The Xbox One X and the PS4 Pro are indicators that the early adopters are rewarded the least by manufacturers.
The devs don't have to do anything and most of them won't do anything as seen by the Pro really. It costs more money to bump up the graphics instead of going to lowest denominator which will also be the biggest install base on whichever platforms the game is made on.
"It costs more money to bump up the graphics"... wrong! Developers create high resolution assets for PCs and downgrade them, it doesn't cost them more.
Yes that is why so many great ports go to pc.
Alrighty! If I were you I would apply at some dev. and offer your amazing tech skills! I mean, you can just flip a switch and the game suddenly runs in a higher resolution with higher quality assets, even automatically adds additional graphical effects without any effort whatsoever! Probably also figures out all on it's own what the optimum native or checkerboard rendered resolution is as well! Tech these days is so amazing, who even needs programmers any more?
Aenea, maybe they can enrol in your school "Don't Know Nothin University".
Pink is right. Let's follow a simple example. The higher is the resolution, the higher the textures are. The guy making the textures will have to work more ad harder to give the game higher quality textures. He'll work more time, more time means normally getting more payed. Now imagine that with all aspects of a game in the making... Bumping resolution makes games more expensive, it's just natural.
@BG Yeah but it's not just the graphic assets themselves that need to be made tho. You can't just go and change a few lines of code and hope the game performs well at native 4k with Ultra settings. You have to find a resolution and effects that makes the game still perform well, then it might need optimising in all the right places for these settings, and then it needs to be thoroughly tested. This isn't something that you do in a few minutes, this is lots of time spent by more than one person... @jason It's always funny that the people that really do not know a single little thing are only able to hurl insults!
@pink, that has more to do with optimization than creating the base game.
@PiNkFaIrYbOi: >"Yes that is why so many great ports go to pc." Huh? The issues with ports are almost always in the form of bugs, not graphical problems. @BG11579: > "The higher is the resolution, the higher the textures are. The guy making the textures will have to work more ad harder to give the game higher quality textures." Doesn't work that way. Is it harder for you to create a 4K file in photoshop vs a 720p one? The answer is nope. Devs create high quality assets and downscale them as needed. They may or may not use that resolution to implement more details, but frankly at this level it's a diminishing return. Bottom line is a high resolution texture doesn't have to take even a moment more than a lower res one.
Aenea! It's not an insult that you don't know anything, it's a fact.
Still cost money to implement that stuff in the game. Each version has to be tested. Testing can be costly. @others refuting element Most objects and textures in games nowadays are created at a rather high level that wouldn't be possible to use in the game themselves on any platform. They are then downgraded to a point where they can be used, and often times, you may not see much difference in some things if it is significantly reduced due to how textures work, and the ways that polygon objects are rendered on screen using various effects(or tricks) to make them appear to be a higher quality than they really are. This is typical, and actually is a lot easier than making a lower quality model and adding to it, as you basically have to do twice the optimization on an object as you increase it's quality or polygon count. Going from high to low though, there is less, to no optimization in the higher quality versions of the same thing. This however, does not mean that it's as simple as just using higher quality objects, as the objects or textures in question will still be made at a much higher quality than what any GPU could handle today. As it's reduced, each version will be moved lower to accomadate what would be possible on various versions of the game. For the most part, on PC, there will only be a few versions of different quality levels of any individual object or texture....not unlike a Level of Detail model. The sliders which allow for a seemingly exhaustive selection of options only applies different effects to those things. This wouldn't be a good way to handle console games, as it reduces the efficiency of the build, and would lead to wasted resources for things that wouldn't be used. Because of this, it's better to tailor make individual models, thus making ElementX's assertion that it's as simple as throwing in a different model even less relevant, because console programming really doesn't work like that, and each build will require it's own testing to fix problems that would arise due to the use of different models.
"Yes that is why so many great ports go to pc." The quality of ports has nothing to do with the quality of the assets. Devs always create high quality assets as a starting point, before scaling down for each platform. It costs them nothing to scale a high quality asset based on the original. Will every dev do so? Maybe not, but it doesn't really have anything to do with cost.
Or how about all those games that never even make it to pc and I'm not talking about exclusives either.
You would have to look for the games on PC. With PC being mostly digital, not much is ever on store shelves. By making Xbox One and Xbox One X Windows 10 devices, Microsoft is trying to change the way PC games are made. If devs target PC first they will make better PC games. Xbox in return will be better also since it is essentially a PC with the inclusion of Windows 10. The only one not benefiting as much is Sony.
@Death Yeah Xbox is benefitting so much by having all its exclusives go to PC. It's only selling like less than half of Ps4 numbers right?
I wouldn't say it costs nothing, as fine tuning a down grade can be a time consuming process to make it look just right. The biggest reason for starting high is that it's much easier to scale down than up. On top of that, any future enhancements can be done much quicker as new hardware becomes available. In this case, I'd imagine that the higher quality may be done first, then downgraded to X1X or PS4P, then again for the base consoles. But each part does require that time and effort to make it look good. Maybe less time on the mid-gens due to less work needing to be done, and a lot of things can be done quickly. Tweaking object models can be the most difficult part, and then making sure the textures still look good on those downgraded models can also cause tweaking in the textures. It's a common task, and nothing new even for the stock consoles. The bigger the game though, the more work that needs to be done, then the testing to make sure it all works, and the continuous cycle of tweaking everything to make it work good. I see less time being spent on the mid-gens because of the lower install base, and the penchant to just brute force marginal gains because it's the easy thing to do.
Do you know that there are over 70 games which are already enhanced for the X? The X is the best thing that could ever happen for current PSpro owners. As they now stand to gain more attention from developers who found it so easy to do on the X and some will feel obligated to do something for the pro also.
Given that the Pro, by being an extent of the PS4, sells better than the X1X by further fact of being out first, wouldn't it be "easier" to build for it rather than a platform that's still months from release and only seems to exist as a mid platform for consoles and PCs besides?
Well, given that most devs enhancements on the PS4P haven't exactly been a huge strong selling point, I fail to see how it's going to benefit us that X1 is doing it now too. PS4P has shown me that most devs(or likely the publishers) aren't going to spend a copious amount of time making things significantly better just because they can.
If devs target Windows 10, they also create Xbox One and Xbox One X games at the same time. Windows 10 will scale the game accordingly for each platform. PlayStation Pro is different since Sony is using their own proprietary OS and development tools. For Pro devs are forced to create a different game, but many of the assets are shared withPS4.
"Windows 10 will scale the game accordingly for each platform." Stop that nonsense! This is false if we're talking about videogames (not small mobile games)!
"For Pro deva are forced to create a different game" I popped my battlefield 4 in and it worked fine, no pro game installed.
@Aenea, This is how PC games have worked for decades. When I play a game on my Surface, gaming laptop or dedicated gaming PC it's the same game but the fidelity/quality of visuals are based on the hardware it's being used on. @Goldby, You are correct, you can pop a PS4 disc in the Pro and it will work perfectly fine. If you want it "Pro enhanced" it will need to be done by the dev and then patched in the game. The process will be similar on Xbox One X, but the assets will already exist if the developer starts the game on PC. If they don't, Xbox and PS4 are pretty much in the same boat.
There are already PC game developers who have moved their game over to the XB1X SDK and have it up and running in 48hrs. Microsoft has made if very easy to port PC games to the XB1X. Indie developers can now publisher their own games on Xbox as well. There's already 100's of Indies in XBox Store.
@Death No, this is not how PC games have worked for decades and it's not how they work now. It doesn't work automatically, it has to be coded in and even then on PC, people are using the graphics settings themselves to find the best settings for their PC, nothing automatic about it. Except on the Xbox One and the One X the fiddling with the settings to get optimal performance is done by the developers, not the end user...
Death, all developers use PC's running development kit software. Your entire post is nonsense.
@Death but developers done need to create a PS4 version and then make a pro version from scratch. You are implyign they need to make 2 games, one for pro and one for ps4. that isn't the case
If what you are implying were the case, expect the Xbox to not actually use that extra power without added overhead of the system itself. The reason that things on PC are fairly fluid is due to higher level code being used. What is available on a PC isn't what's in the Xbox across the board, which is why DirectX exists in the first place. DirectX was a huge step forward for PC gaming, and it was much needed, and is still needed because it removes the hardware from the equation, and the developer builds to an API, as opposed to building to the hardware. This leaves some power on the table, as it's an extra step in the process, and even the new low level API's with DX12 or Vulcan do not run at the same low level as those in the consoles, although it is better than before. Getting a game up and running from one system to another isn't really that much of a chore if you're using the right engine. I could make a game in Unreal right now, and build it to any number of platforms with the engine interpreting functions for specific consoles. But getting that game running well on all platforms takes more than a couple days, and the optimization(porting) process can be quite arduous as the dev will indeed want to spend as much time getting as much power out of the console as possible. To put things in perspective, I write tools which help port games, and I have several tools which can port between PC, Xbox, and PlayStation platforms and the game will run almost immediately depending on engine used so long as there isn't any specialized low level function which is specific to a specific platform.
I'm hopping that the X sells horribly and receives a price drop shortly after.
Why would you wish that?
I see why you would want to benefit from that. But that would deter console manufacturers from making powerful consoles in the future. They need to at least get the cost back and not loose money to then spend the rest of the gen trying to make it back will other aspects of the console space.
Or,i dont know, the console can be a success, which is good for everyone in the console business and you can wait for the price drop when the market is good and ready...
Lol... Xbox X games will be made with the highest console in mind first, and then much like a computer game that is made the same way, you'll have the lower settings for the Xbox S and Xbox Launch. It's so easy to understand. Not sure why so many online pretend this is hard to get.
PC games are made with the lowest common denominator in mind. It's easier to work up with the code, but down with the graphics. Those minimum requirements are the base that a game is built for at the start, usually not getting that point in the development process and then being optimized so that the game can sell to the most number of people. After that, about the only thing that really changes is the graphics.
Don't know why the downvotes, must be from idiots. Totally agree with you. I'd rather have a limited but optimised box rather than a powerful but inconsistent machine.
Pretty sure developers who are just starting a game now is using the XB1X and PS4 Pro SDK's to make their games and they are scaling back the games so the run on the OG PS4 and OG XB1. There are of course 100's of games that are on the PS4 and XB1, that probably won't get a patched upgrade to the mid-gen level. A lot of developers just don't have the time and resources to do that with every game. The most popular games will get the upgrades though. For example, I wouldn't expect Dance Central Spotlight (XB1) or Godzilla (PS4) to be upgrade to 4K with 4K assets. But you can believe games like Uncharted 4, Horizon: ZD, Gears of War 4 and Halo 5 to be upgraded to 4K with all the bells and whistles. @PiNkFaIrYbOi You mean so many great ports go to game consoles (Divinity: Original Sin, Neverwinter Online, Diablo 3, Rocket League, Smite, Gigantic, etc...etc...).
It will be fine all they do is they running on higher settings most of these games come to PC the Xbox One and PS4 Pro are basically PCs. I've been having a good experience on my PS4 Pro I assume the Xbox One X will give you a good experience if that's what you're looking for no worries people
New to this whole technology thing, huh?
This article makes a huge mistake though. The X is, on paper, about 40% more powerful than the PSpro, but about 5X more powerful than the X1. Its like next gen now, LOL.
but it isn't though. That's the problem. At the end of the day, it's still tethered to the X1. It's still tethered to the 8th gen. They needed to remove that shackle. MS has been supporting dual platforms since 2013 so why stop now?
Why would X1X be " tether" anymore then high end PCs are to low end PCs?
It will get untethered from the OG XB1 eventually. Probably just when the PS5 is about to launch. I see the OG XB1 only lasting to about 2020 before Microsoft pulls the plug on it. It won't matter cause XB1X will be dirt cheap by then and the Scorpio 2 will be on the horizon.
Unfortunately, it falls in a bit of a no man's land in terms of power. It's a power leap for sure, but it's still going to be really tough to hit that 4K/60fps mark that so many seem to have decided is the new benchmark. The net effect is a lot of games will probably settle in somewhere between 1080p and 4K, and the practical visible difference won't be what some might hope. Again the phrase "diminishing returns" comes into play...it's going to take greater and greater leaps in power to make significant improvements in visuals as we get closer to photo-realism. On paper I think the One X could be considered next-gen, but I don't think MS considers it to be. I think actual next-gen will be a roughly 50% increase in performance over the One X.
Whenever they released another Xbox, it will be much more than 50%more powerful. Let's see after a year or 2, what developers are able to get out of it.
The biggest issue isn't really the power, but rather the discrepancies between the hardware. All the people above don't consider that there is no ESRAM in Scorpio, so that easy port becomes a completely different build. They also disregard that the limited memory bandwidth in the stock X1 is going to be the base for which the game is designed, although in this case, it would be possible to build the game from a processing stand point of how it's done in the PS4 or PS4P, so maybe not a big deal. The command processor itself is actually the coolest thing about the X1X IMO. It is quite interesting how it's set up, although it won't bring in the kind of gains that some have asserted, it is indeed nice on the development side to streamline the coding process, but it still does require that work to be done. The DX12 "baked in" to the processors is a nice step, but ultimately, not really that relevant when looking at low level coding. Things won't actually get done faster in the processor itself outside the increased efficiency of the processor. It does help the development process though. There may be some very marginal gains as the processor may not have to wait for the command processor to issue commands to complete a task, but like all the other things, it pretty much requires a specific build to handle such things. For all the good things that X1X has in the hardware, it is not as simple as "we can port it in a day or two", because all the hardware advantages just wouldn't be taken advantage of, so a lot more work is required to optimize compared to the PS4P which is basically just a faster version of the PS4. If the X1X doesn't sell well, or well enough, then I suspect that most of the power will go to waste outside MS 1st party, and maybe the occassional industrious dev. Even on PS4P where it's fairly simple to add in improvements, we don't see it that much.
Yeah, all those losers who bought the consoles when they came out four years ago sure got screwed over. They should have just not played anything for four years on the off chance console makers started doing mid-gen hardware upgrades.
In each cycle from now on,console gamers may spend over 1200USD to get the definitive version of a console and their launch edition downgrade. Patethic.
Yes, your right I normally spend $1000 + everytime I get a new console (games and extra controllers because the old ones don't work with the new system) But, not this time for X1 owners. All their games and controllers will work with the new system. Plus there is no reason not to trade in your old X1 to get about $100 off of X1X. This is going to be one of the cheapest upgrade ever for me.
@itsmebryan No I meant the hardware.
Well can you explain how you would have to spend "$1200USD" to upgrade a $400- $500 console when all of your hardware is backwards compatible also?
I tell you, i don't feel i got screwed over. I have my PS4 and i keep playing with it and i'm having fun. I don't even have a 4K TV, so i don't need a Pro and the games are the same (less graphics ok, but same games). And i'm playing since the console came out, i don't regret it and of course i can't call it "got screwed over".
Right? Should have just waited the 4 years I guess lol Buy xb1x, use current hdd full of games and my elite controller. What's the added expense? This will be the cheapest upgrade for me as well
I'm waiting for 10 years after the generation is over before I dive into the said generation. No way I want to be screwed over.
No shit. You pay the most and have the least. The only reason to be an early adopter is for sheer enthusiasm (or impatience). I've always been an early adopter for better or worse.
Still sitting here trying to figure out why I'd want or even need an XboneX . As stated by MS. it is going to be several years before any amount of decent games or exclusives come out for that console and by that time the PS5 will surely have been announced not to mention any exclusive for the XboneX will be available on PC. I don't get why ( other than the die hard XB fan boys) anyone would want an XboneX at launch, there is literally no exclusives coming for it other than upgrades and remasters. Same goes for the Pro too I guess,.....The only reason I bought a Pro was for the PSVR.
I have a gaming PC and X1 . I pay$400 -$500 for a new gaming video card every few years. And the $400 (if they still offer the @$100 trade in.) is no big deal. I look at it the same way I look at my PC upgrades now. I pay every so often for an upgrade to improve speed and graphics and I can still play everything I have. PC has been that way for decades and it's doing fine. How is that support for PSVR working for you? Is the $800+ you spent for the experience worth it and do you think it is a better value than X1X? Plus, when PS5 comes out you will probably have to spend$1200 + because you will need extra controllers and new games because they may not be backwards compatible like the X1X is.
I'm an launch buyer for ps4 and pro, no issues from me. And the argument that devs have to take time to optimize is bs, what do people think has been going on for PC gamers since the beginning of pc games? They have to provide optimization for every possible setup.
And why do you think PC is last to receive most games? Hint: more variables and therefore more development time. And it will take more time / resources to make games for both the X1X / Pro and the vanilla consoles. If it was as easy as flipping a switch, why hasn't bloodborne received its pro patch? I expect (but hope against) is that 4k gaming will ultimately require a larger time investment just to make quality graphics, thus driving up the costs of development. That means that you can probably expect more micro transactions and season passes / ultimate editions to make up for the added cost.
I am not buying those midgen upgrades, i will wait for proper nextgen in a few years, no need to upgrade right now, my ps4 is doing a fine job in keeping me entertained!
i still think there should be just one console per generation
Well there is if you just use the one you bought. no one is forcing you to buy the upgraded console and the games are releasd as per normal, the only reason you would upgrade is if you want 4k resolution and shinier graphics.
Instead of a mid gen upgrade, they could have used the money to make those mid gen consoles, and invested into their first party. I mean, damn. They're stubborn as hell. It's alright though, more and more people will just leave the Xbox community, since MS want to be a stubborn old dog.
How many games could Sony have made instead of PSVR, the Pro and the $388 million dollar investment into Gaikai? There are over 1000 games on the Xbox One. I think the shortage many people talk about is a little exaggerated.
You should already know this whenever you're an early adopter Later consumers will always get the better deals while eas get brief bragging rights
I see the headliner image is in original Xbox One resolution.
"The Xbox One X claims to deliver a 4k resolution and is 40 per cent more powerful than the original Xbox One" I stopped reading right there. The vanilla PS4 is 50% more powerful than the original Xbox One. Somebody needs to their math straight before they start spouting opinions.
Early adopters are rewarded the least? What? U mean about 4 years ago. My reward was playing games for 4 years. Would u say the same thing about apple. Man since the release of the iphone 7 apple just doesn't care at all about there iphone 5 users. This is how technology works. It's not like they released the pro and x 6 months after the base models. They also don't care about ps2 early adopters anymore, cause it was 17 years ago.