By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sales2099 said:
Mordred11 said:

     People who think Microsoft will "do better" with their July presentation are vastly underestimating what Sony did. There is nothing MS can show that will generate more buzz. Maybe only something impossible like GTA6 being time-exclusive for a year. Not happening.
     The PS5 presentation was some avengers endgame levels of buzz, regardless of the 1% of people who thought "it wasn't anything special and that MS can easily do better".

See that’s my concern that many gamers who use Ps as their primary console won’t be impressed no matter what. The brand power is so strong that ultimately it comes down to “Sony good Ms bad”. 

For one if anything was multiplat I don’t think it’s fair to give Sony credit for that if Series X can play them too.

Otherwise their big guns can be summed up as Horizon, Spiderman MM, Ratchet, GT7, Demon Souls, Returnal. 6 games. Smaller games like Sackboy and Destruction All Stars. 2 there so that’s 8. I’ll give them credit in that waiting this long makes it all announced at once a pretty amazing experience. No wonder it was such a hit.

That said MS has been announcing games all year. Halo Infinite, Hellblade 2, Everwild, Grounded, Project Mara. That’s 5 games to Sony’s 8 and their July conference didn’t even happen yet. Allready we know Forza 8 is the answer to GT7. I’m going to pay very close attention to the reactions on here/Twitter. Not to games like Halo and Forza, figure people are more interested in AAA games Xbox doesn’t normally do. In that regard well see where people stand. 

You missed Astro's Playroom wink wink.

goopy20 said:
DonFerrari said:

If you want to have 4k60fps as standard and if MS follows that you better be ready to have XSX games looking substantially inferior to the ones on PS5 when a dev like ND decides to push the envelope to the limit and choose 1440p30fps, because XSX doesn't have that much higher power to have better visuals while doing twice framerate and twice pixel count.

True that, and its exactly why the Series X's May event got so much crap. Everything they showed was targeting 4k/60fps and it didn't leave much room for improving overall fidelity compared to current gen. 

I think it have more to do with the dev competency than the target resolution.

sales2099 said:
DonFerrari said:

If you want to have 4k60fps as standard and if MS follows that you better be ready to have XSX games looking substantially inferior to the ones on PS5 when a dev like ND decides to push the envelope to the limit and choose 1440p30fps, because XSX doesn't have that much higher power to have better visuals while doing twice framerate and twice pixel count.

I think you are exaggerating. As long as they look better then the best of the best this gen then it’s a upgrade. Not like we gonna get 360 levels of graphics to hit those benchmarks. Like I said of Gears 5 looks like one of the best games this gen at 60fps then I am hopeful. 

I'm sure it will be an upgrade, no doubts about that. What I am saying is when comparing both PS5 and XSX. If MS games are 4k60fps the overall graphical will be inferior on looks compared to a 1440p (upscalled with temporal reconstruction) and 30fps because XSX is only 10-20% stronger, so it can't really have twice the pixels, twice the framerate and still have more effects and other elements.

I used to think the resolution was the most important aspect, but after several CGI threads I saw other important aspects for IQ and seem cases where it is good to sacrifice resolution to get better IQ. No doubt that for multiplats if both system devs choose same pixel count and framerate XSX have the potential to look better. But on exclusives, and that is were Sony have been showing better graphics since PS3, if they go for lower framerate and pixel count they will have better looking games. Will that be noticeable enough for most people? Not sure. Will it be more important than 60fps? For some yes, for others nope. But for my taste it probably aligns better and for yours Xbox will have it better.



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."