By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Otter said:
KratosLives said:
As a playstation gamer, I will oddly defend xbox, in saying that it's the developer's problem for not having the game run at 60fps, not the console. We are talking about a current gen game , but running on a capable system that hasn't even tapped into it's potentials. But the sad thing is is that microsoft should have made it very clear to every published/developer, that 60 fps/1440p is the minimum that must be met before making a game for that system.

MS certainly cannot mandate 1440p  60fps when some games are only run at 1440p on Series X. Mandating performance targets is only fair on developers if optimising for Series S is as easy as toggling down resolution to 1080p, but as we've heard from developers not all GPU/Ram constraints are scaled by resolution and therein may lay the problem. Will have to wait on the DF analysis but this is also the second launch game to not feature parity, so inclined to think that S is requiring more work then developers care to put in. Something MS could have compensated for by only halving the GPU power and being more generous with the RAM

Demanding certain resolution or framerate would only make some games worse or skip. The devs should be the one to see what will better show their 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."