By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
goopy20 on 20 March 2020
Edit Thread
Mr Puggsly said:
Otter said:

And I'm sure they set 1080p as the target when developing Xbox One yet look at how third party developers (99% of the console releases) use it. Ultimately Microsoft do not have a say in how their hardware is used. The only demonstration of ground upXSX content and not ports (Hell Blade 2) is a video consciously rendered at 60% of 4k at 24fps. Its not necessarily realtime but it's just funny because its from a 1st party themselves and no one cared to critique it yet suddenly everything has to be native 4k60fps? 

And no. I'm basically saying this exact principle we see here in the ray tracing demo will apply to other graphical features and ambition down the road. What the video clearly illustrates is that MS see's 1080p as a respectable resolution to show a game off in whereas several pple thought anything 1080p is unacceptable (MS already stated "4k" for them doesn't have to be native). If the minecraft demo was running at 600p, they probably would not have shown it. Also I'm not sure 600p can be reconstructed into quality image for a standard 42" display.

Summary is not that S shouldn't exist incase a developer wants to build a game around ray traced lighting, but S shouldn't exist because it takes freedom away from how developers use the Series X hardware.  Doesn't matter whether its ray tracing or other graphical detail. Alternatively Series S eventually starts hitting 720p and maybe lower. Or requiring games to be extensively optimised to run at higher resolutions which is a developer resource drain. The other thing is consumer expectations. I'm not sure S would be able to suppport many ray traced features at acceptable resolutions, this has to be made clear to consumers otherwise I think many will feel cheated if it becomes a common feature which S owners can't have but all they thought they were missing out on was 4k.

But that's just my feeling on it, I understand the want for a cheap entry level system but given the length of intended cross gen. I don't think it's necessary. In any case there is the PS5 with no weak version if developers want to work without the concern of how the game will look on a much lesser GPU. This just gives them more reasons to make PS5 exclusives.

The simplicity and logic behind S is dependent on the idea that developers will hit all their next geb ambitions alongside native 4k (or something close to it). I don't see that as a reality and my concern is not what happens next year, but what happens in 4 years. Anyway enough speculating on specs, we'll have to wait and see 

I get the impression MS didn't think every game needed to be 1080p. Especially when you consider Ryse and Dead Rising 3 didn't even attempt to get there. In retrospect, its evident X1 should have had more GPU power.

I don't get what your point is about Hellblade 2 is. Nor does it really matter.

You're missing two points. Few if any developers are going to push the Series X hardware so hard that the resolution is 1080p. But even if they do, the Series S could still support these projects at a lower resolution and maybe some tweaks to other graphics settings. Essentially I disagree with your premise Series S shouldn't exist because some hypothetical project could look bad on that hardware.

Question, do X1 users feel cheated because Ark looks and runs awful on base X1? Nope, its currently the 11th most played game on Xbox. With that said, if people get a visually underwhelming experience on Series S they might keep playing anyway. Even though its blurry, terrible performance and aggressive screen tear. Hence, people willing to buy a cheaper box will tolerate things you might not. This is an example of you being out of touch and missing the point.

Most developers already design games with various levels of GPU power in mind. So tweaking settings for Series S and Series X would be easy. Virtually any modern game ported to PC (99% of games) has resolution and graphical settings to tweak. Again, if the disparity is just GPU power than reducing resolution should be an easy solution for many games.

Games don't have to hit 4K Series X to work well on Series S. A sub 1080p game could be acceptable on Series S, they could use image reconstruction and dynamic resolutions to improve the average presentation. Lastly they could tweak graphics settings if necessary to boost resolution, as we've seen for decades.

There is no point in going in circles. Lets just wait and see.

Series S would only make sense if MS made it a point to get all their exclusives run at 1080p on it and 4k/60fps on Series X. Like I said before, that might sound great but not if it will limit the ambitions of Series X games. Trust me, if the ps5's exclusives will aim for 1440p/30 fps, developers will simply be able to do a lot more with their games and they're going to be a helluva lot more impressive looking.