Pemalite said:
goopy20 said:
Now, I know how scaling works but if you have a 2080Ti uber pc right now, can you then really play AAA games on it that take a generational leap over what we're seeing now on consoles? You'll get the same core games only at 300fps and 8k resolution and a bumb in graphics settings. Which will only change when the new consoles arrive and we get AAA games pushing that kind of hardware while targeting 30fps/1440p .
|
Absolutely fucking yes a 2080Ti does provide a generational leap in visual fidelity in games today... And that is before we even talk about resolution or framerates.
Name a console game with hardware ray tracing effects.
goopy20 said:
Weaker specs compared to what's in the Series X and ps5 because only 1% of the pc gamers currently have that kind of hardware. I'm putting so much emphasis on GP and Xcloud because it's become MS's main focus and the dna of their next gen strategy. It's why they are practically giving away their AAA exclusives for free by launching them on GP from day one.
|
Consoles are the lowest common denominator.
Basically all multiplatform games are built with those low-specifications in mind.
Developers on PC don't exactly go out of their way to build games for a Core 2 Quad in 2020 and scale it up to a Ryzen 16-core, if the game works on a Core 2 Quad, then it works, if not, then it doesn't. (It just so happens that a well-clocked 13~ Year old Core 2 Quad is a good fit for Jaguars performance level.)
And often a developer won't bother to test it on old or low-end hardware, but the game will run fine on it as the games hardware demands aren't exactly catastrophic... Contrary to popular belief not all console games use 100% of the consoles power and is 1,000x optimized for that hardware set, you are going to have games which will come short and might only use a couple of CPU cores for example.
Over the years, especially when I wasn't upgrading frequently and technology was progressing rapidly. (Especially in the TnL > SM1.0 > SM1.1 > SM1.4 > SM2.0 > SM 3.0 era) developers would often drop support like a bucket of shit for those older rendering methods in favor of newer ones, rendering older hardware unable to run new games. I.E. Bioshock wouldn't support SM2.0 GPU's or Oblivion only Supporting SM2.0 and newer despite SM1.4 GPU's having more performance than low-end SM2.0 GPU's by several orders of magnitude.
Of course we are in a newer era where tech isn't progressing as rapidly in terms of hardware feature sets, so it just happens that older hardware is sticking around for longer.
But just because a developer lists an older piece of hardware in the "minimum" system requirements, doesn't mean it's actually going to be playable... Or it will only be playable at 720P, 30fps.
goopy20 said:
If I look at the Steam hardware survey and only looking at the gpu's, around 1% of steam users have a gpu that's on par with what's in the Series X. So that would be around 1 million gamers.
|
0% of gamers have a series X though. It's not even out... Thus making the PC ahead statistically.
CGI-Quality said:
Again, it doesn’t matter what you get from Steam, it leaves out a massive chunk of PC users. It’s a fraction and not something you can get a definitive answer on. Not saying that you can’t use it for anything, but there are plenty of PCs out there not tracked by them.
|
Plus Steam will incorrectly track notebooks with switchable graphics, I.E. Will only include the integrated graphics and not the powered-down GPU.
It also doesn't account for multi-GPU configurations.
And of course... Steam includes all hardware, irrespective of age or form factor, if it runs Steam, it's included in the hardware statistics.
So that means it includes Netbooks, NUC's, Notebooks, Compute Sticks, IoT devices, Handhelds... You name it and not just desktop gaming PC's. (Which would obviously have higher average hardware capabilities).
And it makes sense, Steam includes games from every era and some people will be content with 2D puzzle games rather than the latest AAA shooter looter.
Conina said:
Sorry, but we still don't know how fast the Series X will be. We especially don't know how good the raytracing performance of AMD's new APU is compared to the RTX cards.
The performance of the Series X could be in the RTX 2080S area (then 1% of the Steam users have a GPU that's on par.)
The performance of the Series X could be in the RTX 2080/2070S area (then 3% of the Steam users have a GPU that's on par.)
It could even be that the performance of the Series X is only in the RTX 2070/2060S area when it comes to games with raytracing (then more than 5% of the Steam users have a GPU that's on par.)
So at this point performance comparisons of the new consoles with current PC hardware doesn't make any sense... we need a lot more info for educated guesses!
|
Every month the amount of PC's with performance equivalent to the Series X/RTX 2080 will grow from here on out... So whilst it may be 3% today, it could be triple that by the end of the year once nVidia and AMD drop it's next-gen GPU's.
The PC is constantly evolving, improving and getting faster and more capable, it doesn't stand still.
Mr Puggsly said:
This is the list I came up with of games I would like to see added. https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8945343
I looked at the entire library of OG Xbox and 360 titles when I made that list. The number of games that I feel is notable and worth adding is small compared to the entire catalog of these platforms.
The ideal scenario is add everything. But if that can't happen, notable content is much smaller list.
|
Obviously that is just your opinion and isn't representative of everyone else's needs/wants/desires.
|
I know hardware is always evolving and it's only a matter of time before main stream pc catch up and high-end pc's will play next gen console games at native 4k, 60fps and a bump in graphics settings. But nobody, including MS, knows how long that will take. It's very likely that Amd and Nvidia's new mid-range gpu's will piss all over the RTX2080 Super, but it will probably depend on the prices if we'll see main stream pc's catch up quickly or not.
Like I said, my only problem with GP is that it will prevent pushing next gen graphics right out of the gate like a traditional next gen console would. In it's currents state GP is great because everybody and their grandmother has a pc that can run 99% of the games on it. That simply isn't going to be the case when the next gen consoles boasting RTX2080 gpu's will be the lowest common denominator for AAA games, at least not in the first couple of years. Most 3rd party games will be cross-gen and the big franchises that'll skip current gen like GTA, AC, BF won't be on GP from day one. Those kind of games usually come to GP years later, if at all. So the only games on GP that could've potentially pushed next gen consoles would have been MS's day one exclusives. But since MS already said their going to be cross gen for the first 2 years, that isn't happening either.
Now, maybe they will scale amazingly and we get totally different versions on Series X and Xone. But if it's just games designed with Xone as the base platform that scale up and down their family of devices like MS is saying, we could be halfway through the next gen console cycle before we finally see games on GP that were designed with next gen specs in mind.
Console and software sales have been rapidly in decline for MS, so I totally get why they're looking for different business models like GP/Xcloud and them not trying to get in another format war with Sony and Nintendo. Especially, when they envision a future where there's no need for dedicated consoles/ pc at all, and MS is convinced they'll eat the whole pie and become the netflix of gaming.
Personally I just don't see that happening and I think their whole new focus is a shame. I would much rather have seen something like the beginning of the 360/ps3 era, where it was a neck-and-neck race and both companies were forced to compete with amazing exclusives that pushed their console to its limits. Next gen will be totally different. Because for MS, building GP subscribers will be far more important than selling next gen consoles.
MAybe some people think I'm rambling madman spouting conspiracy theories here. But don't take my word for it, I'm just quoting Phil Spencer...
XBOX BOSS PHIL SPENCER ON THE FUTURE OF GAMING: ‘THE BUSINESS ISN’T HOW MANY CONSOLES YOU SELL’
The head of Xbox just unveiled a new console, but Phil Spencer isn’t too worried about selling you one. “I don’t need to sell any specific version of the console in order for us to reach our business goals,” he told me in an interview yesterday, the day after Microsoft held its annual E3 keynote.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/11/18661247/phil-spencer-interview-xbox-project-scarlett-xcloud-e3-2019
Last edited by goopy20 - on 29 February 2020
