Just to be clear right of the bat I don't mean guilty in a "take them to court" kind of way, but that just maaybe they made some promises they couldn't quite keep, specifically in regards to console performance. First of all (and probably the biggest sinner in this category) there's the initial reveal of Project Scarlett in 2019 which made some very lofty promises I think many honestly forgot. I can't get the timestamp to work here but skip to around 90 seconds.
So the first thing we heard about this system was 120 FPS, 8K... Okay dude.
This was of course long before the actual system release and they did dial it back a bit when we got closer, eventually giving us a full spec run down on both Series X and S including performance targets:
So these were the targets shortly before launch and I'm sure some games have lived fully up to them, but if we look at Xbox's biggest 1st party titles since launch: Halo Infinite, Forza Horizon 5 and now Starfield, none of them have had these as their default or reached it without compromises. Halo fell short on the Series S and had only dynamic 4k resolution on the Series X, Forza can reach 4K 60 fps but only in performance mode in exchange for lowered graphics and Starfield now seems to be launching without a 60fps option at all (2.5 years into the generation).
As for Sony I feel like I saw some promises of a similar nature for the PS5, but I can find suprisingly little about the consoles actual target performance between reveal and launch. The one thing I can find however is a very early Wired interview that casually throws in that the console will support 8K graphics: https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/ once again: Okay dude.
So yeah, some lofty promises were definitely made both early and closer to launch, and at the very least I would say that 8K should never have been thrown around as both console manufactures must have known that was a pipe dream. I think the problem is (and arguably has been since the Gen 8 mid-gen consoles) that they felt they needed these higher numbers to sell people on these systems, but the reality is the games themselves are also getting significantly more demanding due to higher density, higher poly counts, more advanced physics etc. The PlayStation 3 could do 1080p and in some cases 60 fps and honestly we haven't gotten that far since then in terms of actual performance because it's just running the games themselves that have taken up most of the extra power. And that's not a bad thing at all imo, but it feels like maybe they conveniently forgot that when they were trying to hype up these new systems and what they could do. Not saying that's a first in the history of consoles, but that doesn't necessarily make it any better.
For the record I'm not really a big performance or graphics affectionado myself or anything, but I know some people on here are and regardless it is perhaps worth discussing if the current gen systems really are falling short on their promises and if so whether they simply overestimated them or consciously overhyped them.Last edited by UnderwaterFunktown - on 12 June 2023