That's just the way it is. Xbox One is weaker and it's also not primary console used by developers.

It was the same last gen with PS3, games were being made on Xbox 360 and poorly ported to PS3.

But that's an empty point to make if we're being honest. The whole point of the witcher is that it took specific time and effort to port to the switch. Infact it required a team to port it (saber interactive) and was being ported for at least 12months. 

Which really just supports the narrative a weaker console will take more time to optimise for.

Personally I'm indifferent to the news, obviously glad that if this is true CD Projekt probably want the Xbox S Version to be respectable. In recent years we've seen too many bad Xbox S ports, and it's quite distasteful when you consider the user base for Xbox S users is like 10x the user base for Xbox One X and were still part of the generation so they should be looked after.

Previous history tells us that this was inevitable honestly. I mean they did it with the Witcher 3 and they've been found out on their poor management practices following the release by ex-staffs.

I think they probably repeated some of the same problems they already had previously.

Anyway, this article rumor is more what I call a small factor into the overall equation. No way they just delayed a game 5 months simply because porting to a multiplat console was problematic. The game wasn't finished and yet they let people hype themselves for something that was never going to come out at the moment promised.

Anywoo such a delay tells me they might delay it even further into next year if they encounter problems of whatever nature.

Kinda have to feel for the devs that most probably will pay the price for this horrible management ...

Personally, I am generally skeptical about major games hitting planned release dates. All the big companies miss targets. While sometimes games are released broken due to trying to hit a specific date.

We had little reason to believe Cyberpunk was ready even before consoles were blamed. They might as well wait for the next gen launch in my opinion. It would get more hype that way.

I am a bit skeptical about Halo Inifinite as well. Not because its on X1, but because we've seen so little after much hype.

Switch isn't just a weaker console, its an exceptionally weaker console. Scaling back assets and optimizing for significantly lower specs does take time. That's why another studio is brought in to handle much of the work. For example MK 11 wasn't developed after the game was completed, it was in development at the same time. That's how the Switch version released at the same time. Doom Eternal may not achieve the same release date, but it shouldn't be 12 months out.

PS4 and X1 are more equal, its the GPU disparity that generally separates them. Sometimes X1 ports have been disappointing considering the polish of PS4 releases, but has the X1 version ever been an unplayable mess? I can't really think of any examples.

Just in case, the X1 is closer in performance to the switch than it is to the series x. So the undertaking will be much harder trying to hold on to it next gen. 

I think the smart thing, all else being equal, would be to release it for PC now with high end specs with the understanding that it will run on PS5 and Series X when they launch.  That would actually make them a high profile launch game for the new consoles.  However, I wouldn't be surprised if they are getting a deal from Sony and/or Microsoft to launch the game on the current console.  That is the only real logical reason I can see why they'd make the game for current consoles.

The point is Jedi Fallen Order is still a functional product on X1. You made a bunch of posts trying to suggest otherwise.

Also, if you pay $299 for either PS4 or X1 you simply made no effort to pay less.

I just wish they would be honest and tells us they delayed because they need more time to PERFECT the game.

If the problem is specs, don't you think they should have determined this was too difficult maybe years ago?

At the same time I think digital foundry has made us too critical about performance in the console space. 

I am a bit skeptical about Halo Inifinite as well. Not because its on X1, but because we've seen so little after much hype.

The amount of effort required to scale back 9th gen games to 8th gen will depend on the project. Some games will scale with more ease obviously. I mean Alien Isolation was clearly easier to do than Witcher 3.

Either MS will design games to be functional on X1 even while looking significantly better on Series X. Or perhaps some games will focus solely on Series X as the lead, while another studio will craft something functional for X1.

Either way I am not that concerned given MS can still make ambitious games even while building around X1 limitations for a few years.

As the gen is nearing its end we are seeing some incredibly ambitious projects on 8th gen, both in visuals and scale.

Have they addressed this rumor at all?  

My guess is that they did know, but figured they'd be able to work it out eventually.  Now they realize its harder than they thought.  

If by "us" you mean people that hang out in gaming forums, I agree.  But, I think that performance is rarely thought about by 98% of console gamers, except very early in each generation, when they appreciate the step up.   

I imagine MS would throw massive resources at Halo Infinite to make sure it is ready.  It is key to getting the next gen started stronger than the last. It would be devastating if it missed holiday 2020.  

Has MS promised that there will never be games that run on X1X but no OG or S?  I know that's the case right now.  But, if they could just let games hit X only, that might work better a few years from now.  Of course, most people that own an X1X will probably upgrade to next gen within a year or two anyway, as they're mostly hardcore gamers.  So, it might be pointless.

Yeah saw that being discussed "elsewhere". Most "others" suggested they haven't been optimized for the specific console.
Then again they did just delay 5 months.
Plus there are other rumors that they are in severe crunch time.

What percentage of PC are "capable" of this game though? How many actually have a computer that will run at what they want, and how many are sitting at console level or less?

PC now - Next gen next year would be interesting. But also a brutal punch to the userbases of both PS and XB. Better to decide now than later though.

I mean who's surprised? Metro Exodus, RDR2 both run at 1536x864, that's even a step down from 900p.

I Imagine Cyberpunk will be 720p with lower details and more frame dips on Xbox One and 900p with better details and frame-rate on PS4.

720p is unacceptable in 2020 though but Jedi Fallen Order was 720p on Xbox One already (900p with better frame-rate on PS4)

That's why I didn't understand all the hype for 4K Blu-Ray Player in One S and people buying it instead of PS4, especially now that they released a disc less version of Xbox One S. You rather play games in 864p than 1080p just because you have 4K Player? Most Blu-Ray movies are upscaled to 4K anyway.

TLOU 2 is already confirmed to run at 1080p on PS4, so will Ghost of Tsushima and probably FF VII. PS4 aged like fine wine imo.

And here we have another reason for me to run away from Xbox S and go straight into Xbox X.

By the way I had no idea we had games even under 900p on the S. Also I felt there was something weird in Jedi Fallen Order for PS4, like if the resolutoin was subpar, even tried changing my TV setup. If you are right now it is explained why.

If Lockhart is just less GPU, why would there be an issue? 1/3 of the GPU power could just be a lower resolution.

Cyberpunk is also heavily reliant on console revenue.

PS4 Pro and XB1 X have overlocked Jaguars, so they wouldn't suffer quite as much from the game being CPU intensive as the base consoles would. While it's easy to scale back things if the problem is GPU based, it's much less easy to scale back CPU based features. 

Obviously not on an Xbox One anyway.

20.9% of PC's have a Geforce 1060 alone which is Xbox One X levels of performance.

A further 20% have a Geforce RTX 2080/2070/2060 and Geforce GTX 1070/1080/1660/1660Ti/1070Ti/1080Ti/1650.

And there are a ton more GPU's that crap all over the Radeon 7750 class GPU in the Xbox One... So it's easy to say the vast majority of gaming PC's beat the Xbox One.

The Xbox One S is just a slimmed and updated base Xbox One with a 4k blu-ray player, HDR support and slightly better clocks to make up for the hit to performance HDR brings.

There are games that are 720P on the S. Heck there are games that are 720P on the Xbox One X...

The GPU does allot... It's not always just as simple as scaling back resolution.

By cutting back the GPU you could be introducing new bottlenecks into the chip design.