Quantcast
MS: 1st party Xbox games will be cross-gen for "next year, two years"

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - MS: 1st party Xbox games will be cross-gen for "next year, two years"

sales2099 said:
goopy20 said:

If you think there's a generational leap between the Xone and X1X version then fine. Maybe we just have different expectations. 

But how you know the generation leap will be nothing special? Having SSD as standard could be a game changer for level design, and they can do some pretty impressive things with Ray Tracing. 

I’m saying there was a significant gap, arguably generational, between Pc and Xbox One where as you played it off as superficial enhancements. Couldn’t be more wrong about that...which directly translates to what Series X will be like compared to XB1, except with added benefits like SSD and enhanced ray tracing etc. 

SSD just means less loading times and no texture pop-in. Which I assure you Series X will have that lower end Xbox’s won’t. And I all ready mentioned Turn 10 is demoing next gen ray tracing at GDC, which I assure you won’t be in the base XB versions of Forza 8. You keep proving the pro Xbox argument. Unlike Sony Ms knows how to scale down from PC for years now. 

It’s easier to make games for Pc and scale down. It’s simply less work then making it for the lowest denomination and going up. Your whole argument is just hoping that MS is making their games backwards or target weak PC specs so you can hold on to the PS power narrative. Which is it??? Are they making the XB1 as base platform or mainstream PC specs as the base? Can’t have it both ways and you just come across as desperately trying to figure out a way that makes Xbox look bad while assuming everything in the process. 

Like I said, I think we just have different expectations. I played Gears 5 on ultra settings on pc and to me it's hard to notice the difference between the base Xone version. Besides the resolution and fps, of course, and there are some extra reflections here and there. You can expect the same thing for Halo Infinite, so if your satisfied with that, then good for you. Just don't expect better ai, physics, advanced ray tracing and bigger, more complex level design compared to the xone version. 



Around the Network
goopy20 said:
sales2099 said:

I’m saying there was a significant gap, arguably generational, between Pc and Xbox One where as you played it off as superficial enhancements. Couldn’t be more wrong about that...which directly translates to what Series X will be like compared to XB1, except with added benefits like SSD and enhanced ray tracing etc. 

SSD just means less loading times and no texture pop-in. Which I assure you Series X will have that lower end Xbox’s won’t. And I all ready mentioned Turn 10 is demoing next gen ray tracing at GDC, which I assure you won’t be in the base XB versions of Forza 8. You keep proving the pro Xbox argument. Unlike Sony Ms knows how to scale down from PC for years now. 

It’s easier to make games for Pc and scale down. It’s simply less work then making it for the lowest denomination and going up. Your whole argument is just hoping that MS is making their games backwards or target weak PC specs so you can hold on to the PS power narrative. Which is it??? Are they making the XB1 as base platform or mainstream PC specs as the base? Can’t have it both ways and you just come across as desperately trying to figure out a way that makes Xbox look bad while assuming everything in the process. 

Like I said, I think we just have different expectations. I played Gears 5 on ultra settings on pc and to me it's hard to notice the difference between the base Xone version. Besides the resolution and fps, of course, and there are some extra reflections here and there. You can expect the same thing for Halo Infinite, so if your satisfied with that, then good for you. Just don't expect better ai, physics, advanced ray tracing and bigger, more complex level design compared to the xone version. 

Ya I find that hard to believe. Given how you also said Game Pass is only full of bargain bin titles. The vid link I gave you seemed to think the PC version dwarfed the Xbox versions. We really don’t know until we see, but I’m not without evidence considering MS is a PC developer in regards to their top games and go from there. You can try to argue otherwise but that’s just you hoping Xbox looks bad. 

On the off chance you are getting off on triggering Xbox fans like myself, I rather am enjoying this debate. Compared to the 2013 reveal, which I was here on Vgchartz in the trenches, this is a cake walk if this is the best anti Xbox argument. It tells me MS is doing much better this time around :)

Last edited by sales2099 - 2 days ago

___________

goopy20 said:

It's true that we don't know the exact specs, but it's pretty safe to assume that they're going to be lot more powerful than the average gaming pc when they launch.

The average PC's specs will have increased by the time next-gen launches. But does it even really matter? Games scale across hardware on PC.

goopy20 said:

I mean around 75% of the Steam users are gaming on a GTX1060 or lower and 50% of them have 8gb of ram. Just because things like SSD have been around on pc for a long time, doesn't mean the bulk of pc gamers have a 1TB SSD and play all their games from there. Most pc's have a 250GB SSD, which barely fits the OS and 2 games. Also, there isn't a single pc game that's designed with SSD in mind and lists it as a minimum requirement.

Are you even sure about that?
Geforce GTX 1060 is 13.51%
Geforce GTX 1070 is 4.55%
Geforce GTX 1080 is 2.8%
RTX 2060 is 2.2%
Geforce GTX 1660 Ti is 1.97%
Radeon RX 580 is 1.85%
Geforce RTX 2070 is 1.74%
Geforce GTX 1080Ti is 1.73%
Geforce GTX 1070Ti is 1.23%
Geforce GTX 1660 is 1.18%
Geforce RTX 2080 is 1.07%
Geforce RTX 2070 Super is 0.8%
Geforce RTX 2080 TI is 0.73%
Radeon RX 480 is 0.65%
Geforce RTX 2060 Super is 0.49%
Geforce GTX 980 is 0.49%
Geforce GTX 980Ti is 0.46%
Radeon RX 5700XT is 0.45%
Radeon RX 590 is 0.38%
Geforce RTX 2080 Super is 0.32%
Geforce GTX 1660 Super is 0.18%
Radeon RX 5700 is 0.16%

That is 38.94% that is a Geforce 1060 or higher.

You do have GPU's like the Radeon R9 380, Fury, Vega 7, Vega 56, Vega 64 which I haven't included.

It also doesn't include Multi-GPU configurations... So rigs with (For example) Dual-Radeon RX 570's which would wipe the floor with a 1060 isn't accounted for.

The amount of VRAM a GPU has is irrelevant, the PC's memory hierarchy is different to that of a consoles... Just because a GPU has 4GB of on-board Ram doesn't mean the GPU can't use 16GB of Ram.

The Size of the SSD is irrelevant. Just because your SSD is larger, doesn't make your games faster.
Nor do we even know the size of the consoles SSD anyway or how said SSD's will be implemented, they might be just a tiny Cache drive?

An SSD isn't a replacement for Ram, the PC doesn't need super fast SSD's as urgently because the PC simply has more Ram than consoles, it can dump more data into System memory rather than rely on streaming assets.

goopy20 said:

"It’s not just a question of simply slapping an SSD into the system, Sony is claiming that it, presumably alongside AMD, has developed the input/output system to offer something over and above what you’d get from simply dropping some NAND flash into a console. Given that the next generation of AMD Ryzen 3000 CPUs, and the upcoming Navi GPUs, are expected to both be operating on the PCIe 4.0 interface those claims of Sony’s PS5 SSD offering greater raw bandwidth than anything on the PC at the moment make sense. Realistically that’s likely only to be a claim it can make until AMD does launch the new CPUs and accompanying X570 motherboards with their PCIe 4.0 support. The new PCIe interface offers twice the theoretical bandwidth of PCIe 4.0, so the PC won’t be left behind when it comes to raw performance. 

What might impact it, however, is the fact that PS5 developers will be able to rely on a certain level of storage performance from their hardware. A level of performance that they won’t have experienced on consoles before, and cannot rely on when it comes to PC game development either. That could end up in some incredibly rich, detailed, vast gameworlds, all without any loading screens breaking that sense of immersion. When you’ve still got some PC gamers still running from anachronistic spinning data platters that’s not necessarily something that could be matched by default on any subsequent PC port. That, more than anything the PS5’s AMD GPU or CPU performance can offer, could make the next-gen console’s games more advanced than your standard PC gaming fare.

PC has faster SSD implementations than what a single SSD leveraging the PCI-E 4.0 interface can offer.

They are just trying to big note themselves... Console manufacturers do it every generation.
I am Still waiting for the extra ACE units and 8GB GDDR5 Ram in the base Playstation 4 to offer games that look better than a 6GB Geforce GTX 1060... Because that simply didn't happen did it?

16GB or more of System memory is now accounting for 45% of PC's... That includes laptops, I would assume desktops would be a higher percentage. - But you also need to account for the 43.96% of PC's with 6-8-12GB or more of video memory on top of that, PC has split memory pools, large memory pools at that, consoles have a unified memory architecture which means it has to share bandwidth and memory capacity with every component in the system.

Plus PC hardware isn't going to stop improving, PC's constantly gets more powerful over time... And the next-gen consoles aren't even out yet, nor will games utilize the console hardware completely in the first year or two anyway.

In the end it doesn't matter anyway, if you want the best graphics, best sound, shortest load times, best control input, best networking, cheapest game prices, the PC is where it's at... If you want hardware that is cheaper, then that is an option on PC as games will scale. - The power of choice.

goopy20 said:

They are talking about 12Tflops, which if true, puts it between a RTX2080 Super and RTX2080 Ti.

That doesn't mean that at all. Flops doesn't equate to actual gaming performance.

goopy20 said:

If you think there's a generational leap between the Xone and X1X version then fine. Maybe we just have different expectations. 

But how you know the generation leap will be nothing special? Having SSD as standard could be a game changer for level design, and they can do some pretty impressive things with Ray Tracing. 

StarCitizen has shown what it's doing with streaming and level design by leveraging SSD's extensively, but in saying that, it's not something that can't be done by throwing more RAM at the problem.

We don't know how next-gen will compare in regards to Ray Tracing, AMD doesn't even have a hardware accelerated Ray Tracing GPU on the market yet, for all we know it's substantially inferior to nVidia's RTX.


HollyGamer said:

What is actually are you trying to argue here,  i already explained that  RT that i mentioned  is the form or Path Tracing on modern GPU. It's different from Ray Marching and limited form ray tracing from the past Crytek engine. Even Crytek has a new technique in the video i showed.

I don't know why you always downplay people and underestimate people on the way you are arguing.  

You asserted that Ray Tracing didn't occur in prior console generations/years and tried to paint it as something new and novel. - Essentially I rendered that idea as false.



Last edited by Pemalite - 2 days ago

--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:

Are you even sure about that?

Geforce GTX 1060 is 13.51%
Geforce GTX 1070 is 4.55%
Geforce GTX 1080 is 2.8%
RTX 2060 is 2.2%
Geforce GTX 1660 Ti is 1.97%
Radeon RX 580 is 1.85%
Geforce RTX 2070 is 1.74%
Geforce GTX 1080Ti is 1.73%
Geforce GTX 1070Ti is 1.23%
Geforce GTX 1660 is 1.18%
Geforce RTX 2080 is 1.07%
Geforce RTX 2070 Super is 0.8%
Geforce RTX 2080 TI is 0.73%
Radeon RX 480 is 0.65%
Geforce RTX 2060 Super is 0.49%
Geforce GTX 980 is 0.49%
Geforce GTX 980Ti is 0.46%
Radeon RX 5700XT is 0.45%
Radeon RX 590 is 0.38%
Geforce RTX 2080 Super is 0.32%
Geforce GTX 1660 Super is 0.18%
Radeon RX 5700 is 0.16%

That is 38.94% that is a Geforce 1060 or higher.

You do have GPU's like the Radeon R9 380, Fury, Vega 7, Vega 56, Vega 64 which I haven't included.

It also doesn't include Multi-GPU configurations... So rigs with (For example) Dual-Radeon RX 570's which would wipe the floor with a 1060 isn't accounted for.

The amount of VRAM a GPU has is irrelevant, the PC's memory hierarchy is different to that of a consoles... Just because a GPU has 4GB of on-board Ram doesn't mean the GPU can't use 16GB of Ram.

The Size of the SSD is irrelevant. Just because your SSD is larger, doesn't make your games faster.
Nor do we even know the size of the consoles SSD anyway or how said SSD's will be implemented, they might be just a tiny Cache drive?

An SSD isn't a replacement for Ram, the PC doesn't need super fast SSD's as urgently because the PC simply has more Ram than consoles, it can dump more data into System memory rather than rely on streaming assets.

PC has faster SSD implementations than what a single SSD leveraging the PCI-E 4.0 interface can offer.

They are just trying to big note themselves... Console manufacturers do it every generation.
I am Still waiting for the extra ACE units and 8GB GDDR5 Ram in the base Playstation 4 to offer games that look better than a 6GB Geforce GTX 1060... Because that simply didn't happen did it?

16GB or more of System memory is now accounting for 45% of PC's... That includes laptops, I would assume desktops would be a higher percentage. - But you also need to account for the 43.96% of PC's with 6-8-12GB or more of video memory on top of that, PC has split memory pools, large memory pools at that, consoles have a unified memory architecture which means it has to share bandwidth and memory capacity with every component in the system.

Plus PC hardware isn't going to stop improving, PC's constantly gets more powerful over time... And the next-gen consoles aren't even out yet, nor will games utilize the console hardware completely in the first year or two anyway.

In the end it doesn't matter anyway, if you want the best graphics, best sound, shortest load times, best control input, best networking, cheapest game prices, the PC is where it's at... If you want hardware that is cheaper, then that is an option on PC as games will scale. - The power of choice.



Question about this. Has dual gpu's increased in efficiencies? I been having thoughts about next gen with it. What are the chances that next gen consoles allow the ability to upgrade by adding an aditional gpu instead of a pro model down the line? Something tells me its possible and proably coming. especially when MS said they are not planing an upgrade down the line. Maybe they have a socket ready for a insert gpu and update.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk said:

Question about this. Has dual gpu's increased in efficiencies? I been having thoughts about next gen with it. What are the chances that next gen consoles allow the ability to upgrade by adding an aditional gpu instead of a pro model down the line? Something tells me its possible and proably coming. especially when MS said they are not planing an upgrade down the line. Maybe they have a socket ready for a insert gpu and update.

Dual-GPU's are very efficient these days, things like microstutter and framepacing are issues long gone.

In saying that, you do need to wait on driver support to catch up to new releases though.

Next-gen probably won't use dual-GPU tech.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Pemalite said:
goopy20 said:

It's true that we don't know the exact specs, but it's pretty safe to assume that they're going to be lot more powerful than the average gaming pc when they launch.

The average PC's specs will have increased by the time next-gen launches. But does it even really matter? Games scale across hardware on PC.

goopy20 said:

I mean around 75% of the Steam users are gaming on a GTX1060 or lower and 50% of them have 8gb of ram. Just because things like SSD have been around on pc for a long time, doesn't mean the bulk of pc gamers have a 1TB SSD and play all their games from there. Most pc's have a 250GB SSD, which barely fits the OS and 2 games. Also, there isn't a single pc game that's designed with SSD in mind and lists it as a minimum requirement.

Are you even sure about that?
Geforce GTX 1060 is 13.51%
Geforce GTX 1070 is 4.55%
Geforce GTX 1080 is 2.8%
RTX 2060 is 2.2%
Geforce GTX 1660 Ti is 1.97%
Radeon RX 580 is 1.85%
Geforce RTX 2070 is 1.74%
Geforce GTX 1080Ti is 1.73%
Geforce GTX 1070Ti is 1.23%
Geforce GTX 1660 is 1.18%
Geforce RTX 2080 is 1.07%
Geforce RTX 2070 Super is 0.8%
Geforce RTX 2080 TI is 0.73%
Radeon RX 480 is 0.65%
Geforce RTX 2060 Super is 0.49%
Geforce GTX 980 is 0.49%
Geforce GTX 980Ti is 0.46%
Radeon RX 5700XT is 0.45%
Radeon RX 590 is 0.38%
Geforce RTX 2080 Super is 0.32%
Geforce GTX 1660 Super is 0.18%
Radeon RX 5700 is 0.16%

That is 38.94% that is a Geforce 1060 or higher.

You do have GPU's like the Radeon R9 380, Fury, Vega 7, Vega 56, Vega 64 which I haven't included.

It also doesn't include Multi-GPU configurations... So rigs with (For example) Dual-Radeon RX 570's which would wipe the floor with a 1060 isn't accounted for.

The amount of VRAM a GPU has is irrelevant, the PC's memory hierarchy is different to that of a consoles... Just because a GPU has 4GB of on-board Ram doesn't mean the GPU can't use 16GB of Ram.

The Size of the SSD is irrelevant. Just because your SSD is larger, doesn't make your games faster.
Nor do we even know the size of the consoles SSD anyway or how said SSD's will be implemented, they might be just a tiny Cache drive?

An SSD isn't a replacement for Ram, the PC doesn't need super fast SSD's as urgently because the PC simply has more Ram than consoles, it can dump more data into System memory rather than rely on streaming assets.

goopy20 said:

"It’s not just a question of simply slapping an SSD into the system, Sony is claiming that it, presumably alongside AMD, has developed the input/output system to offer something over and above what you’d get from simply dropping some NAND flash into a console. Given that the next generation of AMD Ryzen 3000 CPUs, and the upcoming Navi GPUs, are expected to both be operating on the PCIe 4.0 interface those claims of Sony’s PS5 SSD offering greater raw bandwidth than anything on the PC at the moment make sense. Realistically that’s likely only to be a claim it can make until AMD does launch the new CPUs and accompanying X570 motherboards with their PCIe 4.0 support. The new PCIe interface offers twice the theoretical bandwidth of PCIe 4.0, so the PC won’t be left behind when it comes to raw performance. 

What might impact it, however, is the fact that PS5 developers will be able to rely on a certain level of storage performance from their hardware. A level of performance that they won’t have experienced on consoles before, and cannot rely on when it comes to PC game development either. That could end up in some incredibly rich, detailed, vast gameworlds, all without any loading screens breaking that sense of immersion. When you’ve still got some PC gamers still running from anachronistic spinning data platters that’s not necessarily something that could be matched by default on any subsequent PC port. That, more than anything the PS5’s AMD GPU or CPU performance can offer, could make the next-gen console’s games more advanced than your standard PC gaming fare.

PC has faster SSD implementations than what a single SSD leveraging the PCI-E 4.0 interface can offer.

They are just trying to big note themselves... Console manufacturers do it every generation.
I am Still waiting for the extra ACE units and 8GB GDDR5 Ram in the base Playstation 4 to offer games that look better than a 6GB Geforce GTX 1060... Because that simply didn't happen did it?

16GB or more of System memory is now accounting for 45% of PC's... That includes laptops, I would assume desktops would be a higher percentage. - But you also need to account for the 43.96% of PC's with 6-8-12GB or more of video memory on top of that, PC has split memory pools, large memory pools at that, consoles have a unified memory architecture which means it has to share bandwidth and memory capacity with every component in the system.

Plus PC hardware isn't going to stop improving, PC's constantly gets more powerful over time... And the next-gen consoles aren't even out yet, nor will games utilize the console hardware completely in the first year or two anyway.

In the end it doesn't matter anyway, if you want the best graphics, best sound, shortest load times, best control input, best networking, cheapest game prices, the PC is where it's at... If you want hardware that is cheaper, then that is an option on PC as games will scale. - The power of choice.

goopy20 said:

They are talking about 12Tflops, which if true, puts it between a RTX2080 Super and RTX2080 Ti.

That doesn't mean that at all. Flops doesn't equate to actual gaming performance.

goopy20 said:

If you think there's a generational leap between the Xone and X1X version then fine. Maybe we just have different expectations. 

But how you know the generation leap will be nothing special? Having SSD as standard could be a game changer for level design, and they can do some pretty impressive things with Ray Tracing. 

StarCitizen has shown what it's doing with streaming and level design by leveraging SSD's extensively, but in saying that, it's not something that can't be done by throwing more RAM at the problem.

We don't know how next-gen will compare in regards to Ray Tracing, AMD doesn't even have a hardware accelerated Ray Tracing GPU on the market yet, for all we know it's substantially inferior to nVidia's RTX.


HollyGamer said:

What is actually are you trying to argue here,  i already explained that  RT that i mentioned  is the form or Path Tracing on modern GPU. It's different from Ray Marching and limited form ray tracing from the past Crytek engine. Even Crytek has a new technique in the video i showed.

I don't know why you always downplay people and underestimate people on the way you are arguing.  

You asserted that Ray Tracing didn't occur in prior console generations/years and tried to paint it as something new and novel. - Essentially I rendered that idea as false.



Nobody is arguing that pc will always be superior for those willing to buy the latest hardware. However, high-end gaming is a very niche market and that's exactly what MS isn't targeting. They want to reach the people who can't afford to upgrade to next gen, let alone buy a $2000 gaming rig. Fact is that only 5% of the Steam gamers currently have a RTX gpu, capable of Ray Tracing, and I'm sure that not many have a 1TB SSD and a pci4.0 mobo either.  

  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 1.54%
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 - 1.51%
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 - 0.94%
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti - 0.53%
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER - 0.18%
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER - 0.16%
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER -0.16%

Obviously, the hardware in mainstream pc's is constantly changing and when Nvidia/ AMD launch their new gpu's, I'm sure the RTX2*** will be a lot more affordable. Like I said, the 1 or 2 years of cross gen games is probably not set in stone. I'm guessing MS is going to wait it out till 2080RTX like performance becomes mainstream, which is when they hit a price range of around $300. Who knows how long that will take. But it could be years depending on the launch prices of Nvidia/ AMD's new gpu's.

Star Citizen is the only "game" that does recommend SSD, but it's still not a requirement. IMO it does give an indication of the kind of scale and complexity we can expect from next gen games. Especially when we have AAA developers making an actual game with the tech, instead of whatever the hell they're doing with Star Citizen.

I have to say I'm disappointed when you say: "And the next-gen consoles aren't even out yet, nor will games utilize the console hardware completely in the first year or two anyway." That sounds like Sales2099 talk. Some say Gears 5 is the best looking game of the current gen, but I disagree. There are plenty of games that look better imo, including a ps4 launch title called the Order 1886: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3svoHmxMsoU

Say what you want about games like the Order 1886, Shadowfall, Infamous and Driveclub, but they did showcase what the ps4 was capable of and it got people excited for the next gen. I'm just hoping Sony doesn't forget to put some decent game play in their launch titles this time around, but I'm optimistic that they've learned their lesson. 

Last edited by goopy20 - 2 days ago

Pemalite said:
eva01beserk said:

Question about this. Has dual gpu's increased in efficiencies? I been having thoughts about next gen with it. What are the chances that next gen consoles allow the ability to upgrade by adding an aditional gpu instead of a pro model down the line? Something tells me its possible and proably coming. especially when MS said they are not planing an upgrade down the line. Maybe they have a socket ready for a insert gpu and update.

Dual-GPU's are very efficient these days, things like microstutter and framepacing are issues long gone.

In saying that, you do need to wait on driver support to catch up to new releases though.

Next-gen probably won't use dual-GPU tech.

I'm mean instead of a pro version. I'm sure there could be a hell of a lot more gamers willing to buy an extra card worth half the price of the console then buy a brand new full price console 3 years later. Also no need to wait for the upgraded version if you think the base release is not good enough. I'm sure dual gpus would be supported a lot more if the mass console market makes it the norm. Like what they are gona do with ssd's. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

goopy20 said:

I played Gears 5 on ultra settings on pc and to me it's hard to notice the difference between the base Xone version. Besides the resolution and fps, of course, and there are some extra reflections here and there.

Can you tell us your PC specs? And do you have the Xbox One S or X?



Conina said:
goopy20 said:

I played Gears 5 on ultra settings on pc and to me it's hard to notice the difference between the base Xone version. Besides the resolution and fps, of course, and there are some extra reflections here and there.

Can you tell us your PC specs? And do you have the Xbox One S or X?

Sure, I got a Acer Predator with a GTX1060 and i5 8400. It's not exactly a beast of a rig but I haven't run into any game so far, I can't play at max settings. Native 4k not so much, but 1440p runs pretty good so far.



goopy20 said:

Nobody is arguing that pc will always be superior for those willing to buy the latest hardware.

Good. Because as long as Consoles use PC hardware, Consoles will always come up short against the PC.

goopy20 said:

However, high-end gaming is a very niche market and that's exactly what MS isn't targeting. They want to reach the people who can't afford to upgrade to next gen, let alone buy a $2000 gaming rig. 

RTX 2000 series will be outdated and replaced by something newer, AMD will have it's own GPU's with Ray-Tracing cores as well BEFORE next-gen launches.
Nor are you required to spend $2,000 on a gaming rig, that is hyperbole.

Also an RTX 2060 is not high-end.

goopy20 said:

Fact is that only 5% of the Steam gamers currently have a RTX gpu, capable of Ray Tracing

All GPU's are actually capable of Ray Tracing by the way.
Consider yourself a little more educated today: https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/11/18305084/nvidia-driver-ray-tracing-gtx-gpu-graphics-card

goopy20 said:

and I'm sure that not many have a 1TB SSD and a pci4.0 mobo either.  

And what does the size of the SSD matter? Again, I have already touched upon why this is irrelevant, so I would rather tell you to go re-read that (as it's clear you haven't) rather than repeat myself.

Not to mention you don't know how large the next gen consoles SSD's will be anyway, they might only be 256GB!

And you do know PCI-E 3.0 SSD's can be faster than PCI-E 4.0 SSD's? It's not all about the PCI-E interface, any tech head would understand this.

goopy20 said:

Obviously, the hardware in mainstream pc's is constantly changing and when Nvidia/ AMD launch their new gpu's, I'm sure the RTX2*** will be a lot more affordable. Like I said, the 1 or 2 years of cross gen games is probably not set in stone. I'm guessing MS is going to wait it out till 2080RTX like performance becomes mainstream, which is when they hit a price range of around $300. Who knows how long that will take. But it could be years depending on the launch prices of Nvidia/ AMD's new gpu's.

Allot of hypotheticals being thrown around here.

goopy20 said:

Star Citizen is the only "game" that does recommend SSD, but it's still not a requirement. IMO it does give an indication of the kind of scale and complexity we can expect from next gen games. Especially when we have AAA developers making an actual game with the tech, instead of whatever the hell they're doing with Star Citizen.

Of course it's not a requirement, no PC game will require an SSD, PC will always have faster load times too.
And PC has storage that is faster than SSD's.

Clearly you don't care for StarCitizen or "whatever the hell they are doing with it" - So it would probably be wise if you didn't add your own personal commentary if you haven't looked into what it's doing and why it's a feat of engineering.

goopy20 said:

I have to say I'm disappointed when you say: "And the next-gen consoles aren't even out yet, nor will games utilize the console hardware completely in the first year or two anyway." That sounds like Sales2099 talk. Some say Gears 5 is the best looking game of the current gen, but I disagree. There are plenty of games that look better imo, including a ps4 launch title called the Order 1886: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3svoHmxMsoU

PC always has the best looking games.
The Order 1886 isn't using the Playstation 4 hardware to it's fullest capabilities either.

Gears 5 has some interesting technical aspects, but I wouldn't assert it's the best looking console title either.

goopy20 said:

Say what you want about games like the Order 1886, Shadowfall, Infamous and Driveclub, but they did showcase what the ps4 was capable of and it got people excited for the next gen. I'm just hoping Sony doesn't forget to put some decent game play in their launch titles this time around, but I'm optimistic that they've learned their lesson. 

They aren't all that "amazing" from a graphics front. You will need to do more to impress a PC gamer with graphics I am afraid. Nor are they as technically impressive as titles coming out now or soon.



Last edited by Pemalite - 1 day ago

--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--