sales2099 said:
Otter said:
From Microsoft themselves
“The primary difference between Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S is in resolution. Through talking to our customers, we found that many of our fans prioritize framerate over resolution, so we wanted to build a console that didn’t require a 4K TV.”
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/9/21428792/microsoft-xbox-series-s-specs-cpu-teraflops-performance-gpu
The communication has always been about resolution and clearly MS designed it with hitting the same FPS in mind, so its notable that in some cases its not. Fair enough if you already anticipated this, but i think many did not. I expected S and X might have slightly differing degrees of stabalisation but not completely different targets.
As for target audience, I think thats a case of over simplifying the interest in S. Plenty of people do not have set ups which call for 4k but still appreciate 60fps, this is relevant for them, so I don't think it should be dismissed with a "who cares?". Some people who before may have been considering an S, may now be exclusively interested in an X.
|
I’d chalk it up to people who dont have an eye for PR. “The primary difference” meaning main, but not only difference. I remember plenty people saying 30 FPS for certain games, like a 3rd person open world adventure, being sufficient.
But if this is a PSA for people who were expecting something else, then I suppose it’s better to clear the air before launch.
|
There's also a discussion to be had about the specs Microsoft targeted with S (obviously intended with fps parity in mind, same as what Nintendo did with Switch) and whether the specs were appropriate for the function they were aiming for, obviously keeping in mind MS first parties have far more time to optimise then 3rd party multiplats. That will be determined in time and whether it happens with more titles, for now we can assume its a fault of Ubi more then the shortcomings of the hardware balance.
