldn't exist if the CPUs were so limited.

In practice, it seems to me the CPUs in 8th gen consoles had enough power for what developers were generally looking to do. You have a theory and I don't feel evidence supports it.

I don't think graphics are just a marketing tool, its something many gamers care about. The 9th gen consoles will have vastly superior CPUs, but generally that will simply mean more 60 fps games.

Considering most games had bad drops in fps and some even passed long time below 30 while dynamic res and sub fullhd wasn't that problematic on ps4. gpu cpu were balanced, but when comparing to pc the cpu were lower tier to gpu.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."