| bluedawgs said: the microsoft fans on this site are shills man, look at them in this thread. microsoft says scorpio is only true 4k console, whatever that means, people point out that pro has real 4k games and all the xbox fans got is "lol you salty." terrible fanbase |
The MS fans that said this are mostly people I can't remember ever talking in the forums so I wouldn't give them much light.
| Normchacho said: Aren't they not going to make developers have their games run at 4K? So won't they also have games that aren't 4K? Microsoft is so weird with their marketing. There's just a lot of contortion going on for them to get statements like that to sound a certain way without being flat out lying. |
Well in this case they are flat out lying.
Zekkyou said:
Except that's not true at all. The Scorpio will almost certainly hit a native 4k much more often than the Pro (similar to the PS4 with 1080p), but the Pro can (and reportedly already has) hit that mark. Unless every X1 title runs at a native 4k, in which case they can argue a roundabout definition, what they're saying is wrong. They'd have been much better off saying something like "the most capable 4k system ever". |
Hey Zekkyou, MS spokewoman already said they won't demand that all 3rd party games be native 4k on Scorpio, just that all 1st party games will render natively 4k on the timeframe (could even mean on PC and not Scorpio) and certainly 4 years after release there will be a lot of games that would be too demanding for 4k on Scorpio.
Mr Puggsly said:
Its fair to argue MS's word choice is bad given PS4 Pro will have some 4K content. I'm not sure what's worse. MS's bad word choice, or the 4K push on a platform that struggles with 4K. |
Yep... MS bad choice affects nothing in the end but if Sony pushes 4K the wrong way it can certainly have a worse effect... but I like their approach for checkerboard, where they go for 1080p or 1440p when possible and for very little effort on devs and system it upscale for 4k, it probably won't have a bad effect on the games.

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."










