Forums - Gaming Discussion - In your mind, what will the Xbox SX conference have to do to beat the PS5 conference?

Tagged games:

Answer the damned question!

Fantastic games 65 51.18%
 
100% backwards compatible with every Xbox 3 2.36%
 
VR Support 3 2.36%
 
Shockingly low price 21 16.54%
 
There's NOTHING they can do 31 24.41%
 
Other (please explain) 4 3.15%
 
Total:127
DonFerrari said:
sales2099 said:

You or I can’t speak for the casuals. They think different then us. The ones who just play the games and buy on price. Especially in a global recession brought on by a pandemic I think many would be interested in a entry level next gen machine. And if you want to upgrade you trade it in. 

Let it fragment the install base. So long as development is optimized for each console it makes no difference. Leave your performance gap comments at the door because at this stage in the game it’s FUD. 

Is this all just a smokescreen for concern that Lockhart will put a dent in PS market share in less developed regions of the world, not just in NA?

Lockhart attached to GP plan for a 2-5 year contract with a very nice price could make a good splash and make Sony need to run after and improve PSNow or PS+ to offer cheaper PS5 and subs with games.

MAybe that is true, but as a gamer I just don't understand how anyone would want that. The thing with GP is that its a cool service later in a console gen when loads of games have come and gone. Some of them might not have gotten the sales they deserved and GP is great for lowering the barrier so people can still play them later on. However, its a bit different at the start of a new console generation. I mean when will we see next-gen heavy hitters like GTA6, BF6, COD etc on GP, if at all? 

If MS wants to beat Sony's conference they need to clearly demonstrate the difference between their $600 next gen, and $200 current gen console. Which means they have to show games that show a clear overall jump and not just a bump in res/fps like we saw in May. If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles, they should at least have some of the big 3rd party games on stage like a BF6, for example. But unless MS pays them a fortune, it will be years before games like that make their way to GP. 

Last edited by goopy20 - on 04 July 2020

Around the Network
twintail said:
EnricoPallazzo said:
For me, announce that BC will also increase games resolution and frame rate WITHOUT the need of a developer patch.
Like being able to play GTA4, Mass effect trilogy, Dragon Age origins and others on launch day at 1080 60fps.
I doubt it will happen but it would be a game changer for me.

I'm pretty sure that is what both XSX and PS5 are going to do minimum (it's what XBX and PS4 pro do too)

But it's a case by case situation. Games hard-locked at 30fps will not get a jump.

Unfortunately I dont think so. It will be a case to case basis as it happens with xbox one x where for just a few games you are able to run it in a better resolution. Probably depends on agreements with the developers.

Thats why Im seriously thinking about buying a pc to play my backlog while also having a ps5 to play the new games.

But if xbox announce that all those old games are going to be run at better performance then its a day1 buy for me.



goopy20 said:
DonFerrari said:

Lockhart attached to GP plan for a 2-5 year contract with a very nice price could make a good splash and make Sony need to run after and improve PSNow or PS+ to offer cheaper PS5 and subs with games.

MAybe that is true, but as a gamer I just don't understand how anyone would want that. The thing with GP is that its a cool service later in a console gen when loads of games have come and gone. Some of them might not have gotten the sales they deserved and GP is great for lowering the barrier so people can still play them later on. However, its a bit different at the start of a new console generation. I mean when will we see next-gen heavy hitters like GTA6, BF6, COD etc on GP, if at all? 

If MS wants to beat Sony's conference they need to clearly demonstrate the difference between their $600 next gen, and $200 current gen console. Which means they have to show games that show a clear overall jump and not just a bump in res/fps like we saw in May. If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles, they should at least have some of the big 3rd party games on stage like a BF6, for example. But unless MS pays them a fortune, it will be years before games like that make their way to GP. 

First party alone makes GP worth while. And it will be even more evident after July. $15 per month for GP and Live Gold and $10 for just GP. 

Flight Sim, Gears Tactics, Halo Infinite, Forza Motorsport, Forza Horizon, Gears, Hellblade 2, Grounded, Everwild, Peoject Mara. Playgrounds RPG, Obsidian games, Inexile RPGs, The Initiative IP, etc etc.....all day 1. Thats 14 games off the top of my head. Let’s say the lower priced games are $40 and the big hitters are $70. I could play them all for $180 for the year. Let’s be conservative and say PS5 has 7 exclusives in year 1. 70x7 = 490. Simple math dictates Game Pass is a must if you actually value your money. Nevermind the AAA 3rd party games that will eventually come. 

“If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles“

If the games look gorgeous, are quality titles and aren’t on PS, being cross gen is irrelevant. It simply helps differentiate the Xbox brand. 



 

 

sales2099 said:
goopy20 said:

MAybe that is true, but as a gamer I just don't understand how anyone would want that. The thing with GP is that its a cool service later in a console gen when loads of games have come and gone. Some of them might not have gotten the sales they deserved and GP is great for lowering the barrier so people can still play them later on. However, its a bit different at the start of a new console generation. I mean when will we see next-gen heavy hitters like GTA6, BF6, COD etc on GP, if at all? 

If MS wants to beat Sony's conference they need to clearly demonstrate the difference between their $600 next gen, and $200 current gen console. Which means they have to show games that show a clear overall jump and not just a bump in res/fps like we saw in May. If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles, they should at least have some of the big 3rd party games on stage like a BF6, for example. But unless MS pays them a fortune, it will be years before games like that make their way to GP. 

First party alone makes GP worth while. And it will be even more evident after July. $15 per month for GP and Live Gold and $10 for just GP. 

Flight Sim, Gears Tactics, Halo Infinite, Forza Motorsport, Forza Horizon, Gears, Hellblade 2, Grounded, Everwild, Peoject Mara. Playgrounds RPG, Obsidian games, Inexile RPGs, The Initiative IP, etc etc.....all day 1. Thats 14 games off the top of my head. Let’s say the lower priced games are $40 and the big hitters are $70. I could play them all for $180 for the year. Let’s me conservative and say PS5 has 7 exclusives in year 1. 70x7 = 490. Simple math dictates Game Pass is a must if you actually value your money. Nevermind the AAA 3rd party games that will eventually come. 

“If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles“

If the games look gorgeous, are quality titles and aren’t on PS being cross gen is irrelevant. It simply helps differentiate the Xbox brand. 

That's true. MS's 1st party exclusives are obviously the major draw for GP and I know there's a lot of value there. But from all those games you just mentioned, how many of them will require a super fast SSD and a RTX graphics cards?

Look, I'm not here trying to upset anyone and I know not everybody shares the same opinion as me as to what next gen games should be about. I know there are plenty of people who swear by playing 4k on 120hz monitors and were probably super impressed with Dirt 5 running in 120fps. But personally, I just care more about a noticeable leap in overall immersion. I expect to watch a crap quality 1080p Youtube stream in July and still come away impressed because it still shows a generational leap. 

That's why I can't stand all the things I keep hearing from Phil and why I think a 4Tflops Lockhart with half the RAM, is a terrible idea. I know its consumer friendly and all. But if you see how developers are able to optimize on consoles, where even a single unlocked cpu core can make a difference, I just find it hard to believe that it's not going to limit the ambitions of multiplatform games across all platforms. Especially once we get into the middle of the generation and developers are starting to test the limits.

Last edited by goopy20 - on 04 July 2020

goopy20 said:
sales2099 said:

First party alone makes GP worth while. And it will be even more evident after July. $15 per month for GP and Live Gold and $10 for just GP. 

Flight Sim, Gears Tactics, Halo Infinite, Forza Motorsport, Forza Horizon, Gears, Hellblade 2, Grounded, Everwild, Peoject Mara. Playgrounds RPG, Obsidian games, Inexile RPGs, The Initiative IP, etc etc.....all day 1. Thats 14 games off the top of my head. Let’s say the lower priced games are $40 and the big hitters are $70. I could play them all for $180 for the year. Let’s me conservative and say PS5 has 7 exclusives in year 1. 70x7 = 490. Simple math dictates Game Pass is a must if you actually value your money. Nevermind the AAA 3rd party games that will eventually come. 

“If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles“

If the games look gorgeous, are quality titles and aren’t on PS being cross gen is irrelevant. It simply helps differentiate the Xbox brand. 

That's true. MS's 1st party exclusives are obviously the major draw for GP and I know there's a lot of value there. But from all those games you just mentioned, how many of them will require a super fast SSD and a RTX graphics cards?

Look, I'm not here trying to upset anyone and I know not everybody shares the same opinion as me as to what next gen games should be about. I know there are plenty of people who swear by playing 4k on 120hz monitors and were probably super impressed with Dirt 5 running in 120fps. But personally, I just care more about a noticeable leap in overall immersion. I expect to watch a crap quality 1080p Youtube stream in July and still come away impressed because it still shows a generational leap. 

That's why I can't stand all the things I keep hearing from Phil and why I think a 4Tflops Lockhart with half the RAM, is a terrible idea. I know its consumer friendly and all. But if you see how developers are able to optimize on consoles, where even a single unlocked cpu core can make a difference, I just find it hard to believe that it's not going to limit the ambitions of multiplatform games across all platforms.

Don was talking about Lockhart bundled with GP to attract casuals. And the first thing you mention now is SSD and high end graphics specs. Casuals do not care. We can never speak for their buying habits. They buy on price and value. GP is value. Lockhart shouldn’t concern us. 



 

 

Around the Network
EnricoPallazzo said:
twintail said:

I'm pretty sure that is what both XSX and PS5 are going to do minimum (it's what XBX and PS4 pro do too)

But it's a case by case situation. Games hard-locked at 30fps will not get a jump.

Unfortunately I dont think so. It will be a case to case basis as it happens with xbox one x where for just a few games you are able to run it in a better resolution. Probably depends on agreements with the developers.

Thats why Im seriously thinking about buying a pc to play my backlog while also having a ps5 to play the new games.

But if xbox announce that all those old games are going to be run at better performance then its a day1 buy for me.

There's a difference between games being enhanced for the next platform (which would involve being patched and developer input) and the games just running in a BC mode and enhanced from just having stronger hardware. Of course, some games will just incompatible and patching will be required for those. 

Sony have already stated that PS5 BC will enhance frame rates and resolution but this is always going to depend on the game. 

I'm sure i read that XSX will also be able to add HDR to games that never had it in the first place. They talked about this a few months ago when the internal hardware of the XSX was shown off.

That's my understanding of how this is working. 



sales2099 said:
goopy20 said:

That's true. MS's 1st party exclusives are obviously the major draw for GP and I know there's a lot of value there. But from all those games you just mentioned, how many of them will require a super fast SSD and a RTX graphics cards?

Look, I'm not here trying to upset anyone and I know not everybody shares the same opinion as me as to what next gen games should be about. I know there are plenty of people who swear by playing 4k on 120hz monitors and were probably super impressed with Dirt 5 running in 120fps. But personally, I just care more about a noticeable leap in overall immersion. I expect to watch a crap quality 1080p Youtube stream in July and still come away impressed because it still shows a generational leap. 

That's why I can't stand all the things I keep hearing from Phil and why I think a 4Tflops Lockhart with half the RAM, is a terrible idea. I know its consumer friendly and all. But if you see how developers are able to optimize on consoles, where even a single unlocked cpu core can make a difference, I just find it hard to believe that it's not going to limit the ambitions of multiplatform games across all platforms.

Don was talking about Lockhart bundled with GP to attract casuals. And the first thing you mention now is SSD and high end graphics specs. Casuals do not care. We can never speak for their buying habits. They buy on price and value. GP is value. Lockhart shouldn’t concern us. 

Lockhart should concern us when it'll be used as the base console. I'm fine with 4k/60fps, all I'm saying is that Lockhart should't make it so that's literally the only thing developers can do with the extra 8Tflops and 8 gigs of RAM on Series X.

You agreed that 60fps is overkill for most genres and you're also aware that things like checkerboard rendering can get almost 4k like results at a fraction of the cost. So why wouldn't you want developers to decide what yields the best visual results for their game instead of all that "we all need to push for 4k" bollocks?

I am no tech expert, of course. But surely developers should be able to do a lot more impressive things on Series X and ps5 than just 4k/60fps?



goopy20 said:
DonFerrari said:

Lockhart attached to GP plan for a 2-5 year contract with a very nice price could make a good splash and make Sony need to run after and improve PSNow or PS+ to offer cheaper PS5 and subs with games.

MAybe that is true, but as a gamer I just don't understand how anyone would want that. The thing with GP is that its a cool service later in a console gen when loads of games have come and gone. Some of them might not have gotten the sales they deserved and GP is great for lowering the barrier so people can still play them later on. However, its a bit different at the start of a new console generation. I mean when will we see next-gen heavy hitters like GTA6, BF6, COD etc on GP, if at all? 

If MS wants to beat Sony's conference they need to clearly demonstrate the difference between their $600 next gen, and $200 current gen console. Which means they have to show games that show a clear overall jump and not just a bump in res/fps like we saw in May. If they can't really do that with their exclusives because they're all cross-gen titles, they should at least have some of the big 3rd party games on stage like a BF6, for example. But unless MS pays them a fortune, it will be years before games like that make their way to GP. 

Start of the gen it also make a lot of sense when bundled.

If you go there as a casual gamer or someone that really like to game but have limited budget, there is plenty of people like that, and you have one option of PS5 and Series X let's say at 499 (both selling at loss) and you have to put forth extra 60 bucks for new games, and let's say you have to buy 3 games during the first year to have something to play, that means 680 bucks upfront (without even accounting for mp costs).

Now same person see Lockhart for 399 with the option of 0 upfront payment if they sign for a 5 year GP plan and that comes with all the GP library of BC X1 plus added games of GP on launch (like Halo let's say).

Even if long term they end up paying 50-100% more on the HW because of the finnancing when the person see 0 upfront and small monthly payments, let's say 25 bucks (15 for subs and 10 for console) he is certainly be interested by that.



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

twintail said:
EnricoPallazzo said:

Unfortunately I dont think so. It will be a case to case basis as it happens with xbox one x where for just a few games you are able to run it in a better resolution. Probably depends on agreements with the developers.

Thats why Im seriously thinking about buying a pc to play my backlog while also having a ps5 to play the new games.

But if xbox announce that all those old games are going to be run at better performance then its a day1 buy for me.

There's a difference between games being enhanced for the next platform (which would involve being patched and developer input) and the games just running in a BC mode and enhanced from just having stronger hardware. Of course, some games will just incompatible and patching will be required for those. 

Sony have already stated that PS5 BC will enhance frame rates and resolution but this is always going to depend on the game. 

I'm sure i read that XSX will also be able to add HDR to games that never had it in the first place. They talked about this a few months ago when the internal hardware of the XSX was shown off.

That's my understanding of how this is working. 

Yes I get that, for example read dead redemption for Xone X that was more than just higher resolution and etc.

The point is that games will always run at the maximum resolution and fps as originally designed. AGain using GTA4 as an example, even on XSX in theory it will run at 720p 30fps, of course loading times will be crazy fast, it will never drop below 30fps and probably a few other things will get better.

But as far as I know, to run it at a higher resolution of fps it's something that depends on the developer and I think most o them will not be interested in that as it requires time for something that will not bring more money in, and also kind of kills opportunity for future remasters.

My hope is that XSX could do it without the developer, just like a pc game you know? Microsoft internally just deploy an option to run the game at a higher resolution or fps. But again, I dont see that happening unfortunately.



EnricoPallazzo said:
twintail said:

There's a difference between games being enhanced for the next platform (which would involve being patched and developer input) and the games just running in a BC mode and enhanced from just having stronger hardware. Of course, some games will just incompatible and patching will be required for those. 

Sony have already stated that PS5 BC will enhance frame rates and resolution but this is always going to depend on the game. 

I'm sure i read that XSX will also be able to add HDR to games that never had it in the first place. They talked about this a few months ago when the internal hardware of the XSX was shown off.

That's my understanding of how this is working. 

Yes I get that, for example read dead redemption for Xone X that was more than just higher resolution and etc.

The point is that games will always run at the maximum resolution and fps as originally designed. AGain using GTA4 as an example, even on XSX in theory it will run at 720p 30fps, of course loading times will be crazy fast, it will never drop below 30fps and probably a few other things will get better.

But as far as I know, to run it at a higher resolution of fps it's something that depends on the developer and I think most o them will not be interested in that as it requires time for something that will not bring more money in, and also kind of kills opportunity for future remasters.

My hope is that XSX could do it without the developer, just like a pc game you know? Microsoft internally just deploy an option to run the game at a higher resolution or fps. But again, I dont see that happening unfortunately.

MS has already been enhancing BC games without the devs input. You already mentioned RDR, that was Microsoft's doing.

"we saw Gears of War Ultimate Edition operating with a 2x resolution scale on both axes, taking a 1080p game all the way up to native 4K. It's an evolution of the Heutchy Method used to bring Xbox 360 720p titles up to full 4K, with often spectacular results. Crucially, the back-compat team does all the heavy lifting at the system level - game developers do not need to participate at all in the process." 

Now they are talking about adding HDR to older games.

"This was a show-stopping moment. It was indeed Fusion Frenzy - an original Xbox title - running with its usual 16x resolution multiplier via back-compat, but this time presented with highly convincing, perceptibly real HDR. The key point is that this is proposed as a system-level feature for Xbox Series X, which should apply to all compatible games that don't have their own bespoke HDR modes - and as Marais demonstrated, it extends across the entire Xbox library."

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-inside-xbox-series-x-full-specs