By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
KBG29 said:
thismeintiel said:
Lockhart is a big mistake. When we get 2 years in and MS is still trying to force devs to make last gen versions of games, even smaller teams who don't have resources to, I think you will see some dropping support.

A Lockhart version would not be a last gen version. Lockhart if real, would be using the same CPU and GPU architecture as all Scarlett gen consoles. Microsoft will be supplying development tools that ensure that there is no effort required to get a game developed for the Scarlett family to run on all Scarlett devices. A one person team will not have an issues making a game for the entire Scarlett platform.  

shikamaru317 said:

Agreed. Hopefully they either abandon the project soon, or increase the specs to maybe 7 tflop and only slightly less RAM than Anaconda. If they bump it up to 7 tflop and only like 2 GB less RAM than Anaconda it should be powerful enough to meet the 1440p target that MS set for developers on Lockhart, with no other graphical downgrades compared to the Anaconda version. Will be alot easier for developers if all they have to downgrade is the resolution, too much work if they have to downgrade more than resolution to get a game to run on Lockhart.

Ideally though, they should drop Lockhart entirely, and just release a discless version of Anaconda, and subsidize it in order to hit an attractive price point that is $100 less than the disc drive Anaconda. They can make back what they lose on the subsidized console with the higher profit margin on digital game sales. 

Another reason why Lockhart is a terrible idea: if we get mid-gen upgrade consoles, which Sony is already hinting at for PS5, developers will have to support 3 different Xbox consoles with different specs; Lockhart, Anaconda, and whatever the codename for the mid-gen upgrade console will be. Devs will absoutely hate having to support 3 different Xbox's with different specs. Just release a discless Anaconda instead of Lockhart Microsoft.

Supporting 3 different Scarlett devices is not going to be a major effort. Supporting 20 different Scarlett devices wouldn't be a major effort. 

This is not the 90's or 00's anymore. Hardware and Development Tools have changed in the last two decades. Every aspect of the pipeline is being optimized for scalability. These console platforms, are even more optimized for scalability, because they have been built with it in mind, and they run a very specific set of Hardware and Software. 

Sony hinted that Pro was a "Test Case"", and the thinking behind it was "a platform lifecycle, we should be able to change the hardware itself and try to incorporate advancements in technology".

PS4 Pro was a proof of concept, and from what Sony is hinting at, they liked what they saw. To me it sounds like they are ready to go all the way with this thinking with PS5, and we will be seeing yearly PS5 updates, and possibly have PS5 Base and Premium level models as well. 

With the way AMD has laid out Zen and RDNA, and Sony talking about changing hardware during the life cycle, to incorperate advanced technology. It would not be in the least bit surprising to see them bring out new hardware with Zen3 and RDNA2, and again with Zen4 and RDNA3, and so on and so forth, with PS6 arriving when AMD and its parteners nail down full generational transitions to the successors of Zen and RDNA.

The industry is changing. As time progresses everything changes. It is not something to be scared of. There will always be fear mongering with anything new. Don't get caught up in the hyperbole. 

Baselines will always exist and the lower the baseline you have to develop for (there is talks about MS wanting next gen games to keep running on base X1) the lower the quality you can achieve on the upper line because it still have to work on the base one.

Also don't pretend that you have almost no work to make the game work on all versions.

Even PS4Pro that is only twice as powerful than base PS4 the option of IQ or FPS is still additional effort compared to only develop the base game.



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."