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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - MS reveal of ballpark of Scarlett

RolStoppable said:
TruckOSaurus said:

I do too. Games not hitting 60 fps and not being 1080p never bothered me one bit but load times sure did (I'm looking at you DMC5).

Don't get your hopes up. Future games will have to load much more data than current games, so the net benefit of the SSD solution will probably hover around 0. Basically similar to how mandatory installs didn't solve the problem of loading times on the PS4 and XB1, but were merely the solution to circumvent the slow Blu-ray drives and keep loading times in check.

It's important to remember that Sony's demonstration a few weeks ago showed loading times for PS4 quality graphics on the PS5, but PS5 quality graphics will obviously be notably more demanding and have longer loading times.

Another important factor is the individual competence of any given development studio. Just because loading times can be kept under control doesn't mean that every game will be that way.

Way to be a ballbuster



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
TruckOSaurus said:

I do too. Games not hitting 60 fps and not being 1080p never bothered me one bit but load times sure did (I'm looking at you DMC5).

Don't get your hopes up. Future games will have to load much more data than current games, so the net benefit of the SSD solution will probably hover around 0.

It will be higher than net 0 given the results of that PS4 test unless next generation assets are 20-40x the size of current gen assets; which would equate to similarly scoped games being on 20+ discs or a minimum of just under a terabyte of download per game... And that's just not going to happen.

It definitely won't be anywhere near the best case scenario they showcased with SpiderMan either though. Hell, I'd settle with even 3-4x quicker load times on next gen games which I believe is in the realm of possibility given what's currently known. I'd even wager 8x quicker is doable which would take some of those minute and a half long load times down to reasonable levels. 



drkohler said:
DonFerrari said:

I doubt you took more than 2 min to read the OP, so you won't need your 10 min back because of it. And the thread title was very clear on what it is about, so if you didn't want to check on the subject that you are tired of you don't need to enter.

I didn't put any or all specs thinkable. I gave the link to official information.

I read your links three times mainly because I couldn't believe that there was absolutely no information in it. I watched the video twice because I couldn't believe there was absolutely no infornation in it.

"I gave the link to official information"- no you didn't, simply because there is no official information. Again, for absolutely obvious reasons, no company is going to give any official information (which translates to "specs" essentially).

From what I read the 4x over XB1X, SSD, Zen2, etc was official information gave by MS on presentation.



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."

RolStoppable said:
TruckOSaurus said:

I do too. Games not hitting 60 fps and not being 1080p never bothered me one bit but load times sure did (I'm looking at you DMC5).

Don't get your hopes up. Future games will have to load much more data than current games, so the net benefit of the SSD solution will probably hover around 0. Basically similar to how mandatory installs didn't solve the problem of loading times on the PS4 and XB1, but were merely the solution to circumvent the slow Blu-ray drives and keep loading times in check.

It's important to remember that Sony's demonstration a few weeks ago showed loading times for PS4 quality graphics on the PS5, but PS5 quality graphics will obviously be notably more demanding and have longer loading times.

Another important factor is the individual competence of any given development studio. Just because loading times can be kept under control doesn't mean that every game will be that way.

For me there was a net improvement on loading of games, and the suspended activity was also a good improvement, compared to gen 7.



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."

kirby007 said:

Could we assume someones bias is showing a bit in anticipating a new war?

Aka these generalisations are what made quickrick fall of the vgcliff

When you assume you make an ass of you and me.

I expect both consoles to be near performance until we have information showing otherwise. I would say a lot more bias would go on people that are certain, without a doubt, XB4 will be stronger "because of reasons" without we knowing the specs.



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."

Around the Network

You literally did a quickrick how can i assume something else

Edit: anyway im going to be suprised if they vary more then 5% in power



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

kirby007 said:

Edit: anyway im going to be suprised if they vary more then 5% in power

Yeah, what's going to matter are features, price, who's the first to come up with compelling exclusive software and which one grabs the right advertising deals with 3rd party software.



kirby007 said:

You literally did a quickrick how can i assume something else

Edit: anyway im going to be suprised if they vary more then 5% in power

Which or where did I do a quickrick?



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."

If the rumors for Lockhart are true, and it does have around a 4-5 TF Navi GPU and 6-8 core Ryzen CPU, then Lockhart alone could be said to be 4X more powerful than XB1X. That 4-5 TF Navi GPU would probably come close to matching the 6 TF XB1X Polaris GPU, so were they talking about Anaconda or Lockhart? You could still technically say 'it'll eat monsters for breakfast', since Lockhart would be considerably more capable than XB1X, just more so in terms of CPU.

Anaconda would not be 24TF, and if by some chance that were to be the case somehow, if most can agree that a 12 TF console would be around $500, then Anaconda would cost $1,000+. The Apple or Nvidia business model is not going to work for consoles anytime soon.



For reference, the xbox one x is about 4.5x the xbox one, so a smaller 'jump' than the mid gen refresh....