Should Halo Infinite drop Xbox One and go Scarlet exclusive?

[Mr Puggsly]

DonFerrari said: 

Mr Puggsly said:

Witcher 3 is gonna be a functional product on Switch. No cut content, it will probably be around 30 fps with dips, it will ultimately be the same game.

I agree, better graphics is great especially after ~7 years into a gen. The mid gen upgrades were also great for a visual boost. I also agree the specs can be used in other places. I'm saying games don't necessarily take advantage of specs to make games more ambitious, that's often the case.

You're saying "all games." I'm saying most games won't really utilize the new specs to make games more ambitious or increase scope, etc. I was careful about my word choice.

The 8th gen had a huge spec boost, there could have been surprises there as well. I'm simply arguing they were few in regard to game design.

I argue the 8th gen mostly felt like 7th gen with extra polish. But as the games were designed, much of it could have worked fine on 7th gen from a game design perspective.

They are cutting a lot for Witcher 3, there is no other way around it. I guess what you mean is that the gameplay elements will be kept.

Mid gen upgrades I can agree weren't needed and that the games didn't really improve outside of graphics due to them, but the fault would be that they had to keep support for the baseline versions and also kept same architeture due to compatibility. So in this case very bad CPU that held down the GPU more than it should.

Nope, I the "all games" you are saying, which I don't remember saying, would be that any game could benefit from a better HW to improve scope. Still I wouldn't say all games, because there is plenty of shovelware and indies that would run "exactly" the same if released on PS3.

Plenty of games would have a very lower NPC count and physics if CPU was worse (that is a game design element), but also the bad CPU of both consoles also limited the ambition one could go for on PS4/X1 so it had more juice for graphics on GPU than gameplay on CPU.

If one was willing most of the games today with some heavy tweak could play on PS2 perhaps even PS1. But you can be sure a Halo designed exclusivelly for X4 would have potential to be better than having to launch on X1 base. If the game will be better than og Halo that we can only know when it releases and won't be fault of the better HW if it is worse Halo or game.

Well yeah... the point is visual compromises will be made but they claim the gameplay will be the same.

Were mid gen upgraded needed? No. But there is evidently enough demand for them, it was also needed to take advantage of 4K TVs which have become popular and decreased in price faster than I expected.

People tend to mock the CPU of 8th gen consoles, but GPUs aren't amazing either. I don't feel the 8th gen was held back by the CPUs, they were pretty much equal. Better CPUs wouldn't have changed much in the 8th gen because graphics was the focus.

Some games took advantage of the superior capabilities of 8th gen consoles to increase the scope of games, but most didn't. AAA games included, it was mostly visual.

I feel GTAV even on last gen was pretty impressive in regard to physics and NPC count, arguably more so than a lot of modern games. Which supports my original argument, better specs doesn't mean most games become more ambitious or increase in scope. And again getting back to point of thread, I don't feel a game like Halo Infinite would really benefit from being Scarlett exclusive, certainly not this far into development.

Arguably the best use of 8th gen specs that the 7th gen couldn't quite duplicate is large MP games like Fortnite and MMOs. However, that may have been more of a RAM limitation. MAG on PS3 was an exception I suppose, but I never played it so I don't have thoughts on it.

Last edited by Mr Puggsly - on 15 July 2019