You are not understanding the point. Any game would look better if its on a more powerful device. There is always better hardware out there, even when the Series X and PS5 release, there is still going to be better hardware out there that next gen games can utilise to look even better.

The fact that Zelda BOTW was a masterpiece and one of this gens best games, shows you don't need to have a game running on the latest hardware to be amazing. BOTW puts other masterpiece games to shame and it was built on hardware so inferior to even the weakest consoles on the market which is the Switch. 

Games will have slow downs and low res etc but that doesn't stop the game from being unplayable or great. Heck Perfect Dark on the N64 ran at under 20fps most of the time and that game sits on a 97 meta.

An apology from console gamers is in order.

Any game will be held back by the weakest system that it is designed to run on. That is the way it has always been for cross-gen, cross-platform, and cross anything games. But, people make this out to be a much bigger deal than it is. Games always increase in complexity throughout generations. People are always getting better at using the tools that they have. Devs always get better at utilizing the available power. So, yeah, maybe there's a little bit more complication to developing games that are cross generation. But, it's not like some big magical speed bump in the way of making good video games. It's just one factor that is sometimes present, sometimes not, among a sea of many, many factors that determine how big and complex games can be.

In other words, it's not a substantial issue.

No, I understand your point, I don't even disagree with it, it's just that the part I actually replied to - the highlighted part (which I noticed you cut out my quotation of you for some reason in your reply) was literally wrong, so I addressed  it. 

I never mentioned anything about needing to "future proof" a system. I just said their main and top priority is making a profit, not selling at a loss, even in the name of pushing the envelope.

I mean look outside of the games industry and you see this far more often. it's why we're still many decades away from the flying cars, that were once dreamed and envisioned by people, dating all the way back to the 50's. Progress tends to slow down a lot when all you want to focus on is just more ROI.

I don't cheer for a loss in profits, but I'm not one to cheer for having a core and top priority of sales over pushing envelopes for progress. 

I just don't get this logic. Yes, games usually get better later on in a console generation but it's not like developers aren't capable of taking full advantage of the new hardware in the beginning. It's usually more of a business decision or a design choice if they go all out on the hardware. It's also completely dependent on which developers and which ip they'll have ready for launch. Current gen we had games like Killzone, Infamous, Ryze that did look great but just weren't very good games. We'll have to see what Microsoft has but Sony will likely have pretty good ip's early on like Horizon Zero Dawn and a new Spider-man for example. 

We’re not talking about quality. The whole point of this topic is that being held back > quality game. Which is ridiculous and I’m glad you see that.

Im talking potential of the system. Compare Mario 64 to Conker. Huge graphical difference between beginning and end of gen potential. My argument is that early gen potential and cross gen “hold backs” ultimately are the exact same thing. 

Of course if the game scores very well anybody claiming the game is held back is fighting a losing battle. Like Zelda BOTW. Cross gen game that just happens to be one of the best games ever made. Go figure.

If Halo Infinite scores well and I see a PS fan mock the Xbox One holding it back I’ll throw its metascore back in their face and laugh :)

You right in that we have to wait and see. Doesn’t stop fans from one particular brand pushing the notion of held back cross gen games (rolls eyes).

Ok let’s be real, what’s the whole point of Hollys post? It’s easy to read between the lines when you can speak the console war tongue.  It’s “Series X games will be held back by cross gen, lol Sony doesn’t have that problem and thus their games will be superior”

- Redundant if the games meta score is amazing. Zelda BOTW, an example of cross gen being a unanimous success. 

- Witcher 3 and Hellblade on Switch prove the concept you can build high and scale down.

- Obsidian now has since staffed up, with MS time and resources to properly optimize their games in the Xbox/PC ecosystem. It’s common knowledge Outer Worlds had to make due with less then optimal resources. 

- My personal point that it’s all moot because PS5s early titles will lack the potential of its late gen exclusives. This applies to every console every gen no exceptions. 

It’s funny you mentioned straw man arguments because that’s exactly what the thread is. 

Yes it's more powerful but not that more powerful. It's just a slightly . And also BOTW can ran better and be even better if from the get go were design for Switch. In fact it was underwhelm on Switch, it could have been better. 

The funny thing is Zelda BOTW just pointed that cross gen will held back games on future iteration (in this case Switch). Just wait how Zelda BOTW 2 will be different in size, world and gameplay. 

LMAO , try again 

In bettween the lines you can asume he said anything. Thats why Im not concern with what he meant or what hhe is thinking but did not say. Fact is that xsx games will be held back in the first couple of years, what exactly what that means there is no way of knowing yet.

Metascore means nothing to the topic as we are talking capabitilies here. If a world is 100x bigger than the other is factor that wont change even if the game is good or not. That was never up for discution either, another strawman.

Witcher 3 and hellbalde prove nothing as they where years after the original release and MS stated that is not gona be the case.

Obisidian being small and underfunded I will agree with you there. With enough time and resources a good team can blow our minds regardles of specs. 

Your personal point means nothing as is something everybody knows. Its not a personal point to say water is wet. You saying that does not change the fact that for 1-2 years MS chose to hold back games. Anything after that wnt change thouse first games that came in tat period.

How is it a straw man? He maid the thread and topic about it. It added a devs experience to a topic that was previously discused and dismised by people like you that said due to scaling that was done since forever in pc, and games are made on higer ends pc nd scaled down to consoles that devs dint have to sacrifice anything and the x1 wont hold the xsx back.