Remedy's Thomas Puha talked about Xbox Series S optimization, stating that it's nowhere near as simple as lowering resolution and textures despite what some may think.
I still don't get why Microsoft had to release this. They have xCloud as the lowest barrier of entry...
It's just an option for people that don't have 4k televisions. I don't think that xcloud will be mainstream enough for a couple of years and the series x is too expensive if you can't take advantage of the 4k.
They should have just lowered the price of the One X and kept making them. Very stupid to have the Series S IMO.
In the end when it comes down to it, Microsoft only cares about selling their product and making a profit. Not pushing boundaries in gaming like what Sony is doing.
Yeah we get that, also no one cares of anyone of you has one or whatever reason. The point to this is the title of this article not of what you people say
Yes but you have to buy external storage for the series s and ur already over the cost of the series x, I don't get its existence....
That's what they say. Although an excellent console what hurts it is hdd size and not being able to run one x enhanced games which it is capable of
It's not just that tho. It's a last-gen console being labeled as a next-gen console. By requiring that every game can run on both it and the series x. MS is making it much harder on 3rd party devs to really push the limits.
@knightedHollow No 4k is just too early for games even with a 3090 gpu some games drop below 90 fps at max detail on 4k. 1440P games will look way better with HDR and ray tracing turned on with ultra detail settings and you get 120 fps performance even with a 3070 gpu if you can find one for its MSRP; thanks scalpers and miners you pieces of trash.
@ActualWhiteMan "They should have just lowered the price of the One X and kept making them." No, because the One X can not match the Series X, the Series S plays the same games, albeit lower framerate/resolution. Expect games to be no longer playable on the One X within the next 12 months, then what?
I have been pretty impressed with it so far. I know that getting an X will be even better but for now I can't really complain. I still use my one X as well for my disc based games. I can say that between the two, the S is surprisingly powerful. Able to play certain games better than the one X.
@ActualWhiteMan The faster SSD and the updated functionality of the CPU/GPU required a streamed down next gen device instead of a last gen device. This also opens doors for MS to potentially do other things as well. I can see a potential Switch-like or fully mobile XB device based on the lower hardware spec as the generation progresses. By building a trimmed down device focused more around 1080p, its processing generates less heat and makes it easier to put in smaller devices.
🤔😂 . It'll be funny is Microsoft decides to stop supporting the Series S. They should do it now before it gets worse
Why, people are buying the Series S, why would they stop supporting it lmao? Should Sony stop supporting VR due to its small install base? Thought not.
@DJStotty: That's an odd comparison, because PSVR support isn't mandatory. Cutting Series S support now would cause a huge backlash and might even cause customers to take legal action, but the existence of a low tier console is clearly an annoyance for some devs. Many dev teams already transitioned away from cross-gen development internally, so having to support a lower tier console can certainly slow things down.
I wish they would. Not only does the S hold the X back, but it holds PS5 3rd party back as well. I would be very happy if they threw this sku in the dumpster, but I do not see how they can considering customers who purchased this should be entitled to support for most if not all of the generation. I like both the X and the PS5, but I have never liked the S from the day it was introduced. It was obvious from day one that this would be a ball and chain holding back true next gen gaming.
I'm getting one just because of your comment. Let the down votes begin. My body is ready.
Have fun with last gen version of current games.
@ Atticus I say, where is the fun in worrying that much about what he likes? Don't you have better things to worry about in your life?
They wanted a low cost next gen console to push Game Pass on. Something more casual gamers can easily bite into without breaking the bank.
This is exactly why it was invented. A low cost Game Pass machine. Nothing more and nothing less.
I’m pretty sure Remedy don’t know what they’re talking about. Xbox fans on this very site said the opposite.
Did you guys even read the article? Cherry picking that quote is very misleading. He said it'll be even easier this generation to do since newer games will be easier to optimize. Overall, I think the PS5 brings down the X, and the S brings down both, and low end PCs that are 5 years old bring them all down...
The quote was cherry picked because thats what everyone has been saying in regards to what it requires to scale a game down for the Series S to run the game well. Yes it will be easier to optimize but its not just a simple cut and paste process to get it scaled for the lesser hardware like people were assuming.
They released the Series S as an entry level price range for next-gen. The new games on the horizon, will be taking advantage of the Series S specs not available on last-gen consoles. It is just an option, for those that want to experience next-gen games, like Fable, avowed, ES6 etc among others that will only be released for next-gen without the price tag.
Xbox is being very complicated honestly I mean before these consoles I think they came out saying they don’t care about the console sales.... but they release a cheap model of it lol idk I agree it was pointless making this series s, should’ve just made a digital one just like Sony with the same specs
I really didn't understand this for the longest time, but to a degree it actually makes sense. Especially for GamePass. Given GamePass only streams MOSTLY at 720p and is only just getting upped to 1080p, it seems like the ideal choice for any casual gamer who just wants to sit down and play different stuff here and there without much hassle and breaking the bank.
Because there will always be bargain shoppers buying the cheapest option. Usually, the cheapest option is the old console. Microsoft and Sony have sold cheaper, suckier versions of their consoles before. Even Nintendo has the Switch Lite.
MS shoot themselves in the foot with the Xbox Series S, even thou devs releases exclusively for the Xbox, gamers will never see the advantages or power performance with the Xbox Series X cause devs need to take into consideration their game needs to run also almost the same on the low spec hardware, is just common sense this will happen for their future releases, also multiplatform games will be affected as well if third party are planning to release their game in the Xbox.
Wrong again! Ty for your time.
Is that your years of game development speaking?
Bro, if you think the S is holding gaming back, you're sadly mistakin. Any game that releases on pc is the one holding gaming back. Every one of them games needs to meet the minimum requirements of very low end PC. Which is considerably lower spec than the S.
Wrong on PC they set minimum and maximum as they see fit for their game. Quite often new games will not run on peoples pc which then forces them to upgrade if they so desire.
@Dark_WOLF do you think that this is happening for all games right now? Lets say the new CoD game or returnal, will it run on a pc with lower spec than the S? Only spec bump I see changing soon for pc spec is the SSD, which the S already have. The rest is scalable most of the time.
Not even close to being right. A true 180, actually. Developers base their minimum and recommended requirements around what engine they are using, and what they are trying to achieve. The more gaming tech moves forward, as is the minimum requirements needed to run new games. You don't meet those requirements? Oh well; time to buy some newer parts. On console, if you're game is barely functioning on the hardware, you get situations like Cyberpunk where refunds may be required, and potential lawsuits for "not fit for purpose" can be had.
@ted I don't see where my comment is 180 from what I said. You just said it's not fixed and depends on engine ..etc. But still it can be scale down graphics which depends on gpu. The S has very fast cpu and SSD where most game designs depend on.
Uh, I am not a PC gamer,but you are WRONG! If you look at PC games they have a MINIMUM REQUIREMENT to run games even at the lowest settings.
@iplay1up2 I know they have a minimum requirements, that what I said in this thread. But what am trying to explain is the series S has little bit higher spec than most of the minimum requirements for PC games.
@masterfox I think you are either ignorant, or do not understand game development. They program for the Series X, and they can use the API's to downscale the game to Series S, no impact on the game whatsoever. How do you think PC developers get there games running on 100's of different combinations of hardware?
Microsoft should have followed in the same shoes as Sony a PS5 with a disc drive and one with out the disc drive they are the same spec machine. I understand trying to get to a price point but in all honesty Series S is a waste of cash you're better off buying a series X. Microsoft should have just made the series S the same specs as the Series X.
I like a lot of what MS has been doing lately, but the Series S was such a fking stupid decision IMO. When mid gen refresh comes out, Series S will hold everything back on all platforms since MS is now obligated to have every Series X game playable. Only potential that it adds is for Nintendo and a Switch 2, because the gap will already be forced to be smaller than it could be.
So basically...something will end up getting held back eventually. I don't want to see Elder Scrolls VI release only to hear Bethesda had to make some changes because Microsoft wanted it to run almost the same on the Series S, things which couldn't just be achieved with lowering resolution and textures.
err...where have you been? things are already being held back by the SS
Which game has been held back? people keep saying it, but it doesn't matter how many times you say it, it is still a load of dump.
@DJStotty just because you refuse to see them, doesn't mean they don't exist.
@-Foxtrot Microsoft are not pushing for parity between S and X, not quite sure where you pulled that crock of s*&t from. "Microsoft wanted it to run almost the same on the Series S" Source for your bizarre claim please?
wanting and actually executing it are two different things. I want to be billionaire doesnt mean that i will or can be a billionaire. I know what microsoft is aiming for but realistically, they might not able to do that. first party games, they can probably do it. But when it comes to third party games. the developers of third party games might not want to do it because it requires work and resources. Which at the end may not pay off.
Huh, you don't say 🤔
Oh look, it's me, your boy, saying once again, like I did before the consoles launched that the series S is a detriment to next Gen and Microsoft who is forcing devs to make games on both consoles. It will for sure, cause games to be downscaled past resolution and fps. Less enemies on screen, dumber AI, stuff like that will happen for sure. Like I said before, some devs will most likely just make ps5 games and pc to not have to worry about that kind of downscaling and just make a game. Who wants to be like, oh, let's make this current and last Gen game 4 years from now? Also, competitive games like fps games will be unfair if one console is 30 fps and one is 60. They could always just drop everything to make it look and run like crap to make it also 60 fps, or just make them both 30 fps. All in all, it was a dumb move to try to overtake Sony and to get more game pass subs. They shot themselves in the foot to take a half step.
“ some devs will most likely just make ps5 games and pc to not have to worry about that kind of downscaling” I think they do have to worry about that when developing for PC, so is that platform also holding back the generation?
It's completely different when it's consoles. Consoles are always behind when they release, so when they release something weaker than last Gen refreshes, it's like a half Gen release. Look at cyberpunk 2077 5 years ago and on release. How many NPC's, settings and just overall features were cut and why? The initial trailer also looked a lot nicer. I believe that game was always intended for PC and now current Gen consoles, not last Gen. This is what happens. Look at last Gen cross Gen releases. Shadow of mordor had several cut features. This is what happens when you have to accommodate a much weaker console. It's not really about PC because they can out up clear spec recommendations and have way more sliders. It's clear to me that the series S will hold back new Gen. Also, when games start looking better anyways, the refresh consoles will come out because I'm sure they will. Sony and Microsoft don't want to be caught not having a console to deliver in a few years when that happens. How is the series S gonna hold up to a possibly 15 or so TF console when it's 4. Tons of cut features, that's how.
No they don't. Some games will run like shit on a low spec PC, but that's the nature of PC gaming. If your games are running really poorly with newer releases, it's time to upgrade. With Series S, there is a minimum expected performance it HAS to hit. This is a headache I'm sure all developers wish they didn't have.
"some devs will most likely just make ps5 games and pc to not have to worry about that kind of downscaling and just make a game" Ignoring the fact that PC needs extreme downscaling, this 'skipping on a platform' theory really only applies to small indie games. For larger games: 1. You pretty much need to be on all platforms to recoup your development costs. Xbox has a large userbase, too large to miss out on, unless your game is exclusive. Exclusivity only makes financial sense when MS/Sony gives you a paycheck to cover the lost revenue from the other platform. 2. The engineering cost of supporting Xbox is far lower than the revenue generated by having an Xbox SKU. 3. Publishers typically dictate platforms, not developers.
1. No you don't there are plenty of games only on the Switch, PS4, PC or a combination of them. So no you don't need to be on all platforms. Assuming that is idiot. You don't need to look any further than Xbox/PC releases like Falconeer, The Medium for example. Last I checked The Medium wasn't on Playstation or Nintendo and that's not an indie game now is it?! 2. The minimum amount of games that need to published on disc doesn't make Xbox very viable over Playstation and Nintendo which require much smaller or no minimum print runs. Just look at Limitedrungames.com and see how many games are out for PC, Switch, PS4 whereas there are NO Xbox versions 3. Publishers still look at minimum print runs and threshold for profitability and its case by case. The PC along with Switch or PC and Playstation is already a huge market for them. So no they don't "need' Xbox. If it costs more QC, high minimum disc print-runs and the sales are low then no its not necessarily worth being on every platform.
1. You pretty much just proved my point. Falconeer is an indie game made by one guy, and MS paid for marketing and game pass rights to have it on Xbox only (for consoles). The Medium isn’t an indie dev but was given money by MS to be on Xbox only (again, for consoles). Both of these games will clearly end up on PS5 and if MS hadn’t been throwing cash at them, it’s extremely likely the developer would have been on PS5 also on day 1. There are of course some exceptions to the rule, but it’s obvious to anyone that the vast majority of 3rd party games come to all major platforms (excluding 3rd party exclusives). 2. Not sure where you’re getting this minimum run thing from, neither Sony or Microsoft dictate to third parties how many units they have to produce (unless some form of marketing or exclusivity deal is involved). They can produce zero if they want and go fully digital. Clearly the revenue gained by being on Xbox outweighs the cost of supporting Xbox for the vast majority of developers - otherwise devs/publishers simply wouldn’t make games for it (see WiiU). 3. Again minimum print isn’t a thing, that’s up to the publisher. Please name which medium to large publishers, have come out and said they will not be supporting the Series S? Aside from exclusives/paid deals of course. I work for a large developer-publisher and they’ve been clear that they will support any viable platform - a viable platform being that with a large customer base who have a good “average revenue per user” metric. Why would they throw away profit? Sorry but if you’re trying to pretend to yourself that Xbox isn’t a viable platform and that publishers are willing to give up targeting tens of millions of consoles/potential customers with their games - you’re living in a fantasy land since the current reality is clear. Even XB1 had good developer support and it was weak as hell (the original release at least).
I have a PS5, Switch and Series S, more than happy with the S its a great system with lots of potential. Been playing Gears 5, and Hivebusters they look fantastic on my 4k.
But I thought the Series S doesn’t do 4K...
I think @einhander1971 is talking about his 4K screen, not output resolution of the One S.
Quite obvious he was talking about his 4K TV, you know them screens that have upscalers built in? not to mention the upscaler in the Series S. So when using a 4K TV, you will be looking at a 1080p/1440p Native resolution from the console, upscaled to 4K either by the console itself, or the TV.
I can see it being a good option for a second system in a bedroom etc. I'm even considering getting one, just to play all the indie games that come with gamepass, when I'm not at my PC. But I wouldn't say it has lots of potential. Surely it's the opposite. It has very little potential. Current games are already causing it to struggle, often with very poor performance. God knows how it will be performing when this gen hits it's stride
What potention is theyr for The Xbox S?? The thing is in trouble now to run games at high resolution and framerate, imagion in a few years when the real next gen are on the market.......o boy i Swear, some people..
Holding back next gen already. What a shame all so Microsoft can save a few bucks.
I was planning on buying one of these in a year or so second hand for £200 or less. But not been impressed with what I have heard about them. Only want it for old 360 and Xbox games. So might just get a second hand Xbox one x.
"Puha went on to say that it should actually be easier to take into account the Xbox Series S when making a brand new game with that hardware in mind, compared to optimizing an older game like Control." I bet most didn't even read the article, just the headline
Guaranteed they didnt, 99% of comments are from headlines only, freaking idiots lol
I know i keep saying it, but it will be harder to scale an old game to the new systems, than it would to create a new game with just the Series S and X specs in mind. That is why most of the enhancements are software solutions and not the game remade for the new systems.
MS loves to confuse themselves. Years ago Kinect, now Series S.
"Are you making an engine that's much more GPU bound or CPU bound?" s owners never saw it coming, x owners still don't see it coming
We've all been saying this since the specs were released.
I don't understand what he's getting at here. There are PCs that are significantly weaker than the Series S that they also need to develop for. The Series S meets and surpasses the minimum requirements of most if not all PC games. I wish they'd mention this fact and see what his response would be.