Forums - Gaming Discussion - Phil Spencer Says Xbox Series X Games Aren't Being Held Back By Xbox One

goopy20 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

I’m shocked to see that even if Halo Infinite looks great on XSX you’ve found some way to disqualify it as “real next gen”. Totally didn’t see that coming. So apparently what is good enough on PS5 is not good enough on XSX. 

It just seems you can't tell the difference between a next gen title (specifically made to take full advantage of the new features) or a current gen game running at higher settings. Like I said, which game do you think is taking more advantage of the ps4 pro hardware; a ps3 game like TLOU running in 4k/60fps or TLOU2 in 1440p/30fps? 

The definition of what qualifies as real next gen just changes with you on a case by case basis. Strangely always to the benefit of PS5 and the detriment of Xbox. You've already said in this thread that immersion is huge for next gen, even if the core gameplay hasn't changed. You saw no gameplay of HFW, just a cinematic that showed us zero new gameplay elements but it was still ok because "it looked great". Yet somehow Halo looking great on XSX would still not be next gen. It boils down to what I said earlier, you can have the exact same situation on both consoles but the fact that the XSX also has an Xbone version of the games somehow makes it wrong lol.

Also, the more important question you should be asking in regards to LoU HD/LoU2 is what innovations or enhancements to gameplay have there been to justify such a long development time, removal of MP, and lowering of resolution and frame rate? Because I have double digit hours in LoU2 and so far it's just a more action focused LoU. But again, according to you, the same core gameplay is fine so long as it "looks great". Immersion and graphics above gameplay, even though when you originally started your anti-XSX crusade, it was gameplay before next gen graphics.

I'm replaying the entire Halo franchise right now and I am on CE. You can hit a button to change from OG Xbox graphics to the Halo CE Anniversary 360 graphics. The core game is the same on both settings but Anniversary looks infinitely better and is more immersive. If Halo Infinite launches on XSX and has a much farther draw distance, SSD enhancements, higher resolution and frame rate, and better visuals, by your own definition it's next gen. Until you change that definition to discredit Xbox, of course. Oh wait you just did lol



Around the Network
LudicrousSpeed said:
goopy20 said:

It just seems you can't tell the difference between a next gen title (specifically made to take full advantage of the new features) or a current gen game running at higher settings. Like I said, which game do you think is taking more advantage of the ps4 pro hardware; a ps3 game like TLOU running in 4k/60fps or TLOU2 in 1440p/30fps? 

The definition of what qualifies as real next gen just changes with you on a case by case basis. Strangely always to the benefit of PS5 and the detriment of Xbox. You've already said in this thread that immersion is huge for next gen, even if the core gameplay hasn't changed. You saw no gameplay of HFW, just a cinematic that showed us zero new gameplay elements but it was still ok because "it looked great". Yet somehow Halo looking great on XSX would still not be next gen. It boils down to what I said earlier, you can have the exact same situation on both consoles but the fact that the XSX also has an Xbone version of the games somehow makes it wrong lol.

Also, the more important question you should be asking in regards to LoU HD/LoU2 is what innovations or enhancements to gameplay have there been to justify such a long development time, removal of MP, and lowering of resolution and frame rate? Because I have double digit hours in LoU2 and so far it's just a more action focused LoU. But again, according to you, the same core gameplay is fine so long as it "looks great". Immersion and graphics above gameplay, even though when you originally started your anti-XSX crusade, it was gameplay before next gen graphics.

I'm replaying the entire Halo franchise right now and I am on CE. You can hit a button to change from OG Xbox graphics to the Halo CE Anniversary 360 graphics. The core game is the same on both settings but Anniversary looks infinitely better and is more immersive. If Halo Infinite launches on XSX and has a much farther draw distance, SSD enhancements, higher resolution and frame rate, and better visuals, by your own definition it's next gen. Until you change that definition to discredit Xbox, of course. Oh wait you just did lol

Everybody knows what real next gen games means man. We've never had a new console generation where we didn't get them, and we also never had a console maker say "Here's our brand new next gen console... But your old one will play the same games, so you don't really need to buy it". 

Last edited by goopy20 - on 13 July 2020

goopy20 said:

I didn't know that. I thought UE5's Lumination (dynamic global illumination) is kinda like the next best thing to RT at a fraction of the cost. We will see but I got a feeling RT will be too expensive to really be fully utilized in all AAA next gen games. I'm sure we'll see it being used here and there, though. 

Lumin is an "approximation". - Lumin is a "collection" of lighting techniques all working to augment each other in order to get the best result with a low overhead, it's not the best approach to lighting, shit... It's not even the most efficient, but it's damn well impressive for the hardware it's being showcased on.

For larger objects the Global Illumination uses voxels which are cubes of light.
For medium sized objects they use signed distance fields, which is basically grid sampling.. Another use for it is cloth simulation collision detection.
And for smaller sized objects they use screen-space data.. Which is similar to the approach that Gears of War 5 used for it's lighting.




--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
goopy20 said:

I didn't know that. I thought UE5's Lumination (dynamic global illumination) is kinda like the next best thing to RT at a fraction of the cost. We will see but I got a feeling RT will be too expensive to really be fully utilized in all AAA next gen games. I'm sure we'll see it being used here and there, though. 

Lumin is an "approximation". - Lumin is a "collection" of lighting techniques all working to augment each other in order to get the best result with a low overhead, it's not the best approach to lighting, shit... It's not even the most efficient, but it's damn well impressive for the hardware it's being showcased on.

For larger objects the Global Illumination uses voxels which are cubes of light.
For medium sized objects they use signed distance fields, which is basically grid sampling.. Another use for it is cloth simulation collision detection.
And for smaller sized objects they use screen-space data.. Which is similar to the approach that Gears of War 5 used for it's lighting.


Yeah it did look impressive, but how do you think it compares to the Nvidia RTX implementation? And which version of RT do you think will make more sense for developers to use (assuming that AMD's Ray Tracing cores perform about the same as on the RTX cards)?

Personally I'm still hoping to see Path Tracing! Not in 4k, of course, but in 1080p with something like DLLS enabled, who knows :)



goopy20 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

The definition of what qualifies as real next gen just changes with you on a case by case basis. Strangely always to the benefit of PS5 and the detriment of Xbox. You've already said in this thread that immersion is huge for next gen, even if the core gameplay hasn't changed. You saw no gameplay of HFW, just a cinematic that showed us zero new gameplay elements but it was still ok because "it looked great". Yet somehow Halo looking great on XSX would still not be next gen. It boils down to what I said earlier, you can have the exact same situation on both consoles but the fact that the XSX also has an Xbone version of the games somehow makes it wrong lol.

Also, the more important question you should be asking in regards to LoU HD/LoU2 is what innovations or enhancements to gameplay have there been to justify such a long development time, removal of MP, and lowering of resolution and frame rate? Because I have double digit hours in LoU2 and so far it's just a more action focused LoU. But again, according to you, the same core gameplay is fine so long as it "looks great". Immersion and graphics above gameplay, even though when you originally started your anti-XSX crusade, it was gameplay before next gen graphics.

I'm replaying the entire Halo franchise right now and I am on CE. You can hit a button to change from OG Xbox graphics to the Halo CE Anniversary 360 graphics. The core game is the same on both settings but Anniversary looks infinitely better and is more immersive. If Halo Infinite launches on XSX and has a much farther draw distance, SSD enhancements, higher resolution and frame rate, and better visuals, by your own definition it's next gen. Until you change that definition to discredit Xbox, of course. Oh wait you just did lol

Everybody knows what real next gen games means man. We've never had a new console generation where we didn't get them. But have we ever heard any console maker say "Here's our brand new next gen console... But your old one will run the same games so you don't really need to buy it". 

Oh yeah everyone knows what real next gen means. That’s why your definition shifts constantly. You just zig zagged with it again. Also keep in mind this is subjective. You dismiss 60fps and higher as a waste of next gen power yet to others it’s a great use of it. Either way, it’s utilizing the power of the console.

Also didn’t we just see an Infinite type situation with BotW on Switch and WiiU? Can anyone remind me how that turned out? Is goopster right, people shunned it as it was not “real next gen”? I’m assuming it sold like 11 copies or something. 



Around the Network
goopy20 said:
Pemalite said:

Lumin is an "approximation". - Lumin is a "collection" of lighting techniques all working to augment each other in order to get the best result with a low overhead, it's not the best approach to lighting, shit... It's not even the most efficient, but it's damn well impressive for the hardware it's being showcased on.

For larger objects the Global Illumination uses voxels which are cubes of light.
For medium sized objects they use signed distance fields, which is basically grid sampling.. Another use for it is cloth simulation collision detection.
And for smaller sized objects they use screen-space data.. Which is similar to the approach that Gears of War 5 used for it's lighting.


Yeah it did look impressive, but how do you think it compares to the Nvidia RTX implementation? And which version of RT do you think will make more sense for developers to use (assuming that AMD's Ray Tracing cores perform about the same as on the RTX cards)?

Personally I'm still hoping to see Path Tracing! Not in 4k, of course, but in 1080p with something like DLLS enabled, who knows :)

From DF review on GT7 seem like it use path tracing of 1/4 or even less than that with upscalling by temporal reconstruction.



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

AbbathTheGrim said:
sales2099 said:

I’d argue cross gen arguably helps distinguish the difference. Halo Infinite base Xbox One vs Series X will show differences in FPS, resolution, draw distances, AI, textures, ray tracing. Maybe even a mode unique to Series X that Xbox One cant do. 

But nm that, as long as their games look next gen in their own right, regardless of the games being cross gen, concern trollers will make little difference. Series X is after all about 20% stronger then PS5 and I would think 1st party devs can leverage that. 

And I believe Sony is in a similar situation. Spiderman MM is supposedly built off the base game with upgrades next gen elements. GT7, Sackboy, Destruction All Stars, all games that PS4 could also do. 

I can't enforce a definition of "next gen" but mine doesn't allow The Last of Us Remastered to be a "next gen" title in the PS4 when it released simply because of a facelift. It was an enhanced edition of a last gen game.

If Micro releases Xbone-SEX multiplats and makes the Xbone version look good and actually sell the idea that those games look good in both versions then they can't help but put themselves in a ditch when they try to argue that what they are putting out in terms of exclusives put PS5 dead in the water.

If Xbox One can get the job done, enough for Micro to release a Xbox SEX game because they think it is worth buying in Xbox One, then PS5 does that and more.

You can't try to undermine the gap between your old gen and new gen while overselling a supposed gap between your console and your competitor's which runs parallel to what you offer hardware-wise.

Of course, this may be a temporary situation until Micro stops sharing SEX exclusives with Xbox One.

I’d think of it more as Witcher 3 PC vs Witcher 3 on Switch in terms of gap where the high end version stands out on its own merits. Plus they did announce Halo is natively built around Series X and thus will be ported down so not the same as a porting-up remaster like LOU on PS4. 

I maintain this is only for the launch year, where no developers are able to squeeze out maximum potential out the gate. So in the meantime, MS just not gonna abandon late adopters day 1 next gen, which I think is win win. 



 

 

zero129 said:
goopy20 said:

Maybe that's the only parameter that matters for fanboys. But Halo not being on ps5 is just a business decision, whereas Horizon Zero West being exclusive to the ps5 is a design decision. Big difference there in how far the developers can potentially take their ambitions.

The truth is that MS is too busy being all consumer friendly that they ARE forgetting the people who are excited about next gen. You know the people who want to see exciting new games, conceived to be impossible on current gen. I get what you're saying and that you won't settle for anything less than the best version of Halo Infinite. But how many people bought a X1X or a high-end gpu to play the best version of base console games? 

There simply is a difference between a generational jump we typically see when new consoles come out, and scalable graphics like we see on pc. This is the difference.

Generational leap

And it's not just the graphics in this screenshot, it's about the entire scope and visual package of the game.

Scalable graphics on pc

Scalable graphics on pc and the mid-gen consoles are a lot more subtle. Obviously the resolution and framerate jump is noticeable when you're playing the game, but you're still getting the exact same game (same levels, ai, physics etc.) whether your playing on a 1,3TF Xbox One or a X1X/high-end pc. 

Scalable

The Witcher 3 PC

How do you explain this?. Do the images of the witcher 3 not look at least 2 to 3 gens apart?.

I wonder how many devs it took to make both versions....

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-the-witcher-3-switch-tech-interview

Digital Foundry: How long did this take to develop?

Piotr Chrzanowski: Over a year now. Well it depends on whether you want to add the business stuff, but then I would say it's around 12 months at this point.

Digital Foundry: How did the first attempts at getting Witcher 3 running Switch pan out?

Piotr Chrzanowski: We had the project set up in a very clear [direction]. We wanted to achieve each stage that was planned - what was aimed at. Of course one of the first things was to make sure that engine would actually run on the Switch. I would say the other big milestone was to have a piece of the game actually playable. So we went with Kaer Mohren with the prologue, because it was a self-contained world that has all the systems, including combat etc. We looked through that, we saw how we needed to shape the next stages of the project. And then we could expand to the White Orchard, and then to the rest of the world.



https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-the-witcher-3-switch-tech-analysis

Pick a busy street in Novigrad for example, and the lowest reading comes in at just 810x456. For perspective, that's 63 per cent on each axis of 720p.

Jump to PS4, and there's not a tangible a difference in NPC density, just going by eye. Of course, their draw distance is compromised on Switch, but the rendering range on NPCs is generous enough to cram everyone in. The only snag is that the frame-rate on characters is halved towards the distance.

Beyond the inevitable blurriness, there are further downsides. The first is pop-in; often it's well-handled, but Switch has limits in how quickly it can draw everything in. The big trouble spot is cut-scenes; fast camera cuts overwhelm the system, and the way geometry flickers in and out can be pretty glaring. Detail-rich areas such as Novigrad can also push the streaming systems hard, resulting in pop-in that varies on repeat tests.

The Witcher 3's drive for compression also has an impact beyond FMV quality. Textures and sound also take a hit. Texture assets and filtering are of a notably lower quality, where a form of trilinear filtering is used which adds to the generally blurry look - while the assets themselves are essentially very similar to the PC' version's low setting.

Docked play is solid, but dense areas like Novigrad will see performance drop to something closer to 20fps. Portable play is similar, but not quite as robust overall.


A lot of work, a lot of compromises and downgrades. And what does it prove, TW3 has no next gen game play, just better graphics!


Yep, if you work long enough on it and comprise enough you can port things down quite a lot

Minecraft on new 3DS


Minecraft on PC

Of course TW3 and Minecraft have nothing to do with automatic scaling. Tons of work went into these versions with severe compromises. TW3 got the game play in yet Minecraft not so much.

Anyway these examples have nothing to do with being held back, since the 3DS version of MC and Switch version of TW3 came later and had no influence on the design of each game.

Last edited by SvennoJ - on 13 July 2020

goopy20 said:
sales2099 said:

You can’t lecture me on repeating the 20-30% gap when you peddle the holding back concern trolling stance since the year started. Fact is Xbox is in a better position to hit benchmarks while also looking next gen. 

If you make a game on the lower hardware and port up then 100% you are right it holds new hardware back. But since they announced Halo Infinite is built natively on Series X we now know they just have to cut corners to scale down. You know this but still for some reason hope (???) that MS is building games natively on old hardware and porting up.

It’s simple, my TV is 4K and more frames the better. If you wanna settle for less before the generation even begins then I’m glad I’m not on your side. Series X has a better shot to do both because they actually designed it to be next gen. I never played a game at 120 FPS but I imagine it’s a step up and can’t wait to see the difference. 

Here I know it doesn’t suit your concern but here’s the confirmation again.

https://twitter.com/xcloudtimdog/status/1276173499028078592?s=21

We don't even know what "Series X optimized games built natively for Series X" means. All I know is that Halo will be coming out on Xone and they're talking about 4k/120fps or 60fps with RT on Series X. They did say some of the "optimized for Series X" games get more enhancements than others and Halo is one of them. My guess is that it could set a new benchmark for Ray Tracing compared to the stuff we've already seen on pc and it will probably look great.However, the core game will still be designed around the limitations of the Xbox One.

It's like how TLOU remastered maxes out the ps4 pro at 4k/60fps compared to TLOU2 at 1440p/30fps. You tell me which is the more ambitious and better looking game?

Bold: Two seemingly contradictory points that show you definitely looking at this from a negative view. Almost like you have a pre determined narrative...

I can imagine LOU maxes out benchmarks because PS4 can handle it. LOU 2 is what it is because the PS4 Pro is not a well designed console. It struggles to hit benchmarks like Xbox X easily can. I imagine it’s the same scenario with PS5 and Series X where Sony didn’t think to give it enough power to make way for a fast SSD. Series X has more of a shot to do both. 



 

 

sales2099 said:
AbbathTheGrim said:

I can't enforce a definition of "next gen" but mine doesn't allow The Last of Us Remastered to be a "next gen" title in the PS4 when it released simply because of a facelift. It was an enhanced edition of a last gen game.

If Micro releases Xbone-SEX multiplats and makes the Xbone version look good and actually sell the idea that those games look good in both versions then they can't help but put themselves in a ditch when they try to argue that what they are putting out in terms of exclusives put PS5 dead in the water.

If Xbox One can get the job done, enough for Micro to release a Xbox SEX game because they think it is worth buying in Xbox One, then PS5 does that and more.

You can't try to undermine the gap between your old gen and new gen while overselling a supposed gap between your console and your competitor's which runs parallel to what you offer hardware-wise.

Of course, this may be a temporary situation until Micro stops sharing SEX exclusives with Xbox One.

I’d think of it more as Witcher 3 PC vs Witcher 3 on Switch in terms of gap where the high end version stands out on its own merits. Plus they did announce Halo is natively built around Series X and thus will be ported down so not the same as a porting-up remaster like LOU on PS4. 

I maintain this is only for the launch year, where no developers are able to squeeze out maximum potential out the gate. So in the meantime, MS just not gonna abandon late adopters day 1 next gen, which I think is win win. 

So if Halo on XSX compared to X1 doesn't show the same difference as Witcher 3 high end PC vs Switch we can expect you to complain a lot?



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